By Markus Pflüger (AGF Trier)

"How long has your peace association been around - 42 years?"! The fact that the AG Frieden (AGF)', with its almost 300 members, has remained active in Trier and the region for so many years can be attributed to its broad profile, ranging from campaigns and educational programs to networking, as well as its committed association structure. Every year, we carry out civil courage training and tours against forgetting. Most recently, we took part in the human chain against nuclear weapons in Büchel, organized a workshop on 'Racism in Fair Trade' and took part in Fridays for Future campaigns.

In 2015, the AGF was invited to the Peace Academy to discuss "The future of peace work in Rhineland-Palatinate" [1]. Self-critical topics were discussed:

1. The ageing and marginalization of the peace movement,
2. Civil society engagement in times of increasing pressure to perform and isolation,
3. Neoliberal globalization and the increase in (dis)information,
4. Peace is just one of many problems, and the chances of bringing about change are slim,
5. There is a lack of support from politics, science and the media.

The question remains: What new ways, alliances, methods and approaches are there to re-energize younger people? The issue of climate change is now (rightly) at the top of the agenda. Peace policy contexts are often missing. Climate change is fueled by wars, a vicious circle [2]. Although some cooperation with climate activists is encouraging, a fundamental problem remains: Too little attention is paid to the issue of peace. The stronger thematization of the function of war operations for the preservation of the destructive capitalist and neo-colonial economic system is an attempt to strengthen synergies between peace and climate activism. So far, this has worked neither in the movement nor in politics. There is no disarmament policy consequence from the wars from Afghanistan to Yemen. Instead, the traffic light coalition is committed to NATO and is waving through the major European armaments project FCAS, including new nuclear bombers for the Bundeswehr.

In addition to critical self-reflection, the development of effective strategies, campaigns and cooperation - especially with peace research - are major challenges for the peace movement. Can it be more strongly involved again as a "military-critical and disarmament-oriented partner" [3]? How can the movement use the work of peace research for its commitment?

It is important to clear up misconceptions and misunderstandings. For example, not everyone in the peace movement is aware of the non-partisanship and independence of research [4] enshrined in the Peace Academy's mandate as part of the university.

Prof. Ekkehart Krippendorff, a pioneer of peace research, stated that it had failed to criticize war and point out civilian alternatives. German peace research had no alternative foreign policy strategies to offer.[5] Prof. Andreas Buro put it more positively: "There is no alternative to war! To this end, the ideologies of 'just war', 'humanitarian intervention' and the military as the ultima ratio that legitimize war must be clearly and publicly criticized."[6] Peace research needs researchers who identify with the goals of the peace movement and are also prepared to conduct research in the interests of the movement.[7]

The relationship between the movement and research is complex; there is neither 'peace research' nor 'the peace movement' and therefore no specific relationship. In discussions with other peace groups, experiences and expectations differ; there is agreement on the potential for developing relationships. It is important to me that the dialog between the two is based on the common interest of reducing and ultimately preventing military conflicts, strengthening civilian options and making them better known as an effective alternative. It is important to strengthen the exchange despite our own reservations and comfort levels - with mutual suggestions and despite the inevitable distance. In addition to political advice, movement advice would be good and, where scientifically justifiable, a clear positioning without being taken over by the state or civil society. Perhaps internship opportunities in peace policy organizations and networking forums between the peace movement and peace research would be a good step towards more dialogue?