OVERVIEW: Introduction + Key Concepts Types of Conflict + Just War Theory Stages of Conflict Realpolitik: Realistic or practical politics; a form of politics or diplomacy that is guided by practical considerations, rather than by ideals, morals or principles. Negative peace: Peace defined as a period when war is neither imminent nor actually being fought, although the forces that give rise to war remain in place Causes of Conflict: Greed versus Grievance Many forms of discrimination seem to originate from this ingroup outgroup hostility. Vivienne Jabri argues that conflict is defined "in terms of inclusion and exclusion". One element in the process of categorization that can lead to the worst forms of violence is dehumanization. If "the other" is not seen as human anymore, then supposedly one doesn't have to treat them as such. Studies show that social cognition or considering the “humanness" of the other can vary depending on, for example, status (Harris and Fiske, 2011). Propaganda can further strengthen dehumanisation, such as the hate speeches from RTLM in Rwanda during the genocide, separation can also reinforce the process of dehumanization. The wall or barrier that Israel built around the West Bank could have a similar effect. If groups don't meet it may be easier to believe the stories about the other and this could accelerate the process of dehumanization. Lindner's Scale of Human Worthiness uses the well-known terms of übermensch and untermensch used by Hitler to emphasize the greatness of the ingroup and the inferiority of certain outgroups. Collier and Hoeffler's research indicates that conflict groups are more rational than we often perceive them to be, as they calculate the "availability of finance", "the cost of rebellion", and "military advantage". Critics say it is easier to quantify "greed factors" compared to factors related to grievance, but this doesn't mean that grievance plays a minor role in conflict (Collier and Hoeffler 2004: 563-595). Michael E. Brown (1996) argues that all too easily religious or ethnic "ancient hatreds" are referred to as the cause of a conflict, for example, in the former Yugoslavia. He classifies this, according to him "widely held”, view as "simple" and states that "it cannot explain why some disputes are more violent and harder to resolve than others" He identifies four groups of factors "that make some places more predisposed to violence than others": structural, economic/social, political, and cultural/ perceptual. If a country's government has a lack of control over (parts of) the country then it can be classified as a weak state. This lack of governmental control can then lead to groups providing for their own security or vice versa. Brown also argues that states that lack homogenity and have ethnic minorities "are more prone to conflict than others". Brown provides the example of Somalia as a country with a weak central government and many groups that provide for their own security. In terms of ethnic geography, however, Somalia is very homogeneous. Causes and Parties To Conflict Structural Factors Economic/Social Factors Weak states Economic problems Intra-state security concerns Discriminatory economic systems Ethnic geography Modernisation Political Factors Cultural/Perceptual Factors Discriminatory political institutions Patterns of cultural discrimination Exclusionary national ideologies Problematic group histories Inter-group politics Elite politics The underlying causes of internal conflict, Brown, 1996 The political factors that can cause domestic conflict to lead to war are largely related to "the type and fairness of the political system". If groups have opportunities to represent themselves through the political system and if the political system does not value a certain group over another then it's less likely that conflict will lead to direct violence. The authoritarian regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria favoured a particular minority in the country - the Alawites - and when demonstrations were met with repression civil war broke out. Certainly, the inadequacies of the Syrian political system contributed to the outbreak of violence and economic/social factors play another role. Economic downturn can often be a bigger influence than political discrimination. When Jordan lowered its fuel subsidies in 2012 large protests erupted and it was reported that protesters asked for the abdication of King Abdullah. One banner quite rightly stated, "Raising prices is like playing with fire". The rapid process of modernization, the introduction of new technologies Acute socio-political conflicts can be described as transformative dialectic processes that move through certain phases, transforming relationships and social organization. This section will focus on the dynamics of asymmetric conflicts, which are rooted in structural power imbalance between contending societal groups, defined by “the extent to which one party to a relationship is able to dominate another” (Adam Curle 1971) Types of Conflict I. According to Heywood, the nature of historical conflicts and modern ones are not necessarily the same. What examples does the author give, and to what extent do you agree with his analysis? II. III. What does 'asymmetrical warfare' refer to? What does 'postmodern warfare' refer to? What's involved in this type of warfare? Typologies of Wars Symmetric = intrastate wars Asymmetric between one state and one non-state party. Intrastate violent conflict wars between one non-state actor and a state within the existing state’s borders; Extrastate or extrasystemic violent conflict between one non-state and one state actor outside of the existing state’s borders Removal of boundaries as is observable in many of today’s violent conflicts shows itself best in those conflicts in which both parties to the conflict are non-state actors. The German political scientist Sven Chojnacki subsumes these conflicts under“sub-state wars”, and defines four “core types of armed violence”; Interstate violent conflicts between two or more states Intrastate violent conflicts between state and non-state actors within existing borders Extrastate violent conflicts between state and non-state actors beyond existing borders Substate violent conflicts between non-state actors independent of existing borders Consequences of Conflict Short & Long term - Physical: Casualties & Injuries - Psychological: Trauma - Political: Shifts in power, distrust - Economic: Destruction & productivity - Religious: Loss of faith - Moral: decline in values Causes & Parties to & Conflict Dynamics Defining Conflict as; the struggle between two or more opposing forces/ ideas/interests → Disagreement is inevitable given differing values/attitudes/ beliefs Resolution is violent if not addressed constructively By achieving mutually exclusive goals Affects all actors Addressing Conflicts Underlying needs have to be addressed → cooperation is required Levels of Cooperation & Conflict - National - International - Local/Communal - Individual The PIN Model Violence and peace (Source: Galtung 1969) Conflicts emerge from clash of interests Methods of Resolve With ever expanding interpretations of conflict, violence and peace, it is not surprising that the interpretation of “resolving a conflict” has changed. I. Peace Keeping Separating conflicting parties Consultation by international community to reach ceasefire by Peace-keeping force is sent in Humanitarian Intervention: forcible action taken by one state against another state, without the latter’s consent. II. Peace Making Reaching an agreement Diplomacy & Negotiation Interstate: Both sides are heard, but can inflame situation Ideal Mediation: Neutral & unbiased → compromise Arbitration: - Both sides accept a decision made by a III. Peace Building Resolving injustances & reconciliation Methods constituting positive peace Moving beyond mutual tolerance (zero sum) → mutual respect Both sides need to communicate actual needs Other nations help arrange and safeguard meeting Attempt compromise Appeasement: form of pacifism- give into demands Sanctions/ Protests: Gains publicity Strengths legitimacy, burden sharing, and an ability to deploy and sustain troops and police from around the globe, integrating them with civilian peacekeepers to advance multidimensional mandates. Weaknesses Humanitarian intervention → violation of sovereignty - - neutral party (bullying) Experienced professional decides outcome Compromise needed Advice might be ignored Strengths Track 2 Diplomacy: Private facilitators; NGOs & charities (negate bias) Weaknesses Negotiations tend to be lengthy, trying and costly → Machiavelli Track 1 Diplomacy: mediated by intergov. org. Often breakdown, or does not start Strengths Sustainable resolve of underlying conflict Weaknesses De-emphasized due to lack of overt immediacy The Ideal Mediator - Should be perceived as impartial the specific issues dividing the parties to a conflict - Should have influence, if not more effective power, relative to the conflict parties - Should possess the ability to devote sustained attention to the dispute - Should gave a strong incentive to reach a durable agreement Peace Keeping The characteristics of an ideal mediator peacekeeping has unique strengths, including legitimacy, burden sharing, and an ability to deploy and sustain troops and police from around the globe, integrating them with civilian peacekeepers to advance multidimensional mandates. I. II. Consent of the parties; Impartiality; III. Non-use of force except in self-defence and defence of the mandate As negotiations tend to be "lengthy, trying and costly" it is important the mediator has a strong motivation to stay involved. The Harvard Negotiation Project offers a number of additional suggestions to the “ideal mediator” which include the all-important creative approach, “focus on underlying interests” and needs, and the art of listening rather than talking. Peace Making Above all were questions of international diplomacy: What is diplomacy capable of? Is the threat of violence necessary to make diplomacy work? Peacemaking, or bringing the parties together, is still a vital element in the process towards conflict resolution, but increasingly the argument is made that a transformation is needed by fully reconciling the conflict parties. Principles of Interest based negotiation Separate the people from the problem and try to build good working relationships Facilitate communication and build trust by listening to each other rather than by telling each other what to do Focus on underlying interests and core concerns, not demands and superficial positions Avoid zero-sum traps [mutually exclusive goals] by brainstorming and exploring creative options Anticipate possible obstacles and work out how to overcome them Ramsbotham, Oliver. 2010. Transforming Violent Conflict, Radical Disagreement, Dialogue and Survival. Peace Building (why is it under-emphasised?) After peacekeeping (separating the violent conflict parties) and peacemaking (reaching an agreement between the conflict parties) comes peace building. National capacity development must be central to all international peacebuilding efforts from the very start, as part of the entry strategy, not the exit. Indeed, a core objective for peacebuilding is to reach as soon as possible the point when external assistance is no longer required, by ensuring that all initiatives support the development of national peacebuilding capacities. This is a challenge, especially in the early days when peace is fragile and national capacity is often displaced and severely limited. Nevertheless, peacebuilding must focus proactively on (re)building national capacity, otherwise peace will not be sustainable. To support this effort, a collective assessment of existing capacities should be conducted early on.This has often been overlooked, and still is. Susan Opotow describes reconciliation as a process that “can move people from antagonism to coexistence.” It can foster mutual respect, and, at its most ambitious, it can foster forgiveness, mercy, compassion, a shared vision of society, mutual healing, and harmony among parties formerly in conflict". But “[t]here is no one-size-fits-all blueprint for reconciliation.” The four basic options for post-conflict societies are to altogether ignore the conflict, to bring the perpetrators of crimes to justice, to offer amnesty via, for example, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, or a combination of any of these. Development trends in restorative and retributive justice Justice as retributive Justice as restorative Justice as punishment Justice as healing Justice as according to law Justice as according to truth Justice as adversarial Justice as reconciliation Justice as retaliatory Justice as forgiveness Justice as condemnation Justice as merciful Justice as alienation Justice as redemptive Justice as impersonal Justice as humanitarian Justice as blind Justice as sensitive Justice as humiliation Justice as honour Looking at how Sierra Leone dealt A Restorative and retributive justice. Apori-Nkansah, Lydia. 2011. with its violent past, through a combination "Restorative justice in transitional Sierra Leone”. Journal of Public of a war crimes tribunal and a Truth and ’ I. Latent conflict II. Overt conflict III. Conflict settlement IV. Sustainable peace These stages are characterised by: - Different degrees of power imbalance between the conflict parties (from unbalanced to balanced); - different levels of situational awareness of these parties about their conflict- related interests and needs (from low to high); and - different types of external environment (from a rigidity of status quo, instability of open warfare to the dynamic nature of peace and its consolidation). Conflict Resolution + Peace Building Case studies: Yemen Civil War (on-going), Sierra Leone (1991-2002), Arab Spring (2011)
