SOKOTO STATE UNIVERSITY, SOKOTO

Division of General Studies

GST 221– PEACE STUDIES AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

SECOND SEMESTER 2020/2021 ACADEMIC SESSION

INTRODUCTION
Conflict, as a social reality has been part and parcel of human existence.
Whether it is in the “State of Nature” as described by Thomas Hobbes or
the history of ancient or modern empires, or even in contemporary history,
marked by the emergence of the modern nation state, all have witnessed
one form of conflict or the other. Africa, like other continents of the world
has witnessed series of conflicts. Some of the conflicts witnessed by the
continent are the anti-colonial and anti-apartheid struggles in Angola,
Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa; the civil wars in Nigeria, Liberia,
Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sudan, Rwanda, Burundi, and Democratic Republic
of Congo, among others; and communal cum ethno-religious conflicts such
as those experienced in Nigeria – the Tiv-Jukun, Ife-Modakeke, Pan-Gamai,
and Hausa/Fulani-Birom, Afizere and Anaguta, among several others. It is
due to the effects of conflict in terms of either moving a society forward or
backward that it has increasingly attracted the attention of both policy
makers and scholars.

DEFINITION OF CONFLICT
Various definitions of conflict have been proposed by different scholars.
One of the most quoted definitions was given by Louis Coser who defined
conflict as “a struggle over values and claims to status, power and
resources in which the aims of the conflicting parties (opponent/rivals) are
not only to gain the desired values, but also to neutralise, injure or
eliminate their rivals” (Coser, 1956:121). Similarly Oyeshola (2005:201)
states that there is conflict “when there is a sharp disagreement or clash for
instance between divergent ideas, interest, or people and nations.”We may

1
also define social conflict as the opposition between individuals and groups
on the basis of competing interests, and aspirations, different identities
and/or different attitudes.

Conflict is any form of confrontation between two or more parties resulting

from ‘a situation where (these) two or more interdependent groups or
systems of action have incompatible goals (Diller, 1997:6). Of course, it is
universally acknowledged that conflict is inevitable. Thus, it is every
moment occurrence’.
According to Maoz (1982), conflict is “a state of incompatibility among
values, where the achievement of one value can be realized only at the
expense of some other values. Conflict may arise within single organisms
pursuing multiple goals and organisms strives at incompatible goals”
(1982). This definition shows the nature of inevitability in the relationships
between two or more parties. The definition further opined that one may
find his aspirations not compatible with his personal qualities, which tends
to lead to frustration (conflict), and when such frustration (conflict) gets to
the climax, then crisis will emerge.

It is important to note that not all conflict situations are negative; some
often facilitate a transition, which create opportunity for change and even
development.

CAUSES OF CONFLICT
Both at the intra-group, inter-group, national and international levels,
many experts in peace and conflict studies have shown great concern on
the rise in frequency and intensity of conflict, with major focus on the roots
or causes of conflict. Thus, there is no way, a meaningful peace can be
achieved without considering and analyzing the causes of conflict at all
levels including intrapersonal.

Although, there are several causes of conflict, but they can be categorized
into the following:

2
  Conflicts due to resources;
 Conflicts as a result of psychological needs;
 Conflicts due to values
 Conflicts resulting from mismanagement of information.
A. RESOURCES
Conflicts can emerge due to resources. It is very easy to identify any
conflicts that emerge consequent on resources. These conflicts erupt when
two or more parties aspire for scarce resources. It is economic phenomenon
of demand and supply. Thus, there is tendency for emergence of conflict in
a situation whereby the aspiring parties in their demands are more than the
available (scarce) resources. Some political analysts have held a contrary
view, argued that conflict can emerge as a result of over-availability of
resources. For instance, before the advent of ‘Petro-Naira’ or discovery of
crude oil in Nigeria in 1970s, Niger-Delta enjoyed a relative peace, until the
crude oil discovery.

This discovery, rather than be a blessing, has become a curse to the region.
The Region is now baptized with environmental degradation, catastrophic
increase in intercommunal crisis, insurgency and counter insurgency,
political exclusion and structural backwardness. The conflict in the Niger
Delta Region of Nigeria can be easily identified due to the Resource nature
of the conflict. The Nigeria Delta Dissidents as well as their leaders are of
the view that Nigeria should reverse to Pre 1970 revenue sharing formula
of 50% which later brought about the struggle for true federalism and
resource control in Nigeria polity.

The major cause of the violent conflict in Liberia is “the control and
exploitation of diamonds, timber and other raw materials…Control over
these resources financed the various factions and gave them the means to
sustain the conflict” (Report of the UN Secretary General). Here, resources
play a dual role: they serve as the root cause of conflict as well as conflict
sustenance element.

3
At interpersonal level, you may see two pupils fighting over a pencil
(resource), each laying claim to the pencil. One of them of course, may
decide to let go the pencil (object of conflict) to the other pupil (party), and
this will render the conflict terminated. Thus, in some cases such a
concession may only achieve a negative peace, and there is need to always
adopt a win-win approach because sweeping dirt under the carpet, does
not make room clean, but it can only guarantee a bumper harvest of heap.

B. PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS
Any conflict that arises due to psychological needs are those that cannot be
seen. Psychological needs are psychical in nature, as they involve a mental
phenomenon within an emotional framework. Different people with
different levels of perception, and one’s perception determine the direction
of his relationship with other parties. It is worth knowing, a wrong
perception tends to generate conflict. Thus, there are different dimensions
of perceptions

Intrapersonal perception: The way an individual perceives or sees himself

or herself in a given time.
Interpersonal perceptions: Here, the way one sees other people. This may
include the way a child sees his father compared to somebody else’s father.
Having a negative perception about other people can lead to conflict.

Perception of situation/environment: These perceptions are informed by

the happenings about us. For instance, the issue of insecurity among the
workers in Nigeria has created a form of psychological torment, which has
made most of these workers develop a habit of hostility that has often
resulted in conflict situations between them and innocent citizens who
often deal with government agencies. Some of these workers have begun to
seek for alternative and corrupt means to limit the effect of job insecurity
may have on their future or doing some strategic saving for the life after
retirement. This kind of psychological need usually affects the input of an
average worker because he has lost faith in the entire system where labor is

4
disarticulated. This example shows the multidimensional ways to conflict.
Resources have made an average worker to develop a psychological need –
working against insecurity. Thus, the insecurity takes different forms i.e.
economic; political and social.

C. VALUES
Conflict may also emerge due to differences in the value of the people or
organizations. Value includes philosophy, religion, and ideology among
others. The values describe our personalities, our potentials and our
shortcomings, even our down-lows. In Nigeria, religion crises have been
great problems to this nation. The main problem is not the difference in the
religion practice but the conduct and operations of various religious
classifications are the problems. In the two major religions in Nigeria, it is
preached that human blood is sacred and must not be shed not to incur the
wrath of the Almighty God.

Yet, both religions are culprits in Nigeria. In order to understand the root of
a particular conflict, one must consider the issue of value. Again, before the
collapse of Soviet Union at the close of 1980s, there was cold war between
the west and east bloc, which were led by the USA and defunct USSR
respectively. The conflict between the blocs aligned the global system,
which attracted a holocaust in several parts of the world. Africa has its own
share of the violent situation generated by the cold war. The effect of the
west-east conflict was felt throughout the world, which necessitated the
establishment of Non-Alignment organization, and Nigeria was one of the
members.

Still on ideology, some political elites who believe in a state based economy
will never acknowledge individuals or private organizations control of the
means of production. The conflict between Cuba and America is not
basically based on resources but one ideology. America’s hatred for
communism (or socialism) is always demonstrated in the activities of the

5
US against Cuba and other anti capitalist-countries like North Korea. Thus,
ideology plays a big role in the generation of conflict.

D. MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION
Information plays a vital role in the conduct of human and organizational
interactions or relationships. Information if not well -managed can generate
conflict situation. The way an average informed person perceives things
will definitely be different from the way an uniformed individual will
behave on a specific issue at a given time.

In Nigeria because government understands the importance of

information, that is why there are various information gathering and
dissemination agencies like public complaints commission, National
Orientation Commission, Ministry of Information among others. This is not
to say that government in Nigeria is doing enough in the management of
information, that is why there exist several communal crises, sectarian
armed conflicts and insurgency in Nigeria, despite the existence of various
security machineries, particularly the State Security Services (SSS) and
police, who ought to have developed a form of crisis or conflict prevention
strategies and peace, generation mechanisms. It is unfortunate that most of
our security personnel don’t have the knowledge and skills of conflict
management. A case study was the brutal murder of Saro-Wiwa and other
Ogoni leaders. After the state killing, by Late Gen. Sani Abacha, of these
Ogoni leaders, the crisis in the Nigeria Delta has taken a new and more
violent dimension rather than subsiding.

At International level, the current Iraq war has shown the importance of
information in the conduct of international relations. Had it been that the
US Government had substantial information about Iraq, she and her allies
wouldn’t have gone for the war but rather adopt some diplomatic means to
address the Saddam issue. Now, they have displaced Saddam, but no peace
has been achieved so far in spite of huge material and human resources
being pumped into the prosecution of the war. Again, at last no nuclear

6
weapon has been found in Iraq for more than two years since the war
erupted.

TYPES OF CONFLICT
Conflict is universal, yet distinct in every culture, is it common to all
persons yet experienced uniquely by every individual. Generally, two (2)
broad types of conflicts can be identified.

1. VIOLENT CONFLICT
Violent conflict is the resort to use of force and armed violence in the
pursuit of incompatible and particular interests and goals. Conflict is
regarded as violent if it is aimed at destruction of lives and properties.
Violent conflicts may, thus, involve the use of harmful weapons such as
gun, knife, cutlass, etc. In general, any conflict that results to the shed of
blood and having causalities among the conflicting parties is referred to as
violent conflict.

Examples of some notable violent conflicts in Nigeria include those of

Yoruba-Hausa community in Shagamu, which resulted from
Respect/Disrespect for tradition (Oro festival), Eleme-Okrika (Creation of
state and local government, unclear boundaries, clash over ownership of oil
fields, farmlands and waterways), Tiv-Jukun in Wukari (Case of
Indigene/settler - Assassination of the representative of Jukun in Taraba
State House of Assembly (Jukun accused the Tiv for masterminding the
assassination), Itsekiri-Ijaw/Urhobo (Movement of local government
headquarters from Ijaw area to Itsekiri, territory. Land
ownership/dispute). Chamba-Kuteb in Taraba (Chieftaincy title selection
process altered). Ijaw-Ilaje conflict in Ondo (Ownership of land reputed to
be rich in oil reserve). Ife-Modakeke in Osun State (Indegines/settlers case),
Aguleri-Umuleri in Anambra State (Land disputes). Hausa-Yoruba clashes
in Idi-Araba in Lagos State, Ogoni-Adoni, Fulani-Irigwe and Yelwa-
Shendam, both in Plateau State, Hausa/Fulani-Sawaya in Bauchi, Basa-
Egbura in Nasarawa among others.

7
 2. NON-VIOLENT CONFLICT
As the name suggests, this is a conflict which does not involve the use of
physical violence against the conflicting parties. Non-violent conflict occurs
when the conflicting parties do not involve the use of dangerous weapons
or the conflict does not lead to the loss of human life.

Perhaps the only successful non-violent conflict in Nigerian history

occurred in the 1950s. Coincidentally, it was a fight for independence, and
our founding fathers, while they struggled assiduously for this most
golden of objectives, contrived just as sedulously to make certain freedom
was not bought with needless bloodshed. Today, they are extolled and
idolized, their images immortalized on our currency notes and coins, and
nationwide our infrastructure is christened with names of these
emancipation heroes. But their lessons on the successful conduct of non-
violent struggle are long forgotten. Over 3 decades of the jack-booting
military has stomped out this memory, or buried underfoot whatever
vestige was left.

In general, therefore, conflict is an inevitable part of human nature and is

not limited to one-to-one relationships (personal); it involves relationship
between and among groups, societies, organisations, and nation states
(countries). It may be personal, political, socio-economic, cultural and
religious. However, violent conflict is not inevitable and as such it is an
anomaly (problem).

DIMENSIONS OF CONFLICTS
Nigeria as a heterogeneous society in terms of ethnic, religious and cultural
pluralism is prone to conflicts. (Agagu: 2004). Over the last 50 years of
Nigeria’s political independence, the country has been confronted with
varied crises and violence. These conflicts have affected the foundation of
Nigeria unity and corporate existence. In Nigeria, there are three
dimensions of conflicts. These are political dimension, socio-

8
cultural/Religious dimension and Economic and Industrial
dimensions (Odunniyi, 2004)

POLITICAL DIMENSION
This dimension of conflict is endemic in Nigeria and it includes: issues such
as electoral crisis, inter-governmental relation crisis over resource sharing
etc. Nigeria has a history of electoral crisis. The 1964 electoral crisis marked
the watershed in the nation’s political history. The political and electoral
manipulation in the old western region escalated to other parts of Nigeria
and led to a National crises which eventually became part of the problems
that culminated in the first military coup in 1960, which terminated the first
Republic and later led to the Nigerian Civil War: While the First Republic
collapsed as a result of factors arising from regional intra-party crisis, the
second Republic too collapsed under the same circumstances. (Otite: 1999)

SOCIO-CULTURAL/RELIGIOUS DIMENSION
Inter-religious confrontations and the proliferation of sectional groupings
in the last 50 years of Nigeria’s nationhood are other sources of tension
and instability in the polity. Religious extremism, fanaticism and
intolerance in some parts of the country, becomes an extension of inter-
ethnic, inter-communal conflicts. Inter-ethnic struggles over issues that
borders on Public Office and resource sharing take another colouration in
the formation of ethnic militias. For instance, the Odua People’s Congress
(OPC), Arewa Youth Forum (AYF), Boko Haram, Bakassi boys, Egbesu
Boys, The MASSOB in the east and the sub-nationalities in the Niger Delta
region had resurfaced over the years.

Their formation and goals merely reinforced the primordial ethno-political

agenda of the ethnic groups they represent. These sectional groups
instigate violence and abuse human rights including illegal arrest,
detention and execution of innocent citizens. These sectional groups
engage security forces in armed confrontation, leading to the causality and
destruction to property (O’Neil, 2004). These sectional militia’s incessant

9
confrontations with security agents since about 1995 have turned the Niger
Delta region to a permanent battle ground.

Religious uprising in the northern part of Nigeria is taking place since 1981,
when the country witnessed Matatsine religious uprising notably in Kano
and Kaduna. Many other religious riots have taken place in other northern
towns such as Zaria, Kafachan, Maiduguri and recently Jos. The latest
incidents in 2010, in Plateau and Bornu states, where a group of religious
extremists, who claimed they are against Western civilization, broke into
prisons and released prisoners, is the height of lawlessness in the
21st century Nigeria.

ECONOMIC AND INDUSTRIAL DIMENSION OF CONFLICT

This is caused by the Incessant Industrial resentments by labour over
unfavorable government’s economic and industrial policies have been
another major source of disharmony in the system. Contentious issues
have always been those concerned with situation of service and official
economic policies, since 1999, no year has gone by without a major
industrial conflict. The governments at all levels have very poor records of
managing industrial disagreements and unrest, between it and labour
unions in the country. The government, even under a democratic
dispensation, lacks proactive strategies and skills in managing such crises
until they escalate into uncontrollable violent levels (Ola, 2004).

CONSEQUENCES OF CONFLICT
Conflict in mostly depicted as being totally negative i.e. we mostly see it as
a set back and disintegrative. Although conflict truly assumes this negative
form it not always the case. The other social reality is that conflict can
symbolise, as much as lead to positive development for the individuals
groups and society as a whole. Conflict, therefore, exhibits two faces
namely, positive (constructive) and negative (destructive) effects.

With respect to positive effects, the following could be listed as being

important:
10
 1. Conflict tends to allow people to define situations. It allows
members of the society to define their interests and aspirations. In
other words, ambiguous situations are averted, i.e. it helps to define
ambiguous situation so that these are clear to everyone concerned.
2. Conflict is an agent of change. It often nourishes change in human
societies.
3. Conflict fosters solidarity between and within groups.
4. Conflict fosters unity, the emergence of general normative
behaviour when the conflict is ultimately resolved.
5. The known negative consequences of conflict may alert groups to
hasten to resolve emerging conflict, thereby fostering peace.

On the other hand, there are many negative effects of conflicts, including:
1. Conflicts lead to rampant destruction of lives and properties leading
to a general economic set back.
2. It leads to dislocation of social and family life resulting from
displacement, separation and migration.
3. Conflict leads to persistent and widespread fear.
4. Conflict causes untold suffering to the aged, children and women.
5. Conflict causes hatred and mistrust among groups.
6. Conflict serves as a threat it national stability. It can tear a nation
apart.

THEORIES OF CONFLICT
Various theories were developed by scholars in their attempts to provide
frameworks for the understanding of conflict, especially the causes of
conflict or the conditions under which conflicts occur and sometimes the
conditions for their resolution. Some of these theories are presented below:

Structural Theories of Conflict

The main argument of the structural conflict theory is that conflict is built
into the particular ways societies are structured and organised. The theory
focuses on internal and external forces that affect the structure and the way

11
societies are organised to propose that conflict arises as a result of a deep-
rooted structural dysfunction. The theory sees structural defects, either
internally generated or externally conditioned as the main causes of conflict
in society. The theory looks at social problems like political and economic
exclusion, injustice, poverty, disease, exploitation, inequality, etc. as
sources of conflict.
Structural conflict theory has two main sub-orientations:

a) Radical Structural Theory

b) Liberal Structural Theory

Radical Structuralism: maintain that conflicts occur because of the

exploitative and unjust nature of human societies and the domination of
one class by another, etc. This case was made by radicals like Friedrich
Engels, Karl Marx, and was later developed by V. I. Lenin, Mao Tse Tung
and other scholars from developing societies who blame, capitalism for
being an exploitative system based on its relations of production and the
division of society into the proletariat and the bourgeoisie. The theorists
believe that the exploitation of the proletariat (lower class) under capitalism
creates conflict. Thus, capitalist societies are accused of being exploitative
and such exploitation is the cause of conflict in the society. This conflict,
according to the radical structuralism, will be resolved through a
revolution led by workers, bringing about the establishment of a socialist
order led by the working people. Furthermore, theorists believed that there
will be “Capitalist Internationalism”, a situation where workers all over
the world will unite and will not be limited by state borders, since the state
itself is an artificial creation of the bourgeoisie to dominate others.

The Marxist tradition has been extended by Neo-Marxists, mostly members

of the Underdevelopment and Dependency School, most of them from the
developing countries. Some of the neo-marxist includes Andre Gunder
Frank, Water Rodney, Samir-Amin and Immanuel Wallenstein. This
group of scholars seeks to explain the reason for development and
underdevelopment, and why the Third World is not developing and

12
situates their analysis within the world capitalist system and accuses the
system of being structurally exploitative, retarding development of the
third world.

Liberal Structuralism: was expounded by Ross (1993) Scarborough (1998)

and Galtung (1990). This version of structuralism emphasizes how the
competing interest of groups tie conflict directly into the social, economic,
and political organisation of society as well as the nature and strength of
social networks within and between community groups. Ross(1993) for
instance argues that in situations where economic and political
discrimination and weak kingship ties (lack of tolerance) are the defining
characteristics of a society, the chances that negative forms of conflict will
result are higher than in situations where the condition are the exact
opposite. Similarly, according to Scarborough (1998) conflict will emerge
and escalate in situation where:
i. existing structures are tilted in favour of one group while putting
the other(s) at a disadvantaged position;
ii. where cultures are seen an exclusive, where holders of certain
powers or privileges are not willing to acknowledge the rights of
others to be different;
iii. Or where people find it difficult to identify with the political and
economic ideas of a political regime.
Liberal structuralism also adduce that other factors such as over
population, economic underdevelopment, demographic factors and
uninterested social and political institutions are all responsible for the
emergence of internal conflicts. Liberal structuralists call for the elimination
of these structural defects with policy reforms (unlike the radical
structuralists who call for revolution).

Biological Theories of Social Conflict

The central argument of the biological theories of conflict is that mankind is
by nature evil and man’s reaction to unfavorable situations is always

13
expressed in violent activities. This view that human kind is evil by nature
has a long tradition. The assumption is that since human ancestors were
instructively violent beings, and since all humans evolved from them, they
therefore, must bear those destructive impulses in their genetic makeup.
Biological theory is broad in coverage, incorporating scholars with
biological background such as human physiology, ethnology, socio-
biology, psychology etc.

Major contributors to this theory are classical theorists such as Thomas

Hobbes, St. Augustine, Thomas Malthus and Sigmund Freud. These
theorists identified the inherent tendency for humans to be selfish, sinful
and driven by the natural quest for the ceaseless pursuit of power as the
main cases why conflict occur and continue to rise in human societies.
Because of this tendency Hobbes (1951) described life in the “state of
nature” as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”. The biological
theories have given rise to what may be referred to an Innate Theory of
conflict which contends that conflicts is innate in all social interactions.
Others who subscribed to the innate theory are the theologians who see an
inner flaw in humankind by way of sin that brings forth bitterness, violence
and conflict. The whole essence of religion, according to these theologians,
therefore, is to regulate this sinful nature in the relationship between
(wo)men and (wo)men on the one hand, and (wo)men and God on the
other hand.

From another angle, it is believed that conflict is inherent in humans, and

this can be explained from human’s inner properties and attributes as well
as hormonal composition. The aggressive instinct will be provoked when
man is threatened and challenged. In his attempt to understand the high
level of aggression and destruction that occurred during World War I
Sigmund Freud looked to human nature for answers. He described the
destructive tendencies in human beings as products of a dialectical struggle
between the instinct associated with Life and survival (Eros) and the

14
instinct associated with death (Thanatos) and suggested that societies had
to learn to control the expression of both the life and death instincts.
According to Freud, both instincts are always seeking release and it is the
one that win the contest of domination that is released. Thus for Freud,
aggression against others is released whenever the Eros overcomes the
Thanatos. As the puts it, war and conflict is a necessary periodic release
that helps humans preserve themselves by diverting their destructive
tendencies to others.

However, in terms of the remedies of conflicts, these theorists differ in the

sense that each provided a different answer to the question of how conflict
could be resolved. For examples, to theologians such as St. Augustine,
religion plays an important role in regulating the sinful impulse in man
and to Hobbes conflict could be averted when different individuals in
pursuit of interest, in a “state of nature”, agree to surrender their will
(natural rights) to a Leviathan (a sovereign).

From the perspective of another variant form of biological theory of conflict

Ted Robert Gurr, John Dollard, Leonard Berkowitz, and Aubrey Yates
see conflict arising from frustration aggression. They thus, developed
Frustration – Aggression Theory in which they saw conflict as the direct
response to accumulated frustration and anger particularly in societies
where scarce resources hardly satisfy human wants. The most common
explanation of conflict according to this theory is the inability to fulfil
needs. The theory points to the difference between what people feel they
want or deserve to what they actually (the want-get-ratio) and difference
between “expected need satisfaction” and “actual need satisfaction”. Where
expectations do not meet attainment, the tendency is for people to confront
those they hold responsible for frustrating their ambitions.

Human Needs Theory of Conflict

Human needs theory is concerned with the basic needs of people which
must be met in order to have peace and to avoid discord. The major

15
assumption of the theory is that all human beings have some basic needs
which they seek to fulfil and maximize and that any attempt to deny or
frustrate one from satisfying these needs (by other either group(s) or
individual(s)) invites conflict. These needs comprise physical,
psychological, social and spiritual needs. In essence, to provide one (e.g.
food) and deny or hinder access to another (e.g. freedom of worship) will
amount to denial and could make people to resort to violence in an effort to
protect these needs.

Burton (1979) identified a link between frustration which forces humans

into acts of aggression and the need on the part of such individuals to
satisfy their basic needs. According to him, individuals cannot be taught to
accept practices that destroy their identity and other goals that are attached
to their needs and because of this, they are forced to react against the
factors, groups and institutions that they perceived as being responsible for
threatening such needs. Human needs for survival, protection, affection,
understanding, participation, creativity and identity are shared by all
people, are irresponsible and, according to Burton, have components
(needs for recognition, identify, security, autonomy and bonding with
other) that are not easy to give up and no matter how much a political or
social system tries to frustrate or suppress these needs, it will either fail or
cause far more damage in the long run.

The resolution of such conflicts, as Burton (1990) points out, depends on

how best effective mechanisms are put in place to satisfy human needs,
Hence, effective and easily accessible “satisfiers” are to be provided by the
state in order to prevent conflict.

Economic Theory of Conflict

The economic theory of conflict examines the causes of conflict and analyse
the interest of perpetrators of conflict in terms of material benefits.
Fundamental questions such as in whose interest is conflict, who are stand
to gain and loose, etc., are often raised by this theory. The theory assumes

16
that material interest is the motivating factor and the most important issue
at stake in conflict situations.

In his analysis of conflict, Collier (2003:4) pointed out that conflicts are
perpetrated by those who benefit from the ensuring chaos also, referred to
as “conflict entrepreneurs”, who not only steer conflict but also invest
resources at their disposal to ensure that conflict lingers on for
maximization of material benefits (the overwhelming majority of the
population are affected by the negative impact of conflict).

Using a cost benefit analysis, this theory identifies two categories of forces
in conflict situations – those who benefit from conflict; leaders of armed
conflicts as perpetrators of conflict or armed leaders who supply the
conflicting parties with arms, and the overwhelming majority of the
population who are affected by the negative impact of the conflict. Several
flash points of conflict in Africa, particularly where rebel forces and their
leaders are the fighters are typified by this scenario. In most cases, conflict
and its prolongation have become a private business and profit making
enterprises where the sole aim of perpetrators is profit making or its
maximization. Bredal and Malone (2000:1) also agree that social conflicts
are generated by many factors, some of which are deep seated. For Bredal
and Malone, across the ages, conflicts have come to be seen as having a
“functional utility” and are embedded in economic disparities. The scholars
argue that war, the crisis stage of internal conflicts has sometimes become a
vast private and profit-making enterprise.

The economic theory of conflict also posits that although the causes of
conflict may be hidden and perpetrated in the guise of ideological
(nationalism or political liberation) or even religion differences, their
underlying motive is mainly a context for control over economic values;
assets, resources (e.g. a gold mine or oil) or systems.

17
THE CONCEPT OF VIOLENCE
Literally, violence is any physical, emotional, verbal, institutional,
structural or spiritual behaviour, attitude, policy or condition that
diminishes, dominates or destroys ourselves and others. It can also be any
kind of behaviour which is intended to hurt, injure or kill people.

The World Health Organization (WHO) in its 2012 Global Report, defined
violence as “the intentional use of force or power, threaten or actual against
oneself, another person or against a group or community that either result
in, or has a high likelihood of resulting to injury, death, psychological harm
mal-development or deprivation”. This definition involves intentionality
with the committing of the act itself, irrespective of the outcome it
produces. However, generally, anything that is excited in an injurious or
damaging way may be described as violent even if not meant to be violence
(by a person and against a person). Opotor (2008) argues that denying some
members the basic structures needed for human wellbeing and dignity is
also violence.

Despite consensus on the operative meaning of violence as any act that

involves threat to or destruction of lives and property, the concept remains
essentially a contested one. Scholars have not agreed on whether violence is
an objective or subjective phenomenon or what to include or exclude as
violence and how to classify the various forms of violence. These are in
addition to the fact that the definition of violence tends to be coloured by
the cultural, ideological and religion context of usage, which makes some
forms of violence normal or in fact non-violence and legitimate in some
instances and not in the other.

TYPES OF VIOLENCE
The triangle of violence, defined by the Norwegian sociologist Johan
Galtung, identifies three types of violence and argues that the phenomenon
has a similar structure to that of an iceberg, in which there is always a small
visible part and a huge hidden part.

18
The 3 types of violence identified by Johan Galtung are:
1. Direct violence
2. Structural violence
3. Cultural violence
Cultural and structural violence cause direct violence. Direct violence
reinforces structural and cultural violence.

DIRECT VIOLENCE
Direct violence, physical and/or verbal, is visible as behaviour. Direct
Violence can take many forms. In its classic form, it involves the use of
physical force, like killing or torture, rape and sexual assault, and beatings.
Verbal violence, such as humiliation or put-downs, is also becoming more
widely recognised as violence.

Peace and conflict studies scholar Johan Galtung describes direct violence
as the 'avoidable impairment of fundamental human needs or life which
makes it impossible or difficult for people to meet their needs or achieve
their full potential. Threat to use force is also recognised as violence.

Direct violence is usually expressed in physical and psychological violence

against an opponent. Physical violence is the most frequently talked about
and it has criminal and political aspects.

 Criminal violence is said to have occurred where a person or

groups employs violence to attain a criminal objective, such as
assassination, robbery, kidnapping, rape, etc.
 Political violence is geared towards achieving a political objective.
It includes riots, political party clashes, arson, rebellion, political
assassination, military coups, terrorism, civil wars, insurrection,
insurgency, etc.

Direct violence, corresponding to the tip of the iceberg, has as its main
characteristic the fact that most of its effects are visible, mainly the
materials, but not all of them: hate, psychological trauma or the emergence

19
of concepts such as ‘enemy’ are equally serious effects, but they are often
not seen as such. Being the most popular and obvious, it is commonly
thought that direct is the worst kind of violence, which is not true for
precisely this visibility, which makes it easier to identify and therefore to
combat. It is important to note that this type of violence is the manifestation
of something, not its origin, and is in the beginning where it should be
sought, causes and act more effectively. Direct violence does not affect
many people as cultural and structural violence, which are the hidden part
of the iceberg.

STRUCTURAL VIOLENCE
Structural violence may be defined as damage or harm that occurs to
individuals or groups due to differential access to social resources and
which is due to the normal operation of the social system. It also refers to a
form of violence where some social structure or social institution may harm
people by preventing them from meeting their basic needs.

Structural violence exists when some groups, classes, genders, nationalities,

etc are assumed to have, and in fact do have, more access to goods,
resources, and opportunities than other groups, classes, genders,
nationalities, etc, and this unequal advantage is built into the very social,
political and economic systems that govern societies, states and the world.
These tendencies may be overt such as Apartheid or more subtle such as
traditions or tendency to award some groups privileges over another.

Structural violence is expressed in such condition as exclusion, deprivation

and poverty (especially being deprived from access to health, education
and income). This type of violence does not immediately come across as
violence; it arises from a particular form of social organization and
processes. It occurs as a result of deliberate policies and structures that
cause sufferings, death and harm. For instance, a government, through its
policies may cause fuel scarcity, electricity fluctuation, lack of portable,
affordable and drinkable water, absence of drugs in public hospitals and

20
clinics, deny land rights by legislation and allocation, etc. When any of
these occurred then structural violence has occurred because some citizens
have unduly suffered.

Structural violence is displayed when, as a result of social stratification

processes, there is damage in the satisfaction of basic human needs:
survival, welfare, identity, freedom, etc. It is caused by a set of structures,
both physical and organizational, which do not allow the satisfaction of
those needs and is the worst of the three violence because it is the origin of
all and kills and affects more people. It is also a form of indirect violence
and sometimes even unintentional: the actions that cause hunger, for
example, are not designed and made directly for that purpose, but they are
result from capitalist economic policy and the unfair distribution of wealth.
This sometimes causes that the reasons of structural violence are not clearly
visible and therefore it is more difficult to deal with it.

CULTURAL VIOLENCE
Cultural violence is the prevailing attitudes and beliefs that we have been
taught since childhood and that surround us in daily life about the power
and necessity of violence. Consider the telling of history which glorifies,
records and reports wars and military victories rather than people's
nonviolent rebellions or the triumphs of connections and collaboration.
Nearly all cultures recognise that killing a person is murder, but killing
tens, hundreds or thousands during a declared conflict is called 'war'.

Cultural violence is the prevailing attitudes and beliefs that we have been
taught since childhood and that surround us in daily life about the power
and necessity of violence. Cultural violence can be seen as violence that
results from the cultural norms and practices which create discrimination,
injustice and human suffering. Examples of cultural violence include
female circumcision, child labour and abuse, mourning of dead husband
for one year, tribal facial marking, animal sacrifices, exclusion of women in
inheritance, death rituals, child witchcraft, etc.

21
Cultural violence is a symbolic violence that is expressed in countless
media: religion, ideology, language, art, science, media, education, etc, and
serves to legitimize direct and structural violence and to inhibit or suppress
the response of the victims. It even offers justifications for humans, unlike
other species, to destroy each other and to be rewarded for doing so: it is
not strange to accept violence in the name of country or religion. There is a
culture of violence in which schools and other instruments of transmission
and reproduction of culture show History as a succession of wars; it is
usual to suppress conflicts by unquestioned parental authority or authority
of the male over the female; mass media sell armies use as the main way of
solving international conflicts, etc. So life goes on in an atmosphere of
constant violence, manifested daily in all areas and at all levels.

According to Galtung, often causes of direct violence are related to

structural violence and justified by cultural violence: many situations are
the result of an abuse of power which concerns an oppressed group, or a
social injustice —insufficient resources sharing, great inequality in personal
income, limited access to social services— and receive the backing of
speeches justifying them.

THE CONCEPT OF PEACE

The term 'peace' originates from the Anglo-French pes, and the Old
French pais, meaning peace, reconciliation, silence, agreement". Pes itself
comes from the Latin pax, meaning compact, agreement, treaty of peace,
tranquility, absence of hostility. The English word came into use in various
personal greetings from 13century as a translation of the Hebrew shalom,
which is also cognate with the Arabic word salaam, it has multiple other
meanings in addition to peace, such as justice, good health, safety, well-
being, prosperity, equity, security, good fortune, and friendliness. At a
personal level, peaceful behaviors are being kind, considerate, respectful,
just, and tolerant of others' beliefs and behaviors as well as tending to
manifest goodwill etc.

22
This latter understanding of peace can also pertain to an individual's
introspective sense or concept of her/himself, as in being "at peace" in one's
own mind, as found in European references from 12 century. The early
English term is also used in the sense of "quiet", reflecting calm, serene, and
meditative approaches to family or group relationships that avoid
quarreling and seek tranquility or an absence of disturbance or agitation. In
many languages the word for peace is also used as a greeting or a farewell,
for example the Hawaiian word aloha, as well as the Arabic word salaam. In
English the word peace is occasionally used as a farewell, especially for the
dead, as in the phrase rest in peace.

In the early years of peace studies, it was assumed that peace is the
opposite of war. Peace was defined as the absence of war, partially because
the early peace studies was strongly motivated by the reflection on the
tragedies of the Second World War and by a sense of crisis of human
survival caused by the danger of a total nuclear war between the two
superpowers. From our perspective, it can be said that the peace concept at
the time consisted of only one peace value, that is, the absence of war.

It was Sugata Dasgupta (1968) who first went far beyond the absence of
war and proposed a new concept of peace. He proposed the notion of
“peacelessness,” which refers to the situations, especially in developing
countries, where, in spite of the absence of war, human beings are suffering
just as much from poverty, malnutrition, disease, illiteracy, discrimination,
oppression and so on, as from war. Reardon (1988) insists that peace is the
absence of violence in all its forms - physical, social, psychological, and
structural.

As stated by the UNESCO Director-General, “Peace is more than the

absence of war, it is living together with our differences – of sex, race,
language, religion or culture – while furthering universal respect for justice
and human rights on which such coexistence depends”.

23
Analysis of the Global Peace Index in the past few years has consistently
shown that the most peaceful societies also have a higher per capita
income, high levels of well-being, more freedom, better sustainability, and
appear to have a more equitable distribution of social spending. These are
the material factors which foster the creation of a sustainable peace culture
and more peaceful society. And it is with these culture or structures of
peace that we can begin to understand how to build more peaceful and
flourishing societies.

DEFINITION
“Peace is not merely the absence of war but the presence of justice, of law,
of order -in short, of government”. -Albert Einstein

Reardon (1988) insists that peace is the absence of violence in all its forms -
physical, social, psychological, and structural.

In its most myopic and limited definition, peace is the mere absence of war.
But this definition was regarded as a vacuous, passive, simplistic, and
unresponsive escape mechanism too often resorted to in the past - without
success. This definition also commits a serious oversight: it ignores the
residual feelings of mistrust and suspicion that the winners and losers of a
war harbor toward each other.

Trostle’s (1992) comprehensive definition of peace clearly places it within a

positive context:

.... as state of well-being that is characterized by trust, compassion, and

justice. In this state, we can be encouraged to explore as well as celebrate
our diversity, and search for the good in each other without the concern for
personal pain and sacrifice. ... It provides us a chance to look at ourselves
and others as part of the human family, part of one world.

24
DEVELOPING A CULTURE OF PEACE
As defined by the United Nations, the Culture of Peace is a set of values,
attitudes, modes of behaviour and ways of life that prevent and reject
violence by tackling the root causes to solve problems through dialogue
and negotiation among individuals, groups and nations. It consists of
values, attitudes and behaviours that reflect and inspire social interaction
and sharing, based on the principles of freedom, justice and democracy, all
human rights, tolerance and solidarity, that reject violence, endeavour to
prevent conflicts by tackling their root causes to solve problems through
dialogue and negotiation and that guarantee the full exercise of all rights
and the means to participate fully in the developmental processes of their
society.

Similarly, the attainment of a culture of peace will benefit every nation and
its people without diminishing any other. In a rapidly and deeply changing
world characterised by the growing importance of ethical issues, a culture
of peace provides future generations with values that can help them to
shape their destiny and actively participate in constructing a more just,
humane, free and prosperous society and a more peaceful world.

In its essence, the culture of peace and non-violence is a commitment to

peace-building, mediation, conflict prevention and resolution, peace
education, education for non-violence, tolerance, acceptance, mutual
respect, intercultural and interfaith dialogue and reconciliation. It is a
conceptual as well as a normative framework envisaged to inspire thoughts
and actions of everyone. Therefore, it requires cognitive as well as the
emotional abilities to grapple with our own situation in a rapidly changing
world as well as with the emerging world society.

A culture of peace requires that we confront the violence of economic and

social deprivation, poverty and social injustices such as exclusion and
discrimination which weigh particularly heavily particularly on women,
redressing the flagrant asymmetries of wealth and opportunity within and

25
between countries is indispensable to addressing the root causes of
violence in the world. For instance, equality, development and peace are
inextricably linked. There can be no lasting peace without development,
and no sustainable development without full equality between men and
women.

A culture of peace is a culture in which there are a multitude of approaches

to the resolution of conflict in every dimension of life. In the inner
dimensions of religion, psychology, spirituality, the arts, with a wide
diversity of teachings, practices and customs which help people to
creatively resolve their inner conflicts and to build a sense of self-esteem,
harmony and integration. A culture of peace would stimulate the higher
virtues, explore these virtues, support and nourish them. Such a culture
would constantly expose us to images and insights reflecting the beauty
and divinity which lies within each person.

PEACE MEDIATION
Mediation is a special form of negotiation in which a neutral third party has
a role of helping the parties in conflict achieves a mutually acceptable
settlement. Moore (1996) defines mediation as the intervention in a
negotiation or conflict of an acceptable who has limited or no authoritative
decision-making power, but who assists the involved parties in voluntarily
reaching a mutually acceptable settlement of issues in dispute. Beer and
Stief (1997) on their part see mediation as any process for resolving
disputes in which another person helps the parties negotiate a settlement.

The University Of Peace Glossary Of Terms describes peace mediation as

“the voluntary, informal, non-binding process undertaken by an external
party that fosters the settlement of differences or demands between directly
invested parties”. Mediators generally have a vested interest in the
resolution of a given conflict or dispute, but they are able to operate
neutrally and objectively lacking the authority to coerce or impose
judgments, conditions or resolutions.

26
The fundamental goal of mediation is the achievement of an acceptable
settlement through non-violent means between disputants. From human
experience within the family community, organisations up to international
relations, mediation is used as non-violent method of resolving conflict and
attaining peace and justice. Mediation provides an impartial intervener the
opportunity of assisting parties in a dispute to achieve a voluntary
settlement of their differences through an agreement which promotes their
continued relationship. The mediator is therefore someone who intervenes
in resolving conflict and does not have or exercise power over the parties in
conflict and outcome of the mediation. A mediator only proposes, rather
than impose, contracts.

TYPES OF MEDIATION
Interaction between mediators and the parties in conflict usually give rise
to different kinds of relationships which tend to define three broad
categories of mediators.

1. Social Network Mediators: - These are individual or groups who share

common values or a network of relationship with the disputants, as such
are known and trusted by the disputants. Hence, their interest and
confidentiality in the treatment of issues in the conflict is guaranteed. This
type of mediator could be a co-worker, business colleague, member of same
ethnic group, associations, families, religious or political groups, friend etc.

2. Authoritative Mediators: - Are those who occupy positions of relative

importance with the disputants within the same organisation. They have or
control resources which parties to the conflict value so much, but do not
impose their decisions on the parties. Their relative positions of power are
only used to persuade a timely and amicable resolution of the issues for
which they share an ultimate interest. e.g. workplace conflict.

3. Independent Mediator: - This represents neutral individual, groups or

organisations that have no vested interest on any of the issues in conflict.
They are experts and professional in conflict resolution and are expected to
27
apply such professionalism and expertise in the mediation process and for
disputants’ agreement.

THE MEDIATION PROCESS

There are several stages or steps in the mediation process which are forms
of intervention to assist parties in conflict reach a voluntary settlement of
their differences through an agreement that defines their future behaviour.
They include;

1. Initiation: - This is the start or take-up of a mediation process that

has to do with the consent and willingness of the conflicting parties
to seek settlement of the issues in conflict through assistance of an
intermediary. In other words, it is the stage where the matter is
submitted to a neutral mediator by one or all the parties involved.

2. Preparation: - Is a stage where both parties in conflict and

mediators are expected to be well informed about the background
to the conflict and the claims. Legal advice could be sought here on
technical issues such as defences and remedies.

3. Introduction:- This is where the mediators’ acceptability, integrity,

credibility and neutrality are usually established which enables the
mediator an opportunity to determine the control of the entire
mediation process, identify the issues involved and positions of the
parties and search for consensus grounds.

4. Problem statement: - Parties could state a problem in two ways.

First by rising issues one by one and discuss them before
proceeding to the next issue. Second by making an exhaustive list of
all relevant issues before commencing detailed discussion on them.

5. Problem clarification:- At this stage, the mediator brings out the

true underlying issues of the conflict using variety of tools such as
questions, assessments of behaviour etc of the parties involved.

28
 6. Generation and evaluation of alternatives: - Mediator at this stage
first makes attempt to create doubts on the extreme positions of
each of the parties in order to drop unrealistic alternatives from the
negotiation table. Second is to create new alternative courses of
action for all parties, hoping to achieve compromise and agreement
between parties.

7. Selection of alternatives: - The mediator here is expected to help

the parties reduce the number of alternatives down to those with
high prospects for desirable results needed by all parties. The
mediator also helps in the final choice and adoption of alternatives
if necessary.

8. Agreement:-This is usually a joint assignment for disputants

involved in the negotiations; the mediator does not involved in
drafting an agreement for parties but only ensures that a clear
summary of the terms of discussions and negotiated compromises
are available to parties in drafting agreement. He/She then
compliment or appreciate all parties for the cooperation enjoyed
throughout the negotiation period before terminating the mediation
process.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Conflict resolution is defined as a variety of approaches aimed at
terminating conflict through the constructive solving of problems. It is a
sub-field of peace research which entails solutions to deep rooted sources
of conflict with a view to addressing and resolving them as well as
ensuring that behaviour is no longer violent, nor are attitudes hostile any
longer once the structure of the conflict has been changed.

Mitchel and Banus (1996) defined conflict resolution as an outcome in

which issues in an existing conflict are satisfactorily dealt with through
solutions that are mutually acceptable by the parties, solutions which must
be self-sustaining in the long run and productive of new positive
29
relationships between parties that were previously hostile and adversaries.
Conflict reclusion, therefore, connotes a sense of finality where the
conflicting parties are mutually satisfied with the outcome of the settlement
and the conflict is resolved in a true sense.

In general, therefore, conflict resolution aims at helping conflicting parties

to arrive at agreed compromises. It provides opportunity for the
examination of alternative pay-offs in a situation of positioned
disagreement and restores normalcy in societies by facilitating discussions
and placing parties in conflict in situations where they can choose
alternative positive decisions to resolve differences. Conflict resolution
promotes consensus building, social bridge reconstruction and re-
enactment of order in the society. To this end, conflict resolution performs a
healing function in societies. Failure to resolve conflict over access to
commonly valued scarce resources and over divergent perceptions of socio-
political situations has the high potential of degenerating into genocide and
fratricide.

METHODS OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION

There are two major classes or methods of resolving conflicts.
1. Regular Dispute Resolution
2. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

REGULAR DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Regular Dispute Resolution involves the regular system of reporting a case
to the police, getting the offender prosecuted, convicted and sentenced. It
also covers civil litigations. This is basically by litigation in court, that is,
through legal process. Under this system, the winner takes it all. There is
always a winner/loser ending.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as its name implies, includes the
methods that are alternative to the regular system. In this type of dispute

30
resolution strategy, people are encouraged to go for a win-win solution
(instead of a win-lose or lose-lose situation).

TYPES OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)

1) NEGOTIATION: Negotiation involves a process in which two or more
participants attempt to reach a joint decision on matters of common
concern in situations of conflict. The parties meet without a third party and
work at resolving their conflict. Negotiation usually involves
communication governed by pre-established procedures between
representatives of the parties involved in a conflict. The warring parties
come to the realization that they each have a problem and both are aware
that by talking to each other, a solution to the problem could be found.

2) MEDIATION: Mediation is a process in which an impartial third party

helps the conflicting parties to resolve their crisis but the third party does
not have the power to impose a binding solution to the problem. Thus,
under mediation, the parties appoint a neutral person who will guide them
in the resolution of the conflict. The mediator does not adjudicate or give
judgment. Mediation is guided by negotiation. The mediator is not a party
to the negotiation but a contributory observer.

3) CONCILIATION: Conciliation is also a third party activity which covers

intermediary efforts aimed at persuading the parties to a conflict to work
towards peaceful solution. Conciliation is sometimes used interchangeably
with mediation but they really do not mean the same. Technically, the
major difference between the two concepts is that in “conciliation” the
parties involved are not in face-to-face contact at the time of the resolution,
while in “mediation” process, face-to-face interaction between the two
parties is usually allowed.

4) ARBITRATION: Arbitration involves conflicting parties appointing a

neutral person/body to adjudicate on their differences. The resolution is
enforceable by a court of law. However, the procedure is different from the
usual court process.
31
THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN CONFLICT
RESOLUTION
A. MULTI-LATERAL ORGANIZATIONS
UNITED NATIONS PEACE OPERATION IN AFRICA
The Charter of the United Nations gives the Security Council the power
and responsibility to take collective action to maintain international peace
and security. For this reason, the international community usually looks to
the Security Council to authorize peacekeeping operations. Most of these
operations are established and implemented by the United Nations itself
with troops serving under UN operational command. In other cases, where
direct UN involvement is not considered appropriate or feasible, the
Council authorizes regional organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO), the Economic Community of West African States or
coalitions of willing countries to implement certain peacekeeping or peace
enforcement functions. In modern times, peacekeeping operations have
evolved into many different functions, including diplomatic relations with
other countries, international bodies of justice (such as the International),
and eliminating problems such as landmines that can lead to new incidents
of fighting. The UN does not have its own military force; it depends on
contributions.

United Nations Operation in the Congo (UNOC): This was established by

Security Council Resolution 143 (1960) of the 14th July, 1960. The initial
mandate of UNOC was to ensure the withdrawal of Belgium forces from
the Republic of Congo, assist the government in maintaining law and order
and to provide technical assistance. The function were subsequently
modified to include maintaining territorial integrity and political
independence of the Congo, occurrence of civil war, securing the removal
of any external control that is not under the United Nations.

United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM): On 24 April 1992, the

Security Council adopted resolution 751 (1992) establishing UNOSOM. The
UN Secretary-General was directed to immediately deploy 50 unarmed but
32
uniformed United Nations military observers; and continue consultations
with the parties in Mogadishu, with severity of war in that country, a total
of 4, 219 troops and 50 military observers were deployed. It involved troops
from over 20 countries in USA, France, Germany, India, Italy, Canada,
Egypt, Nigeria, United Arab Emirate, among others.

United Nations Mission to Cote D’Ivoire: It was established by the

Security Council Resolution 1479 (2003) of 13th May, 2003 with a mandate
to facilitate the implementation by the Ivorian parties of the Linas-
Marcoussis Agreement, and including a military component
complementing the operations of the French and ECOWAS forces.

United Nation Mission in Burundi (ONUB): This mission was established

in 2004 to follow the AU mission in Burundi (AMID). The first, it was
carried out under the control of AU. The deployment of ONUB came after
decades of war and thousands of death in small Central African country of
Burundi having agreed that Burundi continued to pose a threat to the
international peace and security in the region.

United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS): Having determined that

the situation in Sudan constitute a threat to international peace and
security, the Security Council, by its Resolution 1590 of 24th March, 2005,
decided to establish the UNMIS to support the implementation of the
Comprehensive Peace Agreement signed by the Government of Sudan and
the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement Army.

B. REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
ORGANIZATION OF AFRICAN UNITY (OAU)/AFRICAN UNION
(AU)
Organization of African Unity (OAU), now Africa Union (AU), has
contributed immensely in peace-keeping and conflict resolution in different
parts of Africa. It is the only Pan African framework that had the task of
conflict resolution but faced a lot of financial problems in its major peace
operations. Through the collaboration with United Nations Organization,
33
such inadequacies were reduced at very minimal. Among the operations
that OAU/AU participated as the major peace stakeholder in Africa are:

OAU Peace-Keeping Operation in Chad: The OAU deployed a peace-

keeping force in Chad in November 1981 in an attempt to find solution to
the Chadian tragedy. OAU had its first peace-keeping operation in 1982 in
Chad. The operation could not realize its objectives because many member
states could not honour their promises of fund and troops to the area.

Neutral Military Observer Group (NMOG): The OAU had deployed

Neutral Military Observer Group in 1992 to help monitor the ceasefire
during the Arusha Negotiations. Once the Arusha was implemented, the
OAU indicated that it had no resources to continue its operations, thus
troops from NMOG were incorporated into UNAMIR. After the
transformation of OAU to AU, there was the problem of the willingness
from all member countries to head the operation. Therefore, it was taken
over by UN.

The African Union (AU) Mission in Burundi (AMID): In 2001, AU

deployed a total of 2,870 strong African peacekeeping forces into Burundi,
composed mostly of South Africans, Ethiopians and Mozambique peace-
keepers. It was financially supported by USA and African Union. After
reaching an agreement on 1st June, 2004, UN mission in Burundi took over
the AU Peace-Keeping Mission. And up till now, it is operating UN/AU
joint mission of African peace-keepers under the United Nations Peace-
Keeping mission.

The African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS): The African Union has
deployed about 2,270 peace-keepers in Western Sudan trying to stop the
fighting between rebels and Arab militias since August, 2004. The African
Union plans to increase that number of troops to more than 12,300. The
organization requested for $723 million to help finance and equip the
Darfur operation.

34
 C. SUB-REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
1. THE ECONOMIC COMMUNITY OF WEST AFRICAN STATE
(ECOWAS)
The ECOWAS Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) in Liberia: It
was created, consequently with troops in Nigeria, Ghana, Gambia and the
Sierra Leone. For eight years, the force suffered a huge loss both in
materials and men in the hands of an intransigent rebel movement. They
assisted in evacuation and the protection of civilians, women and children.

The ECOWAS Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) in Sierra

Leone: Some few elements of Sierra-Leonean army, led by Major John
Koromah, acting in concert with the Revolutionary United Front (RUF),
violently seized power and overthrew the democratic government of
President Ahmad Tejan Kabba on 25th May, 1997. ECOMOG was used to
restore Kabba back to his office.

The ECOWAS Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) in Guinea

Bissau: Fighting in Guinea Bissau broke out in June 1998 after President Joa
Bernardo Vieira sacked his Army Chief-of-Staff, Brigadier Ansumane Mane
over allegation that top Guinea military officers were smuggling weapons
to Separatist Casamance rebels in neighboring Senegal. Over 350,000
people were displaced and hundred most non-combatants were killed.

ECOWAS Mission in Liberia (ECOMIL): The ECOWAS send a vanguard

force of West African soldiers after a ceasefire was signed between the
government and the two rebel groups, the Liberians United for
Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) and the Movement for Democracy
in Liberia (MODEL). The Security Council authorized the deployment of
multinational force, with the expectation that it would hand over its
peacekeeping responsibilities to a new UN stabilization force in the near
future.

35
 2. THE CENTRAL AFRICAN ECONOMIC AND MONETARY
COMMUNITY (CEMAC)
The Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC) was
created in 1994 and became operational after the treaty’s ratification in
1999. It is made up of six States: Gabon, Cameroon, Central African
Republic, Chad, the Republic of the Congo and Equatorial Guinea.

CEMAC established a small peacekeeping mission in the Central African

Republic in December 2002 in response to tensions between the Central
African Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo and Chad. Member
countries pledged to contribute 350 troops to the CEMAC peacekeeping
mission with the financial assistance coming from France, Germany and
China.

INTER-AFRICAN FORCE IN THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC

(MISAB)
This was established in Central African Republic on 31st January, 1997. By
8th February 1997, MISAB was deployed in Bangui, comprising over 800
troops from many countries with financial support from France. Prior to its
establishment, the Central African Republic was in 1996 shaken by a
politico-military crisis, punctuated by three successive mutinies of elements
of the Armed Forces. The crisis stemmed to a large extent from widespread
public discontent over social and economic problems exacerbated by
prolonged non-payment of salary arrears. Concerned by the situation and
its implications for the region, and in view of the request of President
Ange-Félix Patassé, the Nineteenth Summit Meeting of Heads of State and
Government of France and Africa, held in December 1996, asked the
Presidents of Gabon, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali to visit Bangui and
mediate a truce between the forces loyal to President Patassé and the
rebels, which they succeeded in obtaining after intensive negotiations.

On 25 January 1997, the parties signed the Bangui Agreements, which

included the necessary elements for a comprehensive settlement. An

36
international committee composed of one representative of each of the four
Heads of State concerned was established to monitor the implementation of
the Agreements.

IMPACTS OF GLOBALIZATION ON CONFLICT IN AFRICA

THE MEANING OF GLOBALIZATION
Globalization means different things to different people. Some say it is the
movement of people, language, ideas, and products around the world.
Others see it as the dominance of multinational corporations and the
destruction of cultural identities.

Globalization broadly refers to the expansion of global linkages, the

organization of social life on a global scale, and the growth of a global
consciousness, hence to the consolidation of world society. Globalization is
also a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies,
and governments of different nations, a process driven by international
trade and investment and aided by information technology. This process
has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems,
on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-
being in societies around the world.

Globalization is defined as a process which intensifies the integration of the

world economy and the people through technological advancement in
several areas, particularly in the area of information technology.

THE IMPACTS OF GLOBALIZATION

Globalization may influence the expression of conflict in a number of ways,
including disturbing local events, providing new resources over which to
compete, and threatening deeply held values or symbols, to name a few.

The impact of globalization had manifested itself differently to different

people and different manners. And such an imbalance rewards to different
states, people and groups leads to conflict. The following are ways in which
globalization causes conflict in African societies.

37
ECONOMIC IMPACT
This involves marginalizing some and rewarding some in the same system.
Certain groups of people take advantage of capitalism. Few states or
groups gain while many states or group loses and such polarization is the
major cause of conflict in Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, etc. Example is the
introduction of SAP in Nigeria, Ghana and Zambia and the consequences
of adopting SAP hampered the recovery of many countries and led to
further deterioration of social service. The inability for the states to provide
certain social services generated serious instability in many countries in
Africa. Continuous economic decline is the major cause of conflict in Africa.

Economically, globalization has, on the whole, reinforced the economic

marginalization of African economies and their dependence on a few
primary goods for which demand and prices are externally determined.
This has, in turn accentuated poverty and economic inequality as well as
the ability of the vast number of Africans to participate meaningfully in the
social and political life of their countries. The scientific and technological
forces unleashed by globalization have facilitated the extinction of the
indigenous development of technology and distorting patterns of
production in Africa.

POLITICAL IMPACT
National liberation struggles and wars in the 1960’s against apartheid and
other racist regimes and the introduction of democratic principles
accompanied by the disarticulation of the fragile government system in
Africa has significantly undermined the development state. The idea of
freedom and democracy enforced by globalization, military intervention
and struggle for rights against oppression of corruption, poverty,
inequality etc have generated conflict in Africa and has kept on generating
conflict in many North African countries.

In the political sphere, the most important consequence is the erosion of

sovereignty, especially on economic and financial matters, as a result of the

38
imposition of models, strategies and policies of development on African
countries by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the
World Trade Organization. More important is the fact that globalization for
most part does not facilitate the establishment of the economic conditions
necessary for genuine democracy and good governance to take solid roots
and thrives.

SOCIAL IMPACT
It is the responsibility of every state to provide social welfare programs.
Those in operation ought to be sustained. The introduction of SAP made it
very difficult for the government to create or sustain social welfare
provisions. That angered or provoked the members of the society as it
generated a lot of conflict in different parts of Africa. The inability of the
government to provide social amenities, social welfare, education, etc has
generated a reaction that causes conflict.

As a result of the cultural domination from outside that goes with

globalization, African countries are rapidly losing their cultural identity
and therefore their ability to interact with other cultures on an equal and
autonomous basis, borrowing from other cultures only those aspects that
meet its requirements and needs. Welfare and other programs intended to
meet the basic needs of the majority of the population are transferred from
governments to non-governmental organizations that begin to replace
governments making them to lose the little authority and legitimacy they
have.

39