by Majbrit Hüttenhein

Content note: This article is about violence and abuse of power in German-language peace and conflict studies and its underlying structures. No specific cases or actions are described.

In the wake of the #MeToo movement, cases of violence and abuse of power have gained new publicity since 2017. The problem does not stop in the film industry but is also reproduced in academic structures in particular[1]. This is because it is precisely in situations in which power hierarchies exist between people that this relationship is repeatedly exploited. The fact that violence and abuse of power also occur and remain concealed in German-language peace and conflict studies is all the more serious, as this field also conducts research into the dismantling of structures of violence and social justice!

During the colloquium of the German Association for Peace and Conflict Studies (AFK) in March 2024, this topic was addressed in a "Bystander Workshop on Violence and Abuse of Power in Peace and Conflict Studies", which was organized by the AFK Women's Representatives, Madita Standke-Erdmann and Stefanie Wesch, and conducted by the educational collective for emancipatory practice fem*ergenz. Bystanders are people who do not experience violence and abuse of power themselves, but are (un)conscious witnesses and act in a supportive manner. In this interview, Madita Standke-Erdmann looks at the organization of the workshop and how the topic is dealt with in German-speaking peace and conflict studies.

Peace Academy (PA): How did it come about that you organized the Bystander Workshop on Violence and Abuse of Power in Peace and Conflict Studies as part of the AFK Colloquium?

Madita Standke-Erdmann (S-E): First of all, thank you for allowing us to publicize the topic a little more via this blog. I think it is really great and very important, to deal with it in different formats and different contexts. Unfortunately, it does not just concern peace and conflict studies, but is of course a topic that is embedded in larger social structures.

How did the workshop come about? In 2022, shortly before the first colloquium, which again took place in presence, we received a message from a member who, together with another person, reported on specific cases of violence and abuse of power in the German-speaking academic context. From my own experience and when dealing with people who report these incidents, I always prefer to use the term "survivors", because speaking of "victims" or "those affected" has a victimizing connotation.

The two of them talked to us about what the AFK could do concerning this matter. At the time, Christine Buchwald and I were still women's representatives. We then jointly with the Executive Board decided to publish a statement in solidarity with people who have had such experiences, regardless of their nature. We spent a very long time dealing with the topic to be able to grasp all the dimensions. As a result, we decided during the colloquium and also in consultation with the membership, especially with the Network of Women Peace Researchers, that we would like to organize this bystander workshop at the next colloquium. It was also important to us to not just print something once and then never talk about it again, but to keep the topic on the agenda.

Last year, this matter became particularly virulent again with #MeTooHistory, i.e. the continuation of the #MeToo campaign concerning historical science, due to the case at the Humboldt University[2]. We then decided to organize a workshop, which, however, was to be conducted by external educational advisors. Based on a systemic understanding, we did not want to manage the realization within the membership: Firstly, we cannot do it alone and secondly, we wanted to have people from the outside look at it. Fortunately, we were given the resources and time to do this.

PA: How was the response to the workshop? Would you say there is an awareness of the problem in the community?

S-E: The initial response was huge, in my opinion. And not just during the workshop, but also in the run-up to it. There was gratitude that the workshop was taking place at all. During the colloquium, many people took the time to attend, even though I had not expected it. We also received a lot of

positive feedback afterward. Stefanie Wesch[3] and I were approached by many people who said that the workshop had met with a very positive response.

I am very, very skeptical as to whether there is an awareness of the problem. I believe that the workshop is the first time that violence and abuse of power have been systematically addressed. And that is not all, there will ideally be more activities on the subject. But I have the feeling that we have touched on topics that are actually present, but with which many people feel extremely alone, as there is no discourse on them and no public-critical positioning. Especially because it has a lot to do with power hierarchies and positions of power. So, the response was great, but the awareness of the problem is not really there. In the workshops, the speakers always assume that people with experience in this field are present in the session. Therefore, the positive response was more likely to come from people who had already dealt with this topic in some way. Awareness of the problem itself, e.g. of the various strategies used by perpetrators, is not as pronounced. But knowledge is the key here for both survivors and bystanders to protect themselves, recognize dynamics at an early stage, and act if necessary.

PA: To what extent can you, as the women's representative of the AFK, provide concrete support for survivors or bystanders?

S-E: First of all, we are a point of contact. We can be contacted either individually or via our shared e-mail address[4]. We can also be approached at the colloquium. There was also an awareness person at the last one for the first time[5]. Unfortunately, there was only a single one - we want to anchor awareness teams even more firmly in the future so that this responsibility does not solely rest on the shoulders of the women's representatives.

What we can accomplish is to open up the discourse within the membership, precisely through such offers. We can talk to the members about what their needs are. Of course, we cannot provide psychosocial support because we are not trained for this, which is why it is naturally limited. But what we can do is demonstrate together with the executive board that the AFK is a space in which there is no tolerance for any kind of psychological, emotional, physical, or sexualized violence and that it should be a safer space at best. We know that it cannot be a safe space, precisely because of social power structures, but at least a safer space.

We are also able to continue to address the problem and give people the feeling that they can also get support from each other, for example by organizing this bystander workshop. This was not just a PowerPoint presentation with input but was characterized by interactive elements so that we as a community could think about ways to support each other.

PA: Are FLINTA* people[6]more often confronted with violence and abuse of power in the university context? Do you know of any studies on this and what does your experience say?

S-E: I believe that FLINTA* people and BIPOC people[7] tend to be more socially affected by violence and abuse of power. However, I don't always find it so easy to judge what the power hierarchies are like. This element of hierarchy between professor and doctoral student, for example, is in itself an implicit inequality of power. Accordingly, I find it difficult to assess the extent to which one can make generally valid statements about this. Unfortunately, I cannot think of any statistics, but the way I understand it, FLINTA* people and BIPOC are confronted with this kind of experience at an above-average rate. But that is what happens most of the time in society in general. That is why I would not separate both debates too much from each other. This power component of different access to resources, socio-economic security, contact points, and anchoring is important. We also talked about this in the workshop. For example, the question of "Who do people actually believe?" due to inscribed power hierarchies is relevant here. Someone who has been in the limelight for a long time or is simply well-known in a community and has a certain standing may be believed more than a person who nobody or hardly anybody knows. An intervention by survivors may then be perceived as damaging to their reputation and untrustworthy. The perpetrator and their status are then in the foreground, they may even be institutionally protected, while the person's suffering is not recognized.

PA: What could working groups or institutes, chairs, organizational units, etc. do to prevent violence and abuse of power and to support survivors?

S-E: I think awareness-raising training is really important. That means it is important that people who are part of the scientific system, who are studying or have an active role, deal with this topic. Target group-specific offers are important at this point. What I have noticed since I started working in academia myself in 2019, is that many people, who, for example, successfully conduct research or acquire third-party funding and can therefore establish themselves in universities, are not necessarily trained in the area of personnel responsibility. And I believe that if this were to be strengthened, which many universities are already trying to do, plus training to raise awareness of violence and abuse of power were integrated into it, a lot would already be done.

At the same time, this also sends a signal. When an institution offers training like this, it first of all demonstrates: "We are here (at least we try to be)! We are awake! We are sensitized to this issue! We do not tolerate or accept it!" But of course, it is not enough to just talk about it once. I, personally, think that such training should adopt a perspective that is critical of power and hierarchy. That is why we also invited the feminist education collective fem*ergenz from Würzburg, which did a fantastic job in this workshop.

Another point is that specific contact points need to be created, which is always a question of resources, that are usually scarce at universities or in the academic context. Equal opportunities officers, for example, often do not have the psychosocial skills or the role and time resources to be a point of contact for cases of violence or abuse of power in the academic system. In addition, although there are often psychosocial counseling centers that are either docked at universities or in their environment, there is rarely any interlinking or dovetailing. At best, institutions create trust-inspiring spaces in which survivors and bystanders are helped. And consequences are needed. It is not enough to recognize survivors' experiences and support them in navigating them. There must be consequences on the part of institutions or associations, such as the AFK, for perpetrators who become violent or abuse their position of power. At the same time, institutional prevention work is needed. This is the only way to achieve structural change.

PA: Are you planning to take up the topic again at AFK events? What is the next step?

S-E: We women's representatives would definitely like to continue this. I also know that there is support for this from the Executive Board and that this work is seen as very important. I could imagine that the topic will be explored in more depth in further workshops, which, for example, also deal with anti-racist or queer-feminist approaches. Ideally, this will be done together with the diversity working group, which has been established for a while now. Moreover, we will listen and pay attention to what the members tell us. For this year, we know that there is an extremely strong desire for it to remain on the agenda. And we will certainly be working towards this.

PA: What would you like to add in conclusion?

S-E: I want to let people who read this know that they are not alone with these experiences. It is so difficult to pluck up the courage to turn to someone and say: "Bad things have happened to me here, but I need help". That is really important at first and a huge step! At the same time, there are also opportunities to support survivors. Bystanders can also proactively ask in a safe environment what people who have confided in them need. In my opinion, the feeling of not being alone as a survivor is one of the most important components in coming to terms with the experience, which can sometimes take a long time and be multi-layered. The after-effects of abuse can also take time to show themselves. This might be confusing for outsiders at first. However, bystanders can also learn to provide support here, as long as this does not strain their own resources.

And as an appeal to the scientific community: Believe people who tell you about their experiences of violence! Believe people who report that things have happened to them that have hurt them or traumatized them! An awareness of violence and abuse of power must be created. Because the damage that remains after such experiences can be extremely long-lasting and is quite underestimated, in my opinion. It does not have to be the same for everyone as people react differently to psychological stress. But the mere fact that violence and abuse of power can cause quite a lot of damage requires vigilance, power-critical, solidarity-based and victim-oriented prevention work, and belief in the people who tell about it.

[1] Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency (2015). Sexual harassment in the university context - protection gaps and recommendations. https://www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikationen/Expertisen/expertise_sexuelle_belaestigung_im_hochschulkontext.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3

English fact sheet: https://www.antidiskriminierungsstelle.de/SharedDocs/forschungsprojekte/EN/Studie_sex_Belaestig_im_Hochschulkontext_en.html?nn=306354

[2] Following allegations of sexualized violence, Humboldt University of Berlin has suspended a professor and initiated disciplinary proceedings.

[3] Madita Standke-Erdmann and Stefanie Wesch have been the AFK's Women's Representatives since 2021 and 2023 respectively.

[4] frauenbeauftragte@afk-web.de

[5] Awareness teams serve as contact persons at events and provide support in case of experiences of discrimination and crossings of boundaries.

[6] German abbreviation for “Women, lesbians, inter, non-binary, trans and agender people” (“Frauen, Lesben, inter, nicht-binäre, trans und agender Personen”)

[7] Black, Indigenous and People of Color