Exercise #3: Nonviolent Action

Stellan Vinthagen

A Brief Introduction to Nonviolent Action:
- Nonviolent action seeks to mobilize people at the grassroots level in such a way as to affect the government.

- The assumption is that grassroots civil disobedience can make a significant difference in a conflict and that power is bestowed upon a government from below.

- Unfortunately, there has been little theoretical development of the concept of nonviolent action.

- The use of nonviolent action is also limited. However, there are at least 30 examples of successful nonviolent action aimed at changing or removing a government and/or government policies.

- Two of the most commonly cited examples of successful nonviolent action are the US civil rights movement and nonviolent action organized by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi in order to achieve Indian indepedence from Great Britain.

- Successful nonviolent action requires training.
o Many training techniques were developed in the US during the civil rights movement.
o The idea behind training is to find new options, techniques, and ways of acting during a conflict.

- Theory vs. Reality
o Theory is discussed extensively in university courses but, unfortunately, these same courses rarely address reality.
o We need to build a bridge between theory and reality.
o We need to develop body memory to remember the theory and use it in reality.

- Bourdieu
o Bourdieu discusses the imporatance of practical knowledge.
o You cannot perform without practice.

- Conclusion: The CIA trains; militaries and police forces train; terrorist organizations train; why shouldn't you?

Exercise #2: Conflict Analysis

Stellan Vinthagen

Assignment: Read "Conflict-sensitive approaches to development, humanitarian assistance and peace building: tools for peace and conflict impact assessment," chapter 2 (http://www.conflictsensitivity.org/resource_pack.html). Select and analyse one of the 15 tools discussed in the chapter. Form groups of 5-6 people to discuss the tools and share your analysis. During your discussion, you should ask, "WHEN is WHAT analytical tool useful? WHY?"

Summary:
- Avoid too much complexity/simplicity.
o Your analysis is too complex when you feel powerless/ overwhelmed.
o However, it is good to appreciate the complexity of a conflict for humility's sake.
o Do not allow complexity to hold you back.

- The bottom line is always: DO NO HARM!
o Do not hurt people or exaccerbate the conflict.
o Do not intervene if there is a great possibility that your intervention will cause harm.

- Possibilities or Priorities?!
o Sometimes you need to focus on one or the other.

- Conflict + Goals + Resources → Project
o Try to contribute/intervene within your means.

- Take these models and tools and combine them to create your own methods of conflict analysis.
o It is essential to continuously develop analytical tools.

- Conflict ANALYSIS is never finished!
o This is because the conflict is always developing.

- Try to continuously contribute and evaluate your contributions.
o You should use your evaluations to rework your project.

- Start small and build up your project step by step (pilot-projects).

- Always keep the following two goals in mind:
o 1. Reduce violence (short term and long term).
o 2. Increase conflict resolution/ conflict transformation capacity.

- Always keep the following recurrent problems in mind:
o 1. How do we avoid donor control?
o 2. How do we coordinate interventions?

Lecture #5: Conflict Analysis

Stellan Vinthagen

Please see the PowerPoint file entitled, "Analysing Conflicts" at:

http://kursportal.student.gu.se/inst/S2GLS%7C_%7CNONE/IK2231/filuppladdning/browse2.php?dir=Kursmoment%2FLecture+notes+and+ppt

Lecture #4: Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Stellan Vinthagen

Suggested Reading: Do No Harm, Mary B. Anderson
- This is essential reading for anyone engaged in conflict resolution
- This book discusses how aid can and does exacerbate/ drive conflict.

Galtung’s Conflict Pyramid
- Before we examine ADR, it is important to revisit Galtung’s Conflict Pyramid.
- Johan created the Conflict Pyramid to explain the minimum dimensions of all conflicts.
- Each corner of the pyramid represents a different dimension of conflict.
o “A”: attitudes
o “B”: behaviors
o “C”: contradictions
- If someone engaged in dispute resolution focuses on the “A” corner, he or she has adopted a process oriented approach.
- If someone engaged in dispute resolution focuses on the “B” corner, he or she has adopted a security oriented approach.
- If someone engaged in dispute resolution focuses on the “C” corner, he or she has adopted an issue oriented approach.
- In all conflict resolution, you must address all three corners of the pyramid even if you focus on one corner.

Traditional Dispute Resolution (TDR)
- We also need to revisit TDR.
- Traditional Dispute Resolution has been adopted by countries, the UN, NATO, and multi-lateral armies.
- TDR is security oriented and focuses on the “B” or behaviors corner of Galtung’s pyramid.
- TDR is typically combined with diplomatic measures and actors engaged in TDR often make threats through diplomatic channels.
- It is top-down and often entails the use of power/ force.
- TDR virtually ignores the “A” or attitudes corner and does little to address the “C” or contradictions corner of Galtung’s pyramid.
- TDR is a form of conflict management.
- Criticisms of TDR have developed into ADR.

Introduction to ADR
- ADR is an approach to conflict resolution that has become popular over the last 20-30 years.
- It is intended as an alternative to Traditional Dispute Resolution (TDR).
- ADR focuses on the “A” or attitudes and the “C” or contradictions corners of the Conflict Pyramid.
- ADR was developed throughout the 20th century but took off in the US in the 1960s and 1970s.
o Background: ADR was developed as an alternative method to resolve conflicts that were typically resolved through costly and time-consuming lawsuits.
o ADR took the form of community dispute centers intended to resolve conflicts and mediate costs.
o This form of conflict resolution spread globally and has been codified in ADR.

The Six Characteristics of ADR
1. Professional conflict resolution by impartial and/or neutral “third parties.”
2. Focus on facilitation (without coercive means or threats).
3. Builds on voluntary participation.
4. Conflict parties are said to “own” their own conflict.
5. Uses training, education, process work to build up skills and awareness to deal with conflicts.
6. Believes in “win-win” solutions as an ideal form of conflict resolution.
Two Examples of ADR
- “The Elders”
o This group was founded/funded by Richard Branson and Peter Gabriel.
o “The Elders” recruits retired, experienced mediators such as Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu to mediate conflicts globally.
- The Harvard Negotiation Project
o This project attempts to resolve conflicts through “principled negotiations.”
o This project embraces a rational approach to conflict resolution.

5 Possible Outcomes of Conflict
1. Total victory for party #1.
2. Total victory for party #2.
3. Mutual destruction/ stalemate.
4. Compromise.
5. “Win-win.” (This is viewed as the best outcome by those who embrace ADR.)

4 Different Versions of ADR
1. Educational (emphasis on knowledge as a means of empowerment)
2. Rational (Harvard Negotiation Project)
3. Therapeutic (“conflict doctors”/ individual and group emotional therapy)
4. Spiritual (appeals to higher power/ see Parry, Warriors of the Heart)

Non-Violent Communication, Marshall Rosenberg
- “Giraffe” language is a form of compassionate communication.
- Normally, when people are engaged in a conflict they speak “wolf” language which is judgmental, aggressive, and, ultimately, counter-productive.
- Rosenberg trains people on how to speak “giraffe.”
- “Giraffe” language has four rules:
1. State what you observe. (Observations must be factual and indisputable.)
2. State what you feel. (Only state “I” messages about yourself./ Stated feelings should provide the reasoning behind the conflict and should be honest and nonjudgmental.)
3. State what you value/need. (Stated needs should explain your feelings.)
4. State what you suggest/ request. (This should serve as a conclusion for your observation, feelings, and needs and should not be an order or a threat.)
- Professor Vinthagen’s views on “Giraffe” language: It is helpful but not useful in resolving all conflicts. In order for compassionate communication to work, both parties have to care about each other. This is just one tool for conflict resolution.
- Professor Vinthagen’s example of “Giraffe” language. This example concerns his teenage daughter’s messy room.
o Observation: His daughter’s clean clothes are on the floor.
o Feeling: This makes Professor Vinthagen frustrated.
o Need: Professor Vinthagen need’s his daughter to take care of her resources/ possessions.
o Request: Professor Vinthagen requests that his daughter put her clean clothes in a drawer.
- Advanced course: Only hear “giraffe” language.

Criticisms of ADR
- This criticisms are based on the writings of P. Caplan, L. Nader, and C. Harrington.
1. Reflects western cultural values such as individualism and rationality.
2. Utopian belief in “The Method”
3. Privatization of conflicts
4. Provides indirect support for powerful groups
5. Mechanism of social control (see Michel Foucault)
6. Adapts a Rational Choice and Economic Man view
7. Informal/ undermines law/justice
8. Alternative Dispute Resolution = Complimentary Dispute Resolution (ADR doesn’t question / criticize the system or power asymmetries. It takes traditional power structures as given.)

3 Ways to View ADR
1. ADR is the only way to resolve conflicts.
2. ADR is as an inherently flawed/ problematic approach to conflict resolution.
3. ADR is a tool that can be employed as part of a tool box of different approaches to conflict resolution. (This is the view recommended by Professor Vinthagen.)

Lecture #3: Conflict Resolution Theory

Lecture #3: “Conflict Resolution Theory”
Camilla Orjuela, Peace Research

Lecture Outline
- Understanding conflicts and resolutions
- Peace research
- Three methods of addressing conflict: management, resolution, transformation
- Actors (Unfortunately, we did not have enough time to cover this point.)
- Throughout the lecture, we will discuss the case of Sri Lanka.

Purpose
- The purpose of this lecture is to discuss the basics in the field of conflict resolution.
- We will discuss debates and theories concerning armed conflict/ use of violence.

Understanding Conflicts and Resolutions
- As soon as more than two people are involved in a conflict, it becomes complicated.
- Here are some instructive conflict statistics have been compiled by academics at Uppsala University, these statistics concern documented armed conflicts occurring between 1946 and 2004:
o There were 362 conflict terminations.
o There were 228 armed conflicts (The difference between the number of conflicts and the number of terminations is principally explained by the fact that conflicts often terminate and resume multiple times. )
o There were 55 peace agreements.
o There were 119 outright victories.
o There were numerous stalemates and instances of de-escalation.
- Peace researchers tend to focus on peace agreements. Unfortunately, this is both narrow-minded and overly optimistic.
- A major problem in every conflict is asymmetric relations.
o Thus, one cannot assume that all parties are equal.
o Asymmetries exist in military strength, economic resources, legitimacy.
o Asymmetric relations are at the center of conflict resolution.
- What is conflict and what is peace?
o Many conflicts concern disputes over social justice vs. social order.
o Although one side may claim to be fighting for social justice and the other may claim to be fighting for social order, both often claim to fighting for peace.
o Often the government/ strongest side claims to be fighting for social order while rebels/ weaker side claims to be fighting for social justice.
o Actors in a conflict often claim to be fighting in order to achieve peace thus blurring the boundaries between conflict and peace.
o A common definition of peace is to end violence as well as the injustices that cause violence. This definition addresses social justice and social order.
o Your own background determines how you view conflicts. If you grew up in the majority, you will see things certain ways. If you grew up in the minority, you will see things in other ways. An example of this is how Swedes and Suomi see conflicts over land and sovereignty.
o There is no easy way to solve conflicts.

The Case of Sri Lanka
- The 26 year old conflict in Sri Lanka is often characterized as an ethnic conflict but it was also a conflict over power, resources, and representation.
- More than 100,000 people died throughout the conflict.
- Sri Lanka now as a long history or “enemy” images. In fact, those 27 years old and younger have only ever known conflict.
- The “contradiction” in the Sri Lankan conflict was thought to be the fact that Sinhalese was the official language and the 25% of the population that principally spoke Tamil thus had difficulties in securing employment. However, once Tamil became an officially recognized language, the conflict did not end.
- There were a number of attempts to end the conflict through peace agreements.
- However, last year, the conflict ended suddenly with an outright government victory.
- The two principle (and most widely recognized) actors in the conflict were the Sinhalese majority as represented by the government and the Tamil minority as represented by the Tamil tigers but there were/ are far more participants. Additional participants included/include:
o International actors such as China, India, Japan, and, to a limited extent, the UN
o The Sinhalese majority
o The Tamil minority
o Political parties
o Other Tamil groups
o Social movements
o Peace organizations
o Migrants/ Members of diasporas
- Unfortunately, many trying to resolve this conflict as well as other conflicts attempt to do so from the outside and with limited knowledge of the conflict, the actors, as well as social structures and customs.
- Example: Camilla observed a peace resolution workshop in the capital city of Colombo. This workshop was led by a South African who was not familiar with the social hierarchies present in Sri Lankan society.
- The preceding case shows that one cannot simply apply generic conflict resolution tools to specific conflicts.
- Although outsiders are useful actors in conflict resolution, their positions and identities are problematic.

Peace Research
- Peace research originated in Norway during the 1950s and 1960s.
- One of the earliest and most influential peace researchers was Johan Galtung.
o Galtung was from Norway.
o He started publishing in the 1960s.
o He was one of the first academics to conceptualize peace.
o He distinguished between negative peace or the absence of war and positive peace or social justice.
o He also distinguished between direct violence which is easily observable and causes direct harm, and structural violence in which people are denied the necessities and/or opportunities to live their lives to the fullest.
o In short, Galtung started to critically examine ideas and methods of peace.
- Peace research became an academic discipline in the 1970s.
o It was multidisciplinary, involving scholars from economics, history, psychology, political science, linguistics, anthropology, sociology, etc.
- Peace research was initially normative in that its goal was explicit change. It is a bit less normative today.
- Peace research is and was problem-oriented.
- Peace research is and was both theoretical and applied.
- Another key researcher is John Burton.
o He argued that basic needs must be met in order to solve a conflict.
o He sought to identify underlying needs such as identity and dignity as well as food and shelter.
o He started a tradition of problem-solving workshops which helped to facilitate creative, win-win solutions based on shared interests.

Management, Resolution, and Transformation
- It is important to note that the three approaches to conflict in the proceeding section are not, necessarily, distinct. They are only treated as such for the purposes of clarity.
- Conflict management
o This approach is derived from the perspective of social order.
o It is a traditional approach/method that utilizes violence and/or superior power.
o This approach is biased towards the stronger party.
o Zartman writes about conflict management when he discusses the “mutually hurting stalemate.” He discusses the mutually hurting stalemate in order to determine why parties start to negotiate. He contends that a mutually hurting stalemate occurs when both sides feel that the conflict is too costly and are, therefore, willing to negotiate. The principal problem with this argument is that it is circular.
o This approach focuses most on the “behavior” of the participants.
o It emphasizes traditional dispute resolution through diplomacy, hierarchies, etc.
o It is also called “Track 1.”
- Conflict Resolution
o Conflict resolution focuses on resolving or ending the conflict.
o A major problem is that conflict resolution gives the impression that conflicts can be resolved.
o The focus of conflict resolution is finding win-win solutions through negotiations.
o Conflict resolution typically involves third parties including the UN, international actors, and academics.
o Conflict resolution focuses more on “attitudes” and “contradictions” than “behaviors.”
o Those engaged in conflict resolution attempt to understand all sides.
o Conflict resolution also employs “principled negotiations” in which actors first agree upon the principles and then discuss the conflict.
o Conflict resolution can also be deemed alternative dispute resolution or ADR.
- Conflict Transformation
o Conflict transformation attempts to alter power/conflict relations.
o This approach is perhaps the most difficult to employ/achieve.
o Conflict transformation often focuses on the weaker party and attempts to recast issues in different ways.
o On way that conflict transformation has occurred in through implementation of regional organizations such as the EU. This shifts the focus away from the nation-state and towards the region and/or micro-region.
o This approach focuses on the broader context and emphasizes social justice.
o John Paul Lederach writes about this approach and emphasizes the importance of bringing in all of society.

Lecure #2: Committing Extraordinary Violence

Michael Schulz, course coordinator

1st- BBC documentary on the Stanford Prison Experiment

2nd- Lecture
Please see the PowerPoint file entitled, "Becoming Evil," at:
http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=5368284585079214518

Lecture #1: Conflict Theory

Michael Schulz, course coordinator

Please see the PowerPoint file entitled, "LectureintoIK2231 vt10.ppt," at:
http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=5368284585079214518