A READER FOR STUDENTS PROJECT ON PEACE AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

A CHAPTER




ON




A READER FOR STUDENTS PROJECT ON PEACE AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION




BY


M.M. YUSUF
DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO





DECEMBER 2006


Conflict Dynamics and Analysis
Introduction
Every human society at different moments in the history of its development produces and reproduces definite forms and varied conflicts. In other words conflict is existing in every human relationships. These conflicts, in contrast to the position held by traditional sociologists who viewed conflict as an aberration are fundamental and brings about human progress.

Whereas some of these conflicts as we experience in modern Nigeria are retrogressive, their correct resolution would come with great promises for a way forward in the development of the society. That is why many conflict researchers insist that conflict is creative as all great institutions, agencies, programmes and ideas for human development are the outcome of conflict.

This chapter deals with a theoretic perspective to comprehending and analysing conflict. However, in order to provide a theoretical insight on conflict analysis a preliminary observation needs to be raised and clarified. This is that analysing conflict is a process of conflict resolution. For such an undertaking is necessary in a Problem-Solving Approach to conflict resolution. Therefore, in order to avoid repetition I am going to give treatment of the components of conflict analysis under the theoretical insights of structural Problem Solving Approach to conflict.

Conflict: The Concept
The conception of conflict as an undebated notion in conventional sociology becomes widely accepted and used in political and economic sciences. Yet it has never become controversial in its meaning. Except in emphasis pertaining to context of each discipline conflict is defined in all the disciplines as a situation whenever two or more people, groups or states seek to possess the same object or to achieve the same goal, operating at the same position but ploy incompatible role in achieving their purposes.

As I suggested earlier William Zantman confirmed that conflict is an inevitable aspect of human interaction, an unavoidable concomitant of choices and decisions (Zantman, 1991:20). He further pressed that conflict stems from the basic fact of human inter-dependencies – as for individuals to meet their basic needs they depend on active participation of other individuals (Ibid:20)

A conflict may surface at many levels, be it between husband and wife in the domestic setting, between workers and management in the factory and it may manifest itself between larger collectivities like conflicts between classes, religious communities and gender groups or between state and society.

Some theorists have distinguished between conflict and dispute. First a dispute is about negotiable interests that can be settled by compromise, while conflict is about human needs and involves addressing underlying causes for effective resolution.

In a conflict relationship I propose four theses that are necessary:
There must be two or more parties with distinct interest
There must be struggle by each party to control the existing object or space of the struggle
The objective of each party is to neutralise, injure or eliminate the other party
Finally, it is important to recognise that conflict is a form of interaction and a way of achieving some kind of unity even if it involves annihilation of the conflicting parties.

Indeed, the world is going through rapid changes including of concepts, theories and ideas, yet the meaning of conflict has not completely changed except an emphasis that because of deep contradictions as a result of interactions in a globalising world people, groups, classes and states are living in a permanent conflictual relationship.

Social Conflict: The Phenomenon
In Conflict Analysis it is important to distinguish between social conflict and non-social conflict. The later is a one-party conflict, an intra-personal or individual in conflict with nature or with environment or with self. The former on the other hand involves at least two parties of distinct groups in a larger society.

It may be further realised that there are varied forms of social conflict each with differing characteristics and outcome in Conflict Analysis. There is institutionalised and non-institutionalised conflict. The former is a conflict between two organised bodies e.g. a conflict between workers and management. That is industrial conflict. The latter is a conflict of a disorganised character e.g. racial conflict, riot (regardless of organised effort to initiate it), rebellion, revolt, etc. Another type which traditional conflict, researchers termed ‘realistic conflict is characterised by opposed means and ends – by incompatibility of values and interests e.g. religious conflicts. Furthermore, there is conflict of right and conflict of interest. Where there is Agreement between two parties and one refused to be bound by some provisions of the Agreement the conflict that would arise is called conflict of right. Or if there is Agreement and one party changes the Agreement without consent of the other is called conflict of interest. Example of these is the protracted ASUU-FGN industrial disputes and conflict in the 1990s.

Social notion of conflict has taken another dimension in peace and conflict studies in the contemporary era of globalisation. There is no doubt that the human society in the last quarter of century has witnessed profound transformations, unprecedented in human history. This development can be observed in pursuit of free market policies in the World Economy, proliferation of Information Technology which has reduced the distance and space of the globe, the increasing westernisation of our culture and politics, living in the world where National bounders are increasingly becoming irrelevant and most importantly the people in developing countries being forced to be governed in a hollowing democracy.

There is an existing debate in the literature on peace and conflict studies that this new development would vanished all sources of social conflict and bring peace while on the other hand others argued that globalisation brings fundamental changes in the spatial and temporal terrain of social existence which brings shifts of forms of human activity which the outcome are all sorts of conflict. According to this view which can be seen everywhere around us the transformation comes with simultaneous processes of integration and fragmentation; of solidification and individualisation; and of social selection and social exclusion. As Charles O. Lerche (2006) observed “All levels of society are being reshaped by this process: the individual may find her/his livelihood threatened or identity thrown into question; localities and whole regions are forced to recreate themselves or die in the face of new economic forces; and nation-states themselves experience steadily decreasing freedom of action and ever closer ties with each other”.

Why must we not say that these produce social conflicts? And that social conflict exists instead of peace. At any rate, the concept of social conflict helped to guide Conflict analysis based on structuralist Problem Solving Approach because both are concerned with human needs of the people.

Conflict Analysis: Theoretical Perspectives
There is no doubt to assert that there are volumes of research output on peace and conflict in Nigeria. Particularly covering ethnic and communal conflicts. The studies are rich in empirical data but weak in their theoretical insights. I am not surprised that many of these studies, sponsored by donor agencies, separate theory from data.

A survey of the literature on peace and conflict studies reveals many theoretical approaches which could help in Conflict Analysis. These theories are also called theories of conflict resolution. These include among others the following:
Conflict resolution as a psychoanalysis
Conflict resolution as a decision-making
Conflict as a conspiracy i.e. the conspiracy theory
There is also rising expectations and frustration aggressive theory
There is historical antecedents model of violence and conflict
Conflict resolution through communication
Power relations theory
There is also Marxist theory of conflict and conflict resolution.

These theories of conflict signifies that each one of them has different assumptions which could explain a conflict in order to manage it. For example the conflict between the Tivs and Jukuns in Taraba State is analysed at one level as a result of unfair distribution of land against the Jukuns which breeds conflict between them. At another level it is said that both Jukuns and Tivs are lovers of war, therefore when they live in one community they would be fighting each other. Each of these levels of analysis will produce different explanations and outcome of the conflict between Tivs and Jukuns.

In this respect, since people are the ones directly affected by conflict, and in order to develop a generic perspective which will capture essentially the peoples’ needs in any form of conflict, it is necessary to get alternative theoretical perspectives which will give broader frame of reference in Conflict Analysis.

The structural Problem Solving Approach is the alternative theory. The emphasis of the theory is on individuals, their unfulfilled needs and their inter-relations with other people. There are two perspectives in this theory. These are:
Structuralist perspective
Human needs theory perspective

Structuralist Perspective
The most remarkable scholar and founder of the structuralist school was Johan Galtung. For Galtung, the central problematic of economic relations, between individuals, groups or nations is “the tremendous, inequality within and between nations, in almost all aspects of human living conditions, including the power to decide over these living conditions, and the resistance of this inequality to change” (Galtung, 1971:81). This inequality is seen to manifest in conflict and violence between individuals, groups and nations.

Galtung introduced a triangle of violence which he called direct violence (aggressive assault or murder), structural violence (death by systemic problems such as poverty and malnutrition) and cultural violence (prejudices that blind us or seek to justify injustice). This reveals that in Nigeria for example, we are in all kinds of conflict and violence – ethnic, religious, industrial, political, and others – because of structural imbalances in the society.

Human Needs Theory Perspective
Essentially, Human Needs theory develops further our understanding of the nature and underlying causes of social and structural conflict and what it means to be human. John Burton was the most remarkable scholar of Human Needs theory of conflict analysis and conflict Resolution.

John Burton maintains that structural changes affect the basic human needs and behaviour of the people. He attributes a great deal of conflict to failure to recognise the frustration of the basic human needs (Burton, 1979:79). Furthermore, John Burton specified that needs theory regards need satisfaction as a stepping stone on the path to a harmonious society.

Accordingly human behaviour is the most important factor to be considered in the process of conflict resolution. Human behaviour is in this context defined to be the needs, values and interests of human beings which must be the issues touched on any conflict whether it is between individuals, groups or state or between the state and the people.

Structural Problem Solving Approach
This paradigm of Conflict Analysis integrates the principles of structuralist theory and of Human Needs theory perspective. Thus, it is called structural Problem Solving Approach.

While the structuralist aspect is derived from Johan Galtung, the Problem Solving dimension is derived from John Burton. In order to drive his position conclusively Burton states that “Problem-Solving at the social level – be it the small groups, the nation state or interactions between states – is possible only by processes that take the needs of individuals as the basis for analysing and planning” (Burton, 1979:80)

The Problem-Solving Approach has three essential features which makes it outstanding as a light for conflict Analysis and conflict Resolution:
First, it digs into the economic relations of domination to bring out the characteristics which produce discontent between individuals, groups or nation-states
Second, rather than carried away by violence and disruptions that are the manifestations of such problems, the Problem-Solving Approach investigates the underlying and causal causes of the problem.
Thirdly, John Burton stressed that “Problem-Solving implies that, in order to reveal the nature of conflict and the sources of particular conflicts, the approach must be analytical. It must include not only clarifications of terms and concepts, but also questioning of assumptions” (Burton, 1990:5).

The Structural Problem-solving Approach model can be created and displayed as Conflict Analysis Map which can be adapted in any case study. The Map is as follows:
Conflict context which will examine the history, origin and sources of the conflict.
It takes into consideration the environment of the conflict which takes note of the strengths and or weaknesses of the parties; the issues; the dynamics; the possibilities of having more than two parties; socio-economic and political development; cultural differences; spread and escalation of violence; etc.
Documentation of knowledge and information about the case
Use of Third Party approach when there is a need
Presence and/or efforts of external parties to influence the conflict

Thus, the above as conflict Analysis Map could result automatically to conflict resolution as problem-solving. Which means that the outcome is not an end of the exercise because it would bound to create another set of relationships – either of peace or more conflicts.

Conclusion
Conflict Analysis is a fundamental requirement of conflict resolution. In another context they are the same because as you are on a process of conflict resolution you are just analysing conflict. A successful transformation of conflict into peace requires an understanding of the conflict. One is knowledge and information about the parties, the issues, the origin and history of the conflict as well as the environment of the conflict. Second, there is need of experts in conflict analysis. This is the rational of having a Third party in conflict resolution. Finally and most importantly, there is a need of a Theoretical Paradigm which will help in discovering the issues, understanding the parties and collecting relevant information and analysing the problem. By the time you are doing this you are already resolving conflict.

References
1. Zantman I. William (1999): Conflict Resolution in Africa. Washington: The Brookings Institution

2. Charles O. Lerche (2006): “The Conflicts of Globalisation”. The International/Journal of Peace Studies: Vol.3

3. Samir Amin (2000): “Economic Globalisation and Political Universalism”. Journal of World Systems Research Vol.3

4. Coser, L.A. (1968): Conflict: The Social Aspect. New York: Fresh Press

5. Johan Galtung (1971): “A Structural Theory of Imperialism”. Journal of Peace Research Vol.8 No.4

6. Johan Galtung (1969): “Violence, Peace, and Peace Research”. Journal of Peace Research No.3

7. Johan Burton (1979): Deviance, Terrorism and War: The Process of solving unsolved social and political problems. Oxford: Martin Robertson.

8. Johan Burton (1990): Conflict: Resolution and Provention. London: Macmillan.

9. Fred E. Jandt (1973): Conflict Resolution through Communication. New York: Harper and Row Publishers

10. James Petras and Kent Trachte (1978): “Liberal Structural and Radical Approach to Political Economy”. James Petras (ed.) (1978): Critical Perspectives on Imperialism and Social Class in the Third World. New York and London. Monthly Review Press.