Peace-building practices in wartime universities: baseline findings from the HOPE Erasmus+ project in Israel

• In Event: Education, Identity, and Peace in Marginalized and Conflict-Affected Contexts

Proposal

Introduction
Higher education institutions (HEIs) are increasingly recognized as pivotal yet understudied actors in conflict zones and areas of emergency for the production of peace and conflict resolution (e.g., Milton et al 2016). Traditionally, however, global peace education initiatives have focused on K–12 schools, with universities lagging behind: peace and conflict resolution training in higher education has often been relegated to a few specialized programs rather than integrated across curricula (Barakat & Milton 2015; Novelli et al 2017). As a result, HEIs have long been seen as peripheral to conflict resolution, and international agendas prioritized primary and secondary schooling—frequently viewing tertiary education in war-torn regions as a luxury instead of a necessity (Milton & Barakat 2016; Novelli et al 2017). Recent scholarship, however, challenges this neglect by illuminating the unique dual role of universities in conflict settings: they can either advance peace or exacerbate tensions (Novelli et al. 2017).
On the one hand, studies from conflict zones show universities functioning as crucial peace-building hubs. In Ukraine, for example, university leaders have insisted on investing in resilience during the war, arguing that strong academic institutions can bolster societal survival and even save lives (Ivanenko 2024). On the other hand, HEIs face profound challenges in active conflict zones. In Palestine–even before the outbreak of the Gaza war in 2023–HEIs operate under siege-like conditions which severely limits universities’ capacity to serve as neutral forums for dialogue and reconciliation (Baker 2016). Likewise, in Afghanistan, the resurgence of authoritarian rule has led to an unprecedented collapse in academic freedom (the sharpest decline globally in 2022), underscoring how quickly war and politics can stifle universities’ peace-building functions (Scholars at Risk 2023). And recent news from the US is barely better.
This growing body of literature from higher education studies in conflict areas highlights both the untapped potential and the persistent constraints of HEIs in fostering peace. It is against this backdrop that the Erasmus+ HOPE research in action project—Higher Education for Openness, Peace & Empathy—is conceived. The HOPE project (2025-2028) brings together universities from Israel, Germany, and Greece to design and implement innovative, skills-based models of peace education in higher education. The project's goal is to increase HEIs' role and visibility in promoting “a culture of peace” in an increasingly conflict- and war-oriented society. Increasingly, scholarship has pointed to the importance of this "third mission" for HEIs (Etzkowitz et al. 2000). By addressing the historical gap in peace education at the tertiary level and empowering universities in divided societies, HOPE aligns with and builds upon the current scholarly consensus that transforming HEIs into proactive peace-builders is both necessary and possible (Barnett 2012; Barakat & Milton 2015; Novelli et al. 2017).



The Erasmus+ HOPE Project
The first part of the paper introduces the project and opens the door for future collaboration. The second part discusses early data gathered from the consortium's four Israeli universities about current creative conflict resolutions (CCR) skills taught or promoted on campus. While this data offers a baseline for evaluating the project and its ultimate efficacy, it also offers insight into current practices of peace-building at HEIs in conflict zones that are of general interest. The goal is to empirically explore how Israeli universities’ prepare (or fail to prepare) students for conflict resolution during an ongoing war.
The paper begins by framing the HOPE project and its central objective to co-develop a joint minor program in peace education focused on practical skills of CCR for Israeli universities and other HEIs in conflict zones. The innovation of the project is its focus on skillsets related to CCR rather than on knowledge about peace and conflict. As conflicts spread globally, this type of curricular innovation--the paper argues--will be increasingly vital for universities beyond Israel. Moreover, while projects like this exist in schools, they are noticeably absent in most HEIs despite extensive evidence from social psychology suggesting that key democratic skills are acquired (or not) in this age group (see Boehnke & Hagan 2000; Baier et al. 2008; Boehnke & Wong 2011). Cross-cultural psychology has long demonstrated how adolescence and young adulthood are decisive for the internalization of democratic orientations and conflict management skills, underscoring the urgency of embedding such initiatives within universities (Binder et al 2013). Importantly, the minor is designed as a model that can be adapted to different conflict-affected areas.

Methodology & Baseline Findings
After introducing the HOPE project, the paper presents the baseline findings from the project’s early phase—focusing on current peace education and CCR policies and practices at the project’s four Israeli partner universities. Our methodology combines document analysis and semi-structured interviews. First, we conduct a structured review of institutional document packs (e.g., codes of conduct, student life protocols, dialogue initiatives, ombuds and mediation services, counseling programs, religious affairs offices, and strategic plans). These sources provide a formal account of how universities represent, regulate, and institutionalize peace-related practices. Second, to probe how these policies operate in practice, we carried out 1–2 exploratory interviews at each site with staff responsible for student affairs, counseling, and CCR. These interviews were designed to elicit not only programmatic details but also perceptions of efficacy, obstacles, and institutional priorities under wartime conditions. Together, these methods allow us to triangulate between the normative ideals of policy and the perspectives of staff charged with implementation.

Contribution
These findings empirically probe how Israeli HEIs are currently preparing students for conflict resolution. Israeli universities are uniquely important study sites for this type of work: situated in an ongoing war context, they face acute pressures that test the limits of HE as a space for building conflict resolution. This baseline inquiry therefore provides both a local diagnostic—mapping the strengths and gaps in current peace-related provisions—and a comparative lens for understanding how HEIs in other conflict-affected regions might adapt similar strategies or avoid similar pitfalls. This focus directly aligns with the CIES 2026 theme of “Re-examining Education and Peace in a Divided World,” as Israeli universities serve as critical sites where the challenges of fostering peace through HE are most visible and instructive for the global community.

Authors

• Zachary Reyna, Constructor University Bremen

• Isak Frumin, Constructor University Bremen