World Peace Index 2012Assessing the State of Peace in the Nations of the World

2012

World Peace ForumSeoul, Republic of Korea

World Peace Forum, Seoul, Korea• Research CommitteeActing Director Seol Dong-Hoon(Chonbuk National University) dhseol@gmail.comResearchers Kim Byeong-Jo (Korea NationalDefenseUniversity) bjkk2181@daum.net

Lee Hyun-Song (HankukUniversityofForeignStudies) hyunslee1@hanmail.netResearchConsultant Lee Sang-Hyun (SejongInstitute) leesh65@gmail.comResearch Assistant Ko Jae-Hun (ChonbukNationalUniversity) indmyrule@naver.com

• Board Members of World Peace ForumChairman Kim Jin-Hyun (former Ministerof Science and Technology, &former

President of the Universityof Seoul) jinhkim@kita.net, jinhkim36@naver.com

Board Members Kim Yersu (ProfessoratGraduateInstituteofPeaceStudiesatKyungheeUniversity,&formerSecretary-General of theKoreanNationalCommissionforUNESCO)

Han Sung-Joo (Emeritus Professor of Korea University, &formerMinisterof ForeignAffairs)

Park Kyung-Seo (EndowedChair Professor at EwhaWomansUniversity, &former StandingCommissionerof theNational HumanRightsCommissionof Korea)

Lee Boo-Young (former Memberof the National Assembly)Lee Hae-Chan (Memberof the National Assembly, & former Prime

Ministerof Korea)Chung Mong-Joon(Memberof the National Assembly)

WorldPeace Index 2012: Assessing the State of Peace in the Nations of the World

Date of Issue October 1, 2012Authors Seol Dong-Hoon, Kim Byeong-Jo, and Lee Hyun-Song

Publisher World Peace ForumSuseo Tower #1109, 725Suseo-dong, Gangnam-gu,Seoul 135-757, Republic of KoreaE-mail: worldpeaceindex@gmail.comURL: http://www.worldpeaceindex.orgTel: +82-2-3703-9290 Fax: +82-2-3703-9216

PrintingService OK Joy Publishing CompanyTel: +82-31-889-4451 Fax: +82-31-889-4452

Copyright ⓒ World Peace Forum, 2012.All rights reserved.Printed in the Republic of Korea.

ISBN: 978-89-965870-5-7 93330

iii

Contents

Preface ······································································································· xiii

Part 1: Analysis ···························································································· 1

Ⅰ. Research Objective ················································································· 3

Ⅱ. The Significance of World Peace Index ·············································· 71. The Concept of Peace ······································································· 72. Features of the World Peace Index 2012 ······································· 93. Implication and Structure of World Peace Index ························ 12

1) Implication of World Peace Index ············································ 122) Unit and Level of Analysis ······················································· 133) Dimensions of Peace ·································································· 134) Data Resource and Research Method of World Peace Index 15

Ⅲ. Methodology: Measurement and Data Sources ································· 171. Political Dimension ········································································· 18

1) A1. Historical Experiences of Domestic Political Conflict ······· 182) A2. Democracy and Capacity of the State ······························· 203) A3. Current Domestic Political Conflict ···································· 22

2. Military-diplomatic Dimension ······················································· 231) B1. Historical Experiences of International Conflict ················ 232) B2. Degree of Militarizaition ······················································ 283) B3. Current International Conflict ············································· 29

3. Socio-economic Dimension ······························································ 311) C1. Social Safety and Stability ··················································· 312) C2. Social Exclusion and Inequality ·········································· 333) C3. Quality of Life ····································································· 34

4. Calculation of World Peace Index ················································· 35

iv

Ⅳ. Analyses of World Peace Index 2012 ················································ 371. World Peace in 2011 ······································································· 37

1) The Era of Global Uncertainty ·················································· 372) The Rise of China and U.S. Pivot to Asia-Pacific ·················· 393) Euro Zone Crisis and Global Economic Downturn ················ 444) Prospects for Korean Peninsula Situations ······························· 48

2. General Characteristics of World Peace Index 2012 ···················· 521) Overview of World Peace Index 2012 ····································· 522) World Peace in Politics, Military-Diplomacy, and Socio-Economy ·· · 533) Correlation between All-items Index and Sub-category Peace Index ·· 544) Comparison of Regional Peace ················································· 575) Comparison of Peace by Income ·············································· 60

3. Analysis of WPI by Country ························································· 621) World Peace and World Peace Index ······································ 622) Established Peace Country ························································· 673) Retarded Peace Country ···························································· 684) Regional Power Countries: U.S., China, Russia, India and Brazil ···· 695) Two Koreas: South and North ·················································· 716) Rising and Falling Countries in World Peace Index 2012 ····· 72

4. Analyses of World Peace Index by Category and Implications ·· 751) Political Peace ············································································· 752) Military-diplomatic Peace ··························································· 813) Socio-economic Peace ································································· 86

Ⅴ. Conclusion and Implications ······························································ 95

References ·································································································· 101

Part 2: Statistical Tables ·········································································· 103

World Peace Index 2012 ··································································· 105

v

World Peace Index, 2001-2012 ·························································· 110Ranks of World Peace Index 2001-2012 ·········································· 115Political Peace Index 2001-2012 ························································ 119Military-diplomatic Peace Index 2001-2012 ······································ 124Socio-economic Peace Index 2001-2012 ············································ 129

Part 3: Country Reports ·········································································· 135

Albania ································································································ 137Algeria ································································································· 138Angola ································································································· 139Argentina ···························································································· 140Armenia ······························································································ 141Australia ······························································································ 142Austria ································································································ 143Azerbaijan ··························································································· 144Bahamas ······························································································ 145Bahrain ································································································ 146Bangladesh ·························································································· 147Belarus ································································································ 148Belgium ······························································································· 149Bolivia ································································································· 150Botswana ····························································································· 151Brazil ··································································································· 152Bulgaria ······························································································· 153Burkina Faso ······················································································· 154Burundi ······························································································· 155Cambodia ···························································································· 156Cameroon ···························································································· 157Canada ································································································ 158Central African Republic ··································································· 159

vi

Chad ···································································································· 160Chile ···································································································· 161China ··································································································· 162Colombia ····························································································· 163Congo, Democratic Republic of the ················································· 164Costa Rica ··························································································· 165Croatia ································································································· 166Cuba ···································································································· 167Czech Republic ··················································································· 168Denmark ····························································································· 169Dominican Republic ··········································································· 170Ecuador ······························································································· 171Egypt ··································································································· 172El Salvador ························································································· 173Estonia ································································································· 174Ethiopia ······························································································· 175Fiji ······································································································· 176Finland ································································································ 177France ·································································································· 178Gabon ·································································································· 179Gambia ································································································ 180Georgia ································································································ 181Germany ····························································································· 182Ghana ·································································································· 183Greece ································································································· 184Guatemala ··························································································· 185Guinea ································································································· 186Honduras ···························································································· 187Hungary ······························································································ 188Iceland ································································································· 189India ···································································································· 190Indonesia ····························································································· 191

vii

Iran ······································································································ 192Iraq ······································································································ 193Ireland ································································································· 194Israel ···································································································· 195Italy ····································································································· 196Jamaica ································································································ 197Japan ··································································································· 198Jordan ·································································································· 199Kazakhstan ·························································································· 200Kenya ·································································································· 201Korea, DPR ························································································· 202Korea, Republic of ············································································· 203Kuwait ································································································· 204Kyrgyzstan ·························································································· 205Laos ····································································································· 206Latvia ·································································································· 207Lebanon ······························································································ 208Libya ··································································································· 209Lithuania ····························································································· 210Luxemburg ·························································································· 211Madagascar ························································································· 212Malawi ································································································ 213Malaysia ······························································································ 214Mali ····································································································· 215Malta ··································································································· 216Mauritania ··························································································· 217Mauritius ····························································································· 218Mexico ································································································· 219Moldova ······························································································ 220Mongolia ····························································································· 221Morocco ······························································································ 222Mozambique ······················································································· 223

viii

Myanmar ····························································································· 224Namibia ······························································································ 225Nepal ··································································································· 226Netherlands ························································································· 227New Zealand ······················································································ 228Nicaragua ···························································································· 229Niger ··································································································· 230Nigeria ································································································ 231Norway ······························································································· 232Oman ·································································································· 233Pakistan ······························································································· 234Panama ································································································ 235Papua New Guinea ··········································································· 236Paraguay ····························································································· 237Peru ····································································································· 238Philippines ·························································································· 239Poland ································································································· 240Portugal ······························································································· 241Qatar ··································································································· 242Romania ······························································································ 243Russia ·································································································· 244Rwanda ······························································································· 245Saudi Arabia ······················································································· 246Senegal ································································································ 247Sierra Leone ························································································ 248Singapore ···························································································· 249Slovakia ······························································································· 250Slovenia ······························································································· 251South Africa ······················································································· 252South Sudan ······················································································· 253Spain ··································································································· 254Sri Lanka ···························································································· 255

ix

Sudan ·································································································· 256Sweden ································································································ 257Switzerland ························································································· 258Syria ···································································································· 259Taiwan ································································································ 260Tajikistan ····························································································· 261Tanzania ······························································································ 262Thailand ······························································································ 263Togo ···································································································· 264Trinidad and Tobago ········································································· 265Tunisia ································································································ 266Turkey ································································································· 267Uganda ································································································ 268Ukraine ······························································································· 269United Arab Emirates ········································································ 270United Kingdom ················································································ 271United States ······················································································ 272Uruguay ······························································································ 273Uzbekistan ·························································································· 274Venezuela ···························································································· 275Vietnam ······························································································· 276Yemen ································································································· 277Zambia ································································································ 278Zimbabwe ··························································································· 279

Part 4: Country Group Reports ······························································ 281

World ·································································································· 283America and the Caribbean ······························································ 284Europe ································································································· 285Sub-Saharan Africa ············································································· 286

x

Arab Countries ··················································································· 287Asia, the Pacific and Oceania ··························································· 288Very Small Population ······································································ 289Small Population ················································································ 290Medium Population ··········································································· 291Large Population ················································································ 292Very Large Population ······································································ 293High-income ······················································································· 294Mid-income ························································································· 295Low-income ························································································ 296G7 ········································································································ 297G20 ······································································································ 298OECD ·································································································· 299EU ······································································································· 300BRICs ·································································································· 301ASEAN ································································································ 302

xi

Illustrations

Figures

Figure 2.1. Two Different Perspectives on Conflict and Peace ············· 12Figure 4.1. World Peace Index 2001-2012 ················································ 53Figure 4.2. Political, Military-Diplomatic, and Socio-Economic PI ········ 54Figure 4.3. Correlation between WPI and PPI 2012 ······························· 55Figure 4.4. Correlation between WPI and MPI 2012 ····························· 56Figure 4.5. Correlation between WPI and SPI 2012 ······························· 56Figure 4.6. WPI by Region 2001-2012 ······················································ 58Figure 4.7. Sub-indices of WPI by Region 2012 ····································· 58Figure 4.8. WPI by Income Group 2001-2012 ········································· 61Figure 4.9. Sub-indices of WPI by Income Group 2012 ························ 61Figure 4.10. WPI of South and North Korea 2001-2012 ························ 71Figure 4.11. Political PI of the South and North Koreas 2001-2012 ····· 80Figure 4.12. Military-diplomatic PI by Major Groups 2001-2012 ··········· 83Figure 4.13. Military-diplomatic PI by Income Group 2001-2012 ·········· 83Figure 4.14. Military-diplomatic PI by Region 2001-2012 ······················· 84Figure 4.15. Military-diplomatic PI of South and North Koreas 2001-2012 ···· 85Figure 4.16. Socio-economic Peace Index 2001-2012 ······························· 86Figure 4.17. High Performers in Socio-economic PI 2001-2012 ·············· 87Figure 4.18. Low Performers in Socio-economic PI 2001-2012 ·············· 87Figure 4.19. Socio-economic PI by Region 2001-2012 ····························· 89Figure 4.20. Socio-economic PI by Income 2001-2012 ····························· 89Figure 4.21. Socio-economic peace of Major countries 2001-2012 ·········· 91Figure 4.22. Composition of Socio-economic PI of Major countries 2012 ······· 91Figure 4.23. Socio-economic Peace of South Korea 2001-2012 ··············· 93Figure 4.24. Composition of Socio-economic PI of South Korea 2001-2012 ···· 93Figure 4.25. Socio-economic PI of South and North Koreas 2001-2012 ·· 94

xii

Tables

Table 2.1 Dimensions and Components of WPI ····································· 14Table 3.1 Status of Nation According to National Power ····················· 26Table 4.1. Inter-Korean Denuclearization Talks and U.S.-North Korea High Level Talks in 2011 · · 50Table 4.2. Scores and Ranks of WPI 2001-2012 ······································ 63Table 4.3. Countries with Significant Change in WPI 2011-2012 ·········· 73Table 4.4. Political PI by Region 2001-2012 ············································ 75Table 4.5. Political PI by Income Group 2001-2012 ································ 76Table 4.6. Top and Bottom 30 Countries in Political PI by Region 2012 ······ 78Table 4.7. Military-diplomatic PI by Region 2001-2012 ·························· 81Table 4.8. Military-diplomatic PI by Income Group 2001-2012 ············· 81

Preface

The overall condition of world peace in 2011 has been on a slightly downward path compared to the previous year. The findings of World Peace Index 2012 show that the level of peace has dropped a little by 0.2 point from last year — which had a big fall from 2010 — scoring 70.1. Since the very first peace index calculation in 2000, this is the second lowest-rated peace level after the lowest of 69.2 in 2004. Various factors seems to have influenced this low score, such as: uncertain future of European economic crisis, the political storm in the Middle East caused by the “Arab Spring (also known as the Arab Revolution)” uprisings and its reactionary movements, a gigantic earthquake and tsunami off the Pacific coast of Japan which led to Fukushima nuclear disaster, the death of leader Kim Jong-il in North Korea, etc.

Especially, those military power and highly populated countries like USA, China, Russia, and India have been unable to play a leading role in peace-making and rather remained low in the Peace Index ranking. On the other hand, South Korea has moved up 20 notches in the Peace Index ranking from 68 to 48 as its socio-economic peace level has increased enough to enter the top-ranking along with the improved military-diplomatic peace level. The continuous decrease in the level of the world peace implies insecurity and risks in human society. And this, in reverse, increases the importance and need of “Peace Index,” a tool which can objectively analyze and examine the current condition of the age of uncertainty.

Since 2001, World Peace Forum has continually developed and presented peace indices that can assess the levels of world peace more objectively and systematically. By proposing the peace condition of as many countries as possible, we hope to establish a warning system of

xiv

world peace, and motivate the members of a global village to make effort to improve peace condition of their country as well as all parts of the world.

World Peace Index 2012 contains the peace index of 143 countries from 2001 to 2012. Unlike the previous reports until 2010, the 2011 report has drastically expanded its coverage from 76 to 142 countries, and this 2012 report has brought the total number of countries up to 143 countries by adding a newly-independent one, South Sudan. It has not only reviewed all the previous data collected over the past twelve years, but also enriched the quality of data by analyzing serial changes of the data over time. In addition to making suggestions on how the peace condition of each country changes over time, interpretation of those changes is also given along with the results. We believe that this report would be an innovative research to help scholars who study the standards of observing world peace and participate in measuring computation of index in the field of world peace assessment.

What we would like to highlight in this twelfth annual report is that there are two groups of countries according the past research results over twelve years: (1) countries that are constantly ranked above the average levels of peace index, and (2) countries that are constantly ranked below the average level of peace index. This phenomenon can be described as “polarization of peace.”

In fact, certain structures and patterns can be found when analyzing the past research results of World Peace Forum’s World Peace Index by political-diplomacy, socio-economics, region, population composition, income, and education levels. Those countries with (1) small population; (2) homogeneousness in religion, language, and ethnicity; (3) high education and income level; (4) safe and stable neighboring areas; (5) democracy taken root tend to score relatively higher level of peace continuously. This gives us a lesson that each country should make the domestic effort to provide a certain level of quality education, improve income level, and establish democratic communities where “citizens”

xv

and civil liberties exist while establishing collective, cooperative structure of peacetime security with other countries internationally.

The years between 2011 and 2013 is a very fluid and transitional period in which political power shift and changes are taking new direction in the midst of the continuous global financial and economic crisis. The world is asking for "peaceful and orderly global village" that requires much stronger cooperation, unity, and concurrence. However, it is ironical to see how leadership of each country, which should be responsible for shaping the framework for orderly society and execute these orders, is becoming more introversive and cohesive regionally and religiously. How much time and cost we would need to resolve these conflicts and untangle the knots of contradictions, and in which direction the conflicts will be settled would be the key factors in determining peace condition of the twenty-first century.

Nevertheless, we have to remember that there are many more countries with much worse peace condition than the lowest ranked country in the peace index among 143 countries — Sudan. Despite of our effort to improve the assessment methods of the world peace index, it is regrettable that we were unable to assess the peace index for some of the "so-called failed countries" like Afghanistan, Somalia, and Palestine where reliable statistical data are unavailable.

I would like to extend my gratitude to the research team for their efforts and hope that World Peace Index 2012 will serve as valuable data to those who love peace and hope for a more peaceful world.

October 1, 2012

Kim Jin-HyunChairman of World Peace Forum

Part 1

Analysis

3

Ⅰ. Research Objective

The information revolution and the demise of the socialist states in the late 20th century gave mankind hope that world peace would finally be accomplished in the twenty-first century. However, such hope almost immediately began to fade away as the world entered the twenty-first century.

Tragedy of the 9/11 in 2001, the ensuing US-Afghanistan war, US-Iraq war, terrorist attacks by the separatist movement of the Russian ethnic minorities, Israel-Palestinian conflicts, unceasing religious and ethnic conflicts in Africa, Middle East and India, and many others have not only resulted in loss of countless lives, but also draped a shadow of anxiety inside the minds of people all over the world.

Moreover, natural disasters are continuing. The major examples are the earthquakes that hit El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Peru in 2001 and hit again in China, Turkey, Japan in 2003. And in December of 2004 a 9.0 scale earthquake hit again deep within the Sunda Trench off the Aceh Province of Sumatra in Indonesia causing the catastrophic Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004. As a result, the people and peace levels of the countries around the Indian Ocean such as Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka suffered greatly. When Tibet was hit by a massive earthquake of 8.0 magnitude on May 12, 2008, approximately 70,000 people were killed and many were injured or missing. A 7.0 magnitude earthquake in Haiti killed more than 220,000 and brought injuries to 300,000 people. A mega earthquake of 9.0 magnitude off the Pacific coast of Tohoku followed by tsunami on March 11, 2011 swept away the eastern Pacific coast of Japan, creating 470,000 refugees among whom 340,000 are still living in refugee camps even after a year and a half. The disaster also destroyed Fukushima nuclear power station and resulting a large scale nuclear accident. This has been now further proceeding to shutting down all

4

fifty nuclear reactors in Japan.Since the days of Enlightenment, the human race has sought an

improvement in their daily lives through an awakening of reason. In fact, mankind has accomplished quality progress in economic and cultural livelihoods through the scientific advances and technological breakthroughs in the 19th and the 20th centuries. At the same time, however, the 20th century was also an era of violence tainted by revolutions and wars. The twenty-first century, which has already been marked by 9/11 and Indian Ocean tsunami, does not offer mankind much optimism.

The 2008 financial crisis continues to expand and reverberate loudly worldwide through European financial and economic crisis of 2010-2011. This financial and economic crisis again has rippled social, political effects with a people-powered movement called “Occupy Wall Street” against financial greed and corruption, raising the possibility of the middle class of the twenty-first century rebelling against the system. Such revolutionary wave of demonstration and protests of the middle class against the existing system is also dramatically expressed in the “Arab Spring,” which started from Tunisia and overthrew dictatorship governments in Egypt and Libya. Furthermore, emergence of civil society and waves of democratization throughout the world, including Africa, South America and the most densely populated countries like China, India, and Russia, gives hope to advancement of human societies.

For the twenty-first century to be a time of hope where society enjoys peace and where individuals’ well-beings are valued, there must be a progress from the past paradigm of “national prosperity with strong military power” to a new paradigm of “peace.” In other words, the global community of the twenty-first century must design a new paradigm of civilization that centers on new values.

World peace is a necessary precondition to a progress based on trust and peaceful coexistence in today’s information society, in which the world is being brought closer together than ever before. It is now time

5

for mankind to be engaged with peace and reconciliation in every dimension of their lives. In other words, the most important task of mankind in the twenty-first century is to construct a new society strongly supported by trust and peace, not by conflict, confrontation, violence or war.

Koreans have a unique history where, in spite of having suffered greatly from countless foreign invasions for the past thousands of years, they have never initiated an attack or a war. Just in the twentieth century alone, Korea suffered from foreign invasion and war. Not only did Korea fell a victim to the Japanese colonial rule, but in the midst of the Cold War, it was also unwillingly divided into two separate countries. Korea still remains the only nation that has not been able to reunify even in the twenty-first century. Therefore, Koreans’ desire for peace is as ardent as that of any other nations in the world.

A peaceful coexistence of South and North Koreas and unification in the future are prerequisite to not only achieving peace in the Korean peninsula and in Northeast Asia, but also achieving world peace. In order for the two Koreas to reunite, a peace system of reconciliation and peaceful coexistence must be firmly established first. As the first step to establishing a peace system, a culture of peace must be spread. The Koreans’ wish for peace will also arouse sympathy from the people all over the world, and this in turn, will serve as a momentum to promote world peace.

Against this backdrop, the World Peace Forum (WPF) initiated a research project named World Peace Index (WPI), started to assess the situation in Korea and sought to invite many other states around the world to make efforts to spread the culture of peace and harmony. There have been a great deal of efforts to produce various indices on many aspects of human life. For instance, numerous institutions have developed and published social index systems, human development index, scarcity index, happiness index, political freedom index, and

6

even transparency index (corruption index). However, these indices are not satisfactory. These are only based on development-centered values and measure partial values rather than assess human life in general. So, with the beginning of the twenty-first century, the WPF decided to suggest a culture of peace and harmony as humanity’s most important value. And as part of the effort to enhance world peace, the WPF is assessing and releasing the World Peace Index.

There is much significance in the world’s only divided nation developing and publishing the WPI. Korea is certainly better-positioned to call for a world peace culture movement, and this will be widely and particularly well recognized by the people around the world because Korea itself was a victim of the ‘wealthy nation with strong military power’ paradigm. Nevertheless, it managed to remain as a peace-loving state. This does not mean that Korea is solely entitled to a privilege in the peace movement. Peace movement is neither a movement of domination and exclusion nor a movement to protect vested interests in the name of peace. The WPF hopes that its peace movement to measure the WPI would play a vital role in making a moral progress into a new era in which peace and happiness will be respected and preserved.

7

Ⅱ. The Significance of World Peace Index

1. The Concept of Peace

The conceptual meaning of peace defies simplification. One distinctive feature is revealed in the difference of the applicable realms of the two terms, peace and war. The most common way of defining peace is to contrast peace with war or, more broadly, with different forms of social conflicts. In fact, different views of peace reflect differences in the emphasis on the type of social conflict with which peace is contrasted, and this in turn has also changed over time according to the prevailing international environment.

In the Cold War era, the ‘mainstream’ peace studies of the North America defined peace as the opposite of war and dealt primarily with deterring war, resolving international conflict, preventing arms proliferation and arms reduction. In Korea, the topics that were most frequently covered were the possibility of the inter-Korea war recurring and the analysis of the international environment surrounding the divided state.

However, ever since the Cold War system has collapsed, peace studies has extended to embrace not only the conventional subjects of war and national security but also various other sectors including political․military and socio-economic conditions. To be more specific, peace studies has branched out into three different approaches: (1) a focus on reduction, prevention and resolution of societal conflicts through a study of inter-group conflicts; (2) a focus on resolving conflicts of clashing economic interests between the working class and the capitalist class; and (3) a focus on peace education whose goal is to nurture peace-loving consciousness in people.

Such diversity in the usage of the terminology and the area of study

8

shows that there exists no universally-agreed upon definition of peace. The concept of peace differs depending upon whether it is negatively defined or whether it is positively defined. Negative peace refers to ‘a state where there is no war.’ In other words, it is achieved when inter-state war does not exist and when sovereignty is strictly respected to disallow any kind of intervention. According to this view, the world is a peaceful place as long as there are no armed conflicts between states and intervening into other states’ affairs is rendered impossible by the immense height of the wall, the sovereignty of individual states.

Meanwhile, positive peace indicates to a state where a quality life is guaranteed and the values of liberty equality justice environmental protection prosperity well-respected. The adjective ‘positive’ is derived from the fact that various structural and institutional violence that exist within individual states and the world are addressed. This concept of peace does not stop at absence of war or non-intervention but seeks to eliminate the fundamental causes of conflict, confrontation, and violence for true peace to be possible.

Positive peace is not complacent with a superficial state of calmness imposed by force, and strives for a state where structural and institutional violence is uprooted from all sectors of politico-military and socio-economics. Admittedly, defining a precise definition of positive peace is not an easy task. Nonetheless, it is still feasible to assess the core elements of positive peace by singling out the factors associated with structural and institutional violence. A society of positive peace is one where authoritarianism, unfair economic order and violent culture are cleared; it is one where democracy is established, human rights is guaranteed, and justice is realized.

Today’s global village is a community. And therefore, the concept of positive peace does not limit its area of interest to achieving peace in a few states. Problems such as nuclear crisis and deterioration of the eco-system that the human race is faced with are understood to be

9

tasks that may be accomplished only when the mankind joins its efforts under the unifying banner of world peace.

This research intends to overcome the barriers of negative peace and move onto positive peace. Peace is defined as follows: “a state in which members of the human race whose survival and progress are not threatened by exercise of violence (ongoing or possibility thereof) from other members or other groups.” To put it simply, peace is achieved when a nation-state enjoys security and an individual enjoys safety.

And to be more illustrative, a nation-state is at peace when it is not involved in conflictual situation with other nation-states. Domestically, under the auspices of a non-oppressive governing regime, conflicts between and among different groups are resolved in a manner that does not resort to violence. Individual citizens are not impeded from enjoying a quality of life and pursue his or her own life chances.

2. Features of the World Peace Index 2012

World Peace Index 2012 is the twelfth annual report published by the World Peace Forum. The World Peace Forum published the very first report, World Culture of Peace Index 2000, in December 2000. From the following year, they changed the title the report to World Peace Index and continued to publish annually. Meanwhile, starting with World Peace Index 2004, the year added to the title of the report has been changed to year of publication instead of year of data collection, and designated January 1 of that year as a fiducial time for data collection of each year. For example, World Peace Index 2011 assesses the level of world peace by January 1, 2012 00:00 fiducially, but it can also be interpreted as the state of world peace in 2011; and World Peace Index 2012 includes all the data for twelve years from 2001 to 2012.

‘Culture of peace’ is a catch phrase officially adopted by the United

10

Nations and used in the peace movement actively promoted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. As our research shares the commitment to the culture of peace, in which people foster peace and peace-loving attitude in their behavior and institutions, we have therefore named the product of our research World Culture of Peace Index (WCPI).

And yet, because the UN’s movement exclusively focuses on ‘culture’ and our research focuses on ‘peace,’ both the experts, after having read the report of 2000, and the researchers reached a consensus that it was unnatural for the report to be named World Culture of Peace Index.

Therefore, from 2001 onward, the report has been newly titled World Peace Index. Nevertheless, aside from several conceptual and methodological modifications, World Peace Index reports since 2001 are basically the same as World Culture of Peace Index 2000.

Until 2010, our World Peace Index covered merely 76 countries. However, in this 2012 report, we have not only expanded its analysis to 143 countries, but also reorganized and included all the previous data of twelve years from 2001 to 2012. As we deduced that we have already obtained stability of the index and data resources through repeated processes of assessing the state of world peace for eleven times over the past eleven years, in the 2011 report, our researchers have refined our World Peace Index and its concept based on the past reports.

Insignificant elements in the existing Index were deleted decisively, and the quality of data was enriched by analyzing serial changes of the data over time. As a result, in the 2011 report, we were able to successfully assess the peace index of 66 countries which were excluded in the previous reports until 2010 due to data problems. The 2001-2009 data targeted on 140 countries excluding Burkina Faso and Madagascar while the 2010-2011 data targets on 142 countries including the two omitted countries in the previous data set.

11

Burkina Faso and Madagascar, which were excluded until the 2010 report, were added totaling the number of countries to 142. In World Peace Index 2012, the number of countries increased to 143 as a newly-independent South Sudan was added. Just like the previous reports, this 2012 report also contains tables and graphs in order to enable us to (1) compare the levels of peace conditions among countries by year, and (2) analyze each individual country's level of peace condition between 2001 and 2012 diachronically. In this sense, the World Peace Index 2012 is expected to achieve qualitative improvement in obtaining more stable and reliable indices. We believe that it would be a ground-breaking research to help scholars around the world who participate in setting up observation standards for world peace, computing and measuring world peace indices.

Nevertheless, we have to remember that there are many more countries with much worse peace condition than Sudan — the lowest ranked country in the peace index among 143 countries. Despite of our effort to improve the assessment methods of the world peace index, we were unable to assess the peace index for countries like Afghanistan, Somalia, Palestine where reliable statistical data are unavailable.

The world peace index will continue to be composed and published every year. We expect as the results of the research are accumulated, they will grow into an important, useful database to enable not only comparison of different states but also an analysis of the same state’s peace level change over time. In doing so, this project can contribute to build the world peace by means of scientific study. The objectives of this project are as follows:

l To spread the paradigm of peace as a universal value in the twenty-first century,

l To enhance the global citizens’ peace awareness through illustrating the state of peace of a certain nation at a certain point in time,

12

l To provide an early-warning signal to the non-peace state of a certain nation,

l To stimulate a world-wide peace movement; andl To search for a way to promote peace.

3. Implication and Structure of World Peace Index

1) Implication of World Peace Index

World Peace Index is a composite measure that is calculated by assigning appropriate weights to each related elements. In measuring the peace index, this study adopts a continuum approach to scoring peace, allowing for the peace score to fall anywhere on this continuous spectrum as shown in Figure 2.1.

Peace

Peace

Gray Area

Conflict

Conflict

A. Discrete Perspective B. Continuum Perspective

Figure 2.1. Two Different Perspectives on Conflict and Peace

13

The discrete approach views peace negatively as the absence of conflict which, in turn, is rather narrowly conceived in terms of the absence of war. But if one adopts a wider view of peace encompassing military, political, social, and economic factors, the discrete approach is no longer tenable. For it is practically impossible to find a society that is devoid of any political, social, and/or economic conflict. Instead, societies in the world are seen to be in a state that is more or less peaceful.

2) Unit and Level of Analysis

The unit of analysis and observation in this project is national societies or societies based on nation-states. While peace can be studied at different levels such as individual, family, community, and organization, and their respective peace have differences and these differences do matter, we primarily focused on the differences of peace that exist in different states.1) Therefore, we conceptualize world peace index of a national society in a particular period of time as “the level of peace that the member individuals of the enjoy on average.”

The primary level of analysis is also at the national level, although national level observations allow aggregation at the global and/or regional level. In calculating the world peace index and the regional peace index, we assumed that each nation-state was neither more nor less important than other states as a member of the global village, and therefore, gave equal weights to each individual states.

3) Dimensions of Peace

l Negative Peace and Positive Peace: This project starts from the

1) This is partly related to the lack of data. Data on other agents including individuals and groups are only available in a few comparative studies and therefore are not appropriate to be utilized in calculating world peace index.

14

perspective of negative peace, and extends to that of positive peace so as to embrace the elements of peace from both perspectives.

l Peace at Different Levels of the Society: (1) Macro/Societal Level: Security would be the central element of peace. (2) Micro/Individual Level: Safety of Individuals would constitute the core of peace.

A Political Dimension B Military-diplomatic Dimension

C Socio-economic Dimension

A1 Historical Experiences of Domestic Political Conflict

B1 Historical Experiences of International Conflict

C1 Social Safety and Stability

A11 Civil Wars B11 War Experience C11 Ecological and Social Safety

A12 Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or Riots

B12 Colonial Experience and State Formation

C12 Socio-economic Stability

B13 Geopolitical ConditionsA2 Democracy and

Capacity of the StateB2 Degree of

MilitarizaitionC2 Social Exclusion and

InequalityA21 Degree of

DemocratizationB21 Military Expenditure C21 Poverty

A22 Human Rights Protection

B22 Armed Forces C22 Social Inequality

A23 Political Transparency B23 International Treaties against Weapons of Mass Destruction and Its Experiments

A3 Ongoing or Current Domestic Political Conflict

B3 Ongoing or Current International Conflict

C3 Quality of Life

A31 Civil Wars B31 All-out Wars: Occurrence and Location

C31 Degree of Life Quality

A32 Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or Riots

B32 Use of Force Other than Wars, or Acts of Violence

A33 Political Settlements or Policies to Resolve Domestic Conflicts

B33 Peace Enhancing Events or Measures

Table 2.1 Dimensions and Components of WPI

15

l Structure and Change in Peace Level: World Peace Index contains both structural and behavioral elements.

l Peace according to Different Social Dimensions: World Peace Index divides peace broadly into the political, military-diplomatic, and socio-economic dimensions. Political and military-diplomatic peace means freedom from fear and absence of violence and conflict. Socio-economic peace means freedom from want and guarantee of quality of life, security and safety (See Table 2.1).

4) Data Resource and Research Method of World Peace Index

Historical incidents span over a period of sixty-seven years from 1945 to 2011 were analyzed. The period was divided into two: 1945-1979 and 1980-2011, and the more recent they were, the more heavily weighted. For the present-day indices of 2012, aggregate figures such as military expenditures were ones most-up-to-date available and incidents were ones observed from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011. Historical records were collected from widely used public data from the Correlates of War Project provided by the University of Michigan; recent records for the past one year were found from a world news digest, Facts on FileⓇ, and other various sources for international statistics including the World Development Indicators, and Human Development Report.

Putting together the collected data into an index was an inductive procedure. First, the different indices were collected and the compositional elements of each category that include these indices were measured. The arithmetic means for each category would range from scores of 0 to 100. 0 signifies absolute non-peace and 100, perfect peace. This method was applied in measuring elements located at the very bottom level to the very top. The results are a separate indices representing Political World Peace, Military-diplomatic World Peace, and Socio-economic World Peace which

16

were again all added up to produce an arithmetic mean of aggregate World Peace Index.

There are over two hundred nation-states in this world nowadays. However, as a considerable number of countries did not compute the data we needed for assessment, it was inevitable to limit the size for data analysis to 143 countries. In spite of this, the lack of data conundrum still persisted, because even among those 143 countries, some particular indicators were often found missing. In this case, the missing data was substituted with the most current raw data available from the database of World Peace Index. When even this was not possible, it was replaced with the data from a geographically neighboring country which is in a similar situation.2)

Therefore, our World Peace Index scoring is relative evaluation among the countries which have secured the minimum level of peace. Since the government’s capability to compile statistics for national evaluation implies its sense of control, many countries that were excluded due to their lack of statistical resources show their governments’ weak sense of control. Thus, we can presume that those countries that are not included in the list of our World Peace Index could be in much worse peace condition.

2) Substitution of missing values was usually done in the socio-economic indices. In the case of nation with missing values, per capita gross domestic product (GDP) and the geographical location (i.e., continent) of the concerned nation were taken into consideration for evaluating the nation.

17

Ⅲ. Methodology: Measurement and Data Sources

Every specific indicator of the World Peace Index was enumerated from 0 (peace) to 1 (non-peace) so that worsening peace condition can be represented by increasing numerical index values. Two different methods were used to standardize the numbers. First, when absolute minimum and maximum values were found in the index, we first subtracted the minimum value from each value in order to make the lowest value start from 0, and then divided each by the maximum value to make them range from 0 to 1. For example, for an index ranging from 3 to 15, 3 is subtracted from all the original value to make them range from 0 to 12; then, these newly calculated values are recoded and divided into 12.1) Secondly, for indices of unemployment and inflation rates, we first took the values lying in the 95th percentile in the distribution (i.e., top 5% values only) to prevent the index values from being sensitive to outliers. After that, we equally re-encoded them to remove outliers, and then divided each by the maximum value in order to make them all range from 0 to 1.

The previous indices measured the degree of ‘conflicts’ rather than ‘peace.’ In other words, the values of these sub-variables in the previous indices had tendency to increase in more unpeaceful conditions. Therefore, it was very necessary and conceptually more accurate to revert the measurement in order to design the culture of peace index that is suitable for assessment. Since the values of each sub-category

1) This standardization of variables was to synthesize values of other variables. When creating a new variable Z by combining the X variable with values from 1 to 100 and the Y variable with values from 0 to 1, the value of dependent variable Z can be significantly influenced or determined by the value of the independent variable X. However, such problem can be avoided if the ranges standardization is performed for both independent variables X and Y.

18

index ranged from 0 (peace) to 1 (non-peace), we converted the values of the previous indices from 1 (i.e., now, 1 referring to ‘peace’ and 0 referring to ‘non-peace’). And then, we multiplied each index by 100 to adjust all the values ranging from 0 (non-peace) to the perfect score of 100 (peace). In other words, all the indices of components A1∼A3, B1∼B3, and C1∼C3 ranged from 0 (the most ‘unpeaceful’ condition) to 100 (the most ‘peaceful’ condition). After that, the arithmetical mean values of each sub-category peace index were calculated to produce the all-item World Peace Index.

1. Political Dimension

The state of peace in political dimension is measured in terms of (1) historical and current domestic political conflicts, and (2) management capacity of the government. Political conflict refers to civil wars, Coup d’état, and other types of violent political confrontation. The capacity of the government is determined by the level of democratization and protection of human rights. The details of the data and method of coding are given below.

1) A1. Historical Experiences of Domestic Political Conflict

The state of peace of a nation is deeply influenced by its domestic politics such as confrontations between the government and interest groups, as well as international politics. Civil wars, Coup d’état, and other types of violent political confrontations were taken into consideration in analyzing the state of peace and conflict in domestic politics.

A11. Civil WarsCivil wars constitute challenges to state authority and hence reveal

the weakness of the state and instability of domestic politics.2) We

19

coded the frequency of civil wars and size of casualties in relation to the nation’s population and more recent civil wars were weighted twice since they would have more influence on the current state of peace. Civil wars are categorized into two subcategories according to the year the war ended: (1) between 1945 and 1979, and (2) 1980 and afterward; and the latter ones were weighted twice.

A11 ‘Civil Wars since 1945’A11a ‘Frequency of civil wars in 1945-1979’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or

more)A11b ‘Size of casualties from civil wars in 1945-1979’ (0: Less than 1/10,000

per population; 1: 1/10,000 or more)A11c ‘Frequency of civil wars in 1980 and afterward’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2:

Twice or more)A11d ‘Size of casualties from civil wars in 1980 and afterward’ (0: Less than

1/10,000 per population; 1: 1/10,000 or more)

A12. Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or RiotsCoup d’état as a type of irregular regime change and other types of

confrontation represent the instability of the political system. Other types of confrontation are limited to visible cases that resulted in bloodshed, casualties or overthrow of existing regime.3) The year of these events taking place is also taken into consideration: 0 in case of no confrontation, 1 if the event occurred in 1945-1979, and 2 if the event occurred after 1980.

A12 ‘Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or Riots since 1945’ (0: None since 1945; 1: Occurred from 1945-1979; 2: Occurred from 1980 and afterward)

As indicated above, A11 and A12 are integrated to indicate the level

2) The New COW War Data, 1816-2007 (v4.1). http://www.correlatesofwar.org/datasets.htm

3) Data sources are CIA World Factbook, or Wikipedia.

20

of domestic political peace against a perfect score of 100.

A1 ‘Historical Experiences of Domestic Political Conflict’A1={1-((A11a+A11b)+(A11c+A11d)×2+A12)/11}×100.

2) A2. Democracy and Capacity of the State

The level of democratization implies the capacity of the state to manage conflicts or crises, and thus indicative of the culture of peace. We assumed that the higher the level of democratization, the more likely a nation is inclined to peace; and the lower the level of democratization, the more likely conflicts are to occur. According to democratic peace theory, democratic norms and system restrain decision-makers from initiating a war and thus contributing to peace.

A21. Degree of DemocratizationWe used the Annual Survey of Country Rating released by Freedom

House, which categorizes nations into three categories: democratic, quasi-democratic, and non-democratic.4) Freedom House survey measures the level of democratization through three different indices: political rights, freedom of citizens, and overall freedom provided by the regime. Political rights (1-7 point scale where 7 is the worst) and freedom of citizens (1-7 point scale where 7 is the worst), are reversely recoded so that it is spread over the 0-6 point scale.

A21 ‘Degree of Democratization’A21a ‘Democratization: Political Rights Protection’ (0: very bad; 1: bad; 2:

somewhat bad; 3: moderate; 4: somewhat good; 5: good; 6: very good)A21b ‘Democratization: Freedom of citizens’ (0: very bad; 1: bad; 2: somewhat

bad; 3: moderate; 4: somewhat good; 5: good; 6: very good)

4) Freedom House. 2012. Annual Survey of Country Rating. http://www.freedomhouse.org.

21

A22. Human Rights ProtectionThis category measures how well human rights are protected by

examining the Human Rights Index, and how many of the nine international conventions a nation ratified.

The Observer’s Human Rights Index was used to measure the level of human rights protection between 2001-20105) whereas UNDP’s Human Rights Index was used for evaluating the years 2011-2012's;6) here, UNDP’s Human Rights Index (1-5 point rating system where 5 is the worst) was re-encoded its rating scale in reverse order (0-4 point scale where 0 is the worst). Human Development Report 2009 was consulted to confirm the international conventions related to the protection of human rights that a nation has ratified.7)

A22 ‘Human Rights Protection’A22a ‘UNDP Human Rights Index’ (0: very bad; 1: bad; 2: moderate; 3: good;

4: very good)A22b ‘Ratified International Conventions’ (0: None; 1: One; 2: Two; 3: Three;

4: Four; 5: Five; 6: Six; 7: Seven; 8: Eight; 9: All Nine)

A23. Political TransparencyThis category examines the degree of political corruption: the larger

value indicates greater fairness of the political procedures. We used the current Corruption Perception Index 2011 to obtain data on individual nations.8)

5) The Observer. 1999. “Human Rights Abuses by country.” Observer Human Rights Index, 2nd Edition. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Tables/4_col_tables/0,,258329,00.html. Minimum (peace) 0; ……; maximum (non-peace) 24.

6) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2010. Human Development Report 2010: The Real Wealth of Nations ― Pathways to Human Development. New York: UNDP. pp. 164-167. Minimum (peace) 1; ……; maximum (non-peace) 5.

7) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2009. Human Development Report 2009: Overcoming Barriers ― Human Mobility and Development. New York: UNDP. pp. 163-166.

8) Transparency International. 2012. Corruption Perception Index 2011. http://cpi.tra

22

A23 ‘Political Transparency’ (0: very bad; ……; 10: very good, very transparent)

As indicated above, A21, A22, and A23 are integrated to indicate the level of democratization and protection of human rights against a perfect score of 100.

A2 ‘Democracy and Capacity of the State’A2={((A21a/6+A21b/6)/2+(A22a/4+A22b/9)/2+A23/10)/3}×100.

3) A3. Current Domestic Political Conflict

The category aims to measure the impact of domestic political incidents on peace in 2011.9) Indicators are civil wars and violent confrontations between the government and social groups. At the same time, we consider the settlements made by the parties to resolve the conflicts as evidence of reconciliation. The latter is viewed as enhancing the state of peace, whereas conflict detracts from it.

A31. Civil WarsIt is considered as 'civil wars' if there is (1) an armed forces that

officially claims themselves as a form of government, or (2) continuously active rebel forces even without a government.

A31 ‘Civil Wars in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or More)

A32. Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or RiotsHere, coup d’état refers to the deposition of a government by a

small group of the existing state to replace deposed government with

nsparency.org/cpi2011/results/.9) News articles of individual states with reference to the material on Facts on

FileⓇ.

23

another body by using force. Political riot is understood as the case when domestic conflicts are visualized as forms of bloodletting, regime change or producing casualties. The value is given by measuring the frequency of coup d’état or a political riot.

A32 ‘Political Conflicts such as Coup d’état or Riots in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or More)

A33. Political Settlements or Policies to Resolve Domestic ConflictsAny agreement and action to resolve domestic conflicts are considered

as an action for promoting democracy.

A33 ‘Political Settlements or Policies to Resolve Domestic Conflicts in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Reached)

A31, A32, and A33 are integrated and standardized by the methods explained above so that the final value could indicate the level of domestic political conflict and reconciliation in 2010 against a perfect score of 100.

A3 ‘Ongoing or Current Domestic Political Conflict’A3={1-(A31+A32-A33)/4}×100.

2. Military-diplomatic Dimension

The state of peace in military-diplomatic dimension is measured in terms of (1) past and current international political conflicts, and (2) degree of militarization.

1) B1. Historical Experiences of International Conflict

We measure the conflicts and reconciliations a nation has experienced in the relationship with other nations by examining wars, colonization,

24

and international alliances and reconciliation during its history. War is the most visible sign of conflict between nations, and colonial experience inhibits the development of a spirit of community within a nation. They cause the deterioration of peace and, moreover, current experiences are assumed to be more influential in determining peace.

B11. War ExperienceThe followings are taken into consideration: frequency of wars, size of casualties

in relation to the population, the site where a war occurs foreign or domestic territory, and whether the war ends in victory or defeat.10) Dividing the time periods into two: (1) 1945-1979, and (2) 1980 and afterward, we gave 1 point to the former and 2 to the latter. In other words, if the war ended in 1945-1979, it received a score of 1; and if it ended in 1980 and afterward, it received a score of 2. We calculated the following four criteria in each time periods.

B11 ‘War Experience since 1945’B11a ‘Frequency of Wars in 1945-1979’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or More)B11b ‘Size of Casualties from Wars in 1945-1979’ (0: None or less than

1/10,000 per population; 1: 10,000 or more per population)B11c ‘Site or Wars in 1945-1979’ (0: No War or in Foreign Territory; 1:

Domestic Territory or Same Continent)B11d ‘Victory or Defeat from Wars in 1945-1979’ (0: No War or Victory; 1:

Defeat)B11e ‘Frequency of Wars in 1980 and afterward’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice

or More)B11f ‘Size of Casualties from Wars in 1980 and after’ (0: None or less than

1/10,000 per population; 1: 1/10,000 or more per population)B11g ‘Site of Wars in 1980 and afterward’ (0: No War or Foreign Territory; 1:

Domestic Territory or Same Continent)B11h ‘Victory or Defeat from Wars in 1980 and after’ (0: No War or Victory;

1: Defeat)

10) The New COW War Data, 1816-2007 (v4.1). http://www.correlatesofwar.org/datasets.htm. We follow the COW Project’s definition of war: (1) the participant nations are members of the interstate system, and (2) at least 1,000 deaths

25

B12. Colonial Experience and State FormationFollowing the same logic as war experience, we assigned different

weights according to the year of independence. That is, the later the independence was obtained, the bigger the weight given. We assumed that the conflictual structure to be diluted in cases where a considerable period of time has passed since the independence. Accordingly, we gave a score of 0 to nations without any colonial experience or those that achieved independence before the twentieth century, 1 to nations that experience it in 1900-1949, and 2 to nations that experience this in 1950 and afterward.11)

B12 ‘Colonial Experience and State Formation’B12a ‘Experience of Colonial Rule’ (0: No; 1: Yes)B12b ‘Year of The Formation of Independent State’ (0: Before 20th century; 1:

1900-1949; 2: 1950 and afterward)

B13. Geopolitical ConditionsPolitical conditions derived from the geographical location of a nation

may influence the state of peace. We measure these conditions by examining the number of neighboring countries, the number of major powers among the neighboring countries, enduring rivalry with other nations, and the potentiality of territorial disputes. The geographical or spatial position of a state give rise to a geopolitical condition that in turn exerts considerable

are caused by battles. The general principle regarding war experience is as follows: if the war continued onward to the following period, we coded the war according to the time it ended. Meanwhile, if there was more than one war within the same time span, we coded the wars according to the number of casualties in comparison to the aggregate population, with the one of largest casualty being the standard. Victory and loss were weighted more in case of wars where the number of casualties were larger; however, in cases where the line between victory and loss is hard to draw, past experiences of loss were taken into consideration. In case of no war during the said time period or wars that took place in the state to which the said state used to belong to, before achieving independence, we gave a score of 0.

11) CIA World Factbook.

26

influence upon the culture of peace in that state. Contemporary examples of cases where peace was extensively damaged by geopolitical conditions are not hard to find. For instance, because it was positioned among traditionally strong powers such as Russia, Prussia, and Austria, Poland was forced to undergo more than once a division of its territory. Even in the twentieth century, Poland was the first place to be taken over by the Nazi regime which sought to obtain a buffer zone against the Soviet Union.

Our first theoretical assumption is that the more neighboring countries a nation-state has, the greater would be the likelihood of conflicts with other countries to occur, since it would have more chances of interacting with the others. Thus, we count the number of neighboring countries and that number implies the level of threats to peace.

Second, international relations are inherently power relations. Powerful states are less vulnerable to external threats than weaker states whereas the latter are likely to face a condition of non-peace regardless of its intention. Thus, a nation’s status in the international system is an important contributor to the maintenance of peace. Table 3.1 is the classification of nations by the economic and/or military power and the size of population.

Status NationSuperpower State Ÿ United StatesInternational Power State

Ÿ United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, Canada, Italy, China, and Russia

Regional Power State Ÿ America: Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and CubaŸ Europe: SpainŸ Sub-Saharan Africa: South Africa, and NigeriaŸ North Africa and Middle East: Egypt, Saudi

Arabia, Israel, Iran, Iraq, and LibyaŸ Asia: Indonesia, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Republic of

Korea, and Democratic People’s Republic of KoreaŸ Oceania: Australia

Others Ÿ Other nations not listed here

Table 3.1 Status of Nation According to National Power

27

Third, we examined the relation with the neighboring states and the method of measurement were the same as indicated Table 3.1. We coded the number of nations whose power status is stronger or equal compared to the said nation. For example, if the concerned nation is a regional power state, we coded the number of superpower, international power, and neighboring power states; if the said state is an international power state, the number of superpower state and international power states were coded.

Fourth, nations engaged in an enduring rivalry with the said nation are influential to its conflict structure. Enduring rivalry is defined as a relationship between two countries where militarized disputes took place six or more times during the past 20 years; we assess that this rival relationship contributes in escalating the likelihood of conflicts.12) However, here we encounter a time problem. According to the data which was most recently updated in December 31, 1992, the dates differ from state to state. For example, mid-1992 is the date of final assessment of inter-Korea relations and India-Pakistan relations. Therefore, we decided that 1990 would be the standard of the time period in this case. In addition, the data does not truly reflect the power of rival states. In other words, the relative power of two states are indicated by ‘major’ or ‘minor’; however, this does not lead to any significant spillover of influence in judging whether the states are in rivalry. Still, despite the incompleteness of the indices, we assumed that they would be practically useful and therefore kept the original value in tact.

Fifth, we tried to assess the possible outbreak of territorial disputes. Here, we consulted the data of individual nations in the CIA World Factbook. In this case, it is possible to have more than one dispute per single nation; for instance, territorial disputes and maritime boundary

12) Rival relations are deduced through the enduring rivalry data collected by Paul F. Diehl and Gary Goertz. Gary Goertz, and Paul F. Diehl. 1992. Territorial Changes and International Conflict. London: Routledge; Paul F. Diehl (ed.) 1999. The Road Map to War: Territorial Dimensions of International Conflict. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

28

disputes. Regardless of the number of disputes, if the dispute occurred in one state, we coded it under the heading of ‘occurred.’

B13 ‘Geopolitical Conditions’B13a ‘Nation’s Power’ (0: Superpower; 1: International Power; 2: Regional

Power; 3: Others)B13b ‘Number of Neighboring States’ (0: None; 1: One; 2: Two or More)B13c ‘Relations with Neighboring Powers: Number of Neighboring States with

Equal or Superior Status’ (0: None; 1: One; 2: Two or More)B13d ‘Number of Nations in Enduring Rivalry’ (0: None; 1: One or More)B13e ‘Potential Territorial Dispute’ (0: None; 1: One or More)

By integrating the above B11, B12, and B13, we calculated the historical experiences of international conflicts against a perfect score of 100.

B1 ‘Historical Experiences of International Conflict’B1={1-(((B11a+B11b+B11c+B11d)+(B11e+B11f+B11g+B11h)×2)/15+(B12a+B12b)/3+(B13a+B13b+B13c+B13d+

B13e)/8)/3}×100.

2) B2. Degree of Militarizaition

Militarization is defined as the percentage of resources spent on military affairs out of the total amount spent by the nation. This includes the percentage of military budget out of the gross domestic product (GDP), and the ratio of size of military force to population.13) The degree of militarization implies the degree of its importance and influence on the nation’s decision-making process. The greater the nation’s militarization, the more likely a nation is to be involved in international conflicts.

B21. Military ExpenditureThe ratio of military expenditure over GDP is measured.

13) International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). 2012. The Military Balance 2012. London: IISS.

29

B21 ‘Ratio of Military Expenditure over GDP’ (0: Minimum value; ……; 1: Maximum value)

B22. Armed ForcesThe ratio of the armed forces per population is measured.

B22 ‘Military Force per Population’ (0: Minimum value; ……; 1: Maximum value)

B23. International Treaties against Weapons of Mass Destruction and Its ExperimentsWe coded the number of the Entry into Chemical Weapons Convention

(CWC), Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), and Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).14)

B23 ‘International Treaties against Weapons of Mass Destruction and its Experiments’ (0: None; 0.5: Signature, Non-ratification; 1: One Convention; 2: Two Conventions; 3: All)

B21, B22, and B23 are integrated to calculate the level of peace regarding militarization, obtaining a perfect score of 100.

B2 ‘Degree of Militarizaition’B2={1-(B21+B22+B23/3)/3}×100.

3) B3. Current International Conflict

This category measures major international events that occurred from January 1 to December 31, 2011. We have taken the following factors into consideration: protracted war, use of force, use of violence, or events that increased the level of peace.

14) “Multilateral Arms Regulation and Disarmament Agreements.” http://unhq-appspub-01.un.org/UNODA/TreatyStatus.nsf/MasterOutline?OpenPage&BaseTarget=NotesView.

30

B31. All-out Wars: Occurrence and LocationAn all-out war is a clear impediment to peace. If there is no all-out

war, 0 was given; if there is one, then 1 is given; and 2 is given if an all-out war occurred in a nearby territory.

B31 ‘All-out Wars in 2011: Occurrence and Location’ (0: None; 1: Occurred in non-neighboring states; 2: Occurred in neighboring states)

B32. Use of Force Other than Wars, or Acts of ViolenceIn accordance with the Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID), we have

checked the incidents that fall under the ‘use of force.’15) The Use of Violence falls under the categories of ‘threat to use force’ and ‘display of force’ according to the MID.16)

B32 ‘Use of Force Other than Wars, or Acts of Violence in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or more, and/or strong conflicts)

B33. Peace Enhancing Events or MeasuresFor peace-enhancing events, we have counted the cases of: (1) armistice

15) Under the MID categorization, the ‘use of force’ includes closing of the territorial boundaries, occupation, assault, collision, and declaration of war. For each types of the incidents we took into consideration the occurrence of battles, its frequency and repetitiveness, number of casualty, the place of battle (whether it was within domestic territory or at the borders). Dispatching of the Peace-keeping force is not included in the use of force; however, once the peace-keepers engage in actual fighting, we included them in the category of the use of force. Daniel M. Jones, Stuart A. Bremer, and J. David Singer. 1996. “Militarized Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 15(2): 163-213. Data on international military disputes are downloadable from the homepage of the Peace Science Society International. http://pss.la.psu.edu/MID_DATA.HTM.

16) The ‘threat to use force’ includes threat to use military power, or threat to close borders, and the ‘display of force’ does display of military force, battleship, fighter jets, war alert, military mobilization, and intentional crossing of the borders.

31

or peace treaties and its ratification implementation, (2) agreements on arms reduction or control, (3) politically ground-breaking economic, technological agreements such as trade agreements, and (4) other political agreements that have led to resolution of political-military tension.17)

B33 ‘Peace Enhancing Events or Measures in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Made)

B31, B32, and B33 are integrated and standardized by the methods explained above so that the final value could indicate the level of peace regarding international political conflict in 2010 out of a perfect score of 100.

B3 ‘Ongoing or Current International Conflict’B3={1-(B31+B32-B33)/4}×100.

3. Socio-economic Dimension

Socio-economic dimension is further divided into three subcategories: (1) quality of life, (2) social exclusion and inequality, and (3) social safety and stability. We adopt the positive definition of peace that goes beyond the conventional concept of peace, the absence of violence. In this aspect, we believe that a society that satisfies all three following conditions is a peaceful society — a society that (1) offers quality life, (2) does not discriminate particular members in the distribution of its resources, and (3) guarantees ecological/societal safety, economical stability, and social security.

1) C1. Social Safety and Stability

Peaceful society is a society whose people are not subject to physical

17) News articles of individual states with reference to the material on Facts on FileⓇ.

32

threats or unexpected social changes. In measuring this category, we have adopted three indicators: ecological and societal safety, and social stability.

C11. Ecological and Social SafetyEnsuring safety from natural disasters such as earthquake, tsunami or

typhoon, in other words, ecological safety in human life is becoming increasingly important. Social safety has also become another important element in contemporary life. Ecological and social safety in 2010 is assessed by analyzing news articles of each state on disasters, accidents and incidents occurred over a one-year period.18)

C31 ‘Ecological and Social Safety in 2011’ (0: None; 1: Once; 2: Twice or more)

C12. Socio-economic StabilityA stable economic structure is a basic requirement for the overall

peace within a state. In determining the stability in the economic structure, we used the following indicators that represent economic instability: unemployment rate, and inflation rate. Uncontestedly, unemployment rate and inflation rate reflect the economic instability of a nation. Their importance have been increasing ever since the world experienced economic crises of debt and deficit during the past years.19) Each value is converted and entered within the range of 0 (minimum) to 1 (maximum).

C12 ‘Social Stability’C12a ‘Unemployment Rate’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)C12b ‘Inflation Rate’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)

C11 and C12 are integrated and standardized by the methods explained

18) News articles of individual states with reference to the material on Facts on FileⓇ.

19) World Bank. 2012. World Development Indicators 2012. Washington, DC: World Bank. pp. 58-61, 274-277.

33

above so that the final value could indicate the level of quality of life and social security out of a perfect score of 100.

C1 ‘Social Safety and Stability’C1={1-(C31+(C32a+C32b)/2)/2}×100.

2) C2. Social Exclusion and Inequality

It is difficult for a society to maintain stability when resources are distributed unequally and a large population is deprived of the basic needs to have decent life. Discrimination and exclusion between social groups aggravate inequal distribution of resources resulting in the undermining of peace.

C21. PovertyThe poverty level of sub-human living conditions for 2001-2010 is

assessed by using UNDP’s Human Poverty Index.20) For 2011-2012’s, UNDP’s Multidimensional Poverty Index values are converted and entered within the range of 0 to 1.21)

C21 ‘Multidimensional Poverty Index’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)

C22. Social InequalityInequalities of income and gender are selected criterion to evaluate

social inequality. We used GINI Index for evaluating inequality among

20) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2000-2009. Human Development Report. New York: UNDP. Minimum (peace) 0; ……; Maximum (non-peace) 4. UNDP developed Human Poverty Index that favors a composite index measuring deprivations in the three basic dimensions captured in the human development index long and healthy ― life, knowledge and a decent standard of living, and social exclusion. It applies different sets of minimum standards of living to developed and developing countries.

21) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2010-2011. Human Development Report. New York: UNDP. Minimum (non-peace) 0; ……; Maximum (peace) 1.

34

different income groups, and UNDP’s Gender Empowerment Measure for assessing the gender-inequality condition during 2001-2010. For measuring gender inequality of 2011-2012, UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index values are converted and entered with the range of 0 to 1.

Income and gender inequality are selected criterion to evaluate social inequality. We used GINI Index for evaluating inequality among different income groups,22) and UNDP’s Gender Empowerment Measure for assessing the gender-inequality condition during 2001-2010.23) For measuring gender inequality of 2011-2012, UNDP’s Gender Inequality Index values are converted and entered with the range of 0 to 1.24)

C22 ‘Social Inequality’C22a ‘Income Inequality: GINI Index’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)C22b ‘Gender Inequality: GII Index’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)

C21 and C22 are integrated and standardized by the methods explained above so that the final value could indicate the level of social inequality and exclusion out of a perfect score of 100.

C2 ‘Social Exclusion and Inequality’C2={1-(C21+(C22a+C22b)/2)/2}×100.

3) C3. Quality of Life

It is necessary to know what level of welfare the average members of a society enjoys and the extent of the social security net that has been

22) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2011. Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity ― A Better Future for All. New York: UNDP. pp. 135-138. Minimum (non-peace) 0; ……; Maximum (peace) 1.

23) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2000-2009. Human Development Report. New York: UNDP. Minimum (non-peace) 0; ……; Maximum (peace) 1.

24) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2010-2011. Human Development Report. New York: UNDP. Minimum (non-peace) 0; ……; Maximum (peace) 1.

35

established in order to determine the state of societal peace. The social peace index movement, which was initiated in the 1960s world-widely, reveals the limits of examining the level of welfare benefits just by looking at the income earnings. Therefore, we used UNDP’s Human Development Index that encompasses health, education, and income earnings.25)

C1 ‘Human Development Index reflecting Income, Education and Health’ (0: Minimum; ……; 1: Maximum)

4. Calculation of World Peace Index

The world peace index is calculated by adding up the peace score in each dimension derived as explained so far.

l World peace index=(A1＋A2＋A3＋B1＋B2＋B3＋C1＋C2＋C3)/9.l Political peace index=(A1＋A2＋A3)/3.l Military-diplomatic peace index=(B1＋B2＋B3)/3.l Socio-economic peace index=(C1＋C2＋C3)/3.

25) United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2011. Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity ― A Better Future for All. New York: UNDP. pp. 127-130. Minimum (non-peace) 0; ……; Maximum (peace) 1.

36

37

Ⅳ. Analyses of World Peace Index 2012

1. World Peace in 2011

1) The Era of Global Uncertainty

Most of the global affairs these days are the result of the failure in global governance. The key reason for the difficulties in the coordination of global affairs is, most of all, because of uncertainties inherent in contemporary international system. With deepening globalization and information revolution, the world is encountering emerging threats such as proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, international terrorism, transnational organized crimes, and cyber attacks. The threats from non-traditional security areas, such as climate change, natural disasters, environmental pollution, infectious diseases, are also on the rise. In the process of promoting international cooperation to deal with new risk factors that may arise from these changes, international competition to secure an advantageous position in issues and expand one's influence is also becoming more intense. In case of energy security, despite the global consensus on further development of reusable energy and green growth, it is expected that competition among nations to secure existing energy sources and reusable energy technology will also get tougher.

In the aftermath of the latest global financial crisis, the world economic outlook does not seem optimistic because global recession and global economic uncertainty are expected to continue. Despite the concern for re-emergence of protectionism as the worldwide stagnation continues, the international community today enjoys solid trade system based on enhanced liberal trade norms and expanded opportunities

38

provided by regional economic integration. Due to economic growth of BRICs countries, South Korea will be exposed to both competitions and new opportunities for economic growth. Particularly, due to China's recent turn to policies designed to boost its domestic markets, it is expected that world export market will grow in the mid- to long-term. The demand for green growth and balanced economic growth are also on the rise. To meet such demands, major nations are discussing multilateral cooperative process to establish a new mechanism to deal with climate change and low carbon green growth.

According to Global Risk 2011 report published by World Economic Forum, the world is facing two clusters of risks: (1) the macro economic disparity, and (2) failure of global governance.1) This implies that transnational cooperation through global network will be increasingly important in the future. To cope with such uncertainties, international community is beefing up collective efforts to enhance global governance coordination. The G20 system, which launched right after the global financial crisis in 2008, represents such efforts in economic area to fight back global risks mentioned above. South Korea has actively participated in worldwide cooperation to build stable global economic and trade institutions by hosting G20 Summit in Seoul in 2010. Within the G20 framework, important issues such as prevention of trade protectionism, global financial safety net, development cooperation, and green growth have been under discussion. The Nuclear Security Summit held in Seoul in March 2012 was an integral part of global efforts to strengthen global governance in nuclear non-proliferation area.

Even though variety of policy options are available, it is almost impossible to prepare for all the risks under the contemporary global governance system. International community has no better options but

1) World Economic Forum. 2011. Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition: An Initiative of the Risk Response Network. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

39

to live with such risks for the time being. Depending upon how hard the world leaders struggle to cope with such uncertainties, risk management can become relatively easy but fundamental limitations would still remain. That is the reality the world peace faces today.

2) The Rise of China and U.S. Pivot to Asia-Pacific

Recent global transformation starts in Asia-Pacific. The rise of China, and the U.S. pivot to the Asia-Pacific region in response, is the key factor that is bringing about changes at both the global and regional levels. The rise of China is not a new phenomenon at all. China's total GDP has already outstripped that of Japan a few years ago and is now world's second largest. Based on full economic confidence, China invests heavily in military modernization as well.

As strategic importance of the Asia-Pacific region rises, the Obama administration has made attempts to make a strategic turn since 2011, repeatedly emphasizing the importance of pivot ― re-engagement or re-balancing ― toward Asia-Pacific. Tom Donillon, U.S. National Security Advisor, emphasized that the U.S.'s key goal for pivoting is to establish norms and rules in this region. The U.S. pivot consists of several elements: (1) it purports to maintain 'geographically distributed, operationally resilient, and politically sustainable' military stance; (2) diplomatically, it includes more respect for region’s multilateral mechanism, such as ARF, EAS, and APEC; (3) economically, it pushes for Trans-Pacific Partnership, enhancing the U.S.-FTA networks in the region. This latest pivot toward Asia-Pacific region seems to be stimulated by the following four reasons: (1) rising strategic importance of the Asia-Pacific region; (2) ‘re-balancing’ China’s increasing assertiveness in South China Sea; (3) starting to have more room to concentrate on the Asia-Pacific region after winding down of the U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan; and (4) inevitable choice

40

of concentration due to the scheduled cuts in the U.S. military spending after the global financial crisis.

Some experts indicate that 're-balancing', rather than pivot, is a more appropriate term because the latest change in the U.S. strategy toward the Asia-Pacific is simply a modified and expanded version of the existing Asia policy of the past administrations. They argue that Obama's pivot represents the changes in policy tools rather than the changes in policy directions. The U.S. policy in this region has focused on measures to manage conflicts with China and engage China into international system. They also argue that the term 'pivot' may give unnecessary misunderstanding that the U.S. intends to 'disengage' from the region.

Despite such controversies, there are several new features in the latest U.S. policies toward the Asia-Pacific that are distinctive from the past. First, adjustment in military deployment stance and military priorities are quite visible. Such changes are well reflected in the Defense Strategic Guidance of 2012 and Defense Authorization Act of 2013. One of the most notable features is the decision to maintain 11 carrier battle groups as it is and major cuts will be done in the army and marine forces, leaving the navy almost intact. The decision was a direct response to China's A2/AD (anti-access, area denial) strategy. Following the decision, part of the U.S. marines in Okinawa will be moved to Darwin, Perth, and Brisbane in Australia, and the rest will be rotationally deployed in Cocos Islands, Singapore, and Philippines. Second, it declared a more integrative and region-wide approach to the Asia-Pacific. It contains old and new military policies, diplomatic measures and economic initiative in single a package. Third, it reflects an expanded geographical concept, including the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asian littoral areas into the geographical boundary of the Asia-Pacific for the first time. This goes in line with the insight of Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for Asia-Pacific Affairs, that

41

the next challenge in the U.S. strategic thinking would be how to link the Pacific Ocean with the Indian Ocean.2)

China's military modernization programs aim, most of all, to strengthen military stance, preparing for the contingency situations around Taiwan and guaranteeing the superiority through anti-access, area denial strategy. For this purpose, China's defense authorities invest heavily on anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM), attack submarines, and C4ISR capabilities. Additional goals may include protecting territorial sovereignty in Southeast China Sea, securing maritime interests and safety of sea lanes of communications, and raising China's reputation as a world power. Some of the key military assets include ASBM, anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCM), submarines, aircraft carrier battle groups, and surface battleships.

Throughout the history of mankind, parties involved in the military campaign have always tried to obstruct the opponent's freedom of action and access to key operational areas. Combatant parties usually set up a comprehensive strategic plan to prevent opponent's 'movement to' and 'maneuver within' key operational areas. Such plan is usually called anti-access and area denial―or A2/AD, in short.3) More specifically, anti-access refers to those actions and capabilities, usually long-range, designed to prevent an opposing force from entering an operational area; area denial refers to those actions and capabilities, usually of shorter range, designed not to keep an opposing force out, but to limit its freedom of action within the operational area.4)

The main reason that the Obama administration emphasized the

2) Mark Manyin, Stephen Daggett, Ben Dolven, Susan V. Lawrence, Michael F. Martin, Ronald O'Rourke, and Bruce Vaughn. 2012. “Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration's 'Rebalancing' Toward Asia.” CRS Report for Congress, no. R42448. pp. 4-5.

3) Air-Sea Battle (ASB). 2011. Air-Sea Battle Concept Summary (Story Number: NNS111109-17). http://navy.mil.

4) U.S. Department of Defense. 2012. Joint Operational Access Concept (JOAC) Version 1.0. http://www.defense.gov, p. i.

42

pivot to the Asia-Pacific is China's rapid military buildup in this region. According to China's official government statistics, its annual military expenditure is slightly over 100 billion US dollars. However, the U.S. Defense Department or other major research institutes presume that China's actual military spending will be over 160 billion US dollars per year. More worrisome part is its composition, rather than the size. China invests heavily on high-tech power projection areas, rather than traditional defense capabilities, including air force, navy, or strategic nuclear capabilities. For example, production of state of the art attack submarines, construction of blue water navy including a first aircraft carrier, and building Chinese model of stealth fighter airplane do not well match with China's famous 'Peaceful Rise' thesis. Ironically, the more China reveals strong assertiveness backed up by powerful armed forces and claims core national interests, the more its national security will be hampered. China's growing assertiveness frightens neighboring nations and make them to strengthen their relationship with the United States or among themselves.5)

Henry Kissinger, former U.S. Secretary of State and a well-known international relations scholar, argued in his latest book that the future of U.S.-China relations need not, and should not, become a zero-sum game. He argued that the appropriate label for the Sino-American relationship is less partnership than 'co-evolution'. It means that both countries pursue their domestic imperatives, cooperating where possible, and adjust their relations to minimize conflict. He claims that if the United States attempts to reshuffle the Asian chess board by creating a bloc of democratic nations based on ideological crusade or deterrence against China's rise, the likelihood of success is very slim. Likewise, if China attempts to exclude the United States from Asia's

5) Daniel Twining. 2012. “The Chinese Military's Great Leap Forward.” Real Clear World. http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2012/03/08/the_chinese_militarys_great_leap_forward_99944.html.

43

security or economic issues, it will face a serious resistance from almost every Asian nations. If the United States and China confront each other with a false prophesy of inevitable collision, this will surely ruin the both nations. To avoid such tragedy, both nations must agree to create a Pacific Community, a region to which the United States, China, and other states all belong and cooperate to ease both fears.6)

Although the Obama administration's China policy has been quite accommodative at the beginning, current stance is changing so that it emphasizes the importance of international rules and norms in response to China's growing assertiveness. When Barack Obama took office in 2009, China evaluated such gentle stance as naive, and revealed a bit arrogant attitudes toward the United States. However, China is now concerned that current U.S. pivot to Asia-Pacific may result in the resurgence of containment policy. From American perspective, if the United States does not act against China's rise, it would be equivalent to acknowledging U.S. decline. When the United States withdrew from Vietnam in the mid-70's, China silently took the Paracel Islands from Vietnam. Similarly, when the Soviet Union withdrew from Cam Ranh Bay and the United States cut its military relationship with the Philippines, China silently occupied Mischief Reef around the Spratly Islands. This region is where the latest dispute over Scarborough Shoal took place between China and the Philippines. From American perspective, re-engagement in the West Pacific is a natural reaction to China's rise, but too much of it raises the doubt that the U.S. intends to contain China again. Hence, the U.S. policy must be subtle and tough at the same time. It is recommended that the United States should expand security cooperation with China while engaging China into international system.7)

6) Henry Kissinger. 2011. On China. New York: Penguin Press. pp. 523-529.7) Bonnie S. Glaser. 2012. “Pivot to Asia: Prepare for Unintended Consequences.”

Pp. 22-24 in 2012 Global Forecast: Risk, Opportunity, and the Next Administration,

44

The future of U.S.-China relations and their policies toward the Asia-Pacific have profound implications for the future international peace. If both nations choose to conflict, it will be detrimental for peace and stability of the whole world.

3) Euro Zone Crisis and Global Economic Downturn

Perhaps one of the most serious challenges to the world peace in 2011 was the Eurozone crisis that started with global financial crisis in 2008. Financial crisis that started in Greece and soon swept all Souther European nations posed the biggest challenge for the future of the Euro Zone. It is still uncertain whether Eurozone nations can get over current crisis and maintain the solidarity among the EU member states.

Current global financial system has many advantages for market-oriented global economy. Nevertheless, the system has a critical weakness that it is quite inflexible under the crisis situation. Market-oriented financial system is characterized by equal and flexible distribution of risk and profit, and quick evaluation of debt-servicing potential of the debtor. This system can contribute to the stabilization of the global financial system by employing immediate corrective measures under the normal situation. However, under the crisis situation, such system can cause liquidity problem by aggravating the balance sheet of the creditor (i.e., the bank). The financial crisis that started in the United States in 2008 was caused by unhealthy individual behaviors rather than systemic problems. In contrast, the Eurozone crisis revealed the critical weakness of market-oriented financial system that existed all over the world. The problems in financial system tend to result in a vicious circle of shrinking credit, deteriorating consumer confidence, increasing unemployment rate, and

edited by Craig Cohen and Josiane Gabel. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.

45

eventually bringing about negative effect on financial institutions.In addition to the problems caused by a single-currency system, the

Eurozone crisis also revealed a fundamental limits of integrated economic system that it is practically impossible to distribute the burdens to diverse stakeholders. Compared to Japan's stagnant economy, which is often called the "lost decade", current crises tend to spread quickly all over the world. Japan's problem did not spread to other parts of the world, and Japanese government could keep the troubles in the public sector under control. Populist approach and moral hazard of European nations also took part in the crisis. Since the Eurozone crisis erupted, many Eurozone nations adopted populist economic policies and peoples generally supported them. In an integrated economic system like EU, decision makers in individual member states have always incentives to defray the burden of domestic depression onto their neighbors. As a result, disappointed voters tend to support extreme measures, which, in turn, cause further polarization of domestic politics, making indispensable reforms even more difficult. In many Eurozone nations, there are controversies over financial measures. Many European nations are in a dilemma between expanded budget and reduced budget on the one hand, and between mounting financial pressure and growing public uneasiness on the other hand.8)

The main reason for the Eurozone crisis can be found in two explanations. First view explains that government budget crisis naturally ensued global financial crisis. Financial crisis started with the troubles in financial institutions. To save those institutions, governments usually inject public funds in huge scale. Governments' efforts for expansionary policy tend to further deteriorate fiscal

8) Yoshio Okubo. 2012. “Rethinking Japan's "Lost Decade": Some Post-Crisis Reflections.” Pp. 54-58 in Think Tank 20: New Challenges for the Global Economy, New Uncertainties for the G-20. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

46

situations. If this explanation is correct, the solution is straightforward and it is a good news. Because fiscal problems in several EU countries, including Greece, is temporary problem, it is very likely that Eurozone will continue to exist if the current crisis is resolved successfully.

The second explanation touches the more fundamental issues. According to Paul Krugman and other economists those who opposed the idea to create a single currency zone, current crisis will eventually lead to the dissolution of the Eurozone. From the beginning, it was a difficult decision to adopt a common currency for many states under different circumstances. Nations can harvest many benefits by using a common currency; its costs are formidable as well. When nations use a common currency, for example, they can spare costs for currency exchange. They can avoid risks associated with foreign transactions such as exchange rate fluctuations, because using a common currency has the same effect as a fixed exchange rate. Such benefits create huge profits by quickly increasing trade and capital transactions among nations using a common currency. However, a common currency entails one critical risk. Nations cannot change the amount of currency circulation by their independent decisions any more. Change in currency circulation is possible only when all member states agree. Changing exchange rate involves the same problem. In sum, the most serious cost of using a common currency is that nations should give up their privilege to decide currency circulation and exchange rate by their own judgement.

When the Eurozone was created, all member states understood this problem. However, political voices overwhelmed the economic worries. In fact, it is well known that the political motivation to avoid war on the European continent was far greater than economic calculations. Eurozone was created despite oppositions of economists. Since the Eurozone launched, however, whereas the expected increase in trade

47

was minimal, capital flow among Eurozone nations surged rapidly. Some underdeveloped countries like Greece or Portugal could get huge benefit by joining the Eurozone. Their credit rate improved significantly and interest rates for loans dropped dramatically. As a result, capital moved into relatively poor countries from wealthier countries like Germany or France. Thanks to such capital flow, Greece and Spain could boost their economy quickly. Their luck was not free. Since joining the Eurozone, Spain's property price soared three times, and wage level rose sharply. Those who support the second view claims that the real cause of Eurozone crisis is the weakened basis of tax revenues that followed the removal of bubbles shaped by false economic boom. According to this explanation, it is extremely difficult for nations with financial crisis to escape from the crisis. In order for these nations to recover competitive power, two conditions must be met: either wages and prices drop, or currency must be devalued. The former is politically unsustainable; the latter is impossible as long as a nation stays in the Eurozone.9)

The Eurozone crisis showed a sign of relief in early 2012 when EU nations responded with active policy measures. European Central Bank's decision to finance troubled commercial banks with a trillion Euro ― December 2011 and February 2012 ― also contributed to stabilize the European financial market. However, since the first quarter of 2012, anxiety for market de-stabilization spreads again because of zero percent economic growth rate in EU nations. The likelihood that Greece may exit from the Eurozone further aggravated the situations. The first quarter record was quite sluggish; economic growth rate for Germany was 0.5%, 0% for France, -0.8% for Spain, -0.2% for United Kingdom. Also, due to tightened budget and delayed

9) Shin Kwan-Ho. 2010. “Two Views for the Reason of Eurozone Crisis.” Chosun Ilbo Daily, Weekly Biz (June 12, 2010). http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/06/11/2010061101577.html. [in Korean]

48

recovery, unemployment rate rose from 10% in December 2011 to 11% in April 2012.

At the G20 Summit held in Los Cabos, Mexico in June 2012, world leaders agreed to take steps to stimulate the global economy. Although Eurozone nations attempted to overcome financial crisis by concluding a new financial pact and strengthening fiscal healthiness, they had to face criticism that too strict fiscal policy may result in prolonged stagnation and further aggravation of the world's fiscal situations. After a lengthy controversy, G20 leaders agreed to pursue a sustainable fiscal policy and measures to boost economic growth.

Since a proposal to provide a relief loan for Spain was approved, and New Democracy (Nea Dimokratia) won the general election and successfully form a coalition government, the concern for 'Grexit' is expected to lessen for a while. Nevertheless, Germany is opposing the policy of relief loan in EU. Thus, a lengthy controversy will continue over strict fiscal policy and relief loan issue. Moreover, as Francois Hollande ― who emphasizes easier monetary policies like pump-priming to offset the contractionary effect of fiscal policy ― won the presidential election in France, there is a growing consensus that EU nations must take steps to stimulate fast economic growth. Despite such efforts, European Commission estimated that EU region's economic growth rate in 2012 will be 0% and 1.3% in 2013. Such a gloomy outlook will contribute to spread continuing uncertainty in Eurozone nations.

4) Prospects for Korean Peninsula Situations

Since Kim Jong-il's unexpected death in December 2011, situations in the Korean Peninsula has been unstable. Apparently, power transition from Kim Jong-il to his third son, Kim Jong-un, is going on smoothly. However, regime disturbance can occur at any time due to the

49

possibility of power struggle within power elite group and prolonged economic difficulties. At the same time, we must pay attention to the inherent instability in power transition process and increasing security threats. North Korea may take another provocative steps toward the South to consolidate younger Kim's domestic power basis. Meanwhile, North Korea is expected to concentrate on developing ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons, repeating the age-old tactics of 'negotiation-provocation-reward' sequence. It is hard to expect the early solution of the nuclear crisis, given North Korea leadership's obsession with nuclear weapons and existing distrust between the United States and North Korea. In the long-term, the increasing impact from the rise of China and U.S.-China relations will have an important effect on North Korean leadership's strategic decision for the future.

Since Kim Jong-il's death, power transition to Kim Jong-un has been under way quickly and quietly. Kim Jong-un already took major posts in North Korea's party, military, and administration, including Supreme Commander, First Secretary of Workers' Party, and First Chairman of National Defense Commission. From institutional perspective at least, it is said that power transition is already complete. Kim also took steps to reorganize power hierarchy on the occasion of Party Congress or Supreme People's Assembly, appointing Chang Sung-taek to Politburo member, Kim Kyung-hee, Kim's aunt, to Party Secretary in charge of party structure, Choi Ryong-hae to Vice Marshall, General Political Chief of People's Army, and a member of Defense Commission. The dismissal of Rhee Young-ho, General Chief of Military, is known to be the result of conflict and power struggle between the party and military. Rhee's displacement signals that North Korean regime may be in the transition from military-first to economy-first system.

Meanwhile, North Korean media frequently reported Kim Jong-un's economy-related field supervising and propagated Kim's caring images like addressing people's welfare like food shortage problem. Basically,

50

a temporary division of labor is working, so that Kim is in charge of military and political affairs, whereas Prime Minister Choi Young-rim in charge of economic affairs.

North Korea recently resumed its external outreach that stopped after Kim Jong-il's death. Kim Young-il, Director of International Affairs of Workers' Party, visited China (April 20-24); Kim Young-nam, Standing Chairman of Supreme People's Assembly, visited Singapore and Indonesia (May 11-16); Rhee Young-ho, General Chief of Military, visited Laos (May 8-11). Many experts theorized that North Korea attempted to restore stiffened China-DPRK relations after missile launch and promote economic cooperation with other nations.

North Korea's harsh verbal provocations continued. North Korea even threatened to take 'special action' against civilian targets and continued GPS disruption against civilian airplanes and vessels.

Inter-Korean Denuclearization Talks (July 22, September 21, 2011)

U.S.-North Korea High Level Talks (July 28, October 24, 2011)

• Reaffirmed the usefulness of inter-Korean dialogue and improvement in inter-Korean relations

• Raised North Korea's understanding of Grand Bargain

• Discussed Preliminary steps to prove North Korea's genuine intention to resume Six-party Talks

• North Korea: pledged to stop operating Yongbyon UEP facilities; moratorium for missile and nuclear experiment; agreed on the return of IAEA inspection team; reconfirmed the willingness to implement September 19 joint statement

• United States: agreed to provide nutritional assistance and activate the exchange of human resources

Table 4.1. Inter-Korean Denuclearization Talks and U.S.-North Korea High Level Talks in 2011

North Korea's nuclear issue entered a new phase when North Korean authority invited Stanford University Professor Siegfried Hecker and abruptly disclosed their uranium enrichment facilities on

51

November 12, 2011. North Korean authority showed Hecker and his colleagues new experimental Light Water Reactor construction site and more than a thousand state-of-the-art uranium centrifuges. Spurred by such development, South and North, the United States resumed their high level contacts.

As a result of U.S.-North Korea high level talks, both side reached a compromise known as 'Leap Day Deal' on February 29, 2012. The United States promised to provide North Korea substantial amount of nutritional assistance; in return, North Korea agreed to take preliminary steps for denuclearization process.

The deal, however, did not last long. On April 13, North Korea launched a long-range missile, which they claim a 'working satellite', completely reversing the deal. Although the launch ended in failure, the United Nations Security Council quickly responded with a strong Chairman's statement that criticized the launch as a violation of Security Council Resolution 1718 and 1874. The statement also clearly prohibited further test with any rockets using ballistic missile technology, nuclear test or provocations. The statement introduced elevated sanctions, and pledged even higher sanction in case North Korea took another nuclear test or provocations. North Korea Sanction Committee of Security Council added three North Korean entities to the existing list of sanctions.

Although nations participating in Six Party Talks share the goal of North Korea denuclearization in principle, their respective positions are slightly different. United States, China, Japan, and Russia agree that negotiation is the only way to proceed, and Six Party Talks are the only viable framework. United States, however, is quite skeptic about the future of nuclear negotiation, because North Korea has repeatedly breached the promises of Geneva Agreed Framework in 1994, September 19 Joint Statement in 2005, and the Leap Day Deal in 2012. Hence, Washington prefers a complete and comprehensive approach

52

including human rights issue to cope with North Korea's untrustworthy records. China insists early resumption of Six Party Talks and continuing negotiation while requesting North Korea to stop further nuclear provocations. Japan takes side with the United States and Korea, while raising the abduction issue whenever possible. Russia insists, like China, to resume Six Party Talks as early as possible. Considering current situations, future of Six Party Talks will unfold, depending on North Korea's attitudes and how other five nations reach consensus on the sequence and conditions for resuming the talks. In addition, the scope and intentions of China will be an important factor for drawing more practical discussion on North Korea sanctions and their human rights issue in the future.

2. General Characteristics of World Peace Index 2012

Since publishing its first measurement in 2001, the World Peace Forum has now completed the twelfth report, the World Peace Index 2012 containing the measurement of world peace levels in 2011. The WPIs for 143 nations were measured from reliable data available for the entire analyses, reflecting the multi-dimensional state of political, military-diplomatic, and socio-economic peace.

1) Overview of World Peace Index 2012

The WPF surveyed the state of world peace in 2011 as of the time point of January 1, 2011. The 2012 WPI was 70.1. This value is an average of three dimensions: 71.6 points of political PI, 71.9 points of military-diplomatic PI and 66.8 points of socio-economic PI. The value of 2012 WPI is lower by 0.2 than that of last year.

Figure 4.1 shows the trend of WPI over the past 12 years. The

53

world peace recorded the lowest level at the early 2000's when the World Trade Center was hit by the terror attacks. Since then, the world peace have kept improving incrementally until the highest point of 2010. However it fell down again since then. It was because the financial crisis of 2008 reverberates over the whole world afterwards. The level of world peace in 2012 slipped to lower than the previous year, approaching that of right after the early 2000's terrorist attacks.

Figure 4.1. World Peace Index 2001-2012

2) World Peace in Politics, Military-Diplomacy, and Socio-Economy

World Peace Index is the combination of three sub-indices in Political, Military-diplomatic and Socio-economic PI. The change in the world peace is more likely to be incurred in the change in one of the three sub-indices. Figure 4.2 shows the change in the three sub-indices over the past 12 years. The figure demonstrates that the recent fall in WPI is derived from the sudden deterioration in Socio-economic peace. When the three sub-fields of peace are surveyed over the past 12 years, a distinctive pattern is found for each one. The political peace

54

has shown no notable change over the most of 2000's, but has recently fallen down. It is because the economy of each country got worse and the extreme right gained influence as a result of worsened economy.

Figure 4.2. Political, Military-Diplomatic, and Socio-Economic PI

On the other hand, military-diplomatic peace shows a consistent improvement since the 9.11 terrorist attacks. Even though the peace level did not reach that of pre-9.11 years, the world are getting more peaceful as the wars involved by many countries such as the Afghanistan war and the Iraq war came to a close. Socio-economic peace is the hardest hit sub-field of peace over the past couple of years. It gave more sufferings to many countries after the continuous improvement until the financial crisis of 2008. Since the Euro Crisis procrastinates with no exit in sight, the socio-economic peace of the world glooms for a while.

3) Correlation between All-items Index and Sub-category Peace Index

The level of peace varies by region and income levels, and such

55

patterns are similarly displayed in the all-items index (i.e., WPI) as well as sub-category Peace Indices (i.e., political, military-dimplomatic, socio-economic PIs).

Three figures below are scatter plots which analyze the correlations between WPI and three sub-category PIs: Figure 4.3 shows the correlation between WPI and political PI in 2011; Figure 4.4 demonstrates the correlation between WPI and military-diplomatic PI; Figure 4.5 exhibits the correlation between WPI and socio-economic PI. All three figures show high positive correlations between WPI and the three sub-category PI variables (See Figures 4.3 to 4.5). This means that countries with low sub-category PI also scored low WPI while those with high sub-category PI scored high WPI. And in terms of the degree of dispersion, the higher sub-category PI and WPI were, the smaller the dispersion was.

Figure 4.3. Correlation between WPI and PPI 2012

56

Figure 4.4. Correlation between WPI and MPI 2012

Figure 4.5. Correlation between WPI and SPI 2012

57

After all, countries with high WPI also have high political, military- diplomatic, socio-economic PIs, and vice versa. In other words, a country’s WPI can increase if its political, military-diplomatic, socio- economic PIs are correspondently high. Therefore, it can be interpreted that a country which scores high WPI has formed a certain degree of stability in its domestic politics, military-diplomacy, and socio-economics. Here it is crucial to note that a country must score high in all three sub-category PIs in order to be ranked high on the WPI. On the other hand, in the result of rare analysis, each sub-category PIs’ coefficient of determination (R²) is in the order of Political PI (77.9%), Socio- economic PI (53.4%), military-diplomatic PI (34.5%), which means that one nation’s level of peace is determined or influenced by certain factors in the order of domestic politics, socio-economics, and military-diplomacy.

4) Comparison of Regional Peace

Geographical location of a country acts as an important factor in determining peace level of a country. Figure 4.6 shows a distinctive pattern of each region. Europe ranks first by a huge margin. America, Asia-Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Arab and North Africa follows after Europe in order. There is no change in the order of peace in the past 12 years. Most regions show a consistent improvement until 2008, and a fall for the past years. The exceptions in such general trend are Asia-Pacific and Sub-Saharan Africa. It suggests that the two regions are less affected by the recent financial crisis than other ones.

As seen in Figure 4.7, the composition of peace varies across the regions. Though countries scored the same overall peace level, peace indices of political, military-diplomatic, and socio-economic categories are different by region. In the case of Europe ― the most affluent and democratic region with few military and diplomatic tensions, peace indices are different from those of other regions. The political PI in

58

Figure 4.6. WPI by Region 2001-2012

Figure 4.7. Sub-indices of WPI by Region 2012

59

Europe is by far higher than other peace indices as they have stable economic condition under the well-developed democracy. Meanwhile, the military-diplomatic PI in the region recorded the lowest level among the three sub-fields of peace. It is because the European countries have intervened in foreign conflicts. As they have recently renounced military interventions in the Middle East and North African regions, the military-diplomatic PI in the region has significantly improved.

America shows different patterns from Europe. The military-diplomatic PI is higher than that of the political PI. It is because the countries in Central and South America are politically unstable and inflicted with dictatorship, while military conflicts and diplomatic strains are relatively rare in the region. The socio-economic peace is much worse than the political and military-diplomatic peace in the region.

Asia-Pacific region shows a similar pattern to America rather than Europe. The military-diplomatic peace shows much better shape than the political peace. In the region there is no notable military-diplomatic tensions and conflicts taking place recently. On the other hand, the political PI has deteriorated in recent years. China's confrontation with ethnic minorities, South Asia's political instability, and other skirmishes regress the peace status in the region. The socio-economic peace achieved a substantial improvement in the region over the past years.

Figure 4.7 demonstrates what the most serious problem is in Sub-Saharan Africa and Middle East and North Africa. The Sub-Saharan Africa, notorious for the poverty-ridden people, records the lowest level of socio-economic peace, which does not show any significant improvement. The Middle East and North Africa is distinctive in that the military-diplomatic peace is below the political and socio-economic peace. Though the military-diplomatic peace has somewhat improved over the recent years, it is still lower than the rest in the world. Meanwhile, the socio-economic peace has shown relative improvement over the years.

60

5) Comparison of Peace by Income

Peace level of a country is closely related to its overall income level. High-income states tend to record high in peace level. The countries are divided into three groups by their GDP at purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita; high-income group ($16,000 and above), middle-income group ($3,000-$15,999), and low-income group (less than $3,000). All the three income groups display a stable status in their peace level over the past 12 years.

As seen in Figure 4.8, the world peace moved in an identical direction regardless of income level. All the income groups enhanced their peace level during the mid 2000's and reached the highest point in 2001 WPI. Since then all of them fell together. Such a consistent fall is caused by the financial crisis of 2008, but the impact varies across the income groups. The high-income group fell by 2.2 between 2010 and 2012, the middle-income group by 1.5, and the low-income group by 1.4. It confirms that the higher their incomes are, the harder is the impact of financial crisis.

The composition of peace varies by the income level. As seen in Figure 4.9, the high-income group scores higher points in the political PI than in the other two sub-field of peace. The military-diplomatic PI records the lowest among the three sub-fields of peace. Such pattern is similar to that of the European region. Meanwhile, the middle-income group scores similar in the three sub-fields of peace. The military-diplomatic PI is relatively higher than the other two sub-fields, but the difference is not too large. The low-income group has a outstandingly low level of socio-economic PI. The pattern is similar to that of Sub-Saharan Africa.

Such pattern tells which sub-field of peace should be closely monitored for each income group. It is no doubt that the low-income group has to put the highest priority on improving their socio-economic level. The high-income group had better give more concern to improving the military-diplomatic peace. The middle-income group needs a balanced approach to improving all the three sub-fields of peace, domestic politics, military-diplomatic peace, and socio-economic level equally.

61

Figure 4.8. WPI by Income Group 2001-2012

Figure 4.9. Sub-indices of WPI by Income Group 2012

62

3. Analysis of WPI by Country

1) World Peace and World Peace Index

During the first decade of the twenty-first century, the WPI have indicated a tendency of stabilizing world peace around year of 2005 which worsened by the 9/11 and War in Iraq. But we noticed the symptom of backdrop in the World Peace 2011, the opening year of second decade of the twenty-first century. Not because of international war, but economic crisis, natural disaster, and upheaval of domestic politics hindered world peace. Regretfully, this tendency continues in the year of 2012.

To improve the World Peace, the efforts of individual global citizen to the peace must be fundamental prescription. However, it seems realistic that the country's efforts for making peace are critical to the World Peace. We hope each country develops and executes the policies which enhance the peace. Here we present the country ranking of WPI 2012. This might encourage high-tier countries to endeavor to keep the high state of Peace and low-tier countries to endeavor to raise Peace level. We anticipate that the competition in good faith among the countries will give the impetus for the world peace.

Table 4.2 shows the ranking of 143 countries and the changes of the ranking in the previous years. According to WPI 2012, Sweden was found to be the most peaceful country with a PI level of 91.5.10) She had keep the honorable position of the most peaceful country consecutively from the WPI 2010. Iceland, Austria, Switzerland and

10) The index values of this report have been rounded up at the hundredths. The index value may appear to be the same; however many indices differ when the decimal places are taken into account. For instance, Austria and Switzerland have scored 90.9 points. The rankings do examine the differences in decimal places and this is reflected in the rankings.

63

Nation WPI2012

Ranks

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001Sweden 91.5 1 1 1 2 3 3 8 2 7 12 4 3Iceland 91.0 2 10 7 31 2 2 2 3 1 1 9 1Austria 90.9 3 3 10 5 4 17 1 6 10 16 14 14Switzerland 90.9 4 4 2 3 1 1 3 1 8 11 11 15Denmark 89.9 5 5 6 1 10 14 7 8 14 4 10 2Germany 88.9 6 17 15 13 33 16 6 4 11 15 17 9Canada 88.8 7 6 17 21 18 18 13 13 2 10 8 13Netherlands 88.0 8 2 3 6 16 4 12 5 3 2 15 4Finland 87.4 9 14 11 15 21 10 17 19 18 17 6 17Malta 87.1 10 11 12 20 9 11 14 14 12 8 5 8Luxembourg 86.9 11 12 8 10 7 9 10 11 9 5 2 5Slovenia 86.1 12 16 5 23 5 6 18 10 16 9 7 10Czech 86.0 13 18 25 19 8 27 26 16 25 22 13 23Bahamas 85.5 14 22 19 41 32 21 24 31 17 21 21 24Norway 85.4 15 7 4 4 15 5 4 7 5 3 1 11Belgium 85.2 16 9 33 26 13 15 9 9 15 6 16 12Australia 84.7 17 19 14 8 11 7 16 38 40 23 12 22Ireland 84.7 18 8 9 9 6 8 15 12 4 7 32 16Japan 84.6 19 13 22 30 29 31 23 17 22 13 18 7Poland 83.8 20 23 21 14 48 48 36 23 57 30 53 20Slovakia 83.3 21 20 20 12 14 23 21 21 32 27 23 18Uruguay 82.9 22 25 45 25 34 25 35 29 19 24 24 27

Table 4.2. Scores and Ranks of WPI 2001-2012

Denmark followed the Sweden as the high-tier peace country. These countries have common features. They located in Europe, high income country and very small population with less than 10 million people.

On the other hand, Sudan have positioned the most unpeaceful country with a PI level of 37.8. Yemen, Iraq, Congo Democratic Republic, South Sudan were vulnerable in peace like Sudan. These countries are in Arab or African region, low income, and over the 20 million people as relatively large population in the region.

Although there are several exceptions, we find almost the same countries in high or low rankings throughout the years.

64

Nation WPI2012

Ranks

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001New Zealand 82.8 23 15 13 7 19 12 5 15 6 19 3 6Taiwan 81.7 24 29 32 47 27 40 44 37 44 51 42 63Mauritius 81.4 25 30 23 27 23 22 27 28 20 26 28 28Estonia 81.3 26 31 18 22 26 19 40 24 21 25 31 26France 80.6 27 26 29 37 46 45 45 35 29 37 27 40Bulgaria 80.1 28 40 26 38 37 30 28 73 55 53 49 44Costa Rica 80.0 29 28 35 17 17 38 33 20 13 20 26 39Lithuania 80.0 30 34 28 28 25 29 41 61 38 33 35 31Singapore 79.9 31 41 34 32 31 35 32 34 45 43 38 35Croatia 79.7 32 35 36 35 35 60 38 43 46 54 59 60Italy 79.4 33 21 16 18 30 33 19 25 27 18 22 21Spain 79.3 34 27 40 63 22 24 11 69 81 39 19 32Albania 79.0 35 43 41 62 58 41 37 52 47 58 48 53Panama 78.9 36 48 27 44 50 32 42 41 42 31 30 34Latvia 78.7 37 39 53 36 38 28 39 32 24 32 33 37Portugal 78.5 38 32 24 16 12 20 29 18 23 14 20 19Jamaica 78.0 39 53 37 56 60 36 54 44 26 45 51 52United Kingdom 77.9 40 33 42 24 20 13 22 30 39 28 40 41Korea, Rep. 77.6 41 67 57 83 63 49 49 42 35 65 50 65Hungary 77.5 42 24 31 11 24 26 20 22 41 29 29 33Fiji 76.6 43 73 46 69 36 47 31 33 30 34 34 29Tunisia 76.0 44 47 59 52 52 52 51 51 56 50 55 77Argentina 75.7 45 37 60 74 69 50 84 50 51 63 82 59Romania 75.4 46 49 48 33 54 46 53 78 92 44 61 57Chile 75.3 47 44 61 34 42 34 25 27 31 38 37 25Mexico 75.1 48 42 63 54 98 92 30 26 28 60 25 75Paraguay 75.1 49 66 49 43 47 44 69 48 36 78 46 95Ukraine 74.7 50 54 65 60 87 75 68 92 95 109 99 81South Africa 74.6 51 52 54 50 64 56 55 56 71 46 44 55Malaysia 73.8 52 46 74 45 75 61 61 71 72 55 58 87Trinidad and Tobago 73.7 53 36 30 29 28 39 34 36 33 36 39 36Papua New Guinea 73.7 54 61 80 72 95 90 87 63 67 73 52 56Saudi Arabia 73.6 55 62 88 76 73 95 93 90 112 74 65 48Botswana 73.5 56 64 84 75 85 86 96 66 59 66 54 79Moldova 73.5 57 45 70 40 71 58 46 57 89 52 47 93Qatar 73.2 58 58 50 66 57 70 74 82 78 83 92 61Kyrgyzstan 72.8 59 55 69 65 55 82 88 70 65 79 84 73

65

Nation WPI2012

Ranks

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001Ghana 72.6 60 57 62 53 67 65 52 45 37 49 71 49Mongolia 72.5 61 38 38 57 43 69 56 39 49 42 57 72United Arab 72.1 62 72 51 68 44 54 64 59 70 67 89 64Venezuela 72.1 63 65 56 48 70 57 81 96 50 59 75 80Kazakhstan 71.9 64 56 43 39 41 59 60 46 63 70 67 43Oman 71.8 65 50 67 67 66 51 50 67 53 77 91 58Gabon 71.7 66 74 87 64 61 68 73 64 73 81 60 68Senegal 71.6 67 77 73 94 77 67 66 65 61 86 63 76Togo 71.4 68 85 76 77 83 71 92 76 66 72 66 102Dominican 71.2 69 96 68 84 74 89 70 74 104 64 80 62Cuba 71.2 70 79 52 46 86 63 82 75 52 61 88 51Namibia 71.0 71 75 66 70 62 66 63 68 62 80 73 54Peru 71.0 72 78 113 89 91 77 114 91 97 110 69 107United States 70.8 73 76 39 42 40 43 43 53 69 47 36 30Kuwait 70.5 74 69 44 61 39 42 47 47 79 69 43 42Brazil 70.2 75 70 58 51 53 55 65 55 75 84 96 70Madagascar 70.0 76 93 83 49 56 81 58 72 54 87 56 84El Salvador 69.2 77 68 79 59 49 64 72 62 43 56 78 50Honduras 69.1 78 51 55 78 51 53 57 83 86 48 81 45Bolivia 69.0 79 63 99 80 94 74 71 49 85 35 70 71Vietnam 69.0 80 90 106 101 114 102 118 114 99 106 128 86Bahrain 68.9 81 60 64 55 59 72 62 60 48 57 62 66Malawi 68.6 82 94 71 91 76 80 76 101 109 99 76 74Thailand 68.6 83 99 94 73 80 91 86 87 87 62 85 78Mali 68.6 84 98 100 79 111 76 94 86 88 75 68 82Tajikistan 68.6 85 106 86 88 104 83 109 88 82 97 105 91Azerbaijan 68.6 86 87 82 95 97 88 91 97 90 102 86 111Uzbekistan 68.4 87 97 75 82 96 73 102 113 58 71 95 67Greece 68.1 88 86 78 58 45 37 48 40 34 40 41 47Gambia 68.0 89 84 90 86 81 85 79 81 77 105 104 104Laos 67.8 90 81 93 81 78 79 90 89 96 89 98 106Bangladesh 67.6 91 88 112 99 101 109 128 116 111 114 130 94Cameroon 67.5 92 91 92 105 99 96 83 85 84 82 77 92Sri Lanka 67.0 93 89 134 127 119 121 125 108 105 85 116 125Belarus 66.8 94 59 47 71 82 84 59 54 64 41 45 38Ecuador 66.7 95 71 91 92 65 62 67 58 83 88 64 46Zambia 66.6 96 83 81 90 103 113 95 99 106 92 87 100Indonesia 65.4 97 108 115 111 102 97 113 121 119 120 117 119Armenia 65.1 98 100 89 100 72 93 103 77 68 76 83 83

66

Nation WPI2012

Ranks

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001Israel 64.7 99 128 110 98 79 114 77 110 101 93 72 90Georgia 64.6 100 105 97 124 105 116 99 95 80 108 106 97Nicaragua 64.6 101 80 95 93 90 103 85 80 74 95 93 123Tanzania 64.1 102 95 85 85 92 115 116 100 91 98 103 85Burkina Faso 64.1 103 82 72 87 68 78 75 79 60 68 74 69Morocco 63.8 104 101 101 96 88 98 89 105 102 107 109 99Mauritania 62.3 105 114 96 104 89 106 117 129 115 100 94 110Guatemala 61.9 106 109 103 106 117 100 101 84 103 90 100 103Niger 61.8 107 113 126 112 93 87 80 107 93 91 97 88China 61.7 108 104 108 103 110 104 98 93 94 94 79 96Egypt 61.6 109 111 114 119 106 134 132 117 114 122 107 126Algeria 61.3 110 103 137 120 121 110 130 137 131 136 139 137Russia 61.0 111 121 119 126 109 118 123 118 118 124 125 129Mozambique 60.9 112 116 120 108 118 107 107 104 113 118 113 121Turkey 60.8 113 92 77 116 129 120 78 102 123 113 102 112Sierra Leone 60.8 114 112 109 109 125 108 111 112 110 112 124 133Libya 60.7 115 107 107 113 100 94 105 106 107 103 110 98Nepal 60.4 116 117 116 123 122 124 136 130 124 133 133 108Jordan 60.0 117 115 104 97 84 101 104 103 98 101 101 89Lebanon 59.7 118 120 121 115 128 130 129 124 129 116 108 120Philippines 59.5 119 110 129 118 113 99 100 119 120 123 112 113Kenya 58.8 120 102 102 107 115 105 97 98 76 96 90 105India 58.5 121 124 98 133 133 127 108 109 117 125 137 127Guinea 57.8 122 118 123 110 108 111 110 111 100 111 115 109Central Africa 57.2 123 132 111 102 112 131 106 128 139 127 120 101Chad 56.8 124 119 138 132 116 126 120 135 116 115 129 139Cambodia 56.4 125 131 132 137 127 119 122 120 121 128 123 124Zimbabwe 56.3 126 126 117 122 138 123 124 134 133 104 118 130Korea, DPR 56.0 127 123 118 121 126 128 127 123 122 117 131 118Rwanda 55.2 128 133 127 134 124 117 115 125 126 121 119 138Iran 55.1 129 137 136 117 107 129 119 126 134 126 136 116Uganda 55.0 130 135 135 139 136 135 135 136 136 131 114 115Colombia 54.1 131 122 105 114 137 112 131 94 108 132 111 114Burundi 53.2 132 136 124 130 120 125 133 138 137 137 132 134Nigeria 53.0 133 130 122 125 131 137 138 133 128 130 121 131Pakistan 51.8 134 134 139 136 132 132 140 132 135 140 140 132Angola 49.8 135 138 128 131 135 140 126 127 130 141 138 136Ethiopia 49.5 136 129 140 135 134 142 134 115 125 129 127 128Myanmar 46.9 137 140 131 128 141 139 141 122 138 119 134 135

67

Nation WPI2012

Ranks

2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001Syria 46.8 138 127 125 129 130 133 112 139 132 134 126 122South Sudan 46.3 139Congo, Dem 45.5 140 141 130 140 140 136 137 141 141 142 141 142Iraq 42.0 141 142 142 142 142 141 142 142 142 135 135 141Yemen 41.4 142 139 141 138 123 122 121 131 140 138 122 117Sudan 37.8 143 125 133 141 139 138 139 140 127 139 142 140

2) Established Peace Country

There are some countries that are constantly ranked in high tier of PI throughout the years. We might call these countries in sum as established peace country. Finland, Luxemburg, and Norway could be included in a group of established peace country in addition to Sweden, Austria, and Switzerland.11)

The rankings of each categories of the top three countries are as follows. Sweden was ranked 3rd in the political PI, 9th in the military-diplomatic PI, and 5th in the socio-economic PI. And Iceland was ranked 16th in the political PI, 3rd in the military-diplomatic PI, and 3rd in the socio-economic PI. Finally, Austria was ranked 6th in the political PI, 7th in the military-diplomatic PI, and 8th in the socio-economic PI. According to the above analysis, we may propose a hypothesis that a country sustain high ranking in WPI only if she keep the high ranking on all of the each categories which composite PI.

Following the top three countries, Switzerland, Denmark, Germany, Canada, Netherlands, Finland, and Malta occupy the high rankings of

11) Among the established peace country, some countries lose high peace condition during a certain period. As a small country, Iceland peace condition dropped drastically in 2009. Western financial crisis caused economic stagnation of Iceland, whose economy heavily depends on financial service. And people demonstrated to ask the Cabinet to resign.

68

WPI 2012. With Canada as an exception, 9 out of the top 10 countries are located in Europe. This indicates that Europe sustains high standard level in all three dimensions in PI. Among the upper 30 peace countries in 143 countries, there are 9 countries which reside outside the Europe; Canada (7th), Bahamas (14th), Australia (17th), Japan (19th), Uruguay (22nd), New Zealand (23rd), Taiwan (24th), Mauritius (25th), Costa Rica (29th). Among 9 countries, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are included in European civilization. Besides, Uruguay and Costa Rica have more European oriented civilization among South America countries. Therefore, we might conclude that European civilization seems to lead the level of World Peace until now.

3) Retarded Peace Country

And then, are there any characteristics at the low ranking peace countries? In the lower ranking countries in WPI 2012, we can find many Sub-Saharan African countries, Arab countries and Asia-Pacific countries. Sudan (143rd) was found as the most unpeaceful country in the world. Although South Sudan officially departed from the Sudan as a independent country in 2011, militant conflicts continues in the borderland with South Sudan. This made Iraq, which had been the lowest rank in PI from 2008, to escape from the unhonorable title of the most unpeaceful country, but it still remained in the group of the lowest PI countries with rank of 141st.

In WPI 2012, Uganda (130th), Columbia (131st), Burundi (132nd), Nigeria (133rd), Pakistan (134th), Angola (135th), Ethiopia (136th), Myanmar (137th), Syria (138th), South Sudan (139th), Congo Democratic (140th), Iraq (141st), Yemen (142nd) and Sudan (143rd) are the under the 130th ranking countries. Except Columbia, all of the above countries always ranked below 100th during past 12 years. This implies that it is very difficult for the disrupted unpeaceful country to restore the level of peace.

69

Countries with low PI score still remain low in the WPI ranking. In spite of the world's hope for peace, WPI results suggest undergoing polarization of peace. Therefore, we have to pay more concerns to improve the peace of the lower ranking countries.

4) Regional Power Countries: U.S., China, Russia, India and Brazil

In the high or low tier rankings in WPI 2012, we could not find regional power countries that represent each continents: USA, China, Russia, India, and Brazil. How about the peace levels of these countries?

The U.S. ranked 73rd place in WPI 2012. Although the U.S. leads the world order, she is not the leader for the enhancing world peace. The U.S. was ranked: 19th in political PI, 135th in military-diplomatic PI, and 80th in socio-economic PI. Although the U.S. is included in the upper peace group in the political dimension, she is in middle-low peace group at the socio-economic dimension, and in the lower peace group in the military-diplomatic dimension. U.S. had withdrawn the military from the Iraq in 2111 and announced to withdraw the military from the Afghanistan in 2013. But she has not been able to recover peace condition in the military-diplomatic dimension as she undergoes heavy casualties and conflicts with Pakistan while being in the war on terrorism. And domestically, as the symbolic slogan of 'Occupy the Wall Street' manifests, she experiences economic depression, widening of inequality, and a series of shooting sprees. If the U.S. is to be a leading country for peace, it is necessary to improve socio-economic peace in the domestic policy, and to reduce military interventions in the foreign policy.

China is placed 108th in the ranking of WPI 2012. China is certainly not a leading country for the world peace, either. The rankings of China in each sub-dimension were: 112th in political PI, 115th in military-diplomatic PI, and 93rd in socio-economic PI. She is at the

70

low-middle ranker in all of the each sub-dimension. Although accomplishing remarkable economic growth, she has retarded in the peace dimension. If China wants to play the role of a true member of G2, she should convert the state policy to the peace promoting ones.

Russia ranked 111th in WPI 2012. Russia is included in lower peace group. The rankings of Russia in each sub-dimension are: 134th in political PI, 93rd in military-diplomatic PI, and 48th in socio-economic PI. Because of rising prices of raw materials, socio-economic PI of the Russia has promoted. However, political dimension of the peace is very low. To enhance peace situation of Russia, priority must be to establish political stability.

India ranked 121st and was also included in the lower peace group. Its sub-dimensional rankings were: 117th in political PI, 99th in military-diplomatic PI, and 114th in socio-economic PI. Like China, India was ranked in the low-middle position in all three sub-dimensions. It might not be easy to level up its peace condition with a short period of time.

Brazil ranked 75th, falling into the mid-ranked peace group. Its sub-dimensional rankings were: 68th in political PI, 42nd in military-diplomatic PI, and 106th in socio-economic PI. Among the three sub-dimensions in peace, Brazil is placed close to the upper peace group in political dimension while falling far behind in socio-economic dimension. In order to improve the overall WPI, Brazil should make efforts to improve socio-economic condition especially.

The peace level of Europe is generally high. But except Germany, the major powers in Europe do not appear in the highest ranking in WPI 2012: France (27th), Italy (33th), Spain (34th) and United Kingdom (40th). Even these countries were lowering PI because of European economic crisis.

So far, we have discussed that the PIs of major regional powers are not high. These power countries should need to reflect on their insufficient ability to lead the world peace. We hope that power countries pay more attention to promote world peace.

71

Figure 4.10. WPI of South and North Korea 2001-2012

5) Two Koreas: South and North

Let’s investigate the peace level of South and North Korea. The ranking of South Korea is 41st in WPI 2012. This indicates remarkable improvement compared with 67th in last year. Although the ranking of the political PI is the same as the last year, the ranking of the military-diplomatic PI has improved greatly and the ranking of the socio-economic PI has improved in some degree. The ranking of the socio-economic PI is 19th (falling in high tier group). and the ranking of the political PI is 31st (close to the highest 39 countries). But military-diplomatic PI is 120th even though it is the improved result. In order to raise the overall peace level, South Korea must focus on improving the military and security environment.

72

On the other hand, North Korea ranked 127th. Last year, the ranking of North Korea was 123rd. Slightly fallen, its sub-dimensional rankings were: 94th in political PI, 138th in military-diplomatic PI, and 99th in socio-economic PI. Like South Korea, the very low score in military-diplomatic PI decisively makes North Korea fall into the low peace group. In conclusion, we suggest that the policy priority must be laid to enhance the military-diplomatic peace dimension to improve the peace conditions of two Koreas.

6) Rising and Falling Countries in World Peace Index 2012

To improve the world peace, it is needed to stir up the concerns of individual country to the peace condition. To put it concretely, it is necessary to present which policy is suitable to raise the peace condition of the relevant country. In discussing the countries which underwent drastic changes in WPI during the last year, we want to find policy suggestions to improve peace conditions.

Table 4.3 categorizes the countries that experienced a change in PI over the ±5 points by regions. 9 countries experienced significant increase of WPI, and 12 countries experienced decrease of PI. The larger number of decreased countries than increased country marks parallel situation of the slight drop in WPI.

Regionally, 3 countries have experienced significant changes in PI in Europe and America and the Caribbean Europe each. 5 countries experienced significant changes in WPI in Arab and North Africa, Sub-saharan Africa and Asia-pacific region each.

And the number of countries with rising or falling PI in each region was somewhat evenly distributed except America and the Caribbean. All 3 countries with significant change in America and the Caribbean region experienced the drop of the PI.

73

Region Countries with Rising WPI(9 countries)

Countries with Falling WPI(12 countries)

America and the Caribbean (3 countries)

Honduras (-6.5), Trinidad and Tobago (-5.6), Nicaragua (-5.3)

Europe (3 countries) Russia (5.0) Hungary (-5.6), Belarus (-7.3)

Sub-Saharan Africa(5 countries)

Uganda (5.8), Central African Republic (5.1)

sudan (-17.0), South Sudan (-8.5), Kenya (-5.5)

Arab Countries(5 countries)

Iraq (10.2), Israel (10.1), Iran (7.5)

Syria (-7.8), Bahrain (-5.1)

Asia, the Pacific and Oceania (5 countries)

Tajikistan (5.5), South Korea (5.2), Fiji (5.1)

Mongolia (-5.9), Turkey (-5.8)

Note: * greater than 5 index points

Table 4.3. Countries with Significant Change in WPI 2011-2012

In America and the Caribbean region, Honduras, Trinidad and Tobago, and Nicaragua experienced significant drop in peace condition. Because of heavy flood which occurred in Central America, Honduras and Nicaragua deteriorated socio-economic dimension of peace. Trinidad and Tobago worsened political dimension of peace as she declared national emergency against rising crime level.

In Europe, Russia improved peace condition where as Hungary and Belarus deteriorated. Even though European economy is depressing, Russia recovered socio-economic condition owing to the soaring price of raw materials as oil. On the contrary, Hungary, greatly influenced by the economic depression of Western Europe, eventually had to request for IMF Insurance. This led political demonstration occurred against the constitutional amendment in Hungary. In Belarus, the political unrest enlarged because of imprisonment of the leader of the opposition party, and hundreds of prisoners protested against the government.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, Uganda and Central Africa Republic improved peace conditions. Uganda improved socio-economic situation, and Central Africa Republic lessened political unrest somewhat degree. Conversely,

74

Sudan, South Sudan and Kenya had worsened their peace conditions. Although South Sudan became an independent country, Sudan and South Sudan have continued military conflicts in border area. Kenya suffered from the severe famine because of the East Africa drought. Generally, Sub-Saharan Africa countries have low level of peace in political dimension. If a natural disaster outbreaks in these country, it exert a significantly bad effect on the peace condition of the country.

In the Arab countries, Iraq, Israel and Iran improved peace conditions. But Syria and Bahrain were worsened. Even though the political situation of the Iraq was unstable due to frequent terrorist attacks, political system of new Iraqi government was settling gradually and socio-economic situation was getting better. Israel relieved military strain with Hamas regarding Gaza district and this improved peace condition. Iran mitigated military strain concerning atomic power plants whereas political peace conditions in Syria and Bahrain got worsened. This led to aggravation of movements for the democracy and a bloody affairs or even a civil war.

In the Asia-Pacific region, three countries (Tajikistan, South Korea, and Fiji) have improved and two countries (Mongolia and Turkey) deteriorated. Tajikistan and Fiji recovered political unrest during the last year, so peace conditions returned to the normal state. South Korea also recovered peace condition especially in military-diplomatic dimension. In WPI 2011, North Korea's torpedo attack on the Korean naval ship of Cheonan and artillery shelling of Yeonpyeong Island lowered peace condition of South Korea. Disputes between political parties regarding president election made Mongolian peace condition worse. And Turkey lost peace condition because of many casualties from earthquake and enduring conflicts with the Kurd.

75

4. Analyses of World Peace Index by Category and Implications

1) Political Peace

The Political Peace Index of 2012 for 143 countries was analyzed. Tables 4.4 and 4.5 displays the transitions in Political Peace Index (PPI) of WPI and Political Peace Index by region. Political PI started point of 71.4 in 2001 and raised to the point of 74.0 in 2008, but dropped to the point of 71.6 in 2012. The political peace level had returned to the level of 2001.

From the Table 4.4, we can conclude that European countries have enjoyed high levels of the political peace. And America and the Caribbean countries followed next to Europe whereas the other regions scored still low in PPI. Particularly, decreasing level of the political peace in Arab countries was noticeable.

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012World 71.4 73.7 73.9 72.8 73.7 73.4 73.1 74.0 72.5 73.3 72.2 71.6America and the Caribbean 73.5 76.5 74.4 73.9 77.4 75.5 76.1 75.2 77.6 76.4 75.6 74.2Europe 84.3 87.9 87.9 86.6 87.8 88.4 87.9 88.0 86.6 87.2 85.3 85.3Sub-Saharan Africa 64.7 67.5 67.5 67.9 67.8 67.4 66.3 69.6 66.5 67.0 64.3 68.2Arab Countries 61.7 64.1 65.6 60.5 62.0 64.2 62.2 62.6 60.4 63.6 61.6 55.6Asia, the Pacific and Oceania 66.8 66.1 67.8 67.2 66.7 64.7 66.1 66.9 64.6 65.8 67.8 66.7

Table 4.4. Political PI by Region 2001-2012

Usually, the political PI of Europe distributed in late 80s. However, from the 2011 the political peace conditions of the Europe are falling and marked 85.3 in 2012 like in 2011. There are not any serious political conflicts which endangering regime stability, but group conflicts concerning immigration issues and economic crises influenced political stability of the Europe. Although Europe still maintains high

76

level of political peace compared to other regions, the changes of PPI exposes the possibility of lowering political peace in Europe.

The political peace of America and the Caribbean is high after Europe. PPIs of America and the Caribbean countries have been around the middle of 70s. Like Europe, there have been few ongoing serious domestic political conflicts in this region. But many of America and the Caribbean countries have relatively short history of democracy, so the level of political peace is largely fall short of Europe in general.

The levels of political peace in Asia-Pacific, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Arabs are low. The PPI of these regions are far below the world PPI. The improvement of political peace is urgently necessary in these regions. Almost all of countries in these regions experienced colonial era.

Among these three regions, PPI of the Arab countries had became worse from 2011, and PPI of the Arab countries of the 2012 is far below the other two regions. This phenomenon is the effects of the democratization movements in Northern Africa Arab countries, which started from Tunisia. In the end, the democratization improves the political peace condition of the relevant country. But democratization didn't settled in these Northern Africa Arab countries until now. It is the stage that domestic political conflicts are spreading.

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012World 71.4 73.7 73.9 72.8 73.7 73.4 73.1 74.0 72.5 73.3 72.2 71.6High-income 87.1 89.5 88.9 87.4 89.1 89.6 89.5 89.4 88.4 89.2 87.2 86.1Mid-income 66.4 68.9 70.0 68.0 69.6 69.5 68.5 68.6 68.3 68.3 68.6 66.8Low-income 58.7 60.6 60.6 61.0 60.2 58.5 59.0 62.3 58.5 60.2 58.1 60.4

Table 4.5. Political PI by Income Group 2001-2012

Table 4.5 shows that there are big differences in the PPI among the income groups. The PPIs of the High-income Group are high and changes in the latter part of 80s. The PPIs of the Mid-income Group changes in the latter part of 60s, and the PPIs of the Low-income

77

Group changes between latter part of 50s and first part of 60s. However, it is remarkable that the PPI of the High-Income Group is lowering recently. The main reason is that political unrests emerge in Europe region, where the high income countries are concentrated in.

Let's discuss the characteristics of political peace of the individual country, focused on the top 30 and the bottom 30 in the ranking. Table 4.6 shows top and bottom 30 countries by region.

Among 143 countries, New Zealand (98.8) stood at the top in the political dimension of WPI 2012. And Finland (98.7) followed New Zealand. Including Finland, many European countries are in the high rank. 20 out of top 30 countries in PPI are in European region. Out of remaining 10 countries, 4 countries are located in America and the Caribbean, 3 are in Sub-sahara Africa, and 3 are in Asia, the Pacific and Oceania. There is no Arab country in the top 30 PPI. The distribution of the upper political peace group is skewed among the regions.

Within 10 countries which are outside Europe region, 4 countries (USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia) have long history of democracy based on European civilization. Other 6 countries are; Bahamas and Uruguay in America and the Caribbean; Namibia, Mauritius and Botswana in Sub-sahara Africa; and Singapore in Asia, the Pacific and Oceania. These 6 are small population states with less than 10 million. Although these countries experienced colonial era, the composition of the populations are rather simple. Having a small number of race resulting relatively less ethnic conflicts seems to be the reason for maintaining high political peace level.

The opposite features emerges in the distribution of the lower political peace countries. In PPI 2012, Yemen (12.9) turned out the worst peace country among 143 countries in political dimension. 30 bottom PPI countries are concentrated in 3 regions; 9 in Sub-sahara Africa, 9 in Arab countries, and 8 in Asia and the Pacific, Oceania.

78

Region Political Peace Index Top 30 Countries

Political Peace Index Bottom 30 Countries

America and the Caribbean

Canada (96.5), Bahamas (94.7), Uruguay (93.6), United States (91.8)[4 countries]

Bolivia(56.7), Guatemala (52.5), Colombia (32.5)[3 countries]

Europe Finland (98.7), Sweden (98.6), Denmark (97.3), Austria (96.9), Switzerland (96.7), Ireland (96.3), Belgium (95.2), Slovenia (94.8), France (94.7), Luxemburg (94.2), Estonia (94.0), Iceland (94.0), Malta (93.6), Poland (91.4), Portugal (90.6), Netherlands (90.6), Czech Republic (89.8), Slovakia (89.7), Spain (89.4), Germany (88.8) [20 countries]

Russia (37.5) [1 country]

Sub-Saharan Africa Namibia (91.3), Mauritius (89.6), Botswana (88.9)[3 countries]

Angola (53.3), Zimbabwe (51.8), Chad (49.9), Burundi (48.2), Rwanda (46.1), Uganda (43.4), Nigeria (34.2), Congo, Dem. (28.7), Sudan (24.9) [9 countries]

Arab Countries Lebanon (56.9), Egypt (56.9), Jordan (53.8), Algeria (42.4), Syria (40.7), Libya (37.4), Iran (35.1), Iraq (31.2), Yemen (12.9)[9 countries]

Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

New Zealand (98.8), Australia (98.0), Singapore(89.2) [3 countries]

India (54.7), Cambodia (50.9), Sri Lanka (50.7), Indonesia (50.6), Nepal (47.2), Philippines (43.0), Pakistan (37.6), Myanmar (32.5) [8 countries]

Table 4.6. Top and Bottom 30 Countries in Political PI by Region 2012

79

In the Sub-Saharan African countries, large population countries (over the 30 million), such as Nigeria, Congo Dem., Sudan, Uganda, and Ethiopia, are all in the bottom ranking of political peace. They have prolonged ethnic conflicts since independence.

There is no Arab country in the top 30 political peace countries. This may be interrelated with the facts that Islam states confine the western style democratic political activity. In Libya, Syria, and Egypt, political turmoils are expanding as the people demand democratization. In Yemen, Iraq, and Lebanon, they continue to have serious conflicts between religious groups and/or have frequent terrorist attacks.

In Asia-Pacific region, low political peace countries (India, Indonesia, Pakistan, the Philippines, Myanmar, and Sri Lanka) have the same features: large populations and complexities in ethnic and religion.

Bolivia, Guatemala and Colombia in America and Russia in Europe are included in the bottom 30 political peace group. Although many internal conflicts diminished in the Central and Latin America countries after the mid-1980s, these countries have had prolonged civil wars. At glance, Russia recovered political stability under Putin's political power. But political turmoils has not yet been resolved sufficiently until now.

In PPI 2012, Norway, a representative democratic country, is not included in top 30 countries. This might be worth special mention. Norway scored 86.7 in PPI and ranked 37th. This score is far behind 94.4, the score of 2011 PPI. In Norway, an anti-multiculturalism and anti-Islam terrorist attacked government and youth summer camp on July 22, 2011. This incident was noted as the deadliest attack since WWⅡ and dropped political conditions of Norway.

Japan is missing in top 30 PPI countries, too. Japan scored 88.6 in PPI and ranked 32nd. In 2012 PPI, Japan lost about 7 points compared with last year. Japan government could not respond adequately to the radiation materials leaking from Fukushima nuclear plant which

80

destroyed by tsunami on 11 March 2011. So, distrust to the politics has elevated in Japan.

South Korean PPI in 2012 was 886 and ranked 31st. The political peace of South Korea slightly dropped during the beginning of Lee Myong-bak regime, but it recovered as before recently. On the other hand, the PPI of North Korea in 2012 is 66.1 with the ranking of 94th out of 143. North Korea lost about 8 points in the PPI compared with last year. So far, the PPI of the North Korea has retained certain level with no distinct change. But the death of North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in the end of 2011 increased political uncertainty in North Korea. We have to pay attention to the newly started Kim Jong-eun regime and how this young new leader manages North Koreans' dissatisfaction in politics.

Figure 4.11. Political PI of the South and North Koreas 2001-2012

81

2) Military-diplomatic Peace

In order to measure Military-diplomatic Peace Index, three subcategories were taken into consideration. First, in addressing the subcategory of "historical international conflict," we looked for any history of international war and colonialism and considered geopolitical conditions of each country. Second, in addressing the subcategory of "militarization level," we considered how much each country contributed to the international disputes through military expenditure and military power, and whether it took part in any Weapons of Mass Destruction related international agreements. Third, in addressing the subcategory of "international political conflict," the team considered how much each country was influenced by the recent peace-affecting incidents that took place within the past year such as international all-out war, battle, violence, and other political-diplomatic incidents.

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012World 74.0 69.9 71.4 69.4 70.4 71.4 71.4 72.0 70.9 72.7 72.2 71.9America and the Caribbean 80.2 77.1 78.9 76.9 77.1 76.5 76.4 77.2 76.0 77.3 78.8 77.6Europe 78.6 75.4 76.3 72.1 75.5 75.9 75.9 75.8 74.7 77.4 76.9 76.1Sub-Saharan Africa 72.4 71.9 71.5 71.9 70.1 73.4 71.9 70.8 71.7 72.8 73.5 73.5Arab Countries 62.2 52.1 54.3 52.9 53.2 57.9 55.8 59.9 58.1 59.0 55.9 54.9Asia, the Pacific and Oceania 72.8 66.4 70.5 68.2 70.3 68.5 71.4 72.2 69.9 72.1 70.4 71.9

Table 4.7. Military-diplomatic PI by Region 2001-2012

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012World 74.0 69.9 71.4 69.4 70.4 71.4 71.4 72.0 70.9 72.7 72.2 71.9High-income 77.8 72.9 73.9 70.7 74.0 75.3 75.0 75.2 74.7 76.2 74.4 75.0Mid-income 72.7 68.4 70.6 68.6 69.2 69.1 69.3 70.4 68.8 70.8 70.8 70.6Low-income 71.2 68.1 69.5 68.9 67.6 70.1 69.9 70.0 69.4 71.1 71.4 69.7

Table 4.8. Military-diplomatic PI by Income Group 2001-2012

82

The average military-diplomatic Peace Index for 143 countries is 71.9, which is slightly lower than the last year's, which was 72.2. The average military-diplomatic Peace Indices over the past 12 years are 74.0 (2001), 69.9 (2002), 71.4 (2003), 69.4 (2004), 70.4 (2005), 71.4 (2006), 71.4 (2007), 72.0 (2008), 70.9 (2009), 72.7 (2010), 72.2 (2011), and 71.9 (2012). The trend shows that military-diplomatic Peace Index has plummeted right after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but now trend shows a minor fluctuation without dramatic change. OECD member states, where South Korea belongs, show far higher level of military-diplomatic Peace Index compared to the rest of the world. Based on military-diplomatic aspect only, Japan is ranked as the most peaceful and Republic of South Sudan, which is added for the first time in World Peace Index, ranked as the least peaceful ones among 143 countries. Last year, Israel recorded the worst.

Relationship between peace level and income level indicates that peace level is higher in the wealthy areas and lower in the poor areas. Regionally, there is also a large deviation with the peace level being higher in America and Europe while lower in the Arab and North Saharan Africa regions. This is an on-going trend observed since the very first World Peace Index in 2001.

Countries in the top rank for military-diplomatic peace level are Japan, Czech Republic, Iceland, Germany, Slovakia, Dominican Republic, Austria, Guatemala, Sweden, and Italy. These countries are, with an exception of Japan, either traditional welfare states in Europe or small countries those who do not have a significant influence in the international politics or located in traditionally safe regions. By contrast, countries in the lower rank include Jordan, United States, Armenia, Lebanon, North Korea, Israel, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, and South Sudan. The most noticeable case is the United States. Main reason for the low ranking appears that the U.S. overseas military operations are not complete yet. Also, the latest U.S. policy of pivot toward Asia-Pacific,

83

Figure 4.12. Military-diplomatic PI by Major Groups 2001-2012

Figure 4.13. Military-diplomatic PI by Income Group 2001-2012

84

Figure 4.14. Military-diplomatic PI by Region 2001-2012

including partial relocation of the U.S. marines in Okinawa to Guam and other areas in the Asia-Pacific, may have some effect on lowering the ranking. Except the United States, all the rest are those countries that are currently under civil war or in terrorism-prone, protracted conflict region.

South and North Koreas each ranked 120th and 138th in military-diplomatic PI for 2012. South Korea’s military-diplomatic peace level has been fluctuating for the past years without much change whereas that of North Korea tends to decrease over the years. South Korea’s military-diplomatic peace level dropped significantly last year due to North Korean provocations that happened in 2010.

North Korea is responsible for the second nuclear crisis that began in October 2002, and has been under the international community’s omnidirectional pressure. North Korea’s food and energy shortage problem seems to have ameliorated a bit but it is still experiencing

85

much difficulty. Their illegal export of ballistic missiles and drugs and circulation of forged currency have raised deep concerns from Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) members and the international community. As a result, North Korea’s military-diplomatic Peace Index has remained in the lowest bracket. In particular, North Korea’s declaration of possession of nuclear weapons, subsequent international sanctions on the North, and suspension of inter-Korean and the United States-North Korean dialogues further worsened the North’ situation. The inter-Korean relations which began to turn sour since the inauguration of Lee Myung-bak administration has been further aggravated since 2008. The Cheonan incident and shelling of Yonpyong Island were further aggravated the situation. Since Kim Jong-il's death in December 2011, North Korea's future is under gross uncertainty that is associated with the power transition process.

Figure 4.15. Military-diplomatic PI of South and North Koreas 2001-2012

86

3) Socio-economic Peace

In order to measure the Socio-economic Peace Index dimension, three subcategories were taken into consideration. First, the subcategory of ‘quality of life’ evaluates average welfare conditions in the area of health, education, and income. Second, the subcategory of ‘social exclusion and inequality’ evaluates the peace level dependent on the extent of inhuman deprivation and differences of and inequality between various groups. Third, the subcategory of "safety and stability" evaluates the level of ecological and social safety, personal security, and socio-economic stability.

The 2012 Socio-economic Peace Index was measured for 143 countries in the world. The world average in this category recorded 66.8 point, a 0.3 point increase from the previous year. The increase shows a stagnant state after abrupt fall of 2010 as a result of the financial crisis of 2008 (Figure 4.16). The socio-economic peace of 2012 approached the level of one decade ago in 2001.

Figure 4.16. Socio-economic Peace Index 2001-2012

87

Figure 4.17. High Performers in Socio-economic PI 2001-2012

Figure 4.18. Low Performers in Socio-economic PI 2001-2012

88

Based solely on socio-economic aspect, Norway was ranked as the most peaceful with 92.7 points followed by other Northern European countries including Iceland, Swiss, Netherlands, and Sweden in order. As seen in Figure 4.17, these countries had brief set-back in 2011, but bounced back to the pre-2010 condition in 2012.

Ethiopia, on the contrary, was ranked as the least peaceful with the PI score of 19.5 points. The next lowest countries were mostly those in Sub-Saharan regions such as Kenya, Congo Republic, Guinea, Mozanbique, Central Africa in order. These countries were also ranked at the bottom portion in 2011’s report as well, indicating that the socio-economic peace in these countries are not improving.

When the level of socio-economic peace is surveyed, the world is divided into three groups of region. As seen in Figure 4.19, Europe is an indisputable leader recording higher than 80 points in socio-economic peace. Meanwhile, America, Asia-Pacific and Arab countries build a cluster displaying a similar level of socio-economic peace far apart from Europe. There are some variation among these regions. Until 2010, America lead the other two regions. But since then Arab countries recorded an rapid improvement and overpassed America and Asia-Pacific regions. Sub-Saharan Africa keeps the distinctively lowest position in socio-economic peace. The distance of the region from the others is not shortened. To make matters worse, the socio-economic peace over the past two years in the region was worsened as a result of the financial crisis of 2008.

The Socio-economic Peace Index of 2012 was grouped by income levels and the composing categories are compared for each income group. The upper income countries with $16,000 and more per capita GDP records the higher level in all the three composing categories (Figure 4.20). Particularly, the category of safety and stability approached the theoretically full point until 2010, but fell sharply since then. As a result of financial crisis of 2008, the socio-economic PI of

89

Figure 4.19. Socio-economic PI by Region 2001-2012

Figure 4.20. Socio-economic PI by Income 2001-2012

90

high-income group is lower by 1.2 points than one decade ago, recording 80.1 points. This reflects how economic constrain and anxiety have been spreading out over the world lately. The levels of social exclusion and inequality that used to remain high with steady improvement have also dropped down sharply during the past two years.

The mid-income countries with the income range of $3,000 and $15,999 show a quite difference in the pattern of socio-economic peace. They had consistent improvement until 2009, having a brief spell of falling, and rebound in 2012 socio-economic PI. As a result, the socio-economic PI in 2012 is higher by 3.4 points than that in 2001. In contrast to the upper income countries, the category of exclusion and inequality stayed at the lowest position compared to the safety and stability and the quality of life. It implies that the social exclusion and inequality is the major culprit to pull down the socio-economic peace in those countries. They experienced the similar pattern of sharp drop over the past two years like other nations.

The low-income countries of annual income of less than $3,000 has a miserable level of socio-economic peace. Their peace index score is lower than the upper income countries by more than 30 points, and has no notable change over the time. The socio-economic PI of these countries recorded 49.2 in 2012, which is higher by 1.5 points than that of 2001. It is outstanding that their score in safety and stability is much lower than other two sub-categories of socio-economic peace. It tells that they suffer from frequent disasters and accidents as well as economic hardship due to severe unemployment and high inflation. The social exclusion and inequality in those countries are as much inferior. The miserable and stagnant state in the socio-economic area pulls down their peace level.

Figure 4.21 shows the trend of socio-economic PI of the major countries in the world. It is notable that the socio-economic PI of Europe have been falling since 2009. On the other hand, the United States

91

Figure 4.21. Socio-economic peace of Major countries 2001-2012

Figure 4.22. Composition of Socio-economic PI of Major countries 2012

92

fell in socio-economic peace from 2010 to 2011, but rebound in the 2012 PI. The United States have fallen considerably as a result of the 2001 terrorist attacks, but did not recover to the peace level of the previous years. The socio-economic PI in 2012 is as much as 13.6 points lower than that in 2001. China fell a little in 2010 but had a substantial recovery since then.

The socio-economic peace of major countries varies substantially in its composition of peace as well as in its average level. As seen in Figure 4.22, the socio-economic peace of leading countries in Europe such as Germany and Sweden displays a quite similar shape. They scored equally high points in all of the three composing sub-categories of socio-economic PI. On the other hand, the United States, another high-income country in the Western culture, scored a lowest level in security and stability like China, and also stayed at the similar level as China in exclusion and inequality. The US shares with the Western European leaders only in the average level of quality of life. China stays at far lower level in all the composing sub-categories of socio-economic peace, particularly being lowest in security and stability.

South Korea scored 82.3 in socio-economic PI in 2012, which is higher by 2.5 points than that in 2011. This is much lower than the highest point in 2005, but much higher than that in 2001. Korea fell sharply as a result of financial crisis of 2008, but kept recovering from the shock since then. Korea was ranked 18th out of 143 countries in 2012 socio-economic PI. This is indeed substantial improvement compared to its 34th position in 2011 and its 67th position in the WPI ranking list in 2010. However, it may not necessarily reflect South Korea’s tangible improvement in terms of socio-economic peace condition. Rather, such achievement could be possible as most of the other countries were undergoing relatively more severe hardships lately.

93

Figure 4.23. Socio-economic Peace of South Korea 2001-2012

Figure 4.24. Composition of Socio-economic PI of South Korea 2001-2012

94

South Korea records the highest points in the quality of life compared to the other two composing sub-categories of socio-economic peace. On the other hand, it scored lower points in security and stability. The social exclusion and inequality level of the country is worsened recently.

As seen in Figure 4.24, South Korea is positioned between the European leaders and the United States in security and stability. She is closer to the European leaders in the level of social exclusion and inequality than to the United States. Korea reached the level of European countries in the quality of life.

Figure 4.25 compares the socio-economic PI of South and North Koreas. South Korea scored 82.3 in socio-economic PI for 2012 and was ranked 18th among 143 countries. This was indeed a great jump from being around 33rd (79.8) in 2011. On the other hand, North Korea was ranked 99th with the socio-economic PI of 59.1, which was a slight rise from its 104th (57.1) position in 2011. Since the socio-economic peace levels of both countries have improved, it still has left the vast gap between North and South Koreas in socio-economic peace level unnarrowed.

Figure 4.25. Socio-economic PI of South and North Koreas 2001-2012

95

Ⅴ. Conclusion and Implications

The year 2011 covered by World Peace Index 2012 may be dubbed as a period of global risk in which macro level failure in global governance was an important factor for the world peace. In fact, all the current troubles are on the extension of 2008 global financial crisis. As the World Economic Forum's 2011 Global Risk Report shows,1) more non-military, non-traditional risk factors such as socio-economic turbulence, climate change, or financial disparity are found to be threatening key factors to the world peace than traditional security threats such as in-state military conflicts or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. According to WEF's Expert Survey, the chaos caused by fiscal policy failure, geo-political and geo-economic disputes, economic disparity, dispute over energy and water resource are some of the key factors that would affect the future global risk for a while.

Today’s global order is not dictated solely by the U.S., but by many prominent nations including China, the EU, India, Japan, and Russia, the order appearing to be a multipolar system. However, the current global order differs from the historical definition of a multipolar system is that although there are many powers are involved, many of them may not be actual nations. An important characteristic of modern day international system is that the nation state has lost its exclusive grasp on power. The strata above today’s nation state are regional and national organizations, and below it are various paramilitary organizations, and its peers include NGOs and corporations that challenge its position for power. To summarize, one would say in international relations, the power is dispersed ‘in various places, in

1) World Economic Forum. 2011. Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition: An Initiative of the Risk Response Network. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

96

various hands.’2) Such a complex nature of today's global environment has a close connection with the discussion of world peace. If we take lessons from the latest global financial crisis, it is that the world is not compartmentalized by nation-states any more, and all the political, military-diplomatic, socio-economic activities are all connected through global network. Because of such networked nature, the struggle for world peace today requires transnational, networked approach, too.

This year’s analyses of indices resulted in a WPI of 70.1 points, the mean value derived from 71.6 index points in domestic-politics category, 71.9 index points in military-diplomatic category, and 66.8 index points in the social-economic category. By region, Europe is the most peaceful region, followed by America, and Asia-Pacific. Africa and Arab regions are the least peaceful regions. The level of world peace in 2012 dropped slightly compared to last year’s 70.3. Looking back the past eleven years where the measure of peace level was possible, there has been a fluctuation in the peace level; the early 2000’s showed the lowest, beginning to rise in the mid-2000’s, and now it recovered the pre-September 11 level. Unfortunately, latest global financial crisis imposed a severe shock to world peace. Such new trend indicates that now factors related with global governance are becoming important indicators of world peace.

Based on our analyses up to the present, promoting the next dimension of world peace and its implications to the members of the global village are as follows:

First, years of research suggests that world peace in the twenty-first century contains a very comprehensive and complex significance, which goes beyond a simple absence of war or material abundance. It is directly and indirectly associated with every aspect of human civilization, which encompasses humanity issues like human isolation

2) Richard N. Haass. 2008. “The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance?” Foreign Affairs 87(3): 44-56.

97

and dehumanization due to urbanization and information; and sustainability issues like global warming, energy and water shortage; as well as clear anti-peace factors like war on terror, identity-related racial, religious and cultural conflicts, economic imparity, political repression and violence, and human rights abuses in failed states. As a result, world peace in the post-September 11 era requires a more holistic approach than in the past. Such trend implies that world peace cannot be achieved by the intervention of a global power or international organizations but by concerted efforts of countries around the world. World peace is no longer a matter of an individual but of all entities of the global village as a whole, and solutions to this gargantuan question will come from worldwide cooperation and dedication.

Second, peace level greatly varies depending on geographical location. The survey shows that peace levels of America or Europe are higher than those of Africa or Arab under the same conditions of population size and income level. A regression analysis with population size and national income as controlled variables and geopolitical locations as independent dummy variables significantly improve the explainability of the WPI. Indeed, years of analyses find that Europe and America have been steadily shown as peaceful regions while Africa and the Middle East as permanent conflict zones. In the case of the Middle East, the War in Iraq partly accounts for the low peace level, but prolonged Arab-Israel conflicts and overall poor security in this region are the fundamental causes. This suggests that the Western world needs to provide systematic and dedicated aid to non-Western world with aims to promote democracy, improve their living conditions by economic growth, and enhance mutual understanding through dialogues between cultures.

Third, the wealth gap continues to increase, and the socio-economic PI reflects structural factors of the society and economy as unable to

98

improve or worsen within a short period of time. Unlike the political PI or the military-diplomatic PI, the socio-economic PI is greatly swayed by national income levels and regional factors. This means high-income countries are a safer and more equal society with a relatively larger portion of its citizens protected by social security. Poorer states show a particularly large gap in the sub-criteria of inequality, discrimination and exclusion. From this we see that lower income nations suffer not only lower standards of living, but also great social inequality and exclusion of socially disadvantaged classes.

All in all, further advancement in peace levels are hard to expect because corresponding issues are yet discussed at a national level, not accounting for the complex and transnational nature of world peace. World peace is far beyond the ability of any single measure or a power of a nation to unilaterally resolve. To promote world peace, the question must be approached from dimension of global governance, standing on international consensus.

The twenty-first century is the age of network― an era characterized by a complex global order founded on a network system― which is a result of the information revolution and widespread globalization. As a result, international system can no longer be considered as a framework composed of individual states, and even the concept of sovereignty is found wanting in its scope of defining the complexity of international politics.

The world is becoming increasingly complex. No single nation can be dominant since the order is divided and multi-polar with a lot of networks. Under these circumstances, power is derived from ‘connectivity’ with other actors, and how well that network is maintained and implemented. Any nation with an initiative to lead must place itself at the hub of such a network to gain control over global agendas. In this new global order, a nation must strive for both quantity and quality of networks with competitive nations. To survive

99

in this framework, the exertion toward seeking network-oriented diplomacy and alliances become inevitable Such networks are open-order, and less the connectivity to such a network, more limited is a nation’s international capability. With a cliquish nationalistic perspective, the full benefits of such globalization will not be reaped, and the common truth that world peace requires worldwide effort and dedication cannot be stressed enough. World peace can neither be achieved solely by the power and influence of political leaders nor are they exclusive artifacts of powerful nations. All members of the global village must realize the value of peace and strive for greater understanding and generosity towards others so that all may enjoy the boundless benefits of peace.

There are many ways the World Peace Forum can contribute in these turbulent times. The role of World Peace Index is to quantitatively index world peace levels to aid visualization and enlighten people of the value of peace and ultimately contribute to awareness of promoting peace amongst all members of the global community. Furthermore, the World Peace Forum is seeking ways to quantify and index the level of contribution of each nation and region. The World Peace Forum hopes that the findings of World Peace Index will contribute to all members of the international community in their endeavor to improve peace within their communities.

101

References

Air-Sea Battle (ASB). 2011. Air-Sea Battle Concept Summary (Story Number: NNS111109-17). http://navy.mil.

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 2012. The World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook.

Correlates of War (COW). 2011. The New COW War Data, 1816-2007 (v4.1). http://www.correlatesofwar.org.

Diehl, Paul F. (ed.) 1999. The Road Map to War: Territorial Dimensions of International Conflict. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Freedom House. 2012. Freedom in the World. http://www.freedomhouse.org.Glaser, Bonnie S. 2012. “Pivot to Asia: Prepare for Unintended Consequences.”

Pp. 22-24 in 2012 Global Forecast: Risk, Opportunity, and the Next Administration, edited by Craig Cohen and Josiane Gabel. Washington,

DC: Center for Strategic and International Studies.Goertz, Gary, and Paul F. Diehl. 1992. Territorial Changes and International

Conflict. London: Routledge.Haass, Richard N. 2008. “The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S.

Dominance?” Foreign Affairs 87(3): 44-56.International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). 2012. The Military Balance

2012. London: IISS.Jones, Daniel M., Stuart A. Bremer, and J. David Singer. 1996. “Militarized

Interstate Disputes, 1816-1992: Rationale, Coding Rules, and Empirical Patterns.” Conflict Management and Peace Science 15(2): 163-213.

Kissinger, Henry. 2011. On China. New York: Penguin Press.Manyin, Mark E., Stephen Daggett, Ben Dolven, Susan V. Lawrence, Michael

F. Martin, Ronald O'Rourke, and Bruce Vaughn. 2012. “Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration's 'Rebalancing' Toward Asia.” CRS Report for Congress, no. R42448. pp. 1-29.

Observer, The. 1999. Observer Human Rights Index, 2nd Edition. http://www.

102

guardian.co.uk/rightsindex.Okubo, Yoshio. 2012. “Rethinking Japan's "Lost Decade": Some Post-Crisis

Reflections.” Pp. 54-58 in Think Tank 20: New Challenges for the Global Economy, New Uncertainties for the G-20. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Shin Kwan-Ho. 2010. “Two Views for the Reason of Eurozone Crisis.” Chosun Ilbo Daily, Weekly Biz (June 12, 2010). http://biz.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2010/06/11/2010061101577.html. [in Korean]

Transparency International. 2012. Corruption Perception Index 2011. http://cpi.transparency.org.

Twining, Daniel. 2012. “The Chinese Military's Great Leap Forward.” Real Clear World. http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2012/03/08/the_chinese_militarys_great_leap_forward_99944.html.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2009. Human Development Report 2009: Overcoming Barriers ― Human Mobility and Development. New York: UNDP.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2010. Human Development Report 2010: The Real Wealth of Nations ― Pathways to Human Development. New York: UNDP.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 2011. Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity ― A Better Future for All. New York: UNDP.

U.S. Department of Defense. 2012. Joint Operational Access Concept (JOAC) Version 1.0. http://www.defense.gov.

Wikipedia. 2012. Wikipedia. http://www.wikipedia.org.World Bank. 2012. World Development Indicators 2012. Washington, DC:

World Bank.World Economic Forum. 2011. Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition: An Initiative

of the Risk Response Network. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

Part 2

Statistical Tables

105

Nation Rank WPI POL MIL SOCSweden 1 91.5 98.6 84.7 91.1Iceland 2 91.0 93.7 87.0 92.1Austria 3 90.9 96.9 85.1 90.6Switzerland 4 90.9 96.7 84.3 91.6Denmark 5 89.9 97.3 81.6 90.9Germany 6 88.9 88.8 86.8 91.1Canada 7 88.8 96.5 80.6 89.2Netherlands 8 88.0 89.8 82.7 91.5Finland 9 87.4 98.7 73.7 90.0Malta 10 87.1 93.1 82.6 85.5Luxembourg 11 86.9 94.2 77.0 89.5Slovenia 12 86.1 94.8 84.1 79.3Czech 13 86.0 89.8 87.9 80.2Bahamas 14 85.5 94.7 79.5 82.3Norway 15 85.4 86.5 77.0 92.7Belgium 16 85.2 95.2 80.1 80.3Australia 17 84.7 98.0 74.8 81.2Ireland 18 84.7 96.3 80.4 77.3Japan 19 84.6 87.6 90.2 76.0Poland 20 83.8 91.4 84.0 76.0Slovakia 21 83.3 89.7 85.3 75.0Uruguay 22 82.9 93.6 77.6 77.6New Zealand 23 82.8 98.8 77.9 71.6Taiwan 24 81.7 84.1 73.0 87.9Mauritius 25 81.4 89.6 81.9 72.6Estonia 26 81.3 94.0 70.0 80.0France 27 80.6 94.7 67.2 80.1Bulgaria 28 80.1 85.7 77.0 77.6Costa Rica 29 80.0 86.2 84.3 69.7Lithuania 30 80.0 87.5 73.1 79.4Singapore 31 79.9 89.2 62.7 87.9Croatia 32 79.7 73.6 83.2 82.2Italy 33 79.4 74.5 84.6 79.1Spain 34 79.3 89.4 82.2 66.3Albania 35 79.0 81.2 77.3 78.5Panama 36 78.9 86.6 77.1 73.1Latvia 37 78.7 83.6 74.9 77.7Portugal 38 78.5 90.6 78.1 66.8

World Peace Index 2012

106

Nation Rank WPI POL MIL SOCJamaica 39 78.0 82.0 82.6 69.4United Kingdom 40 77.9 87.2 60.1 86.4Korea, Rep. 41 77.6 88.6 61.9 82.3Hungary 42 77.5 84.1 83.6 64.9Fiji 43 76.6 76.8 84.0 69.2Tunisia 44 76.0 76.8 76.2 75.1Argentina 45 75.7 79.9 71.1 76.2Romania 46 75.4 75.5 80.5 70.2Chile 47 75.3 84.1 79.5 62.2Mexico 48 75.1 73.0 83.6 68.8Paraguay 49 75.1 72.7 83.1 69.4Ukraine 50 74.7 72.1 75.8 76.2South Africa 51 74.6 81.8 79.6 62.5Malaysia 52 73.8 63.3 76.7 81.5Trinidad and Tobago 53 73.7 72.2 78.6 70.2Papua New Guinea 54 73.7 80.4 79.0 61.5Saudi Arabia 55 73.6 76.0 66.7 78.0Botswana 56 73.5 88.9 70.1 61.7Moldova 57 73.5 82.0 64.9 73.5Qatar 58 73.2 78.6 68.1 72.9Kyrgyzstan 59 72.8 69.4 76.7 72.3Ghana 60 72.6 87.3 78.1 52.4Mongolia 61 72.5 74.7 70.2 72.7United Arab 62 72.1 82.7 57.2 76.4Venezuela 63 72.1 73.5 72.9 69.8Kazakhstan 64 71.9 63.5 73.6 78.6Oman 65 71.8 71.4 65.1 78.8Gabon 66 71.7 77.2 73.4 64.6Senegal 67 71.6 85.6 75.9 53.3Togo 68 71.4 80.3 75.4 58.3Dominican 69 71.2 63.6 85.1 64.7Cuba 70 71.2 69.0 75.1 69.3Namibia 71 71.0 91.3 63.2 58.6Peru 72 71.0 65.0 73.2 74.6United States 73 70.8 91.8 52.2 68.5Kuwait 74 70.5 69.6 60.1 81.7Brazil 75 70.2 75.1 79.3 56.1Madagascar 76 70.0 76.1 83.2 50.8El Salvador 77 69.2 73.3 81.3 53.1Honduras 78 69.1 78.8 79.9 48.7

107

Nation Rank WPI POL MIL SOCBolivia 79 69.0 56.7 80.7 69.7Vietnam 80 69.0 68.5 66.8 71.5Bahrain 81 68.9 59.9 66.8 79.9Malawi 82 68.6 82.6 76.1 47.3Thailand 83 68.6 68.4 77.1 60.4Mali 84 68.6 84.8 76.7 44.3Tajikistan 85 68.6 57.5 76.9 71.4Azerbaijan 86 68.6 75.8 53.4 76.5Uzbekistan 87 68.4 63.4 72.5 69.4Greece 88 68.1 69.7 66.6 68.0Gambia 89 68.0 76.1 79.6 48.2Laos 90 67.8 66.9 75.3 61.3Bangladesh 91 67.6 75.5 76.6 50.8Cameroon 92 67.5 71.6 72.6 58.4Sri Lanka 93 67.0 50.7 77.1 73.2Belarus 94 66.8 69.6 63.6 67.1Ecuador 95 66.7 64.1 70.0 66.0Zambia 96 66.6 80.4 72.9 46.5Indonesia 97 65.4 50.6 78.0 67.8Armenia 98 65.1 74.9 46.5 73.8Israel 99 64.7 64.5 41.6 88.1Georgia 100 64.6 65.0 56.3 72.5Nicaragua 101 64.6 62.6 83.7 47.4Tanzania 102 64.1 73.8 72.6 45.8Burkina Faso 103 64.1 67.2 78.3 46.6Morocco 104 63.8 63.1 59.0 69.5Mauritania 105 62.3 74.4 65.5 47.0Guatemala 106 61.9 52.5 84.8 48.3Niger 107 61.8 69.9 76.3 39.3China 108 61.7 59.6 63.7 61.8Egypt 109 61.6 56.9 59.4 68.6Algeria 110 61.3 42.4 66.0 75.4Russia 111 61.0 37.5 70.3 75.1Mozambique 112 60.9 65.1 79.3 38.4Turkey 113 60.8 69.6 61.4 51.4Sierra Leone 114 60.8 60.3 76.8 45.2Libya 115 60.7 37.4 66.1 78.6Nepal 116 60.4 47.2 80.0 54.0Jordan 117 60.0 53.8 52.6 73.7Lebanon 118 59.7 56.9 45.0 77.1Philippines 119 59.5 43.0 81.0 54.4Kenya 120 58.8 75.9 67.5 32.9

108

Nation Rank WPI POL MIL SOCIndia 121 58.5 54.7 69.1 51.5Guinea 122 57.8 65.3 73.3 35.0Central Africa 123 57.2 60.3 72.7 38.5Chad 124 56.8 49.9 71.6 49.1Cambodia 125 56.4 50.9 57.0 61.4Zimbabwe 126 56.3 51.8 67.0 50.1Korea, DPR 127 56.0 66.1 42.7 59.1Rwanda 128 55.2 46.1 73.7 45.8Iran 129 55.1 35.1 60.6 69.5Uganda 130 55.0 43.4 69.1 52.5Colombia 131 54.1 32.5 67.3 62.6Burundi 132 53.2 48.2 72.2 39.1Nigeria 133 53.0 34.2 79.9 45.0Pakistan 134 51.8 37.6 59.1 58.7Angola 135 49.8 53.3 56.8 39.2Ethiopia 136 49.5 60.4 68.4 19.5Myanmar 137 46.9 32.5 59.5 48.8Syria 138 46.8 40.7 27.7 71.9South Sudan 139 46.3 62.9 21.7 54.4Congo, Dem 140 45.5 28.7 73.3 34.6Iraq 141 42.0 31.2 36.8 58.1Yemen 142 41.4 12.9 62.4 48.9Sudan 143 37.8 24.9 32.2 56.4

World 70.1 71.6 71.9 66.8America and the Caribbean 72.9 74.2 77.6 67.0Europe 80.4 85.3 76.1 79.9Sub-Saharan Africa 63.1 68.2 73.5 47.6Arab Countries 60.4 55.6 54.9 70.7Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

68.8 66.7 71.9 67.8

Very Small Population 75.3 79.6 73.1 73.1Small Population 67.2 68.1 72.2 61.3Medium Population 66.1 65.8 67.0 65.4Large Population 65.3 63.8 68.8 63.4Very Large Population 64.9 60.0 73.6 61.2High-income 80.4 86.1 75.0 80.1Mid-income 68.2 66.8 70.6 67.2

109

Nation Rank WPI POL MIL SOCLow-income 59.8 60.4 69.7 49.2G7 81.6 88.7 74.5 81.5G20 74.2 77.1 72.7 72.8OECD 82.0 89.3 77.0 79.7EU 83.1 89.7 79.2 80.4BRICs 62.8 56.7 70.6 61.1ASEAN 65.3 59.3 70.5 66.1Notes: 1) ‘Very Small Population’: less than 10 million; ‘Small Population’: 10

million to 29 million; ‘Medium Population’: 30 million to 49 million; ‘Large Population’: 50 million to 99 million, and ‘Very Large Population’: more than 100 million people.

2) ‘High-income’: more than $16,000; ‘Mid-income’: $3,000 to $15,999; and ‘Low-income’: less than $2,999 of GDP per capita at purchasing power (PPP).

110

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012RankSweden 92.2 89.6 87.7 87.7 93.2 90.2 93.3 93.1 93.4 93.5 90.0 91.5 1Iceland 93.0 87.5 93.1 93.5 93.0 93.4 93.4 93.2 81.9 90.1 86.7 91.0 2Austria 88.4 86.8 86.5 86.8 92.4 93.6 87.0 92.3 92.0 89.6 89.7 90.9 3Switzerland 88.3 87.1 87.9 87.5 93.3 93.2 93.9 93.4 93.4 93.3 89.5 90.9 4Denmark 92.8 87.4 90.6 85.0 90.5 90.5 87.9 88.0 93.5 90.4 89.3 89.9 5Germany 89.2 86.2 86.6 86.6 92.9 90.7 87.2 81.5 87.3 87.4 84.6 88.9 6Canada 88.6 88.5 88.9 91.2 88.4 88.5 85.8 86.0 85.8 85.7 87.9 88.8 7Netherlands 91.9 86.5 92.5 89.7 92.5 88.7 92.4 86.5 91.9 92.6 89.8 88.0 8Finland 87.9 89.1 86.3 83.5 86.5 87.7 89.4 83.8 87.0 89.4 85.7 87.4 9Malta 89.4 89.2 89.2 86.3 88.4 88.3 88.8 88.8 85.8 88.8 86.6 87.1 10Luxembourg 90.4 90.4 90.5 87.4 90.1 89.8 90.0 90.0 89.8 89.8 86.0 86.9 11Slovenia 89.2 88.6 89.1 83.9 90.2 87.6 90.7 90.9 85.3 91.0 85.2 86.1 12Czech 84.1 86.9 83.5 81.1 87.1 84.5 83.0 88.9 86.5 83.8 84.4 86.0 13Bahamas 83.7 83.7 83.8 83.6 81.3 84.5 84.1 81.5 78.8 85.2 83.7 85.5 14Norway 88.7 91.7 92.0 89.3 91.9 91.9 92.0 86.6 92.2 92.2 87.1 85.4 15Belgium 88.6 86.4 89.6 84.6 90.3 89.9 87.2 87.0 84.3 81.5 86.7 85.2 16Australia 84.3 87.1 83.1 76.4 79.0 87.7 90.4 87.7 90.3 87.5 84.2 84.7 17Ireland 87.9 80.6 89.4 89.7 90.0 87.9 90.2 90.1 90.1 89.8 87.0 84.7 18Japan 89.7 84.8 87.5 81.8 87.0 84.5 82.0 82.0 82.0 85.0 85.8 84.6 19Poland 85.3 73.8 81.5 73.2 84.7 79.7 77.3 77.6 87.1 85.1 83.2 83.8 20Slovakia 86.7 82.6 82.3 79.5 85.7 86.0 83.6 86.9 87.6 85.1 83.8 83.3 21Uruguay 83.0 82.6 83.0 82.9 82.7 79.8 83.3 81.3 84.3 79.3 83.0 82.9 22New Zealand 90.3 90.0 85.3 88.1 88.3 91.4 88.8 85.9 91.4 88.3 85.6 82.8 23Taiwan 72.9 77.8 75.5 75.4 79.0 77.9 80.0 82.8 76.9 82.5 81.2 81.7 24Mauritius 82.6 82.1 82.8 82.9 82.9 82.7 83.9 83.6 84.0 84.6 81.2 81.4 25Estonia 83.5 80.9 82.8 82.6 83.7 78.9 85.1 82.9 85.8 85.6 81.1 81.3 26France 78.7 82.2 79.8 80.2 80.0 77.6 77.8 77.9 80.2 83.1 82.8 80.6 27Bulgaria 77.9 75.2 75.3 73.5 71.4 81.5 82.6 80.3 80.2 83.4 78.3 80.1 28Costa Rica 79.2 82.4 85.3 85.6 86.0 80.0 80.2 86.2 86.7 81.3 81.5 80.0 29Lithuania 82.0 79.8 80.4 76.6 74.4 78.8 82.7 83.1 83.5 83.4 80.1 80.0 30Singapore 80.4 79.7 77.5 74.8 80.2 80.4 80.9 81.5 81.4 81.4 78.1 79.9 31Croatia 73.4 72.4 75.2 74.8 78.0 79.6 74.6 80.7 81.0 81.2 79.4 79.7 32Italy 85.0 83.0 86.0 80.5 83.6 86.9 81.5 81.9 86.6 86.6 83.7 79.4 33Spain 81.6 84.2 79.0 68.6 71.9 88.9 83.3 83.7 74.7 80.1 81.7 79.3 34Albania 75.0 75.5 74.6 74.7 75.8 79.6 79.6 75.2 74.7 79.8 77.6 79.0 35Panama 80.6 81.3 81.5 75.9 78.6 78.8 81.8 76.7 77.6 83.4 76.2 78.9 36Latvia 80.3 80.1 81.1 81.1 80.9 79.2 82.8 79.9 80.3 76.9 78.4 78.7 37Portugal 86.3 84.0 87.2 81.7 86.9 81.4 84.6 87.2 86.9 84.2 80.3 78.5 38Jamaica 75.1 74.3 77.3 80.7 77.7 75.7 80.6 74.8 75.5 80.9 75.4 78.0 39

World Peace Index, 2001-2012

111

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012RankUnited Kingdom 78.6 78.6 81.7 76.5 82.0 85.8 88.1 85.4 85.1 79.6 80.2 77.9 40Korea, Rep. 72.5 74.8 72.6 77.7 78.2 76.3 77.0 74.2 70.8 76.5 72.4 77.6 41Hungary 81.1 81.4 81.7 76.2 84.9 86.0 83.1 83.2 88.5 82.5 83.1 77.5 42Fiji 82.4 80.0 80.2 79.9 80.2 81.2 77.5 80.6 73.6 78.9 71.5 76.6 43Tunisia 70.3 72.9 75.7 73.2 76.1 76.2 76.4 76.2 76.1 76.0 76.4 76.0 44Argentina 73.5 67.7 73.4 74.0 76.2 68.1 76.8 72.5 72.4 75.8 78.4 75.7 45Romania 74.0 71.9 77.4 66.6 69.9 75.7 77.7 75.8 81.4 78.4 76.1 75.4 46Chile 83.6 79.7 79.5 79.8 83.0 84.5 81.1 78.6 81.3 75.8 77.3 75.3 47Mexico 70.5 82.6 74.4 80.4 83.5 81.3 67.3 67.5 75.8 75.6 77.7 75.1 48Paraguay 64.7 76.1 70.4 77.1 76.8 71.7 77.9 77.7 77.9 78.2 72.6 75.1 49Ukraine 69.2 62.4 62.9 65.7 67.3 72.3 70.9 68.5 74.8 75.0 75.3 74.7 50South Africa 74.2 76.7 76.5 70.1 75.5 75.4 75.3 74.0 76.4 76.7 75.4 74.6 51Malaysia 67.3 72.4 75.0 70.0 71.6 73.9 74.1 71.5 77.6 72.1 76.6 73.8 52Trinidad and Tobago 80.3 79.4 80.0 79.3 79.7 79.9 80.1 82.2 82.6 82.6 79.3 73.7 53Papua New Guinea 74.0 73.8 71.0 71.0 73.0 67.9 67.9 67.9 73.0 70.7 73.8 73.7 54Saudi Arabia 75.8 71.2 70.8 59.7 67.8 65.5 65.9 71.8 71.6 69.1 73.7 73.6 55Botswana 69.6 73.3 72.5 72.6 72.2 64.7 68.7 68.9 71.8 70.2 73.1 73.5 56Moldova 65.3 75.6 75.3 67.0 75.5 77.1 75.0 72.4 79.0 73.7 76.9 73.5 57Qatar 73.4 65.3 69.1 69.1 69.2 69.9 71.5 75.5 73.8 78.0 74.5 73.2 58Kyrgyzstan 70.6 67.2 70.3 71.3 71.8 67.6 69.7 75.7 74.2 73.8 74.9 72.8 59Ghana 75.6 70.2 76.0 76.7 77.5 75.8 73.2 73.6 76.0 75.6 74.5 72.6 60Mongolia 71.4 72.6 77.6 74.4 78.9 75.1 72.4 78.6 75.1 80.2 78.4 72.5 61United Arab 72.6 66.4 72.4 70.4 74.5 73.0 75.7 78.5 73.7 77.2 71.5 72.1 62Venezuela 69.5 69.3 74.5 74.4 65.9 68.9 75.1 72.4 76.7 76.6 72.9 72.1 63Kazakhstan 77.9 70.9 71.4 71.8 77.1 74.2 74.6 78.9 79.2 79.5 74.8 71.9 64Oman 73.9 65.4 70.6 73.8 71.9 76.3 76.6 73.6 73.7 74.8 75.8 71.8 65Gabon 71.6 72.3 69.7 69.9 72.9 70.0 72.7 74.7 74.6 69.1 71.0 71.7 66Senegal 70.5 71.4 68.8 72.3 72.3 72.7 72.8 70.6 67.6 72.4 70.4 71.6 67Togo 63.0 71.2 71.1 71.1 70.8 66.0 71.2 69.0 71.5 71.9 67.7 71.4 68Dominican 73.3 68.0 72.8 62.8 70.9 71.0 67.9 71.7 70.7 74.5 66.3 71.2 69Cuba 75.1 66.5 73.9 73.9 70.8 68.8 73.8 68.6 77.3 77.1 70.1 71.2 70Namibia 74.7 69.5 69.8 72.2 71.9 73.3 73.1 74.4 73.5 74.9 70.9 71.0 71Peru 60.9 70.6 62.4 65.0 67.3 59.2 70.8 68.3 69.0 61.0 70.3 71.0 72United States 82.4 79.7 76.2 70.9 75.8 78.8 78.8 79.1 78.7 80.1 70.5 70.8 73Kuwait 78.4 77.3 71.6 68.8 77.1 77.1 78.8 79.4 74.8 79.4 72.2 70.5 74Brazil 71.5 63.3 69.0 69.5 75.5 72.7 75.6 76.0 76.1 76.4 72.2 70.2 75Madagascar 68.1 72.9 68.4 73.7 71.5 74.8 69.8 75.6 76.6 70.4 66.6 70.0 76El Salvador 75.4 68.9 75.0 75.4 73.2 70.6 73.7 76.7 74.9 71.2 72.2 69.2 77Honduras 76.5 67.8 76.1 68.3 68.9 75.1 75.8 76.6 71.2 76.6 75.7 69.1 78Bolivia 71.4 70.4 80.0 68.4 76.5 70.8 70.9 68.1 71.2 65.6 73.1 69.0 79

112

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012RankVietnam 67.7 53.7 63.3 64.2 57.9 57.8 63.0 60.8 63.1 63.6 67.0 69.0 80Bahrain 72.4 71.7 74.7 74.7 74.5 73.5 71.1 74.9 75.8 75.5 74.0 68.9 81Malawi 70.6 69.2 64.3 60.7 63.5 69.3 69.8 71.2 68.4 73.1 66.5 68.6 82Thailand 69.8 66.9 73.4 68.3 68.1 67.9 67.5 70.4 72.9 67.9 65.4 68.6 83Mali 69.2 70.7 70.8 68.0 68.1 65.3 70.9 62.7 71.2 65.2 65.8 68.6 84Tajikistan 65.7 60.6 65.3 68.5 68.1 60.8 69.3 64.0 69.2 69.7 63.1 68.6 85Azerbaijan 59.5 66.8 64.2 66.9 65.9 66.4 68.1 67.5 67.3 70.5 67.6 68.6 86Uzbekistan 72.2 63.4 71.2 72.7 59.9 63.0 71.0 67.7 70.9 72.0 65.8 68.4 87Greece 76.1 78.5 78.5 78.5 78.6 76.7 80.5 78.3 75.1 71.8 67.7 68.1 88Gambia 61.7 61.2 63.4 69.3 69.4 69.1 69.3 70.1 69.4 68.6 67.9 68.0 89Laos 61.0 62.6 68.0 65.4 67.8 66.4 69.8 70.6 71.0 68.1 69.0 67.8 90Bangladesh 65.1 53.7 59.8 59.8 57.3 54.5 60.3 66.0 64.0 61.3 67.4 67.6 91Cameroon 65.6 69.1 69.2 68.4 68.2 68.3 65.6 66.7 62.0 68.1 66.8 67.5 92Sri Lanka 55.8 57.6 69.0 61.5 60.9 55.5 56.0 58.1 52.0 51.2 67.0 67.0 93Belarus 79.2 76.6 77.8 71.6 75.6 74.7 69.3 69.7 73.1 78.5 74.0 66.8 94Ecuador 76.2 71.3 68.1 68.5 74.7 72.6 73.9 73.8 68.3 68.5 71.5 66.7 95Zambia 63.5 66.6 66.6 61.1 64.1 64.8 59.5 64.8 68.8 70.6 68.0 66.6 96Indonesia 57.6 57.0 57.1 56.1 55.5 59.3 65.4 65.5 60.8 60.9 62.3 65.4 97Armenia 68.6 67.7 70.7 71.0 70.1 62.5 66.1 72.3 63.2 68.8 64.8 65.1 98Israel 66.1 69.6 66.5 64.0 60.7 69.3 59.1 70.4 65.1 62.1 54.6 64.7 99Georgia 64.6 60.4 63.2 68.6 66.0 64.0 58.8 63.9 53.5 66.5 63.5 64.6 100Nicaragua 56.8 64.5 66.3 69.7 69.4 68.0 62.7 68.3 68.1 67.7 69.9 64.6 101Tanzania 67.7 61.5 64.6 66.8 63.6 58.8 58.9 68.2 69.4 69.9 66.4 64.1 102Burkina Faso 71.6 69.4 71.9 72.3 69.9 69.6 70.0 72.7 69.4 72.4 68.6 64.1 103Morocco 63.7 59.6 63.2 63.4 61.4 67.5 65.1 68.4 65.4 65.2 64.6 63.8 104Mauritania 59.6 64.2 64.3 58.9 50.5 58.1 61.6 68.4 62.3 67.4 59.5 62.3 105Guatemala 62.0 62.3 67.8 62.9 68.9 63.4 63.7 58.6 61.8 64.8 62.0 61.9 106Niger 67.0 62.6 67.8 66.5 61.1 69.0 68.4 68.2 60.7 54.8 61.3 61.8 107China 64.6 68.7 66.4 66.4 66.6 64.2 62.6 62.7 62.9 62.7 63.6 61.7 108Egypt 55.2 59.7 56.4 59.3 56.4 53.8 49.8 63.9 55.6 61.0 61.6 61.6 109Algeria 44.4 43.7 49.4 49.7 45.1 54.1 59.8 57.4 55.2 49.5 64.1 61.3 110Russia 53.5 54.3 54.5 57.4 55.9 56.0 57.2 63.0 52.8 59.8 55.9 61.0 111Mozambique 57.4 58.3 58.1 59.5 61.9 61.6 60.9 58.3 61.4 59.1 58.2 60.9 112Turkey 59.3 61.7 59.9 53.6 62.4 69.2 56.6 54.2 57.9 71.9 66.6 60.8 113Sierra Leone 49.3 54.7 60.0 60.5 59.9 60.4 60.4 55.3 61.4 62.4 61.4 60.8 114Libya 64.2 59.0 63.9 61.0 61.4 62.4 66.0 66.1 60.6 63.6 62.5 60.7 115Nepal 60.8 52.9 49.6 52.4 49.2 50.5 53.9 56.8 53.7 60.9 58.1 60.4 116Jordan 66.9 62.3 64.3 64.5 62.3 62.5 63.2 69.0 65.3 64.7 59.5 60.0 117Lebanon 57.5 59.6 59.2 50.6 53.4 54.1 51.7 54.4 58.5 58.6 57.0 59.7 118Philippines 59.2 58.4 55.8 55.5 55.9 63.9 63.9 61.9 56.3 53.3 61.8 59.5 119Kenya 61.4 65.8 66.0 69.4 64.2 64.5 62.0 59.7 61.8 65.0 64.3 58.8 120India 55.2 46.1 54.5 57.6 60.8 61.2 53.0 50.2 50.1 66.4 55.3 58.5 121

113

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012RankGuinea 60.1 58.1 60.7 64.1 60.5 60.7 59.7 63.1 61.3 57.1 57.3 57.8 122Central Africa 63.0 56.0 53.8 48.6 50.9 61.9 51.0 62.3 62.9 61.5 52.0 57.2 123Chad 42.7 53.7 59.6 58.3 46.4 57.5 53.1 58.7 50.5 47.6 57.2 56.8 124Cambodia 55.9 55.4 53.2 54.7 55.6 56.6 57.1 54.6 46.3 51.9 53.0 56.4 125Zimbabwe 51.6 56.6 63.5 49.5 47.0 56.0 55.0 48.2 54.4 60.8 54.7 56.3 126Korea, DPR 58.0 53.5 59.2 53.8 53.7 54.8 52.3 54.9 54.9 60.2 55.4 56.0 127Rwanda 44.2 56.3 56.5 52.3 52.8 59.0 58.6 55.6 50.1 54.3 51.8 55.2 128Iran 58.5 47.8 54.1 49.0 52.6 57.7 51.9 63.8 56.7 50.7 47.6 55.1 129Uganda 58.7 58.2 50.2 49.0 46.1 52.3 49.5 49.6 44.7 50.9 49.2 55.0 130Colombia 59.0 58.9 49.8 61.0 66.3 53.8 59.5 49.1 58.6 64.1 55.8 54.1 131Burundi 48.9 53.1 49.2 48.8 45.0 53.3 53.6 57.8 51.3 56.9 48.2 53.2 132Nigeria 50.8 55.9 51.7 50.8 47.2 46.4 48.6 52.0 53.1 57.2 53.8 53.0 133Pakistan 50.0 42.8 46.0 49.0 48.1 44.6 50.0 50.2 48.7 46.1 50.6 51.8 134Angola 47.2 45.9 45.4 49.9 51.7 55.3 46.6 49.7 51.0 53.3 47.0 49.8 135Ethiopia 54.1 53.8 52.9 52.3 57.7 52.5 41.6 49.7 49.9 45.5 54.3 49.5 136Myanmar 48.5 50.1 58.1 48.6 54.8 41.3 47.2 47.1 51.8 52.4 42.7 46.9 137Syria 56.9 53.9 49.5 49.6 43.2 59.8 50.0 53.3 51.3 56.5 54.6 46.8 138South Sudan 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 46.3 139Congo, Dem 38.9 42.4 33.1 41.7 36.8 49.5 49.2 47.2 40.9 52.5 42.4 45.5 140Iraq 38.9 49.3 49.4 28.0 30.1 35.0 42.5 39.2 34.7 40.5 31.8 42.0 141Yemen 58.2 55.8 47.6 46.3 48.5 57.4 55.3 56.7 45.5 43.9 44.4 41.4 142Sudan 42.6 39.9 46.6 50.8 38.0 45.0 48.0 47.6 36.2 51.3 54.8 37.8 143

World 70.3 69.5 70.6 69.2 70.2 70.8 70.8 71.3 70.9 71.9 70.3 70.1America and the Caribbean 73.9 73.3 74.6 74.2 75.7 73.6 75.0 73.8 75.1 75.3 74.0 72.9Europe 81.3 80.1 81.3 78.8 81.9 82.2 82.0 81.9 82.0 82.7 80.6 80.4Sub-Saharan Africa 61.7 63.2 63.1 62.8 61.7 63.7 62.6 63.9 63.4 64.4 62.3 63.1Arab Countries 62.5 60.6 61.7 59.0 59.3 63.0 61.8 64.7 61.4 63.5 62.1 60.4Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

67.9 65.5 67.7 66.7 67.3 66.5 67.8 68.2 67.6 68.8 68.0 68.8

Very Small Population 75.5 74.8 75.9 75.0 76.1 76.0 76.4 77.3 76.8 77.9 75.2 75.3Small Population 68.0 67.8 69.0 66.7 67.5 68.8 68.9 69.0 68.6 68.5 67.7 67.2Medium Population 65.4 64.3 64.9 63.9 63.8 65.4 66.1 65.0 64.5 67.4 67.0 66.1Large Population 65.3 63.8 65.4 63.4 65.4 65.9 63.5 65.3 65.7 66.9 64.9 65.3Very Large Population 64.2 62.3 62.8 62.9 64.1 64.0 63.7 64.7 63.4 65.4 64.8 64.9High-income 82.0 80.5 81.2 79.1 82.0 82.1 82.1 82.4 82.1 82.6 80.5 80.4Mid-income 67.7 66.8 68.6 67.2 68.1 68.4 68.5 68.8 68.7 69.7 68.5 68.2Low-income 59.2 59.5 60.0 59.6 58.2 59.7 59.8 61.0 59.7 61.2 59.7 59.8

114

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012RankG7 84.6 83.3 83.8 81.1 84.3 84.7 83.0 82.0 83.7 83.9 82.2 81.6G20 73.9 73.4 73.6 71.9 75.1 75.3 73.9 73.3 73.9 76.2 74.4 74.2OECD 84.2 83.3 83.5 81.1 84.8 85.3 83.8 83.4 84.3 84.3 82.1 82.0EU 85.1 83.2 84.6 81.3 84.9 85.3 85.5 85.0 85.6 85.2 83.3 83.1BRICs 61.2 58.1 61.1 62.7 64.7 63.5 62.1 63.0 60.5 66.3 61.8 62.8ASEAN 63.1 61.8 64.6 62.0 63.0 63.1 65.5 64.9 64.6 63.5 64.0 65.3Notes: 1) ‘Very Small Population’: less than 10 million; ‘Small Population’: 10

million to 29 million; ‘Medium Population’: 30 million to 49 million; ‘Large Population’: 50 million to 99 million, and ‘Very Large Population’: more than 100 million people.

2) ‘High-income’: more than $16,000; ‘Mid-income’: $3,000 to $15,999; and ‘Low-income’: less than $2,999 of GDP per capita at purchasing power (PPP).

115

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Sweden 3 4 12 7 2 8 3 3 2 1 1 1Iceland 1 9 1 1 3 2 2 2 31 7 10 2Austria 14 14 16 10 6 1 17 4 5 10 3 3Switzerland 15 11 11 8 1 3 1 1 3 2 4 4Denmark 2 10 4 14 8 7 14 10 1 6 5 5Germany 9 17 15 11 4 6 16 33 13 15 17 6Canada 13 8 10 2 13 13 18 18 21 17 6 7Netherlands 4 15 2 3 5 12 4 16 6 3 2 8Finland 17 6 17 18 19 17 10 21 15 11 14 9Malta 8 5 8 12 14 14 11 9 20 12 11 10Luxembourg 5 2 5 9 11 10 9 7 10 8 12 11Slovenia 10 7 9 16 10 18 6 5 23 5 16 12Czech 23 13 22 25 16 26 27 8 19 25 18 13Bahamas 24 21 21 17 31 24 21 32 41 19 22 14Norway 11 1 3 5 7 4 5 15 4 4 7 15Belgium 12 16 6 15 9 9 15 13 26 33 9 16Australia 22 12 23 40 38 16 7 11 8 14 19 17Ireland 16 32 7 4 12 15 8 6 9 9 8 18Japan 7 18 13 22 17 23 31 29 30 22 13 19Poland 20 53 30 57 23 36 48 48 14 21 23 20Slovakia 18 23 27 32 21 21 23 14 12 20 20 21Uruguay 27 24 24 19 29 35 25 34 25 45 25 22New Zealand 6 3 19 6 15 5 12 19 7 13 15 23Taiwan 63 42 51 44 37 44 40 27 47 32 29 24Mauritius 28 28 26 20 28 27 22 23 27 23 30 25Estonia 26 31 25 21 24 40 19 26 22 18 31 26France 40 27 37 29 35 45 45 46 37 29 26 27Bulgaria 44 49 53 55 73 28 30 37 38 26 40 28Costa Rica 39 26 20 13 20 33 38 17 17 35 28 29Lithuania 31 35 33 38 61 41 29 25 28 28 34 30Singapore 35 38 43 45 34 32 35 31 32 34 41 31Croatia 60 59 54 46 43 38 60 35 35 36 35 32Italy 21 22 18 27 25 19 33 30 18 16 21 33Spain 32 19 39 81 69 11 24 22 63 40 27 34Albania 53 48 58 47 52 37 41 58 62 41 43 35Panama 34 30 31 42 41 42 32 50 44 27 48 36Latvia 37 33 32 24 32 39 28 38 36 53 39 37Portugal 19 20 14 23 18 29 20 12 16 24 32 38

Ranks of World Peace Index 2001-2012

116

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Jamaica 52 51 45 26 44 54 36 60 56 37 53 39United Kingdom 41 40 28 39 30 22 13 20 24 42 33 40Korea, Rep. 65 50 65 35 42 49 49 63 83 57 67 41Hungary 33 29 29 41 22 20 26 24 11 31 24 42Fiji 29 34 34 30 33 31 47 36 69 46 73 43Tunisia 77 55 50 56 51 51 52 52 52 59 47 44Argentina 59 82 63 51 50 84 50 69 74 60 37 45Romania 57 61 44 92 78 53 46 54 33 48 49 46Chile 25 37 38 31 27 25 34 42 34 61 44 47Mexico 75 25 60 28 26 30 92 98 54 63 42 48Paraguay 95 46 78 36 48 69 44 47 43 49 66 49Ukraine 81 99 109 95 92 68 75 87 60 65 54 50South Africa 55 44 46 71 56 55 56 64 50 54 52 51Malaysia 87 58 55 72 71 61 61 75 45 74 46 52Trinidad and Tobago 36 39 36 33 36 34 39 28 29 30 36 53Papua New Guinea 56 52 73 67 63 87 90 95 72 80 61 54Saudi Arabia 48 65 74 112 90 93 95 73 76 88 62 55Botswana 79 54 66 59 66 96 86 85 75 84 64 56Moldova 93 47 52 89 57 46 58 71 40 70 45 57Qatar 61 92 83 78 82 74 70 57 66 50 58 58Kyrgyzstan 73 84 79 65 70 88 82 55 65 69 55 59Ghana 49 71 49 37 45 52 65 67 53 62 57 60Mongolia 72 57 42 49 39 56 69 43 57 38 38 61United Arab 64 89 67 70 59 64 54 44 68 51 72 62Venezuela 80 75 59 50 96 81 57 70 48 56 65 63Kazakhstan 43 67 70 63 46 60 59 41 39 43 56 64Oman 58 91 77 53 67 50 51 66 67 67 50 65Gabon 68 60 81 73 64 73 68 61 64 87 74 66Senegal 76 63 86 61 65 66 67 77 94 73 77 67Togo 102 66 72 66 76 92 71 83 77 76 85 68Dominican 62 80 64 104 74 70 89 74 84 68 96 69Cuba 51 88 61 52 75 82 63 86 46 52 79 70Namibia 54 73 80 62 68 63 66 62 70 66 75 71Peru 107 69 110 97 91 114 77 91 89 113 78 72United States 30 36 47 69 53 43 43 40 42 39 76 73Kuwait 42 43 69 79 47 47 42 39 61 44 69 74Brazil 70 96 84 75 55 65 55 53 51 58 70 75Madagascar 84 56 87 54 72 58 81 56 49 83 93 76El Salvador 50 78 56 43 62 72 64 49 59 79 68 77Honduras 45 81 48 86 83 57 53 51 78 55 51 78

117

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Bolivia 71 70 35 85 49 71 74 94 80 99 63 79Vietnam 86 128 106 99 114 118 102 114 101 106 90 80Bahrain 66 62 57 48 60 62 72 59 55 64 60 81Malawi 74 76 99 109 101 76 80 76 91 71 94 82Thailand 78 85 62 87 87 86 91 80 73 94 99 83Mali 82 68 75 88 86 94 76 111 79 100 98 84Tajikistan 91 105 97 82 88 109 83 104 88 86 106 85Azerbaijan 111 86 102 90 97 91 88 97 95 82 87 86Uzbekistan 67 95 71 58 113 102 73 96 82 75 97 87Greece 47 41 40 34 40 48 37 45 58 78 86 88Gambia 104 104 105 77 81 79 85 81 86 90 84 89Laos 106 98 89 96 89 90 79 78 81 93 81 90Bangladesh 94 130 114 111 116 128 109 101 99 112 88 91Cameroon 92 77 82 84 85 83 96 99 105 92 91 92Sri Lanka 125 116 85 105 108 125 121 119 127 134 89 93Belarus 38 45 41 64 54 59 84 82 71 47 59 94Ecuador 46 64 88 83 58 67 62 65 92 91 71 95Zambia 100 87 92 106 99 95 113 103 90 81 83 96Indonesia 119 117 120 119 121 113 97 102 111 115 108 97Armenia 83 83 76 68 77 103 93 72 100 89 100 98Israel 90 72 93 101 110 77 114 79 98 110 128 99Georgia 97 106 108 80 95 99 116 105 124 97 105 100Nicaragua 123 93 95 74 80 85 103 90 93 95 80 101Tanzania 85 103 98 91 100 116 115 92 85 85 95 102Burkina Faso 69 74 68 60 79 75 78 68 87 72 82 103Morocco 99 109 107 102 105 89 98 88 96 101 101 104Mauritania 110 94 100 115 129 117 106 89 104 96 114 105Guatemala 103 100 90 103 84 101 100 117 106 103 109 106Niger 88 97 91 93 107 80 87 93 112 126 113 107China 96 79 94 94 93 98 104 110 103 108 104 108Egypt 126 107 122 114 117 132 134 106 119 114 111 109Algeria 137 139 136 131 137 130 110 121 120 137 103 110Russia 129 125 124 118 118 123 118 109 126 119 121 111Mozambique 121 113 118 113 104 107 107 118 108 120 116 112Turkey 112 102 113 123 102 78 120 129 116 77 92 113Sierra Leone 133 124 112 110 112 111 108 125 109 109 112 114Libya 98 110 103 107 106 105 94 100 113 107 107 115Nepal 108 133 133 124 130 136 124 122 123 116 117 116Jordan 89 101 101 98 103 104 101 84 97 104 115 117Lebanon 120 108 116 129 124 129 130 128 115 121 120 118Philippines 113 112 123 120 119 100 99 113 118 129 110 119Kenya 105 90 96 76 98 97 105 115 107 102 102 120

118

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012India 127 137 125 117 109 108 127 133 133 98 124 121Guinea 109 115 111 100 111 110 111 108 110 123 118 122Central Africa 101 120 127 139 128 106 131 112 102 111 132 123Chad 139 129 115 116 135 120 126 116 132 138 119 124Cambodia 124 123 128 121 120 122 119 127 137 132 131 125Zimbabwe 130 118 104 133 134 124 123 138 122 117 126 126Korea, DPR 118 131 117 122 123 127 128 126 121 118 123 127Rwanda 138 119 121 126 125 115 117 124 134 127 133 128Iran 116 136 126 134 126 119 129 107 117 136 137 129Uganda 115 114 131 136 136 135 135 136 139 135 135 130Colombia 114 111 132 108 94 131 112 137 114 105 122 131Burundi 134 132 137 137 138 133 125 120 130 124 136 132Nigeria 131 121 130 128 133 138 137 131 125 122 130 133Pakistan 132 140 140 135 132 140 132 132 136 139 134 134Angola 136 138 141 130 127 126 140 135 131 128 138 135Ethiopia 128 127 129 125 115 134 142 134 135 140 129 136Myanmar 135 134 119 138 122 141 139 141 128 131 140 137Syria 122 126 134 132 139 112 133 130 129 125 127 138South Sudan 139Congo, Dem 142 141 142 141 141 137 136 140 140 130 141 140Iraq 141 135 135 142 142 142 141 142 142 142 142 141Yemen 117 122 138 140 131 121 122 123 138 141 139 142Sudan 140 142 139 127 140 139 138 139 141 133 125 143

119

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Sweden 99.1 98.7 99.0 99.0 98.9 98.9 98.9 99.0 99.0 98.9 98.5 98.6Iceland 98.6 98.6 98.9 99.1 99.0 99.2 99.1 98.6 81.6 89.4 93.9 93.7Austria 88.7 97.2 97.2 97.4 97.9 98.2 98.1 97.5 97.5 97.3 97.0 96.9Switzerland 98.5 98.0 98.1 98.4 98.8 98.8 98.8 98.7 98.7 98.3 96.5 96.7Denmark 100.0 99.4 99.4 99.4 99.4 99.4 99.4 91.0 99.2 99.2 97.2 97.3Germany 88.3 96.0 95.8 97.2 97.8 97.8 97.5 97.3 97.4 97.5 88.7 88.8Canada 98.9 98.5 98.7 98.3 98.1 98.0 98.1 98.3 98.3 98.3 96.8 96.5Netherlands 98.8 98.6 98.8 98.7 98.4 95.2 98.4 98.0 96.8 98.7 98.0 89.8Finland 99.8 99.9 99.7 99.7 99.7 99.6 99.6 99.3 99.3 98.8 98.5 98.7Malta 96.4 96.4 96.4 96.4 95.7 95.4 95.2 94.5 94.5 94.7 93.1 93.1Luxembourg 98.7 98.6 98.9 98.6 98.2 98.3 98.4 98.2 98.1 98.0 94.2 94.2Slovenia 94.6 93.7 94.6 95.4 95.6 95.7 96.0 96.2 96.3 96.2 87.0 94.8Czech 81.0 88.6 88.3 88.6 89.8 89.9 90.5 90.9 82.6 90.3 81.7 89.8Bahamas 90.6 90.6 90.2 89.8 89.8 90.1 88.7 88.9 89.1 91.2 90.6 94.7Norway 98.8 98.4 98.3 98.7 98.8 98.8 98.7 98.6 97.7 98.4 94.4 86.5Belgium 93.5 94.9 95.5 97.0 96.9 96.8 96.7 96.4 80.0 88.1 94.8 95.2Australia 89.1 97.2 97.3 80.8 80.8 97.5 97.4 97.3 97.4 97.4 97.9 98.0Ireland 96.8 96.5 95.4 96.1 96.5 96.4 96.4 96.5 96.8 96.7 96.9 96.3Japan 93.2 94.5 94.5 94.4 93.4 93.9 85.9 85.8 85.6 86.4 95.7 87.6Poland 88.6 88.4 88.3 71.2 88.7 88.6 88.9 89.5 89.9 90.4 91.1 91.4Slovakia 88.6 88.6 88.6 88.6 89.8 90.2 90.6 90.8 91.0 90.4 81.7 89.7Uruguay 89.1 90.8 90.8 91.3 92.1 91.7 92.3 92.6 92.8 92.6 93.5 93.6New Zealand 99.2 99.2 99.3 99.3 99.4 99.4 99.4 99.2 99.1 99.2 98.6 98.8Taiwan 91.6 92.9 92.6 91.8 91.9 84.8 83.9 92.0 92.0 93.1 83.8 84.1Mauritius 93.2 92.7 92.7 92.6 92.4 91.6 92.6 92.2 93.0 93.0 90.0 89.6Estonia 93.8 93.7 93.7 93.6 95.1 95.5 95.9 95.6 95.8 95.8 94.1 94.0France 86.4 94.8 86.1 96.0 96.2 88.3 88.2 79.8 96.0 96.0 86.1 94.7Bulgaria 85.8 87.4 87.5 88.3 88.6 88.6 88.5 88.6 87.6 87.3 77.7 85.7Costa Rica 87.3 86.7 86.7 86.4 88.0 87.3 87.2 88.2 88.3 88.5 86.7 86.2Lithuania 85.1 86.2 86.2 77.7 76.7 87.1 87.1 87.1 86.9 87.2 87.8 87.5Singapore 86.7 86.8 87.0 88.0 88.4 88.5 88.5 88.4 88.3 87.3 88.4 89.2Croatia 57.3 70.6 71.5 71.3 71.1 71.0 71.0 71.8 72.1 72.7 73.7 73.6Italy 92.7 93.6 93.3 94.3 93.8 94.0 93.9 94.2 84.5 92.3 82.0 74.5Spain 75.3 92.4 84.1 59.8 76.7 93.2 84.7 84.6 84.4 92.3 80.9 89.4Albania 78.2 80.1 80.3 81.2 80.3 81.1 81.3 81.7 82.2 82.0 81.4 81.2Panama 88.1 88.1 87.5 87.8 88.1 87.9 87.5 87.6 87.8 87.8 78.6 86.6Latvia 85.0 85.0 85.3 85.4 85.7 86.8 87.4 86.5 86.8 69.5 83.7 83.6Portugal 92.8 92.4 92.4 92.7 92.4 92.6 92.7 92.6 92.2 91.8 90.5 90.6

Political Peace Index 2001-2012

120

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Jamaica 78.0 85.5 85.7 85.5 85.0 85.4 85.5 85.0 84.8 84.8 73.6 82.0United Kingdom 71.7 96.4 96.8 89.4 97.6 97.6 97.6 97.4 97.4 96.6 95.3 87.2Korea, Rep. 77.3 86.1 86.5 86.2 87.4 87.9 88.1 79.7 80.3 88.2 88.6 88.6Hungary 93.5 93.6 93.2 93.1 94.0 94.2 86.1 94.5 94.3 77.7 93.5 84.1Fiji 81.5 79.6 79.6 79.6 80.0 80.8 68.9 77.3 77.3 76.9 68.4 76.8Tunisia 83.8 84.1 83.6 83.7 83.8 83.7 83.4 82.0 82.2 82.0 81.0 76.8Argentina 79.4 63.3 61.6 71.5 80.1 71.8 80.2 80.2 71.9 80.2 79.8 79.9Romania 77.7 77.1 76.9 77.1 76.3 77.3 77.4 78.1 78.2 78.2 67.3 75.5Chile 90.5 91.2 91.2 92.9 92.9 92.8 92.8 84.1 92.4 92.1 92.5 84.1Mexico 65.8 84.6 84.5 85.5 85.5 85.3 67.5 67.8 84.5 84.2 81.4 73.0Paraguay 56.5 73.2 55.7 73.2 74.0 74.2 74.8 74.6 74.6 74.2 72.7 72.7Ukraine 83.0 64.8 65.1 73.4 74.2 84.8 85.0 76.6 84.7 84.4 81.4 72.1South Africa 78.2 86.3 85.8 85.4 85.7 85.6 84.8 85.7 85.1 84.9 82.3 81.8Malaysia 61.9 78.5 78.3 79.6 80.8 80.8 80.8 72.6 80.9 71.6 71.8 63.3Trinidad and Tobago 85.9 83.2 81.8 82.4 82.1 82.6 82.8 83.0 83.3 83.4 81.0 72.2Papua New Guinea 82.2 82.2 82.2 81.2 82.2 82.7 82.0 81.5 80.6 80.8 80.3 80.4Saudi Arabia 77.5 77.5 77.5 60.8 76.5 69.9 77.3 77.4 77.5 77.9 77.3 76.0Botswana 91.6 92.5 93.0 92.2 91.9 91.8 91.4 91.2 91.7 90.7 88.5 88.9Moldova 51.0 84.9 83.8 74.9 83.1 83.8 84.1 83.6 83.8 67.5 82.0 82.0Qatar 76.3 76.3 76.3 76.3 76.4 78.0 77.3 77.3 77.8 79.5 79.2 78.6Kyrgyzstan 68.6 76.0 67.6 75.9 76.0 61.3 69.5 77.8 77.4 75.7 77.6 69.4Ghana 85.4 86.4 87.0 87.2 87.5 88.4 88.1 88.6 88.8 88.1 87.5 87.3Mongolia 86.2 86.2 87.2 86.6 86.6 86.6 78.1 86.6 70.0 85.6 83.0 74.7United Arab 81.5 81.5 81.5 80.5 81.3 83.0 83.9 83.4 83.4 83.8 83.1 82.7Venezuela 69.3 77.8 69.2 70.0 61.5 60.6 77.3 76.9 76.8 75.2 65.3 73.5Kazakhstan 80.2 80.7 80.2 80.3 81.2 82.0 82.4 81.8 82.0 82.5 80.4 63.5Oman 78.0 78.9 79.0 79.0 79.4 80.4 79.4 78.6 81.4 79.9 80.3 71.4Gabon 82.1 82.1 73.8 73.8 81.3 72.4 80.9 81.2 81.0 62.5 76.9 77.2Senegal 85.4 84.5 84.7 86.7 86.4 86.7 86.8 87.1 86.0 85.5 85.6 85.6Togo 78.6 78.6 78.6 77.6 76.9 61.0 77.6 78.5 78.9 79.9 72.0 80.3Dominican 67.2 68.1 66.7 50.3 67.1 67.6 50.3 68.0 67.2 67.7 55.7 63.6Cuba 69.4 69.4 69.4 69.4 68.7 69.6 68.4 69.2 70.3 69.9 60.1 69.0Namibia 91.1 91.2 91.5 90.4 89.7 90.9 90.7 91.1 91.1 91.1 91.3 91.3Peru 52.6 73.4 56.7 63.7 63.5 55.2 71.6 71.8 72.0 55.4 73.5 65.0United States 95.3 95.4 94.1 77.2 94.1 94.2 93.8 94.9 95.0 93.5 91.8 91.8Kuwait 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.9 86.1 86.2 87.3 86.7 86.7 85.8 86.2 69.6Brazil 75.6 68.1 76.4 77.2 85.6 86.3 85.8 86.0 86.0 86.3 83.3 75.1Madagascar 84.5 82.7 67.4 84.1 84.0 83.6 77.0 85.4 85.6 66.5 65.0 76.1El Salvador 73.7 73.3 73.1 73.5 74.0 74.0 73.8 73.8 73.7 73.1 73.6 73.3Honduras 82.3 83.3 83.3 67.1 67.1 84.1 84.0 84.0 84.1 73.8 81.6 78.8

121

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Bolivia 59.6 75.7 76.0 65.9 73.7 65.7 66.3 58.2 66.7 58.0 73.4 56.7Vietnam 62.5 46.8 63.2 63.2 62.8 64.5 64.5 64.5 64.6 63.3 62.2 68.5Bahrain 73.9 75.7 75.7 77.6 77.5 78.3 77.4 77.4 77.8 76.7 77.3 59.9Malawi 85.3 83.4 83.1 74.6 81.2 81.2 82.0 81.1 81.2 83.5 83.0 82.6Thailand 71.6 71.6 79.9 64.3 63.9 63.2 58.4 75.6 67.3 60.6 59.2 68.4Mali 81.2 85.8 85.3 86.2 86.4 86.1 86.0 84.9 85.4 85.0 76.4 84.8Tajikistan 48.1 56.5 56.5 57.4 56.8 48.6 57.0 56.9 56.8 57.6 48.9 57.5Azerbaijan 60.2 76.3 76.3 67.7 76.3 68.1 68.4 68.0 76.1 76.6 75.8 75.8Uzbekistan 66.3 67.3 67.5 66.9 50.2 50.0 65.7 56.9 57.0 64.5 55.1 63.4Greece 81.9 81.1 81.1 82.1 82.1 82.1 82.3 82.5 74.3 72.9 70.7 69.7Gambia 75.0 60.1 67.1 78.2 78.6 78.0 77.3 77.5 76.7 76.9 76.7 76.1Laos 68.2 68.2 67.2 67.2 67.5 67.9 66.7 66.7 66.9 65.9 66.8 66.9Bangladesh 77.0 60.4 61.2 77.1 60.7 60.9 69.5 76.9 69.7 62.6 75.2 75.5Cameroon 71.3 72.8 73.0 72.6 72.1 72.2 72.3 72.4 55.7 73.0 71.2 71.6Sri Lanka 22.2 30.5 55.5 39.4 47.9 30.9 28.9 20.7 20.7 19.6 50.6 50.7Belarus 81.4 81.4 83.0 82.3 80.4 79.6 70.7 70.7 79.0 79.4 78.1 69.6Ecuador 73.3 64.1 72.3 72.3 80.9 72.6 64.1 63.9 72.1 72.3 80.5 64.1Zambia 78.4 77.4 77.4 78.2 77.5 77.5 61.8 78.4 79.6 79.7 80.2 80.4Indonesia 52.1 36.6 36.6 44.9 44.5 55.7 65.1 64.9 48.6 48.6 58.7 50.6Armenia 70.4 78.8 79.3 79.3 78.5 78.3 78.3 78.4 60.7 77.1 74.9 74.9Israel 63.6 80.2 71.6 71.2 70.6 79.7 80.2 79.5 80.3 79.5 54.2 64.5Georgia 56.4 55.5 72.3 63.3 56.1 57.3 57.9 65.0 57.3 74.1 64.6 65.0Nicaragua 57.1 64.7 64.3 64.4 64.6 64.9 64.9 64.9 63.9 46.3 63.5 62.6Tanzania 69.9 53.5 70.7 71.4 71.9 63.7 63.7 72.4 72.1 71.8 73.4 73.8Burkina Faso 85.7 87.6 87.6 88.0 89.0 88.0 87.8 87.5 86.3 86.4 84.0 67.2Morocco 81.2 80.2 79.8 79.3 80.2 80.2 80.2 80.5 72.2 79.6 79.8 63.1Mauritania 60.0 74.8 75.7 57.6 65.5 68.8 70.0 78.7 59.5 76.6 65.9 74.4Guatemala 52.9 52.5 52.1 42.7 50.8 51.2 52.2 44.1 52.8 52.2 52.2 52.5Niger 75.8 78.6 78.6 78.6 79.6 79.8 79.7 79.1 62.5 45.1 68.1 69.9China 60.8 69.2 68.8 68.6 68.7 60.6 52.3 52.6 52.3 51.6 67.8 59.6Egypt 56.6 72.7 72.5 64.0 73.2 56.7 56.6 72.9 64.4 72.7 65.4 56.9Algeria 14.7 14.7 14.7 31.4 31.5 48.3 48.6 31.8 32.0 14.9 50.7 42.4Russia 33.9 43.9 41.6 49.9 40.8 40.3 40.5 56.9 40.0 40.1 37.2 37.5Mozambique 68.1 68.1 67.2 67.2 67.5 67.5 67.5 68.4 68.2 67.2 56.7 65.1Turkey 49.3 49.3 64.1 41.3 60.0 60.3 44.0 44.3 44.9 77.3 69.9 69.6Sierra Leone 23.1 55.5 55.5 57.4 56.7 56.8 56.6 57.4 57.2 57.9 60.2 60.3Libya 60.8 60.8 60.8 60.8 61.2 61.2 61.5 61.2 61.2 60.5 61.7 37.4Nepal 59.9 26.6 26.6 33.0 23.8 30.9 32.7 49.4 33.9 48.7 47.2 47.2Jordan 76.9 75.6 75.2 75.3 77.0 77.5 77.0 76.3 75.9 74.4 62.3 53.8Lebanon 57.6 57.6 57.6 40.9 40.6 42.9 43.4 42.7 34.4 59.1 49.5 56.9Philippines 46.5 37.4 28.8 28.7 28.8 36.1 52.7 43.5 26.6 26.7 42.8 43.0Kenya 57.0 73.7 74.5 79.2 78.6 78.6 70.4 61.0 69.3 77.9 67.4 75.9

122

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012India 57.1 40.2 56.4 64.8 64.9 65.4 49.2 41.1 40.6 64.6 55.0 54.7Guinea 74.5 66.2 74.5 74.5 74.5 57.9 57.9 66.2 64.9 64.2 56.8 65.3Central Africa 66.2 46.8 46.8 28.2 36.8 63.7 47.0 62.3 62.3 54.9 43.6 60.3Chad 37.8 54.5 54.5 54.5 53.7 45.4 44.8 52.0 43.6 35.2 49.6 49.9Cambodia 48.5 49.5 49.5 49.5 49.5 49.5 48.3 49.1 48.9 49.1 50.9 50.9Zimbabwe 42.1 48.2 56.3 39.2 46.7 55.4 55.2 46.5 46.2 55.3 52.0 51.8Korea, DPR 72.8 72.8 72.8 72.8 72.4 72.5 73.4 72.9 72.8 71.7 74.9 66.1Rwanda 20.4 45.4 45.4 47.2 47.3 47.3 46.7 47.0 47.0 48.4 36.6 46.1Iran 44.7 36.4 53.0 36.4 44.9 53.2 44.6 52.8 52.5 34.8 34.5 35.1Uganda 49.9 48.7 40.5 34.2 34.6 42.8 26.4 51.5 34.6 50.8 43.5 43.4Colombia 25.0 34.3 17.4 34.2 51.0 19.7 36.3 19.5 35.2 51.8 32.6 32.5Burundi 21.6 38.2 29.9 40.1 40.1 41.9 49.4 49.6 32.2 48.4 31.4 48.2Nigeria 36.3 50.4 34.4 43.5 26.2 18.2 35.2 35.2 34.9 35.4 34.2 34.2Pakistan 42.3 35.0 35.4 35.2 35.2 19.7 35.6 35.9 29.4 29.4 45.8 37.6Angola 35.3 35.3 43.6 53.0 52.7 51.9 44.6 52.9 52.9 52.9 44.8 53.3Ethiopia 63.9 47.3 63.9 62.8 62.6 45.8 46.1 62.7 62.9 45.7 52.1 60.4Myanmar 16.6 41.6 41.6 24.9 42.3 9.0 25.8 25.3 41.8 33.3 23.1 32.5Syria 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0 42.4 65.5 43.6 59.7 59.4 58.9 58.2 40.7South Sudan 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 62.9Congo, Dem 20.1 29.3 21.0 37.7 12.7 37.8 21.9 21.8 12.3 29.2 12.0 28.7Iraq 37.5 54.1 54.1 22.7 22.7 23.7 23.4 22.0 21.8 22.4 20.3 31.2Yemen 55.4 54.5 54.5 39.6 56.1 56.4 56.3 47.9 31.2 29.1 28.4 12.9Sudan 19.2 27.6 35.4 43.8 18.9 19.2 18.6 18.4 10.1 42.5 33.2 24.9

World 71.4 73.7 73.9 72.8 73.7 73.4 73.1 74.0 72.5 73.3 72.2 71.6America and the Caribbean 73.5 76.5 74.4 73.9 77.4 75.5 76.1 75.2 77.6 76.4 75.6 74.2Europe 84.3 87.9 87.9 86.6 87.8 88.4 87.9 88.0 86.6 87.2 85.3 85.3Sub-Saharan Africa 64.7 67.5 67.5 67.9 67.8 67.4 66.3 69.6 66.5 67.0 64.3 68.2Arab Countries 61.7 64.1 65.6 60.5 62.0 64.2 62.2 62.6 60.4 63.6 61.6 55.6Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

66.8 66.1 67.8 67.2 66.7 64.7 66.1 66.9 64.6 65.8 67.8 66.7

Very Small Population 79.5 82.1 81.8 80.8 81.4 81.8 81.7 82.5 81.5 81.6 79.8 79.6Small Population 69.4 71.9 72.0 70.6 71.7 71.1 70.7 71.7 69.8 69.3 69.0 68.1Medium Population 62.3 64.5 63.8 62.8 65.3 65.7 65.2 63.5 62.8 68.7 66.8 65.8Large Population 60.4 64.6 69.3 64.3 67.3 64.0 61.6 65.7 65.5 66.6 60.9 63.8Very Large Population 61.3 59.6 59.4 62.3 60.7 59.7 61.1 61.8 57.8 59.1 64.1 60.0High-income 87.1 89.5 88.9 87.4 89.1 89.6 89.5 89.4 88.4 89.2 87.2 86.1Mid-income 66.4 68.9 70.0 68.0 69.6 69.5 68.5 68.6 68.3 68.3 68.6 66.8

123

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Low-income 58.7 60.6 60.6 61.0 60.2 58.5 59.0 62.3 58.5 60.2 58.1 60.4G7 89.5 95.6 94.2 92.4 95.9 94.8 93.6 92.5 93.5 94.4 90.9 88.7G20 74.9 77.4 78.8 77.0 80.6 80.5 78.3 78.0 77.0 81.2 79.8 77.1OECD 88.9 92.6 92.3 89.7 92.2 93.2 91.6 90.9 90.5 92.3 89.7 89.3EU 89.9 92.7 92.1 90.6 92.4 93.1 92.7 92.3 90.9 91.1 88.8 89.7BRICs 56.8 55.4 60.8 65.2 65.0 63.1 56.9 59.1 54.7 60.6 60.8 56.7ASEAN 57.2 57.4 59.1 56.7 58.7 57.2 61.2 61.2 59.3 56.3 58.2 59.3Notes: 1) ‘Very Small Population’: less than 10 million; ‘Small Population’: 10

million to 29 million; ‘Medium Population’: 30 million to 49 million; ‘Large Population’: 50 million to 99 million, and ‘Very Large Population’: more than 100 million people.

2) ‘High-income’: more than $16,000; ‘Mid-income’: $3,000 to $15,999; and ‘Low-income’: less than $2,999 of GDP per capita at purchasing power (PPP).

124

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Sweden 85.3 85.6 70.4 87.2 87.2 87.2 87.9 87.9 88.1 88.5 84.3 84.7Iceland 87.0 70.4 87.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 87.0 70.4 86.6 85.9 87.0Austria 85.8 86.4 86.7 78.2 86.0 89.0 69.6 86.4 85.5 86.5 85.0 85.1Switzerland 86.6 88.0 79.7 79.3 87.7 88.0 90.1 90.2 88.2 88.3 84.4 84.3Denmark 86.0 70.4 79.1 70.3 78.1 78.5 70.7 79.0 86.7 85.6 83.1 81.6Germany 89.5 81.2 89.6 81.3 89.7 83.5 89.9 73.6 89.6 89.4 86.6 86.8Canada 85.0 76.2 76.3 83.5 76.1 84.5 67.8 67.9 75.4 66.9 80.9 80.6Netherlands 85.6 85.2 85.5 85.6 85.2 86.0 85.5 85.6 85.4 85.1 82.3 82.7Finland 76.2 77.1 76.6 59.6 76.9 72.0 77.1 60.3 77.3 76.6 72.1 73.7Malta 84.9 84.6 84.2 75.7 82.3 82.5 84.2 84.3 83.7 83.8 82.8 82.6Luxembourg 78.6 78.5 78.4 69.8 78.0 78.2 78.6 78.6 78.2 78.4 77.0 77.0Slovenia 86.3 86.1 86.2 86.1 86.2 86.5 86.4 86.2 76.9 85.3 83.5 84.1Czech 84.4 84.2 84.5 68.0 83.5 83.9 86.7 86.7 86.2 78.4 85.5 87.9Bahamas 79.3 79.0 78.9 78.9 78.6 78.9 79.2 79.0 77.8 79.9 79.4 79.5Norway 81.9 82.7 83.2 74.9 82.9 83.1 83.4 84.2 83.9 83.3 75.7 77.0Belgium 81.5 81.9 82.0 73.4 81.3 81.6 73.7 82.0 81.6 81.5 79.9 80.1Australia 74.2 82.3 74.1 65.5 73.1 73.6 81.8 82.1 81.0 80.9 74.5 74.8Ireland 81.0 65.0 82.0 81.9 81.7 83.6 82.0 82.1 81.6 81.5 80.3 80.4Japan 93.0 85.2 76.8 76.8 84.9 85.1 85.1 85.2 84.8 93.1 89.4 90.2Poland 86.0 67.8 76.4 68.0 84.7 68.4 69.2 69.2 85.1 85.4 84.7 84.0Slovakia 86.3 75.2 84.2 67.9 84.8 85.1 85.7 86.4 85.3 77.0 87.8 85.3Uruguay 80.4 78.9 79.8 79.2 79.9 70.8 80.0 79.8 78.3 79.0 78.1 77.6New Zealand 83.1 82.1 74.1 74.3 82.1 82.3 74.4 65.9 82.3 81.6 79.4 77.9Taiwan 57.1 62.3 64.1 64.5 66.8 67.8 75.1 75.4 57.7 73.3 73.5 73.0Mauritius 82.6 81.3 83.1 83.2 83.1 83.1 83.0 83.0 82.8 82.7 81.4 81.9Estonia 74.6 75.8 75.2 74.4 72.8 64.9 74.2 66.5 73.0 72.5 71.0 70.0France 78.6 80.3 64.0 72.3 71.2 71.6 72.6 72.7 70.4 78.6 77.2 67.2Bulgaria 76.5 73.8 73.8 66.0 59.0 78.0 76.2 76.1 75.8 75.6 77.0 77.0Costa Rica 86.2 87.0 87.4 87.3 87.2 86.7 70.6 87.4 87.1 87.2 85.0 84.3Lithuania 77.0 75.2 75.0 74.1 65.6 74.0 74.7 75.3 75.2 75.1 74.6 73.1Singapore 68.9 67.2 59.8 67.5 65.6 65.8 66.7 66.7 66.1 65.9 61.4 62.7Croatia 80.8 79.0 79.1 85.2 84.1 84.5 85.1 85.2 84.2 84.3 83.3 83.2Italy 84.8 85.9 85.9 77.6 69.6 78.1 78.1 78.4 84.3 85.1 84.6 84.6Spain 85.5 83.8 76.1 76.0 67.4 84.6 84.5 76.2 65.9 75.8 83.4 82.2Albania 70.3 70.1 75.0 65.8 67.9 77.1 76.8 79.1 76.7 76.4 76.2 77.3Panama 79.8 81.4 81.3 81.4 81.7 81.7 81.6 81.7 81.4 81.4 78.4 77.1Latvia 77.5 76.9 76.1 74.9 75.0 66.9 76.0 67.8 66.6 74.5 74.6 74.9Portugal 79.3 79.6 80.0 79.5 79.3 80.0 80.5 80.7 79.8 79.7 77.5 78.1

Military-diplomatic Peace Index 2001-2012

125

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Jamaica 83.7 83.3 83.5 83.6 83.1 83.3 83.4 83.4 82.5 83.0 82.7 82.6United Kingdom 75.1 66.0 74.4 66.0 65.5 76.4 74.6 74.8 65.9 67.2 61.3 60.1Korea, Rep. 70.7 53.2 61.0 60.1 59.5 60.3 61.4 61.2 58.0 66.7 48.7 61.9Hungary 83.9 82.9 83.1 66.4 82.5 84.9 83.6 83.9 83.8 83.3 82.7 83.6Fiji 87.8 87.2 87.7 87.5 87.8 90.0 90.5 90.5 78.2 86.2 84.0 84.0Tunisia 77.4 68.1 76.1 76.2 75.6 75.8 76.6 76.7 75.9 75.9 76.2 76.2Argentina 79.9 62.3 79.0 70.9 70.5 70.7 71.4 71.5 71.2 79.8 79.3 71.1Romania 81.9 78.8 80.8 64.3 72.5 84.0 81.5 82.3 81.4 81.8 81.1 80.5Chile 80.4 69.4 76.5 68.6 76.7 80.2 78.0 78.1 77.9 69.2 79.8 79.5Mexico 84.9 84.3 76.0 84.3 85.2 77.0 68.3 68.0 67.5 67.4 83.7 83.6Paraguay 84.0 82.7 83.2 85.2 83.2 66.7 84.6 84.6 84.0 84.0 83.9 83.1Ukraine 72.8 71.6 72.8 64.2 72.2 54.3 57.7 66.2 66.8 67.2 75.0 75.8South Africa 81.6 80.4 80.6 80.6 80.4 80.1 81.0 80.9 80.4 80.6 80.2 79.6Malaysia 62.3 68.1 67.5 67.7 70.9 77.3 60.9 69.2 76.7 68.5 77.7 76.7Trinidad and Tobago 78.2 77.9 77.4 77.1 77.4 77.6 77.4 81.1 79.9 79.4 78.5 78.6Papua New Guinea 79.4 78.6 79.0 79.4 76.3 62.3 79.6 79.7 79.2 79.4 79.2 79.0Saudi Arabia 75.3 69.3 59.7 59.4 59.4 59.5 61.2 69.7 66.8 66.8 66.9 66.7Botswana 75.2 69.4 71.3 71.1 70.8 68.1 71.8 56.1 63.5 55.8 68.7 70.1Moldova 69.8 68.3 68.6 51.8 67.5 71.3 63.4 55.2 73.7 73.8 74.0 64.9Qatar 63.6 40.1 51.2 48.4 48.4 48.4 54.1 64.9 58.1 67.2 62.6 68.1Kyrgyzstan 70.7 53.0 70.2 63.5 74.6 67.5 66.3 74.4 76.0 76.1 75.0 76.7Ghana 78.5 78.1 78.1 78.3 78.8 78.8 78.3 78.0 77.7 77.7 78.0 78.1Mongolia 77.2 77.4 76.9 76.5 77.6 78.5 78.6 79.0 77.9 77.9 78.4 70.2United Arab 58.6 48.1 57.9 52.3 62.9 64.0 63.6 65.8 58.6 58.8 57.2 57.2Venezuela 83.0 67.0 82.7 82.9 65.9 74.5 74.9 75.0 73.2 73.6 80.2 72.9Kazakhstan 73.6 70.8 71.3 70.4 70.5 62.5 71.0 75.0 75.0 75.0 74.8 73.6Oman 71.5 48.4 65.1 74.7 75.2 75.3 75.3 75.3 65.1 65.3 65.1 65.1Gabon 71.3 72.5 72.1 72.3 73.8 74.2 74.0 75.9 73.7 74.0 73.2 73.4Senegal 77.6 77.2 76.9 77.0 76.7 76.8 77.0 76.6 67.6 75.8 75.7 75.9Togo 66.3 74.3 73.6 74.5 74.1 75.6 74.8 74.9 74.5 73.8 73.2 75.4Dominican 83.7 83.4 83.5 66.9 83.4 83.6 83.6 83.7 81.3 83.3 84.8 85.1Cuba 73.0 63.4 76.8 68.5 67.8 68.0 68.4 60.0 74.9 74.7 75.1 75.1Namibia 71.8 60.1 68.8 69.3 69.7 70.1 69.2 69.6 67.5 67.2 62.9 63.2Peru 73.8 73.4 73.4 73.4 73.4 65.4 74.5 74.4 73.0 64.8 73.4 73.2United States 69.8 69.4 60.7 60.5 59.3 67.6 68.1 68.0 66.2 72.8 52.3 52.2Kuwait 60.3 57.5 49.1 40.4 56.8 57.4 61.1 62.5 64.6 62.7 50.0 60.1Brazil 82.6 73.1 74.0 73.8 74.1 74.2 83.1 83.0 82.4 82.1 78.8 79.3Madagascar 79.9 80.0 79.9 79.9 81.7 81.8 81.8 81.8 83.4 83.5 83.3 83.2El Salvador 82.3 80.2 81.3 81.1 73.6 82.1 82.2 82.2 75.8 81.5 74.1 81.3Honduras 78.9 69.6 77.8 69.4 78.2 79.9 80.4 80.5 71.7 79.9 79.7 79.9

126

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Bolivia 83.3 82.6 82.3 82.4 82.0 73.9 74.0 81.7 72.8 80.8 80.5 80.7Vietnam 68.3 58.7 61.8 53.6 51.9 50.0 63.6 55.4 45.7 65.2 67.0 66.8Bahrain 68.0 63.7 69.4 67.3 66.8 63.0 67.5 67.7 68.3 69.4 68.4 66.8Malawi 76.7 74.7 76.7 76.2 76.1 75.8 76.2 76.4 74.6 74.8 75.8 76.1Thailand 78.0 68.3 78.6 70.4 78.6 77.4 79.4 71.1 69.7 69.5 60.3 77.1Mali 76.9 77.0 77.2 69.2 77.8 77.9 78.0 60.9 77.1 77.0 76.2 76.7Tajikistan 74.1 50.8 72.9 72.9 72.1 59.2 76.1 76.2 74.9 75.6 76.4 76.9Azerbaijan 47.3 52.4 44.5 61.3 48.2 49.1 57.5 58.6 46.7 54.4 47.4 53.4Uzbekistan 77.3 49.6 74.8 74.5 71.3 63.2 72.3 72.6 76.6 76.6 72.0 72.5Greece 70.2 69.7 69.6 68.7 68.1 69.4 71.9 72.7 69.6 69.3 65.0 66.6Gambia 79.7 76.3 75.9 78.9 79.2 78.8 79.6 79.8 79.3 76.9 79.6 79.6Laos 75.2 60.0 77.1 68.4 75.1 75.9 77.9 78.1 77.2 77.3 77.6 75.3Bangladesh 69.8 59.9 76.9 60.3 68.7 60.4 60.3 76.9 76.3 76.2 76.7 76.6Cameroon 74.3 73.3 73.0 73.1 72.7 72.8 72.2 64.9 72.7 73.0 72.4 72.6Sri Lanka 83.8 70.5 78.7 82.7 79.3 79.1 82.1 81.0 78.3 76.1 77.9 77.1Belarus 74.7 69.9 71.5 62.5 69.2 61.2 53.4 62.3 55.0 71.9 71.3 63.6Ecuador 81.4 80.4 78.9 70.4 78.9 79.3 80.8 80.4 70.8 70.4 78.0 70.0Zambia 71.0 72.2 73.2 73.2 73.4 73.7 73.9 72.0 75.0 75.6 73.9 72.9Indonesia 70.7 79.3 78.9 67.0 67.3 67.4 76.2 76.2 78.0 78.0 77.3 78.0Armenia 63.5 57.4 60.3 60.1 56.1 47.1 57.6 59.2 49.6 48.8 47.2 46.5Israel 48.0 42.5 41.6 33.4 24.9 49.9 26.5 43.5 42.6 33.2 24.9 41.6Georgia 61.9 50.9 52.0 69.1 67.4 59.3 51.8 51.8 27.9 49.8 63.7 56.3Nicaragua 67.8 83.9 83.4 83.2 74.8 75.2 67.4 75.7 75.8 84.1 84.2 83.7Tanzania 73.1 71.7 72.0 72.1 69.8 70.1 69.6 69.6 72.2 72.5 72.5 72.6Burkina Faso 79.3 79.3 79.3 79.3 79.2 79.2 79.3 79.4 79.1 79.0 78.4 78.3Morocco 62.5 41.9 52.9 53.5 60.2 61.0 53.3 61.8 61.0 60.5 58.5 59.0Mauritania 69.5 67.3 67.0 68.6 51.5 68.2 69.2 69.6 69.2 68.9 64.7 65.5Guatemala 82.8 82.2 82.0 75.6 84.3 85.3 76.4 77.0 76.8 85.1 84.9 84.8Niger 76.4 75.5 75.4 75.6 76.2 76.5 76.5 76.3 76.0 75.9 75.7 76.3China 74.1 68.7 70.1 70.1 70.3 70.3 73.2 73.4 72.6 72.6 63.8 63.7Egypt 61.2 41.8 48.1 49.0 48.2 48.9 40.4 49.3 48.2 57.5 48.8 59.4Algeria 72.0 69.0 69.3 69.6 55.4 64.0 63.9 72.9 71.1 71.4 68.6 66.0Russia 69.7 66.2 66.8 66.0 64.8 63.4 66.4 67.2 51.5 75.2 71.1 70.3Mozambique 75.4 72.7 74.3 74.2 73.8 74.0 74.1 75.5 75.4 75.2 75.4 79.3Turkey 77.5 74.9 67.6 67.4 75.3 75.8 62.0 61.9 70.1 78.6 69.5 61.4Sierra Leone 77.2 77.4 76.4 75.9 74.6 74.8 75.2 75.7 75.4 76.9 76.9 76.8Libya 61.9 43.6 57.4 48.2 52.1 53.3 64.4 64.4 54.8 54.8 59.4 66.1Nepal 83.4 82.5 80.3 81.3 80.6 80.9 80.8 80.8 79.8 77.0 79.9 80.0Jordan 59.8 39.1 45.4 44.8 44.3 44.3 37.5 55.0 52.6 52.6 44.3 52.6Lebanon 39.9 44.9 43.7 43.4 43.5 43.5 35.2 43.6 63.0 38.3 52.9 45.0Philippines 74.0 81.3 81.5 80.8 81.8 82.0 82.1 82.4 82.0 73.5 80.9 81.0Kenya 77.5 75.4 75.0 75.0 76.3 76.9 76.9 76.7 75.2 75.5 75.9 67.5

127

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012India 62.8 51.7 60.0 60.3 60.2 60.2 60.1 60.3 60.0 68.0 68.6 69.1Guinea 73.5 64.8 56.2 72.6 55.5 72.4 71.2 72.6 72.9 73.0 72.8 73.3Central Africa 73.9 70.6 73.0 72.6 72.0 72.1 58.8 75.6 75.2 75.3 72.2 72.7Chad 54.8 69.9 72.1 72.0 55.1 73.8 63.9 73.0 55.5 71.0 71.2 71.6Cambodia 61.8 57.8 50.5 54.2 56.0 58.6 59.5 58.9 24.3 48.6 48.4 57.0Zimbabwe 59.6 61.9 73.9 65.1 58.8 66.9 62.7 56.6 73.5 73.3 71.5 67.0Korea, DPR 57.5 42.7 42.7 42.7 42.7 42.7 34.4 42.7 42.7 42.7 34.4 42.7Rwanda 62.7 67.2 68.8 57.8 60.0 68.8 71.3 64.3 63.9 72.5 73.5 73.7Iran 63.9 56.4 58.4 59.7 61.4 67.0 57.8 66.8 60.3 60.3 52.3 60.6Uganda 67.6 67.2 51.1 58.9 58.7 51.3 59.7 51.6 51.3 51.6 60.5 69.1Colombia 80.2 79.9 78.1 77.8 76.3 68.3 77.0 68.8 65.8 65.5 74.9 67.3Burundi 71.3 67.4 66.8 66.3 46.5 63.9 65.4 67.5 64.3 64.3 70.4 72.2Nigeria 81.2 76.2 80.1 71.9 79.2 79.3 72.2 63.9 80.5 80.6 80.2 79.9Pakistan 64.5 51.1 60.7 61.3 68.4 70.3 70.4 70.2 69.5 61.3 62.9 59.1Angola 62.4 55.3 54.6 56.0 58.2 64.5 62.6 62.0 60.1 62.7 54.6 56.8Ethiopia 52.8 68.4 65.8 67.7 71.6 73.0 48.5 49.4 50.3 59.5 76.9 68.4Myanmar 65.2 59.8 66.0 54.5 55.9 48.2 60.0 59.9 55.7 56.0 51.0 59.5Syria 45.3 35.3 22.2 30.6 24.4 41.8 34.5 27.8 37.3 36.0 36.1 27.7South Sudan 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 21.7Congo, Dem 66.4 65.7 47.3 63.8 57.4 76.0 73.7 74.8 73.5 73.7 73.1 73.3Iraq 39.1 37.5 37.7 21.8 27.0 28.1 42.7 34.1 20.8 38.3 29.2 36.8Yemen 69.6 63.5 46.7 49.1 46.3 63.7 65.5 68.5 66.4 63.0 54.0 62.4Sudan 68.4 56.8 66.7 69.8 55.5 72.2 73.7 65.8 56.8 69.1 73.6 32.2

World 74.0 69.9 71.4 69.4 70.4 71.4 71.4 72.0 70.9 72.7 72.2 71.9America and the Caribbean 80.2 77.1 78.9 76.9 77.1 76.5 76.4 77.2 76.0 77.3 78.8 77.6Europe 78.6 75.4 76.3 72.1 75.5 75.9 75.9 75.8 74.7 77.4 76.9 76.1Sub-Saharan Africa 72.4 71.9 71.5 71.9 70.1 73.4 71.9 70.8 71.7 72.8 73.5 73.5Arab Countries 62.2 52.1 54.3 52.9 53.2 57.9 55.8 59.9 58.1 59.0 55.9 54.9Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

72.8 66.4 70.5 68.2 70.3 68.5 71.4 72.2 69.9 72.1 70.4 71.9

Very Small Population 74.5 70.1 72.6 70.8 72.3 72.2 72.3 73.9 72.6 73.8 72.8 73.1Small Population 74.0 71.2 72.0 69.5 70.0 72.8 72.6 72.8 71.7 72.9 73.1 72.2Medium Population 73.5 66.3 68.3 66.8 66.0 66.3 67.3 66.3 65.1 68.5 69.7 67.0Large Population 71.8 67.3 67.3 65.3 66.4 68.8 66.7 65.7 65.3 70.1 67.4 68.8Very Large Population 74.8 70.5 71.9 69.4 72.0 71.4 72.1 72.9 72.6 75.1 73.8 73.6High-income 77.8 72.9 73.9 70.7 74.0 75.3 75.0 75.2 74.7 76.2 74.4 75.0Mid-income 72.7 68.4 70.6 68.6 69.2 69.1 69.3 70.4 68.8 70.8 70.8 70.6

128

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Low-income 71.2 68.1 69.5 68.9 67.6 70.1 69.9 70.0 69.4 71.1 71.4 69.7G7 82.3 77.7 75.4 74.0 73.8 78.1 76.6 74.4 76.6 79.0 76.0 74.5G20 77.9 73.2 72.4 70.7 71.4 72.6 72.8 72.4 72.4 76.3 73.4 72.7OECD 80.8 76.7 76.6 72.8 76.9 78.5 76.4 76.3 77.3 78.2 76.6 77.0EU 81.7 77.8 79.3 74.0 77.6 79.4 79.2 78.4 78.8 80.2 79.5 79.2BRICs 72.3 64.9 67.7 67.5 67.3 67.0 70.7 71.0 66.6 74.5 70.6 70.6ASEAN 69.4 66.7 69.1 64.9 67.0 67.0 69.6 68.6 64.0 66.9 66.8 70.5Notes: 1) ‘Very Small Population’: less than 10 million; ‘Small Population’: 10

million to 29 million; ‘Medium Population’: 30 million to 49 million; ‘Large Population’: 50 million to 99 million, and ‘Very Large Population’: more than 100 million people.

2) ‘High-income’: more than $16,000; ‘Mid-income’: $3,000 to $15,999; and ‘Low-income’: less than $2,999 of GDP per capita at purchasing power (PPP).

129

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Sweden 92.1 84.6 93.7 77.0 93.6 84.6 93.0 92.4 93.2 93.1 87.1 91.1Iceland 93.4 93.5 93.5 94.2 93.1 94.0 94.0 94.0 93.6 94.3 80.3 92.1Austria 90.7 76.7 75.7 84.6 93.3 93.6 93.2 93.0 93.1 84.9 87.1 90.6Switzerland 79.7 75.4 86.0 84.7 93.5 92.9 92.9 91.5 93.2 93.3 87.6 91.6Denmark 92.5 92.3 93.4 85.2 94.1 93.6 93.6 93.9 94.5 86.3 87.6 90.9Germany 89.8 81.5 74.3 81.4 91.4 90.8 74.1 73.5 74.8 75.3 78.6 91.1Canada 81.8 90.9 91.8 91.7 91.2 83.1 91.5 91.7 83.7 92.0 86.1 89.2Netherlands 91.4 75.9 93.3 85.0 93.8 84.8 93.2 76.1 93.6 94.0 88.9 91.5Finland 87.7 90.2 82.8 91.2 83.1 91.5 91.5 91.7 84.2 92.7 86.4 90.0Malta 87.0 86.6 86.9 86.7 87.4 86.9 87.1 87.5 79.2 88.0 83.9 85.5Luxembourg 93.7 94.3 94.4 94.0 94.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 93.0 86.8 89.5Slovenia 86.6 85.9 86.5 70.1 88.9 80.7 89.8 90.3 82.6 91.4 85.2 79.3Czech 87.0 87.7 77.7 86.7 88.0 79.5 71.9 89.1 90.8 82.8 86.0 80.2Bahamas 81.1 81.3 82.2 81.9 75.4 84.5 84.5 76.6 69.5 84.6 81.1 82.3Norway 85.5 94.0 94.4 94.4 94.1 93.9 93.9 77.1 94.9 94.8 91.2 92.7Belgium 90.8 82.3 91.4 83.4 92.7 91.3 91.3 82.6 91.2 74.8 85.5 80.3Australia 89.8 81.9 77.9 82.9 83.0 92.0 92.0 83.8 92.5 84.2 80.2 81.2Ireland 86.1 80.3 90.9 91.2 91.7 83.5 92.3 91.7 91.9 91.1 83.9 77.3Japan 82.9 74.7 91.2 74.4 82.6 74.7 75.0 75.1 75.5 75.4 72.2 76.0Poland 81.4 65.1 79.9 80.4 80.8 82.1 73.9 74.2 86.1 79.4 73.9 76.0Slovakia 85.1 84.2 74.0 82.0 82.3 82.7 74.6 83.6 86.6 88.0 82.0 75.0Uruguay 79.6 78.1 78.2 78.3 76.2 76.9 77.6 71.5 81.7 66.2 77.3 77.6New Zealand 88.7 88.8 82.6 90.7 83.5 92.5 92.6 92.7 92.8 84.2 78.9 71.6Taiwan 69.9 78.2 69.9 69.9 78.2 81.0 81.0 81.0 81.0 81.0 86.5 87.9Mauritius 72.2 72.1 72.5 72.9 73.2 73.3 76.2 75.7 76.1 77.9 72.3 72.6Estonia 82.0 73.3 79.6 79.9 83.2 76.3 85.2 86.5 88.6 88.7 78.0 80.0France 71.1 71.5 89.3 72.5 72.7 72.7 72.7 81.1 74.4 74.7 85.1 80.1Bulgaria 71.3 64.5 64.6 66.2 66.7 78.1 83.1 76.2 77.2 87.4 80.2 77.6Costa Rica 64.1 73.6 81.8 83.1 82.7 66.0 83.0 83.1 84.8 68.1 72.7 69.7Lithuania 84.0 78.0 79.9 77.8 80.9 75.4 86.3 86.8 88.5 87.9 78.0 79.4Singapore 85.6 85.0 85.6 69.0 86.5 86.8 87.6 89.4 89.9 90.8 84.4 87.9Croatia 82.2 67.5 74.9 67.8 78.9 83.1 67.5 85.2 86.6 86.7 81.2 82.2Italy 77.5 69.4 78.7 69.5 87.4 88.5 72.5 73.1 91.0 82.4 84.6 79.1Spain 83.9 76.6 76.9 69.9 71.5 88.8 80.8 90.1 73.9 72.3 80.7 66.3Albania 76.6 76.3 68.5 77.1 79.3 80.6 80.8 64.7 65.3 81.0 75.0 78.5Panama 73.8 74.4 75.6 58.4 65.9 66.9 76.2 60.7 63.7 81.0 71.6 73.1Latvia 78.4 78.4 81.9 82.9 81.9 83.8 85.1 85.4 87.5 86.8 76.8 77.7Portugal 86.7 80.0 89.3 72.9 88.9 71.5 80.4 88.2 88.6 80.9 72.9 66.8

Socio-economic Peace Index 2001-2012

130

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Jamaica 63.4 54.0 62.7 73.0 65.0 58.3 72.9 56.0 59.2 75.0 69.7 69.4United Kingdom 88.9 73.3 74.0 74.1 82.8 83.2 92.0 83.9 92.0 75.1 84.0 86.4Korea, Rep. 69.5 85.1 70.3 86.7 87.8 80.8 81.4 81.7 74.2 74.5 79.8 82.3Hungary 66.0 67.7 68.7 69.1 78.1 79.0 79.7 71.1 87.5 86.6 73.2 64.9Fiji 78.0 73.2 73.3 72.6 72.9 72.9 73.2 74.0 65.5 73.7 62.1 69.2Tunisia 49.7 66.5 67.5 59.8 69.0 69.1 69.4 69.8 70.1 70.2 71.9 75.1Argentina 61.3 77.5 79.5 79.8 78.0 61.8 78.9 65.8 74.1 67.4 76.3 76.2Romania 62.4 59.8 74.4 58.4 60.9 65.8 74.4 66.9 84.5 75.1 79.9 70.2Chile 79.8 78.6 71.0 77.9 79.2 80.4 72.5 73.7 73.5 65.9 59.6 62.2Mexico 60.9 78.9 62.6 71.5 79.7 81.7 66.0 66.6 75.3 75.3 68.2 68.8Paraguay 53.6 72.2 72.4 72.8 73.1 74.1 74.2 74.0 75.1 76.3 61.2 69.4Ukraine 51.9 50.8 50.7 59.4 55.3 77.8 69.9 62.9 72.9 73.5 69.4 76.2South Africa 62.8 63.3 63.1 44.3 60.5 60.5 60.3 55.2 63.7 64.6 63.8 62.5Malaysia 77.6 70.8 79.2 62.8 63.1 63.7 80.7 72.6 75.2 76.1 80.4 81.5Trinidad and Tobago 76.8 77.2 80.8 78.4 79.5 79.5 79.9 82.3 84.6 84.9 78.4 70.2Papua New Guinea 60.6 60.6 51.9 52.5 60.5 58.6 42.2 42.6 59.3 52.1 61.9 61.5Saudi Arabia 74.7 66.9 75.3 58.9 67.5 67.3 59.2 68.2 70.3 62.5 76.8 78.0Botswana 42.1 57.9 53.1 54.6 53.8 34.1 42.7 59.5 60.2 64.1 62.1 61.7Moldova 75.2 73.7 73.5 74.2 75.7 76.1 77.4 78.3 79.5 79.8 74.8 73.5Qatar 80.3 79.6 79.7 82.5 82.6 83.4 83.1 84.3 85.4 87.2 81.6 72.9Kyrgyzstan 72.7 72.7 73.1 74.6 64.7 74.0 73.4 75.1 69.2 69.6 72.0 72.3Ghana 63.0 46.0 62.9 64.5 66.2 60.2 53.0 54.2 61.6 61.1 58.1 52.4Mongolia 50.7 54.1 68.7 60.0 72.5 60.3 60.7 70.1 77.4 77.2 73.9 72.7United Arab 77.7 69.5 77.8 78.2 79.3 71.9 79.6 86.3 79.0 88.8 74.3 76.4Venezuela 56.2 63.0 71.6 70.2 70.3 71.5 73.0 65.2 80.2 81.0 73.4 69.8Kazakhstan 80.0 61.2 62.7 64.7 79.7 78.1 70.4 79.8 80.5 80.8 69.3 78.6Oman 72.1 68.8 67.7 67.7 61.2 73.1 75.1 66.9 74.7 79.3 81.9 78.8Gabon 61.5 62.4 63.1 63.7 63.6 63.5 63.2 67.1 69.1 70.9 62.8 64.6Senegal 48.5 52.5 44.7 53.3 53.7 54.7 54.8 48.2 49.2 55.8 49.8 53.3Togo 44.1 60.7 61.0 61.2 61.4 61.6 61.1 53.7 61.1 62.1 57.8 58.3Dominican 69.0 52.6 68.1 71.2 62.2 61.8 69.7 63.3 63.6 72.7 58.4 64.7Cuba 82.8 66.9 75.4 83.7 76.0 68.7 84.4 76.5 86.8 86.7 75.1 69.3Namibia 61.1 57.1 49.1 57.0 56.3 58.9 59.5 62.4 61.9 66.5 58.5 58.6Peru 56.3 65.1 57.1 58.0 65.1 57.0 66.4 58.7 62.1 62.9 63.9 74.6United States 82.1 74.5 73.9 74.9 74.2 74.5 74.5 74.4 74.8 74.1 67.2 68.5Kuwait 87.8 87.4 78.7 79.2 88.3 87.5 88.1 88.8 73.2 89.8 80.4 81.7Brazil 56.3 48.7 56.6 57.6 67.0 57.8 57.9 58.9 59.8 60.8 54.4 56.1Madagascar 39.9 55.9 58.0 57.2 48.8 58.9 50.5 59.5 60.7 61.0 51.5 50.8El Salvador 70.4 53.3 70.5 71.6 71.9 55.8 65.2 74.0 75.3 58.8 69.0 53.1Honduras 68.2 50.6 67.3 68.5 61.3 61.2 63.0 65.4 57.9 76.1 65.7 48.7

131

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Bolivia 71.3 52.8 81.8 56.7 73.8 72.7 72.4 64.3 74.0 57.9 65.4 69.7Vietnam 72.3 55.7 64.9 75.8 59.0 58.9 61.0 62.4 78.8 62.4 71.8 71.5Bahrain 75.3 75.8 79.1 79.1 79.1 79.1 68.4 79.5 81.1 80.4 76.2 79.9Malawi 49.9 49.6 33.3 31.4 33.1 51.0 51.1 56.2 49.4 61.0 40.7 47.3Thailand 59.9 60.9 61.6 70.3 61.9 63.1 64.8 64.4 81.6 73.6 76.7 60.4Mali 49.4 49.3 49.8 48.5 40.2 32.1 48.7 42.2 51.1 33.7 44.7 44.3Tajikistan 74.9 74.7 66.6 75.3 75.4 74.7 74.9 59.0 75.9 76.0 63.9 71.4Azerbaijan 71.1 71.7 71.7 71.8 73.2 81.9 78.3 76.0 79.2 80.6 79.5 76.5Uzbekistan 73.0 73.2 71.2 76.8 58.1 75.7 75.0 73.7 79.0 74.8 70.2 69.4Greece 76.2 84.6 84.6 84.6 85.6 78.5 87.5 79.7 81.4 73.1 67.2 68.0Gambia 30.3 47.1 47.4 50.7 50.3 50.5 50.9 53.0 52.3 51.9 47.5 48.2Laos 39.7 59.5 59.8 60.7 60.9 55.5 64.8 67.0 68.8 61.0 62.6 61.3Bangladesh 48.5 40.7 41.3 42.0 42.4 42.2 51.0 44.3 46.2 45.2 50.4 50.8Cameroon 51.2 61.3 61.7 59.5 59.8 60.0 52.2 62.8 57.7 58.3 56.9 58.4Sri Lanka 61.4 71.9 72.7 62.3 55.5 56.4 57.0 72.6 56.9 58.0 72.6 73.2Belarus 81.6 78.5 78.9 69.9 77.2 83.3 83.8 76.1 85.4 84.3 72.7 67.1Ecuador 74.0 69.4 53.0 62.7 64.2 65.8 76.9 77.2 62.1 62.7 56.1 66.0Zambia 41.1 50.2 49.0 31.8 41.3 43.3 42.8 43.9 51.9 56.4 49.9 46.5Indonesia 50.0 55.2 56.0 56.4 54.6 54.8 55.0 55.5 55.6 56.3 51.0 67.8Armenia 71.9 67.0 72.6 73.7 75.6 62.2 62.4 79.1 79.2 80.5 72.3 73.8Israel 86.7 86.2 86.4 87.3 86.5 78.3 70.6 88.3 72.5 73.6 84.7 88.1Georgia 75.4 74.9 65.3 73.5 74.5 75.3 66.7 74.9 75.2 75.4 62.2 72.5Nicaragua 45.6 44.9 51.1 61.6 68.9 63.9 55.7 64.4 64.7 72.7 62.0 47.4Tanzania 60.2 59.2 51.0 56.9 49.2 42.7 43.4 62.6 64.0 65.3 53.2 45.8Burkina Faso 49.6 41.3 48.7 49.7 41.4 41.6 42.8 51.1 42.8 51.7 43.4 46.6Morocco 47.4 56.6 57.0 57.4 43.9 61.4 62.0 62.9 63.0 55.4 55.4 69.5Mauritania 49.2 50.5 50.3 50.6 34.4 37.4 45.7 56.9 58.2 56.8 48.1 47.0Guatemala 50.3 52.4 69.3 70.3 71.5 53.7 62.5 54.6 55.9 57.0 49.0 48.3Niger 48.9 33.9 49.3 45.3 27.6 50.5 49.0 49.1 43.5 43.5 40.1 39.3China 58.9 68.3 60.4 60.5 60.9 61.9 62.2 62.2 63.7 64.0 59.2 61.8Egypt 47.8 64.7 48.5 64.9 47.8 55.6 52.4 69.4 54.2 52.7 70.4 68.6Algeria 46.4 47.2 64.1 48.2 48.4 50.0 66.9 67.6 62.5 62.1 72.9 75.4Russia 57.1 52.7 55.2 56.3 62.1 64.3 64.6 64.9 66.9 64.0 59.6 75.1Mozambique 28.6 34.1 32.9 37.1 44.4 43.4 41.0 31.2 40.6 35.0 42.3 38.4Turkey 51.2 60.9 47.8 52.0 51.9 71.6 63.8 56.5 58.6 59.8 60.5 51.4Sierra Leone 47.7 31.3 48.1 48.2 48.5 49.7 49.6 32.8 51.6 52.3 47.1 45.2Libya 70.1 72.5 73.4 74.0 70.8 72.5 72.2 72.7 65.7 75.4 66.5 78.6Nepal 39.2 49.6 41.9 42.8 43.1 39.8 48.2 40.1 47.5 57.0 47.0 54.0Jordan 63.9 72.1 72.3 73.5 65.5 65.7 74.9 75.6 67.5 67.2 71.8 73.7Lebanon 75.0 76.5 76.3 67.6 76.3 76.0 76.5 76.8 78.1 78.5 68.7 77.1Philippines 56.9 56.4 57.2 57.0 57.1 73.7 57.0 59.9 60.2 59.9 61.8 54.4Kenya 49.6 48.4 48.3 53.9 37.8 38.2 38.8 41.4 40.8 41.7 49.5 32.9

132

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012India 45.8 46.4 47.0 47.5 57.2 57.9 49.6 49.2 49.8 66.7 42.5 51.5Guinea 32.3 43.2 51.2 45.1 51.7 51.8 50.0 50.6 46.1 34.0 42.3 35.0Central Africa 49.0 50.7 41.5 44.9 43.7 50.0 47.2 49.0 51.2 54.2 40.3 38.5Chad 35.5 36.7 52.1 48.3 30.5 53.4 50.6 51.1 52.2 36.7 50.9 49.1Cambodia 57.5 59.1 59.8 60.5 61.2 61.8 63.6 55.8 65.7 57.9 59.8 61.4Zimbabwe 52.9 59.6 60.4 44.2 35.4 45.6 47.2 41.5 43.5 53.9 40.6 50.1Korea, DPR 43.8 45.0 61.9 45.8 45.9 49.1 49.0 49.0 49.2 66.1 57.1 59.1Rwanda 49.4 56.2 55.3 52.0 51.1 60.8 58.0 55.6 39.5 42.1 45.1 45.8Iran 66.8 50.5 50.9 51.1 51.6 53.0 53.3 71.9 57.3 57.0 55.9 69.5Uganda 58.6 58.6 59.1 53.8 44.9 62.7 62.4 45.8 48.3 50.1 43.6 52.5Colombia 71.9 62.4 53.8 71.0 71.6 73.4 65.4 59.0 74.7 75.0 59.8 62.6Burundi 53.8 53.6 50.9 39.9 48.3 54.1 45.9 56.3 57.3 58.0 42.9 39.1Nigeria 34.9 40.9 40.5 37.0 36.0 41.8 38.2 56.8 44.0 55.6 47.0 45.0Pakistan 43.3 42.4 42.0 50.4 40.7 43.8 44.1 44.5 47.1 47.5 43.1 58.7Angola 43.9 47.2 37.9 40.6 44.3 49.4 32.7 34.0 40.0 44.5 41.6 39.2Ethiopia 45.6 45.6 28.9 26.5 38.8 38.8 30.4 37.1 36.4 31.4 33.8 19.5Myanmar 63.8 48.8 66.6 66.4 66.4 66.6 55.7 56.0 58.0 68.0 54.0 48.8Syria 67.2 68.4 68.2 60.2 62.8 72.0 71.7 72.3 57.2 74.7 69.6 71.9South Sudan 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 　 54.4Congo, Dem 30.1 32.1 31.0 23.8 40.3 34.8 52.0 44.9 36.8 54.7 42.0 34.6Iraq 40.1 56.3 56.3 39.6 40.6 53.1 61.4 61.4 61.3 60.9 46.0 58.1Yemen 49.5 49.5 41.8 50.1 43.1 52.0 44.0 53.7 39.0 39.7 50.7 48.9Sudan 40.0 35.2 37.7 38.9 39.5 43.6 51.8 58.4 41.6 42.2 57.6 56.4

World 65.5 65.0 66.5 65.6 66.6 67.4 67.9 68.1 69.2 69.6 66.5 66.8America and the Caribbean 67.9 66.4 70.4 71.9 72.7 68.8 72.7 69.1 71.5 72.3 67.6 67.0Europe 80.8 76.9 79.5 77.7 82.3 82.3 82.2 81.7 84.8 83.5 79.7 79.9Sub-Saharan Africa 48.0 50.3 50.2 48.4 47.2 50.3 49.7 51.3 52.0 53.3 49.1 47.6Arab Countries 63.5 65.6 65.3 63.5 62.8 66.8 67.2 71.6 65.6 67.9 68.7 70.7Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

64.1 64.1 64.9 64.7 64.8 66.1 65.8 65.5 68.5 68.4 65.9 67.8

Very Small Population 72.6 72.0 73.3 73.3 74.7 73.8 75.1 75.5 76.4 78.2 73.1 73.1Small Population 60.7 60.3 63.1 59.9 60.9 62.5 63.4 62.4 64.2 63.3 61.1 61.3Medium Population 60.5 62.2 62.6 62.1 60.1 64.0 65.9 65.4 65.7 65.1 64.5 65.4Large Population 63.7 59.6 59.7 60.7 62.7 64.8 62.1 64.5 66.2 63.9 66.5 63.4Very Large Population 56.5 56.7 57.0 57.1 59.5 60.7 57.9 59.4 59.9 62.0 56.4 61.2High-income 81.3 79.0 80.7 79.0 83.0 81.4 81.7 82.4 83.3 82.4 79.9 80.1Mid-income 63.8 63.1 65.2 65.0 65.5 66.6 67.7 67.3 69.0 70.1 66.2 67.2

133

Nation 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012Low-income 47.7 49.7 50.0 48.9 46.9 50.6 50.4 50.8 51.3 52.4 49.5 49.2G7 82.0 76.5 81.9 76.9 83.2 81.1 78.9 79.0 80.9 78.4 79.7 81.5G20 69.1 69.6 69.7 68.0 73.3 72.6 70.7 69.6 72.2 71.0 70.0 72.8OECD 82.9 80.6 81.7 80.8 85.2 84.1 83.4 83.1 84.9 82.4 80.0 79.7EU 83.7 78.9 82.4 79.4 84.7 83.4 84.6 84.2 87.1 84.3 81.5 80.4BRICs 54.5 54.0 54.8 55.5 61.8 60.4 58.6 58.8 60.1 63.9 53.9 61.1ASEAN 62.6 61.3 65.6 64.3 63.4 65.0 65.6 64.8 70.4 67.3 66.9 66.1Notes: 1) ‘Very Small Population’: less than 10 million; ‘Small Population’: 10

million to 29 million; ‘Medium Population’: 30 million to 49 million; ‘Large Population’: 50 million to 99 million, and ‘Very Large Population’: more than 100 million people.

2) ‘High-income’: more than $16,000; ‘Mid-income’: $3,000 to $15,999; and ‘Low-income’: less than $2,999 of GDP per capita at purchasing power (PPP).

Part 3

Country Reports

137

Albania

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,002,859 Area of land (km²) 27,398GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $25.23 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $7,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Albania

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 53 75.0 78.2 70.3 76.62002 48 75.5 80.1 70.1 76.32003 58 74.6 80.3 75.0 68.52004 47 74.7 81.2 65.8 77.12005 52 75.8 80.3 67.9 79.32006 37 79.6 81.1 77.1 80.62007 41 79.6 81.3 76.8 80.82008 58 75.2 81.7 79.1 64.72009 62 74.7 82.2 76.7 65.32010 41 79.8 82.0 76.4 81.02011 43 77.6 81.4 76.2 75.02012 35 79.0 81.2 77.3 78.5

138

Algeria

Population (July 2012 est.) 35,406,303 Area of land (km²) 2,381,741GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $267 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $7,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Algeria

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 137 44.4 14.7 72.0 46.42002 139 43.7 14.7 69.0 47.22003 136 49.4 14.7 69.3 64.12004 131 49.7 31.4 69.6 48.22005 137 45.1 31.5 55.4 48.42006 130 54.1 48.3 64.0 50.02007 110 59.8 48.6 63.9 66.92008 121 57.4 31.8 72.9 67.62009 120 55.2 32.0 71.1 62.52010 137 49.5 14.9 71.4 62.12011 103 64.1 50.7 68.6 72.92012 110 61.3 42.4 66.0 75.4

139

Angola

Population (July 2012 est.) 18,056,072 Area of land (km²) 1,246,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $117.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $6,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Angola

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 136 47.2 35.3 62.4 43.92002 138 45.9 35.3 55.3 47.22003 141 45.4 43.6 54.6 37.92004 130 49.9 53.0 56.0 40.62005 127 51.7 52.7 58.2 44.32006 126 55.3 51.9 64.5 49.42007 140 46.6 44.6 62.6 32.72008 135 49.7 52.9 62.0 34.02009 131 51.0 52.9 60.1 40.02010 128 53.3 52.9 62.7 44.52011 138 47.0 44.8 54.6 41.62012 135 49.8 53.3 56.8 39.2

140

Argentina

Population (July 2012 est.) 42,192,494 Area of land (km²) 2,736,690GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $725.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $17,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Argentina

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 59 73.5 79.4 79.9 61.32002 82 67.7 63.3 62.3 77.52003 63 73.4 61.6 79.0 79.52004 51 74.0 71.5 70.9 79.82005 50 76.2 80.1 70.5 78.02006 84 68.1 71.8 70.7 61.82007 50 76.8 80.2 71.4 78.92008 69 72.5 80.2 71.5 65.82009 74 72.4 71.9 71.2 74.12010 60 75.8 80.2 79.8 67.42011 37 78.4 79.8 79.3 76.32012 45 75.7 79.9 71.1 76.2

141

Armenia

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,970,495 Area of land (km²) 28,203GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $18.17 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Armenia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 83 68.6 70.4 63.5 71.92002 83 67.7 78.8 57.4 67.02003 76 70.7 79.3 60.3 72.62004 68 71.0 79.3 60.1 73.72005 77 70.1 78.5 56.1 75.62006 103 62.5 78.3 47.1 62.22007 93 66.1 78.3 57.6 62.42008 72 72.3 78.4 59.2 79.12009 100 63.2 60.7 49.6 79.22010 89 68.8 77.1 48.8 80.52011 100 64.8 74.9 47.2 72.32012 98 65.1 74.9 46.5 73.8

142

Australia

Population (July 2012 est.) 22,015,576 Area of land (km²) 7,682,300GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $926.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $40,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Australia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 22 84.3 89.1 74.2 89.82002 12 87.1 97.2 82.3 81.92003 23 83.1 97.3 74.1 77.92004 40 76.4 80.8 65.5 82.92005 38 79.0 80.8 73.1 83.02006 16 87.7 97.5 73.6 92.02007 7 90.4 97.4 81.8 92.02008 11 87.7 97.3 82.1 83.82009 8 90.3 97.4 81.0 92.52010 14 87.5 97.4 80.9 84.22011 19 84.2 97.9 74.5 80.22012 17 84.7 98.0 74.8 81.2

143

Austria

Population (July 2012 est.) 8,219,743 Area of land (km²) 82,445GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $356.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $42,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Austria

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 14 88.4 88.7 85.8 90.72002 14 86.8 97.2 86.4 76.72003 16 86.5 97.2 86.7 75.72004 10 86.8 97.4 78.2 84.62005 6 92.4 97.9 86.0 93.32006 1 93.6 98.2 89.0 93.62007 17 87.0 98.1 69.6 93.22008 4 92.3 97.5 86.4 93.02009 5 92.0 97.5 85.5 93.12010 10 89.6 97.3 86.5 84.92011 3 89.7 97.0 85.0 87.12012 3 90.9 96.9 85.1 90.6

144

Azerbaijan

Population (July 2012 est.) 9,493,600 Area of land (km²) 82,629GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $94.25 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $10,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Azerbaijan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 111 59.5 60.2 47.3 71.12002 86 66.8 76.3 52.4 71.72003 102 64.2 76.3 44.5 71.72004 90 66.9 67.7 61.3 71.82005 97 65.9 76.3 48.2 73.22006 91 66.4 68.1 49.1 81.92007 88 68.1 68.4 57.5 78.32008 97 67.5 68.0 58.6 76.02009 95 67.3 76.1 46.7 79.22010 82 70.5 76.6 54.4 80.62011 87 67.6 75.8 47.4 79.52012 86 68.6 75.8 53.4 76.5

145

Bahamas

Population (July 2012 est.) 316,182 Area of land (km²) 10,010GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $10.92 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $31,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Bahamas

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 24 83.7 90.6 79.3 81.12002 21 83.7 90.6 79.0 81.32003 21 83.8 90.2 78.9 82.22004 17 83.6 89.8 78.9 81.92005 31 81.3 89.8 78.6 75.42006 24 84.5 90.1 78.9 84.52007 21 84.1 88.7 79.2 84.52008 32 81.5 88.9 79.0 76.62009 41 78.8 89.1 77.8 69.52010 19 85.2 91.2 79.9 84.62011 22 83.7 90.6 79.4 81.12012 14 85.5 94.7 79.5 82.3

146

Bahrain

Population 1,248,348 Area of land (km²) 760GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $31.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $27,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Bahrain

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 66 72.4 73.9 68.0 75.32002 62 71.7 75.7 63.7 75.82003 57 74.7 75.7 69.4 79.12004 48 74.7 77.6 67.3 79.12005 60 74.5 77.5 66.8 79.12006 62 73.5 78.3 63.0 79.12007 72 71.1 77.4 67.5 68.42008 59 74.9 77.4 67.7 79.52009 55 75.8 77.8 68.3 81.12010 64 75.5 76.7 69.4 80.42011 60 74.0 77.3 68.4 76.22012 81 68.9 59.9 66.8 79.9

147

Bangladesh

Population (July 2012 est.) 161,083,804 Area of land (km²) 130,168GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $285.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Bangladesh

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 94 65.1 77.0 69.8 48.52002 130 53.7 60.4 59.9 40.72003 114 59.8 61.2 76.9 41.32004 111 59.8 77.1 60.3 42.02005 116 57.3 60.7 68.7 42.42006 128 54.5 60.9 60.4 42.22007 109 60.3 69.5 60.3 51.02008 101 66.0 76.9 76.9 44.32009 99 64.0 69.7 76.3 46.22010 112 61.3 62.6 76.2 45.22011 88 67.4 75.2 76.7 50.42012 91 67.6 75.5 76.6 50.8

148

Belarus

Population (July 2012 est.) 9,542,883 Area of land (km²) 202,900GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $143.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Belarus

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 38 79.2 81.4 74.7 81.62002 45 76.6 81.4 69.9 78.52003 41 77.8 83.0 71.5 78.92004 64 71.6 82.3 62.5 69.92005 54 75.6 80.4 69.2 77.22006 59 74.7 79.6 61.2 83.32007 84 69.3 70.7 53.4 83.82008 82 69.7 70.7 62.3 76.12009 71 73.1 79.0 55.0 85.42010 47 78.5 79.4 71.9 84.32011 59 74.0 78.1 71.3 72.72012 94 66.8 69.6 63.6 67.1

149

Belgium

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,438,353 Area of land (km²) 30,278GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $418.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $38,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Belgium

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 12 88.6 93.5 81.5 90.82002 16 86.4 94.9 81.9 82.32003 6 89.6 95.5 82.0 91.42004 15 84.6 97.0 73.4 83.42005 9 90.3 96.9 81.3 92.72006 9 89.9 96.8 81.6 91.32007 15 87.2 96.7 73.7 91.32008 13 87.0 96.4 82.0 82.62009 26 84.3 80.0 81.6 91.22010 33 81.5 88.1 81.5 74.82011 9 86.7 94.8 79.9 85.52012 16 85.2 95.2 80.1 80.3

150

Bolivia

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,290,003 Area of land (km²) 1,083,301GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $51.56 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Bolivia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 71 71.4 59.6 83.3 71.32002 70 70.4 75.7 82.6 52.82003 35 80.0 76.0 82.3 81.82004 85 68.4 65.9 82.4 56.72005 49 76.5 73.7 82.0 73.82006 71 70.8 65.7 73.9 72.72007 74 70.9 66.3 74.0 72.42008 94 68.1 58.2 81.7 64.32009 80 71.2 66.7 72.8 74.02010 99 65.6 58.0 80.8 57.92011 63 73.1 73.4 80.5 65.42012 79 69.0 56.7 80.7 69.7

151

Botswana

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,098,018 Area of land (km²) 566,730GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $30.09 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $16,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Botswana

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 79 69.6 91.6 75.2 42.12002 54 73.3 92.5 69.4 57.92003 66 72.5 93.0 71.3 53.12004 59 72.6 92.2 71.1 54.62005 66 72.2 91.9 70.8 53.82006 96 64.7 91.8 68.1 34.12007 86 68.7 91.4 71.8 42.72008 85 68.9 91.2 56.1 59.52009 75 71.8 91.7 63.5 60.22010 84 70.2 90.7 55.8 64.12011 64 73.1 88.5 68.7 62.12012 56 73.5 88.9 70.1 61.7

152

Brazil

Population (July 2012 est.) 205,716,890 Area of land (km²) 8,459,417GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $2.324 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $11,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Brazil

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 70 71.5 75.6 82.6 56.32002 96 63.3 68.1 73.1 48.72003 84 69.0 76.4 74.0 56.62004 75 69.5 77.2 73.8 57.62005 55 75.5 85.6 74.1 67.02006 65 72.7 86.3 74.2 57.82007 55 75.6 85.8 83.1 57.92008 53 76.0 86.0 83.0 58.92009 51 76.1 86.0 82.4 59.82010 58 76.4 86.3 82.1 60.82011 70 72.2 83.3 78.8 54.42012 75 70.2 75.1 79.3 56.1

153

Bulgaria

Population (July 2012 est.) 7,037,935 Area of land (km²) 108,489GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $102.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $13,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Bulgaria

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 44 77.9 85.8 76.5 71.32002 49 75.2 87.4 73.8 64.52003 53 75.3 87.5 73.8 64.62004 55 73.5 88.3 66.0 66.22005 73 71.4 88.6 59.0 66.72006 28 81.5 88.6 78.0 78.12007 30 82.6 88.5 76.2 83.12008 37 80.3 88.6 76.1 76.22009 38 80.2 87.6 75.8 77.22010 26 83.4 87.3 75.6 87.42011 40 78.3 77.7 77.0 80.22012 28 80.1 85.7 77.0 77.6

154

Burkina Faso

Population (July 2012 est.) 17,275,115 Area of land (km²) 273,800GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $22.32 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Burkina Faso

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 69 71.6 85.7 79.3 49.62002 74 69.4 87.6 79.3 41.32003 68 71.9 87.6 79.3 48.72004 60 72.3 88.0 79.3 49.72005 79 69.9 89.0 79.2 41.42006 75 69.6 88.0 79.2 41.62007 78 70.0 87.8 79.3 42.82008 68 72.7 87.5 79.4 51.12009 87 69.4 86.3 79.1 42.82010 72 72.4 86.4 79.0 51.72011 82 68.6 84.0 78.4 43.42012 103 64.1 67.2 78.3 46.6

155

Burundi

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,557,259 Area of land (km²) 25,680GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $5.25 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Burundi

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 134 48.9 21.6 71.3 53.82002 132 53.1 38.2 67.4 53.62003 137 49.2 29.9 66.8 50.92004 137 48.8 40.1 66.3 39.92005 138 45.0 40.1 46.5 48.32006 133 53.3 41.9 63.9 54.12007 125 53.6 49.4 65.4 45.92008 120 57.8 49.6 67.5 56.32009 130 51.3 32.2 64.3 57.32010 124 56.9 48.4 64.3 58.02011 136 48.2 31.4 70.4 42.92012 132 53.2 48.2 72.2 39.1

156

Cambodia

Population (July 2012 est.) 14,952,665 Area of land (km²) 176,515GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $33.89 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Cambodia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 124 55.9 48.5 61.8 57.52002 123 55.4 49.5 57.8 59.12003 128 53.2 49.5 50.5 59.82004 121 54.7 49.5 54.2 60.52005 120 55.6 49.5 56.0 61.22006 122 56.6 49.5 58.6 61.82007 119 57.1 48.3 59.5 63.62008 127 54.6 49.1 58.9 55.82009 137 46.3 48.9 24.3 65.72010 132 51.9 49.1 48.6 57.92011 131 53.0 50.9 48.4 59.82012 125 56.4 50.9 57.0 61.4

157

Cameroon

Population (July 2012 est.) 20,129,878 Area of land (km²) 472,710GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $47.86 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Cameroon

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 92 65.6 71.3 74.3 51.22002 77 69.1 72.8 73.3 61.32003 82 69.2 73.0 73.0 61.72004 84 68.4 72.6 73.1 59.52005 85 68.2 72.1 72.7 59.82006 83 68.3 72.2 72.8 60.02007 96 65.6 72.3 72.2 52.22008 99 66.7 72.4 64.9 62.82009 105 62.0 55.7 72.7 57.72010 92 68.1 73.0 73.0 58.32011 91 66.8 71.2 72.4 56.92012 92 67.5 71.6 72.6 58.4

158

Canada

Population (July 2012 est.) 34,300,083 Area of land (km²) 9,093,507GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.414 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $41,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Canada

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 13 88.6 98.9 85.0 81.82002 8 88.5 98.5 76.2 90.92003 10 88.9 98.7 76.3 91.82004 2 91.2 98.3 83.5 91.72005 13 88.4 98.1 76.1 91.22006 13 88.5 98.0 84.5 83.12007 18 85.8 98.1 67.8 91.52008 18 86.0 98.3 67.9 91.72009 21 85.8 98.3 75.4 83.72010 17 85.7 98.3 66.9 92.02011 6 87.9 96.8 80.9 86.12012 7 88.8 96.5 80.6 89.2

159

Central African Republic

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,057,208 Area of land (km²) 622,984GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $3.688 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Central African Republic

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 101 63.0 66.2 73.9 49.02002 120 56.0 46.8 70.6 50.72003 127 53.8 46.8 73.0 41.52004 139 48.6 28.2 72.6 44.92005 128 50.9 36.8 72.0 43.72006 106 61.9 63.7 72.1 50.02007 131 51.0 47.0 58.8 47.22008 112 62.3 62.3 75.6 49.02009 102 62.9 62.3 75.2 51.22010 111 61.5 54.9 75.3 54.22011 132 52.0 43.6 72.2 40.32012 123 57.2 60.3 72.7 38.5

160

Chad

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,975,648 Area of land (km²) 1,259,200GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $19.79 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Chad

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 139 42.7 37.8 54.8 35.52002 129 53.7 54.5 69.9 36.72003 115 59.6 54.5 72.1 52.12004 116 58.3 54.5 72.0 48.32005 135 46.4 53.7 55.1 30.52006 120 57.5 45.4 73.8 53.42007 126 53.1 44.8 63.9 50.62008 116 58.7 52.0 73.0 51.12009 132 50.5 43.6 55.5 52.22010 138 47.6 35.2 71.0 36.72011 119 57.2 49.6 71.2 50.92012 124 56.8 49.9 71.6 49.1

161

Chile

Population (July 2012 est.) 17,067,369 Area of land (km²) 743,812GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $303.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $17,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Chile

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 25 83.6 90.5 80.4 79.82002 37 79.7 91.2 69.4 78.62003 38 79.5 91.2 76.5 71.02004 31 79.8 92.9 68.6 77.92005 27 83.0 92.9 76.7 79.22006 25 84.5 92.8 80.2 80.42007 34 81.1 92.8 78.0 72.52008 42 78.6 84.1 78.1 73.72009 34 81.3 92.4 77.9 73.52010 61 75.8 92.1 69.2 65.92011 44 77.3 92.5 79.8 59.62012 47 75.3 84.1 79.5 62.2

162

China

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,343,239,923 Area of land (km²) 9,569,901GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $11.44 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $8,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: China

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 96 64.6 60.8 74.1 58.92002 79 68.7 69.2 68.7 68.32003 94 66.4 68.8 70.1 60.42004 94 66.4 68.6 70.1 60.52005 93 66.6 68.7 70.3 60.92006 98 64.2 60.6 70.3 61.92007 104 62.6 52.3 73.2 62.22008 110 62.7 52.6 73.4 62.22009 103 62.9 52.3 72.6 63.72010 108 62.7 51.6 72.6 64.02011 104 63.6 67.8 63.8 59.22012 108 61.7 59.6 63.7 61.8

163

Colombia

Population (July 2012 est.) 45,239,079 Area of land (km²) 1,038,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $478 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $10,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Colombia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 114 59.0 25.0 80.2 71.92002 111 58.9 34.3 79.9 62.42003 132 49.8 17.4 78.1 53.82004 108 61.0 34.2 77.8 71.02005 94 66.3 51.0 76.3 71.62006 131 53.8 19.7 68.3 73.42007 112 59.5 36.3 77.0 65.42008 137 49.1 19.5 68.8 59.02009 114 58.6 35.2 65.8 74.72010 105 64.1 51.8 65.5 75.02011 122 55.8 32.6 74.9 59.82012 131 54.1 32.5 67.3 62.6

164

Congo, Democratic Republic of the

Population (July 2012 est.) 73,599,190 Area of land (km²) 2,267,048GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $25.59 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Democratic Republic of the Congo

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 142 38.9 20.1 66.4 30.12002 141 42.4 29.3 65.7 32.12003 142 33.1 21.0 47.3 31.02004 141 41.7 37.7 63.8 23.82005 141 36.8 12.7 57.4 40.32006 137 49.5 37.8 76.0 34.82007 136 49.2 21.9 73.7 52.02008 140 47.2 21.8 74.8 44.92009 140 40.9 12.3 73.5 36.82010 130 52.5 29.2 73.7 54.72011 141 42.4 12.0 73.1 42.02012 140 45.5 28.7 73.3 34.6

165

Costa Rica

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,636,348 Area of land (km²) 51,060GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $55.73 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $12,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Costa Rica

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 39 79.2 87.3 86.2 64.12002 26 82.4 86.7 87.0 73.62003 20 85.3 86.7 87.4 81.82004 13 85.6 86.4 87.3 83.12005 20 86.0 88.0 87.2 82.72006 33 80.0 87.3 86.7 66.02007 38 80.2 87.2 70.6 83.02008 17 86.2 88.2 87.4 83.12009 17 86.7 88.3 87.1 84.82010 35 81.3 88.5 87.2 68.12011 28 81.5 86.7 85.0 72.72012 29 80.0 86.2 84.3 69.7

166

Croatia

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,480,043 Area of land (km²) 55,974GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $81.36 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $18,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Croatia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 60 73.4 57.3 80.8 82.22002 59 72.4 70.6 79.0 67.52003 54 75.2 71.5 79.1 74.92004 46 74.8 71.3 85.2 67.82005 43 78.0 71.1 84.1 78.92006 38 79.6 71.0 84.5 83.12007 60 74.6 71.0 85.1 67.52008 35 80.7 71.8 85.2 85.22009 35 81.0 72.1 84.2 86.62010 36 81.2 72.7 84.3 86.72011 35 79.4 73.7 83.3 81.22012 32 79.7 73.6 83.2 82.2

167

Cuba

Population (July 2012 est.) 11,075,244 Area of land (km²) 109,820GDP purchasing power parity (2010 est.) $114.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2010 est.) $9,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Cuba

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 51 75.1 69.4 73.0 82.82002 88 66.5 69.4 63.4 66.92003 61 73.9 69.4 76.8 75.42004 52 73.9 69.4 68.5 83.72005 75 70.8 68.7 67.8 76.02006 82 68.8 69.6 68.0 68.72007 63 73.8 68.4 68.4 84.42008 86 68.6 69.2 60.0 76.52009 46 77.3 70.3 74.9 86.82010 52 77.1 69.9 74.7 86.72011 79 70.1 60.1 75.1 75.12012 70 71.2 69.0 75.1 69.3

168

Czech Republic

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,177,300 Area of land (km²) 77,247GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $288.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $27,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Czech Republic

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 23 84.1 81.0 84.4 87.02002 13 86.9 88.6 84.2 87.72003 22 83.5 88.3 84.5 77.72004 25 81.1 88.6 68.0 86.72005 16 87.1 89.8 83.5 88.02006 26 84.5 89.9 83.9 79.52007 27 83.0 90.5 86.7 71.92008 8 88.9 90.9 86.7 89.12009 19 86.5 82.6 86.2 90.82010 25 83.8 90.3 78.4 82.82011 18 84.4 81.7 85.5 86.02012 13 86.0 89.8 87.9 80.2

169

Denmark

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,543,453 Area of land (km²) 42,434GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $209.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $37,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Denmark

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 2 92.8 100.0 86.0 92.52002 10 87.4 99.4 70.4 92.32003 4 90.6 99.4 79.1 93.42004 14 85.0 99.4 70.3 85.22005 8 90.5 99.4 78.1 94.12006 7 90.5 99.4 78.5 93.62007 14 87.9 99.4 70.7 93.62008 10 88.0 91.0 79.0 93.92009 1 93.5 99.2 86.7 94.52010 6 90.4 99.2 85.6 86.32011 5 89.3 97.2 83.1 87.62012 5 89.9 97.3 81.6 90.9

170

Dominican Republic

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,088,598 Area of land (km²) 48,320GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $94.58 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $9,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Dominican Republic

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 62 73.3 67.2 83.7 69.02002 80 68.0 68.1 83.4 52.62003 64 72.8 66.7 83.5 68.12004 104 62.8 50.3 66.9 71.22005 74 70.9 67.1 83.4 62.22006 70 71.0 67.6 83.6 61.82007 89 67.9 50.3 83.6 69.72008 74 71.7 68.0 83.7 63.32009 84 70.7 67.2 81.3 63.62010 68 74.5 67.7 83.3 72.72011 96 66.3 55.7 84.8 58.42012 69 71.2 63.6 85.1 64.7

171

Ecuador

Population (July 2012 est.) 15,223,680 Area of land (km²) 276,841GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $129.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $8,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Ecuador

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 46 76.2 73.3 81.4 74.02002 64 71.3 64.1 80.4 69.42003 88 68.1 72.3 78.9 53.02004 83 68.5 72.3 70.4 62.72005 58 74.7 80.9 78.9 64.22006 67 72.6 72.6 79.3 65.82007 62 73.9 64.1 80.8 76.92008 65 73.8 63.9 80.4 77.22009 92 68.3 72.1 70.8 62.12010 91 68.5 72.3 70.4 62.72011 71 71.5 80.5 78.0 56.12012 95 66.7 64.1 70.0 66.0

172

Egypt

Population (July 2012 est.) 83,688,164 Area of land (km²) 995,450GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $525.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $6,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Egypt

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 126 55.2 56.6 61.2 47.82002 107 59.7 72.7 41.8 64.72003 122 56.4 72.5 48.1 48.52004 114 59.3 64.0 49.0 64.92005 117 56.4 73.2 48.2 47.82006 132 53.8 56.7 48.9 55.62007 134 49.8 56.6 40.4 52.42008 106 63.9 72.9 49.3 69.42009 119 55.6 64.4 48.2 54.22010 114 61.0 72.7 57.5 52.72011 111 61.6 65.4 48.8 70.42012 109 61.6 56.9 59.4 68.6

173

El Salvador

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,090,646 Area of land (km²) 20,721GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $45.15 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $7,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: El Salvador

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 50 75.4 73.7 82.3 70.42002 78 68.9 73.3 80.2 53.32003 56 75.0 73.1 81.3 70.52004 43 75.4 73.5 81.1 71.62005 62 73.2 74.0 73.6 71.92006 72 70.6 74.0 82.1 55.82007 64 73.7 73.8 82.2 65.22008 49 76.7 73.8 82.2 74.02009 59 74.9 73.7 75.8 75.32010 79 71.2 73.1 81.5 58.82011 68 72.2 73.6 74.1 69.02012 77 69.2 73.3 81.3 53.1

174

Estonia

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,274,709 Area of land (km²) 42,388GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $27.66 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $20,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Estonia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 26 83.5 93.8 74.6 82.02002 31 80.9 93.7 75.8 73.32003 25 82.8 93.7 75.2 79.62004 21 82.6 93.6 74.4 79.92005 24 83.7 95.1 72.8 83.22006 40 78.9 95.5 64.9 76.32007 19 85.1 95.9 74.2 85.22008 26 82.9 95.6 66.5 86.52009 22 85.8 95.8 73.0 88.62010 18 85.6 95.8 72.5 88.72011 31 81.1 94.1 71.0 78.02012 26 81.3 94.0 70.0 80.0

175

Ethiopia

Population (July 2012 est.) 93,815,992 Area of land (km²) 1,000,000GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $96.09 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Ethiopia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 128 54.1 63.9 52.8 45.62002 127 53.8 47.3 68.4 45.62003 129 52.9 63.9 65.8 28.92004 125 52.3 62.8 67.7 26.52005 115 57.7 62.6 71.6 38.82006 134 52.5 45.8 73.0 38.82007 142 41.6 46.1 48.5 30.42008 134 49.7 62.7 49.4 37.12009 135 49.9 62.9 50.3 36.42010 140 45.5 45.7 59.5 31.42011 129 54.3 52.1 76.9 33.82012 136 49.5 60.4 68.4 19.5

176

Fiji

Population (July 2012 est.) 890,057 Area of land (km²) 18,274GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $4.186 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Fiji

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 29 82.4 81.5 87.8 78.02002 34 80.0 79.6 87.2 73.22003 34 80.2 79.6 87.7 73.32004 30 79.9 79.6 87.5 72.62005 33 80.2 80.0 87.8 72.92006 31 81.2 80.8 90.0 72.92007 47 77.5 68.9 90.5 73.22008 36 80.6 77.3 90.5 74.02009 69 73.6 77.3 78.2 65.52010 46 78.9 76.9 86.2 73.72011 73 71.5 68.4 84.0 62.12012 43 76.6 76.8 84.0 69.2

177

Finland

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,262,930 Area of land (km²) 303,815GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $198.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $36,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Finland

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 17 87.9 99.8 76.2 87.72002 6 89.1 99.9 77.1 90.22003 17 86.3 99.7 76.6 82.82004 18 83.5 99.7 59.6 91.22005 19 86.5 99.7 76.9 83.12006 17 87.7 99.6 72.0 91.52007 10 89.4 99.6 77.1 91.52008 21 83.8 99.3 60.3 91.72009 15 87.0 99.3 77.3 84.22010 11 89.4 98.8 76.6 92.72011 14 85.7 98.5 72.1 86.42012 9 87.4 98.7 73.7 90.0

178

France

Population (July 2012 est.) 65,630,692 Area of land (km²) 549,970GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $2.246 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $35,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: France

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 40 78.7 86.4 78.6 71.12002 27 82.2 94.8 80.3 71.52003 37 79.8 86.1 64.0 89.32004 29 80.2 96.0 72.3 72.52005 35 80.0 96.2 71.2 72.72006 45 77.6 88.3 71.6 72.72007 45 77.8 88.2 72.6 72.72008 46 77.9 79.8 72.7 81.12009 37 80.2 96.0 70.4 74.42010 29 83.1 96.0 78.6 74.72011 26 82.8 86.1 77.2 85.12012 27 80.6 94.7 67.2 80.1

179

Gabon

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,608,321 Area of land (km²) 257,667GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $24.89 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $16,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Gabon

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 68 71.6 82.1 71.3 61.52002 60 72.3 82.1 72.5 62.42003 81 69.7 73.8 72.1 63.12004 73 69.9 73.8 72.3 63.72005 64 72.9 81.3 73.8 63.62006 73 70.0 72.4 74.2 63.52007 68 72.7 80.9 74.0 63.22008 61 74.7 81.2 75.9 67.12009 64 74.6 81.0 73.7 69.12010 87 69.1 62.5 74.0 70.92011 74 71.0 76.9 73.2 62.82012 66 71.7 77.2 73.4 64.6

180

Gambia

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,840,454 Area of land (km²) 10,000GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $3.541 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Gambia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 104 61.7 75.0 79.7 30.32002 104 61.2 60.1 76.3 47.12003 105 63.4 67.1 75.9 47.42004 77 69.3 78.2 78.9 50.72005 81 69.4 78.6 79.2 50.32006 79 69.1 78.0 78.8 50.52007 85 69.3 77.3 79.6 50.92008 81 70.1 77.5 79.8 53.02009 86 69.4 76.7 79.3 52.32010 90 68.6 76.9 76.9 51.92011 84 67.9 76.7 79.6 47.52012 89 68.0 76.1 79.6 48.2

181

Georgia

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,570,934 Area of land (km²) 69,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $24.86 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Georgia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 97 64.6 56.4 61.9 75.42002 106 60.4 55.5 50.9 74.92003 108 63.2 72.3 52.0 65.32004 80 68.6 63.3 69.1 73.52005 95 66.0 56.1 67.4 74.52006 99 64.0 57.3 59.3 75.32007 116 58.8 57.9 51.8 66.72008 105 63.9 65.0 51.8 74.92009 124 53.5 57.3 27.9 75.22010 97 66.5 74.1 49.8 75.42011 105 63.5 64.6 63.7 62.22012 100 64.6 65.0 56.3 72.5

182

Germany

Population (July 2012 est.) 81,305,856 Area of land (km²) 348,672GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $3.139 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $38,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Germany

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 9 89.2 88.3 89.5 89.82002 17 86.2 96.0 81.2 81.52003 15 86.6 95.8 89.6 74.32004 11 86.6 97.2 81.3 81.42005 4 92.9 97.8 89.7 91.42006 6 90.7 97.8 83.5 90.82007 16 87.2 97.5 89.9 74.12008 33 81.5 97.3 73.6 73.52009 13 87.3 97.4 89.6 74.82010 15 87.4 97.5 89.4 75.32011 17 84.6 88.7 86.6 78.62012 6 88.9 88.8 86.8 91.1

183

Ghana

Population (July 2012 est.) 25,241,998 Area of land (km²) 227,533GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $75.9 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Ghana

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 49 75.6 85.4 78.5 63.02002 71 70.2 86.4 78.1 46.02003 49 76.0 87.0 78.1 62.92004 37 76.7 87.2 78.3 64.52005 45 77.5 87.5 78.8 66.22006 52 75.8 88.4 78.8 60.22007 65 73.2 88.1 78.3 53.02008 67 73.6 88.6 78.0 54.22009 53 76.0 88.8 77.7 61.62010 62 75.6 88.1 77.7 61.12011 57 74.5 87.5 78.0 58.12012 60 72.6 87.3 78.1 52.4

184

Greece

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,767,827 Area of land (km²) 130,647GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $298.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $26,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Greece

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 47 76.1 81.9 70.2 76.22002 41 78.5 81.1 69.7 84.62003 40 78.5 81.1 69.6 84.62004 34 78.5 82.1 68.7 84.62005 40 78.6 82.1 68.1 85.62006 48 76.7 82.1 69.4 78.52007 37 80.5 82.3 71.9 87.52008 45 78.3 82.5 72.7 79.72009 58 75.1 74.3 69.6 81.42010 78 71.8 72.9 69.3 73.12011 86 67.7 70.7 65.0 67.22012 88 68.1 69.7 66.6 68.0

185

Guatemala

Population (July 2012 est.) 14,099,032 Area of land (km²) 107,159GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $75.67 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Guatemala

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 103 62.0 52.9 82.8 50.32002 100 62.3 52.5 82.2 52.42003 90 67.8 52.1 82.0 69.32004 103 62.9 42.7 75.6 70.32005 84 68.9 50.8 84.3 71.52006 101 63.4 51.2 85.3 53.72007 100 63.7 52.2 76.4 62.52008 117 58.6 44.1 77.0 54.62009 106 61.8 52.8 76.8 55.92010 103 64.8 52.2 85.1 57.02011 109 62.0 52.2 84.9 49.02012 106 61.9 52.5 84.8 48.3

186

Guinea

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,884,958 Area of land (km²) 245,717GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $11.61 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Guinea

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 109 60.1 74.5 73.5 32.32002 115 58.1 66.2 64.8 43.22003 111 60.7 74.5 56.2 51.22004 100 64.1 74.5 72.6 45.12005 111 60.5 74.5 55.5 51.72006 110 60.7 57.9 72.4 51.82007 111 59.7 57.9 71.2 50.02008 108 63.1 66.2 72.6 50.62009 110 61.3 64.9 72.9 46.12010 123 57.1 64.2 73.0 34.02011 118 57.3 56.8 72.8 42.32012 122 57.8 65.3 73.3 35.0

187

Honduras

Population (July 2012 est.) 8,296,693 Area of land (km²) 111,890GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $36.15 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Honduras

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 45 76.5 82.3 78.9 68.22002 81 67.8 83.3 69.6 50.62003 48 76.1 83.3 77.8 67.32004 86 68.3 67.1 69.4 68.52005 83 68.9 67.1 78.2 61.32006 57 75.1 84.1 79.9 61.22007 53 75.8 84.0 80.4 63.02008 51 76.6 84.0 80.5 65.42009 78 71.2 84.1 71.7 57.92010 55 76.6 73.8 79.9 76.12011 51 75.7 81.6 79.7 65.72012 78 69.1 78.8 79.9 48.7

188

Hungary

Population (July 2012 est.) 9,958,453 Area of land (km²) 89,608GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $198.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $19,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Hungary

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 33 81.1 93.5 83.9 66.02002 29 81.4 93.6 82.9 67.72003 29 81.7 93.2 83.1 68.72004 41 76.2 93.1 66.4 69.12005 22 84.9 94.0 82.5 78.12006 20 86.0 94.2 84.9 79.02007 26 83.1 86.1 83.6 79.72008 24 83.2 94.5 83.9 71.12009 11 88.5 94.3 83.8 87.52010 31 82.5 77.7 83.3 86.62011 24 83.1 93.5 82.7 73.22012 42 77.5 84.1 83.6 64.9

189

Iceland

Population (July 2012 est.) 313,183 Area of land (km²) 100,250GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $12.57 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $38,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Iceland

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 1 93.0 98.6 87.0 93.42002 9 87.5 98.6 70.4 93.52003 1 93.1 98.9 87.0 93.52004 1 93.5 99.1 87.0 94.22005 3 93.0 99.0 87.0 93.12006 2 93.4 99.2 87.0 94.02007 2 93.4 99.1 87.0 94.02008 2 93.2 98.6 87.0 94.02009 31 81.9 81.6 70.4 93.62010 7 90.1 89.4 86.6 94.32011 10 86.7 93.9 85.9 80.32012 2 91.0 93.7 87.0 92.1

190

India

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,205,073,612 Area of land (km²) 2,973,193GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $4.515 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: India

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 127 55.2 57.1 62.8 45.82002 137 46.1 40.2 51.7 46.42003 125 54.5 56.4 60.0 47.02004 117 57.6 64.8 60.3 47.52005 109 60.8 64.9 60.2 57.22006 108 61.2 65.4 60.2 57.92007 127 53.0 49.2 60.1 49.62008 133 50.2 41.1 60.3 49.22009 133 50.1 40.6 60.0 49.82010 98 66.4 64.6 68.0 66.72011 124 55.3 55.0 68.6 42.52012 121 58.5 54.7 69.1 51.5

191

Indonesia

Population (July 2012 est.) 248,216,193 Area of land (km²) 1,811,569GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.139 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Indonesia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 119 57.6 52.1 70.7 50.02002 117 57.0 36.6 79.3 55.22003 120 57.1 36.6 78.9 56.02004 119 56.1 44.9 67.0 56.42005 121 55.5 44.5 67.3 54.62006 113 59.3 55.7 67.4 54.82007 97 65.4 65.1 76.2 55.02008 102 65.5 64.9 76.2 55.52009 111 60.8 48.6 78.0 55.62010 115 60.9 48.6 78.0 56.32011 108 62.3 58.7 77.3 51.02012 97 65.4 50.6 78.0 67.8

192

Iran

Population (July 2012 est.) 78,868,711 Area of land (km²) 1,531,595GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.003 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $13,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Iran

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 116 58.5 44.7 63.9 66.82002 136 47.8 36.4 56.4 50.52003 126 54.1 53.0 58.4 50.92004 134 49.0 36.4 59.7 51.12005 126 52.6 44.9 61.4 51.62006 119 57.7 53.2 67.0 53.02007 129 51.9 44.6 57.8 53.32008 107 63.8 52.8 66.8 71.92009 117 56.7 52.5 60.3 57.32010 136 50.7 34.8 60.3 57.02011 137 47.6 34.5 52.3 55.92012 129 55.1 35.1 60.6 69.5

193

Iraq

Population (July 2012 est.) 31,129,225 Area of land (km²) 437,367GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $129.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Iraq

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 141 38.9 37.5 39.1 40.12002 135 49.3 54.1 37.5 56.32003 135 49.4 54.1 37.7 56.32004 142 28.0 22.7 21.8 39.62005 142 30.1 22.7 27.0 40.62006 142 35.0 23.7 28.1 53.12007 141 42.5 23.4 42.7 61.42008 142 39.2 22.0 34.1 61.42009 142 34.7 21.8 20.8 61.32010 142 40.5 22.4 38.3 60.92011 142 31.8 20.3 29.2 46.02012 141 42.0 31.2 36.8 58.1

194

Ireland

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,722,028 Area of land (km²) 68,883GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $183.9 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $40,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Ireland

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 16 87.9 96.8 81.0 86.12002 32 80.6 96.5 65.0 80.32003 7 89.4 95.4 82.0 90.92004 4 89.7 96.1 81.9 91.22005 12 90.0 96.5 81.7 91.72006 15 87.9 96.4 83.6 83.52007 8 90.2 96.4 82.0 92.32008 6 90.1 96.5 82.1 91.72009 9 90.1 96.8 81.6 91.92010 9 89.8 96.7 81.5 91.12011 8 87.0 96.9 80.3 83.92012 18 84.7 96.3 80.4 77.3

195

Israel

Population (July 2012 est.) 7,590,758 Area of land (km²) 20,330GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $238.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $31,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Israel

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 90 66.1 63.6 48.0 86.72002 72 69.6 80.2 42.5 86.22003 93 66.5 71.6 41.6 86.42004 101 64.0 71.2 33.4 87.32005 110 60.7 70.6 24.9 86.52006 77 69.3 79.7 49.9 78.32007 114 59.1 80.2 26.5 70.62008 79 70.4 79.5 43.5 88.32009 98 65.1 80.3 42.6 72.52010 110 62.1 79.5 33.2 73.62011 128 54.6 54.2 24.9 84.72012 99 64.7 64.5 41.6 88.1

196

Italy

Population (July 2012 est.) 61,261,254 Area of land (km²) 294,140GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.871 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $30,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Italy

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 21 85.0 92.7 84.8 77.52002 22 83.0 93.6 85.9 69.42003 18 86.0 93.3 85.9 78.72004 27 80.5 94.3 77.6 69.52005 25 83.6 93.8 69.6 87.42006 19 86.9 94.0 78.1 88.52007 33 81.5 93.9 78.1 72.52008 30 81.9 94.2 78.4 73.12009 18 86.6 84.5 84.3 91.02010 16 86.6 92.3 85.1 82.42011 21 83.7 82.0 84.6 84.62012 33 79.4 74.5 84.6 79.1

197

Jamaica

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,889,187 Area of land (km²) 10,831GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $25.07 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $9,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Jamaica

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 52 75.1 78.0 83.7 63.42002 51 74.3 85.5 83.3 54.02003 45 77.3 85.7 83.5 62.72004 26 80.7 85.5 83.6 73.02005 44 77.7 85.0 83.1 65.02006 54 75.7 85.4 83.3 58.32007 36 80.6 85.5 83.4 72.92008 60 74.8 85.0 83.4 56.02009 56 75.5 84.8 82.5 59.22010 37 80.9 84.8 83.0 75.02011 53 75.4 73.6 82.7 69.72012 39 78.0 82.0 82.6 69.4

198

Japan

Population (July 2012 est.) 127,368,088 Area of land (km²) 364,485GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $4.497 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $35,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Japan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 7 89.7 93.2 93.0 82.92002 18 84.8 94.5 85.2 74.72003 13 87.5 94.5 76.8 91.22004 22 81.8 94.4 76.8 74.42005 17 87.0 93.4 84.9 82.62006 23 84.5 93.9 85.1 74.72007 31 82.0 85.9 85.1 75.02008 29 82.0 85.8 85.2 75.12009 30 82.0 85.6 84.8 75.52010 22 85.0 86.4 93.1 75.42011 13 85.8 95.7 89.4 72.22012 19 84.6 87.6 90.2 76.0

199

Jordan

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,508,887 Area of land (km²) 88,802GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $37.37 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $6,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Jordan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 89 66.9 76.9 59.8 63.92002 101 62.3 75.6 39.1 72.12003 101 64.3 75.2 45.4 72.32004 98 64.5 75.3 44.8 73.52005 103 62.3 77.0 44.3 65.52006 104 62.5 77.5 44.3 65.72007 101 63.2 77.0 37.5 74.92008 84 69.0 76.3 55.0 75.62009 97 65.3 75.9 52.6 67.52010 104 64.7 74.4 52.6 67.22011 115 59.5 62.3 44.3 71.82012 117 60.0 53.8 52.6 73.7

200

Kazakhstan

Population (July 2012 est.) 17,522,010 Area of land (km²) 2,699,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $219.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $13,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Kazakhstan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 43 77.9 80.2 73.6 80.02002 67 70.9 80.7 70.8 61.22003 70 71.4 80.2 71.3 62.72004 63 71.8 80.3 70.4 64.72005 46 77.1 81.2 70.5 79.72006 60 74.2 82.0 62.5 78.12007 59 74.6 82.4 71.0 70.42008 41 78.9 81.8 75.0 79.82009 39 79.2 82.0 75.0 80.52010 43 79.5 82.5 75.0 80.82011 56 74.8 80.4 74.8 69.32012 64 71.9 63.5 73.6 78.6

201

Kenya

Population (July 2012 est.) 43,013,341 Area of land (km²) 569,140GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $72.34 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Kenya

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 105 61.4 57.0 77.5 49.62002 90 65.8 73.7 75.4 48.42003 96 66.0 74.5 75.0 48.32004 76 69.4 79.2 75.0 53.92005 98 64.2 78.6 76.3 37.82006 97 64.5 78.6 76.9 38.22007 105 62.0 70.4 76.9 38.82008 115 59.7 61.0 76.7 41.42009 107 61.8 69.3 75.2 40.82010 102 65.0 77.9 75.5 41.72011 102 64.3 67.4 75.9 49.52012 120 58.8 75.9 67.5 32.9

202

Korea, DPR

Population (July 2012 est.) 24,589,122 Area of land (km²) 120,408GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $40 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: DPR Korea

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 118 58.0 72.8 57.5 43.82002 131 53.5 72.8 42.7 45.02003 117 59.2 72.8 42.7 61.92004 122 53.8 72.8 42.7 45.82005 123 53.7 72.4 42.7 45.92006 127 54.8 72.5 42.7 49.12007 128 52.3 73.4 34.4 49.02008 126 54.9 72.9 42.7 49.02009 121 54.9 72.8 42.7 49.22010 118 60.2 71.7 42.7 66.12011 123 55.4 74.9 34.4 57.12012 127 56.0 66.1 42.7 59.1

203

Korea, Republic of

Population (July 2012 est.) 48,860,500 Area of land (km²) 96,920GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.574 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $32,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Republic of Korea

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 65 72.5 77.3 70.7 69.52002 50 74.8 86.1 53.2 85.12003 65 72.6 86.5 61.0 70.32004 35 77.7 86.2 60.1 86.72005 42 78.2 87.4 59.5 87.82006 49 76.3 87.9 60.3 80.82007 49 77.0 88.1 61.4 81.42008 63 74.2 79.7 61.2 81.72009 83 70.8 80.3 58.0 74.22010 57 76.5 88.2 66.7 74.52011 67 72.4 88.6 48.7 79.82012 41 77.6 88.6 61.9 82.3

204

Kuwait

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,646,314 Area of land (km²) 17,818GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $155.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $42,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Kuwait

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 42 78.4 86.9 60.3 87.82002 43 77.3 86.9 57.5 87.42003 69 71.6 86.9 49.1 78.72004 79 68.8 86.9 40.4 79.22005 47 77.1 86.1 56.8 88.32006 47 77.1 86.2 57.4 87.52007 42 78.8 87.3 61.1 88.12008 39 79.4 86.7 62.5 88.82009 61 74.8 86.7 64.6 73.22010 44 79.4 85.8 62.7 89.82011 69 72.2 86.2 50.0 80.42012 74 70.5 69.6 60.1 81.7

205

Kyrgyzstan

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,496,737 Area of land (km²) 191,801GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $13.29 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Kyrgyzstan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 73 70.6 68.6 70.7 72.72002 84 67.2 76.0 53.0 72.72003 79 70.3 67.6 70.2 73.12004 65 71.3 75.9 63.5 74.62005 70 71.8 76.0 74.6 64.72006 88 67.6 61.3 67.5 74.02007 82 69.7 69.5 66.3 73.42008 55 75.7 77.8 74.4 75.12009 65 74.2 77.4 76.0 69.22010 69 73.8 75.7 76.1 69.62011 55 74.9 77.6 75.0 72.02012 59 72.8 69.4 76.7 72.3

206

Laos

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,586,266 Area of land (km²) 230,800GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $17.66 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Laos

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 106 61.0 68.2 75.2 39.72002 98 62.6 68.2 60.0 59.52003 89 68.0 67.2 77.1 59.82004 96 65.4 67.2 68.4 60.72005 89 67.8 67.5 75.1 60.92006 90 66.4 67.9 75.9 55.52007 79 69.8 66.7 77.9 64.82008 78 70.6 66.7 78.1 67.02009 81 71.0 66.9 77.2 68.82010 93 68.1 65.9 77.3 61.02011 81 69.0 66.8 77.6 62.62012 90 67.8 66.9 75.3 61.3

207

Latvia

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,191,580 Area of land (km²) 62,249GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $35.37 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Latvia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 37 80.3 85.0 77.5 78.42002 33 80.1 85.0 76.9 78.42003 32 81.1 85.3 76.1 81.92004 24 81.1 85.4 74.9 82.92005 32 80.9 85.7 75.0 81.92006 39 79.2 86.8 66.9 83.82007 28 82.8 87.4 76.0 85.12008 38 79.9 86.5 67.8 85.42009 36 80.3 86.8 66.6 87.52010 53 76.9 69.5 74.5 86.82011 39 78.4 83.7 74.6 76.82012 37 78.7 83.6 74.9 77.7

208

Lebanon

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,140,289 Area of land (km²) 10,230GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $62.23 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Lebanon

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 120 57.5 57.6 39.9 75.02002 108 59.6 57.6 44.9 76.52003 116 59.2 57.6 43.7 76.32004 129 50.6 40.9 43.4 67.62005 124 53.4 40.6 43.5 76.32006 129 54.1 42.9 43.5 76.02007 130 51.7 43.4 35.2 76.52008 128 54.4 42.7 43.6 76.82009 115 58.5 34.4 63.0 78.12010 121 58.6 59.1 38.3 78.52011 120 57.0 49.5 52.9 68.72012 118 59.7 56.9 45.0 77.1

209

Libya

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,733,620 Area of land (km²) 1,759,540GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $37.97 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2010 est.) $14,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Libya

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 98 64.2 60.8 61.9 70.12002 110 59.0 60.8 43.6 72.52003 103 63.9 60.8 57.4 73.42004 107 61.0 60.8 48.2 74.02005 106 61.4 61.2 52.1 70.82006 105 62.4 61.2 53.3 72.52007 94 66.0 61.5 64.4 72.22008 100 66.1 61.2 64.4 72.72009 113 60.6 61.2 54.8 65.72010 107 63.6 60.5 54.8 75.42011 107 62.5 61.7 59.4 66.52012 115 60.7 37.4 66.1 78.6

210

Lithuania

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,525,761 Area of land (km²) 62,680GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $62.39 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $19,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Lithuania

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 31 82.0 85.1 77.0 84.02002 35 79.8 86.2 75.2 78.02003 33 80.4 86.2 75.0 79.92004 38 76.6 77.7 74.1 77.82005 61 74.4 76.7 65.6 80.92006 41 78.8 87.1 74.0 75.42007 29 82.7 87.1 74.7 86.32008 25 83.1 87.1 75.3 86.82009 28 83.5 86.9 75.2 88.52010 28 83.4 87.2 75.1 87.92011 34 80.1 87.8 74.6 78.02012 30 80.0 87.5 73.1 79.4

211

Luxemburg

Population (July 2012 est.) 509,074 Area of land (km²) 2,586GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $41.75 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $81,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Luxemburg

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 5 90.4 98.7 78.6 93.72002 2 90.4 98.6 78.5 94.32003 5 90.5 98.9 78.4 94.42004 9 87.4 98.6 69.8 94.02005 11 90.1 98.2 78.0 94.02006 10 89.8 98.3 78.2 93.02007 9 90.0 98.4 78.6 93.02008 7 90.0 98.2 78.6 93.02009 10 89.8 98.1 78.2 93.02010 8 89.8 98.0 78.4 93.02011 12 86.0 94.2 77.0 86.82012 11 86.9 94.2 77.0 89.5

212

Madagascar

Population (July 2012 est.) 22,585,517 Area of land (km²) 581,540GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $20.66 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Madagascar

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 84 68.1 84.5 79.9 39.92002 56 72.9 82.7 80.0 55.92003 87 68.4 67.4 79.9 58.02004 54 73.7 84.1 79.9 57.22005 72 71.5 84.0 81.7 48.82006 58 74.8 83.6 81.8 58.92007 81 69.8 77.0 81.8 50.52008 56 75.6 85.4 81.8 59.52009 49 76.6 85.6 83.4 60.72010 83 70.4 66.5 83.5 61.02011 93 66.6 65.0 83.3 51.52012 76 70.0 76.1 83.2 50.8

213

Malawi

Population (July 2012 est.) 16,323,044 Area of land (km²) 94,080GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $14.08 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Malawi

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 74 70.6 85.3 76.7 49.92002 76 69.2 83.4 74.7 49.62003 99 64.3 83.1 76.7 33.32004 109 60.7 74.6 76.2 31.42005 101 63.5 81.2 76.1 33.12006 76 69.3 81.2 75.8 51.02007 80 69.8 82.0 76.2 51.12008 76 71.2 81.1 76.4 56.22009 91 68.4 81.2 74.6 49.42010 71 73.1 83.5 74.8 61.02011 94 66.5 83.0 75.8 40.72012 82 68.6 82.6 76.1 47.3

214

Malaysia

Population (July 2012 est.) 29,179,952 Area of land (km²) 328,657GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $453 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Malaysia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 87 67.3 61.9 62.3 77.62002 58 72.4 78.5 68.1 70.82003 55 75.0 78.3 67.5 79.22004 72 70.0 79.6 67.7 62.82005 71 71.6 80.8 70.9 63.12006 61 73.9 80.8 77.3 63.72007 61 74.1 80.8 60.9 80.72008 75 71.5 72.6 69.2 72.62009 45 77.6 80.9 76.7 75.22010 74 72.1 71.6 68.5 76.12011 46 76.6 71.8 77.7 80.42012 52 73.8 63.3 76.7 81.5

215

Mali

Population (July 2012 est.) 14,533,511 Area of land (km²) 1,220,190GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $18.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mali

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 82 69.2 81.2 76.9 49.42002 68 70.7 85.8 77.0 49.32003 75 70.8 85.3 77.2 49.82004 88 68.0 86.2 69.2 48.52005 86 68.1 86.4 77.8 40.22006 94 65.3 86.1 77.9 32.12007 76 70.9 86.0 78.0 48.72008 111 62.7 84.9 60.9 42.22009 79 71.2 85.4 77.1 51.12010 100 65.2 85.0 77.0 33.72011 98 65.8 76.4 76.2 44.72012 84 68.6 84.8 76.7 44.3

216

Malta

Population (July 2012 est.) 409,836 Area of land (km²) 316GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $10.89 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $25,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Malta

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 8 89.4 96.4 84.9 87.02002 5 89.2 96.4 84.6 86.62003 8 89.2 96.4 84.2 86.92004 12 86.3 96.4 75.7 86.72005 14 88.4 95.7 82.3 87.42006 14 88.3 95.4 82.5 86.92007 11 88.8 95.2 84.2 87.12008 9 88.8 94.5 84.3 87.52009 20 85.8 94.5 83.7 79.22010 12 88.8 94.7 83.8 88.02011 11 86.6 93.1 82.8 83.92012 10 87.1 93.1 82.6 85.5

217

Mauritania

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,359,185 Area of land (km²) 1,030,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $7.184 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mauritania

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 110 59.6 60.0 69.5 49.22002 94 64.2 74.8 67.3 50.52003 100 64.3 75.7 67.0 50.32004 115 58.9 57.6 68.6 50.62005 129 50.5 65.5 51.5 34.42006 117 58.1 68.8 68.2 37.42007 106 61.6 70.0 69.2 45.72008 89 68.4 78.7 69.6 56.92009 104 62.3 59.5 69.2 58.22010 96 67.4 76.6 68.9 56.82011 114 59.5 65.9 64.7 48.12012 105 62.3 74.4 65.5 47.0

218

Mauritius

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,313,095 Area of land (km²) 2,030GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $19.52 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mauritius

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 28 82.6 93.2 82.6 72.22002 28 82.1 92.7 81.3 72.12003 26 82.8 92.7 83.1 72.52004 20 82.9 92.6 83.2 72.92005 28 82.9 92.4 83.1 73.22006 27 82.7 91.6 83.1 73.32007 22 83.9 92.6 83.0 76.22008 23 83.6 92.2 83.0 75.72009 27 84.0 93.0 82.8 76.12010 23 84.6 93.0 82.7 77.92011 30 81.2 90.0 81.4 72.32012 25 81.4 89.6 81.9 72.6

219

Mexico

Population (July 2012 est.) 114,975,406 Area of land (km²) 1,943,945GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.683 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $14,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mexico

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 75 70.5 65.8 84.9 60.92002 25 82.6 84.6 84.3 78.92003 60 74.4 84.5 76.0 62.62004 28 80.4 85.5 84.3 71.52005 26 83.5 85.5 85.2 79.72006 30 81.3 85.3 77.0 81.72007 92 67.3 67.5 68.3 66.02008 98 67.5 67.8 68.0 66.62009 54 75.8 84.5 67.5 75.32010 63 75.6 84.2 67.4 75.32011 42 77.7 81.4 83.7 68.22012 48 75.1 73.0 83.6 68.8

220

Moldova

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,656,843 Area of land (km²) 32,891GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $12.15 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Moldova

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 93 65.3 51.0 69.8 75.22002 47 75.6 84.9 68.3 73.72003 52 75.3 83.8 68.6 73.52004 89 67.0 74.9 51.8 74.22005 57 75.5 83.1 67.5 75.72006 46 77.1 83.8 71.3 76.12007 58 75.0 84.1 63.4 77.42008 71 72.4 83.6 55.2 78.32009 40 79.0 83.8 73.7 79.52010 70 73.7 67.5 73.8 79.82011 45 76.9 82.0 74.0 74.82012 57 73.5 82.0 64.9 73.5

221

Mongolia

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,179,997 Area of land (km²) 1,553,556GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $13.43 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mongolia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 72 71.4 86.2 77.2 50.72002 57 72.6 86.2 77.4 54.12003 42 77.6 87.2 76.9 68.72004 49 74.4 86.6 76.5 60.02005 39 78.9 86.6 77.6 72.52006 56 75.1 86.6 78.5 60.32007 69 72.4 78.1 78.6 60.72008 43 78.6 86.6 79.0 70.12009 57 75.1 70.0 77.9 77.42010 38 80.2 85.6 77.9 77.22011 38 78.4 83.0 78.4 73.92012 61 72.5 74.7 70.2 72.7

222

Morocco

Population (July 2012 est.) 32,309,239 Area of land (km²) 446,300GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $164.7 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Morocco

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 99 63.7 81.2 62.5 47.42002 109 59.6 80.2 41.9 56.62003 107 63.2 79.8 52.9 57.02004 102 63.4 79.3 53.5 57.42005 105 61.4 80.2 60.2 43.92006 89 67.5 80.2 61.0 61.42007 98 65.1 80.2 53.3 62.02008 88 68.4 80.5 61.8 62.92009 96 65.4 72.2 61.0 63.02010 101 65.2 79.6 60.5 55.42011 101 64.6 79.8 58.5 55.42012 104 63.8 63.1 59.0 69.5

223

Mozambique

Population (July 2012 est.) 23,515,934 Area of land (km²) 786,380GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $24.19 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mozambique

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 121 57.4 68.1 75.4 28.62002 113 58.3 68.1 72.7 34.12003 118 58.1 67.2 74.3 32.92004 113 59.5 67.2 74.2 37.12005 104 61.9 67.5 73.8 44.42006 107 61.6 67.5 74.0 43.42007 107 60.9 67.5 74.1 41.02008 118 58.3 68.4 75.5 31.22009 108 61.4 68.2 75.4 40.62010 120 59.1 67.2 75.2 35.02011 116 58.2 56.7 75.4 42.32012 112 60.9 65.1 79.3 38.4

224

Myanmar

Population (July 2012 est.) 54,584,650 Area of land (km²) 653,508GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $83.74 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Myanmar

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 135 48.5 16.6 65.2 63.82002 134 50.1 41.6 59.8 48.82003 119 58.1 41.6 66.0 66.62004 138 48.6 24.9 54.5 66.42005 122 54.8 42.3 55.9 66.42006 141 41.3 9.0 48.2 66.62007 139 47.2 25.8 60.0 55.72008 141 47.1 25.3 59.9 56.02009 128 51.8 41.8 55.7 58.02010 131 52.4 33.3 56.0 68.02011 140 42.7 23.1 51.0 54.02012 137 46.9 32.5 59.5 48.8

225

Namibia

Population (July 2012 est.) 2,165,828 Area of land (km²) 823,290GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $15.94 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $7,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Namibia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 54 74.7 91.1 71.8 61.12002 73 69.5 91.2 60.1 57.12003 80 69.8 91.5 68.8 49.12004 62 72.2 90.4 69.3 57.02005 68 71.9 89.7 69.7 56.32006 63 73.3 90.9 70.1 58.92007 66 73.1 90.7 69.2 59.52008 62 74.4 91.1 69.6 62.42009 70 73.5 91.1 67.5 61.92010 66 74.9 91.1 67.2 66.52011 75 70.9 91.3 62.9 58.52012 71 71.0 91.3 63.2 58.6

226

Nepal

Population (July 2012 est.) 29,890,686 Area of land (km²) 143,351GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $38.28 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Nepal

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 108 60.8 59.9 83.4 39.22002 133 52.9 26.6 82.5 49.62003 133 49.6 26.6 80.3 41.92004 124 52.4 33.0 81.3 42.82005 130 49.2 23.8 80.6 43.12006 136 50.5 30.9 80.9 39.82007 124 53.9 32.7 80.8 48.22008 122 56.8 49.4 80.8 40.12009 123 53.7 33.9 79.8 47.52010 116 60.9 48.7 77.0 57.02011 117 58.1 47.2 79.9 47.02012 116 60.4 47.2 80.0 54.0

227

Netherlands

Population (July 2012 est.) 16,730,632 Area of land (km²) 33,893GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $713.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $42,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Netherlands

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 4 91.9 98.8 85.6 91.42002 15 86.5 98.6 85.2 75.92003 2 92.5 98.8 85.5 93.32004 3 89.7 98.7 85.6 85.02005 5 92.5 98.4 85.2 93.82006 12 88.7 95.2 86.0 84.82007 4 92.4 98.4 85.5 93.22008 16 86.5 98.0 85.6 76.12009 6 91.9 96.8 85.4 93.62010 3 92.6 98.7 85.1 94.02011 2 89.8 98.0 82.3 88.92012 8 88.0 89.8 82.7 91.5

228

New Zealand

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,327,944 Area of land (km²) 267,710GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $123.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $28,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: New Zealand

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 6 90.3 99.2 83.1 88.72002 3 90.0 99.2 82.1 88.82003 19 85.3 99.3 74.1 82.62004 6 88.1 99.3 74.3 90.72005 15 88.3 99.4 82.1 83.52006 5 91.4 99.4 82.3 92.52007 12 88.8 99.4 74.4 92.62008 19 85.9 99.2 65.9 92.72009 7 91.4 99.1 82.3 92.82010 13 88.3 99.2 81.6 84.22011 15 85.6 98.6 79.4 78.92012 23 82.8 98.8 77.9 71.6

229

Nicaragua

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,727,707 Area of land (km²) 119,990GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $19.12 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Nicaragua

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 123 56.8 57.1 67.8 45.62002 93 64.5 64.7 83.9 44.92003 95 66.3 64.3 83.4 51.12004 74 69.7 64.4 83.2 61.62005 80 69.4 64.6 74.8 68.92006 85 68.0 64.9 75.2 63.92007 103 62.7 64.9 67.4 55.72008 90 68.3 64.9 75.7 64.42009 93 68.1 63.9 75.8 64.72010 95 67.7 46.3 84.1 72.72011 80 69.9 63.5 84.2 62.02012 101 64.6 62.6 83.7 47.4

230

Niger

Population (July 2012 est.) 17,078,839 Area of land (km²) 1,266,700GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $11.78 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Niger

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 88 67.0 75.8 76.4 48.92002 97 62.6 78.6 75.5 33.92003 91 67.8 78.6 75.4 49.32004 93 66.5 78.6 75.6 45.32005 107 61.1 79.6 76.2 27.62006 80 69.0 79.8 76.5 50.52007 87 68.4 79.7 76.5 49.02008 93 68.2 79.1 76.3 49.12009 112 60.7 62.5 76.0 43.52010 126 54.8 45.1 75.9 43.52011 113 61.3 68.1 75.7 40.12012 107 61.8 69.9 76.3 39.3

231

Nigeria

Population (July 2012 est.) 170,123,740 Area of land (km²) 910,768GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $418.7 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Nigeria

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 131 50.8 36.3 81.2 34.92002 121 55.9 50.4 76.2 40.92003 130 51.7 34.4 80.1 40.52004 128 50.8 43.5 71.9 37.02005 133 47.2 26.2 79.2 36.02006 138 46.4 18.2 79.3 41.82007 137 48.6 35.2 72.2 38.22008 131 52.0 35.2 63.9 56.82009 125 53.1 34.9 80.5 44.02010 122 57.2 35.4 80.6 55.62011 130 53.8 34.2 80.2 47.02012 133 53.0 34.2 79.9 45.0

232

Norway

Population (July 2012 est.) 4,707,270 Area of land (km²) 304,282GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $269.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $54,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Norway

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 11 88.7 98.8 81.9 85.52002 1 91.7 98.4 82.7 94.02003 3 92.0 98.3 83.2 94.42004 5 89.3 98.7 74.9 94.42005 7 91.9 98.8 82.9 94.12006 4 91.9 98.8 83.1 93.92007 5 92.0 98.7 83.4 93.92008 15 86.6 98.6 84.2 77.12009 4 92.2 97.7 83.9 94.92010 4 92.2 98.4 83.3 94.82011 7 87.1 94.4 75.7 91.22012 15 85.4 86.5 77.0 92.7

233

Oman

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,090,150 Area of land (km²) 309,500GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $82.82 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $26,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Oman

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 58 73.9 78.0 71.5 72.12002 91 65.4 78.9 48.4 68.82003 77 70.6 79.0 65.1 67.72004 53 73.8 79.0 74.7 67.72005 67 71.9 79.4 75.2 61.22006 50 76.3 80.4 75.3 73.12007 51 76.6 79.4 75.3 75.12008 66 73.6 78.6 75.3 66.92009 67 73.7 81.4 65.1 74.72010 67 74.8 79.9 65.3 79.32011 50 75.8 80.3 65.1 81.92012 65 71.8 71.4 65.1 78.8

234

Pakistan

Population (July 2012 est.) 190,291,129 Area of land (km²) 770,875GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $494.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Pakistan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 132 50.0 42.3 64.5 43.32002 140 42.8 35.0 51.1 42.42003 140 46.0 35.4 60.7 42.02004 135 49.0 35.2 61.3 50.42005 132 48.1 35.2 68.4 40.72006 140 44.6 19.7 70.3 43.82007 132 50.0 35.6 70.4 44.12008 132 50.2 35.9 70.2 44.52009 136 48.7 29.4 69.5 47.12010 139 46.1 29.4 61.3 47.52011 134 50.6 45.8 62.9 43.12012 134 51.8 37.6 59.1 58.7

235

Panama

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,510,045 Area of land (km²) 74,340GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $51.26 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $14,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Panama

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 34 80.6 88.1 79.8 73.82002 30 81.3 88.1 81.4 74.42003 31 81.5 87.5 81.3 75.62004 42 75.9 87.8 81.4 58.42005 41 78.6 88.1 81.7 65.92006 42 78.8 87.9 81.7 66.92007 32 81.8 87.5 81.6 76.22008 50 76.7 87.6 81.7 60.72009 44 77.6 87.8 81.4 63.72010 27 83.4 87.8 81.4 81.02011 48 76.2 78.6 78.4 71.62012 36 78.9 86.6 77.1 73.1

236

Papua New Guinea

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,310,129 Area of land (km²) 452,860GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $17.08 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Papua New Guinea

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 56 74.0 82.2 79.4 60.62002 52 73.8 82.2 78.6 60.62003 73 71.0 82.2 79.0 51.92004 67 71.0 81.2 79.4 52.52005 63 73.0 82.2 76.3 60.52006 87 67.9 82.7 62.3 58.62007 90 67.9 82.0 79.6 42.22008 95 67.9 81.5 79.7 42.62009 72 73.0 80.6 79.2 59.32010 80 70.7 80.8 79.4 52.12011 61 73.8 80.3 79.2 61.92012 54 73.7 80.4 79.0 61.5

237

Paraguay

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,541,591 Area of land (km²) 397,302GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $35.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Paraguay

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 95 64.7 56.5 84.0 53.62002 46 76.1 73.2 82.7 72.22003 78 70.4 55.7 83.2 72.42004 36 77.1 73.2 85.2 72.82005 48 76.8 74.0 83.2 73.12006 69 71.7 74.2 66.7 74.12007 44 77.9 74.8 84.6 74.22008 47 77.7 74.6 84.6 74.02009 43 77.9 74.6 84.0 75.12010 49 78.2 74.2 84.0 76.32011 66 72.6 72.7 83.9 61.22012 49 75.1 72.7 83.1 69.4

238

Peru

Population (July 2012 est.) 29,549,517 Area of land (km²) 1,279,996GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $305.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $10,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Peru

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 107 60.9 52.6 73.8 56.32002 69 70.6 73.4 73.4 65.12003 110 62.4 56.7 73.4 57.12004 97 65.0 63.7 73.4 58.02005 91 67.3 63.5 73.4 65.12006 114 59.2 55.2 65.4 57.02007 77 70.8 71.6 74.5 66.42008 91 68.3 71.8 74.4 58.72009 89 69.0 72.0 73.0 62.12010 113 61.0 55.4 64.8 62.92011 78 70.3 73.5 73.4 63.92012 72 71.0 65.0 73.2 74.6

239

Philippines

Population (July 2012 est.) 103,775,002 Area of land (km²) 298,170GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $395.4 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $4,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Philippines

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 113 59.2 46.5 74.0 56.92002 112 58.4 37.4 81.3 56.42003 123 55.8 28.8 81.5 57.22004 120 55.5 28.7 80.8 57.02005 119 55.9 28.8 81.8 57.12006 100 63.9 36.1 82.0 73.72007 99 63.9 52.7 82.1 57.02008 113 61.9 43.5 82.4 59.92009 118 56.3 26.6 82.0 60.22010 129 53.3 26.7 73.5 59.92011 110 61.8 42.8 80.9 61.82012 119 59.5 43.0 81.0 54.4

240

Poland

Population (July 2012 est.) 38,415,284 Area of land (km²) 304,255GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $781.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $20,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Poland

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 20 85.3 88.6 86.0 81.42002 53 73.8 88.4 67.8 65.12003 30 81.5 88.3 76.4 79.92004 57 73.2 71.2 68.0 80.42005 23 84.7 88.7 84.7 80.82006 36 79.7 88.6 68.4 82.12007 48 77.3 88.9 69.2 73.92008 48 77.6 89.5 69.2 74.22009 14 87.1 89.9 85.1 86.12010 21 85.1 90.4 85.4 79.42011 23 83.2 91.1 84.7 73.92012 20 83.8 91.4 84.0 76.0

241

Portugal

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,781,459 Area of land (km²) 91,470GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $252.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $23,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Portugal

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 19 86.3 92.8 79.3 86.72002 20 84.0 92.4 79.6 80.02003 14 87.2 92.4 80.0 89.32004 23 81.7 92.7 79.5 72.92005 18 86.9 92.4 79.3 88.92006 29 81.4 92.6 80.0 71.52007 20 84.6 92.7 80.5 80.42008 12 87.2 92.6 80.7 88.22009 16 86.9 92.2 79.8 88.62010 24 84.2 91.8 79.7 80.92011 32 80.3 90.5 77.5 72.92012 38 78.5 90.6 78.1 66.8

242

Qatar

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,951,591 Area of land (km²) 11,586GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $184.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $104,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Qatar

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 61 73.4 76.3 63.6 80.32002 92 65.3 76.3 40.1 79.62003 83 69.1 76.3 51.2 79.72004 78 69.1 76.3 48.4 82.52005 82 69.2 76.4 48.4 82.62006 74 69.9 78.0 48.4 83.42007 70 71.5 77.3 54.1 83.12008 57 75.5 77.3 64.9 84.32009 66 73.8 77.8 58.1 85.42010 50 78.0 79.5 67.2 87.22011 58 74.5 79.2 62.6 81.62012 58 73.2 78.6 68.1 72.9

243

Romania

Population (July 2012 est.) 21,848,504 Area of land (km²) 229,891GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $270.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $12,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Romania

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 57 74.0 77.7 81.9 62.42002 61 71.9 77.1 78.8 59.82003 44 77.4 76.9 80.8 74.42004 92 66.6 77.1 64.3 58.42005 78 69.9 76.3 72.5 60.92006 53 75.7 77.3 84.0 65.82007 46 77.7 77.4 81.5 74.42008 54 75.8 78.1 82.3 66.92009 33 81.4 78.2 81.4 84.52010 48 78.4 78.2 81.8 75.12011 49 76.1 67.3 81.1 79.92012 46 75.4 75.5 80.5 70.2

244

Russia

Population (July 2012 est.) 138,082,178 Area of land (km²) 16,377,742GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $2.414 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $17,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Russia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 129 53.5 33.9 69.7 57.12002 125 54.3 43.9 66.2 52.72003 124 54.5 41.6 66.8 55.22004 118 57.4 49.9 66.0 56.32005 118 55.9 40.8 64.8 62.12006 123 56.0 40.3 63.4 64.32007 118 57.2 40.5 66.4 64.62008 109 63.0 56.9 67.2 64.92009 126 52.8 40.0 51.5 66.92010 119 59.8 40.1 75.2 64.02011 121 55.9 37.2 71.1 59.62012 111 61.0 37.5 70.3 75.1

245

Rwanda

Population (July 2012 est.) 11,689,696 Area of land (km²) 24,668GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $13.86 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Rwanda

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 138 44.2 20.4 62.7 49.42002 119 56.3 45.4 67.2 56.22003 121 56.5 45.4 68.8 55.32004 126 52.3 47.2 57.8 52.02005 125 52.8 47.3 60.0 51.12006 115 59.0 47.3 68.8 60.82007 117 58.6 46.7 71.3 58.02008 124 55.6 47.0 64.3 55.62009 134 50.1 47.0 63.9 39.52010 127 54.3 48.4 72.5 42.12011 133 51.8 36.6 73.5 45.12012 128 55.2 46.1 73.7 45.8

246

Saudi Arabia

Population (July 2012 est.) 26,534,504 Area of land (km²) 2,149,690GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $691.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $24,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Saudi Arabia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 48 75.8 77.5 75.3 74.72002 65 71.2 77.5 69.3 66.92003 74 70.8 77.5 59.7 75.32004 112 59.7 60.8 59.4 58.92005 90 67.8 76.5 59.4 67.52006 93 65.5 69.9 59.5 67.32007 95 65.9 77.3 61.2 59.22008 73 71.8 77.4 69.7 68.22009 76 71.6 77.5 66.8 70.32010 88 69.1 77.9 66.8 62.52011 62 73.7 77.3 66.9 76.82012 55 73.6 76.0 66.7 78.0

247

Senegal

Population (July 2012 est.) 12,969,606 Area of land (km²) 192,530GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $25.47 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Senegal

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 76 70.5 85.4 77.6 48.52002 63 71.4 84.5 77.2 52.52003 86 68.8 84.7 76.9 44.72004 61 72.3 86.7 77.0 53.32005 65 72.3 86.4 76.7 53.72006 66 72.7 86.7 76.8 54.72007 67 72.8 86.8 77.0 54.82008 77 70.6 87.1 76.6 48.22009 94 67.6 86.0 67.6 49.22010 73 72.4 85.5 75.8 55.82011 77 70.4 85.6 75.7 49.82012 67 71.6 85.6 75.9 53.3

248

Sierra Leone

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,485,998 Area of land (km²) 71,620GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $5.158 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Sierra Leone

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 133 49.3 23.1 77.2 47.72002 124 54.7 55.5 77.4 31.32003 112 60.0 55.5 76.4 48.12004 110 60.5 57.4 75.9 48.22005 112 59.9 56.7 74.6 48.52006 111 60.4 56.8 74.8 49.72007 108 60.4 56.6 75.2 49.62008 125 55.3 57.4 75.7 32.82009 109 61.4 57.2 75.4 51.62010 109 62.4 57.9 76.9 52.32011 112 61.4 60.2 76.9 47.12012 114 60.8 60.3 76.8 45.2

249

Singapore

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,353,494 Area of land (km²) 687GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $318.9 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $60,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Singapore

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 35 80.4 86.7 68.9 85.62002 38 79.7 86.8 67.2 85.02003 43 77.5 87.0 59.8 85.62004 45 74.8 88.0 67.5 69.02005 34 80.2 88.4 65.6 86.52006 32 80.4 88.5 65.8 86.82007 35 80.9 88.5 66.7 87.62008 31 81.5 88.4 66.7 89.42009 32 81.4 88.3 66.1 89.92010 34 81.4 87.3 65.9 90.82011 41 78.1 88.4 61.4 84.42012 31 79.9 89.2 62.7 87.9

250

Slovakia

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,483,088 Area of land (km²) 48,105GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $128.5 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $23,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Slovakia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 18 86.7 88.6 86.3 85.12002 23 82.6 88.6 75.2 84.22003 27 82.3 88.6 84.2 74.02004 32 79.5 88.6 67.9 82.02005 21 85.7 89.8 84.8 82.32006 21 86.0 90.2 85.1 82.72007 23 83.6 90.6 85.7 74.62008 14 86.9 90.8 86.4 83.62009 12 87.6 91.0 85.3 86.62010 20 85.1 90.4 77.0 88.02011 20 83.8 81.7 87.8 82.02012 21 83.3 89.7 85.3 75.0

251

Slovenia

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,996,617 Area of land (km²) 20,151GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $58.63 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $29,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Slovenia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 10 89.2 94.6 86.3 86.62002 7 88.6 93.7 86.1 85.92003 9 89.1 94.6 86.2 86.52004 16 83.9 95.4 86.1 70.12005 10 90.2 95.6 86.2 88.92006 18 87.6 95.7 86.5 80.72007 6 90.7 96.0 86.4 89.82008 5 90.9 96.2 86.2 90.32009 23 85.3 96.3 76.9 82.62010 5 91.0 96.2 85.3 91.42011 16 85.2 87.0 83.5 85.22012 12 86.1 94.8 84.1 79.3

252

South Africa

Population (July 2012 est.) 48,810,427 Area of land (km²) 1,214,470GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $562.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $11,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: South Africa

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 55 74.2 78.2 81.6 62.82002 44 76.7 86.3 80.4 63.32003 46 76.5 85.8 80.6 63.12004 71 70.1 85.4 80.6 44.32005 56 75.5 85.7 80.4 60.52006 55 75.4 85.6 80.1 60.52007 56 75.3 84.8 81.0 60.32008 64 74.0 85.7 80.9 55.22009 50 76.4 85.1 80.4 63.72010 54 76.7 84.9 80.6 64.62011 52 75.4 82.3 80.2 63.82012 51 74.6 81.8 79.6 62.5

253

South Sudan

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,625,176 Area of land (km²) 644,329GDP purchasing power parity N/AGDP per capita (PPP) N/A

World Peace Index 2001-2012: South Sudan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 140 42.6 19.2 68.4 40.02002 142 39.9 27.6 56.8 35.22003 139 46.6 35.4 66.7 37.72004 127 50.8 43.8 69.8 38.92005 140 38.0 18.9 55.5 39.52006 139 45.0 19.2 72.2 43.62007 138 48.0 18.6 73.7 51.82008 139 47.6 18.4 65.8 58.42009 141 36.2 10.1 56.8 41.62010 133 51.3 42.5 69.1 42.22011 125 54.8 33.2 73.6 57.62012 139 46.3 62.9 21.7 54.4

Note: The statistics before 2011 is those of Sudan.

254

Spain

Population (July 2012 est.) 47,042,984 Area of land (km²) 498,980GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.432 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $31,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Spain

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 32 81.6 75.3 85.5 83.92002 19 84.2 92.4 83.8 76.62003 39 79.0 84.1 76.1 76.92004 81 68.6 59.8 76.0 69.92005 69 71.9 76.7 67.4 71.52006 11 88.9 93.2 84.6 88.82007 24 83.3 84.7 84.5 80.82008 22 83.7 84.6 76.2 90.12009 63 74.7 84.4 65.9 73.92010 40 80.1 92.3 75.8 72.32011 27 81.7 80.9 83.4 80.72012 34 79.3 89.4 82.2 66.3

255

Sri Lanka

Population (July 2012 est.) 21,481,334 Area of land (km²) 64,630GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $118 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Sri Lanka

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 125 55.8 22.2 83.8 61.42002 116 57.6 30.5 70.5 71.92003 85 69.0 55.5 78.7 72.72004 105 61.5 39.4 82.7 62.32005 108 60.9 47.9 79.3 55.52006 125 55.5 30.9 79.1 56.42007 121 56.0 28.9 82.1 57.02008 119 58.1 20.7 81.0 72.62009 127 52.0 20.7 78.3 56.92010 134 51.2 19.6 76.1 58.02011 89 67.0 50.6 77.9 72.62012 93 67.0 50.7 77.1 73.2

256

Sudan

Population 34,206,710 Area of land (km²) 1,886,068GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $90.19 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Sudan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 140 42.6 19.2 68.4 40.02002 142 39.9 27.6 56.8 35.22003 139 46.6 35.4 66.7 37.72004 127 50.8 43.8 69.8 38.92005 140 38.0 18.9 55.5 39.52006 139 45.0 19.2 72.2 43.62007 138 48.0 18.6 73.7 51.82008 139 47.6 18.4 65.8 58.42009 141 36.2 10.1 56.8 41.62010 133 51.3 42.5 69.1 42.22011 125 54.8 33.2 73.6 57.62012 143 37.8 24.9 32.2 56.4

257

Sweden

Population (July 2012 est.) 9,103,788 Area of land (km²) 410,335GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $386.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $40,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Sweden

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 3 92.2 99.1 85.3 92.12002 4 89.6 98.7 85.6 84.62003 12 87.7 99.0 70.4 93.72004 7 87.7 99.0 87.2 77.02005 2 93.2 98.9 87.2 93.62006 8 90.2 98.9 87.2 84.62007 3 93.3 98.9 87.9 93.02008 3 93.1 99.0 87.9 92.42009 2 93.4 99.0 88.1 93.22010 1 93.5 98.9 88.5 93.12011 1 90.0 98.5 84.3 87.12012 1 91.5 98.6 84.7 91.1

258

Switzerland

Population (July 2012 est.) 7,655,628 Area of land (km²) 39,997GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $344.2 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $43,900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Switzerland

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 15 88.3 98.5 86.6 79.72002 11 87.1 98.0 88.0 75.42003 11 87.9 98.1 79.7 86.02004 8 87.5 98.4 79.3 84.72005 1 93.3 98.8 87.7 93.52006 3 93.2 98.8 88.0 92.92007 1 93.9 98.8 90.1 92.92008 1 93.4 98.7 90.2 91.52009 3 93.4 98.7 88.2 93.22010 2 93.3 98.3 88.3 93.32011 4 89.5 96.5 84.4 87.62012 4 90.9 96.7 84.3 91.6

259

Syria

Population (July 2012 est.) 22,530,746 Area of land (km²) 183,630GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $107.6 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $5,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Syria

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 122 56.9 58.0 45.3 67.22002 126 53.9 58.0 35.3 68.42003 134 49.5 58.0 22.2 68.22004 132 49.6 58.0 30.6 60.22005 139 43.2 42.4 24.4 62.82006 112 59.8 65.5 41.8 72.02007 133 50.0 43.6 34.5 71.72008 130 53.3 59.7 27.8 72.32009 129 51.3 59.4 37.3 57.22010 125 56.5 58.9 36.0 74.72011 127 54.6 58.2 36.1 69.62012 138 46.8 40.7 27.7 71.9

260

Taiwan

Population (July 2012 est.) 23,113,901 Area of land (km²) 32,260GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $887.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $38,200

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Taiwan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 63 72.9 91.6 57.1 69.92002 42 77.8 92.9 62.3 78.22003 51 75.5 92.6 64.1 69.92004 44 75.4 91.8 64.5 69.92005 37 79.0 91.9 66.8 78.22006 44 77.9 84.8 67.8 81.02007 40 80.0 83.9 75.1 81.02008 27 82.8 92.0 75.4 81.02009 47 76.9 92.0 57.7 81.02010 32 82.5 93.1 73.3 81.02011 29 81.2 83.8 73.5 86.52012 24 81.7 84.1 73.0 87.9

261

Tajikistan

Population (July 2012 est.) 7,768,385 Area of land (km²) 141,510GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $16.43 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,100

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Tajikistan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 91 65.7 48.1 74.1 74.92002 105 60.6 56.5 50.8 74.72003 97 65.3 56.5 72.9 66.62004 82 68.5 57.4 72.9 75.32005 88 68.1 56.8 72.1 75.42006 109 60.8 48.6 59.2 74.72007 83 69.3 57.0 76.1 74.92008 104 64.0 56.9 76.2 59.02009 88 69.2 56.8 74.9 75.92010 86 69.7 57.6 75.6 76.02011 106 63.1 48.9 76.4 63.92012 85 68.6 57.5 76.9 71.4

262

Tanzania

Population (July 2012 est.) 43,601,796 Area of land (km²) 885,800GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $64.71 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Tanzania

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 85 67.7 69.9 73.1 60.22002 103 61.5 53.5 71.7 59.22003 98 64.6 70.7 72.0 51.02004 91 66.8 71.4 72.1 56.92005 100 63.6 71.9 69.8 49.22006 116 58.8 63.7 70.1 42.72007 115 58.9 63.7 69.6 43.42008 92 68.2 72.4 69.6 62.62009 85 69.4 72.1 72.2 64.02010 85 69.9 71.8 72.5 65.32011 95 66.4 73.4 72.5 53.22012 102 64.1 73.8 72.6 45.8

263

Thailand

Population (July 2012 est.) 67,091,089 Area of land (km²) 510,890GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $609.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $9,500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Thailand

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 78 69.8 71.6 78.0 59.92002 85 66.9 71.6 68.3 60.92003 62 73.4 79.9 78.6 61.62004 87 68.3 64.3 70.4 70.32005 87 68.1 63.9 78.6 61.92006 86 67.9 63.2 77.4 63.12007 91 67.5 58.4 79.4 64.82008 80 70.4 75.6 71.1 64.42009 73 72.9 67.3 69.7 81.62010 94 67.9 60.6 69.5 73.62011 99 65.4 59.2 60.3 76.72012 83 68.6 68.4 77.1 60.4

264

Togo

Population (July 2012 est.) 6,961,049 Area of land (km²) 54,385GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $6.497 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $900

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Togo

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 102 63.0 78.6 66.3 44.12002 66 71.2 78.6 74.3 60.72003 72 71.1 78.6 73.6 61.02004 66 71.1 77.6 74.5 61.22005 76 70.8 76.9 74.1 61.42006 92 66.0 61.0 75.6 61.62007 71 71.2 77.6 74.8 61.12008 83 69.0 78.5 74.9 53.72009 77 71.5 78.9 74.5 61.12010 76 71.9 79.9 73.8 62.12011 85 67.7 72.0 73.2 57.82012 68 71.4 80.3 75.4 58.3

265

Trinidad and Tobago

Population (July 2012 est.) 1,226,383 Area of land (km²) 5,128GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $26.88 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $20,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Trinidad and Tobago

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 36 80.3 85.9 78.2 76.82002 39 79.4 83.2 77.9 77.22003 36 80.0 81.8 77.4 80.82004 33 79.3 82.4 77.1 78.42005 36 79.7 82.1 77.4 79.52006 34 79.9 82.6 77.6 79.52007 39 80.1 82.8 77.4 79.92008 28 82.2 83.0 81.1 82.32009 29 82.6 83.3 79.9 84.62010 30 82.6 83.4 79.4 84.92011 36 79.3 81.0 78.5 78.42012 53 73.7 72.2 78.6 70.2

266

Tunisia

Population (July 2012 est.) 10,732,900 Area of land (km²) 155,360GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $102.3 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $9,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Tunisia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 77 70.3 83.8 77.4 49.72002 55 72.9 84.1 68.1 66.52003 50 75.7 83.6 76.1 67.52004 56 73.2 83.7 76.2 59.82005 51 76.1 83.8 75.6 69.02006 51 76.2 83.7 75.8 69.12007 52 76.4 83.4 76.6 69.42008 52 76.2 82.0 76.7 69.82009 52 76.1 82.2 75.9 70.12010 59 76.0 82.0 75.9 70.22011 47 76.4 81.0 76.2 71.92012 44 76.0 76.8 76.2 75.1

267

Turkey

Population (July 2012 est.) 79,749,461 Area of land (km²) 769,632GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $1.087 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $14,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Turkey

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 112 59.3 49.3 77.5 51.22002 102 61.7 49.3 74.9 60.92003 113 59.9 64.1 67.6 47.82004 123 53.6 41.3 67.4 52.02005 102 62.4 60.0 75.3 51.92006 78 69.2 60.3 75.8 71.62007 120 56.6 44.0 62.0 63.82008 129 54.2 44.3 61.9 56.52009 116 57.9 44.9 70.1 58.62010 77 71.9 77.3 78.6 59.82011 92 66.6 69.9 69.5 60.52012 113 60.8 69.6 61.4 51.4

268

Uganda

Population (July 2012 est.) 35,873,253 Area of land (km²) 197,100GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $46.96 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Uganda

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 115 58.7 49.9 67.6 58.62002 114 58.2 48.7 67.2 58.62003 131 50.2 40.5 51.1 59.12004 136 49.0 34.2 58.9 53.82005 136 46.1 34.6 58.7 44.92006 135 52.3 42.8 51.3 62.72007 135 49.5 26.4 59.7 62.42008 136 49.6 51.5 51.6 45.82009 139 44.7 34.6 51.3 48.32010 135 50.9 50.8 51.6 50.12011 135 49.2 43.5 60.5 43.62012 130 55.0 43.4 69.1 52.5

269

Ukraine

Population (July 2012 est.) 44,854,065 Area of land (km²) 579,330GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $333.7 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $7,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Ukraine

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 81 69.2 83.0 72.8 51.92002 99 62.4 64.8 71.6 50.82003 109 62.9 65.1 72.8 50.72004 95 65.7 73.4 64.2 59.42005 92 67.3 74.2 72.2 55.32006 68 72.3 84.8 54.3 77.82007 75 70.9 85.0 57.7 69.92008 87 68.5 76.6 66.2 62.92009 60 74.8 84.7 66.8 72.92010 65 75.0 84.4 67.2 73.52011 54 75.3 81.4 75.0 69.42012 50 74.7 72.1 75.8 76.2

270

United Arab Emirates

Population (July 2012 est.) 5,314,317 Area of land (km²) 83,600GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $262.1 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $48,800

World Peace Index 2001-2012: United Arab Emirates

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 64 72.6 81.5 58.6 77.72002 89 66.4 81.5 48.1 69.52003 67 72.4 81.5 57.9 77.82004 70 70.4 80.5 52.3 78.22005 59 74.5 81.3 62.9 79.32006 64 73.0 83.0 64.0 71.92007 54 75.7 83.9 63.6 79.62008 44 78.5 83.4 65.8 86.32009 68 73.7 83.4 58.6 79.02010 51 77.2 83.8 58.8 88.82011 72 71.5 83.1 57.2 74.32012 62 72.1 82.7 57.2 76.4

271

United Kingdom

Population (July 2012 est.) 63,047,162 Area of land (km²) 241,930GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $2.29 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $36,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: United Kingdom

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 41 78.6 71.7 75.1 88.92002 40 78.6 96.4 66.0 73.32003 28 81.7 96.8 74.4 74.02004 39 76.5 89.4 66.0 74.12005 30 82.0 97.6 65.5 82.82006 22 85.8 97.6 76.4 83.22007 13 88.1 97.6 74.6 92.02008 20 85.4 97.4 74.8 83.92009 24 85.1 97.4 65.9 92.02010 42 79.6 96.6 67.2 75.12011 33 80.2 95.3 61.3 84.02012 40 77.9 87.2 60.1 86.4

272

United States

Population (July 2012 est.) 313,847,465 Area of land (km²) 9,161,966GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $15.29 trillionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $49,000

World Peace Index 2001-2012: United States

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 30 82.4 95.3 69.8 82.12002 36 79.7 95.4 69.4 74.52003 47 76.2 94.1 60.7 73.92004 69 70.9 77.2 60.5 74.92005 53 75.8 94.1 59.3 74.22006 43 78.8 94.2 67.6 74.52007 43 78.8 93.8 68.1 74.52008 40 79.1 94.9 68.0 74.42009 42 78.7 95.0 66.2 74.82010 39 80.1 93.5 72.8 74.12011 76 70.5 91.8 52.3 67.22012 73 70.8 91.8 52.2 68.5

273

Uruguay

Population (July 2012 est.) 3,316,328 Area of land (km²) 175,015GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $51.56 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $15,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Uruguay

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 27 83.0 89.1 80.4 79.62002 24 82.6 90.8 78.9 78.12003 24 83.0 90.8 79.8 78.22004 19 82.9 91.3 79.2 78.32005 29 82.7 92.1 79.9 76.22006 35 79.8 91.7 70.8 76.92007 25 83.3 92.3 80.0 77.62008 34 81.3 92.6 79.8 71.52009 25 84.3 92.8 78.3 81.72010 45 79.3 92.6 79.0 66.22011 25 83.0 93.5 78.1 77.32012 22 82.9 93.6 77.6 77.6

274

Uzbekistan

Population (July 2012 est.) 28,394,180 Area of land (km²) 425,400GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $96.46 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Uzbekistan

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 67 72.2 66.3 77.3 73.02002 95 63.4 67.3 49.6 73.22003 71 71.2 67.5 74.8 71.22004 58 72.7 66.9 74.5 76.82005 113 59.9 50.2 71.3 58.12006 102 63.0 50.0 63.2 75.72007 73 71.0 65.7 72.3 75.02008 96 67.7 56.9 72.6 73.72009 82 70.9 57.0 76.6 79.02010 75 72.0 64.5 76.6 74.82011 97 65.8 55.1 72.0 70.22012 87 68.4 63.4 72.5 69.4

275

Venezuela

Population (July 2012 est.) 28,047,938 Area of land (km²) 882,050GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $378.9 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $12,700

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Venezuela

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 80 69.5 69.3 83.0 56.22002 75 69.3 77.8 67.0 63.02003 59 74.5 69.2 82.7 71.62004 50 74.4 70.0 82.9 70.22005 96 65.9 61.5 65.9 70.32006 81 68.9 60.6 74.5 71.52007 57 75.1 77.3 74.9 73.02008 70 72.4 76.9 75.0 65.22009 48 76.7 76.8 73.2 80.22010 56 76.6 75.2 73.6 81.02011 65 72.9 65.3 80.2 73.42012 63 72.1 73.5 72.9 69.8

276

Vietnam

Population (July 2012 est.) 91,519,289 Area of land (km²) 310,070GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $303.8 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $3,400

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Vietnam

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 86 67.7 62.5 68.3 72.32002 128 53.7 46.8 58.7 55.72003 106 63.3 63.2 61.8 64.92004 99 64.2 63.2 53.6 75.82005 114 57.9 62.8 51.9 59.02006 118 57.8 64.5 50.0 58.92007 102 63.0 64.5 63.6 61.02008 114 60.8 64.5 55.4 62.42009 101 63.1 64.6 45.7 78.82010 106 63.6 63.3 65.2 62.42011 90 67.0 62.2 67.0 71.82012 80 69.0 68.5 66.8 71.5

277

Yemen

Population (July 2012 est.) 24,771,809 Area of land (km²) 527,968GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $58.71 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $2,300

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Yemen

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 117 58.2 55.4 69.6 49.52002 122 55.8 54.5 63.5 49.52003 138 47.6 54.5 46.7 41.82004 140 46.3 39.6 49.1 50.12005 131 48.5 56.1 46.3 43.12006 121 57.4 56.4 63.7 52.02007 122 55.3 56.3 65.5 44.02008 123 56.7 47.9 68.5 53.72009 138 45.5 31.2 66.4 39.02010 141 43.9 29.1 63.0 39.72011 139 44.4 28.4 54.0 50.72012 142 41.4 12.9 62.4 48.9

278

Zambia

Population (July 2012 est.) 14,309,466 Area of land (km²) 743,398GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $22.16 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $1,600

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Zambia

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 100 63.5 78.4 71.0 41.12002 87 66.6 77.4 72.2 50.22003 92 66.6 77.4 73.2 49.02004 106 61.1 78.2 73.2 31.82005 99 64.1 77.5 73.4 41.32006 95 64.8 77.5 73.7 43.32007 113 59.5 61.8 73.9 42.82008 103 64.8 78.4 72.0 43.92009 90 68.8 79.6 75.0 51.92010 81 70.6 79.7 75.6 56.42011 83 68.0 80.2 73.9 49.92012 96 66.6 80.4 72.9 46.5

279

Zimbabwe

Population (July 2012 est.) 12,619,600 Area of land (km²) 386,847GDP purchasing power parity (2011 est.) $6.206 billionGDP per capita (PPP) (2011 est.) $500

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Zimbabwe

Year Ranks WPI POL MIL SOC2001 130 51.6 42.1 59.6 52.92002 118 56.6 48.2 61.9 59.62003 104 63.5 56.3 73.9 60.42004 133 49.5 39.2 65.1 44.22005 134 47.0 46.7 58.8 35.42006 124 56.0 55.4 66.9 45.62007 123 55.0 55.2 62.7 47.22008 138 48.2 46.5 56.6 41.52009 122 54.4 46.2 73.5 43.52010 117 60.8 55.3 73.3 53.92011 126 54.7 52.0 71.5 40.62012 126 56.3 51.8 67.0 50.1

280

Part 4

Country Group Reports

282

283

World

The 143 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: World

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 70.3 71.4 74.0 65.52002 69.5 73.7 69.9 65.02003 70.6 73.9 71.4 66.52004 69.2 72.8 69.4 65.62005 70.2 73.7 70.4 66.62006 70.8 73.4 71.4 67.42007 70.8 73.1 71.4 67.92008 71.3 74.0 72.0 68.12009 70.9 72.5 70.9 69.22010 71.9 73.3 72.7 69.62011 70.3 72.2 72.2 66.52012 70.1 71.6 71.9 66.8

284

America and the Caribbean

The 24 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: America and the Caribbean

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 73.9 73.5 80.2 67.92002 73.3 76.5 77.1 66.42003 74.6 74.4 78.9 70.42004 74.2 73.9 76.9 71.92005 75.7 77.4 77.1 72.72006 73.6 75.5 76.5 68.82007 75.0 76.1 76.4 72.72008 73.8 75.2 77.2 69.12009 75.1 77.6 76.0 71.52010 75.3 76.4 77.3 72.32011 74.0 75.6 78.8 67.62012 72.9 74.2 77.6 67.0

285

Europe

The 38 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Europe

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 81.3 84.3 78.6 80.82002 80.1 87.9 75.4 76.92003 81.3 87.9 76.3 79.52004 78.8 86.6 72.1 77.72005 81.9 87.8 75.5 82.32006 82.2 88.4 75.9 82.32007 82.0 87.9 75.9 82.22008 81.9 88.0 75.8 81.72009 82.0 86.6 74.7 84.82010 82.7 87.2 77.4 83.52011 80.6 85.3 76.9 79.72012 80.4 85.3 76.1 79.9

286

Sub-Saharan Africa

The 33 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Sub-Saharan Africa

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 61.7 64.7 72.4 48.02002 63.2 67.5 71.9 50.32003 63.1 67.5 71.5 50.22004 62.8 67.9 71.9 48.42005 61.7 67.8 70.1 47.22006 63.7 67.4 73.4 50.32007 62.6 66.3 71.9 49.72008 63.9 69.6 70.8 51.32009 63.4 66.5 71.7 52.02010 64.4 67.0 72.8 53.32011 62.3 64.3 73.5 49.12012 63.1 68.2 73.5 47.6

287

Arab Countries

The 20 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Arab Countries

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 62.5 61.7 62.2 63.52002 60.6 64.1 52.1 65.62003 61.7 65.6 54.3 65.32004 59.0 60.5 52.9 63.52005 59.3 62.0 53.2 62.82006 63.0 64.2 57.9 66.82007 61.8 62.2 55.8 67.22008 64.7 62.6 59.9 71.62009 61.4 60.4 58.1 65.62010 63.5 63.6 59.0 67.92011 62.1 61.6 55.9 68.72012 60.4 55.6 54.9 70.7

288

Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

The 28 countries in the World Peace Index database.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Asia, the Pacific and Oceania

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 67.9 66.8 72.8 64.12002 65.5 66.1 66.4 64.12003 67.7 67.8 70.5 64.92004 66.7 67.2 68.2 64.72005 67.3 66.7 70.3 64.82006 66.5 64.7 68.5 66.12007 67.8 66.1 71.4 65.82008 68.2 66.9 72.2 65.52009 67.6 64.6 69.9 68.52010 68.8 65.8 72.1 68.42011 68.0 67.8 70.4 65.92012 68.8 66.7 71.9 67.8

289

Very Small Population

The 60 countries with less than 10 million people in the World Peace Index database: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Belarus, Botswana, Bulgaria, Central Africa, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Moldova, Mongolia, Namibia, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Oman, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Qatar, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, and Uruguay.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Very Small Population

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 75.5 79.5 74.5 72.62002 74.8 82.1 70.1 72.02003 75.9 81.8 72.6 73.32004 75.0 80.8 70.8 73.32005 76.1 81.4 72.3 74.72006 76.0 81.8 72.2 73.82007 76.4 81.7 72.3 75.12008 77.3 82.5 73.9 75.52009 76.8 81.5 72.6 76.42010 77.9 81.6 73.8 78.22011 75.2 79.8 72.8 73.12012 75.3 79.6 73.1 73.1

290

Small Population

The 44 countries with 10 million to 29 million people in the World Peace Index database: Angola, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, Cuba, Czech Republic, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Korea DPR, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Mozambique, Nepal, Netherlands, Niger, Peru, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Syria, Taiwan, Tunisia, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Small Population

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 68.0 69.4 74.0 60.72002 67.8 71.9 71.2 60.32003 69.0 72.0 72.0 63.12004 66.7 70.6 69.5 59.92005 67.5 71.7 70.0 60.92006 68.8 71.1 72.8 62.52007 68.9 70.7 72.6 63.42008 69.0 71.7 72.8 62.42009 68.6 69.8 71.7 64.22010 68.5 69.3 72.9 63.32011 67.7 69.0 73.1 61.12012 67.2 68.1 72.2 61.3

291

Medium Population

The 15 countries with 30 million to 49 million people in the World Peace Index database: Algeria, Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Iraq, Kenya, Korea Republic, Morocco, Poland, South Africa, Spain, Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Ukraine.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Medium Population

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 65.4 62.3 73.5 60.52002 64.3 64.5 66.3 62.22003 64.9 63.8 68.3 62.62004 63.9 62.8 66.8 62.12005 63.8 65.3 66.0 60.12006 65.4 65.7 66.3 64.02007 66.1 65.2 67.3 65.92008 65.0 63.5 66.3 65.42009 64.5 62.8 65.1 65.72010 67.4 68.7 68.5 65.12011 67.0 66.8 69.7 64.52012 66.1 65.8 67.0 65.4

292

Large Population

The 12 countries with 50 million to 99 million people in the World Peace Index database: Congo Dem, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Myanmar, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, and Vietnam.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Large Population

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 65.3 60.4 71.8 63.72002 63.8 64.6 67.3 59.62003 65.4 69.3 67.3 59.72004 63.4 64.3 65.3 60.72005 65.4 67.3 66.4 62.72006 65.9 64.0 68.8 64.82007 63.5 61.6 66.7 62.12008 65.3 65.7 65.7 64.52009 65.7 65.5 65.3 66.22010 66.9 66.6 70.1 63.92011 64.9 60.9 67.4 66.52012 65.3 63.8 68.8 63.4

293

Very Large Population

The 12 countries with more than 100 million people in the World Peace Index database: Bangladesh, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, and United States.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Very Large Population

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 64.2 61.3 74.8 56.52002 62.3 59.6 70.5 56.72003 62.8 59.4 71.9 57.02004 62.9 62.3 69.4 57.12005 64.1 60.7 72.0 59.52006 64.0 59.7 71.4 60.72007 63.7 61.1 72.1 57.92008 64.7 61.8 72.9 59.42009 63.4 57.8 72.6 59.92010 65.4 59.1 75.1 62.02011 64.8 64.1 73.8 56.42012 64.9 60.0 73.6 61.2

294

High-income

The 49 countries with more than $16,000 of GDP (PPP) per capita in the World Peace Index database: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Belgium, Botswana, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea Republic, Kuwait, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and United States.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: High-income

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 82.0 87.1 77.8 81.32002 80.5 89.5 72.9 79.02003 81.2 88.9 73.9 80.72004 79.1 87.4 70.7 79.02005 82.0 89.1 74.0 83.02006 82.1 89.6 75.3 81.42007 82.1 89.5 75.0 81.72008 82.4 89.4 75.2 82.42009 82.1 88.4 74.7 83.32010 82.6 89.2 76.2 82.42011 80.5 87.2 74.4 79.92012 80.4 86.1 75.0 80.1

295

Mid-income

The 57 countries with $3,000 to $15,999 of GDP (PPP) per capita in the World Peace Index database: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Georgia, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Namibia, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Romania, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Mid-income

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 67.7 66.4 72.7 63.82002 66.8 68.9 68.4 63.12003 68.6 70.0 70.6 65.22004 67.2 68.0 68.6 65.02005 68.1 69.6 69.2 65.52006 68.4 69.5 69.1 66.62007 68.5 68.5 69.3 67.72008 68.8 68.6 70.4 67.32009 68.7 68.3 68.8 69.02010 69.7 68.3 70.8 70.12011 68.5 68.6 70.8 66.22012 68.2 66.8 70.6 67.2

296

Low-income

The 37 countries with less than $2,999 of GDP (PPP) per capita in the World Peace Index database: Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central Africa, Chad, Congo Dem, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, Kenya, Korea DPR, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Yemen, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: Low-income

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 59.2 58.7 71.2 47.72002 59.5 60.6 68.1 49.72003 60.0 60.6 69.5 50.02004 59.6 61.0 68.9 48.92005 58.2 60.2 67.6 46.92006 59.7 58.5 70.1 50.62007 59.8 59.0 69.9 50.42008 61.0 62.3 70.0 50.82009 59.7 58.5 69.4 51.32010 61.2 60.2 71.1 52.42011 59.7 58.1 71.4 49.52012 59.8 60.4 69.7 49.2

297

G7

Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom,

and United States.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: G7

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 84.6 89.5 82.3 82.02002 83.3 95.6 77.7 76.52003 83.8 94.2 75.4 81.92004 81.1 92.4 74.0 76.92005 84.3 95.9 73.8 83.22006 84.7 94.8 78.1 81.12007 83.0 93.6 76.6 78.92008 82.0 92.5 74.4 79.02009 83.7 93.5 76.6 80.92010 83.9 94.4 79.0 78.42011 82.2 90.9 76.0 79.72012 81.6 88.7 74.5 81.5

298

G20

Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea Republic, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: G20

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 73.9 74.9 77.9 69.12002 73.4 77.4 73.2 69.62003 73.6 78.8 72.4 69.72004 71.9 77.0 70.7 68.02005 75.1 80.6 71.4 73.32006 75.3 80.5 72.6 72.62007 73.9 78.3 72.8 70.72008 73.3 78.0 72.4 69.62009 73.9 77.0 72.4 72.22010 76.2 81.2 76.3 71.02011 74.4 79.8 73.4 70.02012 74.2 77.1 72.7 72.8

299

OECD

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea Republic, Luxemburg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, and United States.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: OECD

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 84.2 88.9 80.8 82.92002 83.3 92.6 76.7 80.62003 83.5 92.3 76.6 81.72004 81.1 89.7 72.8 80.82005 84.8 92.2 76.9 85.22006 85.3 93.2 78.5 84.12007 83.8 91.6 76.4 83.42008 83.4 90.9 76.3 83.12009 84.3 90.5 77.3 84.92010 84.3 92.3 78.2 82.42011 82.1 89.7 76.6 80.02012 82.0 89.3 77.0 79.7

300

EU

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Macedonia, Malta, Montenegro, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, and United Kingdom.(Cyprus, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia are not included in the World Peace Index database.)

World Peace Index 2001-2012: EU

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 85.1 89.9 81.7 83.72002 83.2 92.7 77.8 78.92003 84.6 92.1 79.3 82.42004 81.3 90.6 74.0 79.42005 84.9 92.4 77.6 84.72006 85.3 93.1 79.4 83.42007 85.5 92.7 79.2 84.62008 85.0 92.3 78.4 84.22009 85.6 90.9 78.8 87.12010 85.2 91.1 80.2 84.32011 83.3 88.8 79.5 81.52012 83.1 89.7 79.2 80.4

301

BRICs

Brazil, Russia, India, and China.

World Peace Index 2001-2012: BRICs

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 61.2 56.8 72.3 54.52002 58.1 55.4 64.9 54.02003 61.1 60.8 67.7 54.82004 62.7 65.2 67.5 55.52005 64.7 65.0 67.3 61.82006 63.5 63.1 67.0 60.42007 62.1 56.9 70.7 58.62008 63.0 59.1 71.0 58.82009 60.5 54.7 66.6 60.12010 66.3 60.6 74.5 63.92011 61.8 60.8 70.6 53.92012 62.8 56.7 70.6 61.1

302

ASEAN

Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.(Brunei is not included in the World Peace Index database.)

World Peace Index 2001-2012: ASEAN

Year WPI POL MIL SOC2001 63.1 57.2 69.4 62.62002 61.8 57.4 66.7 61.32003 64.6 59.1 69.1 65.62004 62.0 56.7 64.9 64.32005 63.0 58.7 67.0 63.42006 63.1 57.2 67.0 65.02007 65.5 61.2 69.6 65.62008 64.9 61.2 68.6 64.82009 64.6 59.3 64.0 70.42010 63.5 56.3 66.9 67.32011 64.0 58.2 66.8 66.92012 65.3 59.3 70.5 66.1