The Issue of Conflict Resolution - Essay Example

Conflict resolution Introduction Conflict resolution is a term implying the deep rooted causes of a conflict have been addressed and transformed (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse & Miall, 2011). It implies that the conflict violence is no longer evident, attitudes are no longer hostile and the structure of conflict has been transformed. As a field of study, conflict resolution began in the 1950s and 1960s (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse & Miall, 2011) Conflict resolution theories The causes of conflict can be analyzed at three levels, which are; individual, state and the international system (Crocker, Hampson &Aall, 2008). According to Levy, the individual level cause of conflict/war is mainly due to human nature and depends on an individual’s aggressiveness, personality or psychological process. The state or national level cause of war depends on the political system of a country, cultural factors such as ethnicity and nationalism, and economic factors. The international system can also be referred to as the systemic level of conflict cause. The systemic level contains factors such as global system and power structures. Individual level of conflict theory presumes that individuals can be the cause of conflicts in or among states. Individual leaders can lead to wars due to their emotional state such as trauma or aggression. It has been scientifically proven that an individual’s emotional state for example trauma or aggression can lead to poor judgment and decision making process. For example, a leader can be naturally aggressive and due to this personality is highly irritable and anything he considers as offending from an ally or foreign state may lead to him readying up his troops and sending them to war as a result. Trauma refers to shock and this can also lead to an individual who is a leader to pass poor judgment and decisions in the face of conflict which lead to wars. If an individual leader is say in shock, he or she may decide to arm his troops and send them to war against foreign states due to the fact that he is in shock and views as protection for himself (Crocker, Hampson &Aall, 2008). The systemic level analysis of conflicts offers a number of theories on power, cultural and structural factors as the main causes of war among nations. The power theory stipulates that a few countries may have vested interests in trying to achieve their own vested goals and therefore they act to advance their interests to increase their power, security or wealth. Such countries advance their interests by overstepping the boundaries of other sovereign states and this leads to wars and conflict. Super power countries also tend to build up arms and form alliances with cooperating countries to protect their interests and this can at times anger a few opposing sovereign states and thus leading to wars. The global structural setup may also lead to wars and conflicts among states. The lack of a clear and legitimate authority which can regulate and enforce agreements among disputing states may lead to rise of conflicts. Existence of an authority to which all states are answerable can help in minimizing wars and conflicts. The cultural setup among different countries can also lead to conflict. For example, countries that break away from other countries as groupings of ethno national groups are likely to be in conflict. Such countries tend to go into a state of anarchy due to the lack of clear leaders and or national figures who offer direction after the split and therefore the existing uncertainty results in war and conflict between such ethno national countries (Crocker, Hampson &Aall, 2008). The state level theory focuses on factors which are cause of conflicts in a state or country. Factors such as nationalism, ethnicity, political and economical structures may be the contributors of conflicts in a certain country. The probability of occurrence of a war in a country is likely to be influenced on the fairness of its political systems. For a political system which is closed/ authoritarian, its citizens may lack freedom and therefore resent the political powers in the country. Resentment of the political system may lead to tensions and possible cause of conflict within a country (Brown, 2001). The political setting in a given country such as inadequate representation of a particular people in government also breeds room for conflict to arise since the unrepresented become disgruntled. The economic environment in a country may also be a cause of conflict. Uncontrolled rise in prices of essential commodities in the form of inflation may lead to unrest and demonstrations among citizens and this could result in a conflict between the countries citizens and the governing bodies. High unemployment levels may also result to conflicts in countries. The unemployed may cause social unrest through demonstrations and also lead to disgruntled citizens who may revolt against the power holders in the country and thus resulting to conflicts. Unemployment may also result in the increase of social evils such as crime which is always a catalyst for crime. High resource competition within a country may also result to conflicts in a country. Resources especially land if not equitably shared among citizens of a given state is a common cause of internal conflicts. Nationalism refers to how proud a citizen is of his or her country. If a country has few nationalist then it could be a cause for conflicts since other citizens view their country to be their source of suffering and thus few would be willing to die for the cause and save their state in face of conflicts. Ethnicity refers to the process of individuals identifying themselves as of a certain ethnic group. Ethnicity results in groupings within a country and this may result to hatred and animosity among or towards each other creating tension and ground for conflicts in a country. Discrimination due to ethnic grouping in institutions and or employment opportunities creates room for hatred among citizens and thus conflict in a country (Brown, 2001) Conflict resolution approaches Conflict resolution approaches refer to steps carried out by both unofficial (non governmental actors) and official (government actors) in the process of conflict resolution. They are the steps and approaches undertaken to end conflicts by either actors. Mainly non government actors are concerned with the process of conflict resolution. The first approach to conflict resolution is dialogue or negotiation. Dialogue is the process where the parties in conflict seek to discuss, settle and resolve their conflict. Dialogue is normally conducted by the top leaders from both parties of the conflicts (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse & Miall, 2011). The top leaders of both parties meet up to dialogue on issues concerning the conflict resolution. After dialogue, both conflicting parties involve themselves in interactive problem solving procedure. Problem solving procedure is mostly conducted by middle level leaders in the conflict and aims at understanding the causes of the conflict and finding a way to resolve the outcome in a manner that both parties come out as winners . After undertaking problem solving, the conflicting parties engage in reconciliation which is along term activity of trying to overcome mistrust and hostility among the conflicting parties. Reconciliation is more deep rooted and is carried out at the grassroots or lower levels to reach the masses and create a feeling of trust and love among the conflicting parties. Reconciliation precedes the process of conflict transformation which is involved with structural and cultural peace building among the conflicting parties. Cultural transformation is the deepest level in conflict resolution since it involves rebuilding previous establishments that had been destroyed due to the conflict (Ramsbotham, Woodhouse & Miall, 2011) . Non state actors act implicitly during a conflict resolution since they only imply to both the conflicting parties what is to be done to achieve conflict resolution. Non state actors don’t normally have the capacity to implement the conflict resolution on the conflicting parties. State actors meanwhile act explicitly since they express and oversee the process of conflict resolution by ensuring that whatever is discussed on is implemented and achieved. Conclusion This paper has discussed on the three levels of conflict analysis which are individual, national/state and systemic levels of analysis. The three levels are bases for theories on the causes of conflicts. The approach to conflict resolution which is mostly conducted among non state actors has been discussed by expounding on dialogue, problem solving, reconciliation and conflict transformation. Bibliography Aall, C. A. (2001). Turbulent peace: the challenges of managing international conflict. Michigan: United States Institute of Peace Press. Brown, M. E. (2001). Nationalism and ethnic conflict. Massachusetts: MIT Press. Druckman, D. (2000). International conflict resolution after the Cold War. Washington: National Academies press. Jacob Bercovitch, I. W. (2008). The SAGE handbook of conflict resolution. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Ltd. Oliver Ramsbotham, T. W. (2011). The SAGE handbook of conflict resolution. London: Polity. Read More