CRITICAL CHALLENGES IN RESOLVING
CONFLICTS
Some Lessons
for Nigeria’s Niger Delta
By Akpobibibo Onduku |
Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford, UK |
Conflict is an intrinsic and inevitable aspect of social change. It is an expression of the heterogeneity of interests,
values and beliefs that arise as new formations generated by social change
come up against inherited constraints. We might
agree with John Burton, who argues that conflicts are struggles between opposing
forces, implying that the issues are more serious than those relating to disputes,
possibly stimulating physical confrontations. But
the way we deal with conflict is a matter of habit and choice. It is possible to change habitual responses and exercise
intelligent choices. Conflict has now become a
persistent feature of modernity and a universal phenomenon but the manner
and approach with which we handle conflicts in Nigeria is worth reflecting
upon. We should strive to transform potentially
violent conflicts into non-violent alternatives. By
way of clarifications, the prevention of direct violence and war is sometimes
referred to as ‘negative peace’ while the overcoming of structural inequalities
and cultural blindness whether actual or perceived, is considered to be ‘positive
peace’.
The fundamentals of resolving conflicts involve raising consciousness
about cultural differences to enhance intercultural communication and generating
guidelines for intercultural interaction. Actors committed to conflict resolution
processes have put the strategic structural and psycho-cultural frameworks
of resolving conflicts to test in most crisis-ridden regions of the world. The structural theory explained a conflict as one
of incompatible interests, which arose from the structure of the community,
whether the community is that of a nation, a region, or a local community. On the other hand, the psycho-cultural places a greater
emphasis on identifying the fears and misconceptions arising between communities,
the lack of available trust for political negotiation work and the need to
develop relationships between conflictants that are conducive to negotiation,
compromise and cooperation.
Over the years, we might have observed that the sensibilities of
a majority of our leaders at all levels have opted not to consider good listening
and exploring cultural factors as effective conflict resolution skills. Conflicts have, therefore, developed and escalated
at different levels to full-scale violence with all the attendant consequences
of destruction, waste, cessation of productive activities, refugee problems
and environmental disasters. But often, many of
these conflicts are the direct result of human rights violations, injustices
or perceived injustices. It is a truism that the
conflicts have directly or indirectly led to more violation of natural rights
creating a situation that appears to be a cycle of hopelessness, thereby posing
a threat to national stability, peaceful coexistence and economic development. The denial of basic rights relating to food, employment,
housing or cultural life and large-scale discrimination and exclusion from
the decision-making processes of society are root causes of many of the grave
crises of our nationhood. Prolonged conflicts
have affected rural life and local occupation, crippling productivity of subsistence
practices leading to chronic food shortages, malnutrition and famine.
Building peace prevents conflicts and instability, improves governance,
enhances sustainable development and strengthens the rule of law, which is
necessary for cultivating a stable democracy. Therefore,
a very sincere commitment is needed to ensure that the dust of violence expressed
differently across the country permanently settles.
Looking to the future with some hope, we can only see the growing
concerns of few Nigerians that think and dream of the survivability of their
beloved country with little efforts from the recycled and emerging political
leaders within. I think we can move closer to
achieving sustainable peace in every geopolitical region of our country if
only we could opt for positive peace efforts which takes into consideration
of the different forms of injustice. It is high
time we appreciated the fact that to resolve conflicts, we must hold genuine
and sincere consultations.
We may like to take into cognizance, the fact that, conflict resolution
had always been controversial, both in relation to outside disciplines, and
internally amongst its different protagonists and schools.
It has drawn persistent fire from critics at different points on the
political and intellectual spectrum. On the one
hand, realists consider it as a struggle between antagonistic and irreconcilable
groups in which power and coercion were the only ultimate currency. The ideological perceptions of some of those working
in the field of peace research and conflict resolution were regarded as compromising,
and the attempt to combine ‘scientific’ academic analysis with a normative political agenda
as intellectually suspect. Due to the high regard
to protect individual interests, the use of games zero-sum and non zero-sum
approaches and that of the prisoner’s dilemma are commonly adopted and parties
try to reframe from original positions, interests and needs with an acceptance
of a third party intervention.
It has become even more pertinent, due to the politicization and
polarization of political space, to put up a practical and conscious ability
to tolerate cultural and individual differences in whatever degree. Our leaders seem not to be at peace with themselves. They need to build an individual peace effort in other
to avoid being in conflict with the other person.
Even if we apply existing theories to our specific conflict situations,
the question will be as to what extent we can tolerate differences absolutely. For instance, issues such as the signing of the offshore/onshore
oil dichotomy bill should be frugally considered with all sincerity. Our over forty-two years of nation building seems
to place us more in a state of greater uncertainties.
Not quite long, a documentary on Nigeria in one of the British Television
stations portrayed our nation as one where nothing works.
Accepting this or otherwise is another debate altogether. The realities in the images left of the Niger Delta
communities like Oloibiri, Odi, Kaiama, Opia-Ikenya, Okerenkoko, Ogoniland, Choba, the oil city of Warri et cetera
portrays to a considerable extent as to how we handle conflicts. In same manner, the army invasions of the Zaki-Biam
and neighbouring communities in Benue State, the Jos religious clashes and
the scary aftermaths of the Miss World Beauty pageantry in Kaduna and Abuja,
all remind us of our preparedness and abilities to react to impending anarchies.
RETURN TO CONTENTS | RETURN TO ESSAYS PAGE