Catherine Turner, Sarah Al-Areqi
Since the end of the Cold War the international peace architecture has grown exponentially. A progressively more detailed and conceptually broad understanding of peace has emerged to underpin peacemaking by the UN and other international actors. This definition has been developed through a series of resolutions and reports that articulate a specific understanding of 'peace' in which 'sustaining peace' requires the prevention of conflict and addressing its root causes. This paper argues that the expansion of this field has led to the situation where the concept of 'peace' has become so conceptually stretched that it operates in its current form as little more than a metaphor for a detailed normative international order which is concealed behind the metaphor. However, following nearly two decades of normative consolidation we are witnessing a global pushback against international norms. This dynamic is particularly evident when it comes to the Women Peace and Security agenda where language has emerged as a key terrain for the political contestation of norms. This paper compares the English and Arabic translation of key WPS resolutions to demonstrate the difficulties of 'translating' complex concepts related to peace across linguistic and cultural contexts. In doing this it provides a valuable resource for those concerned with the survival of Women Peace and Security as a global agenda.