Post-Conflict History Education Moratoria: A Balance

Abstract

This article deals with post-conflict history education moratoria: the temporary suspension of history education or its recent history segment, including its textbooks, with the aim of aligning it to the goals of a transition to peace and democracy. I present fifteen cases arranged under four types: moratoria after the defeat of the Axis powers in international war (the successor states of Nazi Germany, Anschluss Austria, Fascist Italy, and Imperialist Japan), moratoria after the implosion of communist regimes (USSR, Moldova, Croatia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina), moratoria after genocides (Cambodia, Rwanda, and Guatemala), and moratoria after racial, ethnic and religious conflicts (South Africa, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Iraq). The analytical part starts with the basic question of whether the period of recent violence should be taught at all: I argue that this is a state duty, any suspension of which cannot but be temporary. After a brief exploration of the distribution over time of the moratoria, I discuss the moratoria brokers (the executive and legislative branches of government) as well as the pressures from below (civil society) and above (international intervention). Seven types of reasons typically used to justify moratoria are then weighed: politics, didactics, legacy, practice, safety, reconciliation and the passage of time. Next, the crucial question is tackled of how long moratoria lasted and how long they ought to last: I argue that wholesale moratoria should last no longer than five years and that meanwhile sound interim materials should be prepared. By way of conclusion, the relationship between moratoria, forgetting and democracy is explored. Truly democratic moratoria are part of mediation-induced, not censorship-induced strategies of social forgetting. Five conditions decide this: a legal framework, an explicit and short time span, a public debate, the effective preparation of new materials, and unimpeded academic historical research. They help define under which regime of restrictions postconflict history education moratoria are justified in a democratic society.

Enseñar la historia de conflictos armados internos recientes: revisión de experiencias en África, Europa, Oriente Medio y América

“…Esta lógica ha facilitado que el conflicto armado no se constituya en objeto de estudio escolar, situación que ha contribuido a la solidificación de una amnesia parcial que encubre tensiones aún no resueltas (Gellman, 2016). En otros casos, como el de Bosnia-Herzegovina, a pesar de la existencia de algunos intentos de inclusión curricular del análisis de las causas y consecuencias de la guerra, la reticencia del Estado y de parte de la sociedad en torno a discutir este asunto ha facilitado que el silencio se imponga como ruta de escape en los planes de estudio y en los textos escolares de enseñanza de la historia (Ahonen, 2013;De Baets, 2015). Omisiones similares se registran en el currículo oficial de Irlanda del Norte (Barton y McCully, 2010;Kitson, 2007), Guatemala (Oglesby, 2007;Bellino, 2014), Uganda (Greene, 2017) y Líbano (Van Ommering, 2015).…”

“…Según algunos autores, esta segunda forma de respuesta al problema de olvidar o recordar no es negativa en sí misma y conforme a la intensidad y tipo de conflicto, es deseable en algunos casos. El problema se origina cuando el periodo de transición se vuelve indefinido y por ende, comienza a primar el silencio y a fortalecerse (Bentrovato, 2017;De Baets, 2015). En este caso, es común que comience a ser evidentes la censura, la represión de la memoria y la amnesia selectiva (De Baets, 2015).…”

History Textbook Writing in Post-conflict Societies: From Battlefield to Site and Means of Conflict Transformation

“…Here, the turbulent post-colonial past is either omitted outright or, at best, is reduced to lists of names and dates as a way to avoid controversy (Bentrovato 2017). The choice of a "rhetoric of silence" (Ondek and Laurence 1993) underlying official post-conflict textbook work has been determined by a number of considerations, most of which are underpinned by a belief, or a political pretext, relating to the benefit of the passage of time (see also De Baets 2015). At least four main arguments have been regularly raised by stakeholders around the world to legitimise this option.…”

“…The peacebuilding role of history education and textbooks is also both implicitly and explicitly recognised in key TJ documents issued by the United nations, which hint at the need to expediently revise and update textbooks to accurately deal with a violent past. Particularly, the Un Impunity and Reparation Principles respectively highlight the importance of educative measures to facilitate "A people's knowledge of the history of its oppression" in fulfilment of a state's "duty to preserve memory" and counter impunity (United nations Commission on Human rights 2005), and, on that premise, further call for the "[i]nclusion of an accurate account of the violations […] in educational material at all levels" as a symbolic reparation measure for victims of historical wrongs (United nations General Assembly 2006, in De Baets 2015.…”

Teaching and learning the most recent history in divided societies emerging from conflict: A review of the literature through the lens of social justice

“…These conditions create distinct challenges for classrooms in regards to integration and segregation related to the content and teaching methods in the subject. Thematic reviews within the broader field exist (Corredor, Wills-Obregon, and Asensio-Brouard 2018;Antoon 2015;Guerra-Sua and María 2019;Paulson 2015;Quaynor 2012); however, there is a need for an examination of the range of approaches to the teaching and learning of the most recent history, and above all, understand how these approaches work towards social justice and to overcome misrecognition.…”