Dynamic Approach Of Conflict Resolution

NAME:
BAZL ISHFAQ

REGISTRATION NO:
[Link]-011

DEPARTMENT:
ENGLISH

SEMESTER:
6TH

SUBJECT:
CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN HUMAN SOCIETY

SUBMITTED TO:
MA’AM SABRINA JAHANGIR
QUESTION
EXPLAIN THE DYNAMIC APPROACH OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION.
ANSWER
A classic understanding of conflict sees it as a dynamic phenomenon: one actor is reacting to
what another actor is doing, which leads to further action. Quickly, the stakes in the conflict
escalate. One sequence of events follows another, and it is difficult to decipher which party is
more responsible for what happens. The basic assumption of conflict dynamics approach is that
it takes two to conflict. The classical realist understanding of conflict sees conflict as a dynamic
phenomenon in which one party acts and the other party reacts ultimately leading to a violent
conflict.
There are other dynamics which are;
 Polarization (pushing actors into two camps),
 Centralization (creating a central command),
 Formation of institutions
 Assigning responsibilities and little insights (secrecy and protection).

Conflict takes shape on its own engulfing the actors and pushing them into an ever increasing
conflict. The dynamics of conflict removes all other possible peaceful actions making conflicting
parties blind to an extent that they see no other alternatives than continuing the conflict with
higher level of threats and violence. If the parties follow the rules the outcomes are predictable
but there is a high probability of changing dynamics by the actors by making a different move
even by breaking the rules that the conflict has generated. Game theory can be taken as an
example.
Johan Galtung has introduced a model of conflict dynamics which can be a useful analytical
tool of a conflict. He uses diagnosis and prognosis model of conflict analysis to find the root
cause and way to resolve. According to Galtung
Attitude + Behavior + Contradiction = Conflict
Galtung assumes any point of the triangle can be the starting point of conflict and adds C or
contradiction is most frequent point. In this triangle, the meaning of attitude, behavior and
contradiction are described as under.
Attitude can be cognitive, emotive or preparatory.

2
  Cognitive attitudes: ascribing negative attributes to the opposition, stigmatization and
stereotype.
 Emotive attitudes: hate anger jealousy and contempt
 Preparatory attitudes: for later provocations, discriminations, threats, special laws,
invasion, mass media propaganda

Behavior: Conflict behavior tends to deprive the opposition from something of value like life,
property, dignity, respect, freedom etc. Behavior can be of three types.
Remuneration: Positive= payments, aid, influence, influence
Negative= sanctions, boycott, strike, non-cooperation
Normativity: Positive= respect, appreciation, agreement, recognition, praise
Negative= social exclusion, criticism, slander Violence: Positive= non-violence
Negative= war, threats, violation of rights, imprisonment

Conflict/Contradiction:
Value conflict: disagreement about what is of value
Rank Conflict: Agreement about something is of value but disagreement about how to distribute
it
Goal conflict: parties are subjectively defining it and they are conscious about their incompatible
goals
Interest Conflict: Objectively present but parties are not consciously aware
Complexity: Depends on number of actors and how deep it touches the life of actors
Conflict Prognosis
According to Galtung, Conflict can be transformed since it can be steered in a positive way to
make a conflict creative. Parties can reach a position of transcendence where both win, reach to a
level of compromise by compromising on their interests or they can give up their goals through
dialogues.
From following Figure 3.1, there are many outcomes. Different forms of compromise may be
found here. To the right and above the line, however, there are other complications. This is
where Galtung’s ideas lead: transcendence. The hope is to find points of type D, where both
parties can get what they want at the same time (again: the example of Taormina, Sicily!). The

3
mathematical formulation is, of course, impossible. There cannot be 200 per cent of something,
but this space indicates the challenge of finding solutions beyond established rules and thinking.
Creativity is needed for transcendence. Political battle often stifles innovation and reduces the
options perceived by the actors. Sometimes, the strains of the effort may result in imaginative
actions. In all, Figure 3.1 is a useful device to describe an incompatibility. It will be used later in
this book.

The dynamic approach to conflict analysis points to the significance of establishing a dialogue
between the parties. This is where, for instance, finding a conference format is important. A most
original idea is of conflict resolution mechanisms. This refers to the creation of independent
procedures in which the parties can have confidence. Finally, it follows from this perspective that
parties with non-violent methods are potentially efficient in changing the dynamics. This gives a
role to peace movements but also to other groups and non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
that work for conciliation and understanding across divides.

THE END