Reverend Nancy Brink is the current Executive Director of the Fish Interfaith Center at Chapman. She is an ordained minister in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the same religious group that founded Chapman University. She was a congregational minister for about 30 years before coming to Chapman as the Director of Church Relations and University Chaplain. At the start of this academic year (2023-2024), she was promoted to the new Executive Director of the Fish Interfaith Center.

I met Nancy during my freshman year over Zoom when searching for a Sikh organization on campus. While I was unsuccessful in my search, she invited me to begin attending the weekly Interfaith meetings that Fish hosts with representatives of the different faith organizations on campus. While I have grown used to seeing Nancy most Friday mornings for Interfaith over the last four years, earlier this semester, she invited me and a few other faith leaders of campus clubs to join her in a class called Cultivating Compassion. The name is a bit on the nose, but it was a wonderful experience. 

At the start of the interview, we spent a bit discussing the course and how its teaching is interdisciplinary and can benefit anyone in their day-to-day interactions and global relations. Nancy told me she loved the course because it referred to and drew on sources and ideologies that have fueled movements in the past that we have all come to know. Her main two examples were with Dr. King and the Civil Rights Movement and Mahatma Gandhi’s India Independence Movement. While speaking about these movements, their successes, and and their following, she brought my attention to something she noticed that really stood out to her. 

She told me that while reflecting on the Black Lives Matter movement as it echoed around the nation and beyond our borders following the death of Georg Floyd, she couldn’t help but think it didn’t have the same echoing and staying power that the Civil Rights Movement had as it didn’t have the same spiritual backing. As a woman connected to faith and who values its guidance, she shared a lens I had never considered before. Despite the fact that I knew Dr. King was a religious leader who would speak of his faith and use its lessons in his sermons and addresses, I never connected the intense relation that the people had to him and the movement with how they may also be connecting on a more spiritual level. Gandhi and King were able to use their faith as motivation, which acted as an additional level of connection between the people and the reason why the movement was necessary.

Nancy explained that the class reminded her of how connected we are, how we are connected through the idea of “Big God” and how we have our own “Retail Versions,” but they all fall under faith and belief in some higher power. Something that really stuck with me was when she explained that “the class had this ability to help cultivate compassion which is incredible and important, but it can help us learn how to withstand the brutality, to help us come together, in spite of the pain, which is so powerful.” Nancy’s main takeaway from the course and how it can relate to peace– peace of mind, peace in personal relations, peace in justice and global relations– was that it teaches us very practical and tangible methods to grow a heart of compassion, compassion for yourself, as well and then for compassion for others. In the end, it’s the way to stop the cycle of reactivity. 

The second half of the interview focused on religion’s role in peace. Nancy has visited many places, experienced different faiths and cultures, and has come out of it grounded in her beliefs, so she is appreciative of the differences. When I asked her what she thought the role of religion in peace was, she told me it was “To ground people in the truth that our lives are bigger than just our individual histories and needs.” 

She reminded me that we’re all a part of something bigger, even if we don’t necessarily see it or never try to act on it. She was quick to remind me that when we turn our back on the bigger picture, all it truly does is shrink the world. She did counter that by adding that when we try to tap into the larger picture, there is so much possibility and creativity in that world to be seen. When I asked her to expand on that, on the world of creativity and what tapping into it allows someone to do, she explained that the grounding effect of religion in peace and justice is not the doctrine that saves us or helps us; it is the deep and spiritual practice, the prayer, the meditation, that brings us back and reminds us of why we are connected, of how we are connected. It allows us to ground ourselves and keep from lashing out, to remember why we are doing what we’re doing. 

She gave an example right after that and asked me what I knew about the William Pettis Bridge and John Lewis. While I was familiar with John Lewis and his role in the Civil Rights Movement, I was unfamiliar with the William Pettis Bridge. Nancy took a moment to explain that day in the movement. When members of the Civil Rights Movement arrive at the bridge, intending to cross in their march only to find the State Troopers waiting. State Troopers then advanced and beat them. John Lewis led that march and led it again a few days later after recuperating from his injuries. Nancy looked at me and asked me to consider: where does that come from?

Where does the drive and ability to rally despite the brutality come from? The marchers had been praying and singing as they prepared and walked toward the bridge they had been taught in the School of Civil Rights. Taught the practices of nonviolence, why it was so important not to respond to violence, and how it unmasks the violence of others. 

Toward the end of the interview, we spoke a bit about how religion has been taken and abused as a method by which people separate themselves from others. In Peace Studies, we learned about the concept and practice of othering fairly early, which we expanded on. Religion is meant to connect on the level of spiritual influence. Following my question, Nancy asked me to stop taking notes for a moment and to breathe with her through a meditative exercise where we explored how we feel when we feel so connected to our faiths. It is the joy, wonder, and acceptance that we feel in our faith and communities that can bridge the gaps that some try to widen. 

She explained that the feelings I’d shared when I went to the Gurudwara versus the ones Nancy experienced growing up going to Church were not different at all. She explained that it’s not about the doctrine or the stories. It’s about the practice, the service, the familiarity, and “connecting to God, capital G, the one who is above all, the one that echoes across all faiths.” 

The most significant takeaway I had following the conclusion of my time with Nancy was that we can find individual peace and a chance for greater unity and understanding by respecting and appreciating the similarities and differences as they all connect us to God or any form of a  Higher Power and that it is only to our detriment that is so difficult for us to recognize that on a more regular basis.

Growing up in a Mexican American household where traditional gender roles were reinforced I have always been extremely frustrated by machismo. My grandmother made sure that I learned about Mexico and the issues that caused her to emigrate and that is when I came across the term femicide for the first time. Femicide: killing of women because they are women. One of the most if not the most extreme form of gender based violence. In 2023 it is estimated that 10 women were victims of femicide everyday. For me it was a no brainer what I wanted my capstone to focus on when I decided to major in peace and justice studies. 

For the interview assignment I had the opportunity to interview Dr. Rafael Luevano who is a professor of religious studies at Chapman University. In 2012 Luevano published the book “Woman-Killing in Juarez: Theodicy at the Border”. During our meeting we discussed femicide in Mexico as well as the reality of conducting this kind of work. I asked him about the correlation between domestic violence and femicide and he explained that it is a very important factor to consider when researching femicide.A significant amount of femicides in Mexico are women being killed by their partners where there is a history of domestic violence. It is important to note that here we were looking at all forms of domestic violence: physical, psychological, financial and sexual violence. Domestic violence in Mexico often goes without punishment as does femicide. The impunity for these crimes perpetuates gender inequality and gender based violence. 

Another aspect of femicide in Mexico that we discussed is the difficulty to find accurate quantitative data. As the crime of femicide goes underreported espeacially in rural areas it is difficult to find a solid reflection of the gravity of the situation. Then in cases where femicide is reported there is an attempt by news reporters to deny women their victimhood. In tabloids women are slandered as an attempt to justify the femicide. On this topic we also talked about the feminist responses to femicide . Women, mothers and fathers are sick and tired of this culture of violence and the impunity for the culture and structures that allow their daughters’ murders to go without punishment. There has been a shift in Mexico’s feminist movement from only benefiting middle class women in metropolitan cities to a movement led by women from small communities who are the mothers, sisters and daughters of murdered women. The feminist movement has also shifted from nonviolent to violent in response to increasing rates of femicide. Dr. Rafael Luevano and I also discussed the possibility of my capstone focusing mainly on feminist responses to femicide in Mexico. 

The last topic we discussed is the possibility of a career in Peace and Justice in regards to gender issues. He explained that when conducting the research for his book there were times when he felt his personal safety threatened and he was told by friends and colleagues to stop. He told me that there is a demand for people willing to take on this topic. To pursue research and a career aiming to end femicide in Mexico is not a want but a need that is often taken on by people who have a personal connection to the state. 

I am very grateful to Dr. Rafael Luevano for taking the time to meet with me and I plan to keep him in the loop as I move forward with my capstone project. 

Dr. Bojan Petrovic

For my interview assignment I interviewed Professor Petrovic. I took his course “Psychology of International Conflict” my sophomore year and was fascinated by how much knowledge he had about the topics we discussed and specifically the Middle East. Professor Petrovic is from what is formerly known as Yugoslavia and has experience traveling around the world. He speaks Serbo-Croatian, French, and English. His journey of interest in the Middle East began from learning the negative consequences of foreign rule over the Balkans in school growing up. He researched primarily focused on Europe at first and became more interested in the Middle East after 9/11.

After getting a Bachelor’s in law, he became interested in international law then international relations. In graduate school he became passionate about both international relations and comparative politics. Before becoming a professor he worked at a foreign policy think tank in Yugoslavia. There he focused on ethnic conflicts then moved religious conflicts, which he teaches and writes about today. He said that his career now as a professor just fell into place and that he actually thought he would be a researcher. However he finds that being a professor allows him to research and teach at the same time. His favorite part about being a professor is interacting with the students. It excites him when students become interested in the content of his classes. However, grading is the worst part as it becomes repetitive. Being a professor has also given him the opportunity to write a book on Afghanistan. After he was assigned to teach a course on the subject, he enjoyed putting the pieces of information together and decided to write a book about it. For his research for the book he used a lot of secondary sources along with interviews.

Overall he has found that traveling has helped him learn about his research subjects. Through his travels, he has become convinced that there’s always more to learn beyond just the reading. He has traveled all over both Western and Eastern Europe, South America, East Asia, Israel, Turkey, Jordan, Morocco, and the Gulf area. His most valuable experiences traveling have been the interactions with locals, enjoying the food (particularly street food), and people watching.

Professor Petrovic said that beginning a career in this field is not easy to get by simply applying as there is no strict path. Instead it is important to develop an interest where you can become an expert and then you will become in demand. The more niche the topic is, the better as there will be less competition. He suggests talking with colleagues for clues to issues or concepts that are in demand to be researched and understood. He said to develop your own impressions, not only in terms of us foreign policy, but also other frameworks. Additionally he suggests trying to learn the local languages, which I am in the process of doing as I have learned French and am now trying to learn Arabic. In regards to my project and interests, he said it would be interesting to contrast what diaspora communities are saying versus the natives of the diaspora who remain in their country.

I asked if he finds it challenging to have a work life balance as I sometimes feel like as a student in this field that I have to constantly be up to date on events and the world. He said that it is a busy time of the world right now as there are a lot of moving parts and everything seems to be changing with Russia and Ukraine, China, fears of nuclear war, dooming climate disaster, etc. which makes the Cold War and the 90s seem lazy and predictable. However today, since the world is so dynamic, it can also be seen as exciting because there is more to talk about. He said to just find your own pace and that it is impossible to know everything about one event. Eventually you will catch up with interactions with colleagues and friends or through social media.

Additionally I asked Professor Petrovic what he enjoys doing outside of work. He told me he enjoys playing piano, seeing live music, cooking, driving around the U.S., visiting National Parks, snow skiing, modern dance, and modern art. I told him that I also love art and museums so he gave me a list of art galleries to visit. Overall, I found his advice about research and becoming an expert in whatever I am interested in to be good advice. I feel like this is especially important if I do want to become a professor in the future as it would make me an attractive candidate. It also is another incentive for me to travel the world. I also really appreciated his advice about staying up to date with the world. Overall he said to not panic and give myself time, which is a good reminder.

I recently spoke with Dr. John Hall regarding his experience working in the Peace and Justice field. Dr. Hall is a professor at the Chapman University Fowler School of Law, where he currently teaches a range of subjects, including International Law and Human Rights. Dr. Hall has had an impressive career in the Peace and Justice field. Following a hitch-hiking trip in South East Asia, he became inspired to shift his professional focus from American history to Human Rights Law. He earned his J.D. in law from Stanford University and has participated in extensive human rights fieldwork in Cambodia and the Philippines. Due to the fact that I am interested in a potential career in international public law and human rights, I felt that Dr. Hall would be an excellent person to speak to. We talked about his experiences working in a global arena, studying and practicing law, and building a career in the human rights field. Throughout our conversation, Dr. Hall was able to use his personal experiences to offer valuable insight and advice for myself and other students who may be interested in pursuing a career in this field.

Dr. Hall earned his J.D. from Stanford Law School

One crucial point that Dr. Hall emphasized was the importance of fieldwork. He stated that he views the opportunity to do fieldwork as the most important aspect of his work in human rights. Participating in fieldwork offers valuable opportunities to build connections and gain experience in this field. Dr. Hall also explained that working abroad can assist with building language skills, which can prove to be highly valuable for those who are interested in international law or human rights work. Additionally, fieldwork can provide young professionals with a more robust understanding of how other countries, as well as the international community as a whole, function and interact. Dr. Hall illustrated the importance of building an understanding of a variety of cultures and norms by reflecting on his own experiences while providing legal aid in Cambodia and emphasized the fact that it is essential to understand how to adapt and adjust your practices in order to effectively conduct work abroad. In this sense, fieldwork is valuable because it is the most effective way to provide professionals with opportunities to further the knowledge and skills that are necessary to succeed in this field.

Dr. Hall also emphasized the importance of planning ahead and being strategic and adaptable. Because it may be challenging to find a paying job in human rights work as a young professional, it is important to keep financial restrictions in mind, particularly concerning educational and living costs. Additionally, he explained that diligence and perseverance are highly valuable to securing a job in this field. Dr. Hall recounted times near the beginning of his career in human rights, during which he had to fight hard to secure a position with organizations in order to do the work he was interested in. He underscored the importance of being assertive and taking advantage of the opportunities that are thrown your way. The importance of fieldwork is also relevant in this regard due to the fact that many jobs are based on recommendations or connections, meaning that it may be necessary to engage in volunteer work in order to secure a paying job. Finally, adaptability is vital because of the high level of uncertainty associated with doing work in this field. Dr. Hall stated that this is especially relevant when working with NGOs, which may shift their interests based on new causes or the interests of the international community. Because of this, professionals must be able to adapt to the ever-changing dynamics of this field and the interests of the organizations they work with.

This conversation with Dr. Hall provided me with further insight into the complexities, but also the importance and value, of working in the Peace and Justice field. Due to the fact that this field can be so challenging to get into, I appreciate the immense value of learning from the experiences and advice of professionals. Throughout Dr. Hall’s career, he has clearly gained incredible knowledge, experience, and insight, and I am immensely grateful for the time that I was able to spend with him and for the advice and recommendations he provided.  

Professor Tessa Venizelos

 When I chose to major in Peace Studies, I was aware of the common judgment that any humanities major is a waste of money. Regardless, I cared deeply for all the material I learned, and I have never regretted my decision. This confidence is only further enforced when I get the opportunity to talk to professionals in the field. I chose to speak with Tessa Venizelos, a professor here at Chapman University who has expertise in feminist and post colonialist theory.

I met Professor Venizelos last semester during one of my classes, and was extremely interested in her choice to get a master’s at the London School of Economics, a school I have dreamed of attending since highschool. As graduation looms, the nerves of a life in the “real world” get worse and worse, but talking to Tessa gave me the opportunity to feel hopeful about the future rather than just nervous. 

I began my interview by asking Professor Venizelos about her journey after graduating from Chapman. She explained her strong love of storytelling, and how this led her to take a job in a boutique while writing for free at a lifestyle blog. I enjoy hearing from professionals that they did not necessarily initially have things figured out, and instead tried different experiences in order to build their skills and realize what they wanted to do. This eased my nerves about making decisions post grad, helping me accept that I may not get the perfect job right away, and everyone is on a different path. 

Professor Venizelos then reflected on her time at the London School of Economics, specifically on the cultural differences she experienced while outside of the United States. Especially in a world pre 2020, where many Americans had not yet begun recognizing critical race and post colonial theory, Tessa was confronted by these ideas. The international nature of London helped with this learning, her classmates coming from around the world. While here, she was able to hear criticisms by others about the United States, and had to come to terms with the privilege she experienced in life as an American. As someone who wants to travel post grad, this was useful for me to hear. Although in Peace Studies we try to educate ourselves, when we are confronted head on and even blamed for the actions of our government it can be difficult to process. For Professor Venizelos this was the case, but it also allowed her to create connections across the globe and expand her mind.

“I Really Wanted to Tell the Untold Stories”
– Tessa Venizelos

LSE, attended by Venizelos, is a top Political Science institution.

Professor Venizelos said one thing in particular which really stood out to me, explaining that she “really wanted to tell the untold stories”. During this process, she had to learn when it was important to listen instead of talk, as well as deconstruct initial responses she had and really sit with things and reflect. This is a uniquely “peace studies” sort of perspective, however I wish it was adopted by everyone. Learning when to listen is what allows her to properly let women tell their own stories, rather than continue a cycle of reporting that has existed for so long.  

 What I appreciate about Professor Venizelos’ path is that she did not necessarily have a specific position or career in mind, but rather has focused on a passion. When asking her for advice to give to students, she asked me to think about what it is that I always come back to. This passion is what I should follow, listening to my inner voice and letting the experiences occur from there. This is something I will keep in mind as I move forward in the world, trying to forge my own path using the things I have learned with a Peace Studies degree.

One of the first people I thought of when thinking of Peace Studies professionals I could interview for this project was the lovely Dr. Dani Smith. At Chapman University, Dr. Dani Smith serves as the C.A.R.E.S. coordinator and sexual assault crisis counselor. She also currently co-leads “Healthy Panther,” a First-year orientation program, and the C.A.R.E.S. members arrange information sessions and activities to increase sexual assault awareness. Dr. Smith is a useful person to interview because my topic revolves around sexual violence guidelines. She began working for the Department of Preventative Education in 1993. Her main areas of interest were preventing sexual assault and educating people about drugs and alcohol. However, soon after being hired, two R.A.s approached her and informed her that Chapman University required more sexual assault education. These two students and Dr. Smith started C.A.R.E.S. and went to the freshman seminars to educate students on rape and sexual assault. Furthermore, Dr. Dani Smith wrote the first sexual assault policy and conduct code for Chapman University. She argues that C.A.R.E.S. dealt with cases well, as professors who were experts on the subject were on the hearing board.
With the Title IX coordinator’s institution, the program completely shifted because they had to follow mandates put out by the federal government. Furthermore, she argues that investigators need more training than merely going to a conference. Also, she states that since many cases deal only with people’s accounts, it can be incredibly difficult to discern the truth. She claims that not much has changed since she founded C.A.R.E.S. in 1993, yet she is still optimistic and also argues that the world is not equitable for women. She talked about how instead of being a part of the adjudication process, she stands by the side of the survivors and supports them during the process. Dr. Dani Smith provided information on sexual assaults on college campuses, including the prevalence of attacks by former acquaintances on survivors of sexual assault as well as the prevalence of sexual assault within fraternities and by athletes. Additionally, she claimed that rather than the victim suing the school for wrongly handling the issue, assailants were more likely to sue the school for investigating an assault.
To combat these statistics, she stated that education and intolerance of sexual assault are the most important tools. Dr. Dani Smith works tremendously hard and is passionate about making Chapman University faculty and students feel supported. Dr. Dani Smith’s statements emphasize the need for continued training and experience in treating situations of sexual assault. Her viewpoint emphasizes the necessity of ongoing training and the advancement of investigative methods to guarantee appropriate case management of sexual assaults and assistance for victims. This relates to my thesis because I can utilize her suggestions for improvements in the field for my research.

I interviewed Dr. Jason Sexton, a sociologist who studies theology and the prison system, and the ways they intersect. We met before his talk on his new academic work that will soon be published; the prison and its eugenic logic. During our meeting, we discussed his thoughts and ideas on my research project, and touched on his advice for me regarding how to go forward in the field of law, specifically working towards post-conviction representation. 

During my meeting with Dr. Sexton, he told me a bit about his personal background and how he was formerly incarcerated. I won’t repeat what he told me about this, as I didn’t get his express permission to do so. I did, however, find what he told me very interesting, as being in any U.S. carceral system is sure to be an extremely difficult experience; making the things he achieved after being released even more admirable. He received a PhD from the University of St. Andrews, after which he became a professor of sociology at UCLA. 

He suggested a few pieces of literature to me which I’ve been looking into, and I’m sure will be helpful to the theory I will later use to justify my study’s findings: Discipline and Punish by Foucault, an academic journal titled Punishment and Society, which he mentioned discusses the length of exoneration processes of POC vs non-POC, Robert Ferguson’s work (specifically Inferno and Anatomy of American Punishment) and other broader sociological examinations of punishment and the prison system. He also suggested to me to look at an article titled “The Criminal Is to Go Free” by Johnathan Simon- which brings up the doctrine first written about by Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo, “the criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered”. This phrase and doctrine was recently brought up by Chief Justice Roberts and cited in Haring vs. U.S.; evidence obtained through a violation of one’s constitutional rights cannot be used against them. We discussed how this idea seems to be incongruent with the notion that the law can’t admit it’s wrong and maintain authority. This, along with the other theory and explanations for my findings we discussed, was one of my main takeaways from our interview. I think this idea of the constable and the criminal will be very important in my theoretical analysis, and I intend to read further into the topic. 

Dr. Sexton also made a few suggestions on how to analyze the data I have. He added that I should consider looking into class issues, and how financial means can greatly affect one’s experience in the justice system. He believes that class is also a very important demographic to look at, specifically examining who the law more readily punishes, in addition to race. One of my other main takeaways from our interview was that I can, and should, critique the system within my explanation of my results. Evidently I understand that there are many problems within the justice system, but I didn’t feel I had the authority to properly critique them. Dr. Sexton gave me the idea of adding his research findings and Griset lecture topic to my study; that the American prison comes from persistent eugenic logic. Additionally, he also mentioned something in our meeting that stood out to me; DNA and DNA exonerations will not change the system. Even though this may seem evident, I had not thought of prescribing remedies to the system in this way. DNA evidence truly does not prevent racial, gender, or class prejudice. I intend to look further into this, both for my capstone and personal interest. This felt like a big step forward to me in this research project, because I will now look into DNA vs. non-DNA exonerations, and possibly how race or class plays a role in who gets access to DNA analysis. Relatedly, Dr. Sexton and I discussed the exploitative plea bargaining system in the U.S., and how I could incorporate critiques of this system within my research. 

He also had some professional advice for me: to apply to UC Berkeley law, UCI law, and UC Hastings law. He also encouraged me to keep my GPA up, and continue to pursue work at the Innocence Project. 

Related articles on the “the criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered”, and work by Dr. Sexton:

• https://www.crimrxiv.com/pub/va4ejpb2/release/1 
• https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/should-criminal-go-free-because-constable-has-blundered
• https://www.juvenile-in-justice.com/jijblog/tag/Jason+Sexton 

Dr. Daniel Wehrenfennig

I was very grateful to interview an old professor of mine, Dr. Daniel Wehrenfennig. He has a Ph.D. in Political Science and International Relations from the University of California, Irvine, and taught Conflict Analysis and Resolution at UCI. His doctoral work consisted of studying Israeli-Palestine and Northern Ireland comparatively, focusing on citizen involvement in the peace processes. He is also a founder of the Center for International Experience Learning (CIEL), where he traveled over a dozen times to the Middle East, Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Columbia, and Northern Ireland. With his vast knowledge and connections in peace work, Dr. Wehrenfenning was very helpful in demonstrating potential careers in peace and justice.

Dr. Daniel Wehrenfennig teaching students in the Middle East through CIEL

I first asked him what advice he would give to a graduate with a Peace Studies degree. He said the student should figure out which of three avenues to follow. One avenue is the more traditional one, working as an official diplomatic in the government, State Department, the UN, or the Peacecorp. Dr. Wehrenfenning says joining Peacecorp can be advantageous if you follow future governmental work, and as you have demonstrated, you can survive and thrive in that environment. Another avenue is working internationally in non-governmental and non-profit programs like the Red Cross. There can be more formalized tracks, such as getting an internship and working your way up. One could also work on refugee crises and women’s rights through this avenue. The last avenue would be national and local work, applying peace studies to issues such as racial equity, homelessness, or mediation. Dr. Wehrenfenning says this could be a non-profit or city government applying peace studies to local problems.

While navigating these different avenues, I asked Dr. Wehrenfenning the pros and cons of working with the government vs a non-profit. A governmental job gives you a more formalized direction with job security, but it will take a few years to work your way up to start working on your interest. However, Dr. Wehrenfenning explains that working with the government may lead to difficulties in finding jobs for non-profits due to critical attitudes. In contrast, non-profit work may be impact-based with more independence, but the pay will be less secure, and there will be fewer benefits. 

Next, we discussed how one should navigate getting a Ph.D. or master’s and if there are enough opportunities without one. Dr. Wehrenfenning explained you should get into the workforce and discover what field you want to join, what interests you, and what else you need to learn before earning a master’s. Dr. Wehrenfenning also explained that a Ph.D. may push employers away as they may think you are overqualified, but it is helpful when an organization needs an expert. 

Lastly, Dr. Wehrenfenning emphasized resilience is crucial to success in a peace and justice career. To be resilient, you must manage expectations, pay your dues, and understand that getting where you want may take a few years. He emphasized that getting involved, attending events, and networking are crucial to growth in a career in peace and justice. 

One takeaway that most surprised me about a career in peace and justice was Dr. Wehrenfenning’s advice to get into the workforce before earning a master’s or Ph.D. I was surprised because I was under the impression that one must go straight from college to grad school, but his advice is crucial to discovering what field interests me and then learning the necessities to help one grow in that career. Another takeaway that surprised me was the importance of self-starting and the helpfulness of networking. Dr. Wehrenfenning emphasized that attending events, shaking heads, and networking are crucial ways to get your foot in the door.  

Dr. Angela Lederach

I was very excited to be able to conduct an interview with Dr. Angela Lederach and share more information/takeaways that I noted regarding the Peace and Justice field. Dr. Lederach is currently a professor at Chapman University within the Peace and Conflict Studies department and has spent a significant amount of time in Latin America, namely Colombia. Below is a synopsis of the questions/responses from my interview with her:

• Tell me a bit about your background in the Peace & Conflict field, including how you got involved in the field and what led you to your current role as a professor at Chapman.

Dr. Lederach grew up in a family that was significantly involved in the field, with her parents being very committed to peace-building work. She spent many of her early years in Latin America, namely Costa Rica, during the 80s solidarity movement in which she worked with the exiled indigenous leaders of the Miskito people. She has worked mainly with grassroots and civil society groups in advocacy/post-advocacy work and post-war reconstruction. With regard to her studies, she majored in both anthropology and peace studies at the University of Notre Dame. After which she spent two years in the Phillippines working on grassroots and peace education.

• I know you spent a lot of time working in Colombia. Can you tell me more about what you did there and the population you worked with?

In Colombia, Dr. Lederach was working in the Montes de Maria, a location where the Peace Accords implementation was prioritized, as this site suffered an immense amount of violence. Dr. Lederach had been working in this area since before the peace accords were signed and was studying and researching more to understand what it looked like for people to build peace and the language/rhetoric used to do so up until the peace accords were signed. Her research seeks to understand the differing relationship between the community’s and the national level’s peace process, and a finding has included that international peace-building interventions can undermine and really destabilize the fragile process of community reconciliation. Dr. Lederach is also interested in how civil organizations worked to advocate and combat harmful forms of intervention in a way that called for changes while still supporting a peace accord and resolution. 

• What has been your favorite part about working in the Peace and Conflict field?

Dr. Lederach explained that she loves that this is an applied field that is engaged. She highlighted that in this field, we are asking questions in really empirical ways that help us understand the significant questions of “What reduces violence?” and “How can we create peace?” The field is proactive and has implications for policy and future peace efforts. She also mentioned that she truly loves the depth of the commitment that people within the field show toward creating a better and more peaceful world. 

• Do you have any advice for graduating university students who want to enter this field?

Dr. Lederach explained that there is not a clear pathway when you study peace and conflict, unlike other areas in which there is more of a linear pathway to your career. With this, she stressed that our studies and this field have skills that are directly applicable and useful to any path you decide to take or any specific focus you are exploring. The concepts, theories, questions, and commitments apply everywhere, whether in healthcare, the United Nations, or otherwise. While this is a good thing, it can also be overwhelming; too many paths can make narrowing down your future challenging. Her advice thus was that instead of seeking a singular pathway or answer, focus on identifying the core areas that deeply resonate with you and ask yourself, “What skills have I developed/do I need to develop for this area, and how will I apply them?” From there, it is about applying yourself and seeking the experiences and opportunities to push you forward.

This interview provided me with a couple of takeaways that really surprised me and also helped me understand the potential for my future career in the peace and justice field. The first important takeaway is that the peace and justice field encompasses such a wide variety of different pathways and possibilities for what my future career could look like. It can range from working in the non-profit sector grassroots activism to working for the United Nations and other international organizations. With that being said, it is vital that I recognize that this is both beneficial and also a bit of a struggle. In order for me to truly find what direction I want to go in, I need to identify my core passions and the ways in which I can reach those areas. The second takeaway is that this field often requires a good amount of moving around as opportunities and needs are present all around the world. That said, it does not really bother me, but it is something that I should keep in mind while planning out my next steps after graduation and something I should be prepared for going forward.