INSTITUTE OF ACCOUNTANCY OF ARUSHA

PROGRAM : MASTER OF ARTS IN PEACE AND SECURITY STUDIES

MODULE NAME : PEACE BUILDING AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

INSTRUCTOR NAME : ISRAEL SOSTHENES (PhD Fellow)

MODULE CODE : PSG09101

SEMETER : SECOND SEMETER

TYPES OF WORK : INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

STUDENT NAME : JOHNBOSCO JOHNBOSCO NGONYANI

REGISTRATION NO : MPSS-02-0217-2023

SUBMISSION DATE : 13TH NOVEMBER 2024

Qn. Discuss the motive which make parties to conflict move from violence to peaceful means

of resolving conflict?
1.0 INTRODUCTION

The key objective of this assignment is to encourage a deep analysis and understanding of conflict

resolution mechanisms, especially from perspective of motivations for peace in real word, the

assignment will start with key term definition as introductory part, and the main body

1.1 OVERVIEW OF CONFLICTS AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION(RESOLVING)

1.1.1 CONFLICTS

Conflict from the Latin word means ‘to clash or engage in a fight’, a confrontation between one

and more parties aspiring towards incompatible or competitive means or ends. Conflict may be

either manifest, recognizable through actions or behaviors, or latent, in which case it remains

dormant for some time, as incompatibilities are unarticulated or are built into systems or such

institutional arrangements as governments, corporations, or even civil society (MILLER, 2005).

[Link] TYPES OF CONFLICTS

Most people perceive conflict as a negative term and ascribe negative connotations to it. However,

inherently conflict is neither negative nor positive. Some of its aspects may be either positive or

negative. Conflict has positive aspects when it directs attention to the injustices that need to be

addressed, when it promotes much needed change in organizations and systems, and especially

when it leads to creative problem solving. The negative aspects of conflict are the destructive

behavior (violence leading to loss of life and property), the pain and trauma that is a result of the

violence, and the wastage of resources that would have been better spent on creative activities.

(Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1). Positive Conflicts

Positive conflict, is a type of disagreement that, while potentially uncomfortable, ultimately drives

growth, innovation, and improved performance. This form of conflict is especially valuable in

environments where diverse ideas and critical thinking are encouraged. When individuals express

differing opinions or challenge prevailing norms in a constructive manner, it pushes teams to

encourages innovation by ensuring that all perspectives are considered (Casu, Girardone, &

Molyneux, 2024).

2). Negative Conflict

Negative conflict tends to be personally charged and often spirals into behaviors that disrupt

collaboration and damage relationships. Unlike positive conflict, which focuses on ideas and

solutions, negative conflict stems from underlying issues such as competition for power, jealousy,

or personality clashes. When left unchecked, this type of conflict can lead to a toxic work

environment, where communication deteriorates, trust erodes, and individuals become less willing

to cooperate. Negative conflict can be particularly damaging in settings that rely on team cohesion,

as unresolved tensions may cause team members to disengage or resist collaboration. (Casu,

Girardone, & Molyneux, 2024)

1.1.2 CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Conflict resolution refers to both the process of addressing difficult conflicts and the outcomes of

the process, which must be mutually acceptable and beneficial and are self-sustaining and

adjustable to changing conditions. As such, conflict resolution deals with both the objective issues

in dispute and the subjective or human elements in minds and in the relationship of the parties.

(Siegwart et al., 2011). Research has shown that these procedures help to alleviate mild conflict

but may be worse than useless in severe conflict, allowing arguments and fights to develop

(Deutsch 1973). Zartman (1997), an international relations scholar who takes a psychological

approach, has argued that conflict is most likely to be resolved when both sides become motivated

to escape the conflict, a condition he calls ripeness.

2
[Link] THEORY OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

1). Human Rights Theory

This theory suggests that conflict often arises from perceived or actual violations of fundamental

human rights. When individuals or groups feel that their rights are not respected, they may resort

to conflict as a means of claiming justice or change (Miller, 2005). Human rights theory asserts

that sustainable conflict resolution requires the acknowledgment and protection of these rights,

advocating that conflict prevention and peacebuilding should address inequalities and injustices

related to human rights (Deutsch, 1973).

2). Social Learning Theory

Social learning theory posits that people learn behaviors, including aggressive or cooperative

conflict responses, through observation and imitation of others, particularly influential figures or

authority figures (Kraybill & Ron, 2001). This theory, grounded in psychological research,

explains that individuals who witness conflict being resolved through constructive means, such

as negotiation or collaboration, are more likely to adopt similar methods in their conflicts.

Conversely, exposure to aggressive conflict resolution can increase the likelihood of aggressive

responses in future conflicts (Babcock & Loewenstein, 1997).

3). Relative Deprivation Theory

Relative deprivation theory argues that conflict can arise when individuals or groups perceive a

significant disparity between what they have and what they believe they deserve, especially when

comparing themselves to others in similar circumstances (Shapiro & Babcock, 2004). Feelings of

deprivation and inequality can lead to frustration, which may then manifest as conflict, often

directed toward those seen as responsible for the perceived inequity. This theory emphasizes that

addressing social and economic disparities can be crucial in conflict resolution efforts, as it targets

the root causes of dissatisfaction and tension (Siegwart et al., 2011).

3
1.2 CAUSES OF CONFLICTS

There are different ways of examining the nature of a conflict and identifying the factors that give

rise to it. Even though one precipitating event may lead to an open confrontation, most conflicts

arise from a complex and multiple set of factors that may include the history shared by people

across the divide, the social, political, economic and cultural dynamics, the nature of the issues at

stake etc. Thus, a distinction needs to be made between which are proximate or immediate causes

and underlying causes. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.2.1 Proximate Causes

Proximate causes refer to the immediate factors or events that directly lead to a particular outcome,

for example, the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria in June 1914, which was the

immediate cause of the beginning of the First World War. Proximate Causes represent the specific

actions or events that trigger observable changes or effects, distinguishing them from ultimate

causes, which are deeper, underlying factors that may set the stage for proximate events to unfold.

(Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.2.2 Underlying Causes

Underlying causes are the fundamental and long-term causes, which create conditions in which

immediate triggers of conflict occur. The immediate and underlying causes are interconnected but

in conflict resolution more attention needs to be paid to identifying the underlying and root causes

if we want to work towards sustainable peace. Theoretical explanations of the underlying causes

of conflict focus on either the human agency or the social structural conditions. (Kraybill & Ron

2001).

1.3 SOURCE OF CONFLICT

Sources of conflict can be broadly categorized into personal, structural, and situational factors,

each contributing to discord in different ways.

4
1.3.1 Information

Lack of information, misinformation and different interpretations of information can lead to

conflict. Disputants may not have sufficient information or even the same information about a

given situation. In other instances, groups and individuals may interpret the same data or

information in differing ways or they may assign different levels of importance to the same data.

Control and manipulation of information is a major weapon in conflict situations. (Kraybill & Ron

2001).

1.3.2 Miscommunication

Ineffective communication is another source of conflict. Even if there are no basic

incompatibilities between groups and individuals, miscommunication and misunderstanding can

lead to conflict. Moreover, stakeholders may have different perceptions about the facts in a

situation and until they are clarified, there can be no resolution. Self-centredness, selective

perception, emotional bias and prejudices lead to differing perceptions between the stakeholders

of a conflict. Lack of skill in communicating one’s viewpoint in a clear and respectful manner

often results in confusion, hurt and anger, all of which fuel the conflict further. Whether the

conflict has objective sources or has arisen due to perceptual or communication problems, the

people involved experience it as very real. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.3 Resources

This relates to conflict over material resources such as land, money or objects, which are evidently

identifiable and can be negotiated. Historically, disputes over access to and control of territory,

material, economic and scarce natural resources have been one of the dominant sources of conflict.

One major element in the colonial empire building of the 19th and 20th century was the

competition for resources and defense of national economic interests which were defined in

territorial terms. Here each faction wanted to grab as much as it could; its behaviour and emotions

were directed towards maximizing gain. In extreme cases, disputants may resort to military action

5
or the threat of it to gain or defend access to resources perceived as vital for survival, for example,

the developed Western countries attach a great deal of importance to maintaining their access to

oil supplies in the West Asian region and are prepared to undertake extreme measures to do so.

(Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.4 Relationships

Relationships are an important facet of human life. As human beings, we have personal (family)

and social (community) or organizational (business) relationships. In these relationships, people

have disagreements over a variety of issues, which is very normal. However, sometimes the

interdependence created by these relationships introduces a destructive dimension to these

differences, for example, a wife is repeatedly subjected to abuse and domestic violence but is

unable to walk out of the relationship because (apart from other social and cultural pressures) she

may be economically dependent on her husband, who is aware of this interdependence and uses

it to his advantage. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.5 Interests and Needs

Non-fulfillment of interests and needs are a major source of conflict. The non-fulfillment of these

needs may be either a reality or just a perception. In fact, important needs for identity, respect or

participation are often at the heart of conflicts that ostensibly seem to be a contest for material

things. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.6 Power

Power can mean different things, legitimacy, authority, force, or the ability to coerce. It is a vital

ingredient in conflict situations, Power conflicts can occur between individuals, groups or nations,

when one or both sides choose to take a power approach to the relationship and wish to maintain

or maximize the amount of influence that they exert in the relationship and the social setting.

Power can be either hard (coercive) or soft (persuasive). Hard power consists of the ability to

command and enforce while soft power comprises of the ability to bring about cooperation,

6
provide legitimacy and inspire. In violent conflict situations, hard power dominates, as armies and

militias grapple for victory. On the other hand, soft power is essential for peacemaking and peace-

building. Power should necessarily be accompanied by accountability; otherwise, it tends to give

rise to more conflicts. Being accountable would mean finding ways to report to others and being

open to be questioned by others. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.7 Culture

Culture is an important factor in social conflict. It is learnt from the family, community, school,

and media; it is not something human beings are born with. Culture determines the way

individuals and groups act, the manner in which they relate to others and the way they think about

and perceive events happening around them. Thus, it is necessary to understand the cultural

contexts of the individuals and groups involved in a conflict especially in situations where the

contending sides are from different cultures. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.8 Ideology

Ideology is mostly used in reference to the public world of politics. Political ideologies such as

Fascism, Nazism, and Marxism involve a set of fundamental beliefs about economic organization

or governance of society. One of the most famous ideological conflicts of the 20th century was

the one between the Capitalist Bloc and the Communist Bloc popularly termed as the Cold War,

which manifested in ways such as the formation of economic and military blocs, and proxy wars

between client-states at the regional and local level. The Cold War ended with the disintegration

of the former Soviet Union and withering away of the Communist Bloc. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.3.14 Values

Values are dear to individuals and groups these are the beliefs that shape their identity and faith

perspectives that give meaning to their lives. Incompatibility in ways of life and ideologies such

as preferences, principles and practices that people believe in can lead to value conflicts. When

states, groups and individuals assert the rightness and superiority of their way of life and their

7
political-economic system vis-à-vis other states, groups and individuals, values can then become

a major component in such conflicts. Values are often seen as a part of one’s identity; and thus,

challenge to values is often seen as a threat to identity, resulting in defensive reactions by

individuals and groups since they assume that resolution of the conflict will require a change in

values. (Kraybill & Ron 2001).

1.4 CONFLICT RESOLUTION STRATEGY

1.4.1 Recognize that all of us have biased fairness perceptions.

Both parties to a conflict typically think they’re right and the other side is wrong, because they

quite literally can’t get out of our own heads. Our sense of what would constitute a fair conflict

resolution is biased by egocentrism, or the tendency to have difficulty seeing a situation from

another person’s perspective, research by Carnegie Mellon University professors Linda Babcock

and George Loewenstein and their colleagues’ shows. When embroiled in a conflict, we need to

try to overcome our self-centered fairness perceptions. (Babcock & Loewenstein, 1997).

1.4.2 Avoid escalating tensions with threats and provocative moves.

When we feel we’re being ignored or steamrolled, we often try to capture the other party’s

attention by making a threat, such as saying we’ll take a dispute to court or try to ruin the other

party’s business reputation. There is a time and place for litigation, but threats and other attention-

getting moves, such as take-it-or-leave-it offers, are often a mistake. Because of the common

human tendency to treat others the way they’re treated, people tend to respond to threats in kind,

leading to an escalatory spiral and worsening conflict. (Shapiro & Babcock, 2004).

1.4.3 Overcome an “us versus them” mentality.

Group connections build loyalty and strong relationships, but they can also promote suspicion and

hostility toward members of out-groups. As a result, groups in conflict tend to have an inaccurate

understanding of each other’s views and to see the other’s positions as more extreme than they

actually are. Whether dealing with conflict as a group or on your own, you can overcome the
8
tendency to demonize the other side by looking for an identity or goal you share. Begin your

conflict management efforts by highlighting your common goal of reaching a fair and sustainable

agreement. Try to identify and discuss points of similarity between you, such as growing up in

the same region. (Shapiro & Babcock, 2004).

1.4.4 Look beneath the surface to identify deeper issues.

Labor disputes over employee wages, family conflicts over assets, for example. Because money

is a finite resource, these conflicts tend to be single-issue battles in which one party’s gain will

inevitably be the other party’s loss. But disputes over money often involve much deeper causes

of conflict, such as the feeling that one is being disrespected or overlooked. The next time you

find yourself arguing over the division of funds, suggest putting that conversation on hold. Then

take time to explore each other’s deeper concerns. Listen closely to one another’s grievances, and

try to come up with creative ways to address them. This conflict management strategy is likely to

strengthen the relationship and add new interests to the table, expanding the pie of value to be

divided in the process. (Fisher, Ury, & Patton, 1991).

1.4.4 Separate sacred from pseudo-sacred issues.

Conflict management can be particularly intractable when core values that negotiators believe are

sacred, or nonnegotiable, are involved, such as their family bonds, religious beliefs, political

views, or personal moral code. Take the case of two siblings who disagree about whether to sell

their deceased parents’ farm, with one of them insisting the land must remain in the family and

the other arguing that the parents would want them to sell it. (Shapiro & Babcock, 2004).

1.6 MOTIVATIONS FOR TRANSITIONING FROM VIOLENCE TO PEACEFUL

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

1.6.1 Economic Considerations

One of the foremost motives for shifting away from violence is the economic cost associated with

prolonged conflict. Wars and violent disputes drain national resources, disrupt markets, and
9
impede economic development. As Collier and Hoeffler (2004) argue, the economic burden of

conflict includes not only direct costs, such as military expenditures, but also indirect costs like

loss of human capital and reduced foreign investment. Parties engaged in conflict may recognize

that sustainable economic growth is unattainable without stability, prompting them to seek

peaceful solutions.

1.6.2 Political Incentives and Power Sharing

Political dynamics play a greater role in motivating parties to pursue peaceful conflict resolution.

Inclusive governance structures and power-sharing agreements can mitigate the incentives for

continued violence. According to Mitchell and Pacione (2004), political inclusion of marginalized

groups reduces grievances that often lead to conflict. When conflicting parties perceive that their

political aspirations can be achieved through negotiation and compromise rather than force, the

allure of peaceful resolution increases.

1.6.3 Social and Cultural Factors

Social cohesion and cultural norms also influence the transition from violence to peace. Societies

with strong norms against violence and a culture of dialogue are more likely to resolve conflicts

amicably. Huntington (1996) posits that cultural values emphasizing harmony and collective well-

being can discourage violent confrontations. Additionally, intergroup contact and reconciliation

processes can foster mutual understanding and reduce animosity, facilitating peaceful conflict

resolution (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).

1.6.4 International Pressure and Mediation

External actors, including international organizations and foreign governments, often exert

pressure on conflicting parties to cease violence and engage in dialogue. The role of international

mediation has been pivotal in numerous peace processes. For instance, Lederach (1997) highlights

the effectiveness of third-party mediation in creating frameworks for negotiation and building

10
trust between adversaries. Sanctions, diplomatic efforts, and peacekeeping missions can also

incentivize parties to abandon violence in favor of negotiated settlements (Fearon & Laitin, 2003).

1.6.5 Humanitarian Concerns and Moral Imperatives

Humanitarian considerations and moral imperatives can drive parties to forsake violence. The

desire to prevent further loss of life, alleviate suffering, and uphold human rights can motivate

conflicting parties to seek peaceful resolutions. As Lederach (1997) emphasizes, ethical

considerations and the recognition of shared humanity can transcend animosity and encourage

reconciliation. Leaders who prioritize humanitarian outcomes over militaristic objectives can steer

their factions toward peace.

1.6.6 Strategic Realignment and Changing Circumstances

Shifts in the strategic landscape or changing circumstances can also motivate a transition to peace.

Factors such as military stalemate, loss of public support, or changing geopolitical environments

can render continued violence untenable. Kydd and Walter (1997) suggest that when the costs of

conflict begin to outweigh the perceived benefits, parties are more likely to explore alternative

means of resolution. Additionally, internal transformations, such as political reforms or leadership

changes, can alter the incentives for maintaining violent conflict.

1.6.7 Desire for Stability and Reconstruction

Another significant motivation for transitioning from violence to peaceful conflict resolution is

the collective desire for stability and the need to rebuild society. Prolonged conflict leaves nations

in a state of economic and social devastation, hindering progress and perpetuating hardship. As

Doyle and Sambanis (2000) suggest, the reconstruction of infrastructure, restoration of public

services, and revitalization of the economy become challenging in a state of ongoing conflict. This

recognition often drives conflicting parties to consider peace as a path toward rebuilding and

achieving societal stability. Furthermore, when stability is seen as essential for sustainable

11
development and international support, stakeholders may prioritize peace to facilitate recovery

and reconstruction efforts (Walter, 2002)

1.8 CONCLUTION

To resolve conflicts effectively, it is important to recognize inherent biases, avoid escalating

tensions, and address underlying issues. Research by Babcock and Loewenstein (1997) reveals

that fairness perceptions in conflict are often biased by egocentrism, where individuals struggle

to view situations from others’ perspectives. Reducing conflict often involves avoiding threats

and finding common ground, thereby preventing an “us vs. them” mentality and allowing for

collaborative resolution (Shapiro & Babcock, 2004). Looking beneath surface-level disputes to

uncover deeper issues, such as those involving resources or rights, helps address the core of

conflicts and paves the way for lasting peace.

12
 REFERENCES

Babcock, L., & Loewenstein, G. (1997). Explaining bargaining impasse: The role of self-serving

biases. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(1), 109–126.

Casu, B., Girardone, C., & Molyneux, P. (2024). Introduction to Banking. Pearson Education.

Collier, P., & Hoeffler, A. (2004). Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxford Economic Papers,

56(4), 563–595.

Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. Yale

University Press.

Fearon, J. D., & Laitin, D. D. (2003). Ethnicity, insurgency, and civil war. American Political

Science Review, 97(1), 75–90.

Huntington, S. P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. Simon &

Schuster.

Kraybill, R., & Ron, K. (2001). The little book of conflict transformation: Clear articulation of the

guiding principles by a pioneer in the field. Good Books.

Kydd, A. H., & Walter, B. F. (1997). Cooperation under anarchy. International Organization,

51(1), 425–456.

Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building peace: Sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. United

States Institute of Peace Press.

Miller, C. A. (2005). A glossary of terms and concepts in peace and conflict studies. University

for Peace.

Mitchell, M., & Pacione, M. (2004). Conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Pearson Education.

Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783.

Shapiro, D. L., & Babcock, L. (2004). Managing emotions in negotiations to improve efficiency

and build rapport. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 93(2), 108–125.

Siegwart, L., et al. (2011). Handbook on conflict resolution: Theory and practice. Jossey-Bass.

13
Zartman, I. W. (1997). Ripeness and the theory of conflict resolution. In Conflict resolution and

international relations (pp. 45–61). Routledge.

14