Get e-book Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated?

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? book. Happy reading Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? Pocket Guide.
Social conflicts are ubiquitous and inherent in organized social life. This volume examines the origins and regulation of violent identity conflicts. It focuses on the.
Table of contents

Much public and scholarly attention is now given to revealing the truth about past injustices and human rights violations in order to build a secure peace. Knowledge of past and ongoing oppression by people within the oppressor community or country can alter their self-identity. They may come to see themselves as being complicit in wrongly harming others.

How adversaries interact with each other is particularly important in transforming collective identities and conceptions each adversary has about itself and about the other. Neither side in a conflict is hapless. Policies may be undertaken by either side to foster joint actions that prevent, interrupt, and transform intractable conflicts. Preventive Policies: Many policies can help prevent intractable conflicts from emerging and becoming entrenched. For example, if one side is forthcoming about providing compensatory benefits for past injustices or providing assurances that past injustices will end, the other side tends to pursue limited and non-vindictive goals.

There is a risk, however, that the compensations and assurances will be seen as signs of weakness, and the goals raised higher. Attribution theory suggests another possibility. It follows that if those others have done some good deed, it is only because they were forced to do so and more coercion will yield even greater benefits.

Negotiating shared understandings about conciliatory moves can help reduce such misunderstandings. The way each adversary resists oppression and injustice in turn affects that group's self-identity and conception of the other. For example, in the case of African-Americans and European-Americans in the s and early s, the nonviolent way the civil rights struggle was waged and the way the country as a whole responded affected both parties: it helped change the collective identities of both African and European Americans, increasing the civic character of American identity rather than its ethnic character.

Furthermore, American identity went from being characterized as a melting pot within which "foreign" elements assimilated to an enduring multi-cultural society. Interruptive Policies: Many other policies help interrupt or stop destructive escalation. In many ways, the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union became managed to limit the threat each posed the other. The arms control agreements helped channel and manage the arms race. The Helsinki Accords, signed in , assured the Soviet Union that the borders established in Europe after World War II were inviolable, including the shift of Soviet borders westward and the division of Germany.

Thus assured, the Soviet Union eased the barriers to Western influence. Transformative Policies : Adversaries can act in ways that help transform the intractable conflict between them, by contributing to a fundamental transformation of one or both opponents. For example, during the Cold War, cultural, educational, and other social exchanges between the United States and the Soviet Union were conducted at official and non-official levels.

They contributed to changes in the way many members of the Soviet elites saw themselves and viewed Americans, and people on each side developed new perceptions of the other side. The changes in both identities and conceptions contributed to a transformation in the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War.

Other confidence-building measures between adversaries include agreements to inform each other of military maneuvers and establish mechanisms to be more transparent about actions that otherwise might seem threatening. Confidence-building measures tend to reduce denigrating views of the other side and reduce the inclination to characterize oneself in terms of opposition to the other side. Reconciliatory actions are increasingly common in order to achieve peace.

"Us" versus "Them"

They may not only promote regard for the other side, but also transform the identity of those undertaking the actions. Taking such actions reduces the likelihood of holding onto sentiments that people sharing one's collective identity are superior to other peoples and more wholly human.

Certainly, such reconciliatory actions reduce the grievances of those who previously suffered the indignities of low regard, increasing the likelihood of ending an intractable conflict. Finally, the adversaries can pursue policies that support shared overarching identities. Thus, new institutional arrangements can better highlight broad identities, such as being European. In addition, an old identity may be modified to be more inclusive, as occurred in South Africa with its political transformation and as is occurring in the United States as its multicultural character is increasingly stressed.

Identity Issues | Beyond Intractability

Actors who are not members of the adversarial camps can carry out policies that help to prevent, interrupt, and end intractable conflicts; only a few strategies are briefly noted here. Preventive Policies: Official and nonofficial agencies may help alleviate deteriorating living conditions that otherwise might exacerbate ethnic antagonisms and ignite fights that become intractable. This may include alerting people inside and outside the areas affected about the risks of pursuing conflicts destructively, further imperiling lives.

Outside actors can also foster norms and institutions that help develop nondestructive ways of handling the inevitable disputes of social life. A wide variety of organizations engage in training and consultations to support such methods. Indeed, the world climate may be more or less supportive of various methods of struggle, whether it be armed struggle, democratic elections, terrorism, or nonviolent resistance. Groups resorting to one of these methods may get assistance from particular allies or face external opposition for doing so.

Interruptive Policies: Once a conflict has already become protracted and destructive, intermediaries are particularly needed to stop further deterioration. Domestically, this is often recognized as a primary obligation of the central government, which tries to manage internal conflicts rather than exacerbate them as a party in the fight.

Internationally, the U. External actors may also halt further deterioration by constraining one or both sides in a conflict. Sanctions can affect the self-conceptions of some parties to an intractable conflict. The widespread condemnation of South African white minority's treatment of non-whites under apartheid contributed to changes in the way white South Africans saw themselves and their opponents. Transformative Policies: Outside actors may also undertake a variety of mediating roles to help stop and even transform an intractable conflict.

Mediation generally entails according some legitimacy to the antagonistic sides in a conflict and treating the representatives with human regard, even when the parties themselves do not.

Account Options

In such circumstances, participating in the mediation may prompt each side to modify its conception of the other and also of itself. The social context also affects the long-term transformation of intractable conflicts and the establishment of enduring peaceful accommodations. External actors can be important agents in ensuring compliance to agreements, which helps build trust between former adversaries.


  1. Outlook Odes.
  2. Breadcrumb.
  3. IN ADDITION TO READING ONLINE, THIS TITLE IS AVAILABLE IN THESE FORMATS:.
  4. Winter Quarters (Bello);
  5. Account Options!
  6. 1. Introduction;

Experiences providing grounds for mutual trust affect self-identities and also conceptions of the other side that help transform intractable conflicts. External actors may also contribute resources that help fulfill the terms of agreements and overcome threats to the conflict's transformation and enduring resolution. The resources may include emergency food, assistance in rebuilding infrastructure, aid in training and education, and protection against violent acts by opponents of stability.

Identities can greatly contribute to conflict intractability. How adversaries think about who they are and who and what their enemies are profoundly influences the course of any conflict between them. Their sense of identity and conceptions of each other contribute to their conflict's destructive quality as well as to its long duration. Whether and how identities contribute to intractable conflicts depends on their particular qualities. Of course, identities alone do not determine a conflict's intractability; many other factors are discussed in many other essays in this web site.

Identities can and do change in ways that help prevent, limit, and end intractable conflicts. These changes are brought about by groups within each adversary camp, by the way the adversaries interact, and by the conduct of persons and groups who intervene or otherwise affect the primary adversaries. In addition, adversaries are not unchanging, unitary groups; each has many kinds of members with their own interactions with each other and with persons and groups in and outside the adversary camps. All this complicates but also offers opportunities to avert, interrupt, and end intractable conflicts.

The Trump campaign was said to wage a "war against women," and a "war against Islam," although as I write this, the U. In this article, Lou Kriesberg identifies "preventive policies" to avoid identity conflicts before they start, "interruptive policieis" to stop or limit escalation in its tracks, and transformative policies to de-escalate identity conflicts and to help people develop mutual respect and sources of common ground.

This is extremely badly needed in the United States right now, as is true in Europe, much of the Middle and Far East, as well as Africa. So while this was written some time ago, everything it suggests as "solutions" are still viable and greatly needed! But few Americans would count Russia among our friends at the moment--rather we seem to be reigniting our never-resolved identity conflict.

Kriesberg, T. Northrup, and S.

Hate Speech and Hate Crime

Thorson Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, , Levine and Donald T. New York: Jason Aronson, Coy and Lynne M. Kacowicz and others, eds. Public Domain. Use the following to cite this article: Kriesberg, Louis. Paragraph 7 contains provisions on the prosecution and trial of persons who have been accused of war crimes or of crimes against humanity. A prisoner of war POW is a combatant who is imprisoned by an enemy power during an armed conflict.

Get this edition

The first international convention to define the requirements for combatants to be eligible for treatment as prisoners of war was the Second Hague Convention The Geneva Conventions are the main conventions today that provide a framework for protective rights of POWs. The basic principle is that being a soldier is not a punishable act in itself. The laws apply from the moment a prisoner is captured until he is released or repatriated.

It is prohibited to torture prisoners, and a prisoner can only be required to give his name, date of birth, rank and service number if applicable. According to Article 4 Third Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, protected combatants include military personnel, guerrilla fighters and certain civilians. To be entitled to prisoner of war status, the combatant must conduct operations according to the laws and customs of war, that is, be part of a chain of command, wear a uniform and bear arms openly.

Thus, franc-tireurs, terrorists and spies are excluded. It also does not include unarmed non-combatants who are captured in time of war; they are protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention. Non-combatant is a military term describing persons not engaged in combat, such as civilians and medical personnel. Persons who do not have the status of wounded or sick member of armed forces protected by the First and Second Geneva Convention or prisoner of war protected under the Third Geneva Convention are considered protected persons under the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.

Article 4 defines protected persons as the following:.


  • All Humor Comics #12?
  • Subscribe to Our Newsletter.
  • Poker Night: Girlfriend Shared With The Guys.
  • IA - Simon Brent.
  • Identity Issues | Beyond Intractability.
  • "Us" versus "Them".
  • Identity Conflicts: Can Violence be Regulated? : The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease;

    • Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals. Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.

    Article 5 of the same Convention circumscribes the rights of protected persons when they commit hostile acts:. Where in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.