Literature review
Texte intégral
1Post-conflict education has been discussed in a variety of contexts such as Burundi (Gaynor, 2021; Rwantabagu, 2010; Verwimp & Bavel, 2013), Bosnia and Herzegovina (Efendic et al., 2022; Keaveney, 2009; Swimelar, 2013; Torsti, 2007), Cambodia (Dy, 2013, 2015; In Cambodia’s Schools, Breaking a Silence Over the ‘Killing Fields’, 2015; Munyas, 2008), Colombia (Morales, 2021; Pineda & Celis, 2022), Germany (I. Davies, 2000; Krieg, 2015; Meseth & Proske, 2015; Pineda & Celis, 2022), Guatemala (Sieder, 2002), Northern Ireland (Keaveney, 2009; King, 2009; Terra, 2014), and Rwanda (Buckley-Zistel, 2009; Davidson, 2018; Dy, 2015; Gasanabo et al., 2016; Henry, 2016; Jessee, 2021; McLean Hilker, 2011; Mutabazi, 2021). Although ensuring access to effective educational programmes within schools in areas with a history of armed conflict has been considered valuable by actors such as the Council of Europe (Keaveney, 2009) and the United Nations (UN) (Guterres, 2023), the process is often easier said than done. Several themes emerge throughout the literature, such as the avoidance of controversial material, disagreements in what should be included and how it should be presented, group-centric narratives highlighting in-group–out-group dynamics, education as a tool for power consolidation, education as a peacebuilding tool, and education beyond the classroom.
Silence is golden
2A common tendency found in the literature is the intentional avoidance of discussion relating to past conflicts in national history curricula. A variety of reasons were given as to why this content was kept out. In some cases, it was a choice to avoid dealing with the guilt of atrocities. In Germany, many of the teachers tasked with educating the next generation immediately after the cessation of violence had been active participants in the war. Historical memory of the Nazi regime was repressed until the mid-1960s, after a series of high-profile trials made continued repression untenable (I. Davies, 2000).
3In a slightly different vein, history education was seen as dangerous shortly after the conflict in Rwanda, as it could be weaponised to promote ethnic division and undo efforts to create lasting peace and reconciliation (Dy, 2015). As a result, a moratorium was placed on history education from the mid-1990s until 2006 to allow members of the government to determine how they wanted recent history to be depicted relative to the needs of children, as well as giving teachers time to prepare accordingly (Henry, 2016). This not only included the genocide, but also other historical events that were considered controversial (Gasanabo et al., 2016). During this period, numerous attempts were made to determine how to fill the education gap, including commissions, conferences, and seminars, but ultimately it required the cooperation of international experts and Rwandan academics to put together something acceptable a full twelve years after the conflict (Buckley-Zistel, 2009). The Council of Europe recommended a similar moratorium be put in place in Bosnia and Herzegovina to allow space for historians from all communities in the country to produce a common educational approach (Parliamentary Assembly, 2000).
4In Cambodia, although the Khmer Rouge regime ended in 1979, violence did not come to a complete halt until 1991 (In Cambodia’s Schools, Breaking a Silence Over the ‘Killing Fields’, 2015). In the pursuit of reconciliation between all Cambodians, including political actors from the Khmer Rouge faction, any discussion of Khmer Rouge history was removed from the curriculum between 1991 and 2001, with teachers requested not to approach the subject independently either. There was a desire to keep the past in the past (Dy, 2013). The stated purpose of removing the ideologically driven textbooks and lessons from the curriculum was to promote peace, stability, and reconciliation across Cambodia (Dy, 2015). As evidenced by these examples, for a variety of reasons, countries may require additional time to heal and prepare before introducing content about the conflict into their curricula.
5This is not always in the context of a complete absence of historical information, rather decision makers may carefully choose which parts of history they feel comfortable teaching to their students. A common history curriculum was created in 1991 to bridge the gap between Catholic and Protestant schools in Northern Ireland. This curriculum, however, did not require students to study Irish history past 1922. Many Northern Irish teachers have avoided teaching history related to the sectarian divide and have preferred to focus on less controversial topics (King, 2009). History books produced in West Germany between 1945 and 1955 separated the actions of Hitler and the Nazi government from the German people, thus portraying the population as innocent victims of the regime. Furthermore, many lessons ended their historical coverage before the start of the Third Reich period, avoiding the discussion altogether (I. Davies, 2000). Dane Malešević, Minister of Education and Culture of Republika Srpska, banned the inclusion of any information regarding the siege of Sarajevo and the Srebrenica genocide from textbooks used within the Republika Srpska region, including textbooks produced in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Muižnieks, 2017). In Cambodia, while some discussion of the Khmer Rouge regime was reintroduced in 2001 for secondary school students, it amounted to a mere two sentences (Dy, 2015). As history teachers were unwilling to deviate from government sanctioned material, this gap remained unfilled. Furthermore, even if students asked questions about political topics independently, teachers were unwilling to risk potential repercussions by responding (Dy, 2013). This limited students' abilities to engage with the content, giving students the ability to remember what happened, but not to understand it (Munyas, 2008).
Barriers to creating effective post-conflict learning environments
6If education about a conflict is introduced in a country, there are several possible barriers mentioned across the literature. Language of instruction emerges as a common sticking point in constructing effective post-conflict education in multiethnic states. In 2009, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly called upon signatories to ‘ensure that necessary technologies and opportunities to support both teacher and student interactions within and between states are put in place, including access to written resources and sources in their own language for minority communities’(Keaveney, 2009, 4). In Guatemala, a state with a large indigenous population, the Accord on the Identity and Rights of Indigenous Peoples made space for local populations to adapt education to local needs, including language of instruction, however policy discussions at high levels do not always equate to changes in the classroom (Sieder, 2002).
7Though not linguistic in nature, education in Northern Ireland is deeply rooted in religious divides. Parochial schools were the norm prior to the 1921 partition of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Whilst Protestant churches were quick to give control over Protestant schools to the state, Catholic parishes maintained control over their schools, creating a long lasting divide in education between Catholic and Protestant communities (Terra, 2014). This segregation between these communities in Northern Ireland has bred unfamiliarity and distrust with those considered ‘other’ to one’s group (Bush & Saltarelli, 2000), though attempts have been made to introduce narratives relevant to the other community into the curriculum (Keaveney, 2009).
8These linguistic concerns are strong in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Dayton Peace Agreement which ended the conflict in 1995 split the country into different areas dominated by single ethnic groups (Nystuen, 2005). Though all part of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a whole, they have the final authority to decide how to implement educational policy in their regions, thus making it challenging to propagate a national curriculum regarding the conflict. This division was initially proposed as a solution to reduce conflict between ethnic groups, but now enforces a system of segregation that limits longer-term reconstruction (Swimelar, 2013). Segregated schools were at first promoted by the international community to increase access to education for minority students returning home post-conflict in a way that was acceptable to parents.1 These parents were unwilling for their children to be educated in a different language with narratives told from the perspective of a different ethnic group, as these perspectives could portray their own group as an enemy (Swimelar, 2013). A study in 2007 found that, though the intensity of the representation varied, all three major ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina utilised enemy image stereotypes to negatively portray one or more of the other ethnic groups in the country. This was often seen in the way they used past grievances to explain and justify more recent events. Furthermore, these representations often depicted outside groups as being incompatible with the inside group (Torsti, 2007).
9Another barrier is simply the realities of teaching. Teachers may not feel comfortable or well equipped to effectively teach a topic. For Rwandan teachers, teaching history in a way that ‘incites ethnic hatred’ could be met with a criminal liability (Buckley-Zistel, 2009; McLean Hilker, 2011). In Cambodia, during the period following the conflict, teachers were burdened with the task of developing their own strategies and materials, whilst dealing with poverty, unresolved personal trauma, missing family members, and continued incursions by remaining elements of the Khmer Rouge, while only an estimated ten per cent of teachers had any formal qualifications (Dy, 2015). A study in 2008 found that areas formerly under Khmer Rouge control were not likely to teach even the meagre amount included in the official curriculum about the conflict (Munyas, 2008). Mandated quotas dictating how many classroom hours must be spent learning a certain topic may be incongruent with the needs of the students to properly learn the content, as this can differ from class to class and student to student (Meseth & Proske, 2015). As such, these barriers may not simply be overcome by the introduction of national education policy.
Group-centric narratives in post-conflict education
10Elites in particular groups post-conflict may oppose efforts to seek reconciliation between parties of the conflict as it may be perceived as erasing what they consider to be legitimate grievances and could benefit a rival group over their own. This is seen in each of the different ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina. For Bosniaks, giving up control over the curriculum taught to their children could erase the historical memory of suffering faced specifically by their ethnic group, particularly for those living in Serb-dominated Srebrenica. Many Bosnian Serbs refuse to recognise any wrongdoing on the part of their ethnic group and have maintained a narrative about the conflict that emphasised their innocence (Muižnieks, 2017; Swimelar, 2013).
11Likewise, education about World War II in East Germany focused almost exclusively on the victimhood of political prisoners and Communist resistance to the ruling regime. Other targeted groups were only briefly mentioned, with no mention of Jewish victims of violence until the 1960s and little recognition until the 1980s (I. Davies, 2000). Concepts such as a national past take on different meanings in Northern Ireland, where each community fosters their own historical narrative about the region's past through the lens of demographic affiliation. In practice, Protestant communities frame Northern Ireland as part of British history that resisted armed paramilitary groups supported by their neighbours to the South, whereas Catholic communities are more likely to frame the history of Northern Ireland as one of British colonialism and discrimination. Importantly, as Terra (2014) points out, neither of these narratives are false yet they are unable to coexist.
Education as a tool for power consolidation
12The way the history of a conflict is taught can be shaped by the political goals of those in power. The Vietnamese-backed People's Republic of Kampuchea (PRK) government used graphic depictions of violence during the previous regime at all levels of education to instil fear and hatred for the still active Khmer Rouge. This was powerful propaganda that also justified the presence of the Vietnamese in the country (Dy, 2013). The regime’s textbooks were able to use narratives surrounding the Khmer Rouge as an effective scapegoat for all that was wrong in society (Dy, 2015). Children living in Khmer Rouge controlled territories after the official end of the Khmer Rouge regime had not had the same educational exposure to negative aspects of the regime. Armed with a set of educational materials sympathetic to the Khmer Rouge, instruction focused on the unjust invasion of Cambodia by a foreign enemy, the Vietnamese, over any suffering experienced during the years preceding (Munyas, 2008).
13Similarly, the conflict in Rwanda was not terminated through two sides coming together and deciding to end the conflict through either a peace agreement or a ceasefire, but through a one-sided military victory by the predominantly Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). This offered the victor the opportunity to dictate educational policy without needing to appease their rivals (Henry, 2016), though international stakeholders such as United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and the Education Development Center have been involved in the curriculum development and revision process (Buckley-Zistel, 2009; Gasanabo et al., 2016). Nevertheless, Henry (2016) argues that the historical education about the 1994 conflict in Rwanda perpetuates a one-sided narrative putting the totality of guilt upon the Hutu ethnic group. This, she argues, is dangerous as it threatens long lasting peacebuilding efforts. McLean Hilker (2011) touches on this sentiment as well, emphasising how the silence surrounding suffering that did not occur within the established narrative framework has left many Rwandans with feelings of injustice that are not conducive to long-term reconciliation. Mutabazi (2021) concludes that the current state of history education in Rwanda has not provided students with the skills and tools necessary to overcome past divisions within society.
Post-conflict education as an effective peacebuilding tool
14The aforementioned attempts by countries to either bury the past or reframe it in a way that supports political goals show how challenging crafting peace-supporting education can be. Despite this, education can still be a powerful tool to pursue post-conflict reconciliation. Holocaust education was a large component of West German post-conflict nation building and democratisation. It is not limited to the history curriculum, but is also found in religion, ethics, and literature classes (Krieg, 2015). Although different German Länder have some level of autonomy over what is included in their curriculum, education about the Holocaust remains relatively consistent throughout the country (I. Davies, 2000). Rwanda followed suit in 2016 by introducing elements of genocide studies into a greater number of school subjects. These lessons focus not only on the history of Rwanda, but also on other conflicts such as the Holocaust to understand the factors that lead to genocide in order to prevent future violence (Gasanabo et al., 2016). In contrast to the arguments made by Henry (2016) and Mutabazi (2021), this leads Gasanabo et al. (2016) to perceive the current state of post-conflict education in Rwanda as a positive step towards creating unified communities resilient against the resurgence of violence. Pineda and Celis (2022) argue that the success of peacebuilding education in Colombia is influenced by the country’s educational traditions. For example, they cite the long-standing inclusion of the humanities in all levels and types of education in Colombia as being conducive to peacebuilding efforts.
Alternative avenues for post-conflict education
15History does not sit still. It does not remain buried in a textbook only to be accessed when someone chooses; it is being taught every day by the media, families, and communities at large. When the content found in textbooks aligns with the narratives being circulated by other elements in society, all of these elements can reinforce each other (Gasanabo et al., 2016; Torsti, 2007). However, this is not always the case. A study conducted by Dieter Boßmann in 1977 highlighted a disconnect between the narratives that German adolescents recounted about Adolf Hitler and the scholarly research being conducted at the time (Boßmann, 1977). This showed the limits of formal education in guiding historical memory when other sources of information such as family and media contradict what students learn in school (Meseth & Proske, 2015). This is also reflected in the Rwandan experience, where children received different, biased retellings of the conflict depending on the experience of their family and community (Buckley-Zistel, 2009). Students may emerge from education with two separate versions of history: an official version they learned in school and an unofficial version they learned privately. They are more likely to believe the latter (McLean Hilker, 2011).
16Similarly, in 2008, Munyas found that students in Cambodia also often receive information about the conflict from members of their own family. These retellings weave together elements of unresolved trauma, oppression, violence, victimisation, and loss that go on to form a narrative about the conflict in the next generation (Munyas, 2008). These family members relayed personal stories of misery and suffering, ones that often relied on the absolute evil of the ‘others’ in the story, but rarely answered deeper questions as to the potential causes of the conflict. This, however, was not necessarily the same for the descendants of Khmer Rouge members. Those from the lower ranks in the regime may be more open to talking about their experiences as they perceive themselves as also being victimised, but members who may have committed crimes themselves are more likely to want to erase the past (Munyas, 2008). As such, children not only had asymmetric access to information, but received different education about the conflict depending on their relatives’ roles.
17Memorial sites also play an important role in shaping historical narrative. They can certainly be useful for bolstering historical education, although importantly, students require skills to be able to interpret them. Davies (2000) mentions how these sites are not simply an objective mirror on the past, but are rather a purposeful attempt to reconstruct historical memory in the broader context of the new regime’s post-conflict goals. He utilises the example of the Buchenwald concentration camp, a site altered by Americans following its liberation and interpreted differently before and after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Germany is not the only country that has utilised memorial sites. According to Jessee (2021), much effort to educate the population about the conflict in Rwanda occurs outside of the classroom, centred around memorials and museums. Many Rwandans, however, avoid going to genocide memorials, which impacts their efficacy as a form of genocide education. The narratives outlined at these sites are clear and pervasive, but focus on a single perspective.
18Furthermore, though genocide memorials may be abundant and accessible, Munyas (2008) argues that without a clear understanding as to why the conflict occurred, these memorials are frightening and upsetting rather than educational for children. Formal history classes differ from memorial sites and museums as, rather than providing a one-time learning experience with little opportunity for follow up, education about a conflict may be included in classroom assessments determining the grade a student receives for their work (Krieg, 2015). One solution found in Germany is to utilise visits to local memorial sites as a tool to teach about the Holocaust in combination with regular classwork. Many German teachers found these visits more useful than textbook work alone (I. Davies, 2000).
Methods for improving post-conflict education
19Faced with the aforementioned challenges in creating effective post-conflict education, several authors have proposed methods of improvement. For Rwantabagu (2010), the solution does not rely strictly on the realm of history education. Rather, he argued divergence from indigenous models of education had eroded cultural values in Burundian students by focusing too strongly on cognitive abilities and not strongly enough on ethics. As such, he argued for moral education programmes based on traditional Burundian values to be included in schools to assist in the peacebuilding and reconciliation process. According to Dy (2015), Cambodian national politics have had a greater impact on determining the content included about the conflict and how it was portrayed than any educational theories. Therefore, if international actors were to look at educational theory alone in determining guidance for countries emerging from violent intra-state conflict, their solutions may not fit the contexts they would like to implement them in. Finally, one solution offered by Munyas (2008) is to not force agreement between all sides in a coalition government for a single narrative about the conflict, but to present different narratives equally for the next generations to engage with critically. McLean Hilker (2011) argues this multiperspectivity is vital for the peacebuilding process, and countries such as Rwanda that stick to a single narrative are limiting their ability to reconcile differences. This aligns with a report written by Keaveney (2009) for the Council of Europe acknowledging the possibility for multiple valid, evidence-based perspectives regarding past conflict to emerge, and requires access to both primary and secondary sources as well as giving students the opportunity to interact with the content.
Notes de bas de page
1These refer to schools where multiple ethnic groups receive education in the same building, but do not inhabit the same classes or necessarily use the same teaching materials.

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
The Development of International Refugee Protection through the Practice of the UN Security Council
Christiane Ahlborn
2010
The SWIFT Affair
Swiss Banking Secrecy and the Fight against Terrorist Financing
Johannes Köppel
2011
The Evolving Patterns of Lebanese Politics in Post-Syria Lebanon
The Perceptions of Hizballah among Members of the Free Patriotic Movement
Fouad Ilias
2010
La justice internationale à l'épreuve du terrorisme
Défis, enjeux et perspectives concernant la Commission d'enquête internationale indépendante (UNIIIC) et le Tribunal spécial pour le Liban
Sébastien Moretti
2009
Aut Dedere, aut Judicare: The Extradite or Prosecute Clause in International Law
Claire Mitchell
2009