Essay: Intractable Conflicts

Intractable Conflicts are believed to fester on negative attractors which can be likened to an addiction as they are strong controlling patterns. They create a fertile ground for deconstructive conflict. Attractors represent the issues in a conflict that keep parties drawn in and fixated on a destructive path either through the coherent view of the conflict based on parties’ opinion of each other with an outlook of us vs them, past history of relation and who is accountable of the breakdown or by being the logical fallacy which provides justification and a platform for action or counter action. Attractors could also be either positive or negative but that is subject to how they are utilized. In improving the probability for peace in a conflict situation like Ethiopia/Eritrea which is presumed to be based on the Badme border but with apparently underlying socio economic issues accounting for the full-fledged warfare involved, strategies can be employed based on the Buildup and Tear Down strategy from the Attractor Landscape Model. The Practice main objective is to “support and enhance latent positive attractors and make them more attractive, and to inhibit and deconstruct negative attractors to make them less attractive” i.e. to build up and tear down. The choice of this practice is based on the past relationship between both countries with a possibility of still existing positive attractors through their past relationship and their victory against the Tigarians being a strong positive attractor that can be utilized to increase the prospects of peace between the two nations even if latent.
BUILD UP: Growing Hidden Possibilities
Also, by Circumventing the Conflict, International Organizations can focus on Capacity Building by addressing the conditions of the conflict without connecting with the Peace process or the Conflict. This can be done by providing succor to the directly affected in form of aid and relief to citizens of both Ethiopia and Eritrea. In this case, Circumvention is necessary because prior mediation attempts have created conflict traps which further fuels resistance by feeding the negative attractors. The case of the OAU effort is an instance in which given its resistance to acknowledge Eritrea’s independence can be perceived by Eritreans as affecting the power balance and strengthening Ethiopia’s strength as a recognized independent nation therefore giving them power over Eritrea and also adding assumptions of bias. Rebuilding Social Capital can increase the probability for peace given that the conflict between the two states are said to be border issues and not an ethnic clash. This occurs by working with members of both communities directly affected by the ongoing conflict at the grass root communicating their understanding and perspective on the conflict and how it affects their day to day life. This can bolster superordinate goals between both communities which in turn will create room for Alleviating Constraints on Constructive Network. This implies making use of groups across the divide who are willing to foster peace and dialogue e.g. religious or health groups, traditional rulers or even peer to peer groups. These networks are often the center piece of latent constructive attractors. War has the potential to bring out the best and worst in people and in every conflict situation, even if a few there are people who desire peace.
TEAR DOWN: – Dismantling Destructive Traps
The study of Intractable Conflict has shown that parties are strongly vested in Negative Attractors by holding on to them. The essence of the dismantling the destructive traps is to make them less attractive with the goal of taking focus away from them. This can be done by way of Honoring Emotions by “establishing conditions that enable people to accept and navigate intensely negative emotions is pivotal to deconstructing destructive attractors” P.T Coleman (2011). The government of Ethiopia and Eritrea can adopt strategies of Compartmentalizing and Channeling their emotions. Compartmentalizing would involve coming to terms with the causes and impacts of the war, acknowledging them while being able to detach its influence in determining action and reaction. It is like a process of separation, and assuming position It is apparent that Ethiopia may actually have feeling of betrayal stemming from Eritrea’s currency creation affecting trade relations between the two and control of the Red Sea which puts a strain on Ethiopia’s accessibility to water supply. This means acknowledging and accepting the socio economic factors that have fueled the war, accepting them yet being able to relegate them that they don’t influence the actions of both countries. Compartmentalizing creates the ground for Channeling which involves tapping strong emotions as a source of motivation for constructive change. Both Governments can direct the motives behind the war into areas that foster agreements and potential ceasefire mainly because the war has been a way of channeling emotions that have caused loss of lives and infrastructure as well as a shattered economy especially for Eritrea being a smaller country. Also, the strategy of these conflicts are all linked to this one stands alone can improve the probability for peace. In the case of Eritrea and Ethiopia, both countries have broadened the scope of the conflict by expanding it into neighboring countries and creating alliances with the other’s enemy creating a heightened rivalry. Delinking these factors can create an atmosphere for descalation as the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea stands alone.