UNIT 1

UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPTS OF CONFLICT AND PEACE BUILDING

 THE MEANING OF CONFLICT

The concept "conflict” has been defined by authorities in several forms and here are a few
of them:

i. Nicholson, (1992). Conflict is an existing state of disagreement or hostility between

two or more people.
ii. Nelson and Quick (1997) define conflict as any situation in which incompatible goals,
attitudes, emotions or behaviors lead to disagreement or opposition between two or
more parties.
iii. Procter (1995) defines conflict as an active disagreement between people with
opposing opinions or principles.
iv. Mankoe (2002) contends that conflict is a contest of opposing forces or powers; a
struggle to resist or overcome.
v. Conflict may be defined as a struggle or contest between people with opposing
needs, ideas, beliefs, values, or goals (Foundation Coalition, 2003).

From all the definitions, it is clear that conflicts denote disagreements, contradictions or
incompatibility. It is important to note that conflicts are a fact of life and are, therefore;
inevitable. Conflicts are thus, natural and necessary in any human institution. This means
that conflicts in themselves are not bad at all, but, the most important thing is how they are
handled. Conflict, like fire or electricity, is a good servant but can be a bad master
depending on how it is handled or managed.

 Conflict of Ideas

But it is important to note that not all conflicts are bad. You may not agree but this is very
true. There is a type of conflict is called conflict of ideas. It is an example of a good conflict.
Conflict of ideas is a clash of ideas between two or more individuals or groups who want
their ideas or viewpoints to be accepted. Also, called functional conflict, conflict of ideas
is a kind of conflict in which people freely express their views on different issues

1
affecting nations, organisations, communities and themselves. Conflict of ideas is thus a
competition of ideas which often leads to innovation and progress. That is, conflict of ideas
promotes development. This happens when the different ideas and positions held by
different people are put together for the best decisions to be taken. Conflict of ideas may
also be referred to as consensus building. Examples of such conflicts include staff meetings,
board meetings, parliamentary debates, etc.

 Conflict of Interest

This conflict of interest is destructive unlike conflict of ideas. It is a conflict between an

individual's personal interest and his or her public duty whether or not money is involved. It
can also be defined as a situation in which an official's private interest benefits from his or
her public actions or duty. Example of conflict of interest include: If a District Chief
Executive, Minister of State, Headmaster/Headmistress or any public official, for example,
awards a contract to his or her company or a relative's company, this is termed as conflict
of interest. The reason is that most people are not honest and so if they are left on their
own to award contracts to their companies or to that of their relatives or friends, they are
likely to increase the value of the project to promote their interest as against the interest of
the state.

 THE MEANING OF PEACE BUILDING

Peace building is the conscious effort to create an atmosphere of harmonious living in a

society. Peace building includes a wide range of efforts by diverse actors in government and
civil society at the community, national, and international levels to address the root causes
of violence and ensure civilians have freedom from fear (negative peace), freedom from
want (positive peace) and freedom from humiliation before, during, and after violent
conflict.

Peace building is an activity that aims to resolve injustice in nonviolent ways and to
transform the cultural & structural conditions that generate deadly or destructive conflict. It
revolves around developing constructive personal, group, and political relationships across
ethnic, religious, class, national, and racial boundaries. This process includes violence

2
prevention; conflict management, resolution, or transformation; and post-conflict
reconciliation or trauma healing, i.e., before, during, and after any given case of violence.

As such, peace building is a multidisciplinary, cross-sector technique or method which

becomes strategic when it works over the long run and at all levels of society to establish
and sustain relationships among people locally and globally—thus engendering sustainable
peace. Strategic peace building activities address the root causes or potential causes of
violence, create a societal expectation for peaceful conflict resolution, and stabilize society
politically and socioeconomically.

Peace building vary depending on the situation and the agent of peace building. Successful
peace building activities create an environment supportive of self-sustaining, durable peace;
reconcile opponents; prevent conflict from restarting; integrate civil society; create rule of
law mechanisms; and address underlying structural and societal issues. Researchers and
practitioners also increasingly find that peace building is most effective and durable when it
relies upon local conceptions of peace and the underlying dynamics which foster or enable
conflict.

The Nature of Conflicts

All conflicts are divided into violent and non-violent. ·

i. Violent conflicts: These are conflicts that lead to loss of lives and property. Such
conflicts involve the use of arms, cutlasses, machetes, axes and other dangerous
weapons. People are usually attacked physically, creating panic and insecurity in
the area. Examples of violent conflicts include the Dagbon conflict, Nanumba-
Konkomba war, Liberian war, etc.
ii. Non-Violent conflicts: These are conflicts that are characterised by
peaceful demonstrations amidst singing, drumming and dancing, verbal
exchanges, withdrawing, from one another, etc. In actual sense, non-violent
conflicts are not as serious as the violent ones. But it is important to note that if
non-violent conflicts are not handled while they can become violent or turn into
violent conflicts.

3
Means of Identifying Conflicts

Conflicts can be identified through the following means:

(i) Observation: Through observation, one may perceive visible changes in an existing
relationship , For example, one may observe a change in reception which is usually
accorded his or her. Certain actions which are unwelcome may also be seen or noticed.

(ii) Hearing: One will also be able to determine if there is a conflict by getting to hear what
other person or people are saying by oneself or through informants.

(iii) Feeling: One can sense or feel the conflict through how one is treated by the individual
or group of persons.

Symptoms of Conflict

(i) Furious argument

(ii) A fight (exchange of blows l
(iii) (iii) A cold look/cold reception
(iv) (iv) An returned greeting
(v) Work that is grudgingly done
(vi) A "them" and "us" vocabulary
(vii) Avoidance of social contact (withdrawal)

The symptoms may also include the following:

(i) Unhealthy competition

(ii) Breakdown in communication/communication gap
(iii) Anger
(iv) Aggressive behaviour
(v) Litigation
(vi) Assault (both verbal and physical)
(vii) War
(viii) Bloodshed

4
 (ix) Taking entrenched positions

 CAUSES OF CONFLICTS
 Causes of Conflicts at the Family Level

(i) Placing personal interest above others: In the family, if there are certain members
who always want to place their interest above the others, it means such people would want
to satisfy their needs without thinking about the welfare of others. When this happens,
those whose interests are disregarded may react causing conflicts.

(ii) Shirking of responsibilities: Every member of the family has certain responsibilities
to perform for the benefit of all the members. What will happen if some members fail to
perform their responsibilities? Certainly, it will affect the progress of the family. If some
members of the family refuse to perform their responsibilities, others will not take kindly to
it. Indeed, they may oppose to such a practice leading to conflicts.

(iii) Lack of, inadequate or mismanagement of resources: Do you know the importance of
resources to the family? Surely, resources keep the family going. Examples of resources
include food, money, labour, accommodation, television sets, fridges, chairs, etc. In fact,
families are maintained with resources. If a certain family does not have enough resources,
the members will not be able to cope with life. Sometimes, the lack of these resources may
create conflicts especially if certain members are blamed for being the cause of the
problem. Also, mismanagement of resources by any of the couples may generate conflict
especially if it impacts negatively on the family.

(iv) Intolerance: Intolerance refers to the practice of not accepting opinions, beliefs,
customs, etc. that are different from ours. Some family members are intolerant because
they reject own ideas on other members of the family. This is likely to cause conflicts
because those whose ideas or opinions are rejected may react violently.

(v) Suspicion: This is feeling one has about someone that he or she has done
something wrong. Do you know that some members are wrongfully accused or falsely
suspected? When this happens, those who are wrongfully suspected of committing some
form of crime may attack those who suspected them and this may create conflicts.

5
(vi) Disagreement between parents: It is a normal practice for parents to disagree on a
number of issues including how the family income is spent, the kind of school that
children are to attend, the type of punishment to be given to wayward children, etc. if such
disagreements are not handled with care, conflicts may occur.

(vii) Child delinquency or disobedience: Delinquency means bad behaviour especially by

young people. Examples of delinquent behavior include fighting, stealing, disrespectfulness
towards the elderly, bullying, smoking, engaging in pre-marital sex, etc. When children
misconduct themselves; they have to be corrected through punishment. Sometimes,
parents may disagree on the type of punishment to be given to the wayward child. In
certain cases, delinquent children may resist or challenge their parents for punishing
them. Both may lead to conflicts.

(viii) Discrimination by parents: If parents do not treat all their children fairly but,
discriminate against some of them, this will surely cause conflicts in the family. This is
because those who are discriminated against will never see eye to eye with their parents or
will not be on good terms with their siblings who are favoured or treated well by their
parents.

 The Causes of Marital Conflicts

1. Financial problems: One of the challenges that confront couples is lack or inadequate
finance. This may arise out of joblessness on the part of any of the couple or both for a
certain period of time. It may also come about due to the low wages or salaries that
couples receive from their places of work. Financial problem may also be caused by poor
financial management practices by one or both couple. When a couple is faced with
financial problems it makes it difficult for the basic needs of the family to be provided
leading to low standard of living of members. Usually during this period, the man as the
breadwinner of the family may be blamed leading to conflict and other undesirable effects
on the family.

2. Sexual problems: One of the things which make a happy marriage is the satisfaction of
sexual desires by the couple. Usually most couples have differences over how to manage

6
their sex life. That is, they are not compatible with their sex life. In some cases, they may
disagree on when to have sex. The number of times to have sex and the sex positions to
employ whenever they meet for sex. All the above have serious effects on the marriage.

3. Childlessness: In the Ghanaian society, child bearing is considered very important in

marriage and childlessness is perceived as shameful and sometimes, a curse. It is the desire
of every couple, therefore, to have children and when couples find it difficult to procreate,
it leads to frustration. This may affect the love between the couples and the peace they are
enjoying in the marriage. In certain cases, the couple may blame one another for their
childlessness and this may lead to conflict.

4. Lack of consensus on certain issues: Disagreements on certain vital issues between

couples are also considered as one of the challenges in marriage. Couples may disagree on
a number of issues, including the number of children to have, sex of children, the type of
school children are to attend and many more. It is a normal practice for a couple to
disagree but if such disagreements are not handled with care the couple will not be able to
live peacefully.

5. Poor communication: Effective or good communication in marriage promotes

friendship between the couple and thus enhances their relationship. It also makes them
understand one another and this leads to peace arid harmony between them. The absence
of good communication can lead to mistrust, misunderstanding and conflicts all the time.
Certainly, these are not good for any marriage.

6. Unfaithfulness: The practice of having sex outside marriage is called unfaithfulness in

marriage or infidelity. Unfaithfulness is thus the practice of cheating on one's partner and
when it is detected it leads to loss of trust and confidence in the culprit or the partner who
cheated. If it is not handled well, it will lead to conflict.

7. Maltreatment: Maltreatment in the form of verbal or physical abuse can lead to conflict.
This is because when a partner is maltreated he or she has no sense of security at home and
would, therefore, find it difficult to live with the other partner. He or she would definitely
leave the martial home.

7
8. Drunkenness: Couples who are drunk all the time do not promote good marriages. Such
people do not have good judgment to be able to contribute meaningfully to discussions
aimed at solving certain family problems. In public, they become objects of mockery and
may easily do certain things to disgrace the other. If they share the same bed, then the
smell of alcohol will also make the other very uncomfortable. The above will surely compel
one to get out of the marriage.

9. Interference from family members and friends: In Ghana, marriage is not an individual
affair. From time to time, family members, including parents, brothers and sisters as well
as friends play various roles in the affairs of couples. In some cases, their contributions in
the form of suggestions and pieces of advice create problems for the couple leading to
conflict.

10. Incompatibility: Incompatibility means being different from each other thereby
making it difficult to live or work happily together. In situations where couples are
incompatible, they spend most of their time arguing and fighting instead of supporting
one another in their day to day activities. Indeed, incompatibility has been found to be one
of the main causes of marital conflicts.

11. Lack or inadequate pre-marital and post-marital counselling: Counselling is very

important in every marriage. In pre- marital counselling, would• be couples are provided
with some information that would help them manage the challenges of marriage. They
are also assisted to understand their roles expected of them as husbands and wives.
Pre-marital counselling is also provided to equip couples with information on home
management, sex-related issues and many more. In addition, after marriage, couples must
still go for counselling, that is, post-marital counselling to upgrade their knowledge on
various issues to promote their marriage. If the couple is not provided with the needed
counselling, they will not be able to effectively manage the challenges as they will face and
this may lead to conflict.

12. Early Marriage or Immaturity: Marriage, as an institution, is for matured people and
so if individuals marry, when they are not, matured, they are likely not to succeed. This is
because if couples are not matured, they find it difficult to handle certain marital issues.
This means that boys and girls cannot cope with marital life. Even adults who do not show

8
signs of maturity cannot properly handle· marital issues. When individuals are not
matured socially, psychologically, emotionally and economically, they will find it difficult to
cope with marital life. If they marry, their lack of understanding of certain important issues
will create conflicts regularly.

 Ways of Minimising Marital Conflicts

Marital conflicts can be minimised through the following ways:

1. The need for regular communication: Couples must regularly and constantly
communicate with one another to sustain the marriages. They must be free to share their
feelings and problems and must also be prepared to give any suggestions they have to
promote the marriage. Regular communication between a couple will help minimise
tensions, mistrust and misunderstanding.

2. Respect for one another: Couples should desist from acts which would easily create
conflicts in the marriages. Such acts include verbal and physical attack. They should also
learn to say "please" and "thank you" when any occasion calls for it.

3. The need to keep matters about their marriages to themselves: Couples must, as much
as possible, reduce unnecessary interferences from family members and friends. This can
be done by refraining from discussing or sharing very important issues about their marriages
with them.

4. The need for transparency: Couples must be transparent in dealing with one another.
That is, they must not hide anything from their partners. They should, for example, avoid
undertaking projects without the knowledge of the other since that person will not take
kindly to it if he or she becomes aware of it.

5. The need for counselling: Couples must go for post-marital counselling to address their
problems. Husbands and wives should make it their duty to see a professional counsellor
to update their knowledge on issues which can improve their marriage. In addition, they
must attend marriage seminars and workshops, and also listen to good marriage
programmes on radio and television stations to sustain their marriages. Above all, they must
read good· marriage books for more information on how to promote successful marriages.

9
6. Doing things together: Couples must do things together. Such things include bathing,
eating and praying together. In addition, they must attend programmes such as wedding,
funeral rites and church service together. Such a practice would help build a strong bond
between them and make their marriage successful. They must also develop the culture of
sharing to show that they care for one another.

7. The need for fun-making: Couples must have fun to improve their marriages. At home,
they must learn to create jokes and laugh a lot. They can also visit places of interest such as
waterfalls and botanical gardens. They can also attend social programmes such as film
shows, concert shows and many of such programmes together. In addition, they must have
regular sex to cement their love.

8. The need to work hard to earn a lot of money: Couples must desire to work hard to
make a lot of money by engaging in several income generating activities. This is because
families are maintained with money and usually, the lack of it creates a lot of problems. So
couples must endeavour to work hard to earn a lot of money in order for them to
adequately provide their needs and that of their children as well as the needs of other
dependents.

9. Couples must promote healthy lifestyles: Couples must promote healthy lifestyles by
ensuing personal hygiene and environmental cleanliness. They must also engage in regular
exercises and must also be conscious of what they eat. In addition they must go for regular
check-up

 Causes of Conflict at the Community Level

(i) Disagreement over the choice of leaders: In Ghana, the choice or selection of leaders
such as chiefs and District Chief Executives (DCEs) has been a source of conflicts in various
communities. It is also common in Ghana for Kingmakers to choose people who do not
qualify to occupy certain stools or skins because they are' not members of the royal families.
Also certain people who are appointed as DCEs are opposed by some people for various
reasons. When such leaders are chosen, usually, two camps emerge. These are those

10
who support their appointments and those opposed to them. Sometimes, the two groups
may clash leading to loss of lives and property.

(ii) Disagreement over the location or citing of public property: In Ghana, the location of
public facilities such as markets, libraries, clinics and schools creates conflicts. The conflict
may be created if two or more communities may want the same facility but it can be cited in
only one of them. Also, the selection of a district capital among several communities may
result in a conflict. In both cases, conflicts are bound to happen if the inhabitants of certain
communities think that they have not been treated well.

(iii) Looking down on minority groups: A minority group is one whose members because of
their physical or cultural characteristics are disadvantaged and subjected to unequal
treatment by the dominant group and hence, regard themselves as objects of collective
disorganisation. Whenever minority groups believe that their problems have been
overlooked by those who take decisions, they may react violently or draw public attention
to their plight. Sometimes, their actions create conflict situation.

(iv) Unlawful claims of land: In Ghana, most lands do not have valid documents covering
them by their owners. This is because such lands have not been registered. In some
cases, even registered ones are falsely claimed by certain people. One of the major sources
of conflict in Ghana is ownership of land. The Nkonya-Alavanyo conflict is a dispute over
land ownership. Also, some chiefs engage in multiple sale of land to buyers. These buyers
who have the right to enter the land engage landguards to protect it and this usually results
in clashes among the buyers and their hired landguards. All these generate conflicts in our
communities.

(v) Greed. Greed is one source of conflict in the society. Greedy people have intense desire
for wealth, power or any other thing. They do not get satisfied with what they already have,
so they always crave for more when others have nothing at all. At the dining hall, some
students may take more food than they are entitled to. They may even take some of the
food to the dormitory when other students have not eaten. Such a situation can cause
conflict between students who took more food and those who did not get anything to eat.
Due to greed, some land owners may sell the same plots of land to multiple buyers. Such
dubious land deals can result in conflicts among the buyers.

11
(vi) Injustice. Whenever a group of people have reason to believe that the existing
arrangement for the sharing of national resources is unfair to them, they may protest. The
protest may sometimes turn violent leading to the destruction of lives and property. It is,
indeed, natural for people to protest when they see that some people live in affluence while
others live in poverty. When these conditions prevail, those who think that they have been
unjustly treated may seek justice through violent confrontation with the established order.

(vii) Discrimination. Another source of potential conflict within the society is

discrimination. Sometimes in public appointments, award of contracts and employment,
some people feel that they are discriminated against by the government. These are usually
the minority groups whose members may not be a part of the ruling elite. Again, in
Ghana and other African countries, while the ruling party has access to the state owned
media; opposition parties find it extremely difficult to put their messages across. Aggrieved
communities and opposition parties sometimes express their frustration against such
open discrimination against them through violent protests,

(viii) Bad relationship. In the home, community or nation, good relationships must exist
among citizens. Such good relationships promote peace and harmony among people at
different levels of society. This is, however, not what usually happens in the Ghanaian
society. Suspicion and lack of mutual respect sometimes characterise the relationships
between the ruling party and opposition parties. These bad relationships result in conflict
and tension that disturb the peace of the country.

(ix) Intolerance. Some conflicts occur because certain people are unable to tolerate the
views of others. In Ghana, there is a high level of intolerance among supporters of
some political parties and football teams. Supporters of political parties, sometimes, clash
because they are not able to tolerate criticisms against the parties they support. Such
clashes sometimes lead to injuries and loss of lives. Intolerance among party supporters
which usually create conflicts does not only occur between members of rival parties, but
they sometimes occur among supporters of the same political party such as the National
Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP).

12
Other sources of conflict in our communities include political activities, sporting activities,
religious differences, marital and school-based conflicts or conflicts in our educational
institutions.

 Causes of Conflicts at the National/International Level

1. Disagreements over land or boundaries/claims over natural resources: The free

movements across national boundaries stopped after the colonisation of African countries
by the Europeans. Having fought for their independence, boundaries now define the
limits of lands where countries have direct physical contact with their neighbours, and
facilitate the planning of defence strategies. Boundaries also determine a country's location
to determine its citizens or aliens. In spite of various security measures to protect countries'
boundaries, some countries continue to claim ownership of other country's land or natural
resources leading to conflicts. This is because most boundaries in Africa have not been
properly demarcated, creating disagreements and· conflicts over lands and natural
resources. Examples are Nigeria and Cameroon over the Bakassi Peninsula, Eritrea and
Ethiopia, Ghana and Togo, etc.

2. Military take-overs: Sometimes, the military blames politicians for mismanaging the
economy. They also accuse them of human rights abuses and corruption, and also see the
lifestyles of politicians as a waste of resources. They, therefore, resort to the use of force to
remove such governments to save such countries from experiencing further economic
problems. Sometimes, the coup makers clash with the government forces leading to violent
conflicts.

3. Exclusion of some ethnic groups from the governance of certain countries: In Africa, it
is alleged that members from certain ethnic groups have managed to occupy the major
leadership positions of some countries over a long period of time without considering the
interests of other ethnic groups. All the top positions are taken over by the ruling ethnic

13
group to the neglect of others. What is more, the resources of the state are used to develop
the areas occupied by the ethnic group while the rest suffer from poor social amenities,
unemployment, a high level of poverty, etc. Usually, members from the neglected ethnic
groups become fed up and resort to the use of force to reverse the existing arrangement,
and this generate conflict. An example is the conflicts in Rwanda in which the Hutu, who
form the majority became fed up with the rule of the Tutsi, the minority, and took up arms
to reverse the order.

4. Unlawful constitutional amendment. Unlawful constitutional amendment has also been

causing conflicts in Africa. In Africa, certain Presidents refuse to step down after their
tenure of office. Usually, such leaders command absolute majority in Parliament and,
therefore, hide behind their majority members and amend the Constitution to enable them
extend their rule. This has usually been met with strong opposition from the other parties.
In the process, some have challenged the President leading to clashes. Examples of such
practice have been recorded in Zimbabwe and Togo and Burundi.

5. Poor conduct of democratic elections: Some Africans leaders do not organise

transparent, free and fair elections. Usually, they team up with the electoral commissions
and bloat the voters' register with additional names and fill the ballot boxes with thumb-
printed ballot papers in favour of the ruling leader on election days. Other malpractices
include the use of the security services to make other contestants submit to their
malpractices as well as the use of state resources such as vehicles, money, etc, to improve
their chances of winning while the opposition parties just struggle to survive. In some
cases, members of the opposition parties have resorted to violent conflicts to address their
grievances.

6. Abuse of press freedom: One of the benefits of democracy is press freedom. But, it
must be stated that some journalists lack the required skills and experiences to promote
their chosen careers. In Africa, some journalists are either bribed or they hide behind
certain political parties to attack certain personalities or groups of people. In the process,
communities and even nations have been tom apart. Examples of countries which have
experienced conflicts of this nature are Rwanda and Nigeria.

14
7. Imposition of religious doctrines: Some of the conflicts in Africa are caused by religious
differences or the imposition of religions on certain people. For example, in certain Arab
countries such as Algeria, Islamic fundamentalists are bent on imposing Islam on the people
and make it an Islamic state. Also, in some states in northern Nigeria, where Islam is the
dominant religion, the Islamic leaders have imposed the Sharia Law on all the people,
including Christians. In both cases, the Christians have reacted strongly against the use of
the Sharia Law to rule them by the Moslems. These have led to violent clashes between
Muslims and Christians, causing loss of lives and property. There is also the militant Islamic
group, the al- Shabab, perpetrating religious conflict in Somalia and Kenya (Kisiangani,
2011 ). To add to the above is the resolve of the Boko Haram militants to create an Islamic
state in Northern

 EFFECTS OF CONFLICTS

POSITIVE EFFECTS

1. Conflict provides a basis for the organization of resistance against domination

2. It helps people’s voice to be heard and recognized that they are not happy with what
they are going through.
3. Conflict also provide a sense of belonging as part of an immediate layer of social
relations between the individual and the state. In other words, it allows people of
diverse voices to be heard.
4. When people are challenged through conflict, they revise their way of doing things.
5. In Africa, and other parts of the world, political independence and freedom have
been gained as a result of conflict of different kinds with colonial powers.

 Effects of Conflicts on Families

(i) Broken homes: Violent conflicts between husbands and wives lead to broken
homes. That is, couples may live apart resulting from divorce or separation.
Broken homes usually affect children upbringing especially, their education.
(ii) Child delinquency: It has already been said that conflict in the family may lead
to broken homes. When this happens, the children may not be taken care of
very well. The children will therefore enjoy a lot of freedom to engage in bad

15
 behaviours such as smoking, stealing and sex, thus affecting their future
development.
(iii) Members of the family cannot plan together: Planning involves two or more
people. Since conflicts create disunity, it makes it difficult for members to plan
together. This will retard the progress of the members of the family.
(iv) Loss of lives
(v) Loss or destruction of property
(vi) Mental and psychological problems
(vii) Legal tussle (litigation between couples)
(viii) Economic problems
(ix) Conflicts between couples make them become bad role models for their
children
 Effects of Conflicts on Communities or Nations

(i) People are displaced: Some of the people become refugees whilst others are displaced
internally and live in tents under undesirable conditions. Refugees are people who run
away from their countries to other countries for their safety. Violent conflicts normally force
people to abandon their countries and seek refuge in other countries. In Ghana, refugee
camps can be found at Klikor in the Volta Region and Budumburam in the Central Region.
New refugee camps have been created in the Western Region as a result of the Ivorian
conflict.

(ii) Brain drain or loss of professionals: Conflicts areas suffer from the movement of
professional such as doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers and nurses. Do you know why
they move out? Yes, they migrate for their safety. Apart from those who move out, others
also do not receive postings to such a place. In Ghana, the Dagbon conflict forced a lot of
professionals to desert the Northern Region. Also, the conflict in Liberia forced a lot of
Liberian professionals to move to Ghana.

(iii) Loss of lives and property: Violent conflicts lead to loss of lives and property. Some
people lose their lives because they are attacked and killed by their opponents. For
example, in the Dagbon conflict, the King, Ya-Na and 40 other people were killed. Also, in
the Sierra Leonean war, over 50,000 were killed. Again, about 500,000 Tutsi were killed by
the Hutu in the Rwandan war, while thousands of the Hutu were killed by their own ethnic
16
brothers for opposing the killings. Others also die out of starvation and diseases. Also,
valuable properties are also destroyed. They include houses, vehicles, farms, etc.

(iv) Conflicts create insecurity: The uncontrolled use of arms and other dangerous
weapons in attacking opponents creates insecurity among people. They are forced to leave
their homes and hide in churches, mosques, embassies, etc for their safety. People are,
therefore, unable to move about freely to engage in economic activities to make a living.

(v) Destruction of agricultural lands: In most of the violent conflicts such as the ones
experienced in Sierra Leone and Rwanda, the parties used landmines and other forms of
dangerous explosives to destroy one another. This caused large areas of farmlands to be
abandoned. Also, large areas of land were used for the resettlement of displaced ·persons.
These led to the destruction of farmlands causing severe food shortages.

(vi) Environmental degradation: This is caused by the pollution of water bodies through
the dumping of dead bodies in water sources. Also, the use of bombs and other
sophisticated weapons causes air pollution. All these affect the health of the people.

(vii) Abuse of women and children: In most of the conflicts in Africa, women and
children are abused. A lot of children are recruited as soldiers at the. expense of their
education and personal development. Such children are taught to steal, kill, rape and use
hard drugs. Girls are raped regularly and sometimes in turns without any mercy. In the
same vein, women are raped and those who resist are either killed or have certain parts of
their bodies, especially, their limbs cut off.

(viii) Destruction of infrastructure: The infrastructure of most countries has been

destroyed. In such countries, bridges, roads, electricity and water supply systems, rail lines,
etc, have been destroyed putting a lot of burden on such countries to re• build their
infrastructure.

(ix) Conflicts affect the social and economic life of the people: In the first place,
conflicts restrict the movement of people. This is done to avoid any possible attack from the
opposing parties. A lot of people are also cut off from their relatives and love ones. That is,
socially, family members and friends are separated. Also, a lot of people are unable to go

17
about their business or economic activities. Schools are also closed down, thereby,
affecting the academic programmes of educational institutions and school children.

(x) Countries involved in violent conflicts lose international recognition: Countries

involved in violent conflicts are sometimes suspended from international organisations and
also denied all forms of assistance from the international community. In addition, such
countries also do not attract foreign investors.

(xi) The government spends a lot of money to maintain peace and order in conflict
areas. Such funds could have been used to provide several development projects to
improve the lives of the people. In Ghana, violent conflicts have been experienced in
Dagbon, Bawku and between Nanumba and Konkomba as well as between the people of
Nkonya and Alavanyo. Other violent conflicts are religious in nature. For example, in 1994
and 1998, there were clashes between the traditional religious authorities of the Ga
Traditional State and Christian churches over drumming rights during the celebration of the
Homowo Festival.

UNIT 2

STAGES OF CONFLICT

 STAGES OF CONFLICT
1. Development/Evolution Stage: Conflict do not occur in a flash, before a conflict
erupts there must be an object of divergence, disagreement, and differences. Just
like life develops the moment spermatozoa fertilized an ovum, conflict develops
from one stage to another. Whatever that will cause conflict starts at this
development or evolution stage.
At this stage, there must be a disagreement or differences over one thing or the
other which may be tangible or intangible and when this happens, conflict starts to
develop. During this stage both the shadow and interested parties do not begin to
take sides because the issue in disagreement could be resolved immediately by the
two sides or they may come together and take a common position to bury their
differences. For example if two people from two different communities or ethnic
group engages in a fight over any tangible or intangible thing, people around them
will make every effort to separate them and in most cases caution them. At that

18
 point, both disputants will bury their differences and continue to be friendly, but if
such settlement is not effected or accepted by them or one of them, it is likely that
they will go home and alert their respective communities or group with complaint of
what the other person did, with some fabrications and concocted stories to
stimulate the emotion of his community or group.
The leaders of the two communities or ethnic group or one of them may initiate or
organize immediate settlement meeting by inviting the other party, his community
or group for peace talk so as to effect settlement of the underlying cause of the issue
between their kinsmen. The two men or one of them may be reprimanded or
blamed by the people even their groups and respective communities will join in
scolding the aggressor among the two kinsmen. But if one of the communities or
group decides to protect and defend their respective kinsmen notwithstanding
whether he is the aggressor or not, it is likely that the minor quarrel may degenerate
into another more serious stage.
The development stage is the best time to prevent conflict because at that stage
there is no committing of resources, energies or time by any group or parties. Any
failure to resolve the conflict at this stage as the saying goes “Prevention is better
than cure” will lead to enemy formation stage.
2. Enemy Formation Stage. This is the stage that the minor problem that developed at
the development or evolution stage will degenerate into enemy formation. At this
stage the two parties or groups or communities as described in the former stage will
start to see each other as enemies. During this stage, propaganda is spread, facts are
distorted, past history is remembered, and leaders start to indoctrinate their
followers so as to win their support and cooperation. It is at this stage that parties or
disputants begin to show or demonstrate why the other side should be engaged
squarely. It could happen at both inter-personal, inter-group and at international
level. At this stage also, parties and their allies begin to identify themselves as “we
and them” as well as “in-group and out-group”.
An Intervention by an “Insider Partial” or a charismatic leader or leaders in position
of authority respected by both parties may prevent the conflict from further
intensifying or degenerating.

19
3. Mobilization /Preparation Stage. This is the stage of “gathering storm”. It is the
stage that determines whether the parties will slug it out with each other or not as
well as on the approach to be adopted in pursuit of their position, need and interest.
At the same time parties mobilize and take stock of resources available that will
empower them to further pursue their interest and position.
At the international arena, and in conflict among states or among nations, as well as
in national and ethno-communal, it is at this stage that parties begin to take stock,
stripe and assemble their military arsenals, as well as assess the readiness of their
armies or warriors in case the conflict becomes confrontational. It is at this stage
that either parties spy each other in order to gather intelligence about their
mobilization/preparation. It is the stage of power politics because parties usually try
to maintain balance of power through alliances. Even at the interpersonal level,
before persons or individuals decide to confront the other squarely, they must
endeavor to lure some people within their environment so as to gain their support.
This is the stage that both interested, shadow and secondary parties begin to make
contributions to their allies so as to boast their morale in case the conflict turns
violent However further escalation could be averted with the timely use of early
warning signals by authorities concerned.
At the international level, leaders and heads of national governments during this
stage, seek the support of both their cabinet and legislatures so as to execute the
impending confrontation. At the communal level, youths are mobilized, deities and
oracles consulted, forts are built while several types of rituals are made.
4. Pre-emption Stage. At this stage the possibility of a party or parties launching an
attack against the other becomes inevitable. Any party that wishes to confront the
other violently will at this stage launch a pre-emptive attack so as to know the
reaction of the other party. If the issue in dispute is resources like land the
aggressive party may resort to occupation, trespass and seizure of the land etc so as
to provoke the other party. This is equally the stage that incontrovertible evidence of
impending hostility, confrontation and fighting is established. The party on whom
the pre-empting attack had been launched against may retaliate and this leads to a
full blown arm confrontation or war. Such party depending on the issue in dispute
may take the matter to litigation at the law court or complain to a higher authority

20
 for intervention. In international conflict, this is the stage that the party whom the
pre-emptive attack was launched against may take their case to the United Nation
Security Council or through their allies among the superpowers in the council or may
approach the International Court of Justice for adjudication. The major feature of
this stage is breakdown in communication between the parties.
At the communal level or ethno related conflict the relationship hitherto existing
between the two groups will be completely broken down. Other measures such as
embargo, blockade, and withdrawal of any tie could be taken by parties. Preventing
further escalation at this stage will require the intervention of a powerful or superior
third party or authority for example, the government or the United Nation (in case of
International dispute). At interpersonal level of conflict; families, communities or
their leaders, organizations where the parties belong, religious group(s), or
charismatic leader(s) respected by the parties can intervene to prevent further
escalation.
5. Hostility stage: This is the most violent among the stages. Parties in a conflict or
dispute at this stage engage themselves in physical and violent actions. If it is
national conflict, the stage may lead to a full blown civil war, while groups that
adopts unconventional warfare tactics may apart from armed attack, resort to
insurgency, terrorism, guerilla tactics. Parties at this stage bring out all the resources
and armaments within their arsenal to pursue their interest, positions and need. This
stage is characterized by loss of lives and properties. The destructive nature of this
stage makes it susceptible to intractability because it is the stage where parties may
adopt both high and low intensive warfare tactics depending on the environment of
the conflict. Both conventional and unconventional warfare tactics are also applied
by disputants at this stage. In a non-violent conflict, this is the stage that total
breakdown of relationship, ties and communications as well as cold war between
parties occur. Even while fighting and cold war ranges between parties, diplomatic
means to end the fighting or conflict could be explored. But if it is in a communal or
ethnic conflict, government mobilizes its apparatus such as the armed forces, and
the police to enforce peace. In the enforcement of peace, government uses conflict
suppression mechanism to quell or stop the adversary and aggressive groups in the
conflict. Best (2011:96) described conflict suppression as a situation whereby

21
 instrument of power or force is used to push away the issues under the carpet or to
impose a solution that is not sustainable and which parties are not satisfied. This
happen in an unequal power relation.
Government and repressive regimes are usually guilty of this situation by declining to
take appropriate decision as and when due, or trying to lord it over others, to a
protracted conflicts. Sometimes the state uses its coercive apparatus to suppress
conflict, but this cannot be sustainable. This is the stage that parties adopts any
measure overtly or covertly to outdo the other. The power relation of the parties is
brought to bear at this stage, that is, whether it is asymmetric (unequal) or
symmetric (equal).
It is only the surrender or capitulation of one of the parties or the application of
peace enforcement and conflict suppression strategies by government in ethno-
communal conflict can halt fighting. Any form of mediation at this stage is always a
futile exercise.

6. Cessation/Ceasefire Stage. This is the stage that fighting comes to a halt or hostility
ends. The factors that could lead to this stage to halt hostility include:
a) If there is a ceasefire brokered by a third party and which the parties agree
to respect and honour.
b) If one of the parties suffers defeat, surrenders or withdrew the from issue in
dispute, for example when Iraq after annexing Kuwait, withdrew from
Kuwaiti territories after suffering defeat from the Allied Forces during the
Gulf War, the war came to an end.
c) If one or all the parties exhaust their armaments and weapons or if any of
their weapon supply route is blocked (as done to the Biafrians during
Nigeria- Biafrians civil war 1967-1970.
d) In the communal or ethno conflict, it is the deployment of security
apparatus by government , exhaustion, exertion, blockade of source or
shortage of weapon supply as well as other instruments of war, defeat of
one of the parties, or suffering of heavy losses by parties or one party,
diplomatic effort of a third party among others.

22
 e) When they suffer exertion. In any violent conflict no matter the power
relation and the environment of the conflict, there is a period or stage that
disputants suffer from exertion, because war is fought by humans beings and
not by machines even where modern technology is used, it is still operated
by human beings who must suffer exertion at any stage or the other.
When all or some of the factors highlighted above comes to bear, there will
be partial or complete cessation of hostility or ceasefire by the parties.
Sometimes parties in a conflict may use cessation of hostility or ceasefire as
a strategy to mobilize and reinforce their troops or warriors and their
weapon arsenal. This is also the stage that peacekeepers are deployed to
separate the two sides and create a buffer zone. Under international law, the
duty of deploying troops for peacekeeping in any troubled spot in the world
lies with the United Nation as may be approved by the Security Council. The
peace keepers could be an observer mission, as witnessed in Rwanda,
Mozambique, and Congo etc. Furthermore a regional organization like
NATO, AU or a sub-regional organization like the ECOWAS can put in place a
peacekeeping outfit on the permission of the Security Council, as done in
Sierra Leone and Liberia by ECOMOG and in former Yugoslavia by the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
7. Resolution Stage: This is the stage of peacemaking peacebuilding and reconciliation
as well as reaching agreement to end a conflict. Parties in a conflict having tasted the
scourge of war and agreed on a ceasefire come to the negotiation table or allow a
third party to mediate such conflict at this stage. It is also the stage that mediation
and negotiation becomes effective. The resolution of the conflict will pave way for
peacebuilding and transformation of conflict. However; parties in a conflict may
resort to go back to the hostility stage if their interests, positions and needs were not
properly accommodated during the resolution of the issue that precipitated the
conflict. Resolution of conflict at this stage paves way for reinstatement of
diplomatic ties or relation among the two warring parties both in international or
national, or communal conflict.
8. Reconstruction Stage: In every violent conflict there is always a high level of
destruction which may affect lives and properties as well as relations, even in a non-

23
 violent but hostile conflict, emotion, relationship, ties, resources are also destroyed.
When the conflict comes to an end after its resolution, reconstruction begins. This
may be in the form of rebuilding damaged infrastructures or structures, relationship
and ties, as well as emotion.
At the end of Nigeria-Biafra civil war in 1970, the Federal Military government saw
the need to effect the reconstruction of the damages caused by the war by launching
the famous “3Rs” which translates to reconciliation, reconstruction and
rehabilitation Communities or ethnic groups that engaged in conflict especially
violent conflict use the period to rehabilitate families and relatives of the victims of
the war or conflict.
In a national conflict, it is the stage that disarmament, demobilization and
reintegration of former combatants take place. In international conflict, it is the
function of the national government of each of the parties/states to effect this
reconstruction in their own domestic jurisdiction. However some international
organizations like the World Bank, African development Bank, and numerous other
international donors and organizations offer assistance in one way or the other in
the process of this reconstruction.
 LEVELS OF CONFLICT

There are five levels of conflict and they are as follows: Intra-personal conflict, Inter-
personal conflict, Inter-group conflict, Intra-group conflict, Intra-organisational.

 Intra-personal conflict
This is the kind of conflict that has been described as “man against self” in which man
continues to contend or battle with his mind and habits. Smoking, drug use, alcoholism, as
well as lying are some addictive habits that man may continually contend with; even when
he desires to stop, he may find himself continuing it. This is intra-personal conflict or “man
against self”.
Wright and Noe (1996) clutch intrapersonal conflicts into three categories as approach-
approach-avoidance-avoidance and avoidance–approach.
The approach-approach, the individual has to choose between two equally attractive,
pleasant and desirable alternatives. For example, a manager, who is torn between choosing
two equally proficient minions to accomplish a task for him. Though there are approach

24
tendencies towards two attractive goals, there is a drawback, which is choosing only one of
them. The approach-approach variety turns to be the least stressful because each
alternative chosen has a reasonably happy wind-up. As a result of this pleasurable reality, it
is comparatively easy to go ahead and make a decision.
Avoidance-avoidance, where the individual is torn between two equally repugnant,
unwelcome and unappealing alternatives that are expected to result in negative outcomes.
An instance is where an employer of an institution with serious financial constraints has to
choose between ignoring the problems, thereby allowing them to become worse and laying
off hundreds of employees. Either of these choices looks hostile.
Approach-avoidance. This is also a choice among a set of opinions that are good and bad
outcomes. It has to do with decisions that must be made between alternatives that are
taught to involve both positive and negative outcomes. The approach-avoidance type of
conflict seems to be more common today because many women are torn between getting
married and pursuing a career.

 Inter-personal conflict
This is what has been described as “man against man” in the micro sense. Interpersonal
conflict involves two or more individuals rather than one individual. This type of conflict may
be direct opposition, as in exchange of blows, a gunfight or a robbery, or it may be a more
subtle conflict between the desires of two or more persons. A boxing or wrestling match is a
kind of game, but the act on the mat depicts conflict. Inter-personal conflict involves two or
more individuals who perceive themselves as being in opposition to each other over
preferred outcomes and attitudes, values or behaviours. For example, a headmaster advises
his senior housemaster to work hard to instill discipline among students, but turns around
to accuse the senior housemaster of being too strict on students. When the students see
the headmaster as sympathetic towards them, they may show disrespect to the senior
housemaster. The headmaster's behaviour may generate conflict between him and the
senior housemaster.
 Intra-group conflict

25
Intra group conflict mostly occurs among the members in a group. This refers to clashes
among some or all of a group's members, which often affect the group's processes and
effectiveness. For example, the staff of a school may be divided on the type of punishment
to be given to student who has broken the school's rules and regulation. A few may
support the use of corporal punishment while others may propose other forms. If they are
unable to reach agreement or consensus on the issue, it will generate into conflict.
This type of conflict is confined within the borders of a sovereign state. Such economic
factors as land, uneven development, resource control and revenue-sharing formula could
cause a conflict within a state. Social factors as value differences as had been the case in old
Sudan could also cause conflict. Socio-ethnic factors such as real or perceived ethnic
balancing or ethnic cleansing such as in the case of the Nigeria-Biafra episode and Rwanda
genocide in 1994, could also be a factor. Political factors such as power-sharing, power
equation or zoning formula in public administration, lopsidedness in political appointments,
quota system and the likes could cause intra-state conflict. Other examples of intra-state
conflicts are the Malian crisis, Ivorian crisis, Libyan conflict, conflict in the DRC and Central
African Republic.

 Inter-Group conflict
This refers to the kind of disagreement or feud that takes places between two or more
sectarian or religious groups, ethnic groups, communities, or interest groups. The inter-
group conflict takes place between the two groups. Inter-group conflict develops between
two or more departments or interest groups because of limited resources such as money,
personnel and power. A vivid example could be a conflict between NDC and NPP supporters.
For example, after NDC lost power in 2016 presidential and parliamentary elections, NPP
supporters had to invade certain public places to take over from the claimed NDC
supporters, especially the Passports Office in Accra, Toll both centres and Ports and
Harbours in Accra. In the formation of the sides and taking a stance on an issue, arguments
and positions are clarified, and people can more easily distinguish between two different
points of view. Kinard (1988) observes that inter-group relations are vital to the success of

26
large organizations. The contention between Christians and Moslems in Nigeria is a classic
example of inter-faith conflict. Nigeria has been riddled with clashes between members of
the two faiths since the 1980s.

Another example, in the school situation, conflict often arises between school authorities
as one group, and students as another. A conflict can arise where the staff as a group may
prescribe a type of punishment to a student or a number of students. If the student body
views the punishment as too severe, then out of solidarity with their colleagues, the
students may resort to group action to compel the authorities to review the punishment

 Intra-organisational conflict

This type of conflict arises when the goals or values of diverse individuals or groups are
dissenting and those individuals or groups impede one another‟s attempt to achieve their
objectives.

Levels of Intra-organisational conflict

a) Vertical Conflict: This is a type of conflict which involves clashes between levels in an
organisation. It is commonly called superior subordinate conflict. Such conflict often
occurs when superiors attempt to control subordinates too rigidly and the subordinates
resist. Subordinates may resist because they believe that those controls infringe too much
on the discretion needed to do their jobs. Vertical conflicts can also arise because of
inadequate communication, goal conflicts or lack of consensus building over the use of
resources, deadlines or performance results.

b) Horizontal Conflict: This refers to clashes between groups of employees at the same
hierarchical level in an organisation. Horizontal conflict occurs when each department in
a school or colleague strives only for its own goals disregarding the effects of the on other
departments. For example, a school or college may have limited spaces for use as offices for
staff. One department may desire many more offices for its staff at the expense of other
departments, because it believes its subject is more important than others. Contrasting
attitudes of employees in different departments may also lead to horizontal conflict.

27
c) Line-Staff Conflict: Line-staff conflict refers to clashes over authority relationships.
Most organisations have line and staff departments. The line department represents the
highest office in an organisation while staff departments are the subordinate or lower
positions or offices which exist in an organisation. Staff departments are created to assist
the line department to facilitate the operations of organisations. In a senior high school,
for example, the line-staff includes the headmaster/headmistress, assistant headmaster
(academic) assistant headmaster/headmistress (administration), heads of department and
classroom teachers. Each sub head is responsible for some processes that form part of the
school's total function. Unfortunately, some line authorities may feel that some staff
departments are imposing on their areas of authority. For example, the assistant
headmaster ( academic) may feel that one head of department is interfering with his or her
areas of legitimate authority. For example, a head of department may try to impose time
table changes on the school which the assistant headmaster may not have approved of.
This may lead to clashes.

d) Role conflict: A role is a cluster of activities that individuals holding various positions
are expected to perform, Role conflicts can be caused by several factors such as too much
work or activities to perform, less activities or work, role ambiguity, scarcity of resources,
etc.

Types of Conflict in Organisations . .

Functional conflict is a healthy, constructive disagreement between two or more people

which can produce new ideas, learning and growth among individuals. When individuals
engage in constructive conflict, they develop a better awareness of themselves and others.
In addition, functional conflict can improve working relationships, because when two
parties work through their disagreements, they feel they have accomplished something
new altogether. By releasing tensions and solving problems in working together, morale is
improved. Functional conflict can lead to innovation and positive change for an
organisation. This is because it tends to encourage creativity among individuals and,
consequently, translate into increased productivity. A key for recognising functional

28
conflict is that, it is often cognitive in origin, that is, it arises from someone challenging old
policies or thinking of new ways to approach issues.

Dysfunctional conflict is an unhealthy, destructive disagreement between two or more

people. Its danger is that it takes people's focus on the conflict itself and the parties
involved excessive conflict drains energy that could be used more productively. A key
for recognising a dysfunctional conflict is that its origin is often emotional or behavioural.
Disagreements that involve personalised anger and resentment directed at specific
individuals rather than specific ideas are dysfunctional. Individuals involved in
dysfunctional conflict tend to act before they think, and they often rely on threats,
deception and verbal abuse to communicate. In dysfunctional conflict, the losses to both
parties may exceed any potential gain from the conflict.

UNIT 3

CONFLICT PREVENTION

Conflict Prevention is the process of identifying signals of conflict and encouraging people
to work out their difference to avoid clashes. Conflict prevention aims to end conflict before
they start or before they lead to verbal, physical or violence’

Difference between prevention and preventive measures in conflicts

Conflict prevention refers to measures that are aimed at preventing short-term, often
forthcoming, escalation of a potential conflict. Conflict preventive, on the other hand,
focuses on more long-term measures that address the underlying causes of a potential

29
conflict along with possible escalating factors. Preventive measures are steps taken by an
individual, group, community or a country to avoid conflict completely

 THE ROLES OF INDIVIDUALS IN CONFLICT PREVENTION

 The Role of Parents in Conflict Prevention
(i) They should not discriminate against any of their children. That is, they must
give equal treatment to all their children. If they did, those children who are
discriminated against would be on bad terms with their parents and extend
also this bad feeling towards their own siblings leading to conflicts.
(ii) There must be effective communication between parents and their children.
For example, they must arrange meetings with their children periodically to
find out about their problems and then take steps to address them.
(iii) They must show love to their children.
(iv) They must respect the views of their children.
(v) They must desist from over- protecting their children. That is, they must be
bold to bring their recalcitrant children to order.
(vi) They should show concern about their children's general welfare by
providing their physical and emotional needs.
(vii) They must be fair and firm with their children. Parents must keep to their
words.
(viii) Parents must learn to vary the approaches or the methods they adopt to up
bring their children that suit the stages of their life cycle from infancy to
adulthood.
(ix) They should encourage their adolescent children to make certain decisions
on their own to make the adolescent feel respected and recognised.
(x) Parents must lead positive lifestyles. That is, they must do the right· thing
to enable their children respect them.
(xi) Parents should focus on their children's strengths and assist them to improve
on them instead of emphasising the weaknesses all the time.
(xii) Parents must seek guidance and counselling to persistent parent- child
conflicts.

30
 The Role of Children in Conflict Prevention
(i) Children must co-operate with their parents or they must obey them to ensure
the smooth running of their homes. For example, they must endeavour to
perform various tasks assigned them by their parents.
(ii) They should show gratitude to their parents for the numerous provisions they
receive from them.
(iii) Children should be polite and courteous to their parents and other people.
(iv) Children should learn to use resources judiciously.
(v) They should perform tasks or roles assigned them by their parents.

 The Role of Leaders in Conflict Prevention

(i) They must be approachable, that is, they must open the channels of
communication.
(ii) They must hold regular meetings to inform their followers about the state of
affairs.
(iii) They must be firm and fair.
(iv) They must consult their subordinates on important matters before decisions are
taken.
(v) They must address the grievances of their subordinates.

 The Role of the Government in Conflict Prevention

(i) The government must be neutral and discharge its duty according to the laws of
the land.
(ii) It should strengthen institutions of state and allow them to work without any
unnecessary interference.
(iii) It must ensure fair distribution of national resources to all areas of the country.
(iv) It must ensure that appointments and promotion of people to occupy public
positions are based on meritocracy i.e. on people's qualifications; skills and
experiences and not on any other considerations such as one's ethnic, religious
31
 or political party affiliation. It should, therefore, minimise nepotism or
favouritism to the barest minimum.
(v) It should engage prominent or respectable persons in society to talk to the
people on the need to live in peace.
(vi) It must avoid witch hunting of political opponents.
(vii) It must be accountable to the people.
(viii) It must promote transparency in all its dealings.
(ix) It must resource the security services to retrieve arms from the people
periodically.
(x) It must promote political tolerance.

 Attitudes and values needed to prevent conflicts in the community

(i) Respect for one another: We must learn to respect all manner of people
irrespective of their ethnic groups, religions, political parties, etc, that they
belong to. We must therefore avoid making comments about people that seem
to suggest that such people are less important.
(ii) Tolerance: As human beings, other people may express views that may be
different from ours. We need to respect the views of such people. Hence, we
must be patient and allow others to express the opinions they have about the
issues we are discussing without fighting them. We must, therefore,
endeavour to employ consensus building to overcome our differences to
promote peace in our society.
(iii) Forgiveness: When people offend us and show regret for their actions, we
should be able to forgive them. As human beings we are not pe.rfect because
we also offend others. We must, therefore, learn to forgive people as we also
expect others to forgive us if we offend them. It is equally important for
offenders to note that human beings are generally fallible. Consequently, it is
important for them to show remorse if they offend their fellow human beings to
attract forgiveness.
(iv) Love: Whether we are in the home, school, market, etc; we should not create
the impression for other people to see that we hate them. As we show love to

32
 people, we carry the burden of helping one another. This will create a
harmonious society and prevent conflicts from occurring.
(v) Honesty: Honest people are always truthful and sincere. They also hate
cheating. Whenever people are cheated, they become angry and use. violence to
address their grievances. We must, therefore, be honest in all our dealings with
other people to prevent conflicts. We must also learn to tell the truth all the
time. We must know that truth cannot be hidden forever. When the people we
are dealing with come to know the truth about what we hide from them, they
may get angry which can end up in conflict. To avoid conflicts, therefore, we
must to be honest all the time. ·
(vi) Fairness: To prevent conflicts, we must be fair to everybody. In the family,
parents must learn to apply the same punishment for the same offence to all
their children. The same thing must be done by teachers and heads of
institutions as well as others in leadership positions. Failure to do that will cause
disaffection among some of the students or children. Finally, the government
must treat all persons equally irrespective of where they come from and the
political parties they belong to. If some people have any cause to think that the
government applies the law unfairly, they may protest and this can disturb the
peace of the country.
(vii) Maintaining good relationships to ensure peace in our communities or nation,
there is the need to maintain good relationships. As members of the society, we
cannot all be friends but, at least, we can allow our common interests, hopes and
aspirations to unite us. Again, we may be members of different political parties
or ethnic groups, but what defines all of us is our common humanity. It is for this
reason that we should not develop deep hatred against people who are not part
of the group we belong to. It should be possible to work with the people from
different political parties or ethnic groups in the interest of peace and harmony.
Government must be able to maintain good working relationships with the
opposition party to promote peace and development.
(viii) Positive Thinking: The mind is a very powerful organ of the human being. The
renewal of a person's mind is the only guarantee for the transformation of his or
her physical being. As a country, we must develop positive thinking. In other

33
 words, we must be optimistic about life and always hope for the best to happen
to our country. We should avoid cynicism and pessimism and rather learn to
encourage ourselves. If we develop a positive mind, we will be able to promote
peace and development in our country.

UNIT 4

CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Conflict Management refers to the use of various initiatives and mechanisms to reduce
tension during periods of conflict to facilitate resolution. It may also be refer to long-term
management of difficult to solve conflicts. Conflict management is the practice of being able

34
to identify and handle conflicts sensibly, fairly, and efficiently. Conflict management always
involves a third party known as mediator. The person or group of persons must be neutral

Conflict management is the process of reducing the negative and destructive capacity of
conflicts through a number of measures by working with and through the parties involved in
the conflict. Conflict management thus seeks to deal with conflicts in order to avoid
violence among conflicting parties.

 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES

There are several ways of managing conflicts at the workplace. However, these varied
means of managing conflict can be categorised into two main groups' namely ineffective
and effective techniques:

(a) INEFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES

Under these, we have the following:

(i) Non-action or procrastination: This is doing nothing about the conflict with the
hope that the conflict will disappear by itself. Generally, this is not a good technique
because most conflicts do not go away, and the individuals involved in the conflict
react with frustration.
(ii) Secrecy: This is trying to keep a conflict out of view of most people. An example is a
school's policy on admissions. In some schools, discussion of the school's protocol
admissions is met with sharp reprimand from the school head. In some cases,
teachers who dare discuss protocol admissions are threatened with open release by
headmasters/mistresses, When this is the case, teachers and other stakeholders
of the school suspect that the school head has something to hide.
(iii) Administrative orbiting: This is delaying action on a conflict by buying time, usually
by telling· the individuals involved in the conflict that the problem is being worked
out or resolved or that the boss is still thinking about the issue. Like non-action,
this technique leads to frustration and resentment.
(iv) Due Process non-action: It is a procedure set up to address conflict that is so costly,
time-consuming, or personally risky that no one will use it. A good example is certain
organisations' sexual harassment policies. To file a sexual harassment complaint,

35
 detailed paperwork is required; the accuser must go through a laid down procedure,
and the accuser risks being branded as a trouble maker. Thus, the organisation has
a procedure for handling complaints (due process), but no one uses it (non-action).
(v) Character assassination: This is an attempt to label or discredit an opponent.
One party in the conflict goes about spreading falsehood about the name, character,
integrity, reputation, etc, of the other party with the intent of blackmailing him or
her; to make him or her lose public respect. However, character assassination can
backfire and make the individual who uses it appear dishonest and cruel.
(vi) Coercion: This means bullying, banging the table, and 'knocking heads together'.
Different people will react in different ways to this, but in no case will conflict be
resolved. It is the classic example of treating symptoms rather than causes. If it
achieves anything at all, it will be simply to brush the conflict under the carpet and
create a false sense of harmony. It may encourage more insidious and destructive
methods of waging the conflict.
(vii) Pleading: It is a softer form of coercion, with only slighter less poor results.
Again, this is a way of treating symptoms only. A manager will simply appeal to the
'antagonists' better nature to stop making life unpleasant for each other and their
colleagues. They may or may not agree, but either way it simply drives the conflict
'underground'. It also demonstrates managerial weakness which will eventually
backfire.
(viii) Arbitration: This is awarding 'the cake' to one or the other of the warring
parties or dividing it as you see fit. This is a dangerous response at any time · but
even more so once a conflict has become destructive. Sometimes, but rarely, there
will be a right and wrong side in an argument, but before that kind of decision is
made, you will need to be very sure of your facts and employ your best
communication skills, particularly when informing the loser. Most of the time, there
will be right and wrong on both sides, and in those cases, an arbitrary decision,
based either on prejudice or on chance alone (for the sake of a quiet life) is not only
fraught with danger but is also unimaginative and a waste of an opportunity to
seek mutual gain.
(ix) Buying-off: This entails ending a conflict by giving in to one or both parties on
some other matter. For example, you could 'solve' bitter rivalry between two

36
 colleagues by giving new status-enhancing responsibilities; or 'solve' an argument
over work space or priorities by spending money on unnecessary but highly-prized
equipment which they have asked for at sometime or other. This is a dangerous
downward spiral to get yourself on. It wins no respect and quickly degenerates into
a form of blackmail with the demands increasing in size as time goes on

(B) EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES

There are effective conflict management techniques. These include appealing to

superordinate goals, expanding resources, changing personnel, changing structure, and
confronting and negotiating.

(i) Superordinate goal: This is an organisational goal that is more important to both
parties in a conflict than their individual or group goals. Superordinate goals cannot
be achieved by an individual or by one group alone. The achievement of these
goals requires co-operation by both parties. One effective technique for resolving
conflict is to appeal to a superordinate goal that is to focus the parties on a larger
issue on which they both agree. This helps them realise their similarities rather than
their differences. For example, in a conflict between two teachers over the use
of textbooks and other teaching and learning resources, the headmaster can
appeal to the conflicting teachers on the need for high academic performance by all
students of the school and the need for rill teachers and school administrators to
focus attention on it. This is because both teachers in conflict would agree that
high academic performance by all students is a goal worthy of pursuit and that this
goal cannot be achieved unless there is agreement and co-operation among teachers
in the school.

(ii) Expanding resources: One conflict management technique is so simple that it may
be overlooked. If the source of the conflict is scarce resources, providing more
resources may be a solution. However, the head of the school working with tight
budgets may not have the luxury of obtaining additional resources. Nevertheless, it

37
 is a technique to be considered in conflict management. For example, if there is a
conflict between two teachers over scarcity and distribution of chalk, the purchase
of more chalk would resolve the conflict.
(iii) Changing personnel: Sometimes a conflict is prolonged and severe, and efforts at
resolving it fail. In such cases, it may be appropriate to change personnel.
Transferring or firing an individual may be the best solution, but only after due
process.
(iv) Changing structure: Another way to resolve a conflict is to change the structure of
the organisation. One way of accomplishing this is to create an integrator role. An
integrator is a liaison between groups with very different interests. In severe
conflicts, it may be best that the integrator be a neutral third party. Creating the
integrator role is a way of opening dialogue between groups that have difficulty
communicating. Using cross-functional teams is another way of changing the
organisation's structure to manage conflict. For example, in discussing discipline
in the school, many departments have to contribute to the solution, and this causes
delays resulting from difficulties in co-ordinating the ideas of the various
departments. Using a cross-functional team made up of members from different
departments improves co-ordination and this reduces delays by allowing many
activities to be performed at the same time 'rather than sequentially. The team
approach allows members from different departments to work together and this
reduces the potential for conflict.
(v) Confronting and negotiating: Some conflict requires confrontation and
negotiation between the parties. These strategies require skills on the part of the
negotiator and careful planning before engaging in negotiations. The process of
negotiating involves an open discussion of problems and solutions, and the
outcome is often an exchange in which both parties work towards a mutually
beneficial solution. Negotiation is a joint process of finding a mutually acceptable
solution to a complex conflict.

Negotiating is a useful strategy under the following conditions:

a) There are two or more parties. Negotiation is primarily an inter-personal or

intergroup process.

38
 b) There is a conflict of interest between the parties such that what one party
wants is not what the other party wants.
c) The parties are willing to negotiate because they believe they can use their
influence to obtain a better outcome than by simply taking the side of the
other party.
d) They prefer to work together than to fight openly, give in, break off contact,
or take the dispute to a higher authority.

 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT STYLES

Conflict management means identifying the appropriate strategies to resolve conflicts. If

the occurrence of conflict is an. everyday issue, then its resolution should be a daily affair.
Managing conflict is thus a common activity in organisations. Effective conflict management
involves more than specific techniques. The ability to understand and correctly
diagnose conflict is the first step to managing it.

Conflict management consists

.• of diagnostic processes, interpersonal styles, negotiating

strategies and structural interventions that are designed to avoid unnecessary conflicts,

reduce or resolve excessive conflicts, or even increases insufficient conflict. One way of
classifying styles of conflict management is to examine the styles' assertiveness, that is,
the extent to which you want your goals met, and cooperativeness, that is, the extent to
which you want to see the other party's concerns met. Managers have at their disposal a
variety of conflict management styles or modes. None of this mode is wrong but there are
right and wrong times to use each.

The Thomas Kilmann conflict modes which are widely used to manage conflicts are as
follows:

(i) Avoiding

(ii) Accommodating

39
(iii) Competing

(iv) Compromising

(v) Collaborating

1. Avoiding

Avoiding is a style low on both assertiveness and co-operativeness. It is a deliberate

decision to take no action on a conflict or to stay out of a conflict situation. Many times
some people avoid conflicts out of fear of engaging in conflicts or because they do not
have confidence in their conflicts management skills. In certain situations, it may be
appropriate to avoid a conflict. For example, when the parties are angry and need time to
cool down, it may be best to use avoidance. However, there is a potential danger in using
an avoiding style too often. It is referred to as a lose-lose situation. Avoiding style may be
desirable under the following conditions:

(i) When the issue is minor or only of passing importance and thus not worth the
individual's time or energy to confront the conflict.
(ii) When there is not enough information available to the individual to effectively deal
with the conflict at that time.
(iii) When the individual's power is so low relative to the other person's that there is
little chance for causing change.
(iv) When other individuals can more effectively resolve the conflict. The person who
adopts the avoiding style justifies his stand with the following statements:
a) I usually don't take positions that will create controversy.
b) I shy away from topics that are sources of disputes with my friends.
c) If there are rules that apply, I cite those, and if there are none, I leave the
other person to make his or her own decision. .

The avoiding skills include the ability to withdraw, ability to leave things unresolved and
the. ability to sidestep issues.

2. Accommodating

Accommodating is a style in which you are concerned that the other party's goals be met
but relatively unconcerned with getting your own way is called accommodating. It is a lose-

40
win situation. It is co-operative but unassertive, that is, it is low assertiveness and high
cooperation. Appropriate situations for accommodating include times when you find you
are wrong, when you want to let the other party have his or her way in order to remind the
individual that he or she owes you similar treatment later, or when the relationship is
important. Over reliance on accommodating has its shortcomings. For examples, if heads
of organisations constantly sacrifice their positions or feelings and allow those of their
subordinates to take precedence, they may lose the respect to manage the organisations
successfully. In addition, managers may become frustrated because their own needs are
never met, and they may also lose self-esteem.

Accommodators justify their style with the following statements:

(i) If it makes other people happy, I am all for it.

(ii) I like to smooth over disagreements by making them appear less important.
(iii) I ease conflict by suggesting that our differences are trivial and then show goodwill
by blending my ideas into those of the other person.

The accommodation skills include forgetting your desires, selflessness, ability to yield and
obeying order.

3. Collaborating

Collaborating is a win-win style that is high on both assertiveness and co-operativeness.

Working towards collaborating involves an open and thorough discussion of the conflict and
arriving at a solution that is satisfactory to both parties. Collaboration has been described
as "putting an idea on top of an idea on top of an idea... in order to achieve the best
solution to the conflict". The .best solution is defined as a creative solution to the conflict
that would net have been generated by a single individual. With such a positive outcome
for collaboration, some people profess that the collaboration mode is always the best
conflict mode to use. However, collaborating takes a great deal of time and energy.
Therefore, the collaborating mode should be used when the conflict warrants the time and
energy. For example, if your team is establishing initial parameters for how to work
effectively together, then using the collaborating mode could be quite useful. On the
other hand, if your team is in conflict about where to go for lunch today, the time and
energy necessary to collaboratively resolve the conflict is probably not beneficial.

41
Situations where collaboration may be effective include times when both parties need
to be committed to a final solution or when a combination of different perspectives can be
formed into a solution. The style represents a desire to maximise joint outcomes.
Collaborators tend to have the following characteristics:

(i) They see conflict as natural, helpful, and even lead to a more creative solution if
handled properly.
(ii) They show trust and candour with others.
(iii) They recognise that when conflict is resolved to the satisfaction of all,
commitment to the solution is likely.

Collaborators justify their style with the following statements:

(iv) I stress that nothing we decide is cast in stone and suggest that we find a
position that we can both trust.
(v) I tell the other person any ideas, actively seek out the other person's ideas, and
search for a mutually beneficial solution.
(vi) I like to suggest new solutions that build on a variety of expressed viewpoints.

Collaboration skills include active listening, identifying concerns, non-threatening

confrontation and analysing inputs

4. Competing

Competing is a style that is very assertive and unco-operative or low cooperation. You
want to satisfy your own interests and are willing to do so at the expense of the other
party. In an emergency or in situations where you know you are right, it may be
appropriate to put your feet down. However, relying solely on competing strategies is
dangerous. managers who do so may become reluctant to admit when they are wrong and
may find themselves surrounded by people who are afraid to disagree with them
competing style, which Mankoe (2002) calls it forcing style, is a win-lose approach to
conflict management. Times when the competing mode is appropriate are when quick
action needs to be taken, when unpopular decisions need to be made, which vital issues
must be handled, or when one is protecting self-interests. Those who use this style
may threaten or actually use emotion, dismissal, negative performance evaluations, or

42
punishments to gain compliance from their subordinates. Over reliance on forcing style by
a manager lessens the employee's work motivation because their interests are not
considered.

Statements that reflect a forcing style include:

(i) I like to put it plainly: Like it or not, what I say goes

(ii) I insist that my position be accepted during a disagreement
(iii) l usually hold on to my position to a problem after the controversy starts.

The competing skills include arguing or debating, standing your ground, using rank or
influence, opinions and feelings and stating your position clearly.

5. Compromising

The comprising style is intermediate in both assertiveness and co-operativeness, because

each party must give up something to reach a solution to the conflict. Compromises are
often made in the final hours of union-management negotiations, when time is of the
essence. Compromise is also an effective backup style when efforts towards collaboration
are not successful. The main benefit of compromising is the quick way of dealing with a
conflict. It does not maximise satisfaction, but only a partial satisfaction for each party. It
is, therefore, a win-win situation.

Statements that justify the compromising style include the following:

(i) I want to know how and what others feel and then explain how I also feel.
It is often necessary to settle on some middle ground.
(ii) After failing in getting my way, I find it necessary to seek a fair combination of gains
and loses for both of us.
(iii) I give into others if they are willing to meet me halfway.
(iv) Half a loaf is better than nothing. Let split the difference.

Compromising style in conflict management may have its flaws such as the following:

(i) Managers may be encouraging compromise on stated issues, rather than on the real
ones.
(ii) Premature compromise often prevents full diagnosis of the real issues.

43
 (iii) It is easier to accept an initial position presented than to search for
alternatives that are more acceptable to all the parties.
(iv) Compromise may be inappropriate to all or part of the situation. Research on the
five styles of conflict management indicates that although most managers favour a
particular style, they have the capacity to change styles as the situation demands.

UNIT 5

CONFLICT RESOLUTION

Conflict resolution is a way for two or more parties to find a peaceful solution to a
disagreement among them. The disagreement may be personal, financial, political, or

44
emotional. It usually involves two or more groups with opposing views regarding specific
issues and another group or individual who is considered to be neutral in their opinion
on the subject and who employs various measures to resolve the conflict.

Successful conflict resolution occurs by listening to and providing opportunities for each of
the parties to present their side of the conflict and assisting them to address their interests
so that they are each satisfied with the outcome. People in conflict need opportunities for
resolution if there is to be personal growth or social development. Conflict resolution
practitioners have the task of assisting the parties in moving from crisis through conflict
management to a mutually satisfactory resolution of the matters at issues between them.
Conflict resolution deals with the underlying causes of conflicts. It seeks to satisfy the
interest or values of the conflicting parties through mutually agreed standards of fairness
and justice.

Conflict resolution, properly understood, entails the use of collaborative problem-solving in

a situation where a neutral party helps two or more disputing parties to engage in
conciliation, facilitation and / or mediation. The resolution contributes to the elimination of
the sources of conflict. It is analytical process that tries to get to the root of the problem. It
aims not merely to resolve the immediate conflict but also to provide insights into the
generic nature of the problem thereby contributing to the elimination of the sources and
the prevention of other instances in which the conflict might return.

 Ground Rules for Conflict Resolution Process

In order to effectively resolve conflicts, participants must abide by a well defined set of
ground rules. The ground rules include the following:

45
(i) Conflicts should always be resolved at a neutral site. The perception of a
"home court advantage" will always be a deterrent to resolving conflict.
(ii) Ideally, participation in conflict resolution process is voluntary. Sometimes,
however, in order to _move forward, concerned parties must work to resolve
differences even when they have no initial interest in doing so. The best way to
achieve voluntary participation is to clearly define the benefits of reaching an
agreement versus not doing so.
(iii) Allow adequate time for each party to prepare for the conflict resolution
process. Don't let individuals feel they are playing on an uneven field because
they didn't have time to gather their thoughts and I or materials.
(iv) Allow adequate time for the conflict resolution session. A resolution may not be
achieved in one sitting.
(v) Set the tone for the conflict resolution session. Layout the ground rules for the
session. Who will speak and when? When will questions be asked? Don't allow
for interruptions if one party is speaking. Ensure there will be no retaliation for
any comments made.
(vi) Always remember, we are talking about problems, not persons.
(vii) Allow all parties to state their concerns. Then work to define underlying
interests and begin to look for common ground.
(viii) The speaker must speak to be understood. Who is your audience? What is the
best way to convey your position/ interest to them?
(ix) Always speak about yourself, not about them. For example, "I feel frustrated"
versus "You are so disorganised I can't work with you."
(x) Speak for a purpose- know what you want to communicate before you start
speaking. Use your preparation time to gather your thoughts.
(xi) Ask questions, clarifying anything you feel might still be ambiguous regarding
their point of view.

 Skills for Resolving Conflicts

(i) Good listening skills: In resolving conflicts, mediators must demonstrate good
listening skills. Having good listening skills will help them to follow and
understand clearly what each of the parties has to say. This will also enable the

46
 mediator to provide the needed assistance to the disputants for the effective
resolution of conflicts. The mediator must, first of all, listen attentively or listen
with rapt attention. Mediators must also demonstrate good listening skills by
showing interest in what each party has to say. They must do this by keeping eye
contact with those in conflict as they speak. They should also nod their heads to
show that they are following what is being said. Occasionally, the mediator
should ask the speaker to repeat a statement or ask him or her to throw more
light on a point made earlier. That is, they should ask follow-up questions to
clarify issues which have already been stated.
(ii) Mediators must also learn to restate what someone or a party has already
said. That is, saying exactly what one has said. This serves as a mirror for the
person; That is, repeating what someone has said with the same words and
tone allows the person to hear himself or herself this will make parties to refrain
from telling lies.
(iii) Another important skill needed for resolving conflicts is for the mediator to
learn to paraphrase. To paraphrase is to state in your own words what
another person has said. When paraphrasing, it is important to focus on the
speaker and begin with any of the following phrases:

(a) "Did I hear you say?"

(b) "So you."

(c) "You feel”.

The paraphrased statement should contain the feelings, event and the reason for the
feeling. For example, "So you are angry because John referred to you as Mr. Know it all".

(iv) Mediators must also re-frame statements made by parties as they present their
side of the matter. To reframe is to take what the speaker has said and restate it
in a constructive manner without shifting from the point he or she wants to
make. Often times, when people are angry, they say things negatively
although the points they make are very important. Your role as a mediator is to
look for the constructive or the important element of the statement and restate
it positively. Remember, as the mediator, you are the only one who is

47
 emotionally free from the. burden of the conflict and must, therefore, put
things well in order to always cool down tempers. For example, when a
speaker or a party says you always steal from my office", you, the mediator must
change the word, "steal" to "take things". The statement then becomes "you
always take things from his office".
(v) Fairness to all sides: Mediators should be fair to all persons involved in a conflict
or they should not take sides with any of them. That is, they should give the
same treatment to those involved in conflict. This will ensure that both sides co-
operate with the mediator in resolving the conflict. If any of the parties find out
that he or she is not being treated fairly, it will be difficult for him or her to co-
operate with the mediator.
(vi) Give appropriate responses: If mediators do not give appropriate
responses, it will make the parties become angry and this may affect the
resolution process.
(vii) Encourage people to say what they feel and what hurt them: As people are
given the chance to say what hurt them, they become somehow relieved. This is
very good for effective conflict resolution. In addition, when people say what
hurt them, the mediators are assisted to have a very good idea about the 'extent
to which any of the conflict parties has been hurt. This will enable the mediator
to determine the appropriate compensation to be paid to the people.

UNIT 6

48
 CONFLICT RESOLUTION APPROACHES

(i) Forcing: When one of the conflict’s parts firmly pursues his or her own concerns
despite the resistance of the other(s). This may involve pushing one viewpoint at
the expense of another or maintaining firm resistance to the counterpart’s
actions; it is also commonly known as “competing”. Forcing may be appropriate
when all other, less forceful methods, don’t work or are ineffective; when
someone needs to stand up for his/her own rights (or the represented
group/organization’s rights), resist aggression and pressure. It may be also
considered a suitable option when a quick resolution is required and using force
is justified (e.g. in a life-threatening situation, to stop an aggression), and as a
very last resort to resolve a long-lasting conflict.
However, forcing may also negatively affect the relationship with the opponent
in the long run; may intensified the conflict if the opponent decides to react in
the same way (even if it was not the original intention); it doesn’t allow to take
advantage in a productive way of the other side’s position and, last but not least,
taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting to some
individuals.
(ii) Win-Win / Collaborating: Collaboration involves an attempt to work with the
other part involved in the conflict to find a win-win solution to the problem in
hand, or at least to find a solution that most satisfies the concerns of both
parties. The win-win approach sees conflict resolution as an opportunity to come
to a mutually beneficial result; and it includes identifying the underlying concerns
of the opponents and finding an alternative which meets each party's concerns.
From that point of view, it is the most desirable outcome when trying to solve a
problem for all partners.
Collaborating may be the best solution when consensus and commitment of
other parties is important; when the conflict occurs in a collaborative,
trustworthy environment and when it is required to address the interests of
multiple stakeholders. But more specially, it is the most desirable outcome when
a long-term relationship is important so that people can continue to collaborate
together in a productive way; collaborating is in few words, sharing

49
 responsibilities and mutual commitment. For parties involved, the outcome of
the conflict resolution is less stressful; however, the process of finding and
establishing a win-win solution may be longer and should be very involving.
It may require more effort and more time than some other methods; for the
same reason, collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial and a
quick solution or fast response is required.
(iii) Compromising: Different from the Win-Win solution, in this outcome the conflict
parties find a mutually acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties.
Compromising may be an optimal solution when the goals are moderately
important and not worth the use of more assertive or more involving
approaches. It may be useful when reaching temporary settlement on complex
issues and as a first step when the involved parties do not know each other well
or haven’t yet developed a high level of mutual trust. Compromising may be a
faster way to solve things when time is a factor. The level of tensions can be
lower as well, but the result of the conflict may be also less satisfactory.
If this method is not well managed, and the factor time becomes the most
important one, the situation may result in both parties being not satisfied with
the outcome (i.e. a lose-lose situation). Moreover, it does not contribute to
building trust in the long run and it may require a closer monitoring of the kind of
partially satisfactory compromises acquired.
(iv) Withdrawing: This technique consists on not addressing the conflict, postpone it
or simply withdrawing; for that reason, it is also known as Avoiding. This
outcome is suitable when the issue is trivial and not worth the effort or when
more important issues are pressing, and one or both the parties do not have time
to deal with it. Withdrawing may be also a strategic response when it is not the
right time or place to confront the issue, when more time is needed to think and
collect information before acting or when not responding may bring still some
winnings for at least some of the involves parties. Moreover, withdrawing may
be also employed when someone know that the other party is totally engaged
with hostility and does not want (can’t) to invest further unreasonable efforts.
Withdrawing may give the possibility to see things from a different perspective
while gaining time and collecting further information, and specially is a low stress

50
 approach particularly when the conflict is a short time one. However, not acting
may be interpreted as an agreement and therefore it may lead to weakening or
losing a previously gained position with one or more parties involved.
Furthermore, when using withdrawing as a strategy more time, skills and
experiences together with other actions may need to be implemented.
(v) Smoothing: Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of others first of all,
rather than one's own concerns. This kind of strategy may be applied when the
issue of the conflict is much more important for the counterparts whereas for
the other is not particularly relevant. It may be also applied when someone
accepts that he/she is wrong and furthermore there are no other possible
options than continuing an unworthy competing-pushing situation. Just as
withdrawing, smoothing may be an option to find at least a temporal solution or
obtain more time and information, however, it is not an option when priority
interests are at stake.
Unfortunately, there is a high risk to be abused when choosing for the smoothing
option, therefore it is important to keep the right balance and to don’t give up
one own interests and necessities. Otherwise confidence in the own ability,
mainly with an aggressive opponent, may be seriously damaged, together with
the credibility by the other parties involved. Needed to say that in these cases a
transition to a Win-Win solution in the future becomes particularly more difficult
when someone.

 RESOLUTION PROCESS

1. Clarify what the disagreement is. Clarifying involves getting to the heart of the
conflict. The goal of this step is to get both sides to agree on what the disagreement
is. To do this, you need to discuss what needs are not being met on both sides of the
conflict and ensure mutual understanding. During the process, obtain as much
information as possible on each side’s point of view. Continue to ask questions until
you are certain that all parties involved (you and those on either side of the conflict)
understand the issue.

51
2. Establish a common goal for both parties. In this step of the process, both sides
agree on the desired outcome of the conflict. “When people know that they’re
working towards the same goal, then they’re more apt to participate truthfully to
make sure that they reach that end goal together.” Kimberly A. Benjamin explained
in a recent BLR webinar. To accomplish this, discuss what each party would like to
see happen and find a commonality in both sides as a starting point for a shared
outcome. That commonality can be as simple as “both sides want to end the
conflict.”
3. Discuss ways to meet the common goal. This involves listening, communicating, and
brainstorming together. Continue with both sides working together to discuss ways
that they can meet the goal they agreed on in step 2. Keep going until all the options
are exhausted.
4. Determine the barriers to the common goal. In this step of the process, the two
parties acknowledge what has brought them into the conflict and talk about what
problems may prevent a resolution. Understanding the possible problems that may
be encountered along the way lets you proactively find solutions and have plans in
place to handle issues. Define what can and cannot be changed about the situation.
For the items that cannot be changed, discuss ways of getting around those road
blocks.
5. Agree on the best way to resolve the conflict. Both parties need to come to a
conclusion on the best resolution. Start by identifying solutions that both sides can
live with. Ask both sides and see where there is common ground. Then start to
discuss the responsibility each party has in maintaining the solution. It’s also
important to use this opportunity to get to the root cause to ensure this conflict will
not come up again. “A lot of times when we try to fix problems, we get so caught up
in fixing it that we do not identify what we need to do so it doesn’t happen.”
Benjamin cautioned.
6. Acknowledge the agreed upon solution and determine the responsibilities each
party has in the resolution. Both sides need to own their responsibility in the
resolution of the conflict and express aloud what they have agreed to. After both
parties have acknowledged a win-win situation, ask both parties to use phrases such
as “I agree to…” and “I acknowledge that I have responsibility for…”Bottom of For.

52
 UNIT 7
PEACE BUILDING APPROACHES/TOOLS

 PEACE BUILDING TOOLS

 Communication: This in this context is the process of sharing and exchanging

information between individuals, groups, and potential parties in a conflict situation. It
is also the process of interacting and relating with others, meaning that parties to a
conflict situation still talk. The exchange and sharing of information can help to
remove doubt, suspicion and contribute to the process of confidence building. These
are essential ingredients of peace building. Communication relates to the presence
and sharing of accurate information about a conflict situation, being able to talk about
feelings and concerns of parties, speaking about what parties would like to change,
and discussing the nature and type of conflict, touching on the positions, interests,
needs and fears of parties. Poor communication or the absence of communication
about these and other subjects, or a misinterpretation of the needs and feelings of one
another by conflict parties, can easily lead to the...escalation of conflict. The role of
communication in conflict prevention and crisis management stems from the fact that
most conflicts have to do with perceptions, assumptions, stereotypes and attitudes,
which have been developed by conflict parties vis-a-vis others.
Communication assumed increased significance following the Cuban Missile Crisis in
1962. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a major confrontation during the Cold War between
the United States and the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), over the
issue of Soviet-supplied missile installations in Cuba. It was considered by many as the
closet the world has approached to nuclear war. The crisis began when the United
States discovered that Cuba had secretly installed Soviet missiles able to carry nuclear
weapons. These missiles were capable of hitting targets across most of the United
States. The discovery led to a tense standoff over several days as the United States
imposed a naval blockade of Cuba and demanded that the USSR remove the missiles.
At the end of the crisis, the two nuclear powers decided to keep communication
channels open, clarify intermediaries (Schelling, 1963). It was also decided to open the
"hotline", a direct communication line between Moscow and Washington. It brought to

53
 the fore, the fact that the absence of information over the intentions, movements and
plans of both countries created deep anxiety capable of creating a major explosion.
Even though the Cuban Missile Crisis did not invent the use of communication in
conflict and crisis management; it helped to popularise it at the international level.
Communication has come to represent a key strategy of conflict management, such
as collaboration, negotiation and dialogue; as well as third party interventions like
mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and adjudication, is largely dependent on effective
communication. What third-party interveners do is to bring about an enhanced
process of "controlled communication" (Burton, 1965) between parties in any given
conflict. This keeps the parties seeing each other, interacting with each other and
taking to each other about their problem, with a view to generating workable solutions
to the issues in the conflict. Once communication is lost, parties risk getting into deeper
crisis that cannot be easily resolved. Thus, communication is invaluable for conflict
prevention in the first instance, and then for conflict resolution.
 Collaboration: The collaboration process is one in which parties work together on their
own to resolve problems through constructive dialogue or other activities like joint
projects, sharing of community schools and health centres, markets, bridges and
culverts, as well as other utilities, etc. Collaboration helps to build trust, confidence and
mutual respect. It works on the basis of conflict parties, either potential or actual,
working together on a number of identified common themes and issues, or projects,
which intensify communication and activities between them. It takes place at various
levels, from the inter-personal to the group, community, national, regional to the·
international or universal levels. The assumption is that those who collaborate, and
those who do things together, are likely to build more friendship and mutual respect
among themselves than those who do not. This approach is one of the base methods of
maintaining friendly relations, and is least costly. It is expected that those
collaborating are, most of the time, enjoying the relationship, and that cooperation in
one area can lead to collaboration in other areas. This could ultimately create a chain of
collaborative activities that support peace building. Like communication, collaboration
does not involve a third-party, and so is within the reach and control of the participating
parties.

54
 Negotiation: Fisher et al (2000: 115) define negotiation as " ... .a structured process of
dialogue between conflicting parties about issues in which their opinions differ». Miall,
Ramsbotham and Woodhouse (1999:21) define negotiation as "the process whereby the
parties within the conflict seek to settle or resolve their conflicts". The University for
Peace sees negotiation as: "communication, usually governed by pre-established
procedures, between representatives of parties involved in a conflict or dispute" (Miller,
2003:25). Thus, negotiation is a direct process of dialogue and discussion taking place
between at least, two parties who are faced with a conflict situation or a dispute. Both
parties come to the realisation that they have a problem, and both are aware that by
talking to each other, they can find a solution to the problem. The benefits of
compromised solution, it is believed, outweigh the losses arising from refusal to
negotiate. The goal of negotiation, according to Jeong (2000:168), is" ... to reach
agreement through joint decision making between parties".
From the definitions of negotiation offered, it can be seen that communication is critical
to the process. Thus, it can take place only when there is communication between
parties. At later stages of conflict where conflict might have escalated and
communication is threatened, or has stopped, negotiation becomes harder.
Negotiation typically takes place during the early stages of conflict when there is
communication between parties is existent and good, or at the de-escalation point when
communication has been restored.

There are two types of negotiation; the first is positional negotiation, while the second is
collaborative negotiation. Positional negotiation is based on the aggressive pursuit of
interest by parties, and is typically adversarial and competitive. Parties make demands that
are inconsiderate of the interests and needs of others, and this makes it difficult for these
interests to be met. Parties also perceive themselves to be in competition. The desire will
then be to win, instead of working towards a mutually beneficial outcome. Thus, the
demands of one party can be met only to the detriment of the other. Parties tend to
stubbornly adhere to their positions, and one side seems to dominate the negotiation.
Positional negotiations break down easily.

Collaborative or constructive negotiation on the other hand, is a process where parties try
to educate each other about their needs and concerns, and both search for the best ways to

55
solve their problems in ways that the interests and fears of both or all parties are met. The
process is collaborative in principle and the emphasis is on mutual understanding and
feeling, all aimed at building a sustainable relationship. In practice, it may not be as simple
as the models presented, because to the extent that negotiation is about the interest of
parties, it can be more complex than this. It is also a cheap assumption to believe that all
parties that come to negotiation are as such, interested in reaching a solution. Negotiation
seems to have universal application as a principle of conflict management based on
dialogue. People in all societies and cultures across the worlds talk and negotiate their
interests; There are, however, cultural peculiarities in terms of the setting, preparatory
stage, the actual interaction phase, and the follow up. In the African context, for instance,
there are cultural values that may hinder negotiation. These could include factors like age
difference, the perceptions of the wider community, the psychological impact of the
outcomes from negotiation, relationship and the subject matter. Negotiation is a key
approach to the peaceful resolution of disputes and conflicts that may arise among parties.
It is also within the reach and control of parties, like communication and collaboration,
because there are no third parties involved.

 Conciliation: Conciliation is a close to mediation. It is a third party activity, which

covers intermediary efforts aimed at persuading the parties to a conflict to work
towards a peaceful solution. Conciliation involves facilitation. The University for Peace
sees conciliation in the following way: The voluntary referral of a conflict to a neutral
external party (in the form of an unofficial commission) which either suggests a non-
binding settlement or conduct explorations to facilitate more structures or
techniques of conflict resolution. The latter can include confidential discussions with
the disputants or assistance during a pre-negotiation phase (Miller, 2003: 6-7). The
conciliator communicates separately with parties and provides the assistance needed
from a neutral third party. A key aim of conciliation is to reduce tensions between
parties in a conflict situation. · Conciliation provides the vital background through
several complex activities, which in turn supports higher profile events like
mediation.

56
 Mediation: Mediation has been presented by the United Nations University for peace
as: "the voluntary, informal, non-binding process · undertaken by an external
party that fosters the settlement of differences or demands between directly invested
parties"
(Miller, 2003:23). Miall, Ramsbotham and Woodhouse (1999:22) see mediation as "the
intervention of a third party; it is a voluntary process in which the parties retain control
over the outcome (pure mediation), although it may include positive and negative
inducements (mediation with muscle)."
Thus, mediation is assistance by a third party where the parties to a conflict admit that
they have a problem which they are both committed to solving, but in which the
mediator manages a negotiation process, but does not impose a solution on the parties.
It is a voluntary process. Mediation is a common skill that many people have, but
which they hardly realise they do. When two friends have a disagreement, for instance
and the line of communication is broken, a common friend could be a mediator in the
relationship. This can move on to higher levels of relationship at the group,
community and international levels. The objective of mediation is to help parties to a
conflict, within an environment of controlled communication, to reach solutions to
their problems. Mediation involves dialogue, but it is different because of the
presence of a third party. At the stage of dialogue, parties may still .. be in position to
maintain communication on their own, by themselves.
The role of the mediator is to create the enabling environment for the parties to carry
out dialogue sessions leading to the resolution of a pending conflict. Generally, the
mediator works on communication between parties, by working on common themes
and drawing attention to neglected points and is a confidant to the parties, as well as a
reconciler. The mediator helps parties to identify and arrive at common grounds with a
view to overcoming their fears- and satisfying their real needs. The mediator needs to
enjoy the confidence of the parties to the conflict. In addition, there is need to be
objective, neutral, balanced, supportive, non-judgmental and astute in questioning;
and to try to dive the parties towards win-win as opposed to win-lose outcomes.
Mediation is a popular process in the Western context of conflict management. It is
quite productive and helpful in settling conflicts that would have otherwise escalated
easily. In the African sense, however, some of the principal characteristics of mediation

57
 are absent; Africans do more of arbitration (discussed below) in traditional setting
than mediation. Yet, mediation is gaining increasing significance in Africa as a result of
the funding of African NGO 's by Western donor funds and other Western NGOs.

 Basic Principles Governing Mediation

The basic principles on mediation include the following:

(i) The mediator should be acceptable to both parties to ensure maximum co-
operation from them.
(ii) The mediator should ensure that the conflict parties communicate again, that is, he
or she must ensure that the communicating link is restored.
(iii) Mediators must be involved with all parties. For example, mediators must visit
and listen to all sides of the conflict. That is, visiting those who are accused and
those who have suffered. It can also take the form of attending social programmes
such.as funeral rites organised by all sides.
(iv) The mediator must be neutral, that is, must not take sides with any of the parties.
(v) He or she must respect both parties.
(vi) Mediators must guide and control the· mediation process but must avoid trying
to direct the content of the discussion.
(vii) Options for resolving the conflict must come from the parties themselves.
(viii) It is important that greater care is exercised by the mediator not to say or do
anything that would lead to the loss of interest in the resolution process by both or
any of the parties.

 Arbitration: This is another type of third party intervention that is a step higher than
mediation in the conflict management process. The parties to a conflict, who decide to
use arbitration, even though they choose a non-violent method of settling their disputes
lose more control over their situation than those who select mediation and other
lower levels of intervention. By definition, arbitration is the use and assistance of a

58
 neutral third party in conflict, who hears the evidence from both parties, and
thereafter renders a decision, usually called an award, which is expected to be
binding on the parties.

Arbitration is similar to mediation, and close to adjudication, but different from both. It is
different from mediation in the sense that, the decisions of the arbitrator are binding,
while the mediator refrains from reaching or providing any decisions, whatever the weight
of the evidence that might have been gathered in the mediation process. It is different from
litigation in the Sense that it is done outside the courts, and its enforcement mechanisms
differ from those of court judgments.

Those who favour arbitration above litigation argue that, it permits the parties to a dispute
to select the arbiter they would wish to sit over their case, something not enjoyed by
litigation. However, its critics point to the cost involved, arguing that in the end analysis, it
may not be cheaper than going to court.

As stated earlier, much of third party intervention in traditional African societies is done
through arbitration. Arbitrators fulfill this role by virtue of the positions of authority they
occupy in the society. They could be traditional leaders in the family, clan, village,
community ethnic group, etc. Arbitration may be done in the context of the wider
community, or with just the parties involved in a situation. The parties and witnesses may
be listened to, and then a decision is made about who is right and who is wrong, followed by
what is to be done. There is a desire to ensure that the outcome in any arbitration process
is a fair one. There is no exclusivity in these methods of conflict management. Most of
them have properties of mediation and adjudication. These differences arc for analytical
purposes.

 Adjudication

Adjudication is another non-violent method of conflict management. This involves the use
of the courts and litigation processes. Parties to a dispute may choose instead to take their
case to a court of law, before a judge of competent jurisdiction. Legal counsels may
represent them. At the end of the process, the court gives a judgment. The judgment is
legally binding on both parties. The judgment will be further enforced, where necessary,
by the law enforcement agencies of the state.

59
Like arbitration, adjudication is, or at least, is expected to be a peaceful means of
resolving conflict and disputes. However, its peace is only relative. This is because
litigation tends to destroy trust, love, respect and other forms of confidence between
parties. It increases suspicion and the bitterness of litigation lingers on for a long time after
the judgment must have been given. Litigations end in win-lose outcomes, where the
winner appears to take all, and the loser ends up with nothing. That way, the bitterness
stays. In addition, litigations take quite a long time to dispose of, and they are expensive.
They are also totally outside the control of the conflicting parties in every respect. Parties
cannot decide how long they take, and cannot choose the nature of the outcome.

 Other Methods of Conflict Resolution

Other methods of conflict resolution include the following:

(i) Peace Keeping: The use of peace keeping as a method of conflict resolution is to keep
warring factions apart in order to prevent violent confrontations. Peace keeping may
include the-provision of public education, in churches, mosques, markets and other public
places on the need for the people to avoid acts that will aggravate the conflicts and the
need for them to live in peace. In West Africa and Africa in general, peace keepers have
been mobilised to undertake peace keeping missions in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Cote
d'Ivoire, etc. In addition, peace keepers are found in other parts of the world such as
Lebanon, Cambodia, Somalia and the Dafur Region in Sudan.

(ii) Peace Enforcement: Peace enforcement is a mandate given to peace keepers to

enforce peace by arresting people who breach the peace process to restore law and order.
It is important to note that, in peace keeping missions, the combatants or the. conflicting
parties arc obliged to observe certain rules and regulations to ease tension. In situations
where any of the conflicting parties or certain individuals become lawless and refuse to
conduct themselves according to the rules and regulations which guide the peace process,
they may be arrested to restore peace and order. This action is taken to enforce peace.
Peace enforcement strategies may include the imposition of curfew in conflict areas or
zones, especially, when the conflicting parties or combatants refuse to co-operate with
peace keepers and break the rules and regulations governing the peace process with
impunity.

60
 UNIT 8

THEORIES OF CONFLICT

 Biological Theories : The view that humankind is evil by nature has a long tradition.
The thinking is that since our ancestors were instinctively violent beings, and since we
evolved from them, we too must bear destructive impulses in our genetic makeup.
In their assessment of human nature, classical theorists 'like Thomas Hobbes, St
Augustine, Malthus, and Freu expressed the belief that, human beings are driven by a
natural instinct to self-preservation Because of this tendency, Hobbes described life in
the 'state of nature' as "solitary, poor; nasty, brutish and short". In the same way, Saint
Augustine, (1948) and Neibuhr (1953), and some theologians referred to the linkage
between violent behaviour and original sin: in humanity. To Neibuhr, humans are
driven by a natural quest "will-to-live"/ "will-to- power" to speak power, personal
security and survival at the expense of others around them.
The biological theories have given rise to what may be referred to as the innate theory
of conflict which contends that conflict is innate in all social interactions, and among all
animals, including human beings. The theory is broad in coverage, incorporating
scholars. with biological backgrounds, such as human physiology, ethology, socio-
biological (the use of biological theory to explain social and human behaviour),
psychology (frustration• aggression theory by Dollard et al.), etc. It argues that
humans are animals, although higher species of animals, and would fight naturally over
things they cherish.
Others who subscribe to the innate theory are the theologians and religious people, who
see an inner flaw in humankind by way of sin that brings forth bitterness, violence and

61
 conflict. The whole purpose of religion is to regulate this sinful nature in the relationship
between men and men on the one hand, and men and God on the other hand.
In other words, it is believed that conflict is inherent in man, and this can be explained
from man's inner properties and attributes, and hormonal composition. That
aggressive instinct will be provoked when man is threatened and challenged, etc.
In his attempt to understand the high level of aggression and destruction that occurred
during World War 1, Sigmund Freud (a key founding figure of Psychology) looked to
human nature for answers. He described the destructive tendencies in human beings
as a product of a 'dialectical struggle' between the instinct associated with life and
survival (Eros) and the instinct associated with death (Thanatos) and suggested that
societies had to learn to control the expression of both the life and death instinct. In
this view, both instincts arc always seeking release and it is the one that wins the contest
of domination that is released. Thus, aggression against others is released whenever the
Eros overcomes the Thanatos and as he puts it, war and conflict is a necessary periodic
release that helps men preserve themselves by diverting their destructive tendencies to
others.
Sentiments like those expressed above probably inform the thinking of many people
who argue that failure to express anger results in heart diseases, stress, and high blood
pressure. Zinberg and Fellman (1967) went as far as providing a justification for periodic
military confrontations in suggesting that war serves to discharge the aggressive
instinct and that 'a mature society must eventually accept violence as an essential
part of human nature, essentially not because it is good or bad, but because occurrence
of conflict is shared by many theories of conflict'. As we can see, the realists share
similar principles with the biological, physiological and theological theories, and vice
versa.
 The Frustration- Aggression Theory: The Frustration-Aggression theory which John
Dollard and his research associates initially developed in 1939 and has been expanded
and modified by scholars like Leonard Berkowitz (1962) and Aubrey Yates (1962)
appears to be the most common explanation for violent behaviour stemming from
inability to fulfill needs. Theorists who rely on this explanation use the psychological
theories of motivation and behaviour, as well as frustration and aggression (Anifowose,
1982:6). In an attempt to explain aggression) scholars point to the difference between

62
 what people feel they want or deserve to what they actually get-the "want-get-ratio"
(Feierabends, 1969:256-7) and difference between expected need satisfaction" and
"actual need satisfaction" (Davies, 1962:6). Where expectation does not meet
attainment, the tendency is for people to confront those they hold responsible for
frustrating their ambitions. This is the central argument that Ted Robert Gurr's relative
deprivation thesis addressed in saying, "the greater the discrepancy, however marginal,
between what is sought and what seem attainable, the greater will be; the chances that
anger and violence will result" (1970:24).
The main explanation that the frustration-aggression theory provides is that aggression
is not just undertaken as a natural reaction or instinct as realists and biological assume
it but that it is the outcome of frustration and that in a situation where the legitimate
desires of an individual is denied either directly or by the indirect consequences of the
way the! society is structured, the feeling of disappointment may lead such a person to
express his anger through violence that will be directed at those he holds responsible
or people who are directly or indirectly related to them.
In situations where feelings of frustration become widespread among the population
and the feeling is that people are getting less than they deserve, the most advisable
thing that! political leaders can do is to find out what the expectations of such
individuals and groups! are and to seek ways of negotiating with them. Most times,
however, those in a position! of authority believe that giving in to public demands or
entering into negotiations is a sign of weakness. This is not the case and sometimes, the
fact that an official of the state' or community leader is showing some concern is
enough to make people believe that something is being done.
A good example of the way in which frustration leads to aggression can be seen in the
ongoing cries in the Niger Delta area of Nigeria. After waiting and peacefully agitating

I
for what the people of the region considered a fair share of the oil wealth that is
exploited from their land, youths now take the law into their own hands by vandalising
oil pipelines, kidnapping oil workers for fat ransoms and generally, creating. problems
for those they believe are responsible for their predicaments.
 Physiological Theories: Theorists of this school share the biological and hormonal origins
of aggression and conflict in individuals with realists, theologians and others, but add
by providing the conditions under which this happens. It may thus, look tautological to

63
 include them as a separate category, except that we do it here for emphasis only.
According to them, even though humans have the capacity to be aggressive, this
capacity remains idle until stimulated by necessity or encouraged by success. Scott
(1958) notes that, the expression has a lot to do with learning. In essence, the
physiological sources of aggressive behaviour are a function of several factors including
human nature and the environment. As he pointed out, "we must not forget that in any
real situation, behaviour will be the result of factors from all levels" .
Other physiologists like MacLean (1978) and Lorenz (1966) have sought to understand
how the human brain reacts when people are under stress and threat. He notes that
it is possible for a person to experience conflict between what he is feeling and what he
is thinking. This then determines whether they act on such feelings strongly about
something or not and whether they act on such feelings or decide to ignore the feeling.
For this reason, when people are under stress, and under certain conditions, their
reaction can conform or differ from what others expect. In essence, humans are
naturally capable of being aggressive but do not display violent behaviour as an instinct.
When violence occurs, there is the possibility that it is being manipulated by a
combination of factors within and outside the individual's control.
 Economic Theories: There is a tendency among economists to provide an economic
explanation for the existence and endurance of conflict. This is largely because people
in conflict are assumed to be fighting over, not about, something that is material. The
question then becomes: "Is the conflict a result of greed (intention to 'comer'
something) or of grievance (anger arising over feelings of injustice)". For instance, Collier
(2003) points out that some people (commonly referred to as 'conflict entrepreneurs')
actually benefit from chaos: while the overwhelming majority of the population are
affected by the negative impacts of conflict; the leaders of armed formations that are
actually perpetrating the violence often profit from the chaos: (and) that while the
prospect of pecuniary gains is seldom the principal incentive for rebellion, it can become
for some insurgent groups, a preferred state of affairs.
Bridal and Malone (2000) agree that social conflicts are generated by many factors,
some of which are deep-seated. For them, across the ages, conflicts have come to be
seen as having a "functional utility" and are embedded in economic disparities. War,
the crisis stage of internal conflicts, has sometimes become a vast private and profit•

64
 making enterprise. They argue further that though, to historians and social scientists,
the importance of economic factors to the understanding of conflicts will always be a
contentious issue, the need to explore this linkage, however, is not contested.
Furthermore, they contend that even though issues in conflict may later be packaged as
resulting from ideological, racial or even religious (value) difference; these represent at
the most basic level, a contest for control over economic assets, resources or systems.

 Human Needs Theory: The position of human needs theory is similar to that of
Frustration-Aggression and Relative Deprivation Theory. Its main assumption is that all
humans have basic human needs which they seek to fulfill, and that the denial and
frustration of these needs by other groups or individuals could affect them immediately
or later, thereby leading to conflict (Rosati et al. 1990). 'Basic human needs' in this
sense comprise physical, physiological, social and spiritual needs. In essence, to provide
access to one (e.g. food) and deny or hinder access to another (e.g. freedom of worship)
will amount to denial and could make people to resort to violence in an effort to protest
these needs in an effort to protest these needs.
Needs theorists over time have identified some of these needs the deprivation of which
cause conflicts. Maslow in his Motivation and Personality identified physiological needs,
safety needs, belongingness and love, esteem and self actualisation. Burton (1979)
lists response, stimulation, security, recognition, distributive justice, meaning, need to
appear rational and develop rationality, need for sense of control and the need for role
defence (Burton, 1979). He refers to some needs as basic, such as food, shelter, sex
and reproduction, etc. Edward Azar names some basic needs like security, distributive
identity, social recognition of identity and effective participation in the processes that
shape such identities (Azar, 1994).
Burton identifies a link between frustration which forces humans into acts of
aggression and the need on the part of such individuals to satisfy their basic needs.
According to Burton, individuals cannot be taught to accept practices that destroy their

65
 identity and other goals that are attached to their needs and because of this, they are
forced to react against the factors, groups and institutions that they see as being
responsible for threatening such needs.
Human needs for survival, protection, affection, understanding, participation,
creativity, and identity are shared by all people, are irrepressible, and according to
Burton, have components (needs for recognition, identity, security, autonomy and
bonding with others) that are not easy to give up. No matter how much a political
or social system tries to frustrate or suppress these needs, it will either fail or cause
far more damage in the lung l'WL Like Gun's thesis on relative deprivation, Max-
Neef (1991) believes that the tension between deprivation and potential are main
issues addressed by the human needs theory because whe1:1 important needs are not
sufficiently satisfied, economic and political problems will continue to grow. The
absence of the economic opportunities, hyper-inflation, and penury are
manifestations of economic imbalance; while political imbalance leads to fear,
xenophobia (intense fear or dislike of foreign people, their customs and culture),
crime and violence, forced migration, voluntary or forced exile and political
marginalisation. All these constitute the root causes of bitter conflicts.
Even though needs scholars identify a wide range of human needs, some of which they
consider to basic human needs, they agreed on the fact that the frustration of these
needs hampers the actualisation of the potentials of groups and individuals,
subsequently leading to conflict. Secondly, there is near consensus among them
that to resolve a conflict situation, or to even prevent it from occurring, the needs have
to be met with appropriate satisfiers, those things that were denied them in the first
instance.
 Systematic Theories: Systematic theories provide a socio-structural explanation for
the emergence of violent' social conflicts. The position of this theory is that, reason(s)
for any social conflict lie in the social context within which it occurs. As Johnson
(1966:12-13) noted in the case of political violence, "any analytical penetration of the
behaviour characterised as 'purposive political violence' most utilise as its tool, a
conception of the social context in which it occurs". This paradigm turns our focus to
social factors and the effects of large-scale (usually sudden) changes in social, political
and economic processes that would usually guide against inability.

66
Systemic factors that lead to changes in peoples' material comfort include
environmental degradation that reduces access to sources of livelihood, uncontrolled
population growth, especially, in urban centres, resource scarcity and its allocation
through lopsided political processes and competition, the negative effects of colonial
and Cold War legacies, breakdown of cherished values and traditions that play crucial
social control functions, widespread poverty in the midst of plenty, the domination and
marginalisation of minority groups by those in the majority, and ethnicity. These are all
examples of systematic causes of conflict.
Systemic sources of conflict are found in every aspect of life and affect large numbers
of people even though their influence on the emergence and intensity of conflicts are
not always so visible to people. Because systemic factors bear directly on the less
privileged, preventive strategies that are meant to support social and political
stability, initiate people-friendly economic and political reforms, and state policies the
genuinely seek to prevent or reduce conflicts between individuals and groups by
seriously addressing the underlying issues often yield positive results in the long run
because the people will 'see' and feel the impact of such actions as soon as they begin to
yield fruit.
Systemic theories also seek to explain the relationship between modernisation and
political disorder and see movements between different periods of economic and
political history as containing large amounts of 'pull factors', tension and crisis that
create conditions of internal conflict and instability. Lucian Pye for instance, identifies
identity crisis, legitimacy crisis, penetration crisis, participation crisis, integration crisis,
and distribution crisis as six key issues within modernisation projects that generate
conflicts. The inabilities to manage the challenges that result from these produce the
immediate factors that lead to negative developments within the system.
In trying to cope with the different challenges and crises of modernisation, most
governments that find it difficult to gain the legitimacy needed to attract support from
the people usually resort to unconditional means and force rather than processes that
are in line with the rule of law, in an effort to suppress the legitimate demands of the
people, prevent opposition and civil society groups from criticising policies that they do
not agree with, and generally attempt to dictate the terms on which peace will be
attained.

67
Other Theories of Conflict

Marc Howard Ross (2001) identifies six theories of conflict. They are discussed below:

(i) The community relations theory: It assumes that conflict is caused by ongoing
polarisation, mistrust and hostility between different groups within a
community.
(ii) The human needs theory: It assumes that deep-rooted conflict is caused by
unmet or frustrated human basic needs such as physical, psychological and
social. The most cited needs include security, identity, recognition, participation
and autonomy.
(iii) The Identity theory: It assumes that conflict is caused by feelings of threatened
identity, often rooted in unresolved past loss and suffering.
(iv) The principled negotiation theory: This assumes that conflict is caused by
incompatible positions which are taken by different groups or people.
(v) The inter-cultural miscommunication theory: It assumes that conflict is caused
by incompatibilities between different cultural communication styles.
(vi) The conflict transformation theory: It assumes that conflict is caused by real
problems of inequality and injustice in society. The Marxist Theory of Conflict.
Karl Marx was born in Germany in 1818 and completed his doctorate in 1841
after which he worked as a newspaper editor. So relentless was his social
criticism that he was driven from Germany to live in Paris, and from there to
England where he died in 1883. Marx studied how societies have changed
throughout history, noting that they often evolved gradually, although they
sometimes evolve revolutionary. Marx observed that change is partly prompted
by technological advance. But, he strongly believed that the conflict between
economic classes is the major engine of change.
Marx undertook an analysis into the capitalist economic system. His analysis
centred on the destructive aspects of capitalism especially, how it promotes class
conflicts. The so-called Industrial Revolution which was taking place in Britain
had created two major classes, namely the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. Marx
regarded the proletariat as the forces of production. The proletariat was also

68
called the oppressed, have-nots, masses, poor, lower class people, down-trodden
and the propertyless class.
He also referred to the bourgeoisie as the owners of factors of production.
They were also called the dominant class, haves and the rich. Factors of
production also called productive property or means of production refer to
natural resources necessary to , produce the essentials of life, factories and
the machinery that transform raw materials : into finished goods.
Marx used the term "class conflict" and sometimes "class struggle" to refer to
the antagonism between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat over the
distribution of wealth and power in society. According to Marx, under the
capitalist system the property less majority, who owned only their labour power
had no choice but to rely on those who owned property to employ them as wage
workers often with only sufficient income to keep themselves and their families
alive.
Marx observed that a basic contradiction in this system would become more and
more · apparent to the people as capitalism developed and expanded. The
contradiction in Marx view was that the mass of workers, the majority of the
population, gained little benefit from the great wealth they themselves
produced. In other words, those who generated the riches of the society
through their labour and sweat received only a small portion as their reward with
the bulk going to the bourgeoisie. One thing that worried Marx was the use of
various institutions, especially, religion, to justify their position of power and
exploitation. For the oppressed, religion provided some comfort, but of a
dangerous kind. According to Marx, religion was the "flowers on the chains" that
bound this group in servitude. It prevented the masses from seeing that the
social system was responsible for their condition. Marx, indeed, felt great
compassion for those who needed religion to reduce their suffering. He defined
religion as "the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless
world and the soulless condition. It is the opium of the masses". Marx was of the
view that, the only solution to the suffering of the proletariat was to overthrow
the capitalist and their systems and provide a more humane and egalitarian
productive system. He called this system socialism. He described socialism

69
as a "dictatorship of the proletariat which would come about through elections,
mass protests, demonstrations and strikes in the socialist system, the state
would abolish private ownership of property. There would, therefore, be no
distinction between owners and non-owners of productive resources. The state
would ensure that the wealth created by the economy was distributed equitably
to the workers themselves.
Marx also identified communism as the second and final stage of the revolution
where the state as a political force would become unnecessary and hence, the
state would die away or would no more exist. However, according to Marx,
some individuals would still be required to remain as administrators of
productive resources in various sectors of society. Communism would therefore
eliminate class distinction and class conflict.

70