| Abstract: | The ideas of symmetric peace and symmetric peace education, developed by Anatol Pikas in the preceding article, are here criticised for their lack of definition; it is also alleged that inadequate explanation is given of how the concepts may be applied — for example, in the case of a strong power oppressing a weak one. In particular, this critique concentrates on Pikas' assumption of who the antagonists are, and on his belief in the value of prepared teaching materials. Brock-Utne argues that the common enemy is the arms race itself and that the inculcation of critical and discriminating attitudes is likely to be more effective than producing teaching packages. Constructive alternative ideas, incorporating some of Pikas' thinking, are offered. These emphasize (1) the importance of joint cultural/education exchange programmes for promoting international understanding at grass-roots level; (2) the need to put one's own house in order before criticising the neighbour's — a reference to Sweden's policies, with which Pikas claims to identify, and to the implications of Norway's membership of NATO for those in that country concerned with building peace; and (3) the desirability of setting up fora where, under the right conditions, a type of symmetric peace education can be pursued. |
