ABSTRACT
From a critical perspective the main theoretical patterns through which peace is imagined, theorised and practised and deployed within orthodox, liberalrealist-oriented IR theory, encompasses a discursive imaginary of world politics and of the mechanisms, institutions, actors and methods required to entrench the liberal peace. This is achieved through governance in international, state or private life, as patterns and frameworks of global, local and regional interaction. Indeed, the language that this provides to discuss peace is very limited. This orthodoxy of peace is claimed to be not just a representation, but also a presentation of truth or fact in IR. This is far from consistent given the broad range of issues that addressing the concept of peace, even solely within the context of orthodox IR theory, raises. Orthodox theories indicate that peace can be conceptualised and theorised as positive or negative, as spatial or temporal, in opposition to perceived threats, a victor’s peace, or externally projected or internally constituted. It might be top-down or bottom-up, represent a specific political framework or ideology, a specific international framework, or an economic or social framework.1 Of course, the frameworks that emerge from orthodox theory indicate that peace is strongly contested and subjective, despite the attempts to offer its liberal orthodoxy as an ‘end of history’.2
