Agonistic peace and confronting the past: An analysis of a failed peace process and the role of narratives

AuthorAyşe Betül Çelik
Published date01 March 2021
Date01 March 2021
DOIhttp://doi.org/10.1177/0010836720938401
Subject MatterArticles
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836720938401
Cooperation and Conflict
2021, Vol. 56(1) 26 –43
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0010836720938401
journals.sagepub.com/home/cac
Agonistic peace and
confronting the past: An
analysis of a failed peace
process and the role of
narratives
Ayşe Betül Çelik
Abstract
This study analyzes how peace processes in socio-political environments that do not support
‘confronting the past’ (CTP) initiatives are affected by the exclusion and delegitimization of
alternative narratives different from dominant ones concerning the nature and history of ethnic
conflicts, focusing on Turkey’s failed peace process as a case study. It pays specific attention
to the resistance against acknowledging alternatives to dominant narratives by considering the
role played by bystanders and antagonistic citizens, who are not directly part of the conflict but
nonetheless support it by remaining passive or directly/indirectly supporting dominant narratives.
Driven by agonistic peace theory, the article shows how failing to turn these groups into agonistic
citizens through some form of agonistic CTP initiative and allowing a space for alternative
narratives can result in the fragility of efforts towards a transition to peace.
Keywords
agonistic peace, confronting the past, ethnic conflict, Kurdish issue in Turkey, narratives, peace
processes
A wealth of literature on peace processes shows their fragility. Although there is no sin-
gle factor accounting for success of peace processes and peacebuilding, one of the most
important among factors that make them fragile is political exclusion (Call, 2012), espe-
cially of minorities. While scholars have paid attention to whether and how minorities’
perceived or actual deprivation of an expected opportunity to participate in state admin-
istration was addressed during peace processes (Westendorf, 2015; Wolff, 2009), facili-
tating the public expression of their conflict narratives has largely escaped attention.
Corresponding author:
Ayşe Betül Çelik, Faculty of Arts and Social Science, Sabancı University, Orhanlı, Tuzla, Istanbul 34956, Turkey.
Email: bcelik@sabanciuniv.edu
938401CAC0010.1177/0010836720938401Cooperation and ConflictÇelik
research-article2020
Article
Çelik 27
Moreover, when this has been addressed, the emphasis has mostly been on the necessity
of creating shared histories through negotiating these narratives with hegemonic ones to
open a new page of co-existence (Staub, 2006), mostly ignoring how peace processes are
affected by the exclusion and delegitimization of such narratives, and by the resistance
of different groups to accepting their presence in socio-political environments not sup-
porting ‘confronting the past’ (CTP) initiatives.
Agonistic peace literature emphasizes the importance of turning antagonist/enemy
groups into agonistic ones/adversaries (Aggestam et al., 2015; Maddison, 2014; Mouffe,
2000; Shinko, 2008). First, in such transformations it is essential that historically delegit-
imized and unaccepted conflict narratives also find a public space to be expressed with-
out necessarily being accepted by the whole society. Such expression helps change
certain groups, who reject alternative narratives or remain silent against injustice, and
consequently support the conflict without necessarily being directly part of the armed
conflict. Second, peaceful transformation of conflicts also necessitates turning these
groups into agonistic citizens so that not only do they allow this space for alternative
narratives (without necessarily accepting such narratives), but also such transformation
changes the conflictual relations (especially between the minority and majority groups)
to make peace efforts more powerful.
Establishing peace requires working at various levels of damaged relations: between
state and individuals, state and groups, and among various groups in the society. A holis-
tic and thick approach to peace requires designing different mechanisms to transform
these damaged relations. Peace processes can fail due to many reasons concerning these
levels and contextual factors affecting the process: lack of political will of the conflicting
parties, focusing solely on the political elite level, poor peace process design, not being
able to respond to changing political and social environment, resisting to spoiler effects,
and so forth. Most studies on peace focus on the power of the parties in conflict, their
negotiation (or lack thereof), and the behavior of the state and the armed group
(Westendorf, 2015; Wolff, 2009), limiting such perspectives to establishing only thin/
negative peace centred around the decision-making level. Such focus undermines the
necessity of transforming group relations at the societal level, especially concerning the
role narratives play in affecting inter-group relations. This prevents developing a thick/
positive peace, but can also affect other levels of peacebuilding. For example, failure to
design mechanisms to allow alternative narratives to find a public space and to use this
space to turn antagonistic citizens into agonistic ones hinders developing policy recom-
mendations about CTP mechanisms at the mid-level leadership and designing them at
high-level leadership. As argued by Bashir, ‘neutralizing history’ by breaking with the
past, and ‘bracketing history from politics’, ‘follows the logic of the perpetrators’ (2016:
21). Therefore, there is a need for a political will to support CTP initiatives at various
levels of peacemaking. Such an approach does not imply that transforming inter-group
relations through allowing space for alternative narratives and transforming antagonists
are the most crucial needs for peace processes to succeed, but that the failure to under-
stand the resistance against alternative narratives contributes to their fragility.
This article is an attempt to address the gap in literature in terms of understanding the
resistance against acknowledging alternatives to dominant narratives, by analysing
Turkey’s failed peace process. Its main argument is that in fragile peace processes, such

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT