For the most part, I've left my work out of De Spectaculis. I do this for pleasure, not as a labor, and I like the opportunity to cover territory that is at least somewhat removed from conflicts and wars. Generally, when I start to write about conflict, I feel as though I should just go ahead and write a paper for work, and why should I spend my free time doing that?
A large part of what I do is conflict impact analysis. I work with organizations of all types (NGOs both international and local, donors both government and foundation, businesses and corporations both local and multinational) operating in conflict zones or potential conflict zones. They need to know about the context, of course. They also need to know about the impacts of their decisions and their operations on the conflict.
Every organization knows that they have to perform a risk assessment. But this is carried out almost exclusively from a perspective that a conflict will have impacts on the organization and its operations. People make the assumption that they, and their organizations, are neutral - because they don't explicitly take sides. But no one in a conflict situation is perceived as neutral by the participants, and actions taken in a context of conflict can have serious negative consequences. If people and organizations don't understand the interactions between what they are doing and the conflict systems, it is very easy to heighten the tensions where they are working.
What follows is an outline of one of the simpler frameworks for understanding impacts on a conflict. I spend a fair amount of time teaching people how to use it and how to apply it to their current situations. While simple, this framework is not simplistic, and it has proven to be a powerful tool for analyzing past mistakes, current problems, and directing future programming. It is presented in the form of lessons because each element was in fact learned during a five-year research/collaborative learning project begun in 1994 and about which I may (which is to say, "probably") have more to say at some point.
First lesson, when you enter a context of conflict, you become a part of the context. While this might seem obvious to any bloke who has mastered pop Heisenberg, most people don't think it actually applies to them. As I mentioned above, most people think neutrality is simply a matter of declaration and then all actions taken in that spirit will themselves be neutral. You know what your intentions are; how could anyone else misconstrue them? Alas, in a conflict, you cannot remain separate from the factors involved.
Second lesson, every conflict is broadly characterized by two sets of factors. There are factors that divide people and are pulling them apart, and there are factors that connect people and bring them together. Again, this might seem obvious. However, in a conflict situation, the first set of factors, the dividers, are much more obvious and so tend to dominate all discussion about the conflict. The second set of factors, the connectors, are still there though.
Third lesson, when you enter a context of conflict, you will have an impact on both sets of factors, on both dividers and connectors. This impact can be negative, heightening dividers and/or reducing connectors, or it can be positive, lessening dividers and/or increasing connectors.
The fourth and fifth lessons are concerned with how you impact a conflict situation. Your impact comes from what you bring into the conflict.
Fourth lesson, when you enter a conflict you bring resources (money, equipment, people, etc.). These resources will change the local dynamic. They will have an impact on the economy, an impact on the local authority/government, and an impact on intergroup relationships.
Fifth lesson, you also bring your attitude. The way you do your work in a conflict situation is just as important as what you do. Some ways of working signal an acceptance of conflict and encourage violent competition. Some signal ways of working together and engagement in decision making.
Sixth lesson, the devil is in the details. Your organization or its actions do not have an all or nothing impact. Different elements of your operations may be having an impact on different factors in the conflict.
Seventh lesson, there are always options. You can always find a different way to accomplish your goals, a way that at the very least reduces your negative impact. And a corollary to this lesson is that it is never too late. You can always change what you are doing. You just have to look at your options.
Over the next few days, I will address each lesson in more depth. Questions, as well as comments, are welcome.
Part I: Introduction
Part II: Entering the Context of Conflict
Part III: The Two "Realities" of Conflict
Part IV: You Have an Impact on All Factors
Part V: The Things You Bring
Part VI: How You Do Your Work Matters as Much as What You Do
Part VII: The Devil is in the Details
Part VIII: There Are Always Options