Karl Cordell and Stefan Wolff are both political scientists who specialise in ethnicity and governance in Plymouth University and international security in the University of Birmingham respectively. They collaborated on a number of works and have both co-edited and co-authored works on both ethnicity and conflict. One such book, published in 2009 by Polity, that is co-authored by Karl Cordell and Stefan Wolff is Ethnic Conflict: Causes, Consequences and Responses. In the introduction of this book Cordell and Wolff both clearly lay out what the aims of the book are. They tell us that the book will be investigating what an ethnic conflict is, why ethnic conflict remains so prevalent and why it is still such a challenge in the world today, …show more content…
They acknowledge the fact that they cannot address every theory that is out there, nor than they truly examine any of the theories in great detail in the space that they have afforded them. Instead of attempting this they examine the extant theories with regards to two broad schools of thought. First they deal with the school of thought that sees the ethnic conflicts as a rational conflict with economic and security elements to them. The second school of thought that they address is the more psychological and cultural school of thought which deals more social identity based explanations of ethnic conflict. In their examining of both these schools of thought Cordell and Wolff bring in elements of international relations theory. In their examinations of these schools of thought they make reference to the major contributors, such as Volkan and Monteville and their contributions to psychoanalytical theories of ethnic conflict, and their theories instead of making their own contributions to the …show more content…
They do this by examining they see as the three main schools of conflict settlement. These three schools are centipetalism, power sharing and power dividing. Centripetalism as described by Cordell and Wolff seems on the face of it to be a type of power sharing as it puts forward that “’intergroup political accommodation’ is achieved by ‘electoral systems that provide incentives for parties to form coalitions.’” As well as describing the different theories, they examine recent conflicts and after this analysis they reach the conclusion that there is “a trend towards favouring territorial self-government as a part of an overall institutional design that seeks to square the circle between self-determination of identity groups, on the one hand, and territorial integrity and sovereignty of existing states, on the other” . At the end of this chapter examining the schools of conflict settlement they reach the conclusion that none of the three schools are alone capable of encapsulating the practice of complex power sharing again leading towards the idea that there needs to be some sort of framework that can bring together all the disparate theories of conflict settlement just like they bring the different theories of ethnic conflict under their four tiered
The Middle Eastern states of Lebanon and Israel are at the center of the hot bed centuries of conflict and warfare between the Jewish and Palestinian peoples. Thomas Friedman spent nine years in the region before writing his book From Beirut to Jerusalem about his experiences in both cities. Ultimately, Friedman’s discussion of the violence, instability, and politics in the lives of the two middle-eastern cities creates what he calls tribal politics and Hama Rules. Tribal Politics and Hama Rules dominate the book as Freidman examines not only the current events that occur but also the causes behind the in- and the out-fighting; in order to live in the Middle East, Freidman argues, one must understand these principles or pay for his ignorance.
A Separate Peace, Unit Test Hamza Eldohiri The story “A Separate Peace”, written by John Knowles, was written at the time and takes place during World War II when battles and conflicts amongst nations were evident. Each nation involved struggled and fought their hardest in order to satisfy the good of their nation. Not only is the setting in the story taking place during this time of quarrel, the story also demonstrates areas of self-conflict and an internal battle throughout. The characters in “A Separate Peace”, are described as experiencing this self-conflicting, internal battle. Gene (also the narrator) is specifically depicted as he goes through his battle in life.
This essay argues that states that are ethnically and culturally similar are more likely to engage in conflicts over
Social Forces, 90(3), 993-1022. doi:10.1093/sf/sor024 McConnell, S. (2009). Not so huddled masses: Multiculturalism and foreign policy. World Affairs, 171(4), 39-50. doi:10.3200/wafs.171.4.39-50 Reimers, D.M. (1983).
The table below summarizes major race riots in the United States since the Supreme Court’s desegregation decision of 1954, i.e., the beginning of the Second Reconstruction (v. “The Second Reconstruction” by Thomas Allen) to 2015. Most authors whose books were written between 1955 and 1963 promoting desegregation, integration, and “civil rights” predicted that most racial strife would be in the South. They expected at worse some minor problems outside the South. This table shows that they were false prophets. Between 1954 and 2015, more than twice as many riots have occurred outside the South.
In this interview, it illustrates how power may ignite cultures to have a division based on their cultural group. It may cause a nation to become captivated by misleading mistakes and false representation of a political group. Although, segregation exists, individuals felt the need to react in ways that became unjustifiable causing destruction affecting beliefs, values, and other perspectives amongst other cultures, religions, and beliefs differently than their own. By taking the lives of innocent individuals and shaping and conforming lives according to their biases alters how children may shape their own human world views based on exceptionalism, power and segregation, and improving history and evolution through integration.
The Civil War began in 1861 and ended in 1865. Between the North and South, the Civil War determined what kind of nation the United States would be. The fight was mostly over the rights people should get. Things such as Slavery and Westward expansion really set it off. Slavery had divided the United States from the beginning.
In the book The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien, the soldiers have to carry a lot of things physically and mentally. One of the biggest things the soldiers have to carry is conflict, but not just between other people, inside of themselves as well. In the book The Things They Carried by Tim O’Brien the author has an internal conflict of whether to go fight in the war in Vietnam or to run away to Canada which he tells through the story “On the Rainy River.” An internal conflict is a conflict inside of a character in a story.
Throughout Chapter five of her book Shadows of War, Carolyn Nordstrom shares her views on war in terms of social, physical and mental goals and punishes of such violence. To begin, one of the first goals of war as defined by Nordstrom is a direct result of a threat of loss of control. She explains that it is common for one military to feel the need to destroy another when their control over a certain (land area owned or controlled by someone) is under threat (56). An interesting point that Nordstrom makes is relating to/about (community of people/all good people in the world)'s do not tell the difference between the existence of different violences. As stated by Nordstrom, most people will naturally tell/show the difference between different wars; however, very few tell/show the difference between the experience of violence throughout such wars (57).
Nonetheless, if negative states of mind created in every nation amid the conflict are not tended to, these may produce to further conflict later on. In the interim, conflict change goes for a principal change in conduct of people and the relationship between two or additionally disputing groups. This model is a great deal more exemplified in Bush and Folger 's hypothesis of transformative intervention and Lederach 's model of conflict change. To Lederach, he utilizes the term conflict resolution to allude to peace building.
Rwanda has a history of deep rooted conflict which originates back to when it was once a colony of Germany. Once it became a colony of Belgium after world war one this conflict also came with it, The conflict that exists is thus of two ethnic tribal groups the; Hutus and the Tutsis and their strong hatred of one another. Rwandans myths seems to indicate that Hutu and Tutsi identities did exist before the colonization but the hatred of two predominate ethnic tribal groups of one another only came into existence after colonization. This conflict between them has nothing to with religion, race or language it is to do with territory and the ownership of Rwanda. It is because of the colonies exploitation and classification of the Rwandan people into“an ethnic group” that the conflict seemed to come to a head.
the article by Gregory Gause III “Is this the end of Sykes- Picot?” Gause highlights on the political instability and civil war in Syria and the continued social upheavals in Iraq, Gause relates these modern day international challenges to the faltering of artificial borders in the eastern Arab world, drawn by Britain and France after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Gause reveals in his article a question for the reader, regarding whether or not the borders of the far eastern Arab world are about to be redrawn and if the colonial system entrusted by the Europeans is coming to conclusion. “The end of Sykes-Picot is the notion that political pundits use in order to justify their arguments that the border themselves are undergoing substantial change. Furthermore, the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 divided the former Ottoman territories between Britain and France, however, the final borders were determined by the two powers at the San Remo conference in 1920.
Since,"anarchy is what states make of it,” all states do not need to stress over their relative power and can focus on achieving long term peace.(Wendt, 79-80). While realist classical perspectives point to solely human nature and the anarchical system as the reason for conflict, Wendt provides an example showing that the self identities of states can lead to peace or conflict. He points to defining situations in context history that help determine a state 's interest. He states, “This seems to be happening today in the United States and the former Soviet Union. Without the cold war’s mutual attributions of threat and hostility to define their identities, these states seem unsure of what their ‘interests’
The notion and the meaning of conflict have evolved with time. Before Coser, conflict was seen more as a source of social change and disintegration. However, the conflict theory we are referring to here is not necessarily an infliction of violence or atrocities, but a conflict that arises due to unequal distribution of power and resources. Theorists consider power to be an important element of conflict theory. For instance, who uses power or where is power located are two of the main concerns of conflict theory.
Basis of modern science of conflict is studies of German, Austrian, American sociologists of the 20th century: G.Simmel, L. Gumplowicz, D. Smalley, W. Sumner, R. Dahrendorf, Parsons. Conflict was recognized as normal social phenomenon. A number of biological, psychological, social and other factors inevitably generate conflict. Most scientists refer Georg Simmel to the founders of Theoretical conflictology.