EDUCATION FOR PEACE

‘Peace Education’ is widely talked about in recent years. Though Peace Education is becoming popular in recent years, it is amusing to think that war education has been there in existence from time immemorial. Polemology, the science of war was taught in College and Academies. Aristotle mentions about it and says that it teaches the military profession of preparing for and waging wars. The ‘Mahabharata’ the greatest ancient Indian Classical Epic, believed to have come into being in 5th Century BC, refers to an ‘Academy of Martial Arts’ where a great expert trainer ‘Drona’ taught the princes the art of waging wars. But there had never been until the recent past, colleges or academies teaching peace. But during the recent years, Irenology, the study of peace is getting serious consideration.

These days peace is so widely talked about because peace is something that disappears in all spheres of life. Peace evades mankind. There are ethnic, racial, religious and regional disputes, clashes and violence at all different parts of the world. Colour discrimination, caste segregation, political hostility, racial superiority and religious fanaticism lead to violence all over the world. Violence and terrorism cannot be confined to any region of the world. ‘Terrorism anywhere is terrorism everywhere’. The advanced countries thought that they were safe and free from terrorism and violence. But the destruction of the World Trade Centre on 11th September, the dark day in the history of mankind made the world realize that no place in the world is free from terrorism and violence. As violence threatens human existence, there is a carving for peace everywhere in the world. This makes peace education more relevant and important these days.

Before talking about peace education, we have to define what is peace. Spinoza defines peace as a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence, confidence and justice. Quite often, peace is defined as the absence of war. But this is a negative definition. It tells what peace is not. Quincy Wright in his book, ‘A study of War’ defines peace as the condition of a Community in which order and justice prevail internally among its members and externally in its relations with other communities. This view reflects the people’s aspiration for social harmony based on love and humanistic values.

A proper study of peace examines all the categories of human relationship at the local, national and international levels. It examines civil, structural and international violence. There are conflicts in areas of labour – management relations, student politics at colleges and Universities, ethnical rivalries, intercommunal relations and assertion of cultural identity culminates in wars and wide-range destruction of men and materials.

In this connection let us think of the psychology of violence. There is difference of opinion among psychologists regarding the genesis and development of aggressive behaviour. Some psychologists feel that aggression is due to the operation of some instinctual energy which is innate. Some other psychologists feel that aggression is an interpersonal response trait which develops in an individual out of his dynamic reaction with the environment. The view that aggression is innate instinct to man is supported by Freudian psychologists and also by the studies of Lorenz on aggression in animals. Mc Daugal suggested that the innate instinct of aggression is responsible for war-like behaviour. These psychologists hold that the expression of aggression is healthy and that its repression is unhealthy. But many psychologists like Dollard, Durbin and Bowley regard aggression as originating in response to some frustration. So they regard aggression as a reactive behaviour and not as a primary phenomenon. This theory has been tested by Dollard Miller and Hovland. The current researches also regard aggression not as innate and necessary, but as a learned behaviour and so modifiable. This theory stresses the relevance of peace education. Klineberg points out that people may learn to be aggressive on non-aggressive in a frustrating situation. Their aggression may be reinforced if it brings success or satisfaction or it may be extinguished if it goes unrewarded. It has been experimentally demonstrated that aggression may be learnt by modeling, imitation or by conditioning. So Peace Education is both relevant and significant.

Social Psychologists have focused on civil, structural and international violence. Civil violence is internal war within a state. It includes domestic group attacks, coups, civil violence that originates from lack of political, economic and cultural freedom and equity. Structural violence is built into social structures. Economic exploitation, discrimination against minorities and ethnic groups, the process of under-development and unequal distribution of resources and opportunities lead to structural violence. International violence leads to wars.

Peace Education can be conceived as a synthesis of two major educational trends of developing morals and values through education and by making the students acknowledge the emergence of global society. For this purpose the curriculum should be modified so as to make it related to human values. We have to drive home the idea that conflict, misunderstanding and aggression are ingredient characteristics of people who do not understand what others basically are, feel or want. For this purpose orientation programmes should be held for the teachers and the community has to be educated through non-formal ways.

Further lasting peace can be attained only through social actions. When we think of violence, we usually think only of bloodshed; we do not think of violent social structure and social injustice. Poverty is violence. Poverty in the mist of affluence is violence raised to shameful extent. A just social order is a pre requisite for lasting peace. Only an egalitarian society can ensure lasting peace. Unjust social structures are to be fought against. Any peace project, if it is to be successful should embrace poverty alleviation schemes.

Psychological approaches to Peace making should ensure effective communication, improvement of self-esteem, providing good models, eradicating poverty, enabling people to appreciate differences in values and enhancement of empathy.