UNIT 4 CONFLICT ANALYSIS
national or international? The concept of conflict analysis may look some how abstract to the experience of people. Conflict analysis remains a great and difficult task particularly in this part of the world where there is value-laden problem. The primordial and sectarian sentiments that people attach to their operations, actions, and judgemental imperatives, may affect the process and outcome of our analysis of conflict. Therefore, conflict analysis requires objectivity and neutrality rather than personal values, emotions and manipulations.
In practical terms, conflict analysis is a process, which examines and unravels the root causes, dynamics, issues and other fundamentals of conflict through the use of various perspective mechanisms for our better understanding of the conflict. This understanding of conflict affords us a great opportunity to develop certain strategies and actions for possible termination of conflict. Conflict analysis answers questions on the background and history of conflict situation, identifying parties to the dispute. It also identifies the cultural background of the parties’
relationship as well as factors responsible for such conflict and the trends of the conflict situation and the relative power of the parties.
Conflict analysis is a continuous exercise, which must be undertaken from time to time to develop strategies and actions to change factors and dynamics of conflict events. This task is carried out through the use of some analytical tools and techniques. In this unit, the students will be exposed to some of these tools and techniques. When you intervene as a peace expert in a conflict, you are expected to take or rather fulfill some conditions in order to achieve at least minimum level of success. Data gathering is very important, even before you bring together the disputants. Thus, during the intervention, you gather additional information, and if there is any new information subsequently, you must incorporate all of them to your conflict analytical strategy. This will give you a substantial direction on the choice of strategies for successful intervention, even if it would necessitate an alternative strategy other than the one (s) initially adopted in the resolution of the conflict. The stages or conditions to consider in the analysis of any conflict situation should include:
1. Conflict History
(a) Consider the significant events between the disputants;
(b) Consider if there have been any previous disputes between the disputants;
(c) Examine their relationships, if there has been any change in record time;
(d) Have there been any past efforts to solve the conflict, and consider why these past efforts failed.
2. Context
(a) Examine the step taken by the disputing parties to resolve their differences
(b) Study the physical environment of the conflict;
(c) Evaluate the level and trends of communication between the parties and their decision-making principles.
3. Primary Parties
(a) The major parties to a conflict must be identified;
(b) Examine the positions of the parties;
(c) The interests of the parties must be evaluated;
(d) The values of the parties be examined;
(e) The analysis should also consider how the parties perceive themselves; (Examine the leadership authority to dispute settlement.
(g) Examine if there are any mutual interests goals or needs between the parties.
4. Power
(a) Relative power capabilities of the parties should be studied to know if one party is more powerful than the other;
(b) If there is balance of power between the disputants, what method of peace process is suitable for the success of the intervention?
(c) Identify the source (s) of the parties’ power
(d) Identify the resources at each of the parties’ disposal.
(e) Examine how often the parties use their power, and the consequence or result of such power exercise.
(f) Examine untapped power bases by the parties.
5. Other parties / Stakeholders
Here, we have the secondary parties and shadow parties who must also be considered and their relationships with the primary parties be assessed in order to understand the overall underlying problems of conflict. It is easier to identify the secondary parties than the shadow parties. Shadow parties often hide their identities but provide resources to the primary parties in the prosecution of conflict. You should therefore examine:
(a) The roles these parties play in the conflict
(b) The activities / either aligned or neutral) of these parties towards each of the primary parties;
(c) The availability of agencies or organizations either private or public whose involvement in the interaction is important to the resolution of the conflict;
(d) When and how, can these parties be involved in the peace process?
6. Issues
(a) Identify the basic issues, which the parties have already identified themselves;
(b) Identify the hidden or secondary issues not stated by the parties, if any. The data or relationship or values or interest or secondary issues not stated by the parties, if any,
(c) Consider the types of issues are these. Are they problems of information or values or interest or structure?
(d) Determine the most relevant intervention procedure to the identified issues;
(e) Examine the conflict situation closely and discover if the conflict is a new one or the consequence of improper resolution of previous conflict.
(f) Determine the time and effort, which must expended on the conflict for quality resolution.
7. The Immediate Situation
The intervenor should determine the most effective conflict management strategy to adopt according to the urgency and demand, the situation of conflict demands. For instance, if the conflict is becoming very violent, the intervenor may decide to adopt some violence reduction strategies to limit the casualty rate, which the conflict may generate.
8. Stage of Conflict
(a) Consider if the conflict is still stabilising or escalating or even deescalating and the reasons for the trend;
(b) In the case of conflict escalation, you determine
i. If the issues are transiting from specific to general;
ii. The level of size increase of the issues or resources in the conduct of the conflict by the parties;
iii. If there is any transition to confrontation from disagreement;
iv. The level of increase in the parties exercise of power;
v. Emerging relationships between the parties?
vi. Situation of communication and propaganda between the parties;
(c) In the case of stabilization, the following should be considered/evaluated;
i. Any continued presence of safety-value mechanisms;
ii. The level of fear of conflict escalation;
iii. Existence of agreements on norms and values;
iv. The level of presence of social bonds and traditional or
cultural alliance between parties (in a larger organizational structure);
v. The level of external interference or threat;
vi. The level of time constraints, if any, on the further use of resources.
9. Timing
(a) Determine the right or actual time to intervene;
(b) Determine the most profitable time for the success of the intervention;
(c) Identify the party that is more likely to derive benefits from immediate intervention.
10. Alternatives and Options for Settlement
(a) Consider the parties’ level of knowledge and understanding of their alternatives;
(b) Consider the level of parties awareness of each other’s alternative or options;
(c) Examine the steps or efforts taken so far by the disputing parties in the achievement of their alternatives or options;
(d) Evaluate the realistic nature of the disputing parties.
3.2 The Onion Analytical Tool
This analytical tool is also known as Avocado or Doughnut analytical tool. Onion/Avocado/Doughnut lays the three layers – the outer; the whitish; and the inner. This analytical tool is based on the analogy of Onion where the outer layer contains the position (what we say we want). The whitish layer contains the interests of the parties in conflict, which are what they want to achieve from any particular situation. The third layer is the core cause (B) of the situation, and these are needs – these are what we must achieve from the situation. Every intervenor is expected to carry out this analysis on each of the disputants.
FIGURE 2.1
Interest
Needs What we say we want
what we must have
Interest What we want