Introduction to Peace and

Conflict Studies, PeCS 5011

Fall 2015
 Love, work, and
knowledge are the well-
springs of our life. They
should also govern it.
(Wilhelm Reich 1971:
Epigraph)
 Objectives of the Course
• Introduce Students with the field of Peace and
Conflict studies
• Introduce students with methodological issues of
peace research
• Equip students with the basic concepts and theories
of peace and conflict studies
• Enable students develop skills of conflict analysis,
resolution and transformation
• Introduce students with strategies of building peace
 Chapter Outline
• Chapter–I OVERVIEW OF PEACE AND
CONFLCIT STUDIES
• Chapter-II BASIC CONCEPTS IN PEACE
AND CONFLICT STUDIES
• Chapter-III CAUSES OF CONFLICT AND
VIOLENCE : THEORY
• Chapter –IV : TOWARDS THE
RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT: CONFLICT
ANALYSIS
• Chapter -V STRATEGIES OF CONFLICT
RESOLUTION – PEACE MAKING
• Chapter -VI TOWARDS SUSTIENABLE/
POSITIVE PEACE
Concluding remarks
 Chapter–I OVERVIEW OF PEACE AND CONFLCIT STUDIES

What is peace and conflict studies?

What are the objectives of peace and conflict
studies?
Why should we care about peace and conflict
studies?
Understanding Peace and Conflict
Studies as a field of study
 On the issue of the Nomenclature/
name of the programs…. …
• Peace and conflict studies
• Conflict analysis and conflict resolution
• Peace studies
• Peace and security studies
• Peace and conflict transformation

What is at stake in the name of the programs ?

• Issues of value and normative views, eg peace
studies, non violence studies
• Theory and techniques, eg, conflict resolution
programs.
• Diverse views on conflict, eg conflict
resolution and conflict transformation
• Relational vs non relational, security studies vs
peace studies.
• Writing about the conceptual difference
between security and peace, Johan Galtung
(2007:14) says that, “The security approach,
still dominant, including in the UN Security
Council (not Peace, or Peace and Security,
Council) sees some party as a threat to be
deterred or eliminated”. In the security
approach, there is no focus “on improviing
relationships”. Peace, is about the relationship
between the parties
• Regardless of these differences, there are
increasing suggestions for harmonization and
integration (Dugan, 1989 and Katz 1989)
• The professional and technical focus should be
integrated with the normative view of peace
studies, including social justice, fairness, non
violence – i.e the value and ethical orientations
that underlie various strategies for dealing
with conflict.
• According to Katz(1989:21) peace and conflict
studies programs need to combine “themes,
perspectives and orientations from peace as
well as conflict studies( war studies) along
with a social change emphasis”
• Conflict resolution, peace and conflict Studies
should also focus on issues of social conflict
and social change – instrumental/ teleological
but also on normative values should be
combined.
Some conceptualization and definition…

• Maire Dugan and Dennis P, Carey (1989) has

defined peace studies as “an academic field
which identifies and analyzes the violent and
non violent behaviors as well as the structural
mechanisms attending social conflicts with a
view towards understanding those processes
which lead to a more desirable human
condition.”
 Two focal Points
1.Peace and conflict studies takes the violent and
non-violent behavior as its topic and aims to
gain an accurate understanding of its nature
and praxis.
2. Structural mechanisms attending social
conflicts, with a view towards understanding
those processes which lead to a more desirable
human condition.
• It is an applied social science which studies the
conditions of building “peace by peaceful
means”(Galtung 1996).
• Science with a value commitment, peace by
peaceful means(Galtung 1996)
According Galtung, Peace studies, including
conflict studies, involves three elements
A. Empirical peace studies., based on
empiricism, traditional social science, which,
is the systematic comparison of theories with
empirical reality
B. Critical peace studies, value commitment,
taking explicit stands with respect to data and
values with reference to the future particularly
in terms of policy
C. Constructive peace studies: based on
constructionist, the systematic comparisons of
theories with values
• Applied social science, mainly, because, peace
research involves policy suggestions , advocacy,
practical acts of mediation and conflict resolution
• Comparison with medicine, social work,
architecture
• It also involves scholar-mediation, conscientious
objection and peace activism
What is the difficulty of mixing theory and practice
in peace studies ?
 Is it a discipline ?
• The debate
Peace studies is both field of studies and
discipline, b/c
• it has its own theories, literature and academic
journals
• Distinct from other social science field due to
its sharp focus
• text books
• Expansion of undergraduate, graduate
programs
 Methodological issues with Peace and Conflict Studies

• What kind of science is peace studies ?

Normative science/ value commitment
1.Empirical study/ critical study of reality and
constructionism, the systematic comparison of
theories with value
2. An applied science: research for the sake of
action. Peace research is highly practice
oriented and policy focused.
 What is the strengths and weakness of this
methodology?
• Strengths
Increases knowledge, relevant for policy
• Challenges
• It challenges the traditional methods of social
science, mixes science and politics (Galtung
2000).
 The peace scholar would be directly engaged
with politics.
 What is a peace research ?
What kind of research is a peace research ?
A research that contributes to the understanding
of violent conflict, reduction of violence and
peaceful transformation of conflicts.
The aim of peace research is to understand the
causes of violence and find ways to reduce and
remove violence (Wallensteen, 2001; 2002)
• According Peter Wallensteen, peace research
like other fields of research is “colored” by
major historical changes and events (Do refer
Wallensteen’s book for more).
• Peace research has been influenced/ or is
sensitive to events and changes over time.
Changes and historical events have led to new
areas of inquiry/ consolidation of the existing
one’s
 Traumas and events forming the peace
research agenda

World War I: Trauma League of Nations: Hope

Loss of Crisis Control discouraging Aggression,
History, Causes Need for Rules
of War International Law

World War II: Trauma

Again: Lost Control
Strategic Study vs
Peace Research
 The Historical development of Peace and conflict studies

• Began in 1950’s and 60’s

• Oliver Ramsbotham, Tom Woodhouse and
Hugh Miall (2000), has came up with three
development phases,
• Precursors , 1918-1945
• Foundation , 1945-1965
• Consolidation , 1965-1985
The development of the field can been seen
from the perspective of events that contributed
to its emergence, founding fathers, Pioneering
fields and the development period outlined by
Ramsbotham and his colleagues
 Events
• An air of optimism surrounding the formation
of the league of nation,
• The cold war
• The development of nuclear weapons and a
threat of nuclear war
• Removing glaring inequalities and injustices in
the global system and
• Achieving ecological balance and control
 Pioneering Disciplines and
Contributors
• International relations
• Social Psychology
• Studies in organizational behavior and labor
management relations.
• Politics and international studies
• Non violence, pacifism and conflict resolution
• Empirical studies of war and conflict, studies
by Pitrim Sorokin, Lewis Fry Richardson and
the Quincy Wright.
• These, in particular, were of central
significance and acted as a central catalyst in
the later emergence of conflict resolution field.
They have provided a proper statistical basis
for conflict resolution study.
Non violent and pacifist traditions and theories
of non-violence were cross fertilized with the
academic endeavor to enhance understanding
of violent political conflict and alternatives to
it.
Founding fathers of the
discipline
Kenneth Boulding(1910-1993)
• Boulding was mainly focused on prevention
of wars through research and improving the
“pathological and costly segment of the
total social system”
• Boulding, with other colleagues at the
University of Michigan started the Journal of
conflict resolution (1957)
• 1959, The center for research on conflict
resolution (1959).
Johan Galtung(the father of Peace studies)
• He is often referred as the father of peace
studies
• peace and conflict studies was elaborated as a
field of study in northern Europe.
• The origin of peace research was in
Scandinavia
• International Peace Research Institute in Oslo
(PRIO) (1959) and
• the Journal of peace research
 John Burton (1964-2002)
•
• Burton was known for his contribution on protracted
conflict and needs theory of conflict
• His theory of interests and needs
• Interests are about material goods and can be traded,
bargained or negotiated
• Needs, on the other hand, are non material human
needs ( and not scarce resources)
• A space can be open if conflict are understood in
terms of human needs --the understanding of conflicts
as unsatisfied needs for recognition, security and
development.
Adam Curle (1916-2006)
• Curle was known for his work on mediation
work.
• One of his pioneering book is entitled, Making
Peace( 1971)
• Curle, as a professor of peace and conflict
studies in the UK at Bradford University, was
one of the founders of the discipline in Europe.
 Elise Boulding(1920-2010)
• Elise is known for her work on culture of
peace and peaceful societies.
 Other leading contemporary
scholars
• John Paul Lederach,
• Peter Wallensteen,
• Kevin Clements,
• William I Zartman,
• Lewis Coser,
• John McDonald and Louise Diamond,
• Mary B. Anderson,
• William Ury, Roger Fisher, Paul Rogers, etc
 The Three Development Periods
• The Pre-cursors , 1918-1845
• The foundations, 1945- 1965
• Consolidation, 1965- 1985.
 Summary
• The topic of peace and conflict studies is
violent conflict or destructive conflict and
aims at its reduction and non violent conflict
transformation of conflicts.
• Equally, however, it also focuses on structures
attending to social conflicts and transforming
these structures.
• Peace and conflict studies is a normative and
applied science with, a value commitment,
peace by peaceful means and on values such
as social justice, fairness and non violence.
• This has its own strengths and problems.
 Summary continued

• The Institutional foundations of the field of

peace and conflict studies were laid North
America and Northern Europe in the 1950s
and 60s
• Pioneering fields and studies, included,
 International relations
 Social Psychology
 Studies in organizational behavior and
conflict
Empirical studies of war and conflict
Political science ( the study of revolutions)
and international studies(functionalist studies
on interstate relations)
Non violence theories and pacifist traditions .
 Summary
The founding Fathers of peace studies included,
Kenneth Boulding
John Burton
Adam Curle
 Johan Galtung
 Elise Boulding
Roger Fisher
 Betty Reardon
• Other Leading peace and conflict scholars
include
• John Paul Lederach, Peter Wallensteen, Kevin
Clements, William I Zartman, Lewis Coser,
John McDonald, Louise Diamond, Mary B.
Anderson, William Ury, Paul Rogers, etc
 Chapter -II BASIC CONCEPTS IN PEACE AND CONFLICT STUDIES
?

What Are the Underlying Concepts of Peace and

Conflict
 Understanding conflict
• What is conflict?
• What causes conflict
• What is the nature of conflict? Is conflict
productive or counter productive ?
 The meaning of conflict
• A struggle over values and claims to scarce
status, power and resources in which the aims
of the opponents are to neutralize, injure, or
eliminate the rivals (Coser, 1956).
• This definition highlights the possible causes
of conflict.
• Conflict was definitely viewed as a win-lose
situation.
Struggle over values,
What are the values that could cause conflict ?
Claims to scarce ,
• Status
• Power
• Resources
• Conflict refers to "any situation in which two
or more social entities or ‘parties’ … perceive
that they possess mutually in-compatible
goals.”(Mitchell, 1981, p.17).
• This definition emphasizes the existence of
incompatible or contradictory goals and the
element of perception that leads to conflict
 Conflict as a triadic Concept –
Johan Galtung
Galtung (1996) defines conflict a triadic concept
involving three elements – Behavior, Attitudes
and Contractions
 Behavior (B)
• The actions/inaction the parties take in pursuit
of their goals.
• Behavior is manifest/evident
• Often equated with destructive acts – the
putative understanding of conflict
• Conflict is not limited to behavior, there are
other elements underneath.
 Attitudes/ Assumptions (A)
• Self and other perceptions and views
• These are latent, the latent- manifest dialectic
• These are of two types
1. Cognitions/ assumptions
2. Emotions / attitudes
 Contradictions(C)
• These are the contents of the conflict, often are
the underlying causes of conflict
• Contradictions are caused due to the blocking
of the goals we seek
• Who are goals seeking systems/ beings?
• According to Galtung, the only systems that
we shall accept as goal seeking are live-
systems, capable of experiencing the
realization of the goal as happiness (sukha)
and the deprivation as suffering (Dukha).
• Conflict is all about life.
• All kinds of life are included and all non life
is excluded from conflict.
• a full conflict involves all these three, conflict
is a triadic concept involving
contradictions(C), attitudes(A) and Behavior
(B) i.e A+B+C
 Which corner of the triangle does conflict
begin ?
• Often it starts at the contradiction corner of the
triangle, For example, a blocked goal
(contradiction) leads to frustration(C), in turn
leading to aggressiveness (A) as an attitude,
and finally to aggression as a behavior (B).
• However the problem is that the process/
conflict does not always start with
contradictions. It can also start from A or B.
• For example, one party may have accumulated
negative attitudes (aggressiveness) or negative
behavioral inclination (a capacity,
predisposition for aggression) ; when
something comes that looks like a problem,
either A or B or both might be activated and
hitched on to the new problem.
• In conclusion, conflict could start any where in
the corner of the triangle.
 What is the relevance of Galtung’s conflict
triangle
• Discussion
• How does the triadic concept helps us in
conflict resolution ?
 Other Related Concepts
A. Dispute: two persons, or actors pursuing the
same scarce goal.
• Disputes are short term disagreements and
often on negotiable interests, while conflicts
pertain to deep-rooted problems that involve
seemingly non-negotiable issues and are
resistant to resolution ( John Burton,)
B. Dilemma: one person or actor pursuing two
incompatible goals
 Levels of conflict
• Six levels of conflict can be mentioned
1) Intra-personal conflict refers to conflicts
occurring within a person
2)Interpersonal conflict refers to conflicts
occurring between individuals or small
groups of people
3. Intra-group conflict refers to those conflicts
that happen within a particular group,
whether it is a religious, ethnic, political or
other type of identity group.
• 4)Inter-group conflict refers to conflicts
occurring between large organized social or
identity groups
5) Inter-state Conflict
6) intra state Conflict
Is conflict preventable/inevitable ?

• Conflict is part and parcel of the nature of

human beings
• Conflict is as “human as life itself”(Galtung
and Jacobsen 2002).
Why?
• The deep seated causes of conflict are human
fault lines
 What are human fault-lines ?

• Human divisions along different lines.

Divisions along normal/ deviants, nations
states, humans/nature, genders, generations,
races, etc
Is conflict Productive or counter productive ?

• What is the nature of conflict ? Destructive or

productive ?
• The traditional approach: destructive
• Modern sociology: constructive/
deconstructive
• Doubleness of conflict(Galtung 1996)
• Conflict as an “danger + opportunity”
 What is the opportunity ?
• It generates energy(force)
• It presents a challenge, the mother of creativity
(Galtung , 1996)
 What is the danger ?
• The danger is, the energy, can be used for
destruction.
 Self-destruction
 Other-destruction
 What should we do to deal with conflicts ?

There have been Different suggestions by

different authors, although the ultimate goal is
the same.
 Conflict Transformation
• Conflict transformation is very important to
control the danger or constructively use the
energy generated by conflict.
• What exactly is conflict transformation ?
• Conflict transformation goes beyond the
concept of conflict resolution.
• CT requires a transformation of the parties,
their relationships to each other, and the
structural elements that underlie the conflict
 Conflict transformation..
Continued
• These relationships and social structures are
often unjust and unequal, and transforming
conflict seeks to alter these structures in ways
that build a more just society.
• CT takes a long term perspective on conflict
and mainly relational
• Other talk about other concepts
 Conflict resolution
• Mainly focuses on Content, Contradictions (C)
• Conflict resolution addresses and resolves the
deep-rooted sources of conflict.
 Conflict Management
• Emphasis on behavior(B)
• It is an effort to contain violent conflict,
reduce the levels of violence, or engage par-
ties in a process to settle the conflict
• is the positive and constructive handling of
difference and divergence(Miall, 2004)
 Conflict settlement
• Conflict settlement means the reaching of an
agreement between the parties to settle a
political conflict, so forestalling or ending an
armed conflict (Ramsbotham et al, 2006:31).
• Settlement suggests finality,
• However, in practice conflicts that have
reached settlements are often reopened later.
Underlying attitudes and contradictions may not
have been resolved
 Conflict Prevention
• Conflict can not be prevented.
• Conflict should be understood as the
prevention of violence or destructive energy of
conflict.
 Violence
• What is violence ?
• What is the nature of violence?
• What are the characteristics or dimensions of
violence ?
• What are the types of violence?
• Is some form of violence necessary ?
• What is the linkage between conflict, violence
and peace
 What is violence ?
• Two related definitions by Galtung
Violence is an avoidable insult to basic human
needs, and more generally to life, lowering the
real level of needs satisfaction below what is
potentially possible(Galtung, 1990)

What are basic needs ?

 Which are basic human needs ?
1. Survival needs (negation: death. mortality);
2. Well-being needs (negation: misery,
morbidity)
3. Identity, meaning needs (negation: alienation);
and
4. Freedom needs (negation: repression).
 Second definition by Galtung
(1969)
• Violence is present when human beings are
being influenced so that their actual somatic
and mental realizations are below their
potential realizations.
• Violence is the cause of the difference
between the potential and the actual, between
what could have been and what is.
• In other words, when the potential is higher
than that of the actual, and by definition
avoidable, then violence is present.
• Examples,
A. People dying from preventable diseases
B. Life expectancy today
C. restrictions on movement/ freedom
 Dimensions of violence
1. Physical/Psychological
2. Intended/ unintended
3. latent/manifest
4. Direct/ Indirect
 1.Physical/Psychological
A. Physical: this is somatic. In physical, human
beings are hurt somatically.
It could have two forms
A. Biological violence, reducing somatic
capability
B. Physical violence, directed at harming or
inflicting damage on our body.
• Examples: imprisonments, transportation is
unevenly distributed, keeping large segments
of a population at the same place with mobility
a monopoly of the selected few.
 B. Psychological
• Psychological violence, unlike Physical
violence, psychological violence works on the
soul and decrease mental capabilities.
• Examples: lies, brainwashing, indoctrination
of various kinds, threats, etc. that serve to
decrease mental potentialities.
 2.Intended/ unintended
• Intended , with specific subject –action –
object
• Unintended: with no specific object and
subject
 3. Latent/Manifest
• Manifest is observable, although not always
directly since the theoretical entity of 'potential
realization' also enters the picture.
• Latent violence is something which is not
there, yet might easily come about.
 4. Direct/indirect
• Direct Violence, inflicts damage to an object,
effect is immediate
• Indirect Violence, inflicts damage non-directly,
effect is slow. This is what has been referred
by Galtung as a truncated form of violence.
 Three Forms/Types of Violence
• Violence is manifested in three forms.
These are
1. Personal /direct violence
2. Structural/ in-direct violence
3. Cultural violence
 1. Personal /direct violence
• Personal or direct violence is an attempt to
inflict pain or injury by an identified subject
against an object.
• It entails a clear subject-object relationship –
the source of the violence and the object is
clear.
• the violence is intended are visible and clear.
• Direct violence works fast and dramatically.
• It is personal, visible, manifest and non
structural.
• Can you give example of personal/direct
violence
• Homicide/ suicide
• Beating, psychological and verbal Abuse,
• Robbery,
• Wars, genocide
are forms of direct violence.
 Galtung’s examples
• Survival Needs: Killing
• Well-being Needs: Maiming, Siege, Sanctions,
Misery
• Identity Needs: Desocialzation,
Resocialization, Secondary Citizen
• Freedom Needs: Repression, Detention
Expulsion, Marginalization, Fragmentation
 2.Structural/ In-direct Violence:

• Structural violence is built in the very structure

of the society.
• It is sanctioned by the institutions and the
cultural values of the social system.
• It results from uneven life conditions such as,
inequitable distribution of resources and
unequal decision making powers.
 What are the manifestations of
structural violence ? Can you give
examples
• Survival Needs : exploitation, the underdogs
may in fact be so disadvantaged that they die
(starve, waste away from diseases) from it:
exploitation A
• Well-being Needs: Or they may be left in a
permanent. Unwanted state of misery, usually
including malnutrition and illness: exploitation
B.
• Identity Needs: Penetration (implanting the top
dog inside the underdog), Segmentation
(giving the underdog only a very partial view
of what goes on)
• Freedom Needs; Marginalization (keeping the
underdogs on the outside), Fragmentation
(keeping the underdogs away from each other.
• All these prevent consciousness and
mobilization needed to remove the system
The relationship between Personal
and Structural Violence
• Are these violence forms pure types ?
• Is the manifest presence of one suggests the
latent presence of the other ?
• Is the manifest presence of one presupposes
the manifest presence of the other ?
• Is one required to obtain/or sustain the other
• Is one required to destroy the other ?
 Are they pure types ?
• No, the distinction is not always clear. The
existence of one suggests the slight presence
of the other
• Examples: A person acting violently is not
making decision on individual deliberation,
but also on the basis of expectations and
norms impinging on him on the basis of his
social status and roles expected.
• Violent structure can also be seen as a mere
abstraction unless upheld by the actions,
expected from the social environment
• Structural violence is upheld by the summated
and concerted action of human beings.
Does the manifest presence of one presupposes
the manifest presence of the other ?
No, the manifest presence of one does not often
suggest the manifest presence of the other.
Does the manifest presence of one presupposes
the latent presence of the other ?
• Yes, (violent) social structure is upheld by the
threat of personal violence.
• A manifest structural violence is protected by
the threat or use of personal violence.
Second, the Presence of personal violence may
presuppose latent structural violence.
• This is a situation in which structural violence
is assumed to be important to deal with
personal violence.
• Hierarchies, norms, restrictive laws and others
measures might be essential to control the
behavior of individuals
 Is personal/Structural violence
necessary ?
• What are the very conditions where violence
Could be necessary ?
• These are topics of debate in political theory.
• We do not have simple answers for these
questions.
• Is some forms of structural violence or a threat
of it necessary to control personal violence ?
• Yes, it has been argued that some form of
structural violence or a threat of it is essential
to maintain order and regularity
 Are there cases where personal
violence becomes necessary ?
• Yes, personal violence has widely been
suggested and practiced as a remedy for
crimes.
• Personal violence or the threat of it is also
used to protect/sustain structural violence.
 Is personal violence necessary to
remove a violent structure.
• This is, of course, a famous revolutionary
proposition with a certain currency.
• People have argued regarding the use of
personal violence to deep-root a violent social
structure.
• However, Galtung argues against this from
three perspectives. Empirical, theoretical, and
axiology.
• Empirically: Empirically one would point to
all the cases of structural change decreasing
structural violence that seem to take place
without personal violence.
• Does not often fundamentally bring changes,
deep structure often remain.
• Theoretically: the means of personal violence
against structural violence do no match.
• They are qualitatively different. The means to
change the structure should be structural.
• That is, is it not likely that some, and possibly
also more effective means of changing a
structure would be structural, for instance
systematic changes of interaction networks,
rank profiles etc.?
• Axiology: Even if personal violence could be
seen as indispensable, there still is a good
reason for a systematic search for the
conditions under which this indispensability
would disappear.
 3. Cultural violence
• Cultural violence refers to any aspect of a
culture that can be used to legitimize violence
in its direct or Structural form.
• Symbolic violence, built into a culture does
not kill or maim like direct violence or the is
violence built into the structure.
• Legitimizes or justifies both
• Cultural violence makes direct and structural
violence look even feel right - or at least not
wrong.
 Cultural Peace
• Is the negation of cultural violence.
• Cultural peace refers to aspects of a culture
that serve to justify and legitimize direct peace
and structural peace.
 Examples of Cultural Violence
• Cultural violence is exemplified in,
1. Religion
2. Ideology
3. Language
4. Art
5. Empirical science
6. Formal science
 What is Peace ?

Given the diverse forms of violence we have

seen, peace has to be defined the absence of
violence.
• NEGATIVE PEACE
• POSETIVE PEACE,
What are the strategies of building
Negative peace ?
• Diplomacy, negotiations and conflict
resolution
• Peace through strength, “if you want peace,
prepare for war”
Balance of power
Collective security
• Disarmament and arms control
• International organizations
• International law
• World government, supranational authority
 Building Positive Peace
What are the pathways to building positive peace
?
These include:
A. Promotion and Protection of human rights
B. Ecological well being
C. Economic well being
D. Non-violence
E. Personal transformation
 Chapter 3
Causes of Conflict and Violence –
Theory
• What are the causes of conflict ?
Human fault lines
• Human condition is cut through fault lines
gender and generation; race, ethnicity and
nationality; class (political, economic, military,
Cultural depending on the type of power
involved); and ecology/environment.
These are deep-seated causes of conflict
How do these fault lines lead to conflict ?
 Human nature, aggressiveness
 Scarcity of resources
 Social structures, inequality, exploitation,
repressions
 Why do people, groups and states
fight ?
• Unresolved conflict, underneath violence.
• However, this not always the case
• People/groups and states also become violent
for lots of different other reasons.

Psychological and sociological theories

 Psychological and Sociological
Theories
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL THEORIES
Why do individuals tend to be violent ?
Two major theories,
a. Human Nature theories
b. Non Human Nature Theories
 A. Human Nature Theories

Barash and Webel (2002) had outlined four

major theories of human nature as a source of
violence. These are
1.Instinct theory 2) sociobiology 3) Freudian
and post-Freudian psycho analysis 4) the
postulation of innate human depravity.
ALL these theories focus on the role of the
inborn, human factors
 1.Instinct Theories
• These theories maintain that war and violence
is a result of human nature.
• Aggression is viewed as an instinctive
behavior of human beings.
• Violence is attributed to our biological
heritage, directly to genetic, hormonal and
neurobiological and evolutionary mechanisms.
• The tendency of Human beings to form
dominancy hierarchies,
… defend territories (territoriality) and behave
aggressively.
• This is a behavior comparable with other
species.
• Key contributors here include Konrad Lorenz
• Their works extrapolate war/violence from
human drive.
 2. Sociobiology and evolutionary
psychology
• These two theories emphasize on evolution.
• They focus on the adaptive significance of
behavior , not on spontaneous behavior.
• Scholars in this field emphasize on the
particular behavior patterns that are
maintained or promoted in a population
because they contribute to the reproductive
success of individuals that posses those traits.
• Violence is thus seen as instrumental for
adaptation and survival and reproducing.
• The focus here is thus, on the biological nature
of creatures and phenomenon such as
ecological competition for food, nesting sites
etc, male to male competition for dominance
and for mates.
Violence is seen as adaptive and reproducing
strategy.
• Charles Darwin, the struggle for survival,
survival of the fittest
Charles Darwin
 3. Freudian and post-Freudian
Psychoanalytic theory.
• In his work Freud attributed much of
humanity’s more “ inhumane ” behavior to the
operation of the death instinct, Thantos as
opposed to the Eros, life instinct.
• The death instinct works in every species.
• People need to repress primitive tendencies
toward destructive and aggressive behavior if
they are to live together with a minimum of
violent conflict
 According to Freud,
Parents must provide discipline for their
children
Society must restrict its citizens
Some form of supra national authority is
necessary to enforce the systems of world
government over individual states that would
otherwise function anarchically.
 Freud’s concept of narcissistic
injury
• Narcissism implies Excessive or erotic interest
in oneself and one's physical appearance.
• Narcissism involves infatuation with oneself
• When the individual associates himself or
herself with a larger group, especially, with
the nation state, slights of injuries to the group
are easy to perceive as injuries to oneself.
• Narcissistic injury leads to Narcissistic rage,
the compulsion to revenge and undo the hurt
• This has often resulted in the perpetration of
self righteously employed violence.
Sigmund Freud(1856-1939)
 4.Innate depravity and human
Nature
• This claim is based on a arguments drawn
from biology, moral outrage and on theology.
• It views human nature as “innately deprived,
nasty, and evil.”
• Hobbes, for instance, writing during the
English civil war (1642-1649), talked about
the the lust for power which only ceases with
death.
• The argument from conservative Christian
tradition, which teaches human nature is
inherently flawed. Suffused with original sin,
human beings are deemed to be inherently
incapable of becoming good.
• Not only the capacity for violence but also a
deep seated love for blood letting, hatred and
destruction.
 Limitations of the Human Nature
theories
• What are the limitations/ weaknesses of human
nature theories ?
1. Though it is a widespread human trait, war is
not a universal.
There are cultures and people who have not been
engaged in war.
Examples: Tasaday of the Philippines island,
South African Bush men( San)
• Semai, in South east Asia and the Inuit,
apparently have never been engaged, tough
there are instances of personal violence.
• http://www.peacefulsocieties.org/
2.Even in war prone cultures, there have been
many years of peace. if human nature causes
war, it must also cause peace. How do we
explain the years that follows after the end of a
war ?
3. The existence of war conscientious objectors
• War resisters, peace advocates and long time
non violent traditions such as the Quakers and
Mennonites. Are these people less human or
natural ?
3. The fact that animals behave in certain way
does not necessarily lead us to conclude that
Humans also behave in the same way. Human
beings seem to be unique given with their
capacity to reason.
4. If war is a result of fixed human nature, then it
is “predestined and unavoidable.”
This discourages people from seeking to end war
and seeking solutions
 Non-human nature Theories
These theories do not depend on explicit
assumptions about human nature.
• Frustration-aggression: According to this
theory aggressiveness is caused by frustration,
which is in turn is an interference in the
pursuit of one’s goal.
 Social Learning
• Violence is the result of the experience of the
individuals than their genetic constitution
• Fighting does not arise spontaneously from
our body.
• It rather comes from learning and socialization
 Conditioning
• This was developed by B.F Skinner
• Violence is a result of conditioning
• conditioning theory suggest that people tend to
behave aggressively when such behavior leads
to reinforcing (i.e) positive results and the
likely hood of aggression minimizes when it
leads to negative results.
• Examples: Appeasement policy of Europeans
against Nazi Germany in the 1930s (Positive
reinforcement)
• America’s adventures in south east Asia and
Somalia was negatively reinforced ultimately
leading to reluctance by the US to commit
American ground troops to combat
 Socialization to aggressiveness
• Some societies socialize their members with
aggressive behaviors
• They actively encourage aggressiveness from
early childhood.
• Children, especially male children learn to
embody the values of aggressive dominance
• Example: The Fulani children in Nigeria learn
to beat their cattle to prevent them off
wandering, to fight unhesitatingly.
• We learn not only to fight but also to “hate”
 Self-full filling Behaviors
• Self-full filling Prophecy is a theory which
states that a belief becomes true if enough
people believe in it
• In the field of aggressiveness it means that
people may create their own environment
simply by behaving with certain expectations.
• For example if someone is secretive,
suspicious and blameful, he or she is likely to
elicit comparable behavior.
• aggressive behavior and hostility often begets
 Redirected aggression
• This is a form of aggression generated by
other sources but not directed to the source.
• Usually the victims of redirected aggression
are smaller weaker, or subjects of social abuse
already
 Authoritarian personality
• Following the death of 6 million European
Jews, scholars had focused on the personal
traits and experiences which predispose people
to anti-Semitism and related authoritarianism
and antidemocratic ideologies.
• Authoritarianism is correlated with
hierarchical family structure.
• The husband dominant over the wife, and
parents especially the father demanding
unquestionable obedience and loyalty from
their children.
 Alienation and Totalism

• Unlike other scholars who focus on drives,

some scholar such as Erich Fromm and Erik
Erikkson has focused on how societal culture
and the environment contributes on people’s
propensity for engaging in violent behavior
and other anti social conduct.
• Alienation: acute loneliness and disconnection
from others
• Alienation results in revenge by acts of
violence and revenge with extreme destruction
• Alienated people are also ripe candidates for
inclusion in violent organizations.
• Alienation is not always expressed in terms of
psychological health of the individual
• Alienation could also be the feelings of social
and political alienation may also motivate
people to employ violence.
• Totalism: this refers susceptibilities to all or
nothing simplification, us versus them, good
versus evil.
Causes of violence at Group Level
• Even if individuals are key, war is a group
endeavor
• What makes groups violent against others ?
 1.The Quest for survival and
adaptation
• 17thC is often taken as the beginning of the
modern era
• These apply, particularly, to pre-modern wars.
• Primitive and pre-modern wars were
functional and adaptive than they were
maladaptive
 Pre-modern intergroup wars
• Pre modern in the sense of wars before the
17thc
• 17thc is often regarded as the beginning of the
modern era in the west
• These were primary non technological,
mortality was low
 Why were they adaptive ?
• Because they had positive contribution to
human evolution
• They have provided social solidarity for each
competing unit,
• Yielded access to resources( notably, food
territory or mates)
• Good comradeship and personal
trustworthiness and the capacity of individuals
to subordinate
• These were instrumental for developing
individual social and moral qualities essential
for effective cooperation and higher forms of
social organization.
• In addition to these, pre-modern wars have
also served a number of other functions.
 Functions of pre-modern wars
• Outlets for aggressiveness of young men and
thus reduce within-soceity tensions
• Provide opportunities for social development
• Gain access to food resources
• Obtain women from neighboring groups
• Obtain land from neighboring groups
• Correct imbalance in sex ratio – in some
societies female infanticide create an excess of
males, which can be corrected by mortality
during war
• Achieve revenge.
• Provide opportunity for enlargement of tribal
dominion and for certain individual to
establish large kingdoms or empires
Characteristics of pre-modern wars
• Fighting, private and angry: this has a criminal
character
• Fighting, collective and organized, among
groups having the same cultural trait
• Armed raids, the purpose could be as type of
man hunting sport
• Warfare as a political expression of early
nationalism
 2. Dehumanization
• This refers to the tendency to dehumanize
members of the other group.
• to give the impression to compatriots , and at
least on subconscious level to oneself that , the
others are not or fully human beings.
• This is easy to apply to those groups who are
recognizably different because of language,
appearance, cultural practices, religion and
political ideology
• Dehumnization deprives members of the other
group their humanity, as a result of which they
can be killed with little or no remorse
 3.Nationalism
• This is one of the most powerful forces of
modern times.
• What is nationalism and how does it cause
group violence ?
• Its root word is derives from the Latin, natio,
referring to birth
• Nationalism also refers to,
Yearning of a people to constitute themselves
as part of a nation, typically to form a nation
state and often to adjust geographic boundaries
so as to increase the size of their domain
to incorporate other who share the same sense
of national identity and to establish their
nation as significant ,if not prominent.
Nationalism as a cause of violence
• Valuing and devaluing: the love of one nation
is often combined with antagonism toward
other nations. The tendency to value oneself
and devalue the other
• National independence: the clamor to form a
nation state, eg Algeria, Portuguese colonies in
southern Africa
• National prestige: many of the classic
interstate wars of modern history have been
stimulated by issues of national prestige.
• This could be at the state level or individual
level.
• The aggressiveness by the US, Japan and
Germany to become great nations
• The maintenance of national prestige and
avoidance of humiliation looms large in the
calculation of every state
• Secessionism: yearning to secede from a
larger collectivity of which they do not feel a
part.
• Examples,
• the ibos in Nigeria, the Biafra war
• Kosovars in the former Yugoslavia
• Chechens in Russia
 Why do countries are often
determined to defeat secessionism?
• It is an issue of national pride
• The people who want to leave often tend to
have resources
• The hope for larger or greater state
• Demands of national self determination may
lead to other similar questions
 Re-intergrationism

• People in a region may seek to become

associated with a homeland in which their
nationality is represented
• Example: the Greco –Turkish hostility in
Cypres. In part, this was caused due to efforts
on the part of Greece Cypriots to reintegrate
their population into the Greek nation
• Catholics in Northern Ireland who would like
their province to join the republic of Ireland.
 Irredentism
• Irredentism, the yearning by a nation to
incorporate their kin in other states.
• This has led to violence in the form of uniting
the nations
• Example: the Greater Somalia Ideology
 International or transnational
solidarity
• This national solidarity builds on the belief
that Nationhood extends across boundaries
• This incites strong sense of empathy and
connectedness with fellow nationals living in
another state.
• It prompts intervention when fellow nationals
living elsewhere are assumed to be abused
• Examples:
India’s intervention in the Pakistani civil war
in 1971
Arabs support to the Palestinians
African countries solidarity against apartheid
south Africa.
• Turkey aiding the Turkish population in
Cyprus
• Hitler’s invasion of Czechoslovakia and
Poland to protect ethnic Germans
 3.Racial and cultural intolerance
• many hostilities in the world involve different
nationalities and ethnic groups in conflict.
• This refers to group intolerance, racial or
cultural.
• However, the mere fact of ethnic difference is
far from sufficient.
• Many plural societies live in fact peacefully,
examples, Belgium, Switzerland
• There also cases in which similar ethnic
groups have fought wars, these include
North an south Korea, north and south
Vietnam, Prussians and Austrians
Ethiopia and Eritrea etc
 Cause of violence at State Level
• Why do states fight ?
• What makes states violent ?
 1. State sovereignty

• What is State sovereignty ?

• How does it leads to violence ?
• Sovereignty is state’s supreme authority over
citizens and subjects (Jean Bodin 1576).
• The state is the final arbiter of earthly disputes
and issues, there is not higher recourse.
• the Dutch Jurist Hugo Groitus, considered the
relationship of sovereign rulers to each other.
• According to him, in light of sovereignty, no
ruler could be subjected to legal control by the
other.
• These implies the two key dimensions of
sovereignty
1. Internal
2. External
Sovereignty as a source of violence
– internally
• The state has supremacy over its citizens
• the state is elevated over the individual, ex.
Communism, conservatism
• the state has the legitimate monopoly over
violence
• The state claims the right tokill and perpetrate
violence against its own citizens
• Treason, sedition, murder and such activities
such as war, reprisals and pacifications provide
the state the privilege to kill its own citizens.
• The state also tries to prevent any other
person from killing within its jurisdiction by
enforcing laws against homicide, insurrections
and invasions.
 State sovereignty as source of
violence- externally
• State sovereignty created international
anarchy, a world composed of states which are
sovereign and legally equal, and cannot by
definition, recourse to a higher authority in the
solving of disputes
• The doctrine of sovereignty has resulted in the
lack of an overriding central authority with the
legitimacy and power to carry out its decrees.
• Even the UN Charter clearly states that it does
not seek to restrict the sovereignty of the
states.
• When states disagree seriously, given that they
are legal equals, they are in theory free for
violent test of strength.
• Disagreement between states are more likely
to lead to violence – disagreements over
boundary, territory and one’s role regionally or
internationally
 2. Ideology
• Competing ideologies have also been a source
of violence internationally.
• Among other things the cold war was caused
by ideological differences
 3. Internal cohesion
• A state may cause wars for enhancing its
internal cohesion and raise nationalist feelings.
 4.Diversionary wars
• These are wars undertaken for diverting
attentions
• The state/ government may wage war to divert
the attention of the population from local
problems and issues, i.e key socio-political
problems and failures at home.
 5. Arms Race
• Short of war, arms race is the most prominent
and war like form of competition
• Intense competition between opposed powers,
each trying to get a military advantage over
the other
 The interstate system and its
contributions to violence
• How did the current interstate system came
into being ?
• How does the system serves as a source of
violence ?
 The Origins of the Current State
System
• Anthropologists have focused on various
issues, such as production of agricultural
surpluses and the emergence of centralized
organization to store it
• Still others focus on the beginning of pre-
technological civilization with arid
environments, particularly, the beginning of
irrigation agriculture
• Many social scientists and historians, however
ascribe greater emphasis on conquest.
• the conquest theory explains the origin of the
state as follows – larger well integrated
sociopolicial groups succeeded in conquering
smaller, less integrated rivals , eventually
leading to a modern state system.
• This is widely thought to have originated in
Europe with the peace of Westphalia (1648)
which ended the thirty years war.
• The organization of the people into states
constitutes a major fact of life in today’s world
crucial to issues of war and peace.
• This is due to the sovereignty principle which
the system is based on.
• They states are left to freely act with other
states to maintain and enhance their power and
international position.
• In the current interstate system, states fight in
order to “acquire, enhance or perserve their
capacity to function as an independent actors
in the international system.”(Michael
Howard).
• Similarly, French Political Theorist, Raymond
Aron says that the stakes for war are the
existence, creation or the elimination of the
states.
• Therefore, the very structures of the state-
system seems to serve as a cause of violence.
• Peace activists and progressive scholars have
criticized the existing state system and its
excessive focus on states.
• In particular, the state centered view of the
world politics makes the continuation of the
state a foregone conclusion, thereby shutting
out the possibility of other kinds of peaceful
organization.
• However, it has also been argued that the
problem does not entirely lie on the entire state
system.
This is based on arguments of,
1. Since the end of the second world war, the
number of states has tripled. On the other
hand, the number of interstate wars has
declined.
2. Certain states are disproportionately involved
in wars, these overwhelmingly tend to be the
great powers in Europe.
For example, of the 2,600 most important battles
involving European states between 1480-1940,
France participated in 47%, great Britain and
Russia in 22%(Quincy Wright)
• Thus, this leads us to two ways of thinking
regarding the reasons for war.
1. Systemic analysis: here the most significant
factor is considered to be the pre-existing
organization of the states, ideologies or
individual or .group inclinations.
2. Situational analysis: each war is different in
its own ways, a function of specific events,
actors and unique situations.
 Chapter -IV: TOWARDS THE
RESOLUTION OF CONFLICTS:
CONFLICT ANALYSIS

• What is conflict analysis ?

• Why do we need to analyze conflicts ?
• How can we analyze conflict ?
 Meaning
• Conflict analysis is “a practical process of
examining and understanding the reality of
the conflict from a variety of
perspectives”(Fisher, et al, 2000:17).
• This understanding then forms the basis on
which the strategies can be developed and
actions planned (Ibid).
• Conflict analysis informs decision making with
the aim of improving the effectiveness of
conflict prevention, conflict management and
peace building interventions, including the
effectiveness of development and
humanitarian assistance.
• Put differently, Conflict analysis enables us to
gain a better understanding of the dynamics,
relationships and issues of the
situation”(Fisher, et al, 2000)
• This in turn help the conflict resolution experts
to plan and carry out better actions and
strategies
 Why do we need to analyze
conflicts?
• The definition above makes the objectives
clear.
• However, Simon Fisher and his colleagues
have identified the following specific
objectives.
• To understand the background and history of
the situation in the past and in present.
• To identify all the relevant groups involved,
and not just the main or the obvious one’s
• To understand the perspectives of all the
parties involved and to know more about how
they relate to each other
• To identify factors and trends that underpin
the conflict
• To learn from failures as well as successes
 How can we analyze conflicts ?
• there are a number of tools for analyzing
conflicts
• Simon Fisher, Dekha Ibrahim Abdi, Jawed
Ludin, Richard Smith, Steve Williams, Sue
Williams (2000) identified the following Nine
techniques of conflict analysis.
• These are: stages of conflict, Timelines,
conflict mapping, the ABC triangle, the onion
tool,
• the conflict tree, force-field analysis, Pillars,
Pyramid
 1.Stages of Conflict
• This is a graphic illustration which shows the
increasing or decreasing intensity of the
conflict plotted along a particular time scale.
• The stages of conflict tool of analysis is
useful,
 To identify points of escalation and de-
escalation
 to identify where the situation is now
To identify a period of time to be analyzed
later using other tools.
• The stages of conflict can be used early in a
process of analysis to identify patterns in the
conflict or later to help the process of strategy
building.
• The analysis of the stages should be done
from the viewpoints of the different sides or
different parts of a country in conflict.
• Use a fire analogy, seeing the stages as the
increasing and decreasing intensity of a fire.
•
 The Stages in conflict
• Simon fisher and his colleagues have identified
the following stages.
• Pre-conflict: the period where we have
incompatibility of goals between two or more
parties. the conflict is hidden from the general
view.
• Confrontation: the conflict has become
open, the relationship between the parties is
strained and get polarized.
• Outcomes include one side or the other side
defeated. One or the other party may
surrender or give into the demands of the
other party. The parties may agree to
negotiations. a third party may impose an end
to the fighting.
• Often at this stage the intensity of the
tensions, the violence of the party’s decreases
with some prospect of settlement
• Crisis: this is the peak of the conflict, when
the tension or the violence is tense.
• In large scale conflict this is the time where
people get killed, normal communication
between the parties has probably ceased.
• Outcome: this refers to the consequence of
the conflict.
• Post Conflict Stage: at this phase, the
conflict is resolved, incompatibilities
addressed, violent confrontations are ended,
and tensions decrease and more normal
relationship between the parties emerge.
• If the deep seated issues of the conflict are
not resolved, however, there would be a
return to a pre conflict situation.
 2. TIMELINES
• Timelines is a graphic illustration that shows
events plotted against a particular time scale.
• It lists dates (years, months, or days
depending scale) and depicts events in
chronological order.
• Timeline shows the succession of events and
is often used in historical chronology and
analysis
the timeline tool is useful,

To show the different views of the history of

the conflict.
To clarify and understand each side’s
perception of events.
To identify which events are most important
to each side.
 3. CONFLICT MAPPING
• Conflict mapping is a technique used to
represent the conflict graphically, placing the
parties in relation to both to the problem and
to each other.
• A visualizing technique for showing the
relationships between parties to conflict.
• When people with different viewpoints map,
their situation together, they learn about each
other’s perceptions experiences and
perceptions
• Conflict Mapping enables us,
Identify the parties in relation to the problem
To see where allies or potential allies lie
To see where the power lies
 How can we map Conflicts ?
1. Decide what you want to map, when and
from what point of view. Choose a particular
moment in a specific situation. Mapping the
whole of a regional conflict might be time
consuming, so large and so complex, that is is
not really helpful.
2. Put yourself and your organization on the
map as a reminder that you are part of the
situation, not above it when you analyze it.
3. Mapping Is Dynamic – it reflects a
particular point in a changing situation – do
several mapping of the same situation from a
variety of view points.
4. In addition to the objective aspect of conflict,
include also the issues which the conflict is
about. why does the conflict exists ?
 4. THE ABC Triangle
This analysis is based on the premise that
conflicts have THREE major components, the
Context, or the situation, the Behavior of
those involved, and their Attitudes.
These three factors influence each other. For
instance a context which denies the demand
of one group might lead to an attitude of
frustration which may lead in protests.
 The ABC tool is useful
• To identify these three set of factors for each
of the major parties.
• To analyze how these influence each other
• To relate these to the needs and fears of each
party
• To identify a starting point for intervention.
 How can we use the ABC triangle
1.Draw up an ABC triangle for each of the major
parties in the conflict situation
2. On each triangle, list the key issues related to
attitudes, behavior and context from the view
point of each of the party. if the parties are
participating in the analysis they can make
each their own triangles each from their own
perspective
3.Indicate for each party what you think are
their most important needs or fears in the
middle of their triangle. this will be YOUR
perception
4. Compare the triangles, noting similarities and
differences between the perceptions of the
parties.
5. The Onion Tool/ Doughnut Tool
• This is a way of analyzing what the different
parties to the conflict are saying.
• The onion tool helps us to move beyond the
public position of each party and understand
each parties interests and positions.
• The tool is based on the analogy of onion
forming three parts, the outer layer, inner
layer and the core.
• The outer layer contains the position that we
take publicly for all to see and hear. These are
the position of the parties.
• The inner layer underlines the outer layer and
refers to the interests of the parties – what
the parties want to achieve
• The core: these lie beneath the inner layer and
refer to the most important needs that we
require to be satisfied.
• This tool is useful for the parties involved in
negotation.
• Helps the parties and the negotiator to see
the interior layers of the conflict
• In times of instability and conflict, do not often
reveal their needs
• The onion tools helps to uncover interior
layers beyond the positions of the parties.
 6. The Conflict Tree
• This is graphic tool using the image of a tree to
sort out the key issues of the conflict.
• This can particularly be used when the group
is having a difficulty in agreeing about the core
problem in their situation.
• The tool is based on the analogy of the tree as
having, the roots, the trunk, and branches
The conflict tree tool is useful
• to stimulate discussion with regard to causes
and effects of conflicts
• To help the actors agree on the core problem
• To relate the causes and the effects each
other.
• To identify the core problem and issues
especially when the parties disagree
• That is, the conflict tree is very appropriate
when the parties have disagreements with
regard to:
• what the core problem is,
• what the root causes are,
• What the Effects of the conflict are
• what the important issue for the group to
address first
• With the use of the tree, the conflict tree
helps us to identify,
 The Core problem(s) – The trunk
Causes – the root
Effects – the branches
• Video
 How to use it ?
1. draw a picture of a tree, including its roots,
trunk and branches on a large sheet of paper,
a chalkboard or a flipchart
2. give each person a card or a paper to write a
word or two or draw a symbol or a picture
indicating a key issue in the conflict as they
see it.
3. Invite people what they have written to put it
on the picture of the tree, on the trunk if they
think, it is the core problem, on the roots if
they see it is a root cause, on the branches, if
they see it as an effect.
4. After all the cards are placed on the tree,
engage the group in discussion to reach some
form of agreement on the placement of
issues, particularly, the core problem.
5. If an agreement is reached, ask the people
which issues they want to be addressed first in
dealing with conflict.
6.This process may take a long time and may
need to be continued in further group
meetings.
 7. Force-Field Analysis
• The Force- field analysis is a tool for
analyzing both the negative and positive forces
in a conflict.
• It can particularly be used when planning a
strategy or action to clarify the forces that
might support or hinder what you intend to do.
• In particular, this tool is very important ,
To identify those forces which either support
or hinder a plan of action or a desired change
To assess the strength of these forces and our
own abilities to influence them.
To determine ways of increasing the positive
forces and decreasing the negative forces
 How can we do the force-field
Analysis ?
1. Begin by naming your specific objective, i.e.
the action you intend to take or the change you
desire to achieve. Write this objective at the
top of the page and draw a line the center of
the stage
2. On one side of the line, list all the forces that
seem to support and assist change that is to
happen. Next to each one draw an arrow
towards the center, varying the length and or/
thickness of the arrow to indicate the relative
strength of each force
3. On the other side of the line, list all the forces
that seem to restrain or hinder the desired
action or change from happening. Next to each
one draw an arrow pointing back towards the
center, against the direction of the desired
change. Again the length and/or thickness of
each arrow can indicate its relative strength.
4. Consider the forces which you can influence
either to strengthen the positive forces or to
minimize in some way the negative forces, so
as to increase the likely hood of the desired
change taking place.
5. Reviewing: review your plan of action and
make modification to your strategy in order to
build up on the strengths of positive forces and
, while also trying to minimize or remove the
effects of negative forces.
 8. Pillars
• This is a graphic illustration of elements or
forces that are holding up an unstable
situation.
• It is based on the assumption that some
situations are not really stable, but are “held
up” by a range of factors or forces – the pillars
(Fisher et al , 2000:31).
• And thus, If we can identify these pillars and
try to find ways to remove them or minimize
their effects on the situation, we will be able
to topple a negative situation and build a
positive one.
• In particular, this tool is particularly relevant,
• For understanding how structures are sustained
• To identify the factors that are maintaining an
undesirable situation.
• To consider ways to weaken or remove
negative factors or perhaps to change them to
more positive forces.
 How can we the use Pillars tool?
1.Identify the conflict, the problem or injustice
and show this as an inverted triangle standing
in one point.
2. Identify the forces or the factors seeming to
maintain the situation. Show them as
supporting pillars on both sides of the triangle.
3.Consider how each of these pillars might be
weakened or removed from the situation.
Breifly list your strategy for each pillar.
4. Consider what stable situation would replace
the unstable one.
 9. The Pyramid
• This tool is useful when one wants to analyze
conflict that have more than one layer.
• This is a graphic tool which shows you the
level of stakeholders in a conflict.
• With this method we can identify, the key
actors or parties at each level.
• In particualry, the Pyramid tool helps us,
• it helps us to identify key parties of conflict at
each level including leadership at each level
• It helps us to identify the level which we are
working and find out how we might include
other levels.
• To assess what types of approaches or actions
are appropriate for work at each level
• To consider ways to build links between the
levels.
 When to use the Pyramid
The pyramid tool is appropriate,
• When analyzing a conflict that seems to
include actors at various levels.
• When planning actions to address multilevel
conflicts
• When deciding where to focus one’s actions.
The levels could be three, two or even more.
Other Tools of Analysis
 The conflict wheel

• The conflict wheel is a “meta” conflict

analysis tool introducing other tools
• The wheel is divided into sections
• Each sections of the wheel represents the
elements of a conflict.
• As appropriate, each conflict analysis tool is
used to further analyze the various elements of
the conflict.
 Uses of the wheel
• To organize the other conflict analysis tools
• To serve as an overview when first
approaching a conflict.
 How to use the wheel
1. Draw a wheel;
2. List the various aspects of the conflict in the
six sections of the wheel.
3. Choose further conflict analysis tools for
those aspects you want to examine in more
depth.
INMEDIO’S CONFLICT PERSPECTIVE ANALYSIS (CPA)

• CPA is a method to analyze a conflict in a step

by step process, developed by Inmedio
mediators for micro (interpersonal),meso
(organizational) and macro area.
• CPA focuses on the different perspectives of
the involved parties; this helps conflict parties
to broaden their view.
• Ulterior motives become more visible and
seem less threatening.
• This is particularly useful for a mediator
involving in a conflict
• It helps him deal the conflict constructively by
illuminating the contradictory perspectives of
the parties.
 Needs-Fears Mapping
• The Needs-Fears Mapping is an actor oriented
clarification tool.
• For each actor, the issues, interests
,expectations, needs, fears, means and options
are identified.
• This enables comparison and quick reference
 Multi-Causal Model
• This is based on the assumption that violent
conflict often have multiple causes and layers
• Disputes have their roots in psycho-sociological,
socioeconomic, political, and international
conditions.
• The concept differentiates structural from actor-
oriented factors by synthesizing system and actor
approaches.
• .
• It focuses on causation, on the different quality
of reasons, triggers, channels, catalysts, and
targets.
• Content and actors, dynamics and structures
are also considered.
 Glasl’s Escalation Model
• The model aims to fit our conflict intervention
strategy to the conflict parties’ escalation level.
• As the level of escalation increases, the
intervening party has to become more forceful
in its form of intervention, because the
potential for self-help of the involved parties
decreases.
• The forcefulness of an intervention increases
from level one, where the parties may accept a
conflict management intervention based on
trust, to level nine where parties often have to
be forced to accept an intervention.
• Interactive forms of conflict intervention are
suitable in low- or mid-level escalated conflicts
where the involved parties are still willing to sit
together to discuss the conflict.
• In later stages, forceful intervention might
become appropriate.
 The 3PS
• This is an analysis tool developed by John
Paul Lederach (1995)
• It emphasizes on three elements of conflict –
People, Process and Problem.
• The tool helps us to understand the problem
and the dynamics of the conflict and be able to
identify the peopel who can work with us in
peace building
 People
• People refers to the relational and psychological
elements of the conflict including people’s feelings,
emotions, individual and group perceptions of the
problem.
• Questions to ask include: Who is involved in the
conflict? Who are the primary parties in the conflict?
Who are the secondary parties? How does an
individual or group perceive the situation? How do
perceptions of the conflict differ between the groups?
 Process
• This refers to decision making by the people/
parties.
• Questions to ask include: What methods are
being used, if any, to resolve the conflict? Are
groups using violence or is the conflict playing
out in other ways (e.g. demonstrations, protests,
legal battles)? What is the phase of the
conflict? How has the behavior of the various
parties influenced the conflict?
 Problem
• Problem refers to the specific issues involved
in the conflict and the differences people have
between them.
• These are the roots causes of the conflict and
may involve different values, opposing views
about how to make a decision, incompatible
needs or interests, and concrete differences
regarding use, distribution, or access to scarce
resources (land, money, time).
• Questions to ask include: What are the issues
in the conflict? What are people fighting over?
What are the underlying needs of the various
parties in conflict?
 SPITCEROW
• This tool is developed by Christopher
Mitchell, at Gorge Mason university.
• SPITCEROW short form of the
elements/aspects that we need to examine in
conflict analysis
• SPITCEROW refers to,
• Sources Change over time
• Parties Escalation
• Interests Resources
• Tactics Outcomes and Winners
 Chapter -V
STRATEGIES OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION –
PEACE MAKING
How can we manage, regulate and control conflicts?
What are the strategies for achieving negative
peace ?
 Approach to Conflict resolution
• There are various approaches to conflict
resolution.
• These approaches and our understanding of
them influences the conflict resolution
techniques and strategies we employ.
• There are THREE core approaches to
conflict resolution.
 THREE Major Approaches
• Interest-based Approach
• Needs-based approach
• Rights-based approach
 Interest-based Approach
• It encourages a compromise based on the
division of loss and gains.
• Interest-based bargaining models are suitable
for organizational, industrial, matrimonial,
and other types of dispute that do not involve
widespread violence, confrontations with
authorities, or defiance of legal norms.
• Issues are framed in terms of manifest
interests, but the process is not appropriate
when responding to underlying grievances and
deeper concerns or needs.
• The “utilitarian value of the greatest good to
the greatest number” is applied to interest-
based approaches.
• This approach is particularly useful for the
distribution of material resources and settling
disputes on land and price differences.
 Needs-Based Approach
• This approach has been promoted by John
Burton and Edward Azar.
• This approach emphasizes on the fulfillment
of basic human needs.
• This approach is relevant to conflicts that
involve less tangible issues of self-esteem
and respect enmeshed with territorial or other
types of tangible objects that antagonists fight
over.
• In the Israel–Palestinian conflict, for example,
interests (tangible, such as land and water) are
associated with identity (intangible) issues.
• Identity needs can not be traded or
compromised.
• They rather need to be recognized and
satisfied.
• When needs are at stake traditional forms of
conflict resolution focusing on interest-based
negotiation and distributions of resources
would be insufficient.
 Rights-based approach
• This emphasis on restorative justice and
protection of human rights.
• Rights-based approaches range from a court
verdict to an arbitration to grievance
procedures.
• Emphasizes on punishing responsible actors.
• Limits the possibility for mutual coexistence
and reconciliation.
 Conflict Resolution Tools
There are TWO general forms of resolving
conflicts.
1. Litigation/ Judicial Settlement
2. Alternative Dispute Resolutions Mechanisms
(ADR)
 1. Litigation / Judicial Settlement

• Litigation refers to law suits, the process of

filing claims in courts, and ultimately going to
trial.
• Litigation makes an award based on facts and
evidence.
• Domestically, the parties employ the structure
of the judicial system , while internationally
states employ, the International Court of
Justice(ICG)
 Pros of Litigation
• Litigation is appropriate for interest-based
conflict, in the sense of making an
adjudication over disputes on material goods
and commodities.
• As a formal legal process, adjudication can
handle disputes in the areas of property rights
between individuals, an election result and
territorial disputes between states.
• Decisions are binding, court decisions are
binding having their own enforcement
mechanisms.
• A party reluctant for ADR can be forced for
judicial settlement
 Cons of Litigation
• Parties in the conflict have little control over
the process. The parties cannot choose a judge
or jury who delivers a verdict on their cases
and the outcomes.
• Court arguments are guided by precedents and
legal norms rather than an analysis of the
values and needs of the disputants.
• Litigation is EXPENSIVE!
• Litigation can become protracted and time
taking.
 2. Alternative Dispute resolution
Mechanisms (ADR)
• ADR is a collection of alternative mechanisms
for resolving a dispute without the need for
court proceedings.
• The THREE most common forms of ADR
are Negotiation, Mediation And
Arbitration.
• ADR has a number of advantages over
litigation
 Advantages of ADR
• It gives a chance for the quick resolution of the
dispute
• ADR provides for confidentiality
• It provides an opportunity for long lasting
solutions
• It provides for better communication and
preserving existing relationships.
• ADR provides parties control over the process
of conflict resolution and shape the outcomes.
• It provides a forum for fair decision making
and flexible remedies.
 Limitations of ADR
• ADR requires the agreement of the other party
which might not be forthcoming.
• ADR is almost always a voluntary procedure,
since both parties must agree to use it to settle
a dispute. One exception to this rule is court-
annexed ADR.
• Enforcement is left up to the parties.
• ADR might retain the status quo leading to the
continued exploitation of vulnerable sections
of the society, such as women.
 Negotiations
1. Meaning
• Negotiation is a process whereby the parties
within the conflict seek to settle or resolve
their conflict (Ramsbotham, et al, 2005:29).
• Negotiation is “puzzle to be solved”, a
bargaining game involving an exchange of
concessions”(Druckman, 2007:111).
• Negotiation is“ a communication process that
may takes place whenever you want
something from someone else or they want
something from you( Richard Shell,2005)
• According Fred Ikle (1964:3-4) Negotiation is
“a process in which explicit proposals are put
forward” for the “realization of a common
interest where conflicting interests are
present”.
• In contemporary world, negotiation is an
inevitable part of our daily life.
• In their best selling books, Roger Fisher
(1981) say that “like it or not you are a
negotiator”. “Negotiation is a fact of life.”
• In the broadest terms, negotiating activities
entail trading of concessions and invention of
options for mutual gain.
• The essence of negotiations is bargaining.
• The level of trust and past history of
cooperation affect a commitment to openness
and collaborative discussion.
 What Do We Aim In Negotiation?
• Preventing or stopping violence
• Advancing and protecting interests
• Building durable peace
• Changing attitudes and behaviors
• Defining a process
• Jointly solving problems
• Building relationships
 When To Use Negotiation ?

• To prevent violence before it has taken hold

• To stop violence once it has begun
• To prevent its recurrence and create conditions
for a lasting peace in the aftermath of violence
Useful Perspectives in negotiation

• A good negotiator is aware of that

negotiations may now show positive
results.
• Negotiations could be ploys!
• What do you do when negotiations fail ?
• The BATNA Helps you deal with this.
• The BATNA – Best alternative to a Negotiated
agreement.
• BATNAs are the alternatives that both sides
would take if they did not negotiate—or will
take if the negotiation fails.
• As Fisher and Ury state, “the reason you
negotiate is to produce something better than
the results you can obtain without
negotiating”; therefore, your BATNA is “the
standard against which any proposed
agreement should be measured.”
• BATNA is the standard which can protect you
both from accepting terms that are too
unfavorable and from rejecting terms it would
be in your interest to accept.
Positions, Interests and needs
Creating value vs distributing value
• This contrasts with haggling over a “fixed pie,”
where “one person gains at the expense of the
other”.
• creating value entails an integrative solution,
which involves finding an agreement “that is
better for both parties” through the joint
search for intelligent trade-offs.
 Styles/types of negotiations
• There are different styles. But the two most
common style of negotiation are:
1. Competitive Negotiation: this is most often
viewed as a process of competitive
bargaining, as when haggling over price.
• The goal of the competitive negotiator is to
make the greatest possible gains for his or her
side, to the detriment of the other.
• The interests of the parties are seen as
antagonistic
A model of Competitive
Negotiation
 2.Collaborative Problem Solving
• The goal of negotiation from the problem-
solving perspective is to solve common
problems that the parties face in order to
benefit everyone.
• Therefore, the issue under negotiation is best
defined not as a conflict between parties that
must be resolved but rather as a common
problem confronting all parties that must be
solved
• Collaborative problem solving is more likely
to get at fundamental interests and needs, and
more likely to lead to joint gains, than
competitive bargaining.
• Collaborative negotiations are particularly
helpful in disputes that involve several issues,
a variety of possible solutions, and where the
parties will have an ongoing relationship that
they wish to preserve.
• This form of negotiation assumes that
underneath the issues on the table are other
interests that need to be identified and
satisfied.
• Cooperative negotiation requires more skill
than competitive negotiating, and also takes
more time and money in that the negotiator
will thoroughly analyze the case and identify
all possible options.
 2. The Negotiation Process
It involves three core processes
1. Preparation Phase: research and understand
your case, identify goals and develop a
strategy and plan for the negotiation.
Preparation also entails the assessment and
prioritization of issues, a glimpse into
common interests or differences in goals as
well as the identification of a minimally
acceptable agreement
2. Preliminary stage: establish the tone of the
negotiation and a working relationship with
the other party.
Pre- negotiation focuses on decisions on what
will be on and off the table, venue, time, and
structure of the meeting space.
More specifically, it involves making decisions
on the frequency of the meetings, the length of
each meeting, facilities for a caucus or private
discussion, and the size and composition of
negotiating teams.
3. Formal Bargaining: this is the actual process
of negotiation.
• In general, bargaining starts with the
clarification of assumptions, the exchange of
each other’s list of priorities and bottom lines.
What are the essential skills of you
need as a negotiator ?
• Communication skills
• Listening skill
• The ability to process information
• Planning: the negotiator should plan his
strategy of negotiation
• Openness/ empathy
 Mediation
• Mediation is a process whereby a neutral third
party, acceptable to all disputants, facilitates
communication that enables parties to reach a
negotiated settlement.
• A negotiation process can be modified or
extended by the involvement of a third party.
• The participation of a mediator in negotiation
creates dynamics which are different from
straight negotiation
• The involvement of a third party in the conflict
creates a triangular relationship – it creates a
Triadic dynamics.
 What is the role of the
Mediator ?
• Facilitating communication, support
communication hampered by the conflict.
• Ability to manage adversarial relationships
• Identify concerns which each party is not
willing to openly disclose.
• Identify areas of agreement and disagreement
• Make Recommendations
• In short, the mediator is ‘a facilitator, educator
or communicator who helps to clarify issues,
identify and manage emotions, and create
options, thus making it possible to reach an
agreement avoiding an adversarial battle in
court (Horowitz, 2007)
 traits of a good mediator
• Credibility (being trusted and respected)
• Impartiality, commitment to serve all the
parties
• Neutrality
• communication skills
 Key skills of Mediation
• VIDEO
 Arbitration
• Arbitration shares a great similarity with the
court proceedings.
• This is a quasi judicial process within a legal
system.
• The parties select and present their claims to a
adjucating body known as arbitrators.
• In contrast with litigation, however, the merit
of arbitration permits private arrangements as
well as a certain level of informality and
flexibility.
• The arbitrator provides disputants with an
opportunity to be heard and considers all the
presented claims with supporting facts and
evidence prior to rendering an award which is
final.
• Communication patterns are characterized by
the procedures in which both parties make
arguments, respond to the other side, and
answer arbitrators’ questions at a hearing
• Since participants have to assent to accept the
outcome, goodwill, trust, and cooperation
between parties are not required.
• Impartial judgment is the most important
reference point of arbitration.
• In weighing the merits of a case, arbitrators
consider objective factual matters, and
• The major concerns for arbitrators ought to be
fairness, impartiality, equity, good conscience,
and natural justice.
 The International Permanent Court of Justice
(PCA) and tribunals and commissions under
the auspices of the PCA have examined not
only territorial and human rights disputes
between states but also commercial and
investment disputes.
• Ethiopia and Eritrea boundary dispute
• In the aftermath of armed conflict in Abyei,
the government of Sudan and the Sudan
People’s Liberation Army submitted their
dispute to arbitration in July 2008.
 The steps in Arbitration
The steps that involve in arbitration are
Selection of the arbitrators
Agreement on the procedural matters, such as
the law to be applied
filing of claims
hear the evidence
give an award
 Other concepts
Conciliation: Conciliation is often confused
with mediation since it also involves a third
party.
But conciliation can be taken as the early stage
in the process of mediation and conflict
resolution.
Conciliation is a process in which a third party,
called a conciliator, restores damaged
relationships between disputing parties by
bringing them together, clarifying perceptions,
and pointing out misperceptions.
 Successful conciliation reduces inflammatory
rhetoric and tension, opens channels of
communication and facilitates continued
negotiations.
• Frequently, conciliation is used to restore the
parties to a pre-dispute status quo, after which
other ADR techniques may be applied.
• Conciliation is pertinent when parties are
unwilling, unable, or unprepared to come to
the bargaining table.
 Reconciliation
• This is healing the wounds of the past
• A process that attempts to transform intense or
lingering malevolence among parties
previously engaged in a conflict or dispute into
feelings of acceptance and even forgiveness of
past animosities or detrimental acts.
• Reconciliation is very essential for creating
durable peace and long term stablity.
• Reconciliation is crucial to heal the trauma
and prevent perpetual cycles of retributory
violence.
 Strategies of Reconciliation
• Recourse to Justice
• Compensation
• Sincere expression of regret and remorse; and
elements of forgiveness
 Problem Solving Workshops
• Herbert Kelman
• Christopher Mitchell Lecture
 Other Strategies of Building
Negative Peace
1. Peace through Strength: this is a strategy of
maintaining peace through military strength,
• This has been the most politically potent and
influential concept of war prevention
throughout the 20th century.
• The motto of peace through strength is a
modern version of the Latin vis pacem,
parabellum – if you want peace, prepare for
war.
• This strategy thus uses violence or the threat of
violence to maintain negative peace.
• The two key strategies of peace through
strength are,
1. Balance of power: this is obtained when the
two contending states are roughly equal in
their military strength.
Balance of power primarily relies on deterrence,
the expectation that a would be aggressor
would refrain from attacking opponents who
are more powerful than itself.
• the purpose is then to maintain the mutual
threat symmetrical.
2. Collective Security: in collective security
states refrain from using force against any
member who is within a group, except that
they agree to band together against any
member who any other within the group.
• Collective security differs from balance of
power in that it relies on the participation of
each state as an individual, non aligned entity,
as opposed to a balance of unstable, constantly
shifting alliances.
2. Disarmament and Arms control
• Ideally, this could be a general disarmament of
all countries and complete in the sense of all
weapons.
• this is however very problematic. Some
countries posit an inalienable right to bear
arms.
• Some weapons are also usable for peaceful
purposes, such as construction and energy.
 Forms of disarmaments
• National disarmament to the lowest point
consistent with domestic safety, states would
maintain police forces, but nothing capable of
threatening of other states (Widrow Wilson)
• Selective disarmament: this a form of
disarmament focusing on offensive weapons,
notably, weapons of mass destruction, mainly,
refers to atomic, biological and chemical
weapons, known as weapons of mass
destruction or the so called ABC weapons.
Weapons Free Zones: The aim of weapons free
zones is to agree on the elimination of
weapons within a designated geographic area.
For instance, under the treaty of Tlatelolco,
most of the states in the western hemisphere,
not to develop or deploy nuclear weapons.
The Rush-Bagot treaty of 1817, which arranged
for the demilitarization of the US Canada
border helped set the stage for persistently
good relations between these two north
American neighbors.
 Arms Control
• The ongoing arms race has heightened citizen
anxiety and pushed the west to recognize the
growing dangers posed by radio active fallout
from above ground nuclear testing.
• Arms control focuses on setting up regulations
for the control of weapons.
• This is especially the case for weapons of
mass destruction at the international level.
• By regulating weapons and possession, arms
control aims at reducing the risk of a war
breaking out.
• In the event of a war breaking out, arms
control could still be useful in the sense that it
reduces the level of destruction sinc some
arms would not be deployed.
• Arms control also prevents competition and
creates an environment of mutual trust and
confidence
 3. International Organizations
• According to Kenneth Boulding, conflict
situations can be addressed by associative and
dissociative ways.
• The latter involves relying on military strength
and political separation, based on the notion
that “good fences make good neighbors.”
• International organizations are part of the
associative solutions that go beyond the
current state and look toward larger patterns of
integration.
International organizations could of two types,
1. Regional
2. Global
 The role of International
Organizations in Building
(Negative)
• Brokering peace, UN played a key role in
brokering peace and ceasefires
• Peace keeping
• Third-party mediation
• It is a forum for debate
• Prevents major power conflicts
 4. International law
• This is the law of states
• International law comes from treaties,
customary practices, court precedent and
opinions of jurists
• International law plays a core role in peace
building
 Roles of international law in
realizing Negative Peace
• Create some kind of international order and
norms
• International law creates tacit acceptance and
expectation. Governments often respect the
law
• International law provides for law of war, Just
ad bellum and Jus in bellum
• International law is an instrument for
punishing the perpetrators, the Nuremberg
tribunals
 5. World Government
• This pertains to the idea of forming a world
government by erasing existing political
boundaries and replacing them with
government at the largest level, a most
inclusive one, namely, world government.
• This is an attempt to form some form of world
wide government which acts as political
restraint on war making.
• Philosophers have been suggesting for a world
government to address the inherent problems
of the current international system since the
17th and 18th C.
• The most prominent of proponent of a world
government was Immanuel Kant
• In his small book, Perpetual Peace, Kant made
the first major effort to focus specifically on
the dangers of arms race and armaments.
• Consistent with the philosophy of
enlightenment, Kant maintained that the
ethical and intellectual truth exists independent
of time, place and matter.
• This truth is binding on all people because our
rational capacities transcend day to day
circumstances and permit us to grasp certain
fixed principles.
 Pros and Cons of a world
government
Pros
The world government can enforce peace just
like the domestic government, treating the
diverse government as municipal
governments.
• Avoids the effects of the existing anarchical
state system.
Cons
• The world government could become more
repressive; there is a danger of it being much
repressive.
• Given the current reality, the idea of a world
government might be quite unrealistic, large
states in particular are reluctant to accept the
idea.
• By focusing on the world government, we are
likely to lose touch with the world and its
serious problems as they now exist.
• This is especially important, given time
needed for establishing a world government.
World government will certainly not happen
 6. Ethical and Religious
Perspectives
• The role of moral teaching and religious
perspective in war has been ambiguous.
• Advocates of peace have often derived
inspiration and strength from such teachings.
• On the other hand, the warring parties have
also turned to religious and moral authorities.
• Religious leaders at times have been cheer
leaders of war, at other times, their role has
been acquiescence.
• Religion and moral teachings are crucial for
the establishment of peace.
• Church leaders should work for conflict
resolution, moral teachings of individuals can
help minimize personal violence.
• We have seen the transformative power of
religion and religious leaders in Iran, south
Africa and the US civil rights movements
 Chapter-VI: TOWARDS SUSTIENABLE/
POSITIVE PEACE – PEACE BUILDING
• Preventing war is a necessary condition for
the establishment of real peace, but it is not
sufficient.
• A world without war is certainly to be desired ,
but even this would not really produce a world
at peace.
• We should not only be against something, we
should also be in favor of something, and that
something is positive and affirmative peace.
Strategies for Realizing Positive Peace
 Protection and Promotion of
Human rights
• A great number of human beings are denied of
some of their basic human rights.
• Over one half of Asia and black Africa do not
have access to safe water
• Jails are filled with political prisoners, many of
them held without trial and victimized by
torture
• Child labor is widespread, women are
deprived of the basic rights men are for
granted.
• Billions of people are illiterate
• Communities are denied of their cultural rights
and the rights for self determination
• So, one key approach for building positive
peace is protection and promotion of human
rights
 2. Ecological wellbeing
• Here we are focusing on the relationship
between human kind and their environment
• All things are quite literally linked, ecology in
Greek means, house and peace must take into
account this interconnectedness.
• Some of the core environmental problems
today are pollution, global warming, soil
degradation, drought, depletion of resources.
• The solution that has been suggested to the
increasing environmental challenges of the
world is sustainable development
 3. Economic wellbeing
• Peace implies satisfaction, basic needs need to
be satisfied.
• Many people also rarely feel peaceful, when
they think their economic conditions are
inferior to the others – the concept of relative
deprivation
• In addition, there is little peace in the world in
which there is a “painful difference between
the rich and the poor and the haves and the
have not's.
 Peace – the Human security
approach
• The concept of human security, as defined by
the UN, embraces to twin objectives, i.e
“freedom from fear” (referring to the threat of
violence, crime, and war) and “freedom from
want” (referring to economic, health,
environmental and other threats to people’s
well-being).
• The concept of Human security shifts the
focus from state/national security to the
individual
• human secutity is understood to supersed
state security – further legitmizing “
humantarian intervention where the state is
unwilling or unable to guarantee the security
of its citizens.
• There have been concerted international
efforts for the addressing the security of
individual citzens. These included the MDGS
and the global development goals.
4. Non Violence
• Non violence consists of two words most
people regard as negative: no and violence.
• Although there are some ideas that it shares,
Non violence is different from Pacifism and
non-violent resistance.
• Pacifism denotes the rejection of the use of
violence as a personal decision on moral or
spiritual grounds, but does not inherently
imply any inclination toward change on a
sociopolitical level.
• Pacifism is a personal ethic and does not
involve a not necessarily involve political
action.
• Non-violence involve a daring and risk taking
course of action aimed at socio-political
change.
• The so called peace-churces are common
examples of pacfist communties.
• These include,
1. Brethren
2. Quakers
3. Mennonites
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi
• According Mahatma Gandhi’s, Non violence
basically involves two elements
These are: unwavering firmness vigils and fasts
1. Satyagraha:
• 2. Ahimsa, translates into non-violence in
English. It is the bed rock of Satyagraha, love
of non-violence for change.
 Non-violence strategies
• Non-violent protests
• Non-cooperation
• Non-violent interventions
• Civil disobedience
Non-violence today – Discussion
 Concluding Remarks
• Johan Galtung’s Lecture on Goals, triumphs of
the past and the future