PSY 210 Presentation PDF

THE DYNAMICS OF INTERETHNIC CONFLICT AND RESOLUTION COURSE CODE: PSY 210 COURSE TITLE: PSYCHOLOGY OF ETHNICITY AND ETHNIC GROUPS 2 LECTURERE IN CHARGE: Dr. TAMUNO OPUBO ADDAH GROUP 3(21-30): AKINPELU EMMANUEL GBOLAHAN SOS/22/23/0199 AKINDUNBI OLUWASEUN CHRISTIANA SOS/22/23...

THE DYNAMICS OF INTERETHNIC CONFLICT AND RESOLUTION COURSE CODE: PSY 210 COURSE TITLE: PSYCHOLOGY OF ETHNICITY AND ETHNIC GROUPS 2 LECTURERE IN CHARGE: Dr. TAMUNO OPUBO ADDAH GROUP 3(21-30): AKINPELU EMMANUEL GBOLAHAN SOS/22/23/0199 AKINDUNBI OLUWASEUN CHRISTIANA SOS/22/23/0189 ALADE DANIEL OLUWATIMILEYIN SOS/22/23/0218 AJOKOTOLA OLUWATOMISIN PRAISE SOS/22/23/0172 AJIGLO BLESSING OLAMIDE SOS/22/23/0168 AIKPOKPODION EBOSETALE SOS/22/23/0157 AKPAETI ANGEL UKO SOS/22/23/0213 ALABI ISRAEL OLUWASEUN SOS/22/23/0217 AKINYODE QUAZEEM ENIOLA SOS/22/23/0210 AKINSEFUNMI OLUWATOYOSI PRISCILLA SOS/22/23/0200 WHAT IS AN ETHNIC GROUP? According to the Oxford Dictionary, an Ethnic group is a community or population made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent. CONFLICT Conflict describes a situation in which two or more actors pursue incompatible goals. INTERETHNIC CONFLICT Ethnic, or interethnic conflict refers to disputes between contending groups who identify themselves primarily on the basis of ethnic criteria and who make group claims to resources on the basis of their collective rights. An ethnic conflict Is a conflict between two or more ethnic groups. While the source of the conflict may be political, social, economic or religious, the individuals in conflict must expressly fight for their ethnic group’s position within society. This criterion differentiates ethnic conflict from other forms of struggle. It is not necessarily violent, but the use of tension, dispute, or unease is more common in a nonviolent context. A violent internal conflict is generally called a civil war or armed conflict when casualties and destruction are substantial. Once ethnic conflict breaks out, it is difficult to stop. Massive human-rights violations and physical attacks on civilians—such as rape, torture, mass killings, ethnic cleansing, and genocide—lead to tremendous human suffering. EXAMPLES OF INTERETHNIC CONFLICT Human rights in Ethiopia Sampit conflict  Caste War of Yucatán Russian-Ukrainian War Indo-Pakistani war of 1947–1948 Nigerian Civil War The SREBRENICA MASSACRE CASE STUDY 1: SREBRENICA MASSACRE: The Srebrenica massacre, also known as the Srebrenica genocide, was the July 1995 genocidal massacre of more than 8,000 Bosniak Muslim men and boys in and around the town of Srebrenica, during the Bosnian War. The killings were perpetrated by units of the Bosnian Serb Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) under Ratko Mladić. As of July 2012, 6,838 genocide victims had been identified through DNA analysis of body parts recovered from mass graves; as of July 2021, 6,671 bodies had been buried at the Memorial Centre of Potočari, while another 236 had been buried elsewhere. Some Serbs have claimed the massacre was retaliation for civilian casualties inflicted on Serbs by Bosniak soldiers from Srebrenica under the command of Naser Orić. These ‘revenge’ claims have been rejected and condemned by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the UN as bad faith attempts to justify the genocide. CASE STUDY 2: Nigerian Civil War (6 July 1967 – 15 January 1970) Also known as the Biafran War, was a civil war fought between Nigeria and the Republic of Biafra, a secessionist state which had declared its independence from Nigeria in 1967. Nigeria was led by General Yakubu Gowon, and Biafra by Lieutenant Colonel Chukwuemeka “Emeka” Odumegwu Ojukwu. Biafra represented the nationalist aspirations of the Igbo ethnic group, whose leadership felt they could no longer coexist with the federal government dominated by the interests of the Muslim Hausa-Fulanis of Northern Nigeria. The conflict resulted from political, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions which preceded the United Kingdom’s formal decolonisation of Nigeria from 1960 to 1963. DYNAMICS OF ETHNIC CONFLICT Once ethnic conflict breaks out, it is difficult to stop. Massive human-rights violations and physical attacks on civilians—such as rape, torture, mass killings, ethnic cleansing, and genocide— lead to tremendous human suffering. Systematic discrimination and exclusion from national and local political decision making, the appropriation of ethnic minorities’ traditional homelands, and policies that marginalize ethnic minorities are common practices accompanying ethnic conflict. Ethnic conflicts have very direct effects far beyond their epicenters. Those involve refugee flows, internal displacement, regional instability, economic failures, environmental disasters, diffusion and spillover effects, and conditions favorable to organized crime and terrorism. Ethnic conflicts spread in two ways. Diffusion occurs when an ethnic conflict in one state stimulates conflict in another state with similar conditions. Successful movements provide images and moral incentives that result in the motivation and mobilization of other ethnic movements in similar economic and political conditions. Escalation or contagion effects occur when a conflict in one country spreads across borders into neighboring countries in which an ethnic minority has its kinfolk. That usually involves the engagement of new foreign fighters who are employed by local elites. Ethnic conflicts may start out as intrastate disputes, but they become regional or international crises when foreign powers get involved. Neighbouring states, regional powers, and international powers are often overwhelmed and unable to deal with international consequences of ethnic conflicts. Foreign sympathizers and diasporas can contribute substantially to a group’s cohesion and mobilization by providing financial, military, political, and moral support. External actors in some cases play important roles in inflaming conflicts or prolonging violent struggles. Opportunistic interventions to gain military, economic, or political benefits take advantage of conflict- affected states and contribute to the conflict. CAUSES OF INTERETHNIC CONFLICTS: MICHAEL EDWARD BROWN provided a useful approach to understanding the causes of ethnic conflict. He distinguished between UNDERLYING CAUSES and PROXIMATE CAUSES. UNDERLYING CAUSES include structural factors, political factors, economic and social factors, and cultural and perceptual factors. PROXIMATE CAUSES embrace four levels of conflict triggers: internal mass-level factors (what Brown calls “bad domestic problems”), external mass-level factors (“bad neighborhoods”), external elite-level factors (“bad neighbors”), and internal elite- level factors (“bad leaders”). According to Brown, both underlying and proximate causes have to be present for ethnic conflict to evolve. UNDERLYING CAUSES Structural factors Weak or failed states often serve as an impetus for ethnic conflict. Many times such states are artificial products (e.g., former colonies) that were created without regard for the existing ethnic and political divisions within their borders, and their political and legal institutions tend to be ineffective. Ethnic geography—the geographic distribution and territorial concentration of ethnic groups in pluralistic states—also contributes to the likelihood of violent ethnic conflict. Ethnic conflict is particularly common in states with territorially concentrated ethnic groups located near a border or with ethnic kin in an adjacent state. Political factors Ethnic conflict is particularly likely in states where ethnic groups lack sufficient representation in public and political institutions. Authoritarian one-party regimes with discriminatory legislation and a lack of opportunities for ethnic groups to participate in state decision-making processes are particularly prone to ethnic conflict. The tactics that may be utilized by leaders and elites during political turmoil also affect the likelihood of violent ethnic conflict. Scapegoating, hate speech, and manipulation of the mass media are means that have the potential to heighten existing discord between ethnic groups. Economic and social factors Discriminatory economic systems in which various groups are faced with inequitable options (in terms of economic opportunities, access to land and other resources, standards of living, and the like) generate resentment and also contribute to tensions and destabilization. Cultural or perceptual factors Cultural factors such as problematic group histories, stereotypical perceptions, and grievances over cultural discrimination—including limitations on religious and cultural practices, unequal educational opportunities, and restrictions on the use of minority languages—are common causes of ethnic conflict. PROXIMATE CAUSES Internal mass-level factors. Internal mass-level factors may include fast-paced economic changes, modernization, patterns of political or economic discrimination, and internal migration. Brown deems those “bad domestic problems.” External mass-level factors. “Bad neighborhoods,” according to Brown, are created when radicalized politics in a region lead to contagion, diffusion, and spillover effects (external mass-level causes). Those effects can also occur when refugees or fighters from neighbouring countries cross the border and bring violence and unrest with them. External elite-level factors. External elite-level factors exist when governments make decisions to provoke conflicts in weak neighbouring states for political, economic, security, or ideological reasons, leading to Brown’s label “bad neighbors.” In addition, in some cases, ethnic minorities decide to wage a violent struggle in the hope of political gains and international support. Internal elite-level factors. Brown uses the term “bad leaders” to refer to internal elite- level factors. Those include power struggles by leaders of different groups, ideological disputes over the way a country should be organized, and criminal activity directed against a country’s sovereignty by leaders of organized crime. STRATEGIES FOR RESOLVING INTERETHNIC CONFLICTS STRATEGIES FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION The emphasis here is on the application of appropriate plans, skills, conduct and/or styles directed at reducing to the barest minimum the negative consequences of conflicts. This involves two approaches, namely: CO-OPERATION and ASSERTIVENESS (Gire and Carment, 1993:90-92). Co-operation basically means a conflicting party or conflict resolution manager behaving in a manner that satisfies his/her desires or needs, as well as those of the other party(ies) in conflict. Co-operation is usually manifested in form of accommodation, avoidance, collaboration and compromise. Assertiveness, on the other hand, refers to deliberate action to satisfy one’s individual desires or needs at the expense of the other party’s rights. Those who pursue this type of strategy usually apply arbitration. The interplay of the two approaches has in turn, resulted in “conventional” and “nonconventional” strategies of conflict resolution. Interestingly, both strategies strive at settling conflicts by using the least expensive methods and the preservation of relationships after a settlement. Conventional strategy is anchored on the court process, i.e., adjudication. The non-conventional strategy applies, what is commonly referred to as, “alternative dispute resolution” (ADR). ADR is specifically meant to serve as an alternative to the official conventional means of settling disputes, mainly through litigation and the courts, but with preference for non-violence. He went further to classify them into voluntary and involuntary processes; and emphasized that whereas in the involuntary process, conflictual parties have some level of control over the outcome (result), in case of the voluntary process, the control is usually outside the conflicting parties. Going forward, whereas the voluntary process involves fact-finding, in-depth research and case studies, facilitation, negotiation, mediation and reconciliation, the involuntary process necessitates the involvement of third party. He/she brokers the peace process, and the parties have to accept the outcome in principle or in law. This method includes: arbitration, adjudication and law (peace) enforcement. The voluntary or non-conventional process, i.e., ADR is further divided into African and Western Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR/WDR) strategies. It should be further emphasised that within Africa itself, the strategy differs from country to country, and even within the country, culture to culture. In spite of the diversity, there are several common grounds that we have examined. REFERENCE: Varshney, Ashutosh (2002). Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life : Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven: Yale University Press. Kaufman, Stuart J. (2001). Modern Hatreds: The Symbolic politics of ethnic war. Ithaca: Cornell University. Press. Pp. 17. Denny, Elaine K; Walter, Barbara F (March 2014). “Ethnicity and civil war”. Journal of Peace Research. 51 (2): 199–212. Doi:10.1177/0022343313512853. S2CID 110666158. Dynamics of ethnic conflic Inethnic conflict inOrigin and nature of ethnic conflict Written by Tina Kempin Reuter