Coming to Terms with a Dark Past. How Post-Conflict Societies Deal with History, by Sirkka Ahonen

Abstract

Coming to Terms with a Dark Past. How Post-Conflict Societies Deal with History, by Sirkka Ahonen. Frankfurt am Main, New York and Oxford, Peter Lang, 2012. 181 pp. $48.95 US (paper), $48.95 US (e-book). This book builds upon studies on transitional justice and competing victim-hood to focus on historical specificity and, in so doing, analyze how Finland, South Africa, and Bosnia-Herzegovina have dealt with challenges posed by post-conflict reconciliation. The selection of these case studies stems from Ahonen's persuasion that each of these countries exemplifies a paradigmatic type of conflict (between classes, racial, and ethnic groups respectively) and can thus provide a unique insight as to reasons behind long-lasting divisions, as well as factors that may ultimately help to overcome them. The author opens discussion by drawing attention to terminology used in book, stressing that Halbwachs's notion of collective should be subsumed under concept of social memory which recognizes existence of identity needs and helps to separate us from the other. This line of reasoning prompts Ahonen to posit post-conflict societies as likely to break up into stories of guilt and victimhood and to suggest that narratives articulated by competing groups tend to be exclusive rather than inclusive (p. 15). Undoubtedly, this problematic process has potential to paralyze post-conflict societies, for it can hinder reconstruction and make peaceful coexistence of plural narratives of national past unlikely to occur. This becomes painfully evident when one takes into account ethical dimension inherent in (with moral judgments being placed on intentions of past actors) and trans-generational nature of historical justice (with older generations expecting their descendants to right past wrongs). The book continues with a reflection on manner in which three countries under scrutiny sought to redress past injustices. It highlights fact that despite choosing rather different approaches--Finland exacted justice on first post-conflict generation, South Africa opted for establishment of Truth and Reconciliation Commission (which demonstrated effectiveness of ubuntu), while Bosnia-Herzegovina left handling of perpetrators to judiciary--none of them succeeded in implementing right combination of socio-cultural activities that are necessary for deconstruction of myths inherent in public memory (p. 19). According to Ahonen, this failure is usually cause of contemporary history wars whose main goal is to challenge validity of previously accepted symbolic narratives and, in so doing, reshape public in a manner that reflects changes in power relations. …