The essay is for a module called Theories of Conflict and Violence and I am focusing on the liberal peace model.
The main question is, if liberal peace and peace-building can be applied universally, particularly in the Middle East? Therefore, a case study on Iraq is used. Is conflict in the Middle East a function of the same variables as claimed and widely validated empirically by the liberal peace argument on a global basis? If not, why? Subsequently, what is the real driving force in the deployment of peace-building? How much do local Muslim communities desire such development for their realities?
The essay encompasses FIRST a theoretical framework: power of neo-Liberalism in post-conflict reconstruction, what is meant by liberal peace model (characteristics such as democracy, human rights, economic development etc.), what does the Islamic world understand by peace/conflict reconstruction? Is this compatible with the liberal peace model approach? Critique on the liberal peace model/critique of neo-liberal approach in conflict resolution. SECOND will be a conflict analysis of Iraq (root causes, proximate causes, external and internal actors and interests) and looking at the present status of “peace” in Iraq since the troops withdraw in 2009. THIRD would be then the evaluation why the liberal peace model does (not) work in Iraq, why? Focusing particular on sections such as DEMOCRACY IN IRAQ (works, doesn’t work), ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, HUMAN RIGHTS etc. Are there alternative approaches that work better? Answering the title question – is post-conflict reconstruction an inherently neo-liberal political project?