In what context and under what conditions can nonviolent resistance (NVR) contribute to successful and sustainable conflict transformation processes? This research from the Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management analyses constructive conflict transformation through NVR in the first Palestinian intifada (1987-1993). It argues that nonviolent struggles might support the goals of peacemaking and peacebuilding by transforming unbalanced power relations in preparation for conflict negotiations. Furthermore, by using self-limiting conflict strategies, it reduces inter-party polarisation and encourages democratic practices.
Nonviolent resistance is a necessary component of conflict transformation in asymmetric power relations. It is particularly appropriate at the early stages of latent conflicts rooted in structural violence, as a tool in the hands of marginal or disenfranchised communities to struggle effectively for justice and democracy. Thanks to its potential to encourage popular empowerment, it can put pressure on the opponent and win over the sympathy of powerful third-parties. Thus, it provides a stronger position from which to negotiate concessions.
Nonviolent strategies have limited success in extremely violent situations such as mass slaughter and genocide. However, in most contexts of oppression and exploitation it may be the only way to struggle for justice and democracy in a peaceful and constructive way.
Through its dual process of dialogue and resistance – dialogue with the people on the other side in order to persuade them and resistance to the structures in order to compel change – NVR is a unique method of political action.
- Nonviolent action is increasingly used as a technique of cross-border intervention (most often by transnational grassroots networks) in order to halt violence, or bring about constructive social change in conflict situations.
- NVR can be a catalyst to conflict transformation. It can help marginalised communities achieve sufficient leverage for effective negotiation and to take control over their lives.
- Nonviolent initiatives include wider participation than other forms of asymmetric conflict. Symbolic actions such as large-scale demonstrations and protests increase mobilisation and cohesion among activists.
- In comparison with armed rebellion, NVR is more likely to generate active sympathy in sections of the population, whose support the regime had earlier enjoyed, and provoke loyalty shifts among its enforcement agents.
- In ethnic conflicts, nonviolent strategies might not have sufficient leverage to bring about necessary changes.
- Nonviolent rules and techniques of action can help to break the spiral of destructive relations facilitate inter-group reconciliation.
Nonviolent resistance should be seen as an integral part of conflict transformation that includes dialogue, problem-solving and the restoration of cooperative relationships through mediation, negotiation and restorative justice.
- Highly polarised conflicts can only be transformed through multiple forms of intervention, from negotiation, bridge-building and external mediation, to nonviolent activism and cross-border advocacy.
- It is important to identify more precise entry-points for nonviolent and peacemaking interventions in asymmetric conflicts, both by the conflict parties and outsiders seeking to support these complementary processes.
- To prevent inter-party polarisation and ensure that nonviolent revolutions against oppressors do not result in new versions of the old system, conflict resolution should include nonviolent training for indigenous activists.
- Foreign actors should not only provide protection and solidarity, but encourage local civil society activists to resist the occupation by nonviolent means, without running the risk of imposing external models.