Theoretical Concepts on different schools on resolving conflicts The Conflict Management School Peacebuilding – Debated Context Conflict is a divergence of interests, views or behavior between persons or groups, and is normal in any society. When dealt with in a constructive way, conflict can lead to positive outcomes for individuals and society. However, conflict can also lead to violence when channeled destructively. Since the end of World War II there had been 228 armed conflicts in 148 locations around the globe. In 2004 the number of wars and armed conflicts was estimated to range from 30 (Harbom and Wallensteen 2005) to 42 (Schreiber 2005) depending on the definition of armed conflict. There are different definitions of armed conflict in the literature. Their common determinants are that armed conflicts involve organized, armed groups, in most cases with the government as a party to the conflict. Peacebuilding – Debated Context The Uppsala Conflict Data Program (www.pcr.uu.se/research/UCDP) is frequently used data sets in the world. In order to be an Armed Conflict there should be at least 25 battlerelated deaths per calendar year. In order to be a War, there should be at least more than 1000 battlerelated deaths per calendar year. Peacebuilding is understood as an overarching term to describe a longterm process covering all activities with the overall objective to prevent violent outbreaks of conflict or to sustainably transform armed conflicts into constructive peaceful ways of managing conflict. This definition, however, is only partial because it is not entirely clear on the scope and time frame of peacebuilding. Peacebuilding – Debated Context In the peacebuilding discourse, Galtung (1969) distinguishes two forms of peace—negative peace (end of violence) and positive peace (peaceful society at all levels). A narrow definition of peacebuilding based on the concept of negative peace is evident in the 1992 UN Agenda for Peace where the aim of peacebuilding is defined as preventing large scale violence or the recurrence of violence immediately after wars or armed conflicts (1-3 years, maximum 5 years). A wider definition sees the end of peacebuilding when a positive peace has been achieved. Thus Positive Peacebuilding aims at preventing and managing armed conflict and sustaining peace after large-scale organized violence has ended in order to create conducive conditions for economic reconstruction, development and democratization. Peacebuilding – Different Schools Four schools of though can be distinguished within peace research. These schools use different terminologies, and have different conceptual understandings, approaches and actors. The history of these schools of thought is closely linked to the history and evolution of the field of Peacebuilding. They are namely: The Conflict Management School The Conflict Resolution School The Complementary School The Conflict Transformation School The Conflict Management School The approach of the Conflict Management school is to end wars through different diplomatic initiatives. This is the oldest school of thought, closely linked to the institutionalization of peacebuilding in international law. The peacebuilders within the logic of this school are external diplomats from bilateral or multilateral organizations. Its theoretical approach is referred to as outcome-oriented approach, which aims to identify and bring to the negotiating table leaders of the conflict parties. Its main focus is on the shortterm management of the armed conflict. Recent examples include the Camp David agreement and the Sudan peace accord. The Conflict Management School Utilizing a multidisciplinary approach, we could state that the father of conflict management is Thomas C. Schelling, an American economist and Nobel Prize winner, who authored the Strategy of Conflict in 1960. Schelling’s main goal was to lay the foundation for a theory of conflict that would includee the fields of economics, psychology, sociology and the law. Research and theory on conflict management has been further developed by Allan Horwitz, Calvin Morill, James Tucker, Mark Cooney, M.P. Baumgartner, Roberta Senechal de la Roche, Marian Borg, Ellis Godard, Scott Phillips, Bradley Campbell, Willam Ury, Roger Fisher…. Conflict Management Approach is useful in many fields such as Business Management, Law, International Relations, Political Science and also at the personal and intimate level. The Conflict Management School Conflict Management is a process of making progress – developing mutual gains of both parties, achieving agreements, lying foundations for further negotiations or managing the conflict as much as possible to reduce violence. In legal sense – CM is application of existing laws & regulations to ensure the rights & provides remedies that reconcile past prejudices. In the political discourse management of conflict is sharing of power and privileges. Two schools of thoughts prevails within CM Discourse Conflict as ‘Pathological & Dysfunctional’ – needs to be suppressed or end it. Conflict as functional means for ‘Social Change’ – constructive social process. The Conflict Management School Power mediation is a special form of conflict management, with the same criteria as the outcome-oriented approach but including the possibility of applying external power, including financial carrots and/or military sticks, on the parties. Examples include the 1995 US mediated peace treaty for Bosnia, when the US linked reconstruction support to a peace agreement, and threatened the bombing of Bosnia-Serb artillery in case no agreement was reached. There are two forms of interventions in Conflict Managements : The Conflict Management School What forms and means used to for conflict interventions: Right - based Approach – Legal Interest – based Approach – Alternate Right –based approach is the use of the existing legal instruments for interventions in conflicts such as litigations & arbitration procedures through courts & police. Interest – based approach look for mediation, negotiations, and other collaborative methods for conflict interventions. The Conflict Management School Strategies of CM are: force, withdrawal, collaboration, accommodation, compromise, consensus, passive acceptance, cheating, lying, requesting, maneuvering, pressuring, threatening, demanding, monitoring, arguing by rules, staying neutral, exploiting etc. The preference for a particular CM procedures depends upon the time and context. Most used approaches for intervening conflict through CM approaches are: Negotiation Mediation in Conflict Arbitration in Conflict Litigations in conflicts The Conflict Management School Critique of Conflict Management The Conflict Management school has been criticized because mediators tend to concentrate solely on the top leadership of the conflicting parties, are not always neutral (in internal conflicts), and the approach overlooks deep causes of conflicts and thus cannot guarantee long-term stability of the peace agreement. Many criticize that CM only work on to establish Negative Peace and completely undermines the aspects of Positive Peace. It is only involves the High Level People completely undermining the role of the other people or civil society thus neglecting the people’s concerns and needs. The Conflict Resolution School • There are three approaches to act or intervene on any conflict. They are: – Rights Based Approach – Interest Based Approach – Need Based Approach • Conflict resolution as a discipline diverged from power-based conflict theory, which dominated and still dominates political science, and international relations; and converged from psychology and sociology, which was interested in group dynamics, motivation and relationships between institutional structures. • So many view CR & CM as identical but CM is an ‘outcome oriented approach’ whereas CM is a ‘process oriented approach’. The Conflict Resolution School • The foundations of this discipline is emerged in Europe and North America and were particularly shaped in the twentieth century by the first and second world wars. • Principal antecedents of conflict resolution included philosopher and sociologist Georg Simmel (1858-1914) and Gestalt (influential on social psychology) psychologist Kurt Lewin (18901947). Modern conflict resolution scholars, often quote Georg Simmel, for his contribution to the field for his book Conflict, published posthumously in English in 1955. • Other contributors to the development of this schools are Lewis Coser, Kenneth Boulding, Anatol Rapoport, Johan Galtung, John Burton, Peter Wallensteen, Roget Fisher, William Ury, William I Zartman, Edward Azar, Thomas Ohlson, Paul Rogers, Mohammed Abu-Nimer, Roger Fisher, Willam Ury etc. The Conflict Resolution School • This schools was in academic research in the 1970s, adopting strategies from socio-psychological conflict resolution at the interpersonal level. • Normative political theory saw conflict as a competitive struggle to be won by one side. In contrast, needs-based conflict resolution theorists developed a cooperative approach to conflict resolution, focusing on fundamental human needs, to encourage ‘win-win solutions’. • Thus Conflict resolution is any reduction in the severity of a conflict which may involve conflict management, but adopt less extreme tactics; where conflicting parties reach agreement on enough issues that the conflict stops; or removal of the underlying causes of the conflict. • The approach of the Conflict Resolution School is to solve the underlying causes of conflict and rebuild destroyed relationships between the parties. The Conflict Resolution School • Initially in Conflict Resolution school, peacebuilders were mainly Western academic institutions carrying out conflict resolution workshops. The principle of these workshops is to bring individuals from the conflict parties together that are close to or can influence their leaders. Workshops are designed to rebuild relationships between the representatives of the conflict parties and work with them to solve the causes of the conflict. • As the approach evolved, additional participants entered the field, such as international or local NGOs, CSOs, religious leaders who can exerts some influence over conflicting parties. The common features are that all actors work to address the root causes of conflict with relationship-building and long-term resolutionoriented approaches. The Conflict Resolution School The Conflict Resolution School • The methods used in ‘Need Based’ Conflict Resolution are : – Integrative Bargaining Workshop – Analytic or Interactive Problem solving Workshops – Human Relations workshops • Integrative bargaining (Principled Negotiations) involves “both concession making and searching for mutually profitable solutions”. This tries to move beyond position-based bargaining and determine underlying interests • Analytical & problem solving workshop is “nontraditional, nongovernmental approach emphasizing analytical dialogue and problem-solving”. It begins with an analysis of the political needs and fears – Track II Diplomacy. The Conflict Resolution School • Human Relation workshops recognize and deal with dehumanizing biases, discriminations, and prejudices and creates learning environments that contribute to positive interpersonal relations and the self-esteem of all parties • Conflict resolution scholarship, despite its preference for a needs based or cooperation approach to conflict resolution, still acknowledges the place power-based and rights-based methods have in conflict resolution. • Realist theory argues that international security is best achieved through the action of Great Powers which can create regional power balances in unstable regions across the globe, by force or by “geostrategic mediation” • Thus CR is incorporates CM Approach within itself and give the need based dimentions to the theory. The Conflict Resolution School • Thus the approach of the Conflict Resolution school is to solve the underlying causes of conflict and rebuild destroyed relationships between the parties. • Conflict resolution is a process which is worked our with parties 1. Voluntarily – “Ripeness, “Leadership”, “Civil society” 2. Agreement – Big or Small 3. Regulate the issue 4. Stop actions – Ceasefire 5. Implementation of Agreements • Conflict Resolution is a social situation where the armed conflicting parties in a (voluntary) agreements resolve to peacefully live – and/or dissolve – their basic incompatibilities and henceforth cease to use arms against one another. – Uppsala University. The Conflict Resolution School Criticisms of Conflict Resolution Schools • The critics of CR schools points out that CR undermines the basic definition of conflict as Conflict cannot be resolved, it can either managed or transformed to other forms. • Conflict Resolution is not necessary identical with Peace… The definitions is dependent on what the parties wants or can agree to include. • There is a danger that the agreed form of conflict resolution will contain privileges for the armed groups, at the expenses of other interests in the society. • Conflict Resolution school has been highly criticized, especially by supporters of the Conflict Management school, because the process is too lengthy to be able to stop wars and because improving communications and building relationships between conflict parties do not necessarily result in an agreement to end the war. The Conflict Resolution School Criticisms of Conflict Resolution Schools • Most of the critics also criticize that Conflict Resolution is rather a Conflict Manipulation as parties use conflict resolution process whilst in reality, dialogue is only engaged to ‘buy-time’ and increase bargaining power. • Some also criticize that conflicting parties use Conflict Resolution Approach to legitimize their actions and a window of opportunity for them to be a legitimate parties. • Similarly there is also criticism regarding the sustainability of the Conflict Resolution approach as most of the Peace Process which adopt Conflict Resolution Approach has crumbled after certain period of time. Most of the Peace Agreements are violated or broken after sometime. • From 1989 – 2005, there are 144 Peace Agreements which resolved 42 conflicts. So this questions on the approach as a whole regarding its sustainability.