There is a great deal of evidence that problems cannot be solved militarily. According to studies, there have been more than 14,400 wars in the history of mankind, claiming the lives of some 3.5 billion people. The world is “spinning out of control” and we humans have the capacity to prevent it. Why don’t we?
We tend to see war and peace as opposites. “Peace is the absence of war” is one such definition. But to believe that we will have peace when the war in Ukraine ends may be too short-sighted. The same can be said of the war in Israel. If the end of the war does not also bring an end to the underlying conflicts, tensions will continue to exist. The end of the war only shifts the possibilities, so that there will be no real peace even after the war.
Table of Contents
In peace, war plays no role.
The meaning of peace would be better brought out if it were not considered solely as a state defined by the absence of war. Peace is a dynamic process in which war plays no role. This approach already shifts the focus of attention somewhat.
Thinking backwards: from the expected benefit to the solution
Gerhard Schwarz’s theory presents the strategic options for human behavior in conflicts in the form of a pyramid. For an exit strategy to be successful, it must respond to the conditions that make it possible. If the term “exit strategy” describes a way out of the current strategy, then it is clear that it must be a different strategy than the one currently being pursued.
“The same thinking that leads to a problem cannot lead to a solution,” Albert Einstein.
Indeed, the question of how to end a war allows only three obvious answers: victory, defeat, or a draw. War, as a strategy of confrontation in a zero-sum game (Game Theory), only contemplates these three outcomes. Therefore, a negotiated exit from conflict is only possible when the military situation clearly points to one of these outcomes.
Following Gerhard Schwarz’s theory of conflict evolution, a change in strategy only occurs when the current strategy does not lead to the desired goal and the alternative strategy proves to be more effective. This clearly defines the requirements for an exit strategy: it must break with the logic of confrontation and offer both sides a better outcome than can be achieved through conflict.
This is where comprehensive mediation comes into play, because by definition, mediation is a type of logical thinking that leads away from the problem and does not move linearly forward. The big difference is that mediation thinks backwards, from the expected benefit to the sustainable solution, thereby leading thoughts away from the problem. This way of thinking can help remove all obstacles that prevent the parties to the conflict from finding the solution themselves.
Rethinking: asking the right questions to find consensus
Mediation has a special role to play in the search for balance, it can help to ask the right questions and be the mediating element in which understanding (empathy) comes to the fore. One thing is clear: if you look for it, you can find at least a basic consensus. However, we will find it at a completely different level and certainly not in the warlike solutions that are already on the table: There should be consensus that we are all only human. There should be consensus that we all live in the same world. There should be consensus that we will have nowhere to live if the world comes to an end. Perhaps we can also reach a consensus that we are part of the same global society despite all our cultural differences. A consensus that we all want peace will certainly do that too.
Creating obstacles to the warlike approach
Another important pillar towards a lasting solution will be possible when the path of cooperation is facilitated and the path of confrontation is made more difficult. From a strategic point of view, obstacles to negotiation must be removed, while at the same time obstacles to the warlike approach must be created.
It is clear that there will be no peace unless we begin to think again. If we succeed, we will not be defenseless against wars. Then we will not only be able to put an end to existing wars, but also to prevent new wars. Consequently, we must design an exit strategy from wars, but also an entry strategy for lasting peace.
