History and Conflict Conference: ICAR collaborates with George Eckert Institute and USIP
Between December 2-4 2010, ICAR’s Program on History Memory and Conflict organized a conference entitled "History Education in Conflict and Transitional Societies." The conference was sponsored by the Frederick Ebert Foundation and co-hosted with the United States Institute of Peace (USIP). The conference brought together twenty scholars from the U.S. and Europe to discuss the role of history education in post-conflict and divided societies. In the introduction to the conference, Pia Bungarten, the representative of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES) to the U.S. and Canada, stressed the importance of history for the understanding of current tendencies in society. Andrea Bartoli, Director of ICAR, pointed out that choices that are made to understand and share history require a level of integrity that is hard to acquire in the midst of violent confrontation of destructive conflict. Thus, history education is not only a shared responsibility of remembering but also a chance to learn collectively, to make steps toward reconciliation and creating functional states.
During the first day at USIP participants presented papers that discussed issues reformation of the education system in conflict or post-conflict societies, history education in conflict societies, politics and the teaching of history, textbook revision, bilateral textbook commissions, and joint textbooks. During the following discussion sessions at Point of View the participants of the conference analyzed the relations between history education, formation of identity, justice, loci of power, and representation of voices.
The participants stressed that the elimination of contentious issues from the textbooks is problematic. Instead the goal of history education should be the legitimization of differences, not their elimination. More specifically, it is important to analyze the role privileged groups play in the production of the post-colonial discourse; how authoritarian societies use history education to promote their legitimacy and power over people. Subsequently, the power structure and structure of history education system - vertical, hierarchical direction of power v. horizontal, multiple levels - defines different approaches of educational initiatives. In societies where history education is a subject for constant control, training and evaluation of teachers that empowers them to become agents of change can be a possible alternative for policies imposed by the state.
The participants discussed the place of history education in reconciliation processes stressing that justice should be a part of historic narrative that moves a society forward and confronts the grievances of those affected by conflict. Whilst justice provides mechanisms that uncover crimes, injustices and violations committed in the past, history education ensures a record of accountability for these events and provides a platform for societies to move forward. However, the acknowledgment of past events is not the conclusion of reconciliation, it is important for history education to acknowledge existing injustices. Furthermore, to support the reconciliation process, history education should include visits to memorial sites. Such visits play a role in uniting the public sphere of historic narrative and a student’s personal level of the comprehension of history and identity.
A key challenge to history education is its use by politicians to promote specific political agenda. To represent different voices in society teachers have an important role in the formation of curricula that enable students to think critically. Instead of promoting consensus in the public sphere, history education should encourage open debate, tolerance, and multi-perspectivity.
During the concluding session, the participants discussed future activities and perspectives for research that will explore specific issues of history education including multi-perspectivity, evaluation, creation and re-creation of identity, and transitional justice. Each of the meetings will include analyses of case studies, types of educational initiatives, the role of history education in conflict resolution processes, and the impact of conflict resolution studies on the content and structure of history education. Future meetings will broaden their scope to not only include academics, but also practitioners in conflict resolution, educators, and developmental psychologists. The meetings will endeavor to produce specific recommendations for trainings of teachers and curriculum development.