What is the relationship between conflict and change? How can an understanding of this relationship help resolve conflicts? This paper from the Research Centre for Constructive Conflict management sets out a framework for thinking systematically about conflict and change. This distinguishes between change that: produces conflict, exacerbates conflict, reduces conflict or resolves conflict. While protracted conflict imposes numerous constraints, one universal factor can lead to change: the fact that human beings learn and, through learning, change.
As the term ‘protracted conflicts’ suggests, many deep-rooted social conflicts become trapped in a repetitive pattern of interaction; usually the exchange of violent behaviour. The conflict continues because it was there yesterday. In order to bring about changes in the minds of decision makers and opinion leaders, they must be in an environment where they can contemplate new ideas, innovative alternatives and realistic options.
Change can relate to conflict formation, escalation, mitigation or resolution.
- Three aspects of change are important in generating conflict: The nature of the change, the intensity of the change and the rapidity of the change. Major, sudden, unexpected, rapid or irreversible changes are likely to have the most effect on generating or modifying protracted conflicts.
- Escalation refers to changes in the intensity and frequency of coercive and violent behaviour. Other dynamics involved in the intensification of conflict include: mobilisation, enlargement (pulling in other parties), polarisation and dissociation.
- Another dynamic of protracted conflicts is entrapment. Parties (especially leaders) become trapped in a course of action than involves continuing or intensifying conflict, with little chance of changing policy. In theory, de-escalation, de-mobilisation, de-isolation, disengagement, re-communication and de-commitment are conflict mitigating dynamics. There will obviously be obstacles to the shift from an exacerbating dynamic to a mitigating one.
- There are four types of obstacles to change as a means of overcoming conflict: Policy determinants, psychological determinants, social determinants and political determinants.
Basic methods are suggested for bringing about change that is likely to lead towards conflict resolution or transformation:
- Changing leaders: ‘Regime change’ seems to bring about more conflicts than it resolves. But the change from one leadership group to another can bring in individuals who are not as tied to past policies as their predecessors.
- Changing leaders’ and followers’ minds: This is likely a problematic and drawn out process. People do learn and change, especially if placed in an appropriate environment. But conflicts are the worst environment for bringing about changes in goals, interests and underlying beliefs.
- Changing strategies, policies and behaviour: This is linked to changing people’s minds, but there is debate over what comes first. The public nature of this behavioural component puts it centre stage in initial resolution efforts. Conciliatory gestures are sought, communication channels opened and truces negotiated.
- Changing parties’ environments: Some obstacles will be removed by major structural changes in the parties’ environment. These may change the availability of whatever is in dispute, render it irrelevant, remove threats of render other problems more pressing.
- Tasks have to be carried out by a number of change agents working together to overcome obstacles to resolution. These include monitoring, exploring, unifying, developing skills, initiating and facilitating talks, providing resources and legitimacy, reassuring adversaries and imposing any necessary sanctions.
