Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457): Topic: Conflict and peace – Study Guide

This guide covers the topic Conflict and peace from the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025). Conflict and peace is one of the 22 topics in the topic list in section 3 of the syllabus, and section 3 states that the topic list is for all components: Component 1 Written Exam, Component 2 Individual Report and Component 3 Team Project. The skills you practise here are the assessment objectives in section 2 and the component tasks in section 4.

Topic knowledge is not assessed. Section 3 of the syllabus says plainly that “knowledge of content is not assessed in this syllabus”, and the Written Exam does not test prior knowledge of the topic or issue in the sources. This page shows you how to use Conflict and peace to practise the assessed skills: research, analysis and evaluation; reflection; and communication and collaboration.

Use this guide with the Conflict and peace revision notes and the Conflict and peace practice questions. The Global Perspectives hub and the 0457 checklist show where this topic sits in the whole course.

Coverage table

Syllabus reference	What you must be able to do (from the document)	Where assessed
Section 2, AO1 Research, analysis and evaluation	Research global issues, their causes and consequences and possible course(s) of action; use evidence to support claims; identify and analyse issues, arguments and perspectives; evaluate evidence, reasoning and sources; develop a line of reasoning	Components 1, 2 and 3
Section 2, AO2 Reflection	Consider different perspectives objectively and with empathy; justify a personal perspective with evidence and reasoning; consider how research, perspectives and teamwork influenced your learning	Components 2 and 3
Section 2, AO3 Communication and collaboration	Present arguments, evidence and perspectives clearly and with structure; include citations and references; contribute to the Team Project	Components 2 and 3
Section 3, Issues and perspectives	Use research, reasoning and questioning to understand different perspectives on issues within a topic and form your own judgements	All components
Section 4, Component 1	Analyse sources; evaluate research or evidence and suggest how to test a claim; evaluate arguments; assess actions. Understand bias, claim, fact, generalisation, opinion, prediction, value and vested interest	Written Exam, 1 hour 25 minutes, 70 marks
Section 4, Component 2	Choose a global issue that divides opinion, devise a global research question, explore local and/or national and global perspectives, analyse causes and consequences, propose one course of action, evaluate sources, reflect	Individual Report, 1500-2000 words, 60 marks
Section 4, Component 3	Identify a local issue, research different perspectives, plan and carry out an action, measure its success, reflect	Team Project, 70 marks

Turning a broad topic into issues

The syllabus defines an issue as “an important subject or problem for discussion” and a perspective as “a viewpoint on an issue based on evidence and reasoning”. “Conflict and peace” is a topic, not an issue. Your first skill is narrowing it down to issues at different levels.

Level	Example issues within Conflict and peace
Global	Should countries be allowed to sell weapons to governments involved in armed conflict? Should international peacekeeping forces be able to use force to protect civilians?
National	After a civil conflict, should a country hold criminal trials or a truth commission? Should young people be required to do military or national service?
Local	How should schools deal with fights and bullying between groups of students? How can neighbours settle disputes over shared land or noise without involving the police?

Notice that each issue is phrased as a question that people answer differently. That is what makes it usable. “War causes suffering” is not an issue, because almost nobody disagrees with it.

Key terms

• Conflict: a serious disagreement or struggle between people, groups or states. It ranges from a playground argument to armed war.
• Peacemaking: efforts to bring the sides in a conflict to an agreement, often through negotiation or mediation.
• Peacekeeping: placing neutral forces or observers between sides to stop fighting starting again.
• Peacebuilding: longer-term work on the causes of conflict, such as rebuilding trust, institutions and the economy.
• Mediation: a neutral third person helps the sides reach their own agreement.
• Reconciliation: rebuilding relationships between groups after conflict.
• Ceasefire: an agreement to stop fighting, usually for a set time or while talks happen.

Perspectives and why people hold them

A perspective is not just an opinion. It is a viewpoint backed by reasons and evidence, and it usually comes from the holder’s situation. Component 2 asks you to “demonstrate that they understand why different people have different perspectives”. So for each perspective, ask three questions: who holds it, what they argue, and why their position leads them there.

Take the national issue “Should young people be required to do national service?”

Who	What they might argue	Why they might hold this view
A defence ministry	It keeps the armed forces ready and builds national unity	Its job is national security
A young person about to leave school	It delays study and work	It affects their own plans directly
A peace campaign group	Training young people for combat makes violence seem normal	Its values put non-violence first
An employer	Recruits come back with discipline and teamwork skills	It could gain more skilled workers

None of these is “the right answer”; you are rewarded for analysing them, not for picking a side. The employer and the defence ministry may also have a vested interest: they gain if the policy happens. That does not make them wrong, but it is a reason to check their evidence.

Causes and consequences

The syllabus aims ask you to develop “an analytical and evaluative grasp of global issues and their causes and consequences”. With conflict, causes are often disputed, so show that you know this.

Possible causes you might analyse

• Competition for scarce resources such as land, water or jobs.
• Unequal treatment of groups, real or perceived.
• Historical grievances passed down through families and communities.
• Political exclusion: a group feels it has no peaceful way to be heard.
• Misinformation and rumours that spread fear of another group.

Possible consequences

• People forced to leave their homes.
• Schooling interrupted, with long-term effects on jobs and income.
• Damage to homes, roads, hospitals and businesses.
• Lasting distrust between communities, which can make further conflict more likely.
• Sometimes, positive consequences: new laws, peace agreements or cooperation that did not exist before.

Analysis means showing links, not just listing. For example: a dispute over grazing land (cause) leads to farmers and herders avoiding the shared market (consequence), which reduces trade between the groups, which removes a reason to keep the peace (further consequence). Chains like this earn analysis credit. A list of five unconnected causes usually does not.

Judging sources and evidence

Section 4 says candidates “will benefit from an understanding of the following: bias, claim, fact, generalisation, opinion, prediction, value and vested interest”. These eight terms are your toolkit. Here they are applied to conflict-related statements (all invented for this guide).

Term	Meaning	Example statement
Claim	A statement presented as true that may need evidence	“Our mediation scheme has ended fighting in the town.”
Fact	Something that can be checked and shown true or false	“The ceasefire was signed on 3 March.”
Opinion	A personal view that cannot be proved	“The peace deal is a disgrace.”
Generalisation	A broad statement applied to a whole group from limited cases	“Young men always start these conflicts.”
Prediction	A statement about the future	“Without peacekeepers, fighting will restart within a year.”
Value	A belief about what is important or right	“Every human life matters more than any border.”
Bias	Presenting one side unfairly or leaving out the other	A report on a clash that quotes only one side
Vested interest	The writer gains if readers accept the view	A weapons company arguing that higher defence spending prevents war

Judging reliability. For any source, ask:

• Who wrote it, and what expertise do they have? A doctor working in a conflict zone can speak with authority about injuries, less about military strategy.
• Do they gain from the conclusion? Vested interest is a reason to check, not a reason to reject.
• How was the evidence gathered? Sample size, who was asked, and whether answers were self-reported.
• Is it current? Conflicts change quickly; an old report may no longer describe the situation.
• Is it supported by other sources? Agreement between independent sources raises confidence.

A real source to practise on. The Global Peace Index, published by the Institute for Economics and Peace, ranks countries using a set of indicators grouped into three areas: societal safety and security, ongoing domestic and international conflict, and militarisation. It is useful because it uses the same method across many countries. But a single ranking hides choices: which indicators to include, how to weight them, and how reliable the data are in countries where reporting is difficult. That is exactly the kind of evaluation the syllabus wants.

Courses of action and their effects

The syllabus aims ask you to suggest “possible evidence-based courses of action”, and Question 4 of the Written Exam asks candidates to “assess actions in response to the global issue”. These real examples show actions at different levels. Use them as models of how to evaluate, not as facts to memorise.

Global: international treaties. The Mine Ban Treaty, often called the Ottawa Treaty, was agreed in 1997 and bans anti-personnel landmines for the states that join it.

• Strength: creates a shared rule and pressure on states to clear mines.
• Limitation: it binds only the states that sign up, and some major military powers have not joined.

Global: peacekeeping. The United Nations sends peacekeeping missions, with the consent of the main parties, to help keep ceasefires.

• Strength: neutral forces can reduce the chance of fighting restarting.
• Limitation: missions depend on states volunteering troops and funding, and on the consent and cooperation of the sides.

National: peace agreements. The Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement of 1998 set up shared government in Northern Ireland after decades of violence.

• Strength: it gave all main groups a peaceful political route.
• Limitation: shared institutions can stall when the parties disagree, and people still debate parts of the agreement.

National: truth commissions. South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, heard testimony about human rights abuses committed under apartheid.

• Strength: victims were heard publicly and a record was created.
• Limitation: some victims felt that amnesty for those who told the truth denied them justice.

Local: peer mediation. Many schools train students to help classmates settle disputes.

• Strength: cheap, and students may listen to peers more readily than to adults.
• Limitation: it is unsuitable for serious violence or bullying where one side holds much more power.

When you assess an action, use the same criteria every time: effectiveness (does it reduce conflict?), feasibility (cost, time, who must agree), acceptability (will all sides accept it?), sustainability (will the effect last?) and unintended consequences.

Worked example: an exam-style paragraph

Imagine a source in which a charity that runs a community dialogue programme in a fictional town reports that “trust between the two communities rose sharply after our programme”. An answer evaluating this evidence might read:

The charity’s claim is supported by its own survey, which shows trust rising after the programme (knowledge of the evidence). However, the charity runs the programme and may need good results to keep its funding, so it has a vested interest in reporting success (application to this source). This matters because the survey was carried out by the same people who delivered the sessions, so respondents may have given the answers they thought the organisers wanted (analysis). The evidence is therefore weaker than it first looks. It would be stronger if an independent body repeated the survey with residents who did not attend, so the results could be compared (evaluation and a suggested test).

The last sentence also suggests a way to test the claim, a skill the syllabus describes for Question 2.

Individual Report ideas

Component 2 requires a global issue that divides opinion and a global research question that becomes your title. It must let you explore local and/or national and global perspectives, causes and consequences, and courses of action, and end with one proposed course of action and your own reflective view.

Possible questions (check feasibility with your teacher, who will confirm what is suitable):

• Should countries stop selling weapons to states involved in armed conflict?
• Do truth commissions do more than criminal trials to help societies recover after conflict?
• Should international peacekeepers be allowed to use force to protect civilians?
• Should national service be compulsory for young people?

Weak titles to avoid: “Is war bad?” (no real disagreement), “The history of the United Nations” (description, not an issue), or a title that asks you to decide who was right in a named war. Keep your analysis fair to every perspective. The Individual Report guide and Individual Report practice explain structure and referencing.

Team Project ideas

Component 3 needs a local issue. Conflict and peace works well because many schools and communities have small-scale conflicts that a team can act on safely.

• Issue: arguments between year groups over use of shared spaces. Action: design and run a rota agreed through a student forum. Measure success: count reported incidents before and after.
• Issue: online arguments between students spilling into school. Action: run a workshop on calming disputes online. Measure success: a short before-and-after questionnaire.
• Issue: students do not know how to settle disagreements. Action: create and deliver a peer-mediation lesson for younger students. Measure success: feedback forms and teacher observation.

Keep projects safe. Do not try to intervene in serious violence; that is for adults and professionals. Your team needs an Explanation of Research and Planning (300-400 words), Evidence of Action, and each member writes a Reflective Paper (750-1000 words). See the Team Project guide and Team Project revision notes.

Common errors

• Writing what you know about a war instead of analysing the source in front of you. Prior knowledge is not assessed.
• Treating “conflict” as only war. Local disputes count and are often better for the Team Project.
• Naming a perspective (“the government’s view”) without explaining why that group holds it.
• Calling a source “biased” with no reason. Say what is left out or who gains.
• Rejecting a source just because of a vested interest.
• Listing causes without linking them to consequences.
• Proposing an action with no assessment of feasibility or who must agree.
• Giving your own verdict on a real, contested conflict instead of weighing perspectives fairly.

Where to go next

• Written Exam guide
• Global Perspectives revision notes
• Written Exam practice questions
• Individual Report revision notes
• Related topic: Political power and action

Official syllabus

This guide is based on the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives (0457) syllabus for examination in 2025, 2026 and 2027, Version 2 (published April 2025), sections 2, 3 and 4. Your teacher will confirm how your school organises the topics and components.