Conflict resolution, management / transformation and conflict prevention

• Conflict resolution, management /transformation and Conflict Prevention

There are wide ranges of no-violent methods of managing conflict avail to conflict transformation in international system. These methods are available at the individual, family, group, community, & international levels.

The peaceful methods exist in two broad categories. The first is the proactive category, which entails methods that aim to prevent the occurrences of the conflict in the first instance. The second category is reactive, dealing with response to situations that have already turned conflictive, or are potentially so. These include third party interventions like mediation, brokerage, conciliation, arbitration & litigation, etc

Conflict management- is the process of reducing the negative & destructive capacity of conflict through a number of measures & by working with & through the parties involved in that conflict. This term is sometimes used synonymously with’ conflict regulation’. It covers the entire area of handling conflicts positively at different stages, including those efforts made to prevent conflict, by being proactive. It encompasses conflict limitation, containment & litigation.

Conflict resolution -is seen as a variety of approaches aimed at terminating conflicts through the constructive solving of problems, distinct from management. In these activity it is expected that the deep rooted sources of conflict are addressed & resolved, & behavior is no longer violent, or nor are attitudes hostile any longer, while the structure of the conflict has been changed.

Conflict Prevention- on the other hand, has in the past UN parlance been intended to refer to ’purely’ preventive, anticipatory actions & processes that can help reduce the risks of major conflict in a society that not undergone such conflict in the relatively recent past.

Conflict transformation- is assumed that it goes beyond conflict resolution to build longer standing relationships through a process of change in perceptions & attitudes of parties. The aim of conflict transformation is to change the parties, their relationships & the conditions that created the conflict.

Peace-building-conventional UN usage, around which a great deal of analysis & legislation is already built, saw ’peace=building ‘strictly in terms of ‘post=conflict’ actions, usually following on from a UN peacekeeping operation, that might help reduce the risks of renewed major violent conflict in a society than has undergone such conflict in the  relatively recent past.’

NB: the idea of conflict transformation stem from the recognition of the dialectical element of conflict about the inevitability of change, Secondly, it recognizes the neutrality of conflict as such, & that conflict can be either negative or positive, but parties can transform it into positive to maximize opportunities.

• Preliminary considerations in the process of conflict management

Neutral and unbiased positioned are achieved when:

• Just and fair processes are followed in problem identification( you cannot manage or pretend to know),

• Compatible & incompatible interests of the contending groups should be understood,

• A means to restructure the relationships of the contending parties to place them on equal footing( this has to be on amicable basis)

Sustainable peace is achieved when laws, inclinations and governments & traditional structures are understood & used in a synergistic manner. All should also view through the lens of human right.

I: Alternative conflict resolution methods

Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR)- is the about the search for, & application of, ‘non-conservational’ peaceful methods of settling dispute & resolving conflict situation using the least expensive methods, & in ways that satisfy the parties, as well as ways that preserve relationships after a settlement might have been reached.

1.1. Grassroots Community – Based Activities

Long held traditions and cultures which are rich, promote the human spirit, community life, togetherness and clustering of groups, including their neighbors, in such ways that conflict is downplayed.

1.2. Good Governance

Good governance may be defined as the running of the affairs of government in positive and progressive manners beneficial to the governed, and which delivers the public goods. It is a relative term to which there is consensus, but most will agree that is characterized by democratization, maintenance of law and order, accountability & transparency, responsiveness on the part of government, due process, the rule of law, competence, separation and devolution of powers, a free press and a free virile civil society arena, competition for power and the existence of a credible opposition, the respect for minority rights among other human rights, etc.

1.3. Communication

This in this context is the process of sharing and exchanging information between individuals, groups and potential parties in a conflict situation. It is also the process of interacting and relating with others, meaning that parties to a conflict situation still talk. The exchange and sharing of information can help to remove doubt, suspicion and contribute to the process of confidence building. These are essential ingredients of peace building.

1.4. Collaboration

The collaboration process is one in which parties work together on their own, to resolve problems through constructive dialogue or other activities like joint projects, sharing of community schools and health centers, markets, bridges and culverts, as well as other utilities, etc. Collaboration helps to build trust, confidence and mutual respect. It works on the basis of conflict parties, either potential or actual; working together on a number of identifies common themes and issues. Or projects, which intensify communication and activities between them. It takes place at various levels, form the inter-personal to the groups, community, national, regional to the international or universal levels.

1.5. Negotiation

• The oldest form of conflict resolution method at national and international levels
• It is widely used at traditional and formal state structures
• Usually conducted through face-to-face discussion among the conflicting parties.
• It takes place when the conflicting parties believe that the benefit of compromise outweighs confrontations (cost-benefit analysis).
• The goal of negation is to reach agreement through joint decision making between conflicting parties.
• The precondition for negotiation is the agreement on the agenda for discussions.
• To reach an agreement, negotiators search for common interest and narrow the gap between the divergent interests.
• The outcomes have to be acceptable to all concerned.

1.6. Good Offices

• When the conflicting parties are not able to resolve their difference through negotiations, a third party (good office) can help to resolve their differences.
• The third party is a neutral actor that makes it possible for parties to communicate with each other by providing secure channel of communications
• The role of the third party will not allow them suggest compromise or discussion of any substance
• Negotiation has to be conducted in secret through shuttle diplomacy. Intermediaries meet separately with conflicting parties and convey messages back and forth.
• The task of good office could serve as a stepping-stone for further confidence building among adversaries for face-to-face negotiations. Example: UN, diplomats, religious leaders could serve as a forum for this purpose
• Though it is usually used at international arena, it could also be used at domestic (local) level by using individuals or institutions with strong economics. Social and political leverages to settle conflicts if various types and nature made between individuals, groups/clans

1.7. Arbitration

• This form of conflict resolution involves the third party, where the conflicting parties have the rights to submit their claims and counter-clams to judges of their own choice. The judges render a legally binding decision on the form of majority vote (agreement).
• The conflicting parties agree to the procedure and the scope of authority of an arbitration court
• Issues are narrowly defined and separated from broad relations.
• At an arbitration hearing, both parties have opportunities to present arguments, respond to the other side and answer the questions of arbitrators or may be represented by advocates
• A decision is reached based on evidences presented and can focus on technical issues
• There is no middle way to appease the conflicting parties, rather it is ‘win-lose’ type where one gains and other lose (Zero-sum game)
• Currently it is not widely used at domestic level (both at traditional and formal state institutions).

1.8. Judicial Settlement (adjudication)

• Is formal and institutionalized in many ways. The conflict is relatively well defined, and the question investigated have detailed characteristics
• Judicial decisions rely on national law (example, constitution and specific laws) and binding, which is supported by enforcing bodies.
• As in the case with arbitration, the parties have to accept to the settler voluntarily in advance. However, parties do not have the freedom to choose their own judges.

1.9. Conciliation

• Disputes can be investigated by a commission that presents the parties with a set of formal proposals for its solutions.
• The task of conciliation commission is to elucidate the questions in conflict, collect information by means of enquiry and other endeavors to bring the parties to an agreement.
• In consultation with the parties, the councilor determines their own procedure. In the proceeding, all parties have a right to be heard.
• The major responsibility of the Commission is to assist parties in finding a settlement. However, the success also heavily relies on the third party’s ability to secure constructive dialogue in order to secure agreement of adversaries.

1. Mediation (Facilitation)

• Widely used both in traditional and formal state institutions as a means of conflict resolution method in Africa.
• Its basic format is that mutually acceptable solutions are explored under the aegis of a third party aimed at not helping one party, but bringing about mutual agreement.
• The unacceptable costs of a prolonged conflict tend to make both parties ready to engage in indirect dialogue through mediators to overcome the stalemates (cost-benefit analysis).
• Considered as an extended form of negotiations whereby a third party interfaces to change dynamics of particular conflict.
• The functions of mediation is to attempt to establish or re-establish, sufficiently good communication between parties so that they can talk sensibly to each other without being blinded by emotions such as fear, anger, and suspicion.
• There is no coercion from part of mediators; therefore it depends on good will of conflicting parties. In that sense mediation is distinguished from binding forms of conflict resolution and management as adjudication and arbitration that leave ultimate decision-making power with the third party.

• Process followed

• It starts with confirming the consent and willingness of the parties to get involved in the process even through it may be involved by outsiders.
• Participants ought to accept the rules of the process suggested by the third part

• The role of mediators (facilitators)

• Should be able to open quiet communication between the adversaries, arrange a time and conducting face-to-face negotiation and can reframe the issue and elicit further information by asking questions
• Assist in constructing the agreement by suggesting possible solutions for settling differences
• Keep them in separate place and persuade parties to stick to mutually acceptable solution.
• Mediators have to be neutral, keep the secrecy and in case if one party has a lower status, less bargaining power and poor negotiating skill, serious considerations is needed to prevent unfair outcomes.
• Participate in implementation process with conflicting parties. However, the ultimate power belongs to disputants.

1. Problem Solving Workshop

• Ethnic, communal, national or international conflict can be resolved by a collaborative problem solving process. When parties do not trust each other to enter a joint problem-solving situation, the communication patterns need to be improved through changing the perception of traditional elders (leaders).
• In resolving protracted conflict, a collaborative problem solving process can be utilized to overcome deep mistrust and hatred. A problem solving approach conveys a vies that conflict has to be treated as something to be resolved, not to be won through as adversarial process.
• Compared with mediation, a problem-solving workshop relies on facilitation to analyze the causes of conflict and explore solution. Proposals from a third party mostly reflect external interpretation of events.
• Through facilitation designed to confront the emotions and other aspects of the relationship, problem-solving approach focuses on the analysis of motivation, values and goals of the opposing parties. These processes help participants understand the nature of the changes that are necessary n power structure and social relations. Successful facilitation result in reasoning and searching for an instrumental means that satisfies, identifies and security needs at stake.
• In facilitation, parties are placed in a face-face-face analytical and non-bargaining dialogue. They should directly discuss their major concerns
• Presentation of each party is not interrupted by facilitator except for clarification. Shared and non-shared values should be identified by participants themselves
• In facilitated discussion, interests to be negotiated are differentiated from underlying basic motivation and values that cannot be bargained away. Non-negotiable needs have to be recognized given to costs of ignoring and suppressing them. The search for alternative structure, institutions is required to fulfill the needs of those previously deprived. Changes can result from a facilitated dialogue process involving change as well as the disadvantageous group.

• Procedure and rule

• The third party is not engaged in developing proposals or making recommendations but in injecting into the discussion new knowledge and information.
• It promotes direct communication under third party auspices. Free from governmental and diplomatic protocol, informal communication in a relatively isolated setting could be used to develop a task-oriented, analytical approach.
• The unofficial meetings, which can range for the period of seven to ten days of the workshops, take place in the absence of official

contacts. More or less unstructured discussions are conducted under the guidance of facilitators who are knowledgeable about the group process and dynamics of conflict.

• The facilitated process of conflict resolution relies on certain rules for a third party. First, sponsors need to identify the parties and issues relevant to the conflict before designing the process of promoting communication.
• The workshop participants could be drawn from a pool of public figure that can have an impact on decision-making in their own communities. However, they attend the session as private citizens, not as official representative.
• The meetings have to be organized in a relatively unstructured manner to allow the participants to fully explore the sources and solution of the conflict.

• Features and principles (“win-win” approach)

• The purpose of the workshop is to produce a sense of possibility- a belief that a peaceful solution is attainable and feasible through dialogue
• The workshop approach to interactive communication provides several innovative ways of dealing with conflict.

1. The main task of the workshop is to restructure conflict by identifying and understanding each other’s needs – to stop adversarial approach.
2. The facilitated discussion based on the principles of reciprocity does not depend on the compromise and abandonment of goals by the parties but rather understanding of the underlying issues for building a new relationship – not win-lose outcome.
3. Mutual understanding that emerges through facilitated meeting foster the realization that satisfies basic needs of all parties and is interdependent or compatible.
4. The enterprise is geared toward changing the perception of adversaries. The socio-psychological process cultivates the potential for producing changes in the participants’ belief and attitudes towards creative problems solving.
5. It builds consensus on a framework and a set of principles, which can utilize in formal negotiation. This process in turn serves for transforming the relationship between enemies, establishing an informal structure for future contacts based on the experience of fashioning the possibility of solutions to seemingly intractable conflict.

1. Reconciliation

• Long-standing conflict cannot be resolved without overcoming hatred. The acknowledgment of the tragedy and injustice of losses by the aggressors is accompanied by a formal apology and request for forgiveness.
• Change in the relationship from threats to mutual understanding and respect should be the basis of reconciliation.
• Reconciliation contributes to the restoration of humanity of both sides by establishing just relationships.
• It usually takes place due to internal and external pressure and persuasions.

Example: At the end of Cold War, the handful South Africa Apartheid rulers admitted the injustice thy have done against the black Africa people and asked for officially apology sharing power with African National congress (ANC). This was reciprocated by ANC by granting them equal right with indigenous Africans and by allowing them to peacefully live in South Africa.