From Revenge to Forgiveness: Strengthening Durable Peace in Post-Conflict Societies
Civil conflicts gravely damage the state’s legitimacy. Institutions are rendered incapable of providing security; social trust among its citizenry diminishes; and non-state actors step in to fill the vacuum of power. Following conflict, the state needs to re-establish itself as the legitimate arbiter of processes aimed at bringing former rebel collaborators to justice. Unless it carefully considers subnational variation in the drivers of forgiveness and reconciliation with rebel collaborators, the state may generate new grievances among some communities, increasing the chances of rebel recidivism or the outbreak of new conflict. This project develops and tests a novel framework integrating political science theories of legitimacy with psychological theories of forgiveness, feelings of (in)justice and desire for revenge. To test this framework, we conduct in-depth interviews, hold focus groups and implement three large-scale surveys with embedded experiments (N=3,600) in Iraq, a country that has endured a series of civil conflicts culminating in the recent confrontation with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). This project employs innovative tools to identify both the subnational drivers of violent resentment towards the state and the drivers of reconciliation. It provides policymakers with the information necessary to design successful strategies for reconciliation, re-establishment of state legitimacy, and lasting peace.
Final report
This project was designed to develop and test a unique framework that integrates political science theories of legitimacy with psychological theories of forgiveness, feelings of (in)justice, and the desire for revenge. It had three primary objectives: (1) to map the conditions influencing Iraqis’ willingness to forgive and reintegrate former Islamic State (IS) collaborators into their communities; (2) to explore the mechanisms guiding individuals or groups towards forgiveness or revenge; and (3) to investigate when respondents support collaboration between the state and traditional authorities on security issues.
To fulfill these objectives, we conducted nine in-depth focus groups, each lasting about 1.5-2 hours, to inform extensive face-to-face surveys with 4,592 Iraqi citizens across Baghdad, Anbar, and Ninewa governorates. Additionally, we carried out 150 in-person surveys with local leaders, including tribal leaders, local imams, state officials, and mukhtars. The project concluded with eleven post-survey focus groups, each lasting about 2 hours, focusing on: 1) Return, Resettlement, and Stigma; 2) Justice Gaps; and 3) the Role of Fact-Finding and truth-seeking. The analysis focused on two main demographic divides found in our large-n quantitative studies: men versus women and Sunnis versus Shias.
The project yielded significant results, advancing both tangible outcomes and theoretical insights in conflict and peace studies. First, our paper, "The Power of the Past", revealed that individuals' justice intuitions are heavily influenced by past behaviors, driven by a combination of moral condemnation and a forward-looking assessment of risks and values. Importantly, Iraqi public opinion is in line with international human rights law: post-conflict justice should be proportionate with the severity of the crimes committed. This tendency is consistent across various personal differences, including trust in institutions, victimization, and ethnic identity, underscoring the importance of fact-finding missions for reintegrating internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Iraq and similar contexts. Another paper, "Legal Pluralism and Fragmented Sovereignty in Iraq", demonstrated that Iraqis tend to resolve family disputes through customary orders while favoring the state system for more significant cases despite its corruption. Focus groups indicated that customary orders provide a restorative approach to maintaining social relationships, posing a dilemma between a powerful but corrupt state system and a less enforceable yet less corrupt non-state system. These findings contribute to debates on reforming state-building models to better integrate customary and state dispute-resolution mechanisms.
Second, the project makes substantial theoretical contributions by challenging existing research on the motivations for forgiveness and reconciliation. It emphasizes the necessity of micro-level data to understand individual motivations in reintegration processes and identifies significant variations in the acceptance of state-driven versus traditional reconciliation approaches among different societal groups in Iraq. Additionally, the project tested psychological models of forgiveness in non-Western contexts, offering new perspectives on legitimate arbiters of justice and addressing the gap between victim perspectives and elite-imposed justice mechanisms in post-conflict settings.
Third, the project produced two significant datasets. The first is a probability sample representative of three governorates in Iraq with varying exposures to IS rule, consisting of 4,592 respondents. The second dataset is a convenience sample of 150 local leaders in these governorates. Both datasets will be made publicly available once they are appropriately anonymized within two years of the end of the project (December 2025) or after the five planned publications from them are completed.
The project findings suggest that acceptance of stigmatized IDPs is most difficult among males and members of the outgroup. This generates additional research questions: 1) What could motivate males and members of the outgroup in ethnically defined conflicts to reconcile with one another? 2) To what extent are these findings of the project generalizable to other conflicts? The replicable research design presented in the legal pluralism paper offers an empirical model for studying variables that affect where citizens turn to for help with their disputes more systematically across other countries and regions. A further research question was generated: What types of local actors should be involved in the processes of local conflict resolution, and how can they be better or possibly worse forums for addressing the needs of citizens compared to state institutions?
Our upcoming working paper is on "Injustice Gaps", which occur when punishment does not meet popular notions of what is deemed commensurate with a given crime. It provides evidence that injustice gaps—whether from under- or over-punishment—undermine the legitimacy of authorities. These effects are more pronounced for state versus customary authorities and vary across Sunni and Shia subpopulations. The paper fills an empirical gap in post-conflict transitional justice by highlighting the critical role of non-state, customary authorities in justice provision, challenging state-centric paradigms. It also offers practical insights for practitioners and policymakers working with local actors to restore the rule of law and foster reconciliation in post-conflict settings.
The project has been presented at various workshops, conferences, and forums, both in person and virtually. Initially, the project outline and early research plans were presented on December 9, 2019, at The Middle East Initiative, Harvard Kennedy School, and on December 2, 2020, at The University of California's Comparative Politics Workshop. A virtual workshop titled “Understanding and Measuring Punishment, Revenge, and Forgiveness in Post-Conflict Settings” was held on February 19, 22, and 23, 2021, via Zoom, involving 14 scholars from the US, Europe, and Iraq, which refined the project's survey measures.
The working paper "Legal Pluralism" was presented at multiple events: Uppsala University and The Folke Bernadotte Academy’s workshop in Sweden (October 8-10, 2021), Policy-Research Day in Stockholm (October 11, 2021), the Quality of Government Conference at Gothenburg University (February 10, 2022), the International Studies Association Annual Conference (October 12, 2022), the Midwest Political Science Association Annual Conference (March 28, 2022), and the EuroWEPS Workshop at the Hertie School in Berlin (June 7, 2022).
On October 12, 2022, the working paper "The Power of the Past" was presented at a workshop at the University of Oslo. In 2023, key presentations included the United Nations Innovation Network on June 14 and the European Political Science Association Annual Conference in Glasgow on June 22. A panel on “Reintegration and Reconciliation” was organized at the American Political Science Association annual conference in Los Angeles on September 2, featuring 15 leading scholars in conflict resolution, fostering planned collaborations. A hybrid closing conference was held on October 16-17, 2023, in Gothenburg, Sweden, to disseminate results and research design, receive feedback, and exchange expertise with 16 political science, psychology, and sociology scholars.
Kristen Kao (PI) also presented project results at several forums in 2024, including a talk titled “The Social Sources of Legal Pluralism: Experimental Evidence of State Versus Customary Dispute Resolution in Iraq” at the Institute of Arab & Islamic Studies, Exeter University, UK (March 6). The paper "The Effects of Injustice Gaps" was presented at the University of Amsterdam (May 27), the APSA annual meeting in Philadelphia (September 8), and at the University of Bergen, Norway, (November 29). She presented the work at the “Rehabilitation of ISIS-affiliated Families” policy panel for the XCEPT project at King’s College London (October 23) and at the American University of Kurdistan's Middle East Peace and Security Forum (November 19), where the panel title was “Levels of Justice: International, National, or Local?”. Dr Kao lectured at the Society of International Affairs in Gothenburg on "Attitudes Towards Accused ISIS-affiliated Displaced Persons in Iraq and Sweden," on December 10, and also have been invited to talk at Weatherhead Center at Harvard University on March 24, 2025 on injustice gaps.
Kristin Fabbe, a collaborating researcher, presented findings at the Migration Policy Communications Training, Migration Policy Center, and the Social and Political Sciences Department on May 6 and June 19, respectively.
Other dissemination channels included a 2021 podcast on post-conflict reconciliation, and publications of the working papers on SSRN and by the Quality of Government Institute, with The Power of the Past appearing on SSRN's Top Ten download list twice in 2023.
The project has generated three additional collaborations that were not originally planned: For the post-survey focus groups, we brought in PhD candidate Janek Bruker from ETH Zurich, who applied innovative content analysis methods. A second study is being pursued with post-doc researcher Mara Vidali, at the Paris School of Economics, examining the local leaders survey in comparison to regular citizens. A third study is being conducted with Psychiatry PhD candidate Stéfanie Fréel at the Amsterdam University Medical Center, examining the effect of exposure to traumatic events and victimhood on injustice gaps as well as attitudes toward forgiveness and vengeance, through the lens of social psychology.
Finally, the PI of this project has been nominated by her department to be the 2025 Wallenberg Academy Fellow based on the pilot study of the injustice gaps within this project.
To fulfill these objectives, we conducted nine in-depth focus groups, each lasting about 1.5-2 hours, to inform extensive face-to-face surveys with 4,592 Iraqi citizens across Baghdad, Anbar, and Ninewa governorates. Additionally, we carried out 150 in-person surveys with local leaders, including tribal leaders, local imams, state officials, and mukhtars. The project concluded with eleven post-survey focus groups, each lasting about 2 hours, focusing on: 1) Return, Resettlement, and Stigma; 2) Justice Gaps; and 3) the Role of Fact-Finding and truth-seeking. The analysis focused on two main demographic divides found in our large-n quantitative studies: men versus women and Sunnis versus Shias.
The project yielded significant results, advancing both tangible outcomes and theoretical insights in conflict and peace studies. First, our paper, "The Power of the Past", revealed that individuals' justice intuitions are heavily influenced by past behaviors, driven by a combination of moral condemnation and a forward-looking assessment of risks and values. Importantly, Iraqi public opinion is in line with international human rights law: post-conflict justice should be proportionate with the severity of the crimes committed. This tendency is consistent across various personal differences, including trust in institutions, victimization, and ethnic identity, underscoring the importance of fact-finding missions for reintegrating internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Iraq and similar contexts. Another paper, "Legal Pluralism and Fragmented Sovereignty in Iraq", demonstrated that Iraqis tend to resolve family disputes through customary orders while favoring the state system for more significant cases despite its corruption. Focus groups indicated that customary orders provide a restorative approach to maintaining social relationships, posing a dilemma between a powerful but corrupt state system and a less enforceable yet less corrupt non-state system. These findings contribute to debates on reforming state-building models to better integrate customary and state dispute-resolution mechanisms.
Second, the project makes substantial theoretical contributions by challenging existing research on the motivations for forgiveness and reconciliation. It emphasizes the necessity of micro-level data to understand individual motivations in reintegration processes and identifies significant variations in the acceptance of state-driven versus traditional reconciliation approaches among different societal groups in Iraq. Additionally, the project tested psychological models of forgiveness in non-Western contexts, offering new perspectives on legitimate arbiters of justice and addressing the gap between victim perspectives and elite-imposed justice mechanisms in post-conflict settings.
Third, the project produced two significant datasets. The first is a probability sample representative of three governorates in Iraq with varying exposures to IS rule, consisting of 4,592 respondents. The second dataset is a convenience sample of 150 local leaders in these governorates. Both datasets will be made publicly available once they are appropriately anonymized within two years of the end of the project (December 2025) or after the five planned publications from them are completed.
The project findings suggest that acceptance of stigmatized IDPs is most difficult among males and members of the outgroup. This generates additional research questions: 1) What could motivate males and members of the outgroup in ethnically defined conflicts to reconcile with one another? 2) To what extent are these findings of the project generalizable to other conflicts? The replicable research design presented in the legal pluralism paper offers an empirical model for studying variables that affect where citizens turn to for help with their disputes more systematically across other countries and regions. A further research question was generated: What types of local actors should be involved in the processes of local conflict resolution, and how can they be better or possibly worse forums for addressing the needs of citizens compared to state institutions?
Our upcoming working paper is on "Injustice Gaps", which occur when punishment does not meet popular notions of what is deemed commensurate with a given crime. It provides evidence that injustice gaps—whether from under- or over-punishment—undermine the legitimacy of authorities. These effects are more pronounced for state versus customary authorities and vary across Sunni and Shia subpopulations. The paper fills an empirical gap in post-conflict transitional justice by highlighting the critical role of non-state, customary authorities in justice provision, challenging state-centric paradigms. It also offers practical insights for practitioners and policymakers working with local actors to restore the rule of law and foster reconciliation in post-conflict settings.
The project has been presented at various workshops, conferences, and forums, both in person and virtually. Initially, the project outline and early research plans were presented on December 9, 2019, at The Middle East Initiative, Harvard Kennedy School, and on December 2, 2020, at The University of California's Comparative Politics Workshop. A virtual workshop titled “Understanding and Measuring Punishment, Revenge, and Forgiveness in Post-Conflict Settings” was held on February 19, 22, and 23, 2021, via Zoom, involving 14 scholars from the US, Europe, and Iraq, which refined the project's survey measures.
The working paper "Legal Pluralism" was presented at multiple events: Uppsala University and The Folke Bernadotte Academy’s workshop in Sweden (October 8-10, 2021), Policy-Research Day in Stockholm (October 11, 2021), the Quality of Government Conference at Gothenburg University (February 10, 2022), the International Studies Association Annual Conference (October 12, 2022), the Midwest Political Science Association Annual Conference (March 28, 2022), and the EuroWEPS Workshop at the Hertie School in Berlin (June 7, 2022).
On October 12, 2022, the working paper "The Power of the Past" was presented at a workshop at the University of Oslo. In 2023, key presentations included the United Nations Innovation Network on June 14 and the European Political Science Association Annual Conference in Glasgow on June 22. A panel on “Reintegration and Reconciliation” was organized at the American Political Science Association annual conference in Los Angeles on September 2, featuring 15 leading scholars in conflict resolution, fostering planned collaborations. A hybrid closing conference was held on October 16-17, 2023, in Gothenburg, Sweden, to disseminate results and research design, receive feedback, and exchange expertise with 16 political science, psychology, and sociology scholars.
Kristen Kao (PI) also presented project results at several forums in 2024, including a talk titled “The Social Sources of Legal Pluralism: Experimental Evidence of State Versus Customary Dispute Resolution in Iraq” at the Institute of Arab & Islamic Studies, Exeter University, UK (March 6). The paper "The Effects of Injustice Gaps" was presented at the University of Amsterdam (May 27), the APSA annual meeting in Philadelphia (September 8), and at the University of Bergen, Norway, (November 29). She presented the work at the “Rehabilitation of ISIS-affiliated Families” policy panel for the XCEPT project at King’s College London (October 23) and at the American University of Kurdistan's Middle East Peace and Security Forum (November 19), where the panel title was “Levels of Justice: International, National, or Local?”. Dr Kao lectured at the Society of International Affairs in Gothenburg on "Attitudes Towards Accused ISIS-affiliated Displaced Persons in Iraq and Sweden," on December 10, and also have been invited to talk at Weatherhead Center at Harvard University on March 24, 2025 on injustice gaps.
Kristin Fabbe, a collaborating researcher, presented findings at the Migration Policy Communications Training, Migration Policy Center, and the Social and Political Sciences Department on May 6 and June 19, respectively.
Other dissemination channels included a 2021 podcast on post-conflict reconciliation, and publications of the working papers on SSRN and by the Quality of Government Institute, with The Power of the Past appearing on SSRN's Top Ten download list twice in 2023.
The project has generated three additional collaborations that were not originally planned: For the post-survey focus groups, we brought in PhD candidate Janek Bruker from ETH Zurich, who applied innovative content analysis methods. A second study is being pursued with post-doc researcher Mara Vidali, at the Paris School of Economics, examining the local leaders survey in comparison to regular citizens. A third study is being conducted with Psychiatry PhD candidate Stéfanie Fréel at the Amsterdam University Medical Center, examining the effect of exposure to traumatic events and victimhood on injustice gaps as well as attitudes toward forgiveness and vengeance, through the lens of social psychology.
Finally, the PI of this project has been nominated by her department to be the 2025 Wallenberg Academy Fellow based on the pilot study of the injustice gaps within this project.