It is based on acts of moral reparation that provide lasting relief for moral wounds, and on legal acts that perpetuate this reparation.
Acts of moral reparation (initially)
-
Explicit acknowledgement of the wrongs caused to each other’s populations by the leaders of the belligerent countries, followed by a public expression of forgiveness for these wrongs.
-
Independent judicial processes to bring to justice those involved in belligerencies and combat impunity in accordance with internationally accepted standards of justice.
-
Possible financial compensation, according to mutually agreed standards.
Legal acts that perpetuate moral redress (over time)
-
Reciprocal official declarations to guarantee respect for the fundamental principles of the human right to peace: the right to life, to dignity, to live in security, and to live in a climate of peace,… for the respective populations.
-
Reworked legislation, providing a legal framework for the development of a culture of peace by the respective political players, to encourage a profound turnaround in populations towards reconciliation and peaceful coexistence.
-
Other fundamental and complementary measures, which reduce social and economic disparities, those perceived as fundamentally unjust.
Since the end of the Second World War, there have been numerous examples of public moral reparations that have led to a just and lasting peace (Germany-France, Japan-victim countries, white South Africa-non-white South Africa, non-Aboriginal Australia-Aboriginal Australia (National Sorry Day), etc.).
Just war / just peace – some thoughts (see also the Aphorisms section)
A just war is always a war that is unjust for one of the parties.
A just peace is a peace that is just for all parties.
There is no comparison between the morality of a just war
and the morality of a just peace.
A just war perpetuates a climate of vengeance.
A just peace perpetuates a climate of peace.
A just peace expresses the notion that there can be no peace without justice
and even more no peace without a sense of justice.
A just peace brings more than peace, it brings appeasement.
A just war brings neither peace nor appeasement.
Another possible definition:
“A process by which peace and justice are achieved together by two or more parties, each recognizing the identities of the others, each renouncing certain demands essential to itself and each agreeing to abide by common rules worked out in concert.”
Definition by Pierre Allan and Alexis Keller, in What is a Just Peace? Oxford University press, 2006.
The advantage of this definition is that it implies:
– being able to give up what did not appear to be negotiable, and not seeking only mutual benefits
– adopting common objective standards, not imposed by just one of the parties.