Understanding the Types and Levels of Peace: From Individual to Global

When we think about peace, most of us imagine a world without war or violence. But peace is far more complex than simply the absence of fighting. To truly understand peace, we need to explore its different dimensions and recognize that it operates at multiple levels-from the conflicts within ourselves to the tensions between nations.

Beyond silence: negative peace and positive peace 🔗

Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung, often regarded as the father of peace studies, introduced a crucial distinction between two types of peace. Negative peace refers to the absence of violence-when fighting stops or oppression ends. For instance, when a ceasefire takes effect, negative peace emerges. It is called “negative” not because it is bad, but because it describes the absence of something undesirable.

Positive peace goes much further. It is filled with constructive elements: restored relationships, social systems that serve everyone’s needs, and the ability to resolve conflicts constructively. Peace does not mean the total absence of conflict. Rather, it means the absence of violence in all forms and the constructive management of disagreements through respectful attention to everyone’s legitimate needs and interests.

The interaction between conflict and its resolution creates a spectrum ranging from outright war to unqualified peace, where violence is absent and cooperation is deeply embedded in social structures. Understanding this spectrum helps us recognize that peace is not simply a switch we can turn on or off, but a condition we must actively build and maintain.

The individual level: where peace begins 🔗

Peace starts within each person. Inner qualities such as tranquility, patience, respect, compassion, and self-control can promote peace within an individual, regardless of external circumstances. When we experience inner conflict-tensions between our desires, duties, and societal expectations-it can manifest as aggressive behavior if left unresolved.

Inner conflict often arises from competing feelings, desires, and attitudes. A person’s values, beliefs, principles, and morals help define their inner self. When these elements clash, disharmony results. For example, someone might struggle between their career ambitions and family responsibilities, or between personal desires and moral obligations.

Achieving inner harmony is foundational for broader social peace. Someone experiencing internal conflict cannot easily live in harmony with others. Unity and harmony within individuals creates the foundation for unity and harmony in communities. This is why personal peace work-understanding ourselves, resolving our internal contradictions, and aligning our actions with our values-is not selfish but essential for collective wellbeing.

Building inner peace 🔗

Resolving inner conflict requires honest self-examination. We must identify the competing parts of ourselves, understand what each wants, and find ways to honor our core values while meeting our needs. This process often involves developing self-awareness, practicing mindfulness, and cultivating compassion for ourselves and others. When we achieve inner harmony, we become better equipped to contribute positively to our relationships and communities.

The societal level: when diversity becomes division 🔗

At the level of human groups and nation-states, diversity itself is not inherently problematic. Communities with different ethnic groups, religions, languages, and cultural practices can coexist peacefully. The critical question is: when does diversity become a source of conflict?

Peace is disturbed when diversity becomes politicized, often due to perceived inequalities in the distribution of wealth, power, and prestige. Research shows that while economic inequality between individuals does not strongly predict conflict, inequality between identity groups defined by religion, ethnicity, or region significantly increases the risk of armed conflict.

When certain groups feel systematically excluded from political participation, economic opportunities, or social recognition, they experience a sense of deprivation and discrimination. This perceived inequality fuels group formation and mobilization. In Nigeria, for instance, ethnic groups in the north have consistently higher infant mortality rates and lower educational achievement than groups in the south, creating tensions that can escalate into conflict.

The politicization process 🔗

Politicization occurs when differences that might otherwise remain neutral become markers of political division and competition. A linguistic difference becomes a political issue when speakers of one language are excluded from government jobs. A religious difference becomes political when one faith group receives preferential treatment in accessing resources or services.

This process transforms what could be enriching diversity into destructive division. Group identities that could coexist peacefully instead become the basis for mobilization against perceived injustices. The key to preventing this transformation is ensuring that social, economic, and political goods are distributed fairly across different identity groups, and that all groups have meaningful representation in decision-making processes.

The international level: navigating anarchy 🔗

At the global level, the challenge of peace takes on a different character. The international system operates in a state of anarchy-not chaos, but rather the absence of any authority superior to nation-states capable of enforcing rules and arbitrating disputes.

In this anarchic environment, states must rely on “self-help” for their security. They cannot count on a higher authority to protect them, so they must ensure their own survival. This creates a security dilemma: when one state increases its military capabilities to feel more secure, neighboring states perceive this as a threat and respond by building up their own forces, leading to an arms race where everyone feels less secure.

Power competition and resource struggles 🔗

Realist theories of international relations assert that states are the main power players and must constantly account for the possibility that others might have or gain more power, forcing them into perpetual competition and balancing. Factors like unequal resource endowment and the need for security drive military-industrial competition.

States compete not only for military power but also for economic resources, technological advantages, and political influence. This competition makes sustained peace at the international level particularly challenging. Yet it is also essential, given our global interconnectedness. Climate change, pandemics, and economic crises do not respect national borders, requiring unprecedented cooperation even amid competitive dynamics.

Paths toward international cooperation 🔗

Despite these challenges, international peace is not impossible. Liberal institutionalists argue that international organizations, shared norms, and economic interdependence can mitigate anarchy’s negative effects. When states recognize that cooperation serves their interests better than conflict, and when they build institutions to facilitate this cooperation, they can move toward what some scholars call a “security community”-a group of states among which war has become virtually unthinkable.

Connecting the levels 🔗

These three levels of peace-individual, societal, and international-are deeply interconnected. Individuals who have not resolved their inner conflicts contribute to societal tensions. Societies riven by inequality and politicized divisions cannot be reliable partners in international cooperation. And international conflicts create domestic pressures that exacerbate both social divisions and personal stress.

Building sustainable peace requires work at all three levels simultaneously. We must cultivate inner harmony, address systemic inequalities that fuel group conflicts, and develop international institutions and norms that enable cooperation despite anarchy. This is the challenge of peace studies: understanding these complex dynamics and finding ways to move from negative peace to positive peace at every level of human interaction.

What do you think? How can we bridge the gap between inner peace and global peace? What role can individuals play in addressing group inequalities and international tensions?

References

1. https://www.irenees.net/bdf_fiche-notions-186_en.html
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace
3. https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/dev4peace/inequality-and-conflict-some-good-news
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy_(international_relations)