Bonobos' reputation as make-love-not-war pacifists is quickly becoming undermined by recent research. They hunt for meat, go months without sex, and engage in (albeit more limited) intergroup conflict.
Examining Pan paniscus and Pan troglodytes are like looking at exaggerated aspects of our own nature. But in looking at the behavior of humans, organized group warfare appears to be the norm, rather than the exception.
The decisions and designs of organized group warfare are in the hands of an extremely small few and they are constantly trying to balance the application of their wealth between keeping domestic subversion at bay while clumsily dumping bombs and bodies around the world to "preserve peace."
War is not an undeniable urge, it's a choice. It's proven morally corrupt in most recent applications and this searching for some innate reasoning is an attempt to give hawks a way out of their cognitive dissonance. It's killing for duty, profit, and fun. You always have a choice.
Human war is not some local territory thing though is it? It's far more complex, as are human social interactions.
People love to make the war-chimp-humans-shrug connection, but aren't willing to make the sex-bonobo-human-wink connection??
There is a form of hipster-like love for the "authenticity" of humans as they were tens of thousands to millions of years ago. Just because we want to believe something is baked into our DNA doesn't mean that those tens of thousands to millions of years can be waved off so easily.
Chimps have evolved over the same time as humans. That we don't party like chimps implies that this line of reasoning with zero "war-DNA" evidence is bogus. Show us the genes. Which part of the tiny % difference btw bonobos, humans, and chimps explains all of this?