History

Introduction

This eleventh unit first of all defines the term conflict as a reality of social life

which can exist at all levels of society. It also adds that the conflict has the

attribute of being dynamic and not inherently negative or positive. It further

says that the conflict exists when there is an interaction between two or more

individuals, groups or organizations where at least one side sees their thinking,

ideas, perceptions, feelings or will contradicting with that of the other side and

feels that they cannot get what they want because of the other side.

Different types of conflicts have also been provided in this unit. These include

intra-personal conflicts, inter-personal conflicts, intra-group conflicts, intergroup conflicts, intra-state, inter-national and inter-state conflicts. Therefore, in

general the above conflicts can be grouped into two main parts internal conflicts

between individuals and inter-state conflicts.

In the conflict prevention and resolution, different measures have to be adopted

and respect certain rules and procedures. In fact, the preventive measures of

conflicts are based on conflict analysis and assessment from local communities

to the national level and international level. To make this analysis, it is necessary

to understand the background and history of the events and identify all relevant

groups involved and factors and trends that underpin conflicts.

Once the conflict breaks up, the measures to resolve it would be taken by the

community, nation and international community headed by the United Nation

Organisation. Main measures that can be used are negotiation and mediation.

However, in resettling conflicts, there are still different challenges to handle. Most

of them are the lack of conflict mechanism and programmes in local community

which can hinder the prevention and resolution of conflict in the community. At

international level, as a challenge there is the unwillingness of the United Nation

Organisation to develop such mechanisms and programmes.

Key unit competence

Explore ways of preventing and resolving conflicts and violence at national and

international levels.

Learning objectives

At the end of this unit, I should be able to:

• Describe organs responsible for preventing and resolving conflicts and

violence at national and international levels;

• Analyze different ways of preventing and resolving conflicts and violence;

• Assess the challenges encountered during the prevention and resolution of

conflicts and violence.

Introductory activity

From the apparition of human kind on the earth, conflict has been obvious. By

reading books and doing a research on the internet, account for various ways

through which conflicts may occur and suggest ways to solve them. Analyze again

the challenges may be encountered while dealing with conflict.

11.1 Organs and actors responsible for preventing and
resolving conflicts and violence at national and

international levels

Activity 11.1

Analyze and discuss various actors involved in preventing and resolving conflict

and violence at national and international levels.

Conflict is a reality of social life and exists at all levels of society. Conflicts are as

old as the world itself. We learn from history about individuals being in conflict

with each other because of various reasons.

11.1.1 Causes of conflicts

The conflict was already evident in the thinking of the European theorists of

the early modern period. For Nicholas Machiavelli, conflict was a result of the

human desire for self-preservation and power.

For Hobbes, the three ‘principal causes of quarrel’ in a state were competition

for gain, fear of insecurity, and defense of honour. For Hume, the underlying

conditions for human conflict were relative scarcity of resources and limited

altruism. For Rousseau, the “state of war” was born from “the social state” itself.

The trend has not changed even today. Individuals, villages, tribes, political

parties, nations and other types of groups engage in conflicts. Practically each

of us has in one way or the other been involved in conflicts either at family level,

workplace, and many other places.

Generally, a conflict exists when there is an interaction between two or more

individuals, groups or organizations where at least one side sees their thinking,

ideas, perceptions, feelings or will contradicting with that of the other side and

feels that they cannot get what they want because of the other side.

Four main causes of conflict

Structural factors : such as weak states, security concern and ethnic geography;

Political factors: example discriminatory political institutions, exclusionary national

ideologies, intergroup and elite politics;

Economic factors: example widespread economic problem, discriminatory

economic system, poverty, unequal access to national resources and modernization.

Cultural factors: example cultural discrimination, problematic group histories,

emerging dehumanizing ideologies, etc.

Conflicts are dynamic and are not inherently negative or positive. They can

facilitate growth or bring harm to the people involved. Having differences is

something that is ‘natural’; it is how we express such differences and what we do

that can lead to positive or negative experiences for us and those around us. If

we look at conflicts from a positive point of view, they can be a source of positive

change

The escalating or “going up” factors are what contribute towards turning a

conflict into something negative or destructive. The de-escalating or going

down factors are the factors that help to channel the conflict energy into

something positive and constructive. The way conflicts are seen can determines

how to deal with them.

Conflict escalation and de-escalation

Conflict and violence are linked but are not identical. Violence is very often an

expression of conflict, a way of carrying out conflicts. Violence can be used:

• As an instrument of repression by a more powerful conflict party, wishing to

impose its interests upon others;

• As an instrument for the articulation of interests by the weaker conflict parties,

especially if they do not know other ways;

• When conflict parties fail to find other means of carrying out conflicts (dynamic

of escalation).

11.1.2 Types of conflicts

• Intra-personal conflicts: some are conflicts within a person such as

psychological conflicts and decision making conflicts in one person. Though

intra-personal conflicts may play a part in social conflicts, they are not the

subject matter of conflict transformation work but more a concern of therapy

or counselling.

• Inter-personal conflict: conflicts between two or a small number of people;

• Intra-group conflicts: conflicts within smaller (team, organization, family) or

larger groups (religious community, within elites in a country, etc.);

• Inter-group conflicts: conflicts between groups, like organizations, ethnic

groups, political parties;

• Intra-state: conflicts within a country;

• Inter-national, inter-state conflicts: Conflicts between two or more countries

or states.

There are no conflicts that are entirely similar and special features always have

to be kept in mind. There are rules, norms and understandings that try to resolve

each type of conflict.

Domestic disputes are resolved by counsellors or psychologist provided by the

government; for labour disputes, trained mediators or arbitrators might work

well. A similar process can apply to international disputes where a third party is

brought in as discussed later.

11.1.3 Role of the state in conflicts

The state is, according to political science definition, the only legitimate

user of physical violence in a society. Thus, it is almost by definition involved

whenever there is an armed conflict in society. The control of violence is not

the only distinguishing feature. There are also fiscal, territorial and ideological

monopolies. All these roles make the state an actor in conflict as well as an object

of conflict.

If the state is not capable of performing some of these functions, its strength as

an actor diminishes. This is one of the causes of the phenomenon of warlords

that can be observed in different parts of the world and the phenomenon of

state failure which received particular attention since the 1990s.

The dilemma of state in prevention and conflict resolution can be summarized as

follows: if the state is powerful (totalitarian system), it creates counteraction, fear

among the population and pay high cost of the repression in case of resistance;

if it is weak (failed state enable to maintain, order, and collect taxes) it can be

dismissed.

There are many forces which can compete against the state. These forces include

the companies interested in the extraction of minerals, the religious groups

wanting to institute their own order, the political groups ethnically oriented

searching for control of the power. A weak state can create intrastate wars, and

a strong state may do the same. Both may also lead to regional/international

repercussions. 

To find the “ideal” state for lasting peace is not easy. Liberal democracy has been

identified as an appropriate model, but it may not be applicable in every context

and be sufficient to handle all the world’s conflicts.

Traditionally, a firm distinction has been drawn between international and

internal conflicts. The first can be handled by the international institutions (such

as the UN, the International Court of justice and regional organizations), and the

later treated as “home affairs”. 

Figure 11. 1: International conflicts resolutions

Figure 11.2: Modelling of international social conflicts

Internal conflicts, which consist of interactions among individuals, groups

and peoples brought together inside the same borders, are, according to this

thinking, left to the domains of the states themselves and placed outside of

the international bodies. Internal affairs can be submitted to the international

community if the legitimate, the government, ask for such an intervention. This

is a basic principle of the UN Charter and was seen as an untouchable principle

during the Cold War. 

The separation of interstate conflicts from other conflicts is well established.

Most interstate conflicts dealt with territorial issues, notably changes of borders

and the recuperation of an occupied territory, and control over government. The

Cold War saw many interstate interventions to remove or support incumbent

regimes (unilateral interventionism) by a major power. In fact, a larger number

of current governments have come to power through non-democratic process,

coups, revolutions, civil and dynastic arrangements with the support of external

actors.

A more complex situation is if the external actor is supporting a non-state actor

in the other country. This support is regarded as intervention in an internal

conflict between a non-state actor (the rebels) and the government or, in fact,

an interstate conflict where the external actor is only using the non-state actor.

The internal conflicts must be linked to regional dimensions and with the

international efforts to deal with the problems posed by internal conflicts.

Internal conflicts have always implications for regional stability. Neighbour

states can be innocent victims of internal conflicts, but they are also active

contributors to military escalation and regional instability (“spill over”,

“contagion”). Two aspects of the regional dimension of internal conflicts have to

be considered: the effects of internal conflicts on neighbouring states (refugee

problem, economic problem, military problem, instability, war) and the actions

taken by these states with respect to these conflicts (humanitarian, defensive,

protective and opportunist intervention).

Ancient explanation of internal conflicts given like “ethnic grievances” is no more

appropriate because internal conflicts are caused often by power struggles

and ideological differences. Bad leaders are the bigger problem. To prevent this

type of conflict, long term efforts aimed at underlying conditions that make

violent conflicts more likely to happen (economic, political, cultural), focus on

the decisions and actions of domestic elites.

11.1.4 Conflicts and the global system

States and governments are part of the global system. Other actors are very

active on the regional and international level. One of the most important is

the armed- non- states actors. Few of these organizations are recognized by

international community and certainly not by the states against which they are

fighting. They are instead defined variously as terrorists, gangs, bandits, criminal

groups and so on. Such descriptions may sometimes be accurate, sometimes

not.

Some of these organizations enter into negotiations or even win wars. Their

leaders may then appear as reasonable or even enlightened statespersons

despite the labels that have been put on them previously (for instance, Nelson

Mandela in South Africa). Sometimes the organizations turn into political

parties or legitimate armed structures (integrated in national armies). Other

organizations are still recorded as uncivilized, and cruel (the al-Qaida network

led by Osama bin Laden).

Recently (in the 1990s) new groups of actors emerged such as:

• The private companies of mercenaries very active in Africa, South America and

Middle East. They are also militias or paramilitaries; they are locally recruited,

operate with obscure finances and often directed by a leader with political

objectives;

• The trans-state organizations like arms dealers trading in small arms, merchants

dealing in minerals controlled by governments or non-state actors, drug

traders engaged in international cartels and coalitions, or monetary transfers

and money laundering to support war efforts;

• The non-governmental organizations (NGO) called also civil society organization (CSO); they have the ability to act in transnational giving quick answers

that few actors can;

• The legitimate multinational companies operating all over the globe. They

may be involved in the early phases of conflict, as the exploitation of resources

may be at the heart of social dynamics, leading to armed conflict.

The large number of non-state actors illustrates the shortcomings of focusing

only on the interstate system. Many of the non-state groups would not have

been able to sustain themselves without access to other countries.

The term “global system” is appropriate because it includes all these groups

and organizations with numerous different types of actors who use violence as

means to achieve their objectives.

Armed conflicts

“According to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), for example, the

number of active armed conflicts decreased from 52 to 49 in 2016. However,

despite this reduction, 2016 confirms the trend for there to be a significantly

larger number of conflicts in the past three years compared to the period 2007–

13. Comparisons over a longer period show that the number of armed conflicts in

recent years has been equivalent to the number in the period 1990–92. The two

periods 1990–92 and 2014–16 constitute two distinct peaks in the post-cold war

era. Much of the increase in the number of conflicts in 2014–16 stemmed from

the spread of the Islamic State (IS), which often transformed active conflicts and

led them to be recorded as new conflicts in UCDP data. Of the 49 active conflicts

in 2016, 2 were fought between states (India–Pakistan and Eritrea–Ethiopia)

and the other 47 were fought within states and over government (22), territory

(24) or both (1). There is a clear recent pattern for a larger share of intrastate

conflicts to involve troops from other states on the side of one or both of the

warring parties. In 2016 over one-third (38 per cent) of intrastate conflicts were

internationalized in this way. Most of these (13 out of 18) were fought against

Islamist organizations” ( Sipri year book 2017, Uppsala 2018, p.2).

Negotiation on international level to resolve conflicts has become a common and

frequent practice. Many ways are available to deal with conflict. In most cases

conflicts are resolved through efforts of trained government representatives or

diplomats. 

This is an old tradition by which ambassadors were personal representatives of

one sovereign to the court of another. In modern times, electronic communication

has supplanted the individual diplomat when it comes to the establishment of

important international agreements, but the role of person-to-person contact,

even at the highest levels, remains important.

The process of conflict resolution is like a debate. However, diplomacy and

negotiations have elaborated rules and customs. During the Cold War, it

was common to think that if leaders of two major groups meet and talk over

their disagreements, as concerned human beings, peace between longtime

adversaries might be possible. Unfortunately, in some summits between big

powers negotiations were merely artificial; maybe they have improved the

international atmosphere but few things changed. At other times, summit

meetings made things worse because of bad will.

Third parties can also serve as “fact finders”, for example on a disputed border,

identify the number of political prisoners, how large the military forces, economic

situation in a particular region. International organizations have used also them

in various “commissions of inquiry” to evaluate conflicting claims.

Third parties fulfil the diplomatic functions in mediation and arbitration.

Mediators make suggestions that might be agreeable to both sides. Adherence

to their suggestions is voluntary. By contrast, in arbitration both sides agree in

advance to accept the judgment of the arbitrator.

There is no guarantee that all disputes can be resolved by negotiations. A positive

outcome requires a degree of goodwill and a desire to reach an agreement. It

also requires to “bargain in good faith”. There have been cases in which good

faith was not shown. Such cases are exceptions, because the desire for non

violent conflict resolution appears to be strong and widespread.

Application activity 11.1

1. Discuss the various organs responsible for preventing and solving

conflict.

2. Using internet, textbooks, media, analyze causes of armed conflicts in

Africa taking as case study one of the following countries: Sierra Leone,

South Soudan, Somalia, Liberia, Mali, Libya, Nigeria, DRC, Central

African Republic.

3. By giving clear historical examples, distinguish national conflict of

international conflict.

11.2 Strategies used to prevent and resolve conflicts and violence

Activity 11.2

By doing your own research through the internet and books, analyze the ways that

can be used in preventing and solving conflict and violence.

Because conflicts are an integral part of human interaction, one should learn

to manage them in order to prevent escalation and destruction. Throughout

history, individuals and groups used a variety of ways to resolve their disputes or

conflicts, trying to reach a resolution acceptable to all parties. There is a common

belief in all cultures that it is better to resolve disputes/conflicts and to reach an

agreed compromise, because conflict can be a destructive force.

Much can be learned about the different ways in which conflicts have been

prevented in the past. In older practices, resolving disputes was considered a

domain reserved for the wise and the elders of the community (mostly men)

or for religious leaders. But now, conflict prevention has become an important

focus of interest for everyone.

11.2.1 Conflict analysis

In dealing with conflicts, it is necessary to have a better understanding of the

dynamics, relationships and issues of the situation. A detailed analysis of the

conflict from a variety of perspectives must be carried out by exploring the

specific issues and problems that relate to it. This practical process is what

is called “conflict analysis”. It helps to plan and carry out better actions and

strategies by facilitating to:

• Understand the background and history of the current events;

• Identify all the relevant groups involved;

• Understand the perspectives of all these groups and to know more about how

they relate to each other;

• Identify factors and trends that underpin conflicts;

• Learn from failures as well as successes.

The whole dynamic conflict analysis is to be able to move from an attitude of “I

don’t know what the real cause of the conflict is!” to “Now I know why we have this

conflict!”

It is therefore important for the person or group analyzing a situation to gather data

about the positions, values, issues, interests and needs of each party in conflict.

Positions They are what the person says and demands. They contain an

understanding of the situation, the outcome of the conflict and the role that the

conflicting party plays in it. Very often they contain a value as a justification or

legitimization. Positions are formal, official and very often public.

Values are basic principles which are held to be very important and may be used to

justify positions. They can be cultural norms, laws, ethics, etc.

Issues are what the parties claim the conflict is about. They are specific and concrete.

Very often factual problems are less important than relationship problems, though

conflicts are usually framed in factual terms.

Conflicting parties are motivated by their own interests. They may be expressed but

often they are hidden. Frequently, an actor may have several interests in a conflict.

As interests are not essential human needs, they are negotiable and their relative

importance may change with time.

Needs are the fundamental, essential requirements for human survival. They relate

to security, identity, community and vitality of human life. They are not negotiable,

but they may be satisfied in different ways. They are usually unstated or disguised.

Figure 11.3:Interest and needs

Factors related to attitude, behaviour and context of each side have also to be

analyzed. The purpose is to see how these influence each other; to relate these to

the needs and fear of each party; to identify a starting point for the intervention in

the situation. For example, a context that ignores the demands of one group is likely

to lead to an attitude of frustration, which in turn may result in protests.

There are different practical operations which are accomplished in order to achieve

appropriate strategies and actions of resolving a conflict. The most important are:

Stages of conflict

Conflicts change over time, passing through different stages of activity, intensity,

tension and violence. It is helpful to recognize and analyze each stage (see the

next figure).There are:

Pre-conflict: period when there is an incompatibility of goals between two or more

parties, which could lead to open conflict;

Confrontation: when the conflict has become more open;

Crisis: the peak of the conflict, when the tension and/or violence is most intense.

This is the period of war, when people on all sides are being killed;

Outcome/Consequence: One way or another the crisis will lead to an outcome:

defeat, or perhaps call for a cease-fire (if it is a war), negotiations either with or

without the help of a mediator. At this stage the levels of tension, confrontation and

violence decrease somewhat with the possibility of a settlement.

Post conflict: the situation is resolved in a ways that leads to the end of a violent

confrontation, to decrease the tension and to more normal relationships between

the parties. The problems are not completely addressed, that is why another crisis

can happen again.

Figure 11.4: Stages of conflicts

It is a list of data (years, months, days, location, and actors) which depicts events

in a chronological order. It shows a succession of events and gives examples in

the history of the country. People of opposing sides may have different histories,

emphasize different events, describe them differently, and attach contrasting

emotions to them. The aim of using timelines in this way is to try to arrive at a

“correct” or “objective” history of the conflict and to understand the perceptions

of the people involved. The timeline is also a way for people to learn about each

other’s history and perceptions of the situation. The aim to reach is the point

where the parties in a conflict can accept that others may have valid perceptions,

even if these are opposed to their own.

Conflict mapping

Mapping is a technique used to represent a conflict graphically, placing the

parties in relation both to the problem and to each other. When people with

different view points map their situation together, they learn about each other’s

experiences and perceptions.

Conflict tree

This exercise answers the following questions:

In many conflicts there will be a range of opinions concerning questions such as:

• What is the core problem?

• What are the root causes?

• What are the effects that have resulted from this problem?

• What is the most important issue for our group to address?

The Conflict Tree offers a method for a team, organization, group or community

to identify the issues that each of them sees as important and then sort these

into three categories:

1. Core problem(s)

2. Causes

3. Effects

This tool offers also a way of identifying positive and negative forces and to

assess their strengths and weaknesses.

Pillars

There is a range of factors or forces called the ‘pillars’. If we can identify these

pillars and try to find ways to remove them or minimize their effect on the

situation, we will be able to topple a negative situation and build a positive one.

Figure 11.6: Conflicts mapping pillars

Having looked at the pillars that support the conflict, problem or unjust situation,

the next step is to devise definite actions or strategies that could address each

pillar and weaken or remove it. The Pillars tool can help to see at a glance how

feasible it is to intervene.

This diagram does provide an opportunity to consider which other individuals,

groups or organizations could become allies, and to learn from their constructive

actions already taking place.

Figure 11.7: Land conflicts pillars in Rwanda

Pyramid

Conflicts can have more than one level. With this method, key parties or actors at

each level are identified. This type of analysis helps to locate resource people who

are strategically placed and embedded in networks that connect them vertically and

horizontally within the conflict. These are people who have the ability to work with

counterparts across the lines of division. Therefore they can be key allies for working

within the various levels as well as working simultaneously at all levels.

11.2.2 Intervention in conflict

Dealing with conflicts is called differently: “conflict management,” “conflict

resolution”, “conflict transformation”, “conflict mediation”, “consensus building”, etc.

Most of the theorists and practionners prefer to use “conflict resolution”.

Nations, groups, and individuals have tried throughout history to manage conflicts

in order to minimize the negative and undesirable effects that they may pose to

them.

The possible outcomes can be win-lose (one wins, the other loses), or compromise

(parties settle their difference or win-win). But the common outcome in violent

conflicts is that both parties lose. 

Because conflicts are an integral part of human interaction, one must learn

to manage them, to deal with them in a way that will prevent escalation and

destruction, and come up with innovative and creative ideas to resolve them.

Negotiation

Negotiation is a process in which parties to a conflict discuss directly possible

outcomes. Parties exchange proposals and demands, make arguments, and

continue the discussion until a solution is reached, or an impasse declared. The

goal of negotiation is to reach an agreement that is acceptable to all parties, to

which they remain committed, and which they indeed implement.

In negotiations there are many approaches to resolving the conflict. For

example, negotiators can focus on the discussion about the interests of parties.

Because there are many interests underlying any position, a discussion based on

interests opens a range of possibilities and creative options, but positions may

not be reconciled and can lead to the fail of the negotiations. That is why the

dialogue on interest should be transparent, in order for the parties to arrive at

an agreement that will satisfy the needs and interests.

Another possibility is when the parties attempt to resort to what they consider to

be their rights. This means appealing to the court (local, national or international)

in a legal process in which the law is the dominant feature.

Negotiations are based on the following basic principles:

1. Separate the people from the problem: The participants in a negotiation

have with different perceptions, beliefs, viewpoints and emotions. Taking

positions makes things worse because people tend to identify with their

position and feel that they are personally attacked when their position is

threatened. In negotiation the “people side” must be treated separately

from the factual issues. Ideally, participants should also see themselves

working side by side attacking the problem, not each other.

2. Focus on interests, not positions: The object of negotiation is to satisfy

underlying needs and interests. To take and hold on a position will not

lead to agreements that take care of human needs. Thus the focus should

be on interests.

3. Invent options for mutual gain: Trying to decide on an agreement

under pressure will not lead to good results. In negotiation partners

must take time to look for a wide range of possible solutions before

trying to come to an agreement. If there are many options, there is more

chance of finding solutions which advance shared interests and reconcile

differences.

4. Use objective criteria: Agreement must reflect some fair standards. These

standards are not subjective criteria of one participant; rather they should

be shared by all participants and objectively verifiable.

5. Finally, active listening is the most important and difficult skill needed for

negotiator or mediator to succeed in the negotiation process.

On international level, it was a common understanding, in recent past, that

only diplomats conducted international negotiation and agreements between

countries. Negotiating today is not restricted to the diplomatic corps; it involves

also various actors such as professional people, experts, non-governmental

organizations, local interested groups, local authorities, international entities,

etc.

Today it is realized that conflicts and the issues involved are very complex. For

this reason, the international negotiation process is also more complex, because

of the various interdependencies between countries; the outcomes can affect

other nations, a region, or the world.

Mediation

Mediation is a process that employs a neutral/impartial person or persons to

facilitate negotiation between the parties to a conflict in an effort to reach a

mutually accepted resolution. It is a process close to negotiation.

The mediator’s role is multiple: to help the parties think in new and innovative

ways, to avoid rigid positions instead of looking after their interests. In general,

the mediator not only facilitates but also designs the process, and helps the

parties to get to the root of their conflict, to understand their interests, and

reach a resolution agreed by all concerned parties. He/she uses tools such as

active listening, open-ended questions, and his/her analytical skills.

The mediators, who are hired, appointed, or volunteer to help in managing

the process, should have no direct interest in the conflict and its outcome, and

no power to render a decision. The parties agree on the process, the content

presented through the mediation, and the parties control the resolution of the

dispute.

Because the participation of the parties and the mediator is voluntary, the

parties and/or the mediator have the freedom to leave the process at any time.

The mediator may decide to stop the process for ethical or other reasons, and the

parties may decide that they are not satisfied with the process. The agreement,

which is reached between the parties, is voluntary; the parties own it and are

responsible for implementing it. The agreement is validated and ratified by the

courts.

Mediation has a special advantage when the parties have ongoing relations that

must continue after the conflict is managed. Since the agreement is by consent,

none of the parties should feel they are the losers. Mediation is therefore useful

in family relations, disputes between neighbours, in labour relations, between

business partners, and political parties. It creates a foundation for resuming the

relation after the conflict has been resolved.

There are several different approaches and mediation models: the model of comediation, the model of a single mediator, and the model of a panel of mediators.

Co-mediation has many advantages, but only if the mediators are compatible and

know how to work together. If however the mediators do not know one another,

or are not compatible, the process may work better with a single mediator. 

Cultural issues play a major part in international negotiation, and have a

significant impact on it. Issues such as personal relations, mode of bargaining, and

hierarchy, are culturally based; they need to be considered during negotiations

between different nations, societies, or ethnic groups.

Single mediation is a very common model which is used for many reasons,

and because mediators enjoy working alone and be in control of the process.

Experienced mediators who work alone do excellent work.

The model of a panel of mediators is used in very complex cases that involve

multi-party mediation. The models vary in terms of the methods, the techniques,

the process of mediation, and in the particular circumstances of the conflict in

question.

Mediation plays an important role in international conflicts. The mediator in

international conflicts can be a private individual who is an international figure,

a religious personality, an academic scholar, a government representative, an

international organization, or some other person or body, depending on the

nature of the dispute.

West African Women as Ambassadors of Peace—The Mano River Story

“Women were struggling for peace across the Mano River countries of Sierra

Leone, Liberia, and Guinea throughout the 1990s. But their successes were shortlived as conflict in one country inevitably affected the others. In 1999, believing

that the solution could be found through regional peace efforts, women from

the three countries joined together to form the Mano River Women’s Peace

Network (MARWOPNET). Lobbying regional security organizations, training

women in communities, issuing public declarations, organizing protests and

directly meeting with leaders across the region became the network’s trademark.

In recognition of their important role in bringing the parties to the table,

MARWOPNET was a signatory to the August 2003 peace agreement in Liberia.

The UN recognized their efforts in December 2003, awarding them the annual

United Nations Prize for Human Rights”. (INCLUSIVE SECURITY, SUSTAINABLE

PEACE: A Toolkit for Advocacy and Action, London: 2004)

In individual conflicts the mediator is an impartial neutral third party. In

international conflicts the mediator is not always impartial, or neutral, and

may have his/her own agenda, status, interests, and power, which may be used

during the process. In that case, the mediator becomes part of, and party to, the

negotiation process.

The mediation process works under three basic principles. One, the principle

of the parties self-determination which means parties resolve their differences

without coercion but freely. This also means that the mediator helps them to

make informed choice or decision. Two, the mediator is impartial, meaning that

the mediator has no personal interest or benefit in the issue. Three, the mediator

should keep proceedings private and confidential.

Application activity 11.2

1. Take any case of conflict and analyze its pillars using the diagram

showing the issues and dynamics of the conflicts

2. Make analysis on how the conflict develops.

3. The negotiations are the common way used in helping people in

conflict. Do any analysis and discussions on the basic principles of

negotiations.

11.3 Challenges encountered during the prevention 

and resolution of conflicts and violence

Activity 11.3

By using internet, textbooks, journals and reports make a research on prevention

and resolution of conflicts and violence and examine the challenges encountered by

the peacemakers in conflict prevention and resolution process.

Solving conflicts completely is impossible. We have seen that conflict is part of

the daily life. What is needed to achieve a lasting peace is to prevent escalation

so that it does not become crisis with killings of human beings and destruction

of social and material structures.

Practitioners say that peace begins within each individual and then spread

out. This implies not only examining one’s life and making changes that are

consistent with one’s beliefs life but also identifying those personal attitudes

and behaviour that reinforce systems of oppression. Such self-examination may

lead to some painful recognitions and decisions recognizing how one’s life may

have at times contributed to the oppression of others. The question is that not

everyone is ready to engage in that process unless there is awareness action

with that aim. This can be initiated by the state, the international institutions or

civil society organizations.

Lack of conflict mechanism and programmes in local community can hinder

the prevention and resolution of conflict in the community. Not all countries or

communities have such experience. Rwanda is among the countries who have

elaborated such kind of programmes because of its particular tragic experience. 

The government has established mechanisms to protect and fight against

genocidal ideology and to resolve conflicts on the community level (like

Mediation and Gacaca courts). Public and private media are also involved in this

education campaign as well as some civil society organization like Never Again,

for example.

Peace operations in Africa

“Africa remained the primary focus of peace operations. As recommended in the

report by the UN High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (the HIPPO

report), the UN, the African Union (AU) and the Regional Economic Communities

and Regional Mechanisms are deepening their partnerships. Funding African

operations is still one of the main challenges. In 2016 the AU Assembly of Heads

of State and Government decided to increase the AU contribution to the funding

of all AU peace support operations to 25 per cent by 2020, by means of a 0.2 per

cent import tax on “eligible imports” into the continent. However, African actors

will remain dependent on external funding in the short to medium term and

some external actors—particularly the EU and its member states—are becoming

less generous and more demanding. This presents financial challenges for several

African peace operations, some of which face potential closure as contributors

consider withdrawing their troops” ( SIPRI YEAR BOOK 2017, Uppsala: 2018, p.7).

Minimizing oppressive personal relationships may be a prerequisite for helping to

alleviate the oppression of others. The world will be better and less violent place

if each individual makes peace in his or her own life (inner peace). Commitment

in the struggle for peace may require conflict – preferably non violent – with

existing authorities if meaningful change has to happen.

The best scenario is a national context which is conducive because sensitive to

conflict prevention and resolution by having appropriate policies, especially the

programmes targeting to fight against the potential roots of conflict or to solve

those which have emerged.

On a wide scene, contemporary armed conflicts encompass different levels from

international level (global, regional, bilateral), through national state level, down

to societal level. This is what makes them so hard to resolve or transform.

The ambivalent role played by the state at the national level, the same time the

main actor on the international scene, obliges actors in conflict transformation,

to operate simultaneously at all these levels, including vertical relations up and

down across the levels from the grassroots up to the international, and horizontal

relations across and between all the social actors involved.

There has been a shift from seeing third-party intervention as member of external

agencies towards appreciating the role of internal ‘third parties’ or indigenous

peacemakers. Instead of outsiders offering the space for addressing conflicts,

the emphasis is on the need to build constituencies and capacity within societies

and to learn from domestic cultures how to manage conflicts in a sustained way.

Emphasis is placed on the importance of indigenous resources and local actors.

The world has become one global village. Distances are smaller, communication

means are easier and faster, and the economy has become a major factor in

international relations. A conflict between two or more countries may affect a

whole region. We live in a new and changing world, in which negotiation plays a

major role in resolving these conflicts.

The multilateral arena is more complex than bilateral because there are many

parties, and many issues and interests are at stake. The international community

has not yet been able to manage this complex situation.

Key challenges to conflict prevention remain in international affairs. Many states

in the South are concerned that conflict resolution can be abused as a pretext for

the big powers to violate the sovereignty of the weak. These concerns have been

somewhat verified in the past couple of years. It is the case of recent operations

in Libya.

Concerns about violations of sovereignty persist, as do suspicions about

the underlying motivations behind the use of military power for ostensibly

humanitarian purposes, and perceptions that, even when well-intentioned,

the application of force can potentially have troubling and unpredictable

consequences.

In the field of conflict prevention, the prevailing perception about the

performance of the international community is that recent attention on the issue

has been more rhetorical than practical in addressing emerged and ongoing

crises.

Lack of international community ownership regarding some crises: the actions

of the United Nations are limited with insufficient humanitarian activities and in

some cases (like in Darfur crisis), the international community’s will is oriented by

the big powers such as the USA and China. To some extent, China was mandated

to play a more role to end the conflict in Darfur. Therefore, the conflict became

insignificant to the UN which delays the action to be taken in order to stop it.

Unwillingness of the UN to develop a conflict resolution mechanism capable of

managing crisis also is another challenge in process of conflict resolution. This

unwillingness is a result of the misperception of the existence of glob threats by

states and non-states actors.

Such willingness can be also resulted from the division within international

community based on different interests each member state can find in conflict.

In case of intra-state conflict, some states are not able to address the menace

of the proliferation of small arms and light weapons in polity with functional

policies. This enables different groups to get armed and able to challenge the

national security. As a result, the government is seen as a weak and failed state.

Even the civil society is not able to act in order to prevent the conflict.

Some states also failure to tackle the immediate and root causes of conflict

holistically. After many years of neglect the government can fail to really solve

many cases of injustice, poverty, unemployment and issues of resource control.

In addition, the state failure to address early warning signs and early response

systems can greatly affect the conflict prevention and resolution.

Conflict and the feminization of poverty

“Violent conflict is often said to be a trigger for the “feminization of poverty,”

meaning that women are increasingly found among the ranks of the poor. This

happens partly because of the increasing proportion of households headed

by, and dependent on, women (usually around 30–40 percent in post conflict

transition societies). Female-headed households are thought to be particularly

vulnerable. One difficulty female-headed households may face is inadequate

labor resources, especially in agricultural communities, because there are few

adult men and the adult women are occupied with domestic work. Another

is that without men they are not well linked into the networks that control

marketing, supplies, community decision-making and have poor links to power

structures. Despite their vulnerability in society at large, there are also instances

where members of female-headed households fare better than others, since

female caregivers prioritize the family’s welfare. Also depending on the cultural

conditions and the extent to which war has diminished traditional male roles in

the economy, women often find new public outlets for trading and other incomegenerating activities. In Somaliland, the absence of government regulation

has provided opportunities for business to flourish. This has been positive for

women in some ways, because they now occupy increasingly important roles

in trade. But such changes are often temporary. Typically, after war, women

are forced out of jobs and put under pressure to give control of resources to

men. The challenge for those wishing to support female household heads is

to increase their entitlements (i.e. strengthen their position when it comes to

making claims on authorities or on other members of the community). This can

be done by changing legislation and policies, raising awareness among women

of their rights and supporting their efforts to voice their needs. However, this

is difficult to achieve when all households are likely to be unusually vulnerable

and when new systems of governance and legislation are not yet in place.

In these circumstances women rely more extensively on mutual support”.

(INTERNATIONAL ALERT, INCLUSIVE SECURITY, SUSTAINABLE PEACE: A Toolkit for

Advocacy and Action, London, 2004)

Application activity 11.3

1. In the section 11.3 you have been exposed to the challenges faced

during the prevention and resolution of conflicts and violence.

From your own research, suggest the appropriate solutions to those

challenges.

2. Discuss with example the involvement of western countries in conflicts

as a challenge to armed conflict resolution in Africa.

3. Explain how natural resources constitute challenges to conflict

resolution.

End Unit assessment

1. “Conflict is a reality of social life and exists at all levels of society”. Discuss

this assertion

2. In January 2000, over half of the countries in Africa were affected

by conflicts (gsdrc.ogr/document-library/causes-of-conflicts-in-Africa/).

Analyze the causes and impacts of conflicts in sub Saharan Africa.

3. While solving conflicts, one among the ways used is negotiations.

The mediator must fulfill some qualities to be said as good mediator.

Explain the basic qualities that may possess a good mediator.

4. Explain challenges that may occur when resolving a family conflict.

5. Based on your personal experience, what kind of conflict that may

rise at school? Explain their possible causes and how they can be

prevented.

GLOSSARY

Ambivalent: Uncertain or unable to decide about what course to follow

Constituency: The body of voters who elect a representative for their area or a

district represented by one or more elected officials

Dilemma: State of uncertainty or perplexity especially as requiring a choice between

equally unfavourable options

Escalating: Increasing in extent or intensity

Incumbent: Necessary (for someone) as a duty or responsibility; morally binding

Practitioner: Someone who practices a learned profession

Prerequisite: Something that is required in advance

Ratify: Approve and express assent, responsibility, or obligation

Sovereignty: Government free from external control

Therapy: the act of caring for someone (as by medication or remedial training etc.)

Unpredictable: Not occurring at expected times or Not capable of being foretold