Elaborating on Courses of Conflicts – A New Conflict Model

• In Event: Conflict Processes 3 & Political Psychology Virtual Poster Session
  In Virtual Poster Session: Conflict Processes 3 Virtual Poster Room

Abstract

Within conflict research, conflict models such as Lund’s ‘Curve of Conflict’ or Glasl’s ‘Conflict Escalation Model’ have proven to be important instruments in visualizing the dynamics of conflicts. With their simplicity, they provide an indispensable tool with which intricate conflicts can be analyzed and their structure be better understood. Of the known models only a few concentrate on the course of conflict itself and are therefore useful in illustrating and analyzing its development over time. However, these models neglect the relationships between the conflicting parties and marginalize actors.

Therefore, a model is needed, which includes actors as active personalities, who shape the course of conflict. In this context, actions, understood as reactions, are considered relevant for the deeper understanding of conflict dynamics. Decisions and communication as a means of negotiating relationships are the main focus. A social constructivist perspective addresses these dynamics, since it presupposes that every conflict reality is socially constructed through relationships, discourses, norms and identities. Thus, this analysis addresses two research gaps. First, it approaches conflict analysis from a social constructivist perspective and zeros in on the relationships of conflicting parties. Secondly, it conceptualizes courses of conflict, which are rarely systematically examined. As a result, this paper puts forward a new macro-level-model, which visualizes the course of conflicts with its focus on conflicting parties in the realm of political violence.

The model has been developed on a theoretical basis and is derived from social constructivist perspectives on collective conflicts. This approach includes conflict analysis literature and reviews existing conflict curves. Furthermore, it incorporates conflict analysis of empirical conflicts, in order to operationalize the possible actions of the conflicting parties. Two cases are applied in order to test the model – the ongoing Indian-Pakistan conflict and the Rwandan civil war in 1994.

The structure of the model is simple: the x-axis shows the development over time, while the y-axis shows the intensity of the conflict. Both curves are aligned and are interdependent. Actors behave, communicate and interact with each other. A decreasing gap between the lines, symbolizes a de-escalating conflict, while an increasing gap symbolizes an escalating conflict. In a narrow gap, violence is unlikely, while a wider gap shows a cooling relation which enables violence. The paper outlines different ways, in which the conflicting parties are able to act in order to either approach or distance itself from the other party.

This model forms a more profound basis for the analysis of complicated conflicts. It uses two conflict curves instead of the usual one, since each of the curves represents one of the main conflicting parties. The lines show the respective conflicting parties’ behavior; added together the combined lines mirror their relationships. The advantage of two lines is convincing here because they are able to show the active or reactive as well as compliant or aggressive behavior of each party. Even if one party is less powerful than the other, its agency is nevertheless represented, thereby becoming an active entity instead of being marginalized. Furthermore, it avoids a strict distinction between ‘good’ and ‘evil’, which is a typical pitfall of conflict analysis. Such a perspective on escalating and de-escalating behavior is particularly useful in inextricable conflicts such as those in Palestine and Israel. Hence path dependency plays a crucial role it is pivotal to observe not only a short segment in the course of conflict, but the time period preceding it. This allows elaboration on the development of the conflicting parties’ relationships and previous influences leading up to the outbreak of conflict.

As opposed to other tools, the new model is focused upon the interplay between different parties, the increasing or worsening relationships and violence only becomes evident as the result. The model avoids determining the onset of ‘peace’, since it visualizes interdependent behavior. Last but not least, this new model increases the comparability of social constructivist conflict analyses.

Author

• Katharina Storch, Fernuniversität Hagen