Commenting on the relationship between rationality and emotions, a famous social psychologist once wrote that rational human behavior without emotions is like a computer with the power switched off. Sophisticated as it might be, the computer is lifeless when the power is switched off. Psychoanalysis also gives a central stage to emotions in human life and argues that it is our emotions and affects, particularly those bubbling under the surface unbeknown to our rational minds, that we should investigate when trying to understand our motivation. In short, emotions drive us.
At the social level, the increasing rise of populism and fundamentalism worldwide is a constant reminder of the pivotal role of emotions and, some have argued, ‘irrational’ behavior in social and political life. Consequently, when considering peace mediation which, by definition, takes place in the aftermath of extreme violence, devastation, and loss of human life, one would expect an active interest in and engagement with the emotions at the root of these events and resulting from them. But, alas, the picture is not so straightforward.
The States of Mind in Conflict (SOMIC) pilot project, funded by the Swiss FDFA and run by researchers at CREHR —whose report will be published in April 2022 — was motivated by a perceived lack of attention to the psychological dimensions in peace mediation and peacebuilding. Practitioners were asked in what ways, based on their experience, could psychology improve peace mediation practice. What emerged from the interviews is that the field of peace mediation, as a multi-layered and complex ecosystem, has a complicated and ambivalent relationship with emotions. While the so-called ‘transformative peace practices’ tend to be implicitly interested in and actively engage with emotions, ‘high-level elite mediation’ is uninterested at best and often dismissive of emotions.
Some have attributed this situation to how mediators are trained and the dominance of the rational actor model, which reductively views political decision-making as primarily driven by rational processes. Within this framework emotions are treated as a nuisance or an obstacle to ‘the real work.’ Anybody who has worked in the peace mediation field knows that this is in total contrast with the intense emotional experience of working with parties in conflict. Many practitioners already apply psychological tools intuitively, but, because of the systemic denial of emotions, the embedded sanitization of emotions in peace processes, and the consequent lack of understanding of why what they instinctively do works, practitioners feel deskilled and unprepared. Indeed, the study found that when practitioners intuitively attend to the emotions in peacebuilding, they feel tentative and uncertain, and lack the support they need. In a recent upsurge of interest in the role of emotions in peace mediation, scholars and practitioners have, through a study, argued for the need to shift from the unrealistic and unhelpful attempt to sanitize mediation processes of emotions to facilitating their regulation.
The data collected highlight that a deeper engagement with and understanding of emotions would benefit peace mediation practice in three ways:
- When dealing with parties in conflict that have been traumatized, it would equip practitioners to better understand the mindset of parties and manage their emotional state.
- The recognition of the emotional impact of peace processes on the practitioners’ well-being and the introduction of psychological support would enhance practitioners’ resilience and capacity for self-reflection which would improve their effectiveness.
- Engaging with the emotional register in mediation and in peacebuilding encounters would benefit their relational aspects and facilitate breakthroughs in negotiations.
Overall, and undoubtedly, the findings of the study highlighted the need for a recalibration in the way peace mediation processes are understood and that, as well as a power-brokering and technical and diplomatic exercises, they should also be recognized as a highly emotionally charged intersubjective encounter, requiring a trained sensitivity to emotions. The study also identified the dangers of not attending to emotions and the many lost opportunities for breakthroughs and more successful peace mediation processes.
