Understanding C.R.

SIPABIO A Conflict Analysis Model

C.R. SIPABIO A Conflict Analysis Model

Contextual Factors
Culture

Seven Conflict Elements

7. Outcome Religion

2. Issues/ Interests Environment 3. Parties Ethnicity History 1

Relationship
Power Bond Patterns

6. Intervention

Gender

5. Behaviors

4. Attitudes/Feelings

Media

Other

Class

1. CONTEXT
Context is the sociological, economical and political setting in which a conflict takes place. Cultural perspectives, such as ones access to power and whether the culture is low or high context in its structure, also affect perspectives on conflict. Knowing the context enables an intervener to understand and Context predict the attitudes, behaviors, and the direction of a conflict. Understanding the context prevents an intervener from applying an unsuitable resolution technique that may complicate a conflict rather than resolve it. Examples of contextual factors that may influence conflicts are: history, geography, ethnicity, religion, gender, and media
Culture Class Geography

Religion

Gender & Conflict: Conflict in the Former Yugoslavia Gender is contextual factor that impacts how conflict is enacted and resolved. Sex and gender are intrinsically linked, and distinctions between the two are often confused. Sex is generally defined as the biological categories of male and female. Gender refers to socially constructed concepts of masculinity and femininity. For example, a womans ability to produce eggs and conceive is a biological function related to her sex, while the concept of woman as nurturing, emotional and a caretaker is a socially constructed gender role. Likewise, a mans ability to produce sperm and impregnate a woman is a biological function related to his sex, while the notion of man as strong, logical and a provider is a socially constructed gender role. In other words, gender is the socially constructed expression of sex. Significantly, gender shapes the ways people think, behave, and construct their identities. Gender also influences interactions between people. Notions of masculinity and femininity are not static, but rather vary depending upon the time, geographical region, religion, ethnicity, etc. in which these constructions emerge. Significantly, regardless of the factors that shape gender, notions of gender are policed and reinforced by a set of social penalties and rewards in all societies. Although these penalties and rewards vary contextually, it is important to recognize that men and women who challenge gender proscriptions face negative consequences in all societies. Gender is also a key factor in many different types of conflict. Gender can influence how and why violence is enacted against a group of people, and it can serve to unify and/or

Other

Ethnicity

In order to illustrate how context factors operate in conflict situations, we will discuss the following factors: gender, ethnicity, religion, and geography, as they emerged within conflicts in the Balkans and Bangladesh. These brief case studies exemplify the intersections between conflict and context factors that shape the nature and expression of conflict.

Gender

Media

History

divide groups. The conflict in the Balkans1 during the early 1990s provides an interesting case study of how gender and conflict intersect. Specifically, government forces on all sides used gendered propaganda as a tool to achieve military objectives and overpower the opposition. Prior to and under the leadership of Slobodan Milosevic, the Serbian government tightly controlled the media. The media became a main source of Serbian propaganda during the conflict and women were often placed at the center of this propaganda. Specifically, women were used as symbols to represent population growth and national vulnerability in the Serbian state. In the first instance, the Serbian government Women were articulated that women had a national responsibility to act as used as producers of the Serbian population and Serbian army. State-generated symbols to images connecting motherhood and nationalism bombarded Serbians represent population during the conflict period. Women were thus reduced to their growth and reproductive functions and told literally to bear soldiers for the nation national as a demonstration of national commitment. In the second instance, vulnerability in crimes committed against women were used to represent crimes the Serbian committed against the Serbian state. Throughout the conflict, images state. of raped women and girls appeared on television. These images served to symbolize the invasion of Serbia by opposition forces, thus justifying counterattacks made by Serbia. Images of raped women/nation effectively fueled hatred amongst ethnic groups and perpetuated the conflict. Importantly, the propaganda used by the Serbian government was utilized similarly by opposing forces in the Balkans. Symbolism and propaganda were also directly linked to Serbian policies of ethnic cleansing, which targeted Kosovar Albanians, Croats and Bosnians throughout the early 1990s. Ethnic cleansing policies specifically targeted women and girls in the Balkans. In addition to killing, ethnic cleansing involved the systematic rape and impregnation of women and girls. Rape was used as a tool of war with two objectives: 1) to increase the desired population, and 2) to humiliate the opposition. Significantly, these objectives are directly tied to the use of women as symbols of population growth and national vulnerability. As symbols of population growth and national vulnerability, women and girls are viewed as the means by which military forces can achieve their objectives. In the first instance, systematic rape and forced impregnation serve to increase the population of the aggressor and control the growth of targeted populations.2 In the second instance,
After World War II, Yugoslavia was comprised of six republics: Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia and Macedonia, and two provinces, Vojvodina and Kosovo. A variety of ethnicities and religions existed within each of these republics. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the political climate in Yugoslavia changed dramatically. Croatia and Slovenia, wanting selfdetermination, declared independence from Yugoslavia. Following suit, Montenegro and BosniaHerzegovina sought secession. Croatian and Slovenian secession lead to war with Serbian rebels, who opposed independence movements. This pattern of secession and war repeated itself in Bosnia in 1992. Nationalism and ethnic divisions increased during this period in the Balkans, fueling ethnic cleansing initiatives taken by all sides, predominantly Serbian forces. 2 In the context of the Balkan conflict, children resulting from rape were socially recognized as having the ethnic identity of the male perpetrator, rather than the mother. In this way, rape was used to diminish Albanian Kosovar, Croatian and Bosnian populations and increase Serbian populations. Albanian Kosovar, Bosnian and Croatian actors who raped Serbian women applied the same thinking.
1

because women and girls were used to represent national vulnerability, rape serves as a tool to exploit weakness and demonstrate power over a nation. Thus, women and girls were raped to represent a symbolic attack against the opposition. Ultimately, the genderbased violence, which occurred in the Balkans, can be tied directly to gender-based propaganda and symbolism that was used by warring parties. In this way it is clear that gender can be a key factor shaping how conflict evolves. Ethnicity, Religion and Geography: The Case of Bangladesh (1947-1971) Most conflicts are influenced by more than one contextual factor, and it is this combination that can contribute to the complexity of conflict situations. The case of Bangladesh represents a multiplicity of such factors. Briefly, as India was gaining independence from Britain in 1947, tension escalated between Muslims and Hindus regarding their ability to co-exist in one nation-state with a majority of Hindus. This tension led to an agreement between Muslim and Hindu leaders, who agreed to divide India into two nations - one Hindu and one Muslim. The territories that had the majority of Muslims were located to the east of India, in the Bengal area dominated by the Muslim Bengali ethnic group, and to the west of India, in what is now known as Pakistan and which is dominated by several ethnic groups including the Punjab. The Muslims decided to form one nation-state with two geographical areas called East Pakistan (what is now called Bangladesh) and West Pakistan (what is now known as Pakistan), separated by the Indian subcontinent. The relations between the citizens of the Pakistans reached several boiling points from 1947 to 1971 mainly because of ethnic differences, perceptions of threat to identity and language, feelings of unfairness in resource distribution and governance among Bengalis. Bengalis perceived that their co-nationalists of West Pakistan controlled the government and most resources. When general elections were held in 1970, a Bengali political party Awami League - won an absolute majority, which should have allowed it to form the government. However, those in power in West Pakistan resisted the democratic transfer of power, which resulted in a war in which as many as three million Bengalis died according to some estimates. The war ended with the military intervention of India on the side of the Bengalis who declared independence from the Pakistan state and declared the birth of their nation, Bangladesh, in 1971. This conflict demonstrates how contextual factors such as ethnicity, religion, nationalism and geography all play major roles in shaping conflict and its dynamics. In 1947, sharing the same religion was considered to be a strong enough factor to build one nation-state on two territories, separated geographically by an entire subcontinent. Later, however, culture, language and ethnicity proved to be divisive factors, particularly when there was a perception of injustice because of Bengali ethnicity. It is interesting that while geographical distance may have contributed to the development of the conflict between Bengalis and others in West Pakistan, it also contributed to the rapid de-escalation of the violent conflict of 1971. Arguably, the huge distance between the two nations - Pakistan and Bangladesh - prevented any continuation of violent military actions.

2. RELATIONSHIP
There are different levels of conflicts: inter-personal and inter-group. The bond, attachment or connection within which a conflict exists is vital in determining the type of intervention that needs to be taken. The significance of the relationship bond lies in its cultural meaning. Often, specific relationships in given cultures require that parties play certain roles, and abide by specific rules. The meaning of a bond therefore may influence how people behave in given conflict situations. For example, a son or a daughters bond to a mother or a father within a traditional collective society will be defined by specific cultural norms, and will provide to parties guidelines and expectations regarding behavior. The same may be said in terms of the bonds established between leaders of groups and their followers. Within long relationships, certain dynamics exist that manifest themselves during conflict situations. Power is a significant dynamic in many conflict situations. People derive their power in conflict situations usually from contextual factors. For example, disparities in socio-economic class status may determine how parties would relate to each other during a conflict. The same is true regarding gender, certain ethnicities and religious affiliations. In addition to power, often in conflict situations parties engage in patterns of behavior that are intended to advance their positions. Patterns are certain behaviors that parties resort to frequently during conflict situations. For example, especially in family conflicts one party may pretend to fall sick when a conflict situation becomes complicated, thus diverting attention to him or herself, and generating guilt among other parties for their role in the conflict. Other patterns may include use of violence or vulgar language to force other parties to succumb to demands. As parties resort to such behaviors frequently they become relationship patterns. 3. CONFLICT ELEMENTS SOURCES Some sources and causes of conflict according to Moore:3 Relationship conflicts are caused by: Strong emotions Misperceptions or stereotypes
3

Relationship Power Bond Patterns

Christopher W. Moore, The Mediation Process (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1996), 54.

 Poor communication or miscommunication Repetitive negative behavior

Value conflicts are caused by: Different criteria for evaluating ideas or behavior Exclusive intrinsically valuable goals Different ways of life, ideology, or religion Structural conflicts are caused by: Destructive patterns of behavior or interaction Unequal control, ownership, or distribution of resources Unequal power and authority Geographical, physical or environmental factors that hinder cooperation Time constraints Interest conflicts are caused by: Perceived or actual competition over substantive interests Procedural interests Physiological interests Data conflicts are caused by: Lack of information Misinformation Different views on what is relevant Different interpretation of data Different assessment procedures ISSUES Issues refer to the inter-related interest incompatibilities of adversaries. Issues can be specific tangible interests or aspirations. In many cases incompatible goals lead to issuerelated conflicts. For example, with insufficient income, a husband wants to spend money on a new car, while a wife wants to paint the house. In this case the conflict source is the scarcity of resources, while the issues are to buy a car or to paint the house. Types of issues: Issues that arise out of limited resources Issues that arise out of the need for continued existence (survival conflict) Issues that arise over relationship dynamics (negative dynamics, power issues) Issues that arise out of values (belief systems, religious values)

Sources Outcom Intervention Issues Parties

Behavior

Attitudes

PARTIES Those who participate in a conflict are identified as parties. Parties can be individuals, groups, organizations, communities, or nations.4 Parties to a conflict situation may be divided into three categories: Primary: Those who have a direct vested interest in the conflict (e.g. husband and wife in a dispute over spending money) Secondary: Those who have an indirect interest in the conflict (e.g. the children who are impacted by the parents conflict behavior and financial decisions) Tertiary: Those who have a distant interest in the conflict (e.g. family relatives and friends who are impacted by conflicts between the husband and wife) ATTITUDES Attitudes refer to the emotions and perceptions influencing parties behavior in conflict. Attitudes include: Positive or negative feeling toward a person or object.5 Common patterns of expectation, emotional orientation, and perception which accompany involvement in a conflict situation.6 Perceptions about conflicts, whether it is an activity to be avoided or sought out and whether it is a negative or positive activity, develop over ones lifetime. In this process, refined images or metaphors develop in ones imagination and language that give shape and meaning to conflict episodes. BEHAVIOR Behavior refers to parties actions in conflict situation. Behavior includes: Actions undertaken by one party in any situation of conflict aimed at the opposing party with the intention of making that opponent abandon or modify its goals.7 INTERVENTION Intervention refers to party actions taken with the purpose of reaching a resolution or satisfactory outcome. Conflict intervention can involve an outside third party, not affiliated with either party in the conflict, who become involved with the purpose of helping the parties reach a resolution. The intervening party is distinguished from other participants in the conflict because they get involved for the sole purpose of resolution and do not engage in behavior that would put them in the camp of either party. This usually will involve neutrality and separation from a personal interest in the outcome of the resolution going either way. Intervention usually takes one of the following approaches:

4 5

Rubin, Pruitt, and Kim, 257 ibid., 252 6 Mitchell, 28 7 ibid., 29

1: Conflict Management The purpose here is to help conflict parties develop approaches or behaviors that will prevent hostile or violent behavior. In this case, the intervention does not address the sources of conflict, but focuses on adjusting conflict behavior and addressing some conflict issues to the extent needed to ensure that parties will avoid hostile or violent behavior. Such an approach is usually used to reduce contentious behavior until the situation is ripe for addressing conflict sources and issues.

e.g. establish a ceasefire between warring parties

2: Conflict Resolution The purpose here is to help parties understand each others needs, issues and conflict sources, and to assist them in finding solutions e.g. that address them. This approach usually follows conflict management discuss activities, and is intended to find lasting arrangements to conflicts. An grievances example is to help the warring factions to discuss their grievances and and needs needs (such as need to acknowledge ethnic identity or access to and address resources). Resolutions may include giving political autonomy to the issues of ethnic group, or increasing health, education and employment autonomy opportunities to an underprivileged group. 3: Conflict Transformation This approach attempts to positively change parties relationship, conflict attitudes and behaviors. Here the purpose is to e.g. help parties to transform their relationship from a conflicted one to an Truth & amicable one, by addressing deep-rooted conflict sources and issues. Reconciliation Another purpose is to help parties internalize healthy conflict Committees behaviors that enable them to deal with conflicts on their own. An example is to convene conflict parties in series of problem solving workshops, utilize Truth and Reconciliation Committees, and educate and train parties on conflict transformation techniques. OUTCOME Outcome is the effect of conflict behavior and/or intervention on the state of conflict. These effects are not always positive. Thus, we need to be aware that an outcome of a conflict is not always a happy one. Outcome depends very much on e.g. the capability and seriousness of the parties to resolve a conflict, and Peace Accords the ability of third parties to narrow the gaps between the disputing parties. An outcome is not always an ultimate or final resolution of a conflict, instead it may take the form of a temporary resolution that needs to be worked on. Sources: Azar, E. 1990. The Management of Protracted Social Conflict: Theory and Cases. USA: Dartmouth, 1-28. Burton, J. 1990. Conflict: Resolution and Prevention. London, England: Macmillan Press Ltd., 36-45.

Coser, L. 1956. The Functions of Social Conflict. New York, NY: Free Press. Galtung, J. 2004. Transcend and Transform: An Introduction to Conflict Work. Boulder, Colorado: Paradigm Publishers. Moore, C. 1996. The Mediation Process. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 58-63. Rubin, J., Pruitt, D. and Kim, S. 1994. Social Conflict: Escalation, Stalemate and Settlement. NY: McGraw-Hill. 63-84.