Factors That Determine Ethnic Conflict in the Society - Coursework Example

Khaled Al Sabah S00016084 IR 210 Factors that Determine Ethnic Conflict in the Society Introduction Ethnic conflict, as research into the factorsthat lead to its emergence and progression has shown in the last ten years, is not as a result of any single factor. Rather, it is caused by a combination of factors and has multiple causes, is specific to a particular conflict’s context, and is multi-dimensional. Tang (p. 520) states that ethnic conflict is a result of a combination of factors, including competition over resources and the environment, socio-cultural issues, and institutional and political factors. Competition over resources and environmental factors are because of the effect of population growth on scarcity of natural resources, resulting in unjust exploitation of resources and environmental insecurity. Socio-cultural factors contributing to ethnic conflict include marginalization and exclusion, poverty, and weakened or absence of social cohesion (Tang 520). On the other hand, institutional and political factors have to do with power struggles among the elite, weak institutions of the state, identity politics, and corruption. Each factor could constitute a cause that impacts on the progression of ethnic conflict. The identification of how these causes interact, as well as the dynamics and dimensions of the conflict and the context within which the ethnic conflict arises, is crucial in the determination of intervention activity (Tang 521). Justino (12) argues that the manner in which institutions, or governments, at societal level addresses intra-state group conflict can determine whether the ethnic groups involved in the conflict will decide to pursue violence. Scholars have built on various seminal studies conducted in the 80s and 70s that investigated ethnic rationality, inequality, and mobilization. Due to this, current research into ethnic conflict is in a profound position to elucidate the factors that lead to progression of ethnic conflicts, the potential form they may take, and the associated factors with de-escalation. This progress has been achieved for several reasons. First, Justino (13) states that model development has become increasingly successful, along with testing and measurement, which can be attributed to research refinement on programs that are mainly concentrated on the monitoring of risk-groups through the use of comparative case studies and quantitative data. Secondly, the developed models, rather than expanding on ideas that are empirically unsubstantiated, are reflective of the synthesis of earlier research findings. Finally, current scholars are tending towards examining ethnic conflict from international and domestic political lenses (McGarry and O’Leary 44). This has been informed by the fact that ethnic conflicts are devastating on global economic growth and political order, which makes the integration of globalization understandable. Owing to the additional importance and complexity of understanding ethnic conflict, McGarry and O’Leary (46) identify a framework, which aids in the comprehension of the various factors that influence ethnic conflict, arguing that combination of various ethnic and institutional compositions tend to influence capability distribution among ethnic group leaders. The main conclusion is that diversity of ethnic groups, as well as the constrained nature of state action, are likely to inhibit risky strategies aimed at intervention, thus increasing the likelihood of violence (McGarry and O’Leary 46). As Wolff (39) argues, a workable ethnic conflict theory must sufficiently explain why cooperative and peaceful ethnic relations are a more typical outcome than violence, in spite of increasing tensions. Due to the costs of ethnic violence and the benefits to be reaped from peace, decentralization of institutional arrangements emerges as a moderating instrument for ethnic opportunism (Wolff 40). While ethnic tensions and conflict resolution should always prevail as a more beneficial and rational approach, ethnic conflict still occurs around the world. Some of; the most emotionally and physically haunting examples in the recent past include Iraq, Darfur, Rwanda, and Bosnia. Continuous investigation into the factors causing ethnic conflict is, thus, necessary in order to develop deeper insight on what leads to peace breakdown in numerous multi-ethnic contexts (McGarry and O’Leary 467). Literature on factors that determine ethnic conflict in society pursues this issue using competing theories, including resource competition, political entrepreneurs, institutional, and primordialist theories. However, as contended by Ganguly (41), the number of ethnic conflicts, as well as their fluid and dynamic qualities, means that no factor provides an explanation, which is comprehensive. Therefore, this paper will seek to use a conceptual framework to comprehend ethnic conflict that combines the approaches stated above. Attempting to develop a more comprehensive approach, however, runs the risk of attempting to do too much, particularly for a phenomenon, which is multi-contextual. This will necessitate an exploration of various explanations for ethnic conflict, as well as the extent to which these factors complement each other, to construct a broad-based framework and understand complexities of ethnic conflict. Thus, this paper will set out to identify factors that determine ethnic conflict progression, how to mitigate these factors, and identification of ways to reconcile the groups involved. The paper will argue that ethnic conflict happens as a result of convergence of conditions and factors; political factors, social factors, and resource and environment factors. Aim of the study This research study will set out to assess the factors that determine ethnic conflict in multi-ethnic societies. The information that will be gathered will, in turn, enlighten authorities in how to handle ethnic conflict by being aware of the different factors at play, both individually and in combination. With this knowledge, authorities would have the foundation to design mechanisms and measures that will reduce the number and severity of ethnic conflicts around the world. Additionally, the research findings will be useful for scholars and other researchers studying conflicts in society. The findings of the research are necessary in advancing the knowledge about ethnic conflict that can be used in uplifting the standards of living of people in conflict. Objective of the Study There have been several seminal studies into the factors, which cause ethnic conflict in multi-ethnic societies. Some of these factors include political and social issues (Chinjiwa 45), while multi-cultural factors may also be involved in the emergence of ethnic conflict in various multi-ethnic societies (Koppelman and Lee 87). While majority of studies into ethnic conflict have documented issues that lead to conflict, there is little in the way of studies that elucidate the mechanisms of the individual factors involved in ethnic conflict and how they contribute to conflict in combination. Therefore, this study will focus on the factors that contribute to ethnic conflict. Conceptual framework This research study will use a multi-dimensional conceptual framework that helps in understanding the factors that cause ethnic conflict. This study will use the conceptual framework to argue that ethnic conflict emerges and progresses when a specific set of conditions and factors come together: Social and cultural memories related to inter-ethnic grievances, ethnic intolerance due to institutional factors and political entrepreneurs who evoke emotions in their ethnic groups towards another group(s), and competition among ethnic groups over resources and environmental rights (Barltrop 135). Using this conceptual framework, the study will explore how these factors result in ethnic conflict, its goal being to depart from as simplistic causal explanation for ethnic conflict. Factors that Determine Ethnic Conflict Ethnic conflicts in various locations across the world have resulted in the death of millions of people, especially in the 20th century. Most of these ethnic conflicts have to do with economic, social, and political reasons, factors that are present across the world (Simbowale 107). The table below shows some of the most well-known ethnic conflicts in the world, in which two or three of the factors enumerated have been present at the same time. In this case, the number of factors related to ethnic conflict and the extent of their interaction result in different levels of ethnic conflict. The table shows examples of ethnic conflict and places where they were experienced LEVELS OF ETHNIC CONFLICT CASES REMARKS Genocide Armenians, 1915 Jews, 1939-1945 Cambodia, 1975-79 Rwanda, 1994 The wars led intervention from international communities. War short of genocide Kurds in Turkey, now East Timor, now Yugoslav Wars, 1990s Guatemala, 1970s/80s Sri Lanka, now This is a much more common type of case than outright genocide. It can, however, produce many massacres. In Guatemala, the war was largely but not entirely fought along ethnic lines. Conflict, low level war Israel-Occupied West Bank/Gaza, 1967-now Northern Ireland, 1969 1998? South Africa before 1990 Many cases in Latin America Even more common, these types of semi-wars have occurred in dozens of cases. They sometimes heat up or cool down, but can remain unresolved for decades. These are the kinds of ethnic wars most likely to be stopped with proper mediation, but that can escalate if mishandled. Conflict, no war but occasional violence Israel-Israeli Arabs, 1948-now U.S. South before 1970s Many cases in India Southern Mexico, now Very common, such cases may be held in check by effective repression and co-optation, as in Israel and Mexico. In India, they occasionally flare into more severe warfare, as in Kashmir Past Conflict Followed by Reconciliation South Africa Northern Ireland Malaysia U.S. South Basques in Spain Muslims in Thailand In all these cases, tensions in the recent past either produced wars or high levels of confrontation that seemed to be heading toward civil war. However, all have produced some level of reconciliation in the 1980s and 90s. Institutional and Political Factors in Ethnic Conflict Majority of states and countries across the world manage their political aspects through various political institutions. However, if these institutions are unable to function effectively for all ethnic groups, there is a high likelihood of ethnic conflict emerging, especially if the institutions are weak and not independent, are at the centre of struggles between powerful elites belonging to different ethnic groups, are corrupt, and are reflective of identity politics (Barltrop 18). To begin with, states and countries experience weak institutions when they become incapable of managing the interests of different groups of people in a peaceful manner. As a result, the institutions reach a point where they can no longer accommodate the growing demand of the various groups resulting in fracture in the entire system (Blagonojevic 15). Institutions have a critical role to play in the regulation of conflict potential levels in relation to ethnicity. These institutions define relationships between ethnic groups either through obstructing or facilitating cooperation between the ethnic groups. According to Rupesinghe (67), whether identity politics result in ethnic conflict or not is dependent on how state institutions function, also claiming that where there is practice of identity politics, it is up to the state institutions to channel it by making credible commitments to uphold agreements present among ethnically diverse political actors. For example, the ethnic tensions that were present among Switzerland’s ethnic groups in the 19th century were managed through the institutionalization of ethnic pluralism, which gave all groups equivalent share of power. Ganguly (34) argues that, if the opposite is the case and the state’s legal institutions and administrative structures distribute national resources on the basis of ethnicity, they will only encourage the political mobilization of rival ethnic groups along ethnic lines. Therefore, states in which there is politicization of political institutions along ethnic identity lines become increasingly vulnerable to ethnic conflict, in comparison to those that use political institutions to promote the social integration of ethnic groups. Colonial political systems, especially in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa utilized a strategy to “divide and rule” in order to separate groups on ethnic lines and, in turn, strengthen the colonial power system. On decolonization, however, the young independent countries lacked mature institutional mechanisms to control ethnic groups, which resulted in the surfacing of ethnic emotions and the emergence of ethnic intolerance. Neumayer (266) claims that the exploitation of these situations by political entrepreneurs leads to competition among ethnic groups and subsequent conflict, while also arguing that democratic institutions are the best way to promote cooperation between ethnic groups and reduce the likelihood of ethnic conflict. Stability in democratic multi-ethnic states is normally maintained via compromise and political bargaining among ethnic groups, which makes states with democratic institutions better equipped to mitigate ethnic conflict early on before escalation. Another cause of ethnic conflict may be the transition to democracy from authoritarianism, which, in the course of dismantling the coercive power of state control, leads to ethnic organization and mobilization as different ethnic groups air grievances and make demands of other groups and the state (Neumayer 267). In addition, majority democracy rule raises ethnic fears of domination and marginalization, further increasing ethnic conflict potential. Major structural changes and inability by institutions to regulate competition and rivalry between ethnic groups, leading to uncertainty and instability and providing the necessary conditions for political entrepreneurs to take advantage of ethnic emotions and mobilize ethnic groups for personal gain (Ganguly 34). Mostly, politicians will exploit grievances stemming from historical memories and increase ethnic hatred to strengthen their bargaining power. A security dilemma between ethnic groups emerges as a result of the dynamics between political entrepreneurs and ethnic group followers. Ganguly (34) explains that belligerent political leaders build up hostility where the hostile masses will support them and, together, they threaten rival ethnic groups and create a security dilemma that encourages more mass hostility and belligerence of the leaders. The political entrepreneur will usually manipulate their ethnic group’s uncertainties and fears, as well as desire for the rectification of various wrongs. According to McGarry & O’Leary (72), politicians whose sole goal is the provoking and/or exploiting of ethnic tensions and hatred control production in media with the main aim of provoking national hatred and intolerance in the state and causing violence. Where national leaders lack necessary political responsibility and fail to resist the temptation to deflect attention socio-economic problems through the creation of national concepts of rivals and enemies, the slide towards ethnic intolerance is strengthened. Gilley (1159) argues that this acts as a chance for the existing regime of political leaders who are scared of losing power. Therefore, the manipulation by politicians of emotions within ethnic groups leads to ethnic intolerance. This approach to political entrepreneurship in explaining ethnic conflict and the institutional approach are closely related. Those politicians using ethnicity as an advantage are able to operate successfully within institutional arrangements that that enable them to do so. This means that the strength of state institutions is directly responsible for the ability of political entrepreneurs to mobilize their ethnic groups. In states that allow these entrepreneurs to be competitive and ensure abundant allocation of resources, identity politics are stable and legitimate (Gilley 1159). In cases where there is institutional failure, however, incentives that already exist to promote socio-political divisions along ethnic lines are more likely to persist, giving political entrepreneurs more resources to use in exchange for ethnic support. Socio-cultural Factors in Ethnic Conflict Maddex (91) contends that ethnic conflict may result from the existence of long-term hatreds among ethnic groups, which manifests as the urge to reject or define other ethnic groups. According to this view, human tendencies toward intolerance and xenophobia come more naturally than liberal interest politics. This approach aids in explaining the role that emotions have to play in ethnic conflict, as well as the ethnicity’s conflict potential. In fact, ethnic emotions are socially and culturally constructed realities that are drawn from memories of grievances and injustices from the past. This can be illustrated by showing that national identities are imbued with emotions that are the result of teaching, daily reproduction, and repetition to the point they become common sense. Group history is a social and cultural construct with nations being a specific form of collective whose constitution is done via a history creating process. In addition, national history is constructed to consist of past greatness, heroism, antiquity of origins, continuity, sacrifice, overcoming trauma, and victimization (Maddex 92). History endows this imagined community a territorial claim, referred to as the homeland. Green (54) defines an ethnic group’s historical memory as an idea set about a group’s past history, how it historically relates with other ethnic groups, self-images, and ethnic images. Historical memories are used by ethnic communities as a reference point and a justification and animosity source for acts of discrimination against rival ethnic groups. In this case, socially-constructed history is used to buttress religious and ethnic polemics, as well as to reclaim ethnic identity and reconstruct the same. Kozlov & Mackinnon (52) offers a similar argument, contending that considering rapid changes in contemporary conditions, most people will invent, rediscover, or cleave their ethnicity for personal identification, communal anchorage, and emotional security. Therefore, if every individual belongs to a specific ethnic group and if tensions and divisions among ethnic groups are natural, there is nothing or little that can be done to resolve or even prevent conflict between ethnic groups. However, this is an over-simplified view of what is a complex issue. This is because ethnic animosities are the result of a combination of factors, all of which are equally important to the progress of ethnic conflict (Kozlov & Mackinnon 53). Social contracts are rules that form the framework for governing relations in state-societies, responsibilities and rights, and resource distribution in any organized society. The manner in which a government uses public revenue from natural resources or taxes is crucial, according to Heitmeyer (199), who claims that conflicts are less likely where governments spends public revenue equitably on satisfaction of basic needs and social welfare. Corruption, on the other hand, undermines the trust that society has in the state-government, while it also increases socio-economic grievances, worsens wealth inequalities, and deters foreign and domestic investment. Equally, the state’s inability to give its citizens basic services, such as security and justice reduces its citizen’s trust and legitimacy in the institutions of the state, which weakens this social contract. Additionally, in some cases, the groups that are in power may resort to using violence and conflict in order to prolong their reign, all in order to maintain their opportunities to continue benefitting from corruption (Heitmeyer 199). In turn, this could promote and provoke conflict in the form of rebellion by groups that feel marginalized. In fact, it is also possible that transitions to peace can actually be achieved if the political belligerents and oppositions groups are bought off with a promise to also take part in the government’s corrupt activities, proving that corruption plays an important role in ethnic conflict. Identity politics have long been the subject of research into the causes of socially- constructed ethnic differences. Whereas the primordialist argument contends that cultural, religious, or ethnic differences inevitably lead to conflict, the instrumentalist theory asserts that identity is the result of social and cultural construction and is exploited for mobilization purposes (Heitmeyer 200). However, there has been an argument for a middle ground, which holds that, while cultural, religious, and ethnic identities rarely condemn individuals to fight against each other and are not normally the major reasons and issues for conflict. When mobilized, on the other hand, these identities provide a belief system that unites community adherents, alters how they perceive other ethnic groups, and encourages them to take action together as part of their ethnic group. In other situations of discrimination and exclusion, group identity can be a crucial factor in deciding whether ethnic groups can be mobilized for conflict. Similarly, weak cohesion between ethnic groups reduces the ethnic group’s probability to be mobilized in a manner of exclusion (Heitmeyer 200). Finally, identity politics are used by marginalized groups, as well as dominant groups, to articulate discontent and exclusion. Resource and Environment Related Ethnic Conflict Ethnic identity-driven political mobilization leads to ethnic competition and intolerance over rights and resources that, if left unresolved, could result in ethnic conflict. In conditions of resource scarcity, political entrepreneurs are able to capitalize on ethnicity’s conflict potential. When ethnic groups are characterized by minimal or no opportunities, they become more vulnerable to maneuvering by the political entrepreneurs. These resources include development allocations, language rights, educational admissions, scholarships, jobs, property rights, and government contracts and they all confer specific benefits on persons and their ethnic groups (Wolff 38). Because they are scarce, these resources are objects of competition and lead, occasionally, to struggles between ethnic groups. Economic competition in relation to resources is the most used aspect of resource competition by scholars who argue that, when economic conditions are difficult, coupled with poor future prospects and high unemployment, groups feel victimized and put the blame on rival ethnic groups, leading to inter-ethnic competition. However, Ikejiaku (21) argues that the resource concept also exists in terms of cultural, social, and political resources that include material security and ethnic group rights. In this case, there is a higher likelihood for conflict when opposition and disagreement concerns revolve around collective goods. Ikejiaku (23) finds that in majority of ethnic conflicts, demands by the different groups are centered on securing their basic rights, such as fair distribution of education, better political representation, and employment opportunities. Ethnic mobilization and conflict becomes more likely where there is limited access to resources by the “disadvantaged” group. Some of the mechanism that increase ethnic competition include political and economic processes like state system expansion, cultural-based labor division, employment segregation, and ethnically-split labor markets. These developments increase competition for resources among ethnic groups. The internal colonialism concept has been extensively utilized in the past twenty or so years in accounting for economic differences between ethnic groups. This concept contends that once an ethnic group is able to dominate in society, it can maintain a system of cultural labor division. When other ethnic groups feel victimized by other groups, ethnic identity gains importance as it is seen as a source of protection and security (Ikejiaku 23). The “advantaged” group views the other groups, on the other hand, as plotting to take what is theirs if they gain power, turning to intolerance of dissenters and out-groups and the silencing of diverging opinions and intolerance. If there is not intervention, this leads to ethnic conflict. Blagonojevic (11), on his part, argues that environmental scarcities are a major contributing factor in ethnic conflict, especially in developing countries. These environmental scarcities arise from resource degradation, unequal resource distribution, population pressure, resource degradation, and environmental change. Although environmental factors are rarely the sole factor resulting in ethnic conflict, it can combine with the factors discussed above, leading to instability and conflict. For instance, the state may be weakened by environmental pressures, such as if the state becomes unable to provide its citizens of food security. Economic stability can also result from environmental shocks, particularly in developing nations with poor agrarian industries. Scarcities also lead to increased competition concerning resource allocation between population groups and economic sectors (Blagonojevic 11). Ethnic conflict risk increases if disadvantaged groups also feel politically, economically, or socially marginalized. Another environmental factor that could increase the risks of ethnic conflict, especially during the course of this century, is climate change. The consequences of this will be especially felt in poorly-governed states, especially as they will find it more difficult to adapt. Ethnic conflict could also be fanned by climate change, particularly with regards to economically and politically marginalized groups (Blagonojevic 11). Thus, the environmental factor acts to modify other factors discussed above by exacerbating ethnic tensions. Conclusion In conclusion, the above discussion shows that, in order to understand why ethnic conflict occurs, it is important to perceive ethnic conflict as being of a multi-dimensional and multi-causative nature. From the discussion, it is apparent that political and institutional, socio-cultural, and resource-environmental factors all have a critical role to play individually and in tandem. Ethnic conflict, overall, can be said to be caused mainly by superiority and competition, in which over-dominance by an ethnic group creates a feeling of isolation and marginalization for others. In order for these conflicts to be resolved peacefully and in the long term, it is essential to understand how the various factors converge and interact, which will aid in their elimination, as well as integration and cohesion of the ethnic groups involved. In this paper, a conceptual framework was proposed that sought to understand the factors that lead to ethnic conflict. It was argued that these conflicts arise as a result of a combination of factors, such as competition over rights and resources, facilitation of inter-ethnic group intolerance by weak institutions, political manipulation of ethnicity, historical ethnic grievances, and major structural changes. It was also argued that the presence of these factors in combination influences the progress and extent of ethnic conflict. Ethnic emotions are, especially, crucial to understanding how ethnic conflict comes about, particularly when it is based on historical and cultural injustices and unresolved grievances. How the other factors interact with inter-ethnic group emotions, as well as with each other, will have a profound impact on ethnic conflict. To come up with ways and strategies to effectively ensure peace-building efforts are successful, it is crucial to be cognizant and too address the multiple causes of ethnic tensions and conflict. Analyzing ethnic conflicts using a multi-dimensional framework provides the best grounds for an approach to peace-building that is more comprehensive, while also aiding post-conflict development in societies divided along ethnic lines. Works Cited Barltrop, Richard. Darfur and the international community the challenges of conflict resolution in Sudan. London: I.B. Tauris, (2011). Print. Blagonojevic, Bojana. Causes of Ethnic Conflict: A conceptual framework. Journal of Global change and Governance 3.1 (2009): 1-25. Print. Chijiwa, Kuniko. Locating ethnic context mothers characteristics and child mortality in Trinidad and Tobago. Gainesville, Fla.: University of Florida, (2003). Print. Ganguly, Rajat. Autonomy and ethnic conflict in South and South-East Asia. London: Routledge, (2012). Print. Ganguly, Rajat. Ethnic Conflict: 2. London: Sage, 2009. Print. Gilley, Bruce. "Against the concept of ethnic conflict." Third World Quarterly 25.6, (2004): 1155-1166. Print. Green, Judith. Principles of social research. Maidenhead; New York, NY: Open University Press. 2005. Print. Heitmeyer, Wilhelm. Intimate Partner Violence. International Journal of Conflict and Violence 4.2 (2013): 198-202. Print. Ikejiaku, Brian-Vincent. "The Relationship between Poverty, Conflict and Development." Journal of sustainable development 2.1 (2009): 15-28. Print. Justino, Patricia. "Poverty and Violent Conflict: a Micro-Level Perspective on the Causes and Duration of Warfare." Ids Working Papers 385 (2011): 1-25. Print. Koppelman, Kent L. & Goodhart, Lee. Understanding human differences: multicultural education for a diverse America. 3rd ed. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon, (2011). Print. Kozlov, Vladimir A. & MacKinnon, Elaine. Mass uprisings in the USSR: protest and rebellion in the post-Stalin years. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe, (2002). Print. Maddox, Robert L. International encyclopedia of human rights: freedoms, abuses, and remedies. Washington, D.C: CQ Press, (2000). Print. McGarry, John & OLeary, Brendan. The Politics of Ethnic Conflict Regulation: Case Studies of Protracted Ethnic Conflicts. London: Routledge, 2013. Print. Neumayer, Eric. The Impact of Political Violence on Tourism. Journal of Conflict Resolution 48.2 (2004): 259-281. Print Rupesinghe, Kumar. Ethnicity and power in the contemporary world. Tokyo: United Nations University Press, (1996). Print. Simbowale, Tokunbo. "Ethnic Conflicts in Contemporary Africa: The Nigerian Experience". Journal of Science 12.2 (2006): 101-114. Print. Tang, Shiping. "The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict: Toward a Dynamic and Integrative Theory of Ethnic Conflict." Review of International Studies 37.2 (2011): 511-536. Print. Wolff, Stefan. Ethnic Conflict: A Global Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Print. Read More