19 Oct 2013, p.4
Islamic and Western approaches to conflict resolution
Dr. Maqsudul Hasan Nuri
In the dominant Western conception, peace is associated with the absence of war or organized
violence and justice with an absence of gross violations of human rights. In addition, peace is
maintained through threat of coercion and institutionalization of regulations and decision-making
procedures. Peace and conflict resolution are mostly thought in terms of rational thinking or
problem solving.
The concept of peace occupies a central place among Islamic precepts where it is closely linked
to justice and human welfare and development. Indeed, peace signifies additional values of
human dignity, economic well-being, harmony and ecological balance. Peace in Islam begins
with Allah and Al-Salam (peace) is one of his most fascinating attribute.
The Muslim approaches to conflict resolution draw on religious values, traditional rituals of
reconciliation and historical practices of communal and inter-communal coexistence. These
mechanisms aim to empower family groups and community members to participate in matters of
common concern and place strong emphasis on linkages between personal and group identity.
Studies of Islamic approaches to peace and conflict resolution provide new angles of insight into
universal human dilemmas as well as important supplementation to studies. These recognize
contemporary Islamic activism not as backward-looking rejection of the modern world but a
deeply felt expression of cultural identity and a critique of domestic as well as international
political orders.
There are mainly five Islamic approaches to peace:
Power Politics: As an instrument, Islam is used for legitimating power and authority and for
preservation of social order.
World Order: Peace is a condition of order defined by the presence of such core Islamic values
as justice, human dignity, cultural coexistence and ecological stability and not merely by
absence of direct violence.
Conflict Resolution by Communication: Traditional Islamic approaches are on reconciliation,
mediation and arbitration. These methods affirm a restorative conception of peace and justice,
encompassing notions of compensations for losses, attentiveness to issues of social esteem,
renunciation for the sake of the whole and forgiveness.
Non-Violence: Peace through Will Power. True adherence to Islam requires non-violent
solidarity against oppression, promotion of renewal through broad-based social movements and
training for programs of direct non-violent action. Only a linkage of just ends with just means can
secure authentic justice, peace and human dignity. Force is resorted to in extreme cases like
self-defence.
Peace through Power of Love: This approach defines peace as a condition of all-embracing
harmony perceived through inward renewal and transformation of human consciousness. The
cultural community is the context and the receptacle of human realization; renewal takes place
within each person through inward cleansing and by loving surrender to the Divine.
Conflict resolution levels and processes are implemented in Western and Islamic cultures in
different ways. The assumption, practices and roles of the third party are very different. The
West has a distinctive and professional approach that is different from Islamic societies where
intervention in conflict resolution is used only where traditional norms legitimize such actions.
In the Western context, conflict is normal, positive, and can bring growth and creativity, based
on co-operative frameworks. Any conflict is managed through rational planning, with legal
formality and procedures, leading to a written agreement that is task-oriented. In the Islamic
context, conflict is mostly considered as negative and non-productive phenomenon which brings
disharmony and conflict in societies. Group affiliation is the central identity in a process in which
social norms and hierarchical procedures prevail over legal forms, characterized by emotion and
spontaneity leading to a relationship-oriented outcome.
The main features in the West of a third party in conflict resolution are professionalism,
impartiality, a focus on the individuals\' interests, needs and rights, conformity to legal
procedures and the objective of achieving a fair deal for both parties. The distinctive features in
the Islamic context on the other hand, are the age, experience and credibility of the mediator
and his knowledge of religious learning, customs and norms. The mediator can have a direct or
indirect interest in the dispute. This contributes to his credibility, which is very important.
Qur'an is considered as the highest arbitrator. For this, a human interpreter is required as he
speaks for the Qur'an. Generally, arbitration proves to be more effective as long as no religious
implications are intervened. This means that when dealing with conflict resolution involving
religious groups, the \"divine\" element of the conflict must be taken into account and then
deconstructed into political components. On this basis, arbitration can later work as a method to
solve conflicts.
Reconciliation is usually greeted with distrust unless based on justice and equity. The peace
process in the ME are considered as superficial phenomenon and diplomatic agreements are
linked to capitulation or \"pacification\". Mediators can integrate some principles and symbolic
practices in Middle East reconciliations methodologies - such as sulh (settlement) and musalaha
(reconciliation).
The basic assumption made by Western conflict resolution theorists is that conflicts can and
should be fully resolved. While Arab-Islamic culture is less optimistic, saying that conflicts may
be intractable unless based through principles of justice. The biggest contrast between Western
and non-Western conflict resolution is that the Western approach underscores the primacy of
individual choices in facilitation of the process, whilst the traditional Arab-Islamic process is
communally oriented.
The Western third party relies on guidelines, experience and legal texts but in Arab-Islamic
situations it is based on sacred texts, religious ideals, history and traditions.
The goals of the Western process are pragmatic, trying to achieve a win-win scenario that will
delete the past and usher a new page in history. In contrast, the Arab-Islamic process is
continuity-oriented; history is the source of stability, it shapes the future.
The Western process include structured problem resolution techniques (\"separate the person
from the problem\") which lead to formal, written agreements. In contrast, the Arab-Islamic
approach prioritize the issues - with salience on harmony, solidarity, dignity and prestige.
One of the most important unofficial responses to the conflict in Middle Eastern societies is sulh
and musalaha, which are often simply called \"sulh\". Sulh and Musalaha have their origins in
tribal and village contexts, although not legitimated by Middle Easter states. Today it is used in
many rural areas where state control is not very strong. In Jordan however, the ritual of sulh is
officially recognized.
The purpose of sulh is to end conflict and hostilities so that parties can conduct a relationship in
peace and amity. It is a form of legal contract. In general, there are two types of sulh processes:
public sulh (treaties between two countries - to suspend fighting and to establish peace - for a
specific time period) and private sulh (when both the crime and the guilty party is known and the
purpose is to make sure that revenge will not take place leading to another conflict). The most
common condition is to forget what happened and initiate new and friendly relations. The
mediators in this process are called Jaha - who gain the esteem of the community. The sulh
ritual is not a zero-sum game but \"win-win.\"
Non-Western cultures often consider Western assumptions about conflict resolution provocative
and find them difficult to accept and apply to their circumstances. Due to differences in
approach and methodology in conflict resolution between the Western and Islamic norms,
cultures and traditions, Islamic countries do not feel at home with conflict resolution tools of the
UN and its associated bodies. Inter-state conflict resolution between Muslim states needs
evolution of appropriate structures compatible with Islamic international law, Islamic
jurisprudence and traditions. OIC could provide parentage to such structures. Some suggested
entities could be: OIC Mediation Council OIC Reconciliation Committee; OIC Peace Keeping
Force, including rapid deployment contingents; OIC Observers and Islamic Court of Justice.
____________________________