Brandon Hamber

Studies of violence among young men often focus on individual acts of direct violence without connecting these behaviors to structural and cultural contexts. Violence remains deeply ingrained in ma...

While Northern Ireland is praised as a successful peace process with valuable lessons, peacebuilding is incomplete. The responsibility increasingly falls on young people to address the unfinished business of the past, despite questions of capacity and the complex political and social dynamics of today. This article examines youth sector peacebuilding in Northern Ireland, highlighting shifts in youth policy and the emergence of a dominant contact hypothesis approach. It is argued that this approach is unsuitable for the current context, where new issues extend beyond the Catholic‐Protestant divide, and structural problems such as inequality and social, cultural and political division persist. A critical action approach to peacebuilding is proposed, identifying methodologies to enhance this through consultations, workshops, and interviews with youth leaders and young people. Four pathways to engage young people's critical consciousness for action by youth workers (YWs) are outlined: the appreciation of and adaptation to contexts, instituting deliberative long‐term processes, peer‐to‐peer learning between young people, and all driven by the self‐reflexive, politicized and motivating YW.

This chapter critically reflects on the ways in which masculinities play (or do not play) a role in scholarship and praxis on transitional justice. While transitional justice is inherently dominated by masculine values and actors and structured around the masculine nature of (semi-)legal processes, these aspects have, by and large, not been critically unpacked in the TJ literature. In recent years, there have been some developments in this regard, and scholars have increasingly begun to pay attention to men and masculinities in post-conflict and transitional spheres. As this chapter will chart, however, this engagement primarily unfolds against a violation-centric lens, focusing either on violences perpetrated by (militarized) men or against men, mostly in the form of sexual and gender-based violence. What remains missing, however, is an exploration of the multiplicities and complexities of diverse masculine experiences and identities, including, for instance, civilian masculinities. Against this background, this chapter demonstrates that masculinity lenses offer important avenues for better understanding the diversity of gendered dynamics in processes of transition. Interrogating armed conflicts through a masculinities perspective and paying attention to men’s gendered lived realities must, however, not be misappropriated toward diverting attention away from women’s experiences and femininities, or from queer perspectives.

This book addresses the theory and practice of transitional justice through the lens of masculinities and queer perspectives. What and where are the intersections between masculinities and queer theories and frameworks for better understanding lived experiences of violence, justice, and transitions? How can masculinities and queer perspectives enhance and "complexify" our understandings of the intersections between gender, sexualities, armed conflict and (post-)conflict transitions? Incorporating masculinities and queer perspectives in transitional justice in tandem, and alongside one another, this book contributes empirically, conceptually, and methodologically to an exploration of gender in processes of dealing with violent pasts. More specifically, and by taking on the task of combining, bringing into conversation, and utilizing both masculinities and queer perspectives, the book aims to facilitate and contribute toward more inclusive, holistic, and intersectional approaches of gender in dealing with the past. This book will appeal to scholars and students working in the areas of transitional justice, peace and conflict research, international relations, gender studies, and socio-legal studies. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.

Reflecting on lessons learned throughout the chapters in this volume, this concluding chapter offers final concluding thoughts about the possibilities and challenges of integrating masculinities and queer perspectives in transitional justice. To this end, this chapter draws out several implications and contributions of this volume, in the conceptual, analytical, empirical, methodological, and practical sense, offering concluding thoughts. In addition, the chapter also aims to orient our gaze forward, in terms of identifying gaps that still remain unaddressed, mapping out directions for further research, and articulating calls for action in terms of facilitating and advancing more inclusive approaches to gender in dealing with the past. As such, this chapter includes broader observations by way of considering the individual chapters as a whole, coupled with ensuing reflections from both the editors as well as particular contributing authors, thereby offering a range of different perspectives.

While gender perspectives have become a burgeoning focus of analysis in the field of transitional justice, careful consideration for the roles of masculinities and for the experiences of persons with diverse sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions, and sex characteristics (SOGIESC) remains mostly absent from these debates. By integrating masculinities and queer perspectives in transitional justice, this edited volume begins to remedy these gaps. This introductory chapter outlines the background, aims, and objectives of this volume; situates the book and its chapters in existing literature on gendering transitional justice; and outlines the structure and numerous contributions of the book. The introduction highlights how, by incorporating masculinities and queer perspectives in transitional justice, this book contributes empirically, conceptually, and methodologically to an exploration of gender in processes of dealing with violent pasts.

This article explores the micro-dynamics of intragroup betrayal and self-betrayal that can be evoked by relational peacebuilding between groups. The painful accusation of betrayal by close, family-type group members and internally feeling like a betrayer as a result of working with the ‘other side’ is presented as an underestimated human cost of relational peacebuilding. This understanding emerged from an international ‘Beyond Dehumanisation’ research project, which included experienced peace practitioners from South Africa, the Israel-Palestine region and the conflict in and about Northern Ireland. The emerging diagnostic framework is supported by (and provides empirical support for) theories of betrayal that stress how deeply relational betrayal is. The resonance with Margalit’s theory of betrayal as the ‘undermining of thick relations’ is especially strong. ‘Peace as betrayal’ suggests the need for more practical support for peacebuilders and can also be applied more widely to render resistance to transitional justice processes more visible.

Whilst “spatiality” and “architecture” have become recognized as important dimensions of urban conflict, contemporary forms of power push our gaze toward symbolic landmarks such as Belfast’s “peace walls.” This paper uses Belfast as a case study to instead highlight the fundamental role occupied by “everyday” urban space and architecture. It reveals evidence of an undisclosed body of divisive architecture put in place through a confidential process of security planning between 1977 and 1985 to physically segregate and spatially fragment Catholic and Protestant communities in contested areas of Belfast. Termed here as hidden barriers, they are formed from “everyday” roads, housing, shops, offices, factories and landscaping, and the ways in which they continue to promote division represents a crucially undervalued aspect of conflict-transformation planning. The paper examines the complex urban challenges that they pose, arguing for a reevaluation of the role of everyday architecture and space in conflict and peacebuilding processes.

The article critically examines transitional justice mechanisms to determine if historical abuse inquiries can learn from this field of practice. The article explores the Northern Ireland Historical Institutional Abuse Inquiry which reported its findings in January 2017 as a vehicle for addressing what lessons might be learned or shared between the fields of transitional justice and investigations into historical abuse. Through a detailed analysis of empirical research with those that gave testimony to the Inquiry, including fourthly-three victims and Inquiry transcripts, the article explores to what extent the Inquiry was victim-centered, enabled victim participation (beyond giving testimony) and addressed victim needs. The article shows that many of the flaws of transitional justice mechanisms have been replicated when dealing with historical child abuse. Drawing on lessons from transitional justice – both positive and negative – the article outlines five broad areas for consideration that could strengthen the victim-centered nature of approaches to dealing with the legacy of historical child abuse. The article concludes that addressing victims’ needs should be at the center and drive approaches and processes for both transitional justice and historical institutional abuse.