This text is the working paper prepared under the project "Critical Peace Studies in Turkey"
Translated by: Meral Camcı
The systematic handling of the concepts of war and peace takes place after the First World War. The emergence of academic disciplines, such as Peace Studies, Conflict Resolution, or Peace and Conflict Studies, occurred after the World War II. Initial studies on the resolution of conflicts/disputes, the causes of war, and how peace can be achieved and maintained are generally limited to the fact that each discipline deals with the issue from its own perspective. In addition, the main actors in this field for a long time are seen as states and international organizations. This leads to the dominance of a security-centered perspective in the field for a long time. However, this approach has now been abandoned. Critical Peace Studies provides an approach that a broader, multidimensional, multidisciplinary and non-state-centered multi-actor (including local actors, different segments of society, intellectuals, NGOs and individuals) on the concept of peace, conflict resolution, peace building and sustainability. While this approach proposes a new conceptualization of peace, it also seeks alternative ways and strategies for peacebuilding beyond traditional, mainstream perspectives. In this sense, Critical Peace Studies advocates a bottom-up, non-hierarchical perspective, contrary to classical theorizing, and does not consider peace only as a state of nonviolence or the absence of war/conflict. It also covers fair and equal living conditions, access to basic needs, and the provision of human rights.
The philosophical roots of the concept of peace can be traced back to many periods from the Ancient Ages to the Enlightenment, the Peace of Westphalia and later developments in international law; from the destruction caused by the First World War to the developments between the two wars and the Cold War. However, here, only two thinkers (Jean Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant) who inspired idealist and liberal schools will be briefly discussed and the basic features of the liberal peace theory approach, which they are accepted as pioneers, will be explained before moving on to critical approaches.
Although there are many names who contributed to the liberal peace theory that has dominated the field for a long time, the two most cited and considered to be the pioneers of this approach are J. J. Rousseau and I. Kant. Rousseau reveal their thoughts on war and peace in Abbé de Saint-Pierre's Abstract of the Project for Eternal Peace and Judgment on Eternal Peace.  Although there is a certain difference in the ideas of Rousseau between the two pieces of work, the basic lines of his thoughts on the subject are included in these two. While in the Abstract he explains how peace can be achieved through a European federation with reference to Saint-Pierre, in the Judgment he argues that this is a dream.Rousseau's approach to the issue of peace is based on his debates on equality, rights and freedom, which are his greatest contributions to the literature. He sees the source of both conflicts and disagreements in society and wars between states in inequality and the substitution of particular interests for common interests. At the root of this inequality lies the ignorance of the interests of the majority at the expense of the rising bourgeoisie and the interests of private property owners. In this sense, it is argued that the approach of Marx and Engels parallels the approach of Rousseau. Rousseau defines war as an interstate situation, and it is not possible for the existing system of states to prevent wars, even if states are governed by democratic regimes. According to him; “The rich deceive the poor under the name of protection against external enemies, and wars are a means of maintaining social inequality and human chains. Distrust, tyranny and social inequality between states support each other. (…) Even if states isolate themselves from the international community, they cannot break away from the dynamics of the state system.”  Rousseau does not envisage a second Covenant to maintain peace in the aforementioned system of states. After stating that this system does not allow peace in terms of its dynamics, as a condition of peace, he addresses nation states as small (so that the participation of the society in the decision-making processes could be ensured), self-sufficient (he defends the agricultural society for this) ones that are just, equal, and “moral goals” and “common good” oriented.
Rousseau's views on war and peace are sometimes considered realist, sometimes moralist or idealist in the literature. The reason for this is that his articles on this subject are sometimes inconsistent with each other. However, by looking at the concept of peace on the basis of equality, independence and justice and advocating that equal and just societies should be built as a prerequisite for peace, he pioneers both the concept of peace as justice and the egalitarian concept of freedom of Marx and Engels.
The best known and most cited thinker in classical peace studies and discussions is Kant and his work entitled A Philosophical Essay on Eternal Peace.  This work of Kant constitutes the starting point of the liberal democratic peace theory. Kant's basic thesis that states governed by the republican regime will not fight among themselves is the source of the thesis that democratic regimes will not fight each other, put forward by the liberal school that came later. While this brings the defense of liberal democracy on the one hand, it also paves the way for interventions in countries that are thought to be undemocratic. Kant's optimistic views on the human mind that social life can be improved by moral laws also shape his thoughts on war and how peace can be achieved.  Therefore, Kant opposes that war can be prevented through certain legal rules and treaties, emphasizes that war is a volitional decision taken by reason, and states that “no confederation can prevent war without prioritizing the unacceptability of war morally”.  In other words, peace, which he analyzes in detail in his works, is a moral obligation for Kant. 
Kant emphasizes three points about peace in Eternal Peace. The first (and later much criticized) point concerns domestic law and advocates that every state should be republican. Kant argues that states governed by republics are less likely to fight each other. The second point relates to international law, and the sovereignty of states, non-interference in their internal affairs, etc. It envisages a system based on a federation of free states embracing principles. The third point is cosmopolitan law and is limited to cosmopolitan rights and universal hospitality rules based on a cosmopolitan citizenship. At this stage, Kant argues that the commercial relations that will develop between states and people will contribute to peace.
Kant's views are the source of the peace studies approach criticized by Critical Peace Studies, which is the main subject of this study. The liberal democratic peace theory, starting from Kant, argues that liberal democracies are superior and liberal democratic states do not fight. He argues that the international organizations and society to be formed by liberal democratic states are the guarantee of peace. This approach not only rejects different forms of governance, but also paves the way for intervention in different countries under the name of exporting democracy. It also sees no problem in liberal democratic countries fighting countries that are not governed by liberal democracies for various reasons. 
Discussions about how a world peace can be achieved are revived, especially after World War I. In this period, the prominent name is Woodrow Wilson with his famous 14 principles. Shortly before the end of the war, he describes the “program for world peace”, which consists of 14 principles.  The first five articles of the Wilson Principles are the basic principles that must be valid in the new world order, the sixth article is the necessity of withdrawing from the territory of Russia, the seventh to the thirteenth are the conditions for determining the borders of the country after the war, and the fourteenth is an establishment proposal of an international organization that will guarantee national sovereignty and territorial integrity.” Wilson's approach is consistent with the Kantian approach in many ways. The need for an international organization for peace exists in Wilson as in Kant. In addition, Wilson emphasizes a moral duty for democracy, similar to Kant's view of peace as a moral obligation, and argues that democratically-ruled countries will create “more stable, more prosperous, more peaceful, and more reliable and robust interlocutors due to the support of the people.” 
The most concrete aspect of the Wilson Principles is that although it was not successful, it envisaged the establishment of the League of Nations as an international organization in the name of peace. On the other hand, the argument that both the development of free trade, socio-economic relations and cooperation and the international organizations established for the purpose of international law and peace will improve the ties between the members of the international community and therefore peace, especially in the Second World War. It inspires the United Nations and a number of international and regional organizations after World War II. All this is “the concept of common security first proposed by Wilson, a peace system based on disarmament and arms control, self-determination and freedom of navigation at sea.” 
ßEspecially after the Cold War, the America-centered unipolar world order and the restructuring of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) bring the Neo-Wilsonian approach to the agenda. Within the framework of the liberal democratic approach, Neo-Wilsonism introduces new concepts such as post-Cold War humanitarian intervention, responsibility to protect, peacebuilding, and new international mechanisms. However, the results of various interventions made on the basis of these concepts (Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq, Libya, etc.) are the result of the neo-Wilsonism approach and liberal democratic approach, which ignore local actors and dynamics at the level of states, look conflicts from the outside and from above, and export regimes, reveal that it is far from establishing peace and creating mechanisms to maintain peace. When it was understood in a short time that this approach could not bring a permanent solution to the conflicts and wars in various parts of the world, Peace Studies developed as a separate field. 
In this study, first of all, the approach of Johan Galtung, who is accepted as one of the founders of the field of Peace Studies and who makes both practical and theoretical contributions to the field, will be discussed. Then, the concepts of conflict and conflict resolution will be evaluated within the framework of the approaches of different theorists, and the role of civil society, the notion of justice and the importance of gender perspective in conflict resolution and peacebuilding will be discussed respectively. Finally, the role of NGOs operating in this field, the importance of the phenomenon of justice and the role played by women and LGBTQI+s in the field of Critical Peace Studies in Turkey will be scrutinized.
2. Peace Studies: Johan Galtung
Johan Galtung is considered the founder of the field of Peace Studies. Besides being the founder, he has many contributions to the field. Above all, he provides a practical, functional approach to conflict resolution by giving Peace Studies an interdisciplinary perspective. He also makes practical contributions to peace by acting as a mediator in conflicts in many parts of the world, including Turkey. Galtung is also the founder of the Oslo Peace Research Institute, which was the first research institute in the world to have the peace word in its title in 1959. He also took part in peace missions carried out by the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
Galtung has serious theoretical contributions to Peace Studies. The types of violence, negative and positive definitions of peace, and the approach he developed to transform conflicts are among his greatest contributions to the field. According to him, when defining peace, it is necessary to define violence first. Violence means “to harm and/or hurt”. In a broader definition, “violence is any attack on human basic needs which actually is avoidable. The basic needs of people can be listed as existence, survival, freedom and identity.”  Starting from this simple first definition, Galtung reveals the types of violence. Violence can be physical as well as psychological. Likewise, violence can be direct or indirect, that is, personal and structural, depending on the subject and object of the violence.  Galtung divides violence into five categories: natural, direct, structural or indirect, cultural and temporal. Natural violence originates from nature and is unplanned. Direct violence is violence that is planned and perpetrated by individuals acting individually or collectively. It can be verbal or physical, harming the body, mind or spirit. In structural or indirect violence, the actor who performs the violence is not clear, that is, the actor is actually hidden within the structure. This type of violence is political, oppressive, economic and exploitative. Cultural violence, on the other hand, is violence that serves to legitimize direct and structural violence. While it covers religion, law and ideology, language, art and science in content, it works with carriers such as schools, universities and the media. Temporal violence is negative effects that are passed on to future generations. The extreme case is that life is no longer reproducible, that is, sustainable.  Galtung specifically focuses on the reciprocal and mutually reinforcing relationship between direct, structural and cultural violence. In order to achieve peace, it is necessary to understand the relationship between these three types of violence.
However, various criticisms have been brought to Galtung's approach to violence. Coady states that Galtung's definition of violence is too broad, which “makes it difficult to distinguish violence from situations such as inequality, oppression and alienation”.  Parsons argues that Galtung's definition of structural violence “ignores the different situations in which violence is necessary to achieve social and political justice against oppressive regimes”. 
Based on the types of violence, Galtung defines peace as negative and positive. Negative peace is the absence of any form of violence.  However, positive peace is more comprehensive than negative peace. Galtung deals with positive peace under five headings as types of violence: natural peace, direct positive peace, structural positive peace, cultural positive peace and time. Natural peace is when species cooperate rather than fight each other. Direct positive peace consists of verbal and physical goodness that is good for the body, mind, and spirit of Self and Other. It addresses basic needs such as survival, well-being, freedom and identity. Structural positive peace, on the other hand, is ensuring freedom instead of oppression, equality instead of exploitation, and strengthening it through dialogue rather than penetration, integration instead of division, solidarity instead of fragmentation, and participation instead of marginalization. Cultural positive peace replaces the legitimation of violence with the legitimation of peace; It builds a positive culture of peace in religion, law and ideology, language, arts and sciences, schools, universities and the media. Finally, time is the medium in which any system moves or the process it goes through. More specifically, it refers to a very slow peace process or a very fast progressing violent process or poorly coordinated processes in terms of the temporal dimension of violence or peace. According to Galtung, “all forms of violence nurture all forms of violence”, while “all forms of peace nurture all forms of peace” and “positive peace is the best protection against violence.” 
ßGaltung, who systematizes and analyzes the types of violence and peace, specifically focuses on militarism; ecology and eco-crisis as a direct violence against nature; he draws attention to democracy in the sense of institutionalization of a set of legal rules such as direct or structural peace or culture that may or may not justify violence/war, and patriarchy as a structural violence that includes numerous forms of violence against women, legitimized by certain cultural patterns, with men at the top and women below. 
Galtung's conceptualization of the types of violence and peace forms the basis of his concept of peacebuilding. Peacebuilding should not be separated from peacemaking and peacekeeping. Galtung states with peacebuilding that “it is necessary to eliminate the problems created by structural violence and to aim at positive peace, not the negative. With this feature, it gains a wide content that includes all the activities to be done in order to build peace and ensure sustainable peace.”  According to him, the way to peace at this point passes through the resolution of conflicts through transformation. 
3. Conflict and Conflict Resolution
Although there are different approaches to conflict and conflict resolution, it is generally accepted that it is an inevitable human phenomenon. Different academics/thinkers working in this field propose different definitions of conflict and different strategies for conflict resolution. However, it should be noted that there are certain points that they all have in common (diversity of actors, non-hierarchical approach, inclusiveness, etc.) in terms of Critical Peace Studies. In this sense, Kenneth Cloke's definition of conflict is quite embracive and he proposes many alternative definitions of conflict. Among these are: 
• “Conflict represents a breach of boundaries, a failure to value or recognize our own integrity or the personal space of others.”
• “Conflict represents a lack of listening, a lack of appreciation of the subtlety of what someone else has to say.”
• “Conflict represents a lack of skill, effectiveness or clarity in saying what we feel, think or want.”
• “Conflict is the voice of a new paradigm, the demand for change in a system that has lost its usefulness.”
• “Conflict is often an anxious interpretation of difference, diversity, and opposition that ignores the essential role of polarity in creating unity, balance, and symbiosis.”
While Galtung proposes the transcend method for the transformation of conflicts, Lederach prefers the concept of reconciliation while stating that peacebuilding will be realized through conflict transformation and states that peacebuilding can be achieved through conflict transformation. Dietrich, on the other hand, uses the concept of revealing conflict transformation based on the theorizations of multiple peaces and transrational peace.  Burton, on the other hand, draws attention to the role of violence in conflicts. According to Burton, the basis of conflict is the violence that people resort to when some non-negotiable needs (security, recognition, identity, etc.) are not met. 
Galtung divides conflict into four categories: interpersonal (micro-conflicts), societal (meso-conflicts), international (macro-conflicts) and interregional and inter-civilizational (mega-conflicts).  He states that conflict is based on the incompatible goals of the actors.  The difference of the aims/interests between individuals or states leads to an opposition, ant then this opposition leads to an attitude towards each other. These attitudes turn into behaviors such as aggression and violence. As a result, “the resulting spiral of violence and hatred turns into conflict.”  Since all concepts are interrelated in Galtung's analysis, it is necessary to understand and analyze the actors and objectives in order to understand and transform conflict.
Galtung states that conflicts have a three-stage life cycle: the stage before violence, the stage of violence, and the stage after violence. Even if there is no overt violence in stage I, there is a conflict. The structure and culture that feeds violence (nationalist prejudices, sexist cultural norms, etc.) can lead to the emergence of violence at any time. II. At this stage, the existing conflict turns into violence and the first thing to do at this stage is to stop the violence. Peaceful means should be used to eradicate violence. III. stage covers the actions to be taken after the end of the violence. This stage is more complex than the pre-violent stage because there are hostilities, losses, and feelings of revenge. This can make people, cultures and structures more prone to violence. The tasks at this stage are therefore reconstruction, reconciliation between the parties, and resolving the underlying issue of the conflict. 
Galtung emphasizes the importance of transformation to resolve conflicts. It indicates that this should be done with the transcending method, as stated above. The method of transcending is the one that can be applied to all the above-mentioned levels of conflict. Conflicting parties often fall into the “all or nothing” trap. However, a higher level that includes the wishes of each of the parties, namely the “both-and” level, can be reached. Herein lies the main idea of Galtung's method of transcending.  There can be following outcomes in a conflict between parties who want to achieve their own goals: 
• The victory of one of the parties or the other at the end of the struggle process,
• The absence of a result that satisfies any of the parties at the end of the postponement period, that is, a draw,
• Reconciliation in which both parties compromise as a result of the negotiation process,
• Transcending gained by both parties as a result of the dialogue process.
Galtung attributes a negative connotation to the word victory. Because the victory of one side means the loss of the other side, which can cause the conflict to flare up again. Therefore, the best way to transform a conflict is to transcend, in the sense of “both-and”, which will satisfy both sides, and which does not result in the victory of anyone alone. Thus, the underlying causes of the conflict are resolved. 
Similar to what Galtung did, Morton Deutsch also makes a comparison between the cooperation and competitionpreferences of the conflicting parties in his own conflict resolution theory. He argues that there is a certain degree of dependency (dependence of one party to the other, of the two to each other, or a mutual but asymmetrical dependence) between the conflicting parties. If the parties were completely independent of each other, there would be no conflict anyway. Therefore, conflict is a common problem that the parties involved must resolve. At this point, Deutsch proposes a method of cooperation in which both sides win, rather than competition where one side wins and the other loses. Because, in fact, a struggle or competition in which one side wins and the other loses usually results in both sides losing.  In this sense, it becomes important whether a constructive process based on cooperation or a destructive process based on competition is used in conflict resolution (Deutsch also states that not all competitions are negative). In order to intervene in a particular conflict, to operate a constructive process, the parties to the conflict, their social context, desires, conflict orientations, social norms, etc. requires some knowledge as well as some skills. Developing a cooperative or win-winorientation in resolving a conflict is easier when there is social support. Providing this social support in a hostile environment can be possible with these mentioned skills.  Deutsch also states that at the center of this whole process is the reframing of conflict as a common problem that needs to be resolved through joint cooperation efforts. The values underlying constructive conflict resolution are reciprocity, equality of people, shared community, fallibility andnonviolence.  Deutsch also draws attention to the importance of training parties and mediators for cooperative conflict resolution. Education is a process that should continue not only before or during conflict resolution but also after it.
Another approach on how to resolve conflicts and achieve sustainable reconciliation was developed by John Paul Lederach. Lederach contributes to the field both with his theoretical approach fed by the philosophy of Protestantism and with the roles he takes in conflict resolution in the field. Christian pacifism and nonviolence lie at the core of his theoretical approach. He seeks ways to build peace and sustainable reconciliation in fragmented societies (especially fragmented ones in terms of different beliefs and cultures). Lederach draws attention to the image of the enemy and the us-them distinction that underlies social conflicts. He states that people are extremely vulnerable and more open to manipulation when there is a deep and long-term experience of fear and direct violence that feeds the image of the enemy. He points out that the conflicting groups live in close geographies, that they sometimes have direct trauma of violence that they associate with the people they perceive as the enemies that are passed on through the generations, and that although they are neighbors, they are paradoxically trapped in a long-term enemy interaction spiral. Conflicts are therefore rooted in deep-seated hatred, fear, and serious stereotypes.  This is why reconciliation must be at the center of peacebuilding. Reconciliation, on the other hand, is based on “repairing and rebuilding relations”.  At this point, Lederach emphasizes truth, compassion, justice and peace:
“According to Lederach, reconciliation efforts develop within the framework of the concepts of truth, compassion, justiceand peace. Truth is acknowledgment of wrongdoing; compassion is mourning and acceptance of a new beginning; justice is respect for individual and community rights for social restructuring; and peace will reveal the need for a sense of trust and security, interdependence and harmony.” 
Reconciliation symbolizes a point of confrontation that concerns both the past and the future. So for reconciliation, people need to find ways to face both themselves and their enemies, their hopes and their fears. Compromise-based conflict transformation needs to be understood as a concept beyond the resolution of problems. Conflict resolution occurs through change in four dimensions: personal, relational, structural and cultural.  Therefore, it should be aimed to involve large segments of society in the process. In order for the parties to do this, the peacebuilding practitioner must persuade them to talk to and listen to each other. Where there is no conclusion from this, a group of witnesses should be included in the interviews. If that doesn't work either, an institution that the parties “equally respect” should be included in the negotiation process.  In this sense, it should be taken into account that peacebuilding is a process and will take a long time.
Actors have an important place in Lederach's understanding of building peace by transforming conflicts, based on consensus, which spans the process, covers large segments of society. Lederach presents a pyramid model to achieve this goal. While actors are on one side of the pyramid, there are peacebuilding approaches on the other. Actors are considered at three levels. Starting from the top of the pyramid, the top leaders, including military, political, religious leaders, with high visibility at the first level; middle-level leaders, including highly respected leaders, ethnic/religious leaders, academicians, intellectuals, NGO leaders at the second level; at the third level, there are leaders at the grassroots of the community: local leaders, indigenous NGO leaders, community leaders, local health officials, leaders of refugee camps. Corresponding to these three actor levels, the first level of the peacebuilding approach is focusing on high-level negotiations, attaching importance to achieving a ceasefire, and the existence of a single, highly visible mediator; second level problem solving workshops, conflict resolution training, peace commissions, insider teams; and at the third level, there are local peace commissions, grassroots education, reduction of prejudices, psycho-social work in post-war traumas. According to this approach of Lederach, as you go down the pyramid, the population covered and affected by the process increases. In other words, Lederach proposes a grassroots model of conflict transformation and peacebuilding. This model, an example of which is given below,  is also significant in terms of revealing the role of NGOs and local actors in conflict resolution and peacebuilding.
4. The Role of Civil Society in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
It has been seen in many instances that international initiatives and top-down processes in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes could not produce a permanent peace process, and conflicts resurfaced after a while. Even if the peace processes carried out by international initiatives provide a ceasefire or an environment of peace through certain agreements, it fails to grasp the need for redressing grievances in violent conflicts, proposes strategies that impose some external prescriptions for peace, and resorts to political hierarchy by following an exclusionary decision-making mechanism.  This is exactly why the literature on this subject, briefly summarized above, has sought a model of social reconciliation and conflict transformation that includes the leading figures of the society. At this point, an important role is attributed to NGOs. This process, which is also called informal diplomacy, in which NGOs and local actors are included in addition to the official processes, aims to overcome the approach of official diplomacy, which does not go beyond a military solution, especially in conflicts where serious acts of violence occur, and to build a lasting peace by actually repairing the grievances and getting to the root of the conflicts. In this sense, in violent conflicts, the real peacebuilding process begins after the ceasefire is reached. At this stage, the biggest role is on the individuals and organizations in order to bring the conflicting segments of the society together, heal traumas, address existing stereotypes, and do other work necessary to create lasting peace and reconciliation.
For a lasting conflict resolution and peace process, local people need to take ownership of peace initiatives and continue to implement changes when outsiders who were intervened withdrew. Above all, local people are the main actors of the process and they have the real knowledge of the process. Therefore, people and/or organizations involved in the process from the very beginning should carry out the whole process together with local actors. This process requires “great trust, networking and long-term commitment” and is based on “faith, discipline and patience”.  In this long-term, stereotyped and traumatized process, the importance of NGOs and mediators on which all the parties will agree is of great importance.
Paffenholz states that civil society is “generally understood as the arena of voluntary, collective action of an institutional nature around common interests, goals and values as distinct from the state, family and market”.  Civil society is made up of large and diverse voluntary organisations, not motivated by purely private and economic interests, autonomous, and interacts in the public sphere. Special interest groups, faith-based organizations, traditional and community groups, researchers and research institutes, humanitarian or development service organizations, human rights and advocacy organizations, Non-Governmental Organizations and International Non-Governmental Organizations working for conflict resolution and peacebuilding, social and political movements, business organizations and networks can be counted among the categories of civil society actors.  Paffenholz classifies the contribution of civil society to peacebuilding as protection, monitoring, advocacy, social cohesion/socialisation, intergroup cohesion, facilitation and mediation, service provider. 
In its 2013 report titled A Pot Pourri of Civil Society Action for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding, the Democratic Progress Institute (DPI) sets out a set of principles that can be applied for peacebuilding and conflict transformation in different regions, based on the example of Northern Ireland: 
• “The need to provide people at all levels of society—but particularly in communities and regions most affected by violent conflict—with the opportunity to express their hopes, fears, and experiences.
• The need to create safe spaces where people can make their voices heard
• Importance of listening to often marginalized or silenced groups such as women, youth, minority groups in society
• People involved in/perpetrated by violence—victims/survivors of violence; political prisoners and their families; former warriors; displaced communities—the need to cover their statements
• The importance of listening to communities in their own words, art forms and languages
• Recognizing the diversity of both NGOs and community-based organizations and recognizing the right to express different perspectives”.
It can be said that many studies on the role of NGOs and local actors in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes have common findings. Studies on this subject draw attention to the importance of listening to the stories of the parties who have been exposed to the conflict and/or parties to the conflict and enabling the parties to hear each other's stories by bringing them side by side for lasting peace, mutual forgiveness and a sense of justice. 
5. Justice in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
One of the most important phenomena in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes is the concept of justice. The sense of justice of the victims of conflict or war is shaken the most and this feeling needs to be repaired the most. For this reason, the concept of justice holds a special place in the field of Critical Peace Studies. Alternative ways are sought for the re-establishment of the sense of justice apart from the formal judicial processes, which are mostly based on punishment. While formal justice processes are mostly based on a punitive justice understanding, Critical Peace Studies focuses on reparation, mediation processes based on listening and forgiveness of the parties, and the conceptualization of restorative justice. 
At this point, it is worth mentioning the mediation method, which is a method that has been used more frequently in recent years and which has been increasingly adopted by formal law. Mediation is a conflict management process in which a neutral third party steps in to carry out the negotiation process and an agreement is reached between the parties in the event of a conflict that the conflicting parties cannot resolve among themselves.  In fact, the informal mediation method already exists in the cultures of many different societies and is a method used especially in the resolution of micro conflicts in the society. The success of this method has led states and international organizations to gradually incorporate this method into their formal laws. Mustafa Özbek points out that “victim-offender mediation, which has developed as a part of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) movement that emerged in Anglo-American law”, is gradually spreading in continental Europe as well.  The reasons for the inclusion of both alternative dispute resolution and mediation in formal legal systems are the excessive increase in the number of court cases in most states, the long duration of the cases and the increasing litigation costs that prevent individuals from accessing justice.  Alternative dispute resolution and mediation methods are carried out in a flexible environment that envisages the active participation of the parties in the resolution process, where the parties trust that the third party will act fairly, and in confidentiality.  In the recommendation of the Council of Europe dated 15 September 1999 on mediation, it is stated that mediation is “complementary or alternative to traditional criminal procedure”.  In the same decision, the general principles of mediation are listed as follows: 
• “Mediation in criminal matters is carried out only if the parties give their free will and consent. The parties should always be able to withdraw their consent during mediation.
• Negotiations made in mediation are confidential and cannot be used later, except with the agreement of the parties.
• Mediation in criminal matters should be a generally accessible service.
• Mediation in criminal matters should be available at every stage of the criminal procedure.
• Adequate autonomy should be given to the mediation service in the criminal justice system.”
This movement, which is based on the principle that the parties come together and resolve their disputes based on agreement rather than combative dispute resolution, is referred to by different names such as community justice, restorative justice, and informal justice.  Although this method has been integrated into formal legal systems in recent years, as seen in the literature above, in the field of Critical Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution, a special importance is attached to mediation and restorative justice studies, where the parties are brought together to ensure lasting peace and social cohesion.
Like mediation, the concept of restorative justice is widely used, particularly in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia. The basis of the concept of restorative justice lies in the understanding of “giving the people directly affected by the crime (victim, perpetrator and society) the opportunity to participate directly in the process of determining the reaction to the crime and eliminating the damage suffered by the victim”.  UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) and in the Handbook of Conciliation in Criminal Disputes prepared by the Ministry of Justice of TR, the three basic principles of restorative justice are listed as follows: 
1. “Starting the social reaction against the crime by removing as much as possible of the harm suffered by the victim,
2. Encouraging the perpetrator to understand the effects of their action against the victim and to accept responsibility for it;
3. Giving the victim the opportunity to directly explain the effects of the crime to the perpetrator, to ask them questions, and to meet with the perpetrator in order to best remedy the harm caused by the crime. In addition, community members should be involved in helping this process.”
Victim-offender reconciliation programs, which form the origin of restorative justice, were created in the early 1970s in Canada and the United States, based on the indigenous justice traditions. Alternative understandings of conflict resolution and justice, such as victim-offender mediation, family group conferences, punishment rings, and victim impact panels, evolve over time into today's restorative justice phenomenon. Again, the Civil Rights Movement and the women's movement, which rose in the 1960s, also exhibit the first examples of these alternative practices. Kathleen Daly and Russ Immarigeon draw attention to this relationship between restorative justice and new social movements and list the elements of restorative justice as follows: 
• “Being idealistically value-oriented rather than merely instrumentalistic,”
• “Has a messy, non-programmatic character and an anti-organizational orientation,”
• “It has an inclusive and amorphous structure.”
Restorative justice as a social movement is based on a new and idealistic understanding of justice against traditional justice practices. Restorative justice advocates hold a variety of ideological stances, including liberal, radical-critical feminist, and abolitionist. Their strategies are varied. It has an open and permeable membership structure. Although there are various conferences and meetings that bring researchers and activists together, there is no organization that unites its advocates and/or members. Restorative justice practices are not completely anti-statist, although they are opposed to traditional justice practices implemented by states. Some of its advocates are employed by governments and operate both inside and outside government formations. 
Michael Wenzel et al., while comparing the traditional punitive justice understanding with the restorative justice approach, draw attention to the fact that when a punishment is given to the perpetrator, it is thought that justice is also provided. Punishment is also a part of restorative justice, but among restorative justice practices, is not central. In different and heterogeneous models of restorative justice, violations are viewed as a conflict and this conflict is returned to their owners, the victim, the perpetrator, and their communities for resolution. In practice, this means active participation of the parties in the process. In this process, the parties tell their feelings and their own stories about the conflict. Thus, while revealing the responsibility of the perpetrator for the damage caused by the act, an agreement is reached on which the parties will agree. It is also a process of negotiation and is geared towards healing rather than punishment.  While the victim and the perpetrator are healed and healed in this process, social relations are also repaired. Findings show that victims are more satisfied with restorative justice practices rather than court processes. It has been observed that this high level of satisfaction is related to the participation of the victims in the process rather than reparation. Victims attach more importance to emotional reparation than to material reparation. 
John Parkinson and Declan Roche, on the other hand, draw attention to the similarity between deliberative democracy and restorative justice practices. The characteristics of deliberative democracy are broadly inclusiveness, reasoned public discussion in which final agreements are produced on common issues, accountability to those subject to these agreements, and negotiation between equals. Just as deliberative democracy is a form of critique of democracy, restorative justice is a form of critique of criminal justice with a similar institutional structure. In general terms, restorative justice refers to a set of values and goals that should guide our response to crime. At its core, justice is restorative when it seeks to repair the damage that crime has done to victims, offenders and their communities.”  In this respect, restorative justice has some common features with deliberative democracy. These; inclusiveness, equality among participants, transformative power of negotiation, scope and certainty and accountability.  The inclusiveness feature corresponds to the democratic inclusiveness criterion in that restorative justice practices include all parties and society. Participants in restorative justice practices find common ground by telling their own stories and asking each other questions. Equality between participants is one of the key features of deliberative democracy. At this point, some criticisms are also brought on the grounds that restorative justice is mostly aimed at empowering the victim, thus putting the perpetrator's transformation in the background and violating the principle of equality between the participants. For example, attention is drawn to the power inequality between a woman and the perpetrator of violence, or between indigenous communities and the police. At this point, it is seen that the mediator or conciliator plays a key role for the equal and balanced conduct of the negotiation. In restorative justice practices, the parties' seeking a common way to resolve the conflict and telling their own stories and feelings also has a transformative power. In this way, the parties both transform themselves and transform the other party. In particular, the importance of face-to-face storytelling is emphasized, which allows the parties to question what it means to be in each other's shoes. Scope and precision, another common feature of deliberative democracy and restorative justice, emphasizes the bindingness of the agreement reached for the parties. Similarly, the public character of deliberative democracy also ensures that the process is transparent and the parties are accountable to each other. This feature works similarly in restorative justice practices. The parties are responsible and accountable to each other and to other participants.  Considering these partnerships, it can be said that restorative justice practices have a democratic quality.
Another important concept that comes to mind when the concept of justice in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes is mentioned is transitional justice. The concept of transitional justice “denotes an area of activity and research focused on societies confronting past human rights violations, large-scale massacres or other severe social traumas in order to build a more democratic, just and peaceful future.” Transitional justice, which is a mechanism used mostly in societies that have just emerged from conflict or in transition from authoritarian to more democratic governments, includes both formal and informal methods. That is, it uses tools such as both court processes where perpetrators are subject to criminal investigation and Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, the most widely known and applied transitional justice mechanism. 
Although the roots of transitional justice practices were based on the Nuremberg Trials or the programs of European de-Nazification after World War II, it became consistent in the last quarter of the 20th century and is called the second period of transitional justice. This period covers the prosecution of military junta officials in Greece and Argentina, the truth-seeking attempts in the south of Latin America, the political transformations in Eastern European countries after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions established in different parts of the world. In the third period of transitional justice, transitional justice becomes normalized and widespread. The most well-known symbol of this period is the International Criminal Court. An important aspect of transitional justice is that it does not focus solely on violations, but aims at long-term structural transformation and positive peace:
“The transitional justice approach does not focus solely on what kind of human rights violations are committed, or where and how they are committed. The importance of this approach is that there are attempts to transform the institutional structures and social relations that cause such violations. Equality in political representation and efforts to remedy socioeconomic injustices are examples of this. All of this is important for the building of positive peace as defined by Johan Galtung. Positive peace envisions a society in which structural and cultural elements of violence are eliminated. In this sense, it would not be wrong to say that transitional justice is a set of both backward and forward-looking approaches.” 
This approach aims to confront the events with the participation of actors from different segments of society. Confrontation is an important repair mechanism in societies that have emerged from conflict or war, or in societies where heavy human rights are experienced under authoritarian regimes. It not only ensures the physical and moral recovery of the victims, but also paves the way for the formation of structural and institutional mechanisms to prevent the same mistakes from being repeated in the future. In this sense, the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions established in societies in transition, as a method based on memory and witnessing, both enable society to confront the heavy burden of the past and pave the way for permanent peace going forward. The main purpose of the commission is to open a space for people to freely express themselves and their experiences, to protect their dignity as human beings, and thus to provide some compensation for the harms suffered. 
6. Gender Perspective in Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding
Women and LGBTQI+s are among the segments most affected by conflict and war processes. However, in conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes, they are often left out or included only as victims. However, the experiences of women and LGBTQI+s are very important in conflict resolution and peacebuilding in which they participate as active subjects. Feminist critiques of the security approach, which dominates the field of International Relations, criticize the state-centered and masculine perspective of the field, while also opposing women and LGBTQI+s to be seen as only victims of conflicts and wars, and therefore to be referred to as only victims in peacebuilding processes. They propose a new definition by discussing the concepts of both security and insecurity. At this point, “whose safety?” asked by feminist critics. The question constitutes an important starting point in terms of including the experiences of women and LGBTQI+s in conflict resolution and peace processes. In addition, feminist critics consider it “a gross injustice to marginalize the thoughts, experiences, and knowledge of women, who make up more than half of the world's population.” As in national politics, men and patriarchal structures dominate the high politics of international relations:
“Contemporary writers of the realist paradigm focus on issues of war and peace in the international system formed by sovereign nation-states, with a special emphasis on military strategy. Realist theory divides the issues of international politics into “high politics” and “low politics”. The high politics area, which is seen as a masculine area, deals with issues such as international security, balance of power, military capacity and state administration; The low political sphere, which is seen as a feminine sphere, is defined by issues such as the environment, human rights, minority rights, immigration and family.” 
Therefore, feminist theorists criticize and fight against the exclusion of women's and LGBTQI+'s experience and knowledge from the field defined as high politics. In particular, they draws attention to the fact that women's demand for peace and their struggle against the effects of war are parallel to the history of the feminist movement. They try to bring a gender perspective to phenomena such as security, insecurity, conflict, war and peace. At this point, Cynthia Enloe transforms the second wave feminism's “private is political” discourse into “private is international”, pointing to masculine dominance in this area.  Enloe also focuses on “explaining the complexity of global problems with the collapse of masculine and modernist ideologies” while making “comparisons between the patriarchal structure of socio-economic life and military institutions”.
Carol Cohn, another feminist theorist, also opposes seeing peace as a gender role and associating peace with women or femininity while war is associated with men or masculinity. She argues that this is a reductionist approach. She points out that it is misleading to describe women as “naturally peaceful, accommodating, non-violent”. She tries to develop a feminist approach to problems especially in conflict situations such as compulsory military service, child soldiers, sexual violence, domestic violence. Cohn emphasizes that not only women, but also “all communities excluded by masculine roles such as children and LGBTI individuals participate in the organization and political structure as actors of peace”.
Although different feminist theorists suggest different approaches, it can be mentioned that there are some points that they basically have in common. These are basically gender mainstreaming, a holistic view of peace (conflict, war, poverty, environmental problems, masculine violence as a whole), criticism of approaches centered on the state and national interest, and criticism of the point of view that identifies women with peace and the situations that overlook women’s participation into war. 
As a result of the criticisms of feminist theorists and the struggles of the feminist movement, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) made reference to gender for the first time in 2000 with its resolution 1325:
“With the UNSC resolution 1325 adopted at this meeting, this new perspective can be summarized as follows: a) Women are not only victims of war, but also the driving force of peace; b) Full participation of women in global politics creates greater opportunities for global peace; c) Women are under-represented in post-war reconstruction and reconciliation processes, at the heart of peace talks; d) No peace process can be considered fully successful unless there is or is not achieved equality between men and women in the resolution process; e) The peace process is inextricably based on the equality of men and women.” 
UNSC Resolution 1325 is also significant for its emphasis on the protection of women and girls from sexual and other forms of violence.  In this way, for the first time, an organization at the level of international representation has accepted that there will be no immunity for violent crimes against women and girls, who are the groups that experience the violence of wars and conflicts the most. 
On the other hand, the struggle of civil society has an important place in making the experiences of women and LGBTQI+s both in conflict and war processes and in peacebuilding processes visible; and in increasing their participation in these processes. It is seen in many world experiences that peace processes that do not include the gender perspective are insufficient to build lasting peace. When the consequences of war such as death, violence, migration and poverty are combined with patriarchal norms, it is pointed out that women and LGBTQI+s have different experiences than men. The differences in the problems experienced by these groups also lead to differences in their approaches to peace.  The study, in which Güneş Daşlı, Nisan Alıcı and Ulrike Flader examine the experiences of women in the struggle for peace through Serbia, Kosovo, Sri Lanka and Syria, on one hand reveals the differences between subjective experiences, on the other hand, brings the commonalities in the axis of gender out in different geographies. It is seen that the common elements that determine the methods of peace struggle in different countries are deaths, losses, trauma, migration, poverty, nationalism and patriarchal system. Women are the subjects of the peace struggle both individually and in an organized way. In some experiences, women struggle based on traditional motherhood roles, and in other experiences, they carry on an anti-militarist feminist struggle. Likewise, sometimes they take part in women's organizations and fight for peace, and sometimes they take part in mixed organizations.
Daşlı, Alici and Flader divide the peace struggle of women in different countries during and after the conflict into four different areas: “Reducing the grievances directly caused by the war, ending the war or the current conflicts, confronting the past after the conflict and building social peace, and finally raising the awareness of women and efforts to strengthen it.”  In addition, women also take part in mediation activities and official peace talks to end conflicts. However, it is seen that women and women's organizations actively working in times of conflict make great efforts to participate in official peace talks.  In other words, women are often tried to be prevented from being included in peace processes after wars and conflicts, in which they are involved and directly affected at every stage. At this point, it can be said that the support received from international civil society and organizations generally has a positive effect on women's participation in these processes. At this point, the importance of UNSC Resolution 1325 is once again observed. However, it cannot be said to be sufficient. Women continue to have difficulties in expressing the sexual violence they have in war and conflict situations due to patriarchal norms and social pressures. This shows once again the importance of incorporating a gender perspective into conflict resolution and peacebuilding processes. In other words, the struggle for real and lasting peace also requires the struggle against patriarchal norms. 
The study, in which Güneş Daşlı, Nisan Alıcı and Julia Poch Figuares examine the peace process in Colombia from a gender perspective, is significant as well both in terms of the experiences of women and LGBTQI+s and in terms of offering suggestions about the peace process in Turkey.  The Colombian peace process experience is important in terms of including the gender perspective, and especially LGBTQI+s, in the peacebuilding process more than in any previous example. During the civil war in Colombia, many crimes were committed against the civilian population and serious human rights violations were experienced. The Afro-Colombian population, indigenous people, women and LGBTQI+s have been the most harmed and violated groups in this process.  In this process, especially women and LGBTQI+s have suffered serious damages such as “conflict-related sexual violence, enforced disappearance, torture, forced displacement, poverty, discrimination and violence”. On the other hand, a wide social participation in the peace process was ensured. While the main agendas in the agreement were determined as “rural development, political participation, illegal crops, victims, ending the conflict and implementing and confirming the peace agreement”, citizens' forums were held in various parts of the country in parallel with the negotiations in order to increase social participation. Women and LGBTQI+ organizations collaborated to participate in the peacebuilding process, and thanks to their own efforts, they participated in the peace negotiations held in Havana as an equal subject of the process. In this way, a gender perspective was brought to every article of the peace agreement, and the experiences and problems of women and LGBTQI+s became the agenda in the peace process. While women and LGBTQI+ organizations ensured the adoption of articles related to discrimination and sexual violence, they also ensured that an intersectional approach was adopted by considering the gender perspective together with aspects such as land ownership, political participation, class and ethnicity. 
7. Critical Peace Studies in Turkey
An important aspect of Critical Peace Studies, which is based on the criticism of mainstream and European-centered peace studies, is that it sees peace not as a process in which conflict is ended, but as a field of constant struggle. In this context, Critical Peace Studies;
“seeks to question the aggressive neoliberalism that prevails in the international system and to expose the remnants of colonialism that exist in many international initiatives aimed at bringing development and peace. The critical peace approach envisions emancipatory peace processes organized from below, in which the main actors are the conflict-affected communities. Therefore, in order for conflict to be transformed and for a liberating peace to be realized, the power relations at the root of the conflict must be transformed.” 
It is difficult to talk about a universal theory or practice of peace that can be adapted to every situation. Therefore, the dynamics of each locality are important and should be taken into account in building lasting peace. A peacebuilding that does not take into account local dynamics and does not aim to transform local power relations will also weaken the possibility of being permanent. In this sense, Critical Peace Studies approaches peace first and foremost as a “right”. It attaches great importance to the participation of local actors and the victims and/or parties of conflict and/or war, as well as the broadest segment of society, in peace processes and new mechanisms to be established afterwards. Only in this way will the socialization and ownership of peace be possible. 
The war that has been going on for decades between the Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (PKK) and the security forces makes Critical Peace Studies an important field in Turkey as well. The establishment of peace in Turkey and the problem of democratization are closely related to each other, as in many other societies. The peace negotiations between the Republic of Turkey and the Kurdish Movement, which started in 2013 and are called the Resolution Process,  required not only social peace, but also a wider democratization. However, after the ruling Justice and Development Party (JDPß) lost the election after the general elections held on June 7, 2015, the re-escalation of violence and military operations that led to serious human rights violations in Kurdish provinces caused the Resolution Process to come to an end. The environment of non-conflict between 2013-2015 in Turkey and the transformation of this environment into conflict in a short time once again revealed the importance of the socialization of peace and the mechanisms to be established for this. As in other parts of the world, it has been observed that although the violence ends in Turkey, structural inequalities persist and it is easy to return to the conflict environment as long as all segments of the society are not included in the process.  The demand for peace and the struggle for peace in Turkey, of course, did not start with the Resolution Process, which was carried out through official channels, and therefore continues after the Resolution Process. In the next part of the study, the civil society, justice and gender dimensions of the struggle in the field of Critical Peace Studies in Turkey will be discussed.
7.1. The Role of Civil Society in Critical Peace Studies in Turkey
The history of the 40-year war between the PKK and the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) in Turkey brings with it a history of peace and rights struggles spanning almost the same time period. There are many Non-Governmental Organizations in Turkey that carry out the struggle for peace and rights. A significant part of these organizations do not approach the concept of peace simply as the end of the conflict, but instead focus on peace on the axis of democratic rights and gender, class, ethnicity, etc. deals with it in an intersectional way.
The Human Rights Association (HRA) comes first among these NGOs. The Human Rights Association, which declared its foundation on July 17, 1986, was established to fight for rights against various rights abuses caused by the military dictatorship established after the military coup of 12 September. The HRA was founded by 98 activists who took action against the September 12 regime's practices such as closing political parties, associations and unions, repealing the laws that guarantee various rights, torture practices in detention and prisons, kidnapping and killing people. The HRA, which states the purpose of its establishment as protecting human rights and freedoms in its statute, has carried out various studies in these areas. The HRA still carries out joint works in collaboration with human rights organizations in many countries of the world. The HRA is a member of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN); is also among the founders of the Human Rights Joint Platform (HRJP) and the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey. While defining its fields of activity on its websites, the association presents a wide scale such as amnesty, death penalty, anti-war struggle, peace, State Security Courts, freedom of thought, disappearances under custody, unsolved killings, torture and ill-treatment, prisons, working life. With the deepening of the Kurdish problem, the association has also increased its work on peace and non-conflict. Their work on peace includes ceasefire calls, reporting of losses during the war, unsolved murders and violations of rights, archiving, sharing findings with the public, reporting the status of prisoners of war and defending the rights of prisoners, reporting war crimes, symposiums, seminars, panels, conferences on peace. regulation, reporting of rights violations in prisons.
One of the most important NGOs operating in the field of Critical Peace Studies in Turkey is Diyarbakır Institute for Political and Social Research (DIPSR) which was established in Diyarbakır in 2010, defines itself as follows on its website: 
“Our institute carries out its studies in the axis of 4 research programs. DIPSR aims to function as a center for researchers in the fields covered by its research programs, and to contribute to the formation of policies for the future by conducting research that will pave the way for the social and political development of society, on the basis of first-hand, objective and fieldwork-based knowledge. DIPSR publishes researches and brings them to the attention of those concerned, with the aim of increasing the egalitarian social sensitivity and development of dialogue, which makes it possible for the differences to coexist in peace; It contributes to knowledge sharing through conferences, symposiums, panels, workshops and reports.” 
The four main programs that DIPSR works with are as follows: Mother Tongue and Pedagogy Research Program, Justice and Peace Building Research Program, Sustainable Living and Space Research Program, Gender Equality Research Program. DIPSR has published many reports within the scope of these research programs. 
Another organization that carries out peace efforts is the Peoples’ Democratic Congress (PDC). PDC is a political organization established on 15-16 November 2014 with the initiative of 37 political parties, movements, associations and labor organizations. They expressed the founding program adopted on 15-16 November 2014 as follows:
1. We have come together to eliminate all oppression and injustice directed at our peoples and the oppressed, and to establish a Turkey where we can live in peace and humanity.
2. Turkey's system which is based on oppression and exploitation is constantly being reproduced by the two main political currents of the sovereigns, and all social resistance points struggling against it are tried to be kept under pressure. However, peoples of every language and culture and the oppressed do not have to choose one of these two currents competing with each other to prolong the life of the current system; meanly, the neoliberal and anti-democratic order imposed by the sovereigns, or the Turkish-Islamic synthesizing or nationalist approaches. We are together here to show that it is possible and realistic to dominate the communal democratic life of the oppressed and peoples against the dictates of the two currents of the sovereigns. 
Since its establishment, which coincided with the Resolution Process, PDC has been conducting various panels, hall events, actions and field studies for the democratic and peaceful resolution for the Kurdish question.
The Peace Foundation is one of the first ones that come to mind when it comes to non-governmental organizations that fight for peace in Turkey. The Peace Foundation, which set out to focus on the peaceful solution for the Kurdish Question, is an independent non-governmental organization founded by intellectuals and civil society administrators from various political views in March 2016, after the end of the Resolution Process. The founding mission of the Peace Foundation is to protect the right to life and other fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by international conventions, the Constitution and laws, especially the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to establish democracy and social justice for everyone in Turkey without discrimination, and defines it as working on achieving lasting peace, which is one of the basic conditions for all these.  The Foundation, which organizes workshops, publishes reports, publishes various bulletins and publications and issues press releases on various issues in order to contribute to the solution of the Kurdish Question, has so far published five reports within the scope of peace efforts. These reports are as follows:
-Towards a Solution: Evaluation on Possibilities, Opportunities and Problems
-Resolution Process from Dolmabahçe to Today
-Non-Governmental Organizations during the 2013-2015 Resolution Process
-The Role of Local Governments in Building Social Peace
-Social Perspective on the Kurdish Question (2010-2022)
Other remarkable publications of the Peace Foundation are the books and brochures on the conflict process and peacebuilding. For example, the Peace Handbook, which was prepared to revive the idea of peace in society, to remind the political, national and international legal bases and legitimacy of the demand for peace, and to emphasize its political, social and ethical structure, is one of them. 
Academics for Peace (AfP)  is an organization founded in November 2012 by a group of academicians. AfP, which came together to strengthen the call for peace during the hunger strikes initiated by Kurdish political prisoners in prisons at that time, published a statement signed by 264 academics to draw attention to this situation. Afterwards, the organization, which continues to exist as a civil initiative, has published various declarations and came together in various meetings between 2013-2016 in order to raise the demand for peace and contribute to the process that has begun. AfP representatives, who came together with various representatives from the Wise People Committee formed in the Resolution Process, carry out active work in order to contribute to the peace process. They published the declation called “We will not be a party to this crime!”.  The declaration, signed by 2212 academicians and independent researchers, drew attention to the attacks on civilians in Kurdish provinces by the security forces and warned the state forces about this issue. Signatory academics, who were targeted by the press and state forces in the following period, were targeted by the regime, which became increasingly authoritarian with the State of Emergency (SoE) declared after the 15 July coup attempt. Hundreds of academicians were dismissed by Statutory Decrees (known as KHK in public domain), and some of them had to leave the country. This unlawful process that started with the Decrees still continues.
Young Peace Builders of Turkey Initiative, another organization operating in the field of Critical Peace Studies at local, national and international levels, carries out studies with the theme of “Youth, Peace and Security” based on the United Nations Security Council resolution 2250. The initiative states its main objective as ensuring the active participation of youth in the peacebuilding and violence prevention process.  To this end, the initiative aims to empower youth through activities such as networking, civic education, local, national and international projects, academic research, work, panels, conferences and workshops.
DVV International, the strategic partner of the Beraberce Association, which defines its purpose of establishment as strengthening civil society, active citizenship and carrying out studies in the fields of human rights on its website, is the International Cooperation Institute of the German Adult Education Centers Association.  The association carries out important civil society activities through various projects in Turkey and everywhere they can “get contact with”. For example, on the subject of peace, they started with the “Remember!” project. Within the scope of the project, they organized Online Collective Learning Experiences and Peace Educator Trainings at the Beraberce Academy. Another project on peace is Turkey, EU and candidate countries; It is the PeaCE.net project that aims to bring together Non-Governmental Organizations and platforms that carry out dialogue and peace culture education activities through adult education or are willing to work in this field, in an international network and cooperation. 
Another organization operating in a wide spectrum in the field of Critical Peace Studies in Turkey is the Democracy, Peace and Alternative Policies Research Association (DEMOS Research Association). DEMOS Research Association was established in 2015, based in Ankara, by people working in the field of Social Sciences and aiming to disseminate knowledge production. Since the day it was founded, the association has carried out research around peace studies in a broad sense and examined examples from Turkey and the world. DEMOS Research Association states that while carrying out these studies, it takes the perspective of gender equality at its center. 
Article 2 of the Bylaws of the Association, which defines the field of activity, is as follows:
“The association was established with the aim of conducting in-depth research and studies in the fields of social memory, transitional justice and confronting the past, peace and reconciliation, conflict transformation, and gender, and to act in this direction.” 
DEMOS Research Association has implemented various projects in order to contribute to the peace process in Turkey within the scope of the principles and working areas defined above. Voices from DEMOS, which started shortly before the beginning of the corona virus epidemic and continued during the pandemic, published their research and analysis on their fields of work via podcasts. This podcast project is a project that aims to provide an alternative to mainstream narratives and contribute to peace studies in Turkey by sharing the basic approaches used in the field of Critical Peace, such as subject orientation, peace from below, and gender perspective.  Another project carried out by the DEMOS Research Association during the pandemic period within the scope of peace studies is the project called Peace CSOs. Within the scope of the project carried out between July 2020 and June 2020, Peace in Quarantine interviews were held in order to understand how CSOs operating in the field of peace were affected by the pandemic process, how they carried out their work in this process, and to provide an experience sharing. 
Another project carried out by the DEMOS Research Association within the scope of peace studies is the Local Peacebuilding project. It is stated that this project, launched in August 2020, is based on the need to rethink the constraints of mainstream peacemaking efforts in Turkey and the world as a whole.  Bringing suggestions from Turkey to the liberal and political actor-centered peacemaking efforts that are already dominant within the scope of the project, revealing the historical experiences of ethnic, religious and/or sectarian groups living in Anatolia and Mesopotamia based on peaceful coexistence with these proposals, and trying to avoid racism and sexism. The project, which aims to build on two pillars that will purify it, is in the process of publishing a collective book. Another project of the association within the scope of peace studies is the book project called Women's Struggle for Peace.  The book, which was prepared with the thought that listening to the stories of women who resisted war, nationalism and monism in different parts of the world and fought for peace, and understanding partnerships and differences, would be inspiring for women striving for peace in Turkey, has made two editions. 
In another project titled The Struggles for Peace by LGBTI+ and Women’s Organizations in Turkey, DEMOS Research Association has published a report included in-depth interviews with participants from different women's and LGBTQI+ organizations who carried out peace studies around the Resolution Process between 2013 and 2015, and the experiences of organizations with a gender focus on the peace struggle. 
Another project carried out by the DEMOS Research Association within the scope of gender-centered peace studies, which is the main study subject in the above-mentioned bylaws, is the project called Bringing Peace on the Agenda: Supporting the Participation of Women, LGBTI+, and Youth in Peace Processes. The association stated the purpose of this project, which started in February 2022, as follows:
“With this project, it is aimed to support women, LGBTI+ and youth (and especially young women/LGBTI+) knowledge production in peace studies, to enrich the peace agenda in civil society and academia on the youth/gender axis through blog posts, translations and workshops, with an emphasis on disseminating gender perspective.” 
Finally, the project titled Gender and Peace: Colombian Peace Process, in which the experiences of women and LGBTI+s in the peace process in Colombia are examined and their contribution to the discussions on peace possibilities in Turkey is discussed, is a product of the Critical Peace Studies carried out by the DEMOS Research Association. 
7.2. Justice in Critical Peace Studies in Turkey
The struggle for peace and peace studies in Turkey cannot be separated from the search for justice. As a result of the war that has been going on for many years, thousands of people from different parts of the society have been exposed to serious rights violations, enforced disappearance, torture and ill-treatment, direct and indirect violence, lost lives, suffered economic damage and lost their livelihoods, dozens of villages have been evacuated, and forced migration has occurred. Therefore, the struggle for peace is also a struggle for basic human rights and a search for justice in the face of what has happened. It can be said that non-governmental organizations working in this field, in addition to the struggle for fundamental rights defined in formal law, struggle for positive peace such as memory, confrontation, and the creation of restorative and transformative justice mechanisms. 
It cannot be said that there has been a serious confrontation in the society regarding the losses suffered as a result of years of conflict between the security forces and the PKK. Although various steps were taken in this regard in the Resolution Process carried out between the Republic of Turkey and the PKK between 2013 and 2015, a real justice mechanism was not established and the compensation of the losses could not be provided. In the Resolution Process, a Wise People Committee was established to explain the Resolution Process to the society and persuade different segments. Seven delegations, each with nine members, were formed to work in seven regions of Turkey. Suggestions from the PKK/BDP were taken into account in the selection of the people to take part in these delegations, and journalists, academics, representatives of NGOs, trade unions and professional organizations took part in the Wise People Committee. Thus, both the spread of peace building in the sense Lederach pointed out and the socialization of peace were tried to be ensured. At this point, it should be noted that the Resolution Process is not only aimed at the Kurdish question, but also aims at a broader democratization and positive peace despite its shortcomings. The calls for a more democratic Constitution made in the same period can also be evaluated within this framework.
The Parliamentary Research Commission, which was established in the Turkish Grand National Assembly to Investigate the Ways of Social Peace and to Evaluate the Resolution Process, is another mechanism created in this process. In the report prepared by the Commission in 2013, the following are stated as important areas in the Resolution Process: 
• “New Constitution
• Mother Tongue Discussions
• Autonomy Discussions
• Strengthening Local Governments
• Ranger Issue
• Law No. 5233 on Terrorism and Compensation for Damages Arising from the Fight Against Terrorism and Its Implementation
• Military Restricted and Security Zones
• Mines, Minefields
• Cessation of Terror and Violence, Disarmament
• Anti-Terror Law
• Amnesty Discussions
• Settlement Names Discussions
• Curriculum – Our Pledge Debates
• Evaluations of Some Signboards in Courthouses
• Debates on Police Station and Dam Constructions
• Border Management
• Employment of Public Officials with a Consciousness for Solution, Dialogue and Democratic Transformation in the Region
• Transmission of International Law Rules
• Migration and Displacement
• “Revealing the Facts” / “Social Reconciliation - Justice Commission” Discussions”
As it can be understood from the topics covered in the report, the problems that emerged as a result of the conflicts that have been going on for many years have been dealt with in a broad way and structural transformation has been aimed, not just conflict-free in the narrow sense. Both formal law and restorative justice mechanisms are designed together. However, it was weak to take concrete steps in these areas and with the end of the Resolution Process in 2015, the work in these areas has weakened considerably.
When it comes to the struggle for peace and the pursuit of justice in Turkey, the first thing that comes to mind is undoubtedly the Saturday Mothers/People who have gathered to inquire about the fate of those disappeared in custody since 1995. The Saturday Mothers/People, who came together for the first time on 27 May 1995, continue to fight for the perpetrators to be tried and the disappearances to not happen again, by asking the fate of their disappeared relatives. While it is estimated that a total of 1352 people disappeared in custody in the period from the coup d'état of September 12, 1980 until today, the period in which the most enforced disappearances were experienced was between 1993-1995, when the Saturday Mothers/People emerged. The campaign launched by the HRA in 1992 to find the missing turned into a great search for rights and justice in 1995 thanks to the struggle of the Saturday Mothers/People. Saturday Mothers/People continue to gather at Galatasaray Square every Saturday at 12:00. 
Another Non-Governmental Organization that carries out the struggle for justice in Critical Peace Studies in Turkey is the Human Rights Association (HRA), which is also included in the title of Non-Governmental Organizations that carry out Critical Peace Studies. Since 1986, HRA has been fighting not only for human rights and peace, but also for justice with its branches in many provinces of Turkey. The HRA has a practice that makes it the first human rights struggle organization that comes to mind of people from all walks of life when it comes to seeking rights and fighting for justice in Turkey. As mentioned before, the 1990s were very dark years when the most disappearances in custody were experienced. The fight carried out by the HRA for the rights of the soldiers, especially the casualties and the PKK militants who were captured in the war, has left its mark.
Another Non-Governmental Organization that carries out the struggle for rights and justice is the Human Rights and Solidarity Association for the Oppressed (MAZLUMDER). In his own words, “MAZLUMDER, a human rights organization working independently of the state and political parties and groups, was born as a joint initiative of a group of people who are determined to defend human rights on a double-standardless basis for all people without any discrimination.” 
Founded by 54 people on 28 January 1991, MAZLUMDER expresses its founding purpose as follows:
It accepts working for the abolition of all kinds of oppression and the end of all injustices on earth as a necessity of existing as human beings and living humanely. It believes in the importance of a human rights struggle without double standards, based on the necessity of opposing all kinds of unjust treatment, fighting against torture, humiliation and rape, regardless of who or against whom it is made, without making any discrimination on this matter.” 
For this purpose, MAZLUMDER has press releases, panels, actions, seminars, conferences, prison interviews, prison visits, culture and art events, litigation and public opinion creation initiatives, publications and reports.
Another NGO that fights for rights and justice among Non-Governmental Organizations carrying out Critical Peace Studies is the Memory Center. Established in November 2011 by a group of lawyers, journalists, academics and human rights defenders, the Memory Center “aims to reveal the truth about the gross human rights violations, support the victims in their pursuit of justice, and strengthen social memory by circulating alternative truth narratives to official discourse.”
Focusing on the work on enforced disappearances at the beginning, the Memory Center added the theme of peace to its work areas in the Resolution Process between 2013 and 2015. After the unsuccessful military coup attempt on July 15, 2016, it added a field of study about the difficulties faced by NGOs. Defining this activity as a recent gross violation of human rights, the Memory Center has four working titles: Memory and Peace Studies, Legal Studies, Supporting Human Rights Organizations and Defenders, and International Cooperation and Solidarity.
The Memory Center has made significant contributions to the struggle for peace, rights and justice in Turkey with many projects it has carried out. The projects carried out by the Memory Center are as follows: Towards A Blueprint for Reconciliation: Engaging the Civil Society and Capacity Building, Towards A Blueprint for Reconciliation: Engaging the Civil Society and Capacity Building II., Learning from the Past, Changing Today, Campaign: To ConfrontWiththe90s, Curfews and Civilian Deaths , Poster Campaign: Where Are the Disappeared?, Regional Cooperation Network for Historical Dialogue and Confronting the Past, Enforced Disappearances Database, Hackathon: Telling Stories of Enforced Disappearances, Documentation for Rights Defenders, Is There Hope for Truth?, Advocating for Peace in Difficult Times, Peace Workshops with Youth, Memorialization, Memory and Art Speeches in Turkey, Strengthening Peace Advocacy in Turkey, PERPETRATOR NOT UNKNOWN: Confrontation Cases Monitoring Site, Memory and Youth, Support for Rights – I, Strengthening the Role and Protection of Human Rights Defenders in Turkey. 
NGOs that fight for rights and justice in Turkey have always experienced various difficulties. However, it can be said that these difficulties have increased in recent years. The most important challenge faced by the struggles for rights and justice in Turkey is the opressive environment created in recent years. In fact, it is difficult to identify a milestone for the increase in the pressure environment in Turkey. There have been many breaks in the 100-year history of the republic, each of which has had a direct impact on the transformation of the regime. Military coups, authoritarian reactions developed by state forces against democracy and rights-based rebellions, massacres targeting minorities, Kurds and Alevis, oppressive reactions developed by the state against the civilian sphere in the environment of constant war with the PKK, constitutional and legal regulations made from time to time, have a direct impact on this transformation. creates breakpoints. Nevertheless, it would not be wrong to say that the harshest authoritarianization process in the country's 100-year history is being experienced in the process that started after 2016 and still continues.
The Peace Process between 2013-2015, in which the most serious negotiations were carried out between the PKK and the Turkish State, remained inconclusive and left its place to conflicts, dealing a major blow to the peace and justice struggles that peaked between 2013-2015. The Solution Process has left its place to a serious authoritarianism after the Gezi Uprising, the results of the 2015 general elections and the state of emergency after the military coup attempt in 2016. This authoritarianism process led to the interruption of the struggle for justice.
During the two-year state of emergency, a total of 36 decrees were issued.  In these decree laws, 131,922 measures were implemented in the titles such as dismissals from public office, closure of institutions and legal regulations. When we look at the measures covering the closure of institutions, 178 media organizations, 1425 associations and 123 foundations were closed by the decree laws.  This massive attack on civil society work has had many consequences that have been reflected in the struggle for justice.
After the end of the state of emergency, restrictive and criminalizing regulations regarding civil society activities continued. The most striking regulation, especially regarding the activities of associations, is the Law No. 7262 on the Prevention of Financing the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction, adopted in December 2020. This regulation has been widely discussed as it contains provisions that allow the dismissal of non-governmental organization executives and employees, and the government appoints trustees in their place, under anti-terrorism laws. Considering that the ambiguity of terrorist crimes with this law, the widening of the definition of terrorism with arbitrary evaluations and the development of legal practices in this direction are the most striking phenomena of this period, the extent of the damage caused by the law in the struggle for rights and justice can be better understood.
The presidential government system, which was implemented after the two-year state of emergency, paved the way for the emergence of a justice regime that directly affects the struggles for justice and rights. In modern constitutional systems, the principle of separation of powers, which is the most prominent feature of liberal democracies, is the most important legal norm that prevents the system from becoming authoritarian in theory. The mentioned principle is based on the idea that the powers of the state control and limit each other by dividing them into different organs, namely the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. Although the presidential government system seems to have guaranteed the separation of powers at the constitutional level, the practices from the day the system started to be implemented until today show that this principle does not have much equivalent in real life. Although the independence of the judiciary has always been controversial in Turkey, developments in recent years have deepened these problems. Facts such as the way in which the Council of Judges and Prosecutors were elected and the instructions given to members of the judiciary openly in public have seriously overshadowed the independence of the judiciary.
Another phenomenon affecting the struggles for justice and rights has been the narrowing of the sphere of influence of international judicial institutions in the changing world order. In the report titled Change Lines of the Struggle for Human Rights in Turkey: International Mechanisms, Localization and Solidarity in the Case of the Human Rights Association, prepared by the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey in 2021, it is stated that the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has started to become ineffective in the face of rights violations in Turkey. It was stated that the immigration problem experienced in this was the determining factor:
“The reasons for the ineffectiveness of the human rights regime and mechanisms built by the European Union in the face of violations in Turkey for the last ten years need to be sought in interstate power relations. Although human rights is one of the most important policies of the EU, the implementation of human rights law and the diplomacy maintained in this practice create contradictions in terms of power relations between states. As a result of the EU's policy of externalizing its borders in refugee and migration management, Turkey's positioning as a partner that will prevent migrants and refugees from entering the “Fortress of Europe” and, in return, remaining “unconstrained”, causes the Union to take a passive position in the face of ongoing violations in Turkey. It was enough for Turkey to strengthen its gatekeeper role for the EU and stay in line with EU border control and immigration policy.” 
All these facts seriously hinder the struggles of civil society organizations for rights and justice. This has seriously affected the activities of Non-Governmental Organizations fighting for peace.
7.3. The Role of Women and LGBTQI+s in Critical Peace Studies in Turkey
The report titled From Converging Roads to Narrowing Grounds: The Struggle for Peace by LGBTI+ and Women’s Organizations in Turkey, published by the Democracy, Peace and Alternative Policies Research Association (DEMOS), examines the understanding and practices of women and LGBTI+ organizations who are waging the peace struggle, and the understanding and practices of the conflict based on the Kurdish Question in Turkey. It is a study that examines the Resolution Process, which has been realized in order to evolve into peace, by focusing on it. Since it is centered on the Resolution Process, it naturally focuses on the period between 2013 and 2015, when the negotiations between the Turkish State and the PKK were carried out. The report evaluates the peace efforts focused around the Resolution Process and the partnerships established in this direction through the eyes of women and LGBTQI+ organizations, who are the active subjects of that process.  The study is based on eight semi-structured, in-depth interviews and one written response conducted online with nine people involved in the peace struggle between 30 January and 25 March 2021. The NGOs and organizations participating in the study are as follows: Women's Initiative for Peace, Hêvî Rights, Equality, LGBTI+ Association for Existence, Kaos GL Association, KeSKeSoR Amed LGBTI+ Initiative, LGBTI Peace Initiative and Tevgera Jinên Azad (TJA). As such, it can be said that the report is the most comprehensive study prepared with a gender perspective in the field of Critical Peace Studies in Turkey to date. Therefore, this study will be covered in detail in this section.
In the third part of the report, in which the policies that shape the peace struggle of women and LGBTQI+ organizations are presented, an approach is presented within the framework of the positive peace struggle. As noted above, positive peace does not simply aim at putting an end to violence. In addition, it includes the elimination of inequalities that are at the root of conflict, are the causes of violence, and are often exacerbated by conflict. According to the statements of LGBTQI+ and women's organizations in the report, the struggle for peace should also include the struggle for equality, freedom and democracy. For example, an activist for the struggle for women's rights used the following statements in the interview:
“Speaking of a real peace environment means that all the differences of the society would express themselves equally and freely, participate in public life, that the whole society would benefit equally from all historical, social and cultural resources, especially economic ones, that nature is a part of life, a right. It is necessary to establish a libertarian order in which it would be accepted that each and everyone are the subjects of it.” 
An LGBTQI+ activist, emphasizing that peacebuilding necessarily requires the fight against patriarchy, used the following statements:
“It has to be said that one component of [peace] is definitely gender, definitely sexual orientation, gender identity. Because when we say peace building, it is not just the silence of the guns, this is a prerequisite, yes. (...) Of course, [conflict] is definitely one of the problems of both feminism and the LGBTI+ movement, but (...) the establishment of that peace process is not a world where one cannot access health or food, nutrition, shelter because of their gender. That's why I see them as natural components of the peace process.” 
As can be seen, peacebuilding is seen by activists as a long-term struggle. According to the report, peacebuilding is defined as a process that includes the establishment of freedom and equality for all. Although the silence of the guns is the first condition of this long process, it is only one of the steps to be taken as the rapporteurs stated: “In addition to ending direct violence for peace, it is imperative that the previous forms of domination and exploitation in terms of gender inequality, discrimination based on race and ethnicity, socioeconomic inequalities are at the root of conflict and are intertwined with each other also must disappear.” 
While the report emphasizes that rising militarism strengthens masculinity and gender roles, the interviewees’ perspectives on combating this situation are supported by passages taken directly from the interviews. As stated in the report, in addition to the gender inequality deepened by the war, violence against women and LGBTQI+s, and hate speech produced by the state authorities themselves, conflict and authoritarianism also have an impact in western Turkey, albeit in different forms. Therefore, the common point of the participants in the West and the region is that the struggle for peace is the struggle for democracy. 
All participants of the report emphasize that the struggle for democracy and the fight against patriarchy pave the way for establishing partnerships around the demand for peace. According to LGBTQI+ activists, there is another unique political line that the peace struggle adds to their struggle. One LGBTQI+ activist expresses this as follows:
“Peace is not a foreign concept within the LGBTI+ movement anyway. In other words, reconciliation with ourselves and “homosexuals who are at peace with themselves” would be very popular. There is still. There were many situations where we said, “they could not reconcile with themselves”. “To open up, you first have to make peace with yourself, as we open up, we make peace with ourselves”, is one of the situations that is mentioned and implemented a lot in the movement. Therefore, peace, in all senses of the word, is inherent in the LGBTI+ movement and being LGBTI+.”
According to the rapporteurs, this is an opening directly related to the queer theory. Because queer theory objects to the normalization of any identity and criticizes this LGBTI identity policy based on this. This basically offers a suggestion of de-identification. At this point, it problematizes militarism, which is one of the important tools of constructing the norm. After reconciling with themselves, it is time to reconcile with the others whom militarism considers “the Other”. 
Although DEMOS Research Association's report is based on the 2013-2015 period when the Resolution Process took place, it also takes into account the preparation process before this and the impact of the Kobanê Events in 2014, which prepared the end of this process, rather than a linear and chronological time period. As a matter of fact, the interviewees participating in the study describe a Resolution Process period that is not limited into the 2013-2015 period.
According to the report, in the section where the possibilities offered by the Resolution Process were discussed, the first thing the interviewees emphasized was that they reached a level of breadth that they had never reached before. It is one of the most distinctive experiences of this period that their call for peace, which was made in an environment where the guns were silent, was met by a much wider audience. An LGBTQI+ activist also talked about the contribution of the peace process to their own struggles, also stated that the process created opportunities to come together with people and institutions that they could not come together with before: 
Of course, a separate parenthesis should be opened for the Gezi Resistance, which started shortly after the Resolution Process started. The way in which the intersection of the Gezi Resistance and the Resolution Process was reflected in the struggle of the Women for Peace Initiative (WfPI) at that time. It is reflected in the WfPI statement quoted in the report as follows:
“Today, Turkey is more ready than ever for peace and democracy. Millions of people from all walks of life want peace. For four months, no one has died in this country because of the war. We all know the value of this. We want the state to see it as well… The most obvious manifestation of the fact that peace cannot be achieved without a real democracy was again clearly revealed with the Gezi resistance. These societal demands will not end without a will for rapid democratization, peace and the inclusion of the whole society in decision-making and implementation mechanisms about their own lives.”
An interviewee who attended the resolution commission meeting in the Grand National Assembly of Turkey at that time states that they were thinking about two issues, one being the Resolution Process and the other being Gezi. LGBTQI+s had a similar agenda in the same period. After the libertarian atmosphere created by Gezi, the visibility of LGBTQI+ organizations in Kurdish geographies, which increased in many regions of Turkey outside of the big cities, has also increased. This organization and visibility has also increased the LGBTQI+ movement's participation in peace work. Now LGBTQI+s have started to say “We are here for peace too”. This is another example of how women and LGBTQI+ organizations do not consider the struggle for peace separately from the struggle for democracy. In the Resolution Process, women's organizations and feminists have the opportunity to be involved in the negotiation process and bring their own demands to the peace table. In addition, women's and LGBTQI+ organizations expand their action repertoires in their work in the field of gender by using different methods and tools in this process. Feminists also discuss how to be involved in the negotiation process as a “third eye” in this time period. And finally, Kurdish women in particular work within the framework of the relationship that they have established between peace, women’s politics and democracy. 
In this process, women's organizations also establish different alliances. At the forefront of the alliances that women have formed during the peace struggle is the Women for Peace Initiative, which was formed by women from different walks of life. Within the body of WfPI, the topics that women in the Kurdish regions and women in the west have in common in their struggles are emphasized. One of these titles is the war budget. While it is stated that the war budget represents a total stolen from the lives of all women, what can be done to ensure gender equality with the budget allocated to the war is analyzed. WfPI thus adopts the approach of making all women the subjects of peace. LGBTQI+s also come together under the name of LGBTI+ Peace Initiative. Shortly after the end of the Resolution Process was announced, LGBTI+ Peace Initiative established in August 2015; It is formed by the gathering of representatives from Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Republican People's Party (RPP), LGBTI+ and conscientious objection associations, student societies and independent activists. After the Suruç Massacre is commemorated in the founding declaration, it is demanded to return to the basis of a democratic solution to the Kurdish question. 
Different components of the common struggle under the umbrella of WfPI sometimes have differences in terms of the opinions on developing a common discourse. According to the statements of the interviewees, it is stated that women in the West and Kurdish women activists differ from place to place regarding the interlocutor of the slogan “Let the guns be silent, let the peace speak”. Although the political view is similar, this situation, which causes the discourse to diverge, results in not being able to appeal to some segments of society. 
In the report, it is stated that gender and sexuality are an issue that has been remained disputable or kept silent about the alliances and common means of struggle established by NGOs during the peace process. This limitation created by appealing to a wide audience stems from the heterogeneity of this broad alliance in terms of worldview. At this point, when a conservative or non-feminist audience is addressed, the interviewees inevitably convey that some issues have to be shelved. One interviewee states that due to this limitation, they cannot discuss the family policies of the government and cannot even discuss the impositions such as “acceptable family” and/or “acceptable woman”. An LGBTQI+ activist states that they cannot have a discussion about sexuality due to a similar limitation. According to the rapporteurs, this has led LGBTQI+s to act as acceptable LGBTQI+s in order to be accepted in the struggle for peace. 
Another problem created by the coming together under the roofs of NGOs around the struggle for peace is the tokenism issue. According to Bianet’s Gender in News dictionary, tokenism is “used to describe an organization's recruitment of a single individual or an insignificant number of people in order to avoid accusations of insensitivity to gender, difference, disability, race, age, religion, or ethnic identities.”  At this point, an LGBTQI+ activist expresses their discomfort at the recognition of LGBTQI+s as a part of the peace struggle, limited only by their sexual orientation and gender identity. On the other hand, there is the opposite criticism. Another LGBTQI+ activist criticizes the fact that the LGBTQI+ movement's approach to the Kurdish issue is limited to the “Kurdish website” and the movement's inability to address the Kurdish Question in general. 
The state of emergency declared in 2016 and the authoritarian regime that took shape in the period that followed made it difficult to speak up and take action on peace. Rising authoritarianism has led to the decline of the civil society struggle in many areas in Turkey, and even the criminalization of demands such as peace. In the same report of DEMOS, it is revealed that the biggest problem faced by women and LGBTQI+ organizations in this process is this criminalization process. As mentioned in the report, prohibitions begin to spread rapidly. For example, as of November 2017, the Ankara Governor's Office bans all types of LGBTQI+ events. Such prohibitions directly affect the fields and forms of activity.
Women and LGBTQI+ activists, whose experiences are included in the same report, refer to the problems they experienced in this process. An LGBTQI+ activist describes the impact of the bans in this process on their activities as follows:
“When we were unable to carry out the activities I have just spoke about during the peace process, we had to change the method of organizing them, because for example, we used to call a conference on the website beforehand and announce it on Facebook. We didn't do that anymore because the police were starting to come before we went to the event we were going to... So it was like a war process on one side.” 
This is a general process and has been shaped in the form of a state of authoritarianism that has increased its influence from year to year and continues to this day. However, those who were most affected by this process were undoubtedly women and LGBTQI+s.
KeSKeSoR Amed LGBTI+ Initiative is another Non-Governmental Organization that carried out important studies in this process and published a report with a gender perspective in the field of Critical Peace Studies. KeSKeSoR Amed LGBTI+ Initiative presents a study that coincides with a multiple and intersectional struggle, based on the understanding that “there is no distinction between weapons directed at each other by armies and weapons directed at LGBTI+s”. KeSKeSoR Amed LGBTI+ Initiative uses the violence categorization that Johan Galtung has analyzed under three headings, namely direct, structural and cultural violence, in its report titled “Growing Peace from the Recent Past to the Possible Future: LGBTI+s Living in Diyarbakır between 2013-2018”. In particular, it aims to see how discriminatory attitudes are shaped and how discrimination is fought in the family, education, health and justice institutions, working life and various political areas, and while doing this, it aims to deal with the research in a certain temporal framework. While presenting this study, the scope and possibilities of a lasting peace are discussed by comparing the period of peace with the period of war. The period defined as the period of peace was announced by the reading of Öcalan's letter at Diyarbakır Newroz on March 21, 2013 and lasted until the air attack of the Turkish Air Forces on Kandil, Zap, Metîna, Garê, Haftanîn, Avaşîn and Xakurkê regions on July 24, 2015. While the term covers the period known as the Resolution/Peace Process in the public, the period of war is used for the period between the beginning of the above mentioned operation and the referendum that led to the transition to the Presidential Government System on June 24, 2018. Qualitative research method was used in the study in question, and the interviews with the interviewees were carried out through semi-structured interview forms. In the first part of the interview form, which consists of two main parts, the demographic information of the interviewees is included, while in the second part, there are qestions about discrimination they faced in terms of their sexual orientation/gender identity and the methods of coping with these discriminations between 2013-2018 as follow: their (1) access to justice, (2) access to health, (3) participation in politics, (4) educational life, (5) working life, and (6) family environment. 
While LGBTQI+s living in Diyarbakır between 2013 and 2018 constitute the population of the research, 75 interviewees between the ages of 16-43, reached using the snowball method, constitute the sample of the research. In order to ensure equal representation of LGBTQI+ people, a stratified sample model was used in the study, while a number of 10 lesbians, 19 gays, 21 bisexuals (female/male), 15 transgenders (female/male), 10 +'s were reached, it was noted that intersex people could not be reached.
The ethnic distribution of 75 people interviewed within the scope of the study was expressed as follows: 62 Kurdish (Kurmanç-Zaza) people, 5 Armenians, 4 Turks and 1 Persian. 1 interviewee declared that s/he did not have an ethnic identity, and 1 interviewee stated that s/he did not define their ethnic identity; 1 interviewee stated that their father was Kurdish and mother was Turkish. This interviewer and 1 Armenian, 1 Persian and 2 interviewees who do not have/identify their ethnic identity speak Kurdish; 5 Kurds stated that their mother tongue is Turkish. When it comes to LGBTI+s living in Diyarbakır, it has been emphasized that the ethnic identity of the sample is predominantly Kurdish and their mother tongue is predominantly Kurdish. 
In the study, it is stated that LGBTQI+s living in Diyarbakır experience a unique intersectionality of various factors such as ethnicity, mother tongue, political opinion, socio-economic status, and the environment they live in, apart from their sexual orientation/gender identities. For example, out of 69 interviewees who stated that they were exposed to discrimination based on sexual orientation/gender identity, 54 stated that they were exposed to discrimination based on ethnicity, 50 based on political views, and 35 based on their mother tongue. However, there were 45 interviewees who stated that they were exposed to discrimination based on sexual orientation/gender identity, ethnicity and political opinion. 
In the second part of the study, meanly the part of the stories of the types of discrimination that LGBTI+s are exposed to, the stories of discrimination are included under 6 headings. In this section, in which the discrimination experienced in access to justice, access to health, participation in politics, education, work and family environments between 2013-2018 were asked, the problems experienced were expressed as follows:
1. Access to Justice: The number of interviewees who stated that they had a problem requiring access to justice between 2013-2018 is 44, and the number of those who stated that these problems are based on sexual orientation/gender identity is 25. Among them, the number of applicants to judicial authorities is 17. On the other hand, the number of those who have any problems that require access to justice, although not based on sexual orientation/gender identity, is 19. Among them, the number of applicants to judicial authorities is 9. Therefore, the number of interviewees who applied to judicial authorities between 2013-2018 is 26. 
2. Access to Health: Between 2013 and 2018, all interviewees stated that they had access to health in order to receive examination, control, surgery, accompaniment, medication, blood donation, medical consultation or therapy services. 
3. Participation in Politics: Voting, participating in the press meetings, participating in the strikes, participating in the demonstrations/marches participating in the rallies, taking part in informative materials such as leaflets, press releases, sharing messages on social media in line with their political views, NGOs, unions, professions in line with their political views. 71 of the interviewees stated that they participated in politics by performing one or more of these activities. 
4. Educational Life: 64 of the interviewees stated that they received education in various types and levels between 2013 and 2018. 
5. Working Life: In this item, in which the participation of the interviewees in working life is measured, 56 (75%) of the interviewees stated that they worked in a job between 2013 and 2018, while 38 (68%) of them were in the private sector, 11 (20%) in the public sector and 7 (13%) stated that they work independently. 
6. Family Environment: In this item, which includes a question about how family life is defined, data on family life defined in various ways have been obtained. 73 of 75 interviewees stated that they took part in a family environment between 2013 and 2018. 
In the section of the study where the periods of peace and war are compared, a quantitative comparison of the discrimination experienced by LGBTQI+s in Diyarbakır during periods of peace and war is given. In addition to periods of peace and war, some ongoing cases in 2019, when the research was conducted, are also listed under the title Ongoing as a third title. The table created accordingly is as follows: 
Access to Justice
Access to Health
Participation in Politics
As can be seen from the table, the number of discrimination cases increased significantly during the war period compared to the peace period. According to the researchers, this increase shows that these discriminations are not just structural but are related to wartime conditions. 
The distribution of discrimination and violence types according to periods of peace and war is as follows: 
Exposure to Discrimination
As can be seen from the table, it is observed that the interviewees are exposed to discrimination twice as much during the war period compared to the peace period. This research, which comparatively measures the type and severity of discrimination experienced by LGBTQI+s living in war zones during war and peace times, reveals that the discrimination experienced increases significantly during the war periods. This shows that the intersectional approach of the demand for peace and the fields such as democracy, gender equality and the fight against discrimination is even more meaningful in Turkey.
The existence of the Kurdish Question in Turkey makes the struggle for peace and especially Critical Peace Studies crucial. There are many NGOs and activists from different segments operating in this field. When the activities carried out in this field are examined, it is seen that the struggle for peace has been carried out with a critical and intersectional understanding. In this sense, the struggle for peace cannot be separated from the struggle for democracy, rights and justice in Turkey.
Actors operating in this field are also working on how to create mechanisms for lasting peace and democracy. The recommendations for Turkey in the conclusion part of the report, in which the DEMOS Research Association examines the peace negotiations in Colombia, is very important in this sense.
However, as seen in the previous sections, the Kurdish Question is not the only one, although it is the most important problem in Turkey. In order to ensure social peace, the Kurdish Question must be solved first and the loss of rights must be compensated. This process should be accompanied by a comprehensive democratization program aimed at eliminating structural inequalities, in which large segments of society will participate. The political regime, which has become increasingly authoritarian especially after July 15, criminalizes all struggles for rights and peace in Turkey and targets women and LGBTQI+s. Therefore, the struggle for rights of different segments of the society and the struggle for peace must be handled together.
It is vital to operate transitional justice and restorative justice mechanisms in order to ensure positive peace and compensate for losses in Turkey. The increasing violations of rights, especially in recent years, reveal the need for mechanisms such as confrontation, truth and reconciliation commissions to be carried out together with formal legal processes in order to ensure social peace and harmony, and the gender perspective should be strongly included in this process.
Alıcı, N. & Sunca, Y. (2018). “Yerel Eleştirinin Evrenseldeki İnşası: Barış Çalışmalarına Avrupa Merkezciliğin Ötesinden Bakmak”, Off University Conference Proceedings.
Atmaca, A. Ö. ve Gözen Ercan, P. (2018). “Uluslararası Güvenliği Yeniden Düşünmek: Uluslararası İlişkiler Disiplininde Feminist Eleştiriler”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol. 13, No: 59, p. 19-31, DOI: 10.33458/uidergisi.523824.
Barış İçin Akademisyenler (BAK) (ty). “Hakkımızda”, https://barisicinakademisyenler.net/node/1 date of access: 24 September 2022.
BAK (2016). “Bu suça ortak olmayacağız! Em ê nebin hevparên vî sûcî!”, https://barisicinakademisyenler.net/node/62 date of access: 24 September 2022.
Barış Vakfı (ty). “Hakkımızda” http://barisvakfi.org/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Barış Vakfı (ty). http://barisvakfi.org/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Barış Vakfı (2018). Barışın Elkitabı. İstanbul: Barış Vakfı. For brochure see: http://barisvakfi.org/barisin-el-kitabi/date of access: 24 September 2022.
Beraberce (ty). “beraberce Değişim Programları: Hafıza Mekanları”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Beraberce (ty). “Eğitim Programları”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/project/beraberce-akademi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Beraberce (2022). “Barış Kültürü Eğitimi Ağı PeaCE Net”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/project/baris-kulturu-egitimi-agi-peace-net/ date of access: 24 September 2022
Bilener, T. ve Büyükakıncı, E. (2018). “John Paul Lederach”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 506-531, Ankara: Adres.
Bilgin Aytaç, G. (2018). “Carol Cohn”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 614-636.
Bor, G., Daşlı, G. Ve Alıcı, N. (2021). Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi. İstanbul: DEMOS
Botcharova, O. (2002). “Implementation of Two Track Diplomacy: Developing a Model of Forgiveness”, Ed. Raymond G. Helmick, S. J. ve Rodney L. Peterson Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Religion, Public Policy and Conflict Transformation, p. 279-304, Pennsylvania: Tempelton Foundation Press.
Burton, J. (1990). Conflict: Resolution and Prevention. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
Büyükbaş, H. Ve Atıcı, N. (2013). “Liberal Barış Kuramı: Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, No: 40, p. 1-19.
Cloke, K. (2001). Mediating Dangerously: The Frontiers of Conflict Resolution. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Çiçek, C. (2015). Ulus, Din, Sınıf: Türkiye’de Kürt Mutabakatının İnşası. İstanbul: İletişim.
Daly K. and R. Immarigeon (1998) “The past, present, and future of restorative justice: some critical reflections.” The Contemporary Justice Review 1 (1): 21-45.
Daşlı, G., Alıcı, N. ve Flader, U. (2017). Kadınların Barış Mücadelesinde Dünya Deneyimleri: Sırbistan, Kosova, Sri Lanka, Suriye. İstanbul: Demos.
Daşlı, G., Alıcı, N. ve Poch Figueras, J. (2018). Barış ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet: Kolombiya Barış Süreci. Ankara: Demos.
Democratic Progress Institute (2013a). A Pot Pourri of Civil Society Action for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding. London: DPI.
Democratic Progress Institute (2013b). Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti Önündeki Engeller ve Fırsatlar: Hakikat ve Uzlaşma Komisyonları. Londra: DPI.
Democratic Progress İnstitute (2014). Çatışma Çözümünde Sivil Toplumun Rolü: Yuvarlak Masa Toplantısı. London: DPI.
Democratic Progress Institute (2015). Çözüm Süreci: Kazanımlar ve Tehditler. London: DPI.
Deutsch, M. (2006). “Cooperation and Competition”, Eds. Morton Deutsch, Peter T. Coleman, Eric C. Marcus The Handbook of Conflict Resolution, p. 23-42, San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons.
DEMOS (ty). “Barış ve Uzlaşma” https://demos.org.tr/k/baris-ve-uzlasma/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (ty). “Biz Kimiz?”, https://demos.org.tr/hakkimizda/biz-kimiz/ date of access: 24 September 2022
DEMOS (2017). “Kadınların Barış Mücadelesi”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/kadinlarin-baris-mucadelesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2018). “Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Barış: Kolombiya Barış Süreci”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/toplumsal-cinsiyet-ve-baris-kolombiya-baris-sureci/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2020). “DEMOS’tan Sesler”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/demostan-sesler/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2021). “Barış STÖ’leri”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/baris-stoleri/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2021). ““Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi araştırma raporu yayında!”, https://demos.org.tr/k/turkiyede-kadin-ve-lgbti-orgutlerinin-baris-mucadelesi/date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2021). “Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/turkiyede-kadin-ve-lgbti-orgutlerinin-baris-mucadelesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2021). “Tüzük”, https://demos.org.tr/hakkimizda/tuzuk/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2021). “Yerelden Barış”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/yerelden-baris/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DEMOS (2022). “Barışı Gündemleştirmek: Kadın, LGBTİ+ ve Gençlerin Barış Süreçlerine Katılımının Desteklenmesi”, https://demos.org.tr/projeler/barisi-gundemlestirmek-kadin-lgbti-ve-genclerin-baris-sureclerine-katiliminin-desteklenmesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
DİSA (ty). https://disa.org.tr/disa/ date of access: 5 November 2022.
Egbatan, M. (2013). “Nasıl Bir Barış Süreci: Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet”, Fe Dergi 5, No: 2, 8-19.
Erem, O. (2018). OHAL sona erdi: İki yıllık sürecin bilançosu. https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-turkiye-44799489 date of access: 25 September 2022.
Fahrioğlı Akın, F. (2019). Enformel Arabulucuların Mikro Çatışma Çözümündeki Rolleri: Diyarbakır Örneği. International Journal of Kurdish Studies 5 (2), 393-421 DOI: 10.21600/ijoks.543133.
Fidan, A. ve Göçer, A. (2022). Yakın Geçmişten Olası Geleceğe Barışı Yeşertmek: 2013-2018 yılları Arasında Diyarbakır’da Yaşayan LGBTİ+’lar. https://turkey.fes.de/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf-files/2022/keskesor-bakad-barisi-yesertmek.pdf date of access: 25 September 2022.
Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London: Sage.
Galtung, J. (2000). Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means (the Transcend Method). United Nations. https://www.transcend.org/pctrcluj2004/TRANSCEND_manual.pdf date of access: 14 August 2022.
Galtung, J (2009). Çatışmaları Aşarak Dönüştürmek. Çev. Havva Kök. Ankara: USAK.
HDK (2014). “Program: Halkların Demokratik Kongresi 5. Genel Kurulu Değişiklikleriyle” https://www.halklarindemokratikkongresi.net/hdk/program/1746 date of access: 24 September 2022.
İHD (2013). “1990-2012 PKK Militanları Tarafından Alıkonulanlar Raporu” https://www.ihd.org.tr/1990-2012-pkk-mltanlari-tarafindan-alikonulanlar-rapor/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (ty). Çalışma Alanları. https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/calisma-alanlari/ date of access: 25 September 2022.
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (ty). “Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti Hakkında”, https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/gecis-donemi-adaleti-hakkinda/ date of access: 1 October 2022.
Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (ty). Projeler. https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/calisma date of access: 25 September 2022.
İHD (2014). “Hakkımızda”, https://www.ihd.org.tr/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
İHD (2022). https://www.ihd.org.tr/?s=bar%C4%B1%C5%9F date of access: 24 September 2022.
Lederach, J. P. (1999). Building Peace: Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
Oruç, H. ve Kök Arslan, H. (2018) “Wolfgang Dietrich”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 1532-551, Ankara: Adres.
Özbek, M. (2005). Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin “Ceza Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk” Konulu Tavsiye Kararı. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol: 7, No: 1, p. 127-166.
Özbek, M. (2007). Avrupa Birliğinde Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözümü. TBB Dergisi, No: 68, p. 265-320.
Paffenholz, T. (2009). Summary of Results for a Comparative Research Project: Civil Society and Peacebuilding. Geneva: Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, The Center on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding.
Paffenholz, T. (2015). “Civil Society and Peace Building”, Development Dialogue, No: 63, p.108-118.
Parkinson, J. Ve Roche, D. (2004). “Restorative Justice: Deliberative Democracy in Action?”, Australian Journal of Political Science, 39: 3, p. 505-518. DOI: 10.1080/103614042000295101
Romya Bilgin, K. (2018). “Johan Galtung”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 174-207, Ankara: Adres.
Sade, G. (2020). 15 Temmuz darbe girişimi sonrasında kaç kişi görevinden ihraç edildi, kaç kişi tutuklandı?https://tr.euronews.com/2020/07/15/verilerle-15-temmuz-sonras-ve-ohal-sureci date of access: 25 September 2022.
Salman, F. ve Ergün, A. (2017). OHAL’de Kapatılan Kurumlar. https://m.bianet.org/kurdi/siyaset/182427-ohal-de-kapatilan-kurumlar date of access: 25 September 2022.
Sessiz Kalma (2022). Cumartesi Anneleri/İnsanları. https://www.sessizkalma.org/tr/savunucu/cumartesi-anneleriinsanlari date of access: 25 September 2022.
TBMM (2013). Toplumsal Barış Yollarının Araştırılması ve Çözüm Sürecinin Değerlendirilmesi Amacıyla Kurulan Meclis Araştırma Komisyonu Raporu. https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/Files/MeclisArastirmasiKomisyonlari/CozumSureci/Dokumanlar/cozum_kom_raporu.pdf date of access: 25 September 2022.
TOHAV (2017). Amacımız. https://www.tohav.org/amacimiz date of access: 25 September 2022.
Toker Kılınç, N., Akbaş Demirel, C., Körükmez, L. ve Biter, N. (2021). Türkiye’de İnsan Hakları Mücadelesinin Değişim Hatları: İnsan Hakları Derneği Örneğinde Uluslararası Mekanizmalar, Yerelleşme ve Dayanışma, Ankara: TİHV.
Türkiye Genç Barış İnşacıları (ty). “Biz Kimiz?” https://ypturkey.org/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
Türkmen, F. (2018). “Woodrow Wilson”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 62-85, Ankara: Adres.
UNDP ve T.C. Adalet Bakanlığı (2009). Ceza Uyuşmazlıklarında Uzlaşma El Kitabı.
Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather N. T. ve Platow, M. J. (2008). “Retributive and Restorative Justice”, Law Hum Behav, 32, p. 375-389.
Yalvaç, F. (2018a). “Jean-Jacques Rousseau”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 12-37.
Yalvaç, F. (2018b). “Immanuel Kant”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 38-59, Ankara: Adres.
 These works will be referred to as Abstract and Judgment in the next section.
 Yalvaç, F. (2018a). “Jean-Jacques Rousseau”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara, p. 17.
 Ibid, p. 18.
 Ibid, p. 26-27.
 Ibid, p. 27.
 Ibid, p. 30-33.
 This work will be referred to as Eternal Peace in the next section.
 Yalvaç, F. (2018b). “Immanuel Kant”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 43.
 Ibid, p. 44.
 Ibid, p. 44-45.
 Ibid, p. 50-51.
 Bkz. Büyükbaş, H. Ve Atıcı, N. (2013). “Liberal Barış Kuramı: Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Sayı: 40, p. 1-19; Yalvaç, F. (2018b). “Immanuel Kant”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 53-56.
 Türkmen, F. (2018). “Woodrow Wilson”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 69.
 Ibid, p. 70.
 Ibid, p. 77-78.
 Ibid, p. 81.
 See. Türkmen, F. (2018). “Woodrow Wilson”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 82-84; See. Büyükbaş, H. and Atıcı, N. (2013). “Liberal Barış Kuramı: Eleştirel Bir Değerlendirme”, Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, No: 40, p. 1-19.
 Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London: Sage, p. 2.
 Romya Bilgin, K., ibid, p. 184.
 Galtung, J., ibid, p. 2.
 Ibid, p. 31.
 Akt. Romya Bilgin, K., ibid, p. 186.
 Ibid, p. 186.
 Galtung, J., Ibid, p. 31.
 Ibid, p. 32.
 Ibid, p. 33.
 Romya Bilgin, K., ibid, p. 190.
 Galtung, J (2009). Çatışmaları Aşarak Dönüştürmek. Trans.by. Havva Kök. Ankara: USAK.
 Cloke, K. (2001). Mediating Dangerously: The Frontiers of Conflict Resolution. New York: John Wiley & Sons, p. 7-8.
 Lederach, J. P. (1999). Building Peace: Reconciliation in Divided Societiep. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.
 Oruç, H. and Kök Arslan, H. (2018) “Wolfgang Dietrich”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı, Barış Çalışmaları, p. 532-551, Ankara: Adres.
 Burton, J. (1990). Conflict: Resolution and Prevention. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
 Galtung, J. (2009). Çatışmaları Aşarak Dönüştürmek. Trans.by. Havva Kök. Ankara: USAK.
 Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by Peaceful Means: Peace and Conflict, Development and Civilization. London: Sage.
 Romya Bilgin, K., ibid, p. 192; Galtung, J. (1996), p. 72.
 Galtung, J. (2000). Conflict Transformation by Peaceful Means (the Transcend Method). United Nations, p. 2-8. https://www.transcend.org/pctrcluj2004/TRANSCEND_manual.pdf date of access: 14 August 2022.
 Galtung, J. (2009), p. 14-15
 Ibid, p. 20.
 Ibid, p. 20-21.
 Deutsch, M. (2006). “Cooperation and Competition”, Eds. Morton Deutsch, Peter T. Coleman, Eric C. Marcus The Handbook of Conflict Resolution, p. 23-42, San Fransisco: John Wiley & Sons, p. 32.
 Ibid, p. 33.
 Ibid, p. 34-37
 Lederach, J. P. (1999). Building Peace: Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace, p. 15.
 Ibid, p. 23.
 Ibid, p. 24.
 Bilener, T. ve Büyükakıncı, E. (2018). “John Paul Lederach”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı Barış Çalışmaları i, p. 506-531, Ankara: Adres, p. 513.
 Lederach, J. P., ibid, p. 27.
 Ibid, p. 82.
 Bilener, T. ve Büyükakıncı, E. (2018). “John Paul Lederach”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı Barış Çalışmaları, p. 506-531, Ankara: Adres, p. 514-515.
 Lederach, J. P., ibid, p. 39; Bilginer ve Büyükakıncı, ibid, p. 520.
 Lederach, J. P., ibid, p. 39; Bilginer ve Büyükakıncı, ibid, p. 520.
 Botcharova, O. (2002). “Implementation of Two Track Diplomacy: Developing a Model of Forgiveness”, Ed. Raymond G. Helmick, P. J. ve Rodney L. Peterson Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Religion, Public Policy and Conflict Transformation, p. 279-304, Pennsylvania: Tempelton Foundation Press., p. 280.
 Ibid, p. 282.
 Paffenholz, T. (2015). “Civil Society and Peace Building”, Development Dialogue, No: 63, p. 108.
 Ibid, p. 108-109.
 Ibid, p. 110-113.
 Democratic Progress Institute (2013a). A Pot Pourri of Civil Society Action for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding. London: DPI, p. 7-8.
 Botcharova, O. (2002). “Implementation of Two Track Diplomacy: Developing a Model of Forgiveness”, Ed. Raymond G. Helmick, P. J. ve Rodney L. Peterson Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Religion, Public Policy and Conflict Transformation, p. 279-304, Pennsylvania: Tempelton Foundation Press; Democratic Progress Institute (2013a). A Pot Pourri of Civil Society Action for Conflict Transformation and Peacebuilding. London: DPI; Democratic Progress İnstitute (2014). Çatışma Çözümünde Sivil Toplumun Rolü: Yuvarlak Masa Toplantısı. London: DPI; Paffenholz, T. (2009). Summary of Results for a Comparative Research Project: Civil Society and Peacebuilding. Geneva: Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, The Center on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding.
 Daly K. and R. Immarigeon (1998) “The past, present, and future of restorative justice: some critical reflections.” The Contemporary Justice Review 1 (1): 21-45.
 Fahrioğlu Akın, F. (2019). “Enformel Arabulucuların Mikro Çatışma Çözümündeki Rolleri: Diyarbakır Örneği”. International Journal of Kurdish Studies 5 (2), p. 396.
 Özbek, M. (2005). “Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin “Ceza Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk” Konulu Tavsiye Kararı”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol: 7, No: 1, p. 127.
 Özbek, M. (2007). “Avrupa Birliğinde Alternatif Uyuşmazlık Çözümü”. TBB Dergisi, No: 68, p. 269.
 Özbek, M. (2005). “Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin “Ceza Uyuşmazlıklarında Arabuluculuk” Konulu Tavsiye Kararı”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi Vol: 7, No: 1, p. 130.
 Ibid, p. 132.
 Ibid, p. 135-136.
 UNDP ve T.C. Adalet Bakanlığı (2009). Ceza Uyuşmazlıklarında Uzlaşma El Kitabı, p. 11.
 Ibid, p. 11-12.
 Ibid, p. 35.
 Ibid, p. 36-37.
 Wenzel, M., Okimoto, T. G., Feather N. T. ve Platow, M. J. (2008). “Retributive and Restorative Justice”, Law Hum Behav, 32, p. 375-376.
 Ibid, p. 377.
 Parkinson, J. ve Roche, D. (2004). “Restorative Justice: Deliberative Democracy in Action?”, Australian Journal of Political Science, 39: 3, p. 507-509.
 Ibid, p. 511.
 Ibid, p. 511-514.
 Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi. “Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti Hakkında”, https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/gecis-donemi-adaleti-hakkinda/ date of access: 1 October 2022.
 For this triple distinction, see: Teitel, R. G. (2003). “Transitional Justice Genealogy”, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Volume 16, pp. 69-94.
 Egbatan, M. (2013). “Nasıl Bir Barış Süreci: Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet”, Fe Dergi 5, No: 2, p. 9.
 Demokratik Progress Institute (2013b). Geçiş Dönemi Adaleti Önündeki Engeller ve Fırsatlar: Hakikat ve Uzlaşma Komisyonları. Londra: DPI, p. 10-11.
 Atmaca, A. Ö. ve Gözen Ercan, P. (2018). “Uluslararası Güvenliği Yeniden Düşünmek: Uluslararası İlişkiler Disiplininde Feminist Eleştiriler”, Uluslararası İlişkiler, Vol: 13, No: 59, p. 21-23.
 Ibid, p. 24.
 Bilgin Aytaç, G. (2018). “Carol Cohn”, Ed. Erhan Büyükakıncı Barış Çalışmaları, Ankara: Adres, p. 616.
 Ibid, p. 617.
 Ibid, p. 619.
 Bkz. Atmaca, A. Ö. ve Gözen Ercan, P. (2018), ibid; Bilgin Aytaç, G. (2018), ibid.
 Bilgin Aytaç, G. (2018), ibid, p. 628.
 Atmaca, A. Ö. ve Gözen Ercan, P. (2018), ibid, p. 28.
 Bilgin Aytaç, G. (2018), ibid, p. 629.
 Daşlı, G., Alıcı, N. ve Flader, U. (2017). Kadınların Barış Mücadelesinde Dünya Deneyimleri: Sırbistan, Kosova, Sri Lanka, Suriye. İstanbul: DEMOS, p. 1.
 Ibid, p. 131.
 Ibid, p. 132.
 Daşlı, G., Alıcı, N. ve Poch Figueras, J. (2018). Barış ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet: Kolombiya Barış Süreci. Ankara: Demos.
 Ibid, p. 8.
 Ibid, p. 8.
 Ibid, p. 24-41.
 Alıcı, N. & Sunca, Y. (2018). “Yerel Eleştirinin Evrenseldeki İnşası: Barış Çalışmalarına Avrupa Merkezciliğin Ötesinden Bakmak”. Off University Conference Proceedings, p. 7.
 Ibid, p. 8.
 For previous negotiation and conflict processes on the Kurdish question, see: Çiçek, C. (2015). Ulus, Din, Sınıf: Türkiye’de Kürt Mutabakatının İnşası. İstanbul: İletişim.
 Ibid, p. 16.
 İHD (2014). “Hakkımızda”, https://www.ihd.org.tr/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 İHD (2013). “1990-2012 PKK Militanları Tarafından Alıkonulanlar Raporu” https://www.ihd.org.tr/1990-2012-pkk-mltanlari-tarafindan-alikonulanlar-rapor/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 İHD (2022). https://www.ihd.org.tr/?s=bar%C4%B1%C5%9F date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DİSA (ty). https://disa.org.tr/disa/ date of access 5 November 2022.
 For DISA reports, see: https://independent.academia.edu/disadiyarbakirsiyasalvesosyalarastirmalarenstitusu?fbclid=IwAR3e8r4GHEpb_R-QbjOvCbnlIWqmEG6gD0kckYsZ0mTMMyBr9F4bD0_FnD0 date of access: 5 November 2022.
 HDK (2014). “Program: Halkların Demokratik Kongresi 5. Genel Kurulu Değişiklikleriyle” https://www.halklarindemokratikkongresi.net/hdk/program/1746 date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Barış Vakfı (ty). “Hakkımızda” http://barisvakfi.org/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Barış Vakfı (ty). http://barisvakfi.org/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Barış Vakfı (2018). Barışın Elkitabı. İstanbul: Barış Vakfı. For brochure, see: http://barisvakfi.org/barisin-el-kitabi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Barış İçin Akademisyenler (BAK) (ty). “Hakkımızda”, https://barisicinakademisyenler.net/node/1 date of access: 24 September 2022.
 BAK (2016). “Bu suça ortak olmayacağız! Em ê nebin hevparên vî sûcî!”, https://barisicinakademisyenler.net/node/62 date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Türkiye Genç Barış İnşacıları (ty). “Biz Kimiz?” https://ypturkey.org/hakkimizda/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Beraberce (ty). “beraberce Değişim Programları: Hafıza Mekanları”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/ date of access: 24 September 2022
 Beraberce (ty). “Eğitim Programları”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/project/beraberce-akademi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 Beraberce (2022). “Barış Kültürü Eğitimi Ağı PeaCE Net”, https://www.beraberce.org.tr/project/baris-kulturu-egitimi-agi-peace-net/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (ty). “Biz Kimiz?”, https://demop.org.tr/hakkimizda/biz-kimiz/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2021). “Tüzük”, https://demop.org.tr/hakkimizda/tuzuk/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2020). “DEMOS’tan Sesler”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/demostan-sesler/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2021). “Barış STÖ’leri”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/baris-stoleri/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2021). “Yerelden Barış”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/yerelden-baris/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2017). “Kadınların Barış Mücadelesi”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/kadinlarin-baris-mucadelesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2021). ““Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi araştırma raporu yayında!”, https://demop.org.tr/k/turkiyede-kadin-ve-lgbti-orgutlerinin-baris-mucadelesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2022). “Barışı Gündemleştirmek: Kadın, LGBTİ+ ve Gençlerin Barış Süreçlerine Katılımının Desteklenmesi”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/barisi-gundemlestirmek-kadin-lgbti-ve-genclerin-baris-sureclerine-katiliminin-desteklenmesi/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 DEMOS (2018). “Toplumsal Cinsiyet ve Barış: Kolombiya Barış Süreci”, https://demop.org.tr/projeler/toplumsal-cinsiyet-ve-baris-kolombiya-baris-sureci/ date of access: 24 September 2022.
 On the other hand, the long-standing conflict environment and the policy of impunity have led to a feeling of distrust of the state and formal law, especially in the provinces where Kurds live heavily. This situation pushed the Kurds to seek informal conflict resolution methods and led to the development of the conflict resolution approach, which is defined as “alternative courts” or “PKK courts” in the Turkish public opinion. It is seen that these structures, which traditionally already exist in the cultural structure of the Kurdish people, manifest as the operation of informal mediation, in which opinion leaders are involved, especially in the resolution of micro conflicts. The field findings of Ferda Fahrioğlu Akın’s study on the subject in Diyarbakır show that 80-90% of the conflicts in the society in Kurdish provinces are defined as Kurdish political parties, the Public Relations Commission, which was established under the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and Democratic Regions Party (DRP), reveals that it has been resolved within the body. On the subject, see: Fahrioğlu Akın, F. (2019). Enformel Arabulucuların Mikro Çatışma Çözümündeki Rolleri: Diyarbakır Örneği. International Journal of Kurdish Studies 5 (2), p. 393-421.
 Democratic Progress Institute (2015). Çözüm Süreci: Kazanımlar ve Tehditler. London: DPI, p. 13.
 Toplumsal Barış Yollarının Araştırılması ve Çözüm Sürecinin Değerlendirilmesi Amacıyla Kurulan Meclis Araştırma Komisyonu Raporu (2013). https://www.tbmm.gov.tr/Files/MeclisArastirmasiKomisyonlari/CozumSureci/Dokumanlar/cozum_kom_raporu.pdf date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Sessiz Kalma (2022). Cumartesi Anneleri/İnsanları. https://www.sessizkalma.org/tr/savunucu/cumartesi-anneleriinsanlari date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (ty). Çalışma Alanları. https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/calisma-alanlari/ date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Hakikat Adalet Hafıza Merkezi (ty). Projeler. https://hakikatadalethafiza.org/calisma date of access: 25 September 2022.
 TOHAV (2017). Amacımız. https://www.tohav.org/amacimiz date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Erem, O. (2018). OHAL sona erdi: İki yıllık sürecin bilançosu. https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler-turkiye-44799489 date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Sade, G. (2020). 15 Temmuz darbe girişimi sonrasında kaç kişi görevinden ihraç edildi, kaç kişi tutuklandı?https://tr.euronewp.com/2020/07/15/verilerle-15-temmuz-sonras-ve-ohal-sureci date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Salman, F. ve Ergün, A. (2017). OHAL’de Kapatılan Kurumlar. https://m.bianet.org/kurdi/siyaset/182427-ohal-de-kapatilan-kurumlar date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Toker Kılınç, N., Akbaş Demirel, C., Körükmez, L. ve Biter, N. (2021). Türkiye’de İnsan Hakları Mücadelesinin Değişim Hatları: İnsan Hakları Derneği Örneğinde Uluslararası Mekanizmalar, Yerelleşme ve Dayanışma, Ankara: TİHV, p. 92.
 Bor, G., Daşlı, G. Ve Alıcı, N. (2021). Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi. İstanbul: DEMOS, p. 6.
 Ibid, p. 16.
 Ibid, p. 16.
 Ibid, p. 17.
 Ibid, p. 18-19.
 Ibid, p. 20.
 Ibid, p. 20.
 Ibid, p. 23.
 Ibid, p. 25.
 Ibid, p. 25-27.
 Ibid, p. 34-35.
 Ibid, p. 36.
 Ibid, p. 37.
 Bor, G., Daşlı, G. Ve Alıcı, N. (2021). Kesişen Yollardan Daralan Alanlara: Türkiye’de Kadın ve LGBTİ+ Örgütlerinin Barış Mücadelesi. İstanbul: DEMOS, p. 38.
 Ibid, p. 42.
 Ibid, p. 43.
 Fidan, A. ve Göçer, A. (2022). Yakın Geçmişten Olası Geleceğe Barışı Yeşertmek: 2013-2018 yılları Arasında Diyarbakır’da Yaşayan LGBTİ+’lar, p. 12-13. https://turkey.fep.de/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf-files/2022/keskesor-bakad-barisi-yesertmek.pdf date of access: 25 September 2022.
 Ibid, p. 31.
 Ibid, p. 32.
 Ibid, p. 42.
 Ibid, p. 42.
 Ibid, p. 43.
 Ibid, p. 43.
 Ibid, p. 43.
 Ibid, p. 45.
 Ibid, p. 93.
 Ibid, p. 93.
 Ibid, p. 94.
* Sponsored by the Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung with funds of the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development of the Federal Republic of Germany. This publication or parts of it can be used by others for free as long as they provide a proper reference to the original publication. The content of the publication is the sole responsibility of Off-University. Organisation für den Frieden e.V. and does not necessarily reflect a position of RLS.