The Irredeemability of the Past

Organised by

• Department of Political and Social Sciences

Durable peace after violent conflict where enemies take over territory often requires reintegration of internally displaced persons (IDPs) who are suspected of collaboration with the enemy. Citizens must also refrain from vengeance lest the cycle of violence renew. We lack understanding of what drives tendencies towards reconciliation versus revenge in conflict settings. Can the displaced who are suspected of collaboration mitigate accusations of past wrongs through attempts at redemption? We run two conjoint experiments embedded within a large-N face-to-face survey across three areas of Iraq (n=4,592) experiencing the return or resettlement of IDPs. We find that signaling rehabilitation and gaining sponsorship of trusted authorities have little to no impact on reconciliation and revenge in Iraq; past behaviors, however, are highly predictive of citizens’ attitudes towards IDPs. Less reconciliatory and more vengeful motivations are expressed towards acts higher in severity and volition. Analyses employing cognitive and emotional statistical mediators further demonstrate that past behavior shapes justice intuitions because it simultaneously activates a past-oriented moral condemnation and a future-oriented heuristic assessment of the value and risks of associating with the IDP. Our results suggest that current strategies for the redemption of accused collaborators may not be effective in war torn contexts, especially when people believe that peace requires a careful accounting of crimes committed. The question then becomes: Who wants what accounting of the past, and why?