Discussion paper: "New Trajectories for Peace in Northern Ireland"

I have produced a new discussion paper entitled "New Trajectories for Peace in Northern Ireland". 

This discussion paper outlines new trajectories for peacebuilding in Northern Ireland, assessing the current context and its key challenges. It argues that the government-level model is ill-conceived, fragmented and conceptually deficient: a thin model of peace that favours coexistence and negative peace, largely accepts division and fosters only small pockets of integration. It rests on an insufficiently understood focus on economic development—“peace by prosperity”—and an uncritical faith in growth that normalises division and inequality. The paper calls for a transformative approach to sustainable peace, grounded in inclusion, renewed civic energy and political leadership no longer rewarded for maintaining social division or presenting one-dimensional economic development as a panacea. This requires new thinking about peace, led by younger voices, to address the past and respond to challenges including ongoing division and sectarianism, climate change, mental health, education, human rights, gender and LGBTQI+ rights, and racism. The focus should be on developing transferable, politically informed capacities and consciousness for social transformation, rather than relying on narrow conceptions of peace and a limited repertoire of methods..

Comments and thoughts are welcome.

Direct, Structural and Cultural Violence in a ‘Post-conflict’ Society

We have recently published a new article in the  journal Victims & Offenders:

Murray, C., Hamber, B., McGill, D., & Gallagher, E. (2026). Direct, Structural and Cultural Violence in a ‘Post-conflict’ Society: Lived Experiences of ‘At Risk’ and Incarcerated Young Men. Victims & Offenders, 21(7), 1489–1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564886.2026.2711645

Download the Open Access PDF here.

Abstract

Studies of violence among young men often focus on individual acts of direct violence, without reference to structural and cultural dimensions. To address these omissions, interviews with 46 ‘at risk’ or incarcerated young men (aged 18–24) and 25 professional support or prison staff in ‘post-conflict’ Northern Ireland, all recruited through purposive sampling, were analyzed using inductive reflexive thematic analysis. Galtung’s violence triangle was applied during the interpretive stage of analysis to contextualize and theorize emergent themes, demonstrating how direct, structural, and cultural forms of violence intersect and mutually reinforce one another across four interrelated domains that shape marginalized young men’s identities and lived experiences. Structural exclusion creates systemic barriers that prevent young men from fully engaging in social, economic, and political spheres, perpetuating cycles of marginalization and alienation. Legacies of violent conflict transmit psychological and social trauma across generations, normalizing violence and fostering pervasive mistrust in communities. Through paramilitary recruitment, non-state armed groups make use of deprivation, territorial control, and perceived cultural legitimacy to sustain their allure and ongoing presence. Paramilitary-style attacks employ overt and direct violence, using ‘community punishment’ and vigilantism to maintain social regulation, dominance and fear.

Pathways to youth critical action for sustainable peace

We have recently published a new article in the Journal of Social Issues: 

Hamber, B., & McArdle, E. (2026). Peacebuilding, politicization, and youth work: Pathways to youth critical action for sustainable peace in Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Issues, 82, e70073. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.70073. 

The article is open access and can be downloaded here.

Abstract

While Northern Ireland is praised as a successful peace process with valuable lessons, peacebuilding is incomplete. The responsibility increasingly falls on young people to address the unfinished business of the past, despite questions of capacity and the complex political and social dynamics of today. This article examines youth sector peacebuilding in Northern Ireland, highlighting shifts in youth policy and the emergence of a dominant contact hypothesis approach. It is argued that this approach is unsuitable for the current context, where new issues extend beyond the Catholic-Protestant divide, and structural problems such as inequality and social, cultural and political division persist. A critical action approach to peacebuilding is proposed, identifying methodologies to enhance this through consultations, workshops, and interviews with youth leaders and young people. Four pathways to engage young people's critical consciousness for action by youth workers (YWs) are outlined: the appreciation of and adaptation to contexts, instituting deliberative long-term processes, peer-to-peer learning between young people, and all driven by the self-reflexive, politicized and motivating YW.

New Book Series: Pioneering Peace

Liverpool University Press is delighted to announce a new series: Pioneering Peace: New Paradigms in Peace and Conflict Studies led by series editor Brandon Hamber, John Hume and Thomas P. O’Neill Chair in Peace at the International Conflict Research Unit (INCORE) at Ulster University.

Professor Hamber said: ‘Peace remains one of the greatest challenges facing the world today. Building on decades of work at INCORE, we are committed to transcending traditional narratives and embracing diverse perspectives on peace. This book series will critically examine the pathways to sustainable peace, drawing on the lived experiences of communities and addressing complex, intersecting factors that contribute to lasting peace from an interdisciplinary perspective.’

Commissioning editor Christabel Scaife said ‘We are thrilled to be working with INCORE on this exciting new book series. LUP has been publishing on issues of peace and conflict in Northern Ireland for many years; through collaboration with this leading research institute, we look forward to expanding our peace studies list beyond the Northern Irish context to focus on a global “sustainable peace”.’

Find out more about Pioneering Peace: New Paradigms in Peace and Conflict Studies on the LUP website.

To submit a book proposal, please contact Christabel Scaife at c.scaife@liverpool.ac.uk.

Masculinities in Conflict: My Publications

 

Last Updated 27 February 2026

I have numerous requests for my writing and publications on masculinities, conflict and transition. 

So below I have compiled a list of published work to date:  

• Hamber, B., Schulz, P., Touquet, H. & Messmer, G. (2024). Transitional Justice and Masculinities. In P. Schulz, B. Hamber & H. Touquet (Eds), Masculinities and Queer Perspectives in Transitional Justice. Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon and New York, p. 29-50 [Download]
• Philipp Schulz, Brandon Hamber & Heleen Touquet (Eds) (2024). Masculinities and Queer Perspectives in Transitional Justice. Oxon & New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group [More Information | Read Online | Download Open Access]
• Schulz, P., Hamber, B., Touquet, H. & Messmer, G. (2024). Introduction: Masculinities and Queer Perspectives in Transitional Justice. In P. Schulz, B. Hamber & H. Touquet (Eds), Masculinities and Queer Perspectives in Transitional Justice. Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon and New York, p. 3-28 [Download]
• Hamber, B. & Murray, C. (2022). Voices from the Margins: Young men and post-conflict masculinities in Northern Ireland. Interpeace: Geneva [Download]
• Gallagher, E. & Hamber, B. (2015). Addressing the psychosocial needs of young men: The case of Northern Ireland. In: Psychosocial Perspectives on Peacebuilding. Springer: New York, pp. 90-149 [Information | Request Publication]
• Hamber, Brandon (2015). There Is a Crack in Everything: Problematising Masculinities, Peacebuilding and Transitional Justice. Human Rights Review, 17(1), pp. 9-34 [Access in the Journal]
• Hamber, Brandon and Gallagher, Elizabeth (2014). Ships passing in the night: psychosocial programming and macro peacebuilding strategies with young men in Northern Ireland. Intervention: Journal of Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Conflict Affected Areas, 12(1), 43-60 [Download]
• Hamber, B. (2010). Masculinity and Transitional Justice: An Exploratory Essay (Politorbis). Politorbis, 50(3): 143-154 [Download]
• Hamber, B. (2010). Masculinity and Transition: Crisis or Confusion in South Africa?. Journal of Peacebuilding and Development, 5(3), 75-88 [Access in the Journal]
• Hamber, B. & Palmary, I. (2009). Gender, Memorialization, and Symbolic Reparations. In R. Rubio-Marin (Ed.), The Gender of Reparations: Unsettling Sexual Hierarchies While Redressing Human Rights Violations (pp. 324-381). New York: Cambridge University Press [Request Publication]
• Hamber, B. (2007). Masculinity and Transitional Justice: An Exploratory Essay (Peace Prints). Peace Prints: South Asian Journal of Transitional Justice, 3(1), Autumn [Download]
• Hamber, B. (2007). Masculinity and Transitional Justice: An Exploratory Essay (IJTJ). International Journal of Transitional Justice, 1(3), 375-390 [Access in the Journal]
• Hamber, B. (2006). Where are the men in the battle for equality?. Polity and Engineering News, 20 October 2006 [Substack | Medium | Blog]
• Hamber, B. (2006). "We must be very careful how we emancipate our women": shifting masculinities in post-apartheid South Africa. Paper presented at the Re-Imagining Women's Security: a Comparative Study of South Africa, Northern Ireland and Lebanon Round Table, New York, 12-13 October 2006 [Download]
• Hamber, B., Hillyard, P., Maguire, A., McWilliams, M., Robinson, G., Russell, D., et al. (2006). Discourses in Transition: Re-Imagining Women's Security. International Relations, 20(4), 487-502 [Access in the Journal]

If you cannot access any of the above publications, please send me a request and I will email it to you.

Young People and Peacebuilding Keynote

From DiverseYouthNI Instagram

It was fantastic to deliver the keynote address on "Young People and Peacebuilding" at the INSPIRE NOW! 2.0 Conference, a flagship, youth-led event that brought together young people from across these islands. 

My focus was on the positive contributions young people can make to peace, drawing on the insights from UN Resolution 2250. I emphasised the significance of inclusion and participation, the need for creative approaches to peacebuilding, and the importance of enhancing critical thinking while encouraging young people to challenge the status quo. 

It is always inspiring to hear the voices of young people and understand their priorities, particularly from those who have recently moved to Northern Ireland. Their passion for social change was truly infectious.

Irish President, Catherine Connolly Speaks

Great to hear Irish President, Catherine Connolly, speak today at Ulster University. 

A takeaway: "in a world unfortunately that is ever-more consumed with war and militarism...a lesson that we should all tell the world: that peace is normal and that war is not normal and that peace is possible".

Full speech is here if you are interested.

Irish President, Catherine Connolly, Ulster University, 4 Feb 2026

Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ is really a Board of War

DONALD Trump launched his ‘Board of Peace’ at Davos 2026, with much fanfare, promising to “end decades of suffering, stop generations of hatred and bloodshed”. Initially intended to rebuild Gaza, its mission now appears much broader, marking critical global shifts and raising serious questions about what peace means at the global level.

Through his ‘Board of Peace’, Trump aims to redefine peace by promoting a ‘peace through strength’ approach.

The idea of peace as positive social relationships built on equality and justice has been cast aside. Instead, it is viewed as a form of macro-security enforced by the most powerful through threats and coercion.

This version of peace resembles the international relations of decades past, where stability was thought to be maintained through balancing the power of nations. Security was guaranteed by fear rather than rules or ideas of mutually beneficial cooperation. Arguably, the concept of a balance of power has eroded over the past few decades through multilateral institutions such as the UN, the IMF and the World Bank, which have gained increasing global power.

Additionally, grassroots movements such as those advocating for LGBTQ+ rights and climate-change activism have often emerged from the margins, cutting across traditional forms of political power. These changes Trump and his cronies despise.

In Trump’s view, a return to power politics is necessary, with the US, as the biggest kid on the block, acting as the world’s self-interested policeman.

Inauguration of the Board of Peace at the World Economic Forum 2026 in Davos. Photo: WEF / Flickr / CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 

Peace is transactional or even extractive, with secondary gains for the US, such as oil or rare-earth minerals, flowing from the guarantee of security.

The ‘Board of Peace’ no doubt has been established to further this warped understanding. 

No-one really knows what it will ultimately do. But the trajectory of US foreign policy suggests it will operate more as a ‘Board of War’, legitimising global interventions mainly dictated by Trump, its executive chair.

It would not be surprising if Greenland is the first item on the agenda, with the board endorsing annexation to “promote” global peace. Iran and Cuba might be next.

Only one African country, Morocco, has been invited to join. This reflects Trump’s racist dismissal of African states as ‘shithole’ nations.

But from a more sinister perspective, Africa, rich in resources and riddled with conflict, also seems ripe for the ‘peace through strength’ approach. It could be awkward to be singled out for a Trump ‘peace intervention’ while sitting on the board.

The ‘Board of Peace’ also embodies Trump’s belief that existing global institutions fail to serve US interests and alternative structures are needed. Following his withdrawal from various international organisations, the proposed board aims to replace global bodies such as the UN. It will define its own agenda and legitimacy, centred around Trump, who is the chairman for life with veto power.

In Trump’s words at the launch, the board will “do pretty much whatever we want to do”.

All this reinforces the claim by Mark Carney, the prime minister of Canada, at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, that “the rules-based order is fading”.

The only way out of this, according to Carney, is that “middle powers must act together” in various forms of cooperation, underpinned by values such as respect for human rights, sustainable development and sovereignty.

This speech has been seen as a game-changer, particularly in liberal circles. Carney’s approach, however, misses a fundamental point.

While global institutions have provided a framework for a rules-based world, they have primarily benefited Western nations.

The alarm among Western politicians over Trump’s comments about Greenland reflects a delayed recognition of the power plays that developing nations have faced from the US and Europe for decades.

Western countries have often used the rules-based order to justify toppling governments in the name of democratic peace. They did little to stop the genocide in Gaza.

The International Criminal Court has primarily indicted African leaders, while the likes of Netanyahu remain largely protected. The UN Security Council frequently blocks resolutions that run counter to its interests.

If Carney and his coalition of ‘middle powers’ are serious about ushering in a new era, the normative aspect of their call for collective action requires serious scrutiny.

A radical rethink of the international order is not only overdue but also offers new opportunities.

For example, if the US is no longer interested in cooperating globally, bodies such as the Security Council could be dismantled and replaced with more equitable structures and power in global governance distributed more evenly. Such actions would create a different set of global levers and international players.

The danger right now, however, is that countries such as Canada and the UK – and, of course, the European Union – may become overly focused on the drive to reforge Western alliances while missing the bigger picture.

Nations around the world, including Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey, Mexico, South Africa, India, and Brazil, are expanding their regional influence alongside the ambitions of China and Russia.

Trump’s national-interest-first approach could encourage other nations to waver in their commitments to the international order and even resort to force to resolve disputes. It is no surprise that some countries often critiqued for their human rights records eagerly joined Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’, despite the $1 billion joining fee.

They will be happy to be lackeys in the absence of anything else, or out of fear that their country might otherwise be next on Trump’s dinner table.

In this context, Carney’s ideas of ‘middle power’, Western-only alliances will do little to promote global stability.

Unless this new approach to partnerships is accompanied by genuine soul-searching about the biases, imbalances and gaps in international institutions, and is founded on renewed north-south cooperation, the world will merely replicate past mistakes.

If discussions on power are now the new norm, real change will only occur when global power dynamics are truly disrupted.

So, the discussion of new alliances should embrace rapidly developing nations and the inclusion and empowerment of the weakest.

This approach recognises that sustainable peace is built on participation and embedded in equality and shared access to power – it is not based on threats. Such broader devolution of power is exactly what Trump, as global bully boy, fears most.

Then again, maybe the ‘Board of Peace’ is just a classic Trump billion-dollar grift, to create a new ‘Board of Peace’ Peace Prize –with only one potential winner.

.  .  .

Originally published by Brandon Hamber in the The Irish News, 28 January 2026

Also published in The Geopolitical Economist, here