RECONCILING RELATIONSHIPS WHILE PURSUING JUSTICE:THE CASE OF LAND REDISTRIBUTION IN ZIMBABWE by Erin McCandless This article explores the ways in which land redistribution efforts in Zimbabwe con- tribute to the building of constructive intercommunal relationships and a sustainable peace. Paradoxical questions are conceptualized and analysis and recommendations offered, elicited from stakeholder communities. For theorists interested in reconcilia- tion, this case points towards the need for critical reflection into the ways in which social and economic relationships and structures factor into peace-building. Land has played a pivotal role throughout the history of Zimbabwe (formerly Southern Rhodesia). Control of land was integral to imperialist and develop- ment policies of colonialist rulers, and the desire for land reform inspired revolution. Symbolically and practically, the land issue propelled visions of independence and post-independence development policies. Nearly twenty years since the fall of white colonial rule, land remains high on the national agenda—a primary development issue determining intergroup relations. Zimbabwe’s political and economic environment typifies that of many post–colonial and even post–violent conflict countries. Where primary resources are owned by a minority to the overt detriment of the majority, the potential for instability and violence is high. This potential often assumes an ethnically based character where relationships between communities, rooted in colonialism, continue to be shaped by and expressed around the availabil- ity and use of these resources. How then, can land or other resources be redistributed in a just manner and towards just ends, in an unevenly developed society such as Zimbabwe? How can this be done in a way that fosters constructive intercommunal rela- tionships (reconciliation) and builds a sustainable peace? 1 Zimbabwe has been wrestling with the issues for two decades, and has great experience to share. 225 PEACE & CHANGE, Vol. 25, No. 2, April 2000 © 2000 Peace History Society and Consortium on Peace Research, Education, and Development