6.1. Summary and Conclusion Inter-ethnic conflict is a conflict by which the primary line of confrontation is ethnic markers. In ethnic conflict whatever the cause, ethnic groups confronted each other with special emphasis to their ethnic identity. Moreover, for inter-ethnic conflict to happen two or more ethnic groups must reside in close proximity with in common political and socio-economic territory. Thus, the existing literatures claimed that multi-ethnic states are more prone to ethnic conflict than homogeneous states.
Simply conflict is defined as struggle which grows out of two opposing forces. The conflict word is come from Latin word conflictus which means to strike together. There are many synonyms of conflict which describes as war, battle, strife, a fight and disagreement. Conflict definition is differing from theoreticians view. Some conflict is mental whereas some are practical.
The following are common reasons of project conflicts: • Conflicting interests of stakeholders. A few stakeholders may not see any value in the project or may have conflicting political
The political violence may start from political parties outside power, which join forces, to form a strong opposition against the ruling party and demand its political rights, such as power sharing or acquisition. The government aims to resist these political groups with systematic political violence against them such as dissolving and banning these parties, or threaten their members, imprison them or kill them. Concepts of "political violence" and "political conflict" stems from the theoretical interferences between the concepts of "power, violence, conflict". Violence is a complex concept of multiple images, dimensions and levels. It has social, political and economic connotations.
This suggest that “the evilness of men, or their improper behaviour, leads to war” (Waltz, 2001, p.39). Waltz’s second image that he proposes is that the inner administration of the state component is essential for us to understand its tendency towards war. The image has two beliefs that state that for survival in central conflict or civil war, a state must endorse an entity that is homogenously unified. The third image that Waltz highlights the anarchy that exists in the international system. He proposes that as states have such interests that will all too often clash with the interest of other states, e.g.
Conflict means different opinion to different people. In some reason, conflict can cause fighting, war or trade embargos. But for other people it might be a different in opinion, perspective or personality. Others may think they are in a conflict situation, when the other side may feel that they are just discussing opposing views. His situation depends on our effects can result in damaging our relationship.
Poon Wynne Hsing (20) 403 IH Essay 2 There are many causes of tension between parties that lead to violent conflict. In this essay, we will be looking at different beliefs as a cause of violent conflict. For the sake of clarity, beliefs is defined as different ideologies, and violent conflict is at least two parties using physical force to resolve differing claims or interests. Different ideologies will cause violent conflict if tensions are not too high between the parties involved. The Civil war in Russia in 1917-1922 is a good example.
Violent conflict refers to excessive use of force in acts resulting in genocides and all-out wars, leading to crisis to occur. On the other hand, non-violent conflicts refer to situations where bloodshed may be involved but to a much lesser extent (i.e. protests and riots), thus it is not deemed as a crisis. In this conflict-themed essay, I stand for the argument that differing beliefs will not lead to violent conflict if measures taken to prevent the escalation of conflicts include negotiation and well planned and executed preventive diplomacy with all concerned parties. In this essay, I will be examining if different beliefs in the form of philosophy – self-preservation and ethnic chauvinism, guised as ethnic tension, will always lead to violent conflict.
The relationship between human rights and violent conflict is something like the chicken-and-egg riddle (the chicken or the egg, which came first). Are human rights violations caused by violent conflict, or are they the drivers of violent conflict? According to Parlevliet (2002:8) "violent and destructive conflict can lead to gross human rights violations, but can also result from a sustained denial of rights over a period of time". There is a general consensus that human rights violations are both symptoms and causes of violent conflict. Human rights violation can be viewed as both symptoms and causes of violent conflict because a sustained denial of human rights over a period of time can lead to violent conflict while a destructive conflict can lead to gross human rights violations.
According to Rahim (2001), conflict is an interactive process manifested in incompatibility disagreement, or dissonance within or between social entities (i.e., individual, group, organization, etc. For a conflict to happen generally you will need to have more than one party having different views or interests over something. Research has shown that conflict is inevitable hence a need to prevent or manage it. In an organization usually conflict arise due to various reasons, Moore (1996: 60-61) categorized the causes of conflict into five and suggested strategies in dealing with each conflict sphere. According to Moore, these categories are data / information, relationships, externals or moods, structural and values conflicts.