Suchergebnisse

Conflict is defined as a situation where actors are pursuing incompatible goals. It is assumed that the actors are acting if & only if they deem the value of the goal, weighed by the probability of attaining it, to be greater than the value of the means used, ie the value lost through the struggle. In terms of the variables of a conflict model, conditions of power balance are formulated, ie of a situation where both parties are determined to defend themselves if attacked, & neither attacks. A distinction is drawn between the pol'al burden of military aggression & the physical cost of warfare; similarly, it is distinguished between valuation of the goal from the point of view of expansion & from that of security. On the basis of these distinctions, the concepts of nonexpansive attitude & aggressiveness by fear are defined & their influence on the conditions of power balance is discussed. It is shown that in a situation where none of the actors is expansive & both perceive the other party's att as nonexpansive, peace is independent of military methods of conflict prevention, & thus the concept of power balance cannot be applied. Nonmilitary methods of conflict prevention are defined as measures aiming at influencing the actor's attitude in the direction of nonexpansiveness. Finally, it is attempted to formulate a survey of nonmilitary conflict prevention measures, based in part on how these measures influence the actor's expectations concerning warfare & internat'l cooperation, & in part on which of the value variables determining the actor's attitude they affect. IPSA.

AbstractThis issue of International Negotiation focuses on coordination in conflict resolution. It includes nine articles that discuss theoretical concerns and practical insights about coordination among organizations involved in various aspects of conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peacebuilding, highlighting the utility of applying negotiation theory to the analysis of their relationships, interactions, and cooperative processes. This article presents a thematic overview of the articles and concludes by outlining areas for further development of theory and practice.

1. Consociationalism : power-sharing and self-governance / Stefan Wolff -- 2. Centripetalism : cooperation, accommodation and integration / Benjamin Reilly -- 3. Power dividing : the multiple-majorities approach / Philip G. Roeder -- 4. The diplomacy of conflict management / I. William Zartman -- 5. Quiet diplomacy : preventing conflict through discreet engagement / Craig Collins and John Packer -- 6. Imperfect but indispensable : the United Nations and global conflict management / Anoulak Kittikhoun and Thomas G. Weiss -- 7. Regional origins, global aspirations : the European Union as a global conflict manager / Nathalie Tocci -- 8. Limited capabilities, great expectations : the African Union and regional conflict management / John Akokpari -- 9. Political engagement, mediation and the non-governmental sector / Katia Papiagianni -- 10. Between theory and practice : Rwanda / Janine Natalya Clark -- 11. The challenges of implementation : Guatemala / Virginie Ladisch -- 12. The failure of prevention : Kosovo / Marc Weller -- 13. A never-ending story : Cyprus / Christalla Yakinthou -- 14. The potency of external conflict management : Northern Ireland / Adrian Guelke.

In an important yet under-reported speech to the Kuwait Parliament, Prime Minister David Cameron made a plea to southern Mediterranean and Gulf states to move towards greater economic freedom, rule of law, and the other norms of universal, not necessarily western, values and human rights. The question now is how to translate that vision into reality? One way would be to create a British Foundation for Democracy Development to promote open economics, support competing democratic political movements, and offer contacts and cash to civil society organizations promoting judicial and media independence, free trade unions and women's rights, and non-governmental organisations promoting democracy. Adapted from the source document.

The ongoing conflict in Afghanistan poses a great danger to the Afghanistan state itself as well as for the neighboring countries. A decreasing interest from the United States of America, NATO and other key players due to a long war and other geopolitical challenges will leave Afghanistan with the minimum outer support for the future. The science of conflict resolution is offering a variety of theories that could lead endless wars and conflicts to an end. The ongoing conflict in Afghanistan is challenging those theories, while the resolution is crucial for the Afghanistan people right now. But are those theories reflected in the current actions of the US, NATO and Afghanistan governments? And do those theoretical actions lead to a better future regarding conflict resolution? The purpose of this article was to analyze the current policies of third parties influencing the current conflict in Afghanistan to determine the most relevant conflict prevention theory that could support conflict resolution most effectively in the future. To achieve the mentioned purpose, the following tasks were designed. First, the most relevant conflict prevention theories, applicable to the Afghanistan case, were analyzed and the main characteristics were identified. Secondly, the actions of NATO, US and Afghanistan, connected to the conflict resolution efforts, were identified and analyzed. After that, actions mentioned above were compared with theoretical approaches from different theories and certain trends were detected. Later on, research was focused to detect particular elements that were relevant to each theory and further actions concentrated on identifying the trend of these elements for each theory, while doing a comparative comparison analysis, which was based on selected timeframes. Afterward, the trends for each theory were compared and – by doing this – the most applicable theory was identified that could be later used in practice to resolve the current conflict. Research showed that:All conflict prevention theories showed that resolution is possible only if all parties are involved in the processes and practically commit to actions. Currently this is not the case in Afghanistan.Some conflict resolution theories consider similar actions that currently the NATO, US and Afghanistan governments are using in the region.One of the analyzed conflict resolution theories could be applied practically in the Afghanistan case. The conflict prevention theory is the most flexible and has the widest action set in comparison with other theories.The conflict prevention theory reflects the current US actions in Afghanistan, when the decreasing US support for the Afghanistan government in security, governance and in other sectors influences the weakening security situation. The effectiveness of conflict prevention theory is low due to the Taliban's absence in the negotiations, and this fact does not influence any recognition that the most relevant theory that could support current conflict resolution in the most effective way in Afghanistan is the conflict prevention theory.