Value conflict-group work

THE UNIVERSITY OF ZAMBIA AND ZIMBABWE OPEN UNIVERSITY POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES GROUP WORK NAMES

:

(SEE ALL STUDENT NAMES ON PAGE 2)

MODE OF STUDY

:

DISTANCE LEARNING

PROGRAMME

:

MASTER OF SCIENCE IN PEACE, LEADERSHIP AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

COURSE

:

MSPL 512: CONFLICT AND DEVELOPMENT

TUTOR

:

MR. HABEENZU MULUNDA

ASSIGNMENT NUMBER

:

2

DUE DATE

:

DECEMBER 26TH 2014

QUESTION

:

What is Value Conflict?

1

A Group Discussion about what Value Conflict is By Group Two students comprising of: 1. Habeenzu Precious Mumbi: 0977698895 2. Siazele Matimba: 0975288081 3. Mataa Simui Lewis: 0979851043 4. Mweemba Sostern: 0979625983 5. Mwitumwa Kakulunda Annet: 0979824897 6. Mwaba Godfrey: 0961598102

Authors’ Notes This is a seminar presentation prepared for MSPL 512: Conflict and Development taught by Mr. Habeenzu Mulunda.

2

Introduction “When your values are clear to you, making decisions becomes easier.” Roy E. Disney (longtime senior executive for The Walt Disney Company, 1930 – 2009). Just as people are different in nature, so are their beliefs and convictions. The underlying principle of such beliefs and convictions are what would be referred to as values. Before we can discover the importance of values in shaping our individual beliefs, we must have some understanding of what a value is. Values, as we will use the term, are ideas that someone thinks are worthwhile and in attempting to explore and define values as well as conflict, it is deemed that value conflict, which is our core discussion as a type of conflict of particular interest in this paper will not fall short of shaping our convictions that scholars like Fisher (1989), Cohen (2000), and Wilmot &Hocker (2011) and many others have been explaining in their various theories. While making reference to two main case studies, the CAR conflicts and the Rwandan Genocides, value conflicts in this paper are sure to be understood albeit in bloody context. What are Values? Frank J. Navran, founder and principal consultant of Navran Associates, an ethics and leadership consultancy that earned a reputation for innovative and effective ethics consulting since 1986, defined Values as fundamental beliefs. They are the principles we use to define that which is right, good and just. Values provide guidance as we determine the right versus the wrong, the good versus the bad. They are our standards. Consider the word “evaluate.” When we evaluate something we compare it to a standard. We determine whether it meets that standard or falls short, comes close or far exceeds. To evaluate is to determine the merit of a thing or an action as compared to a standard. Typical values include honesty, integrity, compassion, courage, honor, responsibility, patriotism, respect and fairness and many more. Value conflict: How differences in values affect conflict escalation and the effectiveness of interventions Value conflicts can create interpersonal and intergroup tension at different levels of society. Due to ethnic diversity and globalization, conflicts between individuals or societies are increasingly 3

characterized by differences in core values between parties, of course, with different sociocultural identities. Many scholars, including Fisher (1990 &2000) have dwelled much on the topic and upcoming scholars are continuing to explore value conflict. This tells us that there is more to value conflicts than we see on the surface but despite this fact, one might ask what the thin line is between values and morals. Here is what we understand. There surely is a thin line between the two and the latter being that morals are values which we attribute to a system of beliefs, typically a religious system, but it could also be a political system or some other set of beliefs. These values get their authority from something outside the individual- a higher being or higher authority, like society for instance. Some common features of moral conflict include: Misunderstandings, Mistrust, strained and hostile communication, negative stereotypes and many more. Fisher and Ury’s (1981) well-known book Getting to Yes, the two scholars contend that handling conflict is a daily occurrence for all of us. People differ, and because they do, they need to negotiate with others about their differences (check pp. xi–xii). Conflict and Value Conflict defined According to Wilmot & Hocker, (2011, page 11), Conflict is a felt struggle between two or more interdependent individuals over perceived incompatible differences in beliefs, values, and goals, or over differences in desires for esteem, control, and connectedness. This definition emphasizes several unique aspects of conflict, first, that conflict is a struggle and it is the result of posing forces coming together and second, that conflict in most cases is all about differences. Cohen (2000) comes in to define value conflict as a type of conflict occurring when people have fundamental disagreement on fundamental values while if we take a look at Fisher (1989) as cited by Cohen (2000), he states that value conflict involves incompatibility in ways of life, ideologies, differences, principles and practices that people believe in. one might ask what the difference is between the two scholars. Fisher (2000) dwells further by attributing that International conflict like the Cold War for instance often has a strong value component where each side asserts the relevance and superiority of its way of life and political-economic system. These conflicts are often intractable and long lasting therefore, parties often have trouble describing fundamental issues collectively.

4

In other words, Fisher comes out strongly to note that Value conflict is the most difficult type of conflict to quench once “a fire breaks out!” Now, understanding that each party or side have argued from different moral positions, they disagree about the meaning and significance of important issues making negotiation or compromise extremely difficult which as we may all guess, resolution becomes impossibility. When two sides disagree on basic issues and what forms of conflict resolution are morally right, preferred and politically wise. With headlines such as “Women seized in Nigeria village” or “Dozens killed by Islamic extremists in Nigeria,” one can only guess how bloody value conflict can be if left to escalate. We examine just how serious value conflict can be once left “untreated” as an understatement through two African case studies as examples of Value Conflict. Functions of Value Conflict Conflict is usually viewed to be negative but it is important to realise that it could also have many benefits (Coser, 1956). The following are some of the benefits attributable to valueconflict as adapted from the UNDESA / UNDP/ Centre for Conflict Resolution: A training manual for understanding Conflict, negotiation and mediation.

i. Value Conflict helps establish our identity and independence. ii. Intensity of conflict demonstrates the closeness and importance of relationships. iii. Intimate relationships require us to express opposing feelings such as love and anger. iv. Value Conflict can build new relationships. v. Value-Conflict serves as a safety-valve mechanism which helps to sustain relationships. vi. Value-Conflict establishes and maintains group identities vii. Value-Conflict enhances group cohesion through issue and belief clarification. viii.

Value - Conflict creates or modifies rules, norms, laws and institutions.

The Case of the CAR For a long time, the United Nations, France and other international groups had been warning of the Central African Republic (CAR) facing widespread religious violence that could take on 5

genocidal proportions and as a result, thousands have been killed with Muslims fleeing the capital of Bangui in droves and there has been no shortage of stories about brutal close range communal violence. However, as plainly sectarian as some of the fighting has been, the conflict is far more complicated than some deep-rooted Christian-Muslim enmity bubbling to the surface. Although the country has been notoriously unstable since gaining independence from France in 1960, communal violence of this nature and severity is unprecedented. In fact, there has previously been little or no history of specifically-religious conflict in the CAR, but according to Burchard (2014), the conflict has deeper and different roots, only by understanding these issues can suitable measures be taken to resolve the conflict. The case of Rwanda Another interesting case study is that of the Genocide in Rwanda. Genocide is the deliberate and often systematic destruction of an ethnic, religious, or racial group. What caused a neighbor to turn on another neighbor with the intention to kill, or how would you explain a wife or husband suddenly attempting to kill each other simply due to their “sudden” known state of ethnicity? Could this have been avoided altogether? The Rwanda case is not unique or new to stand in as a good candidate for value conflict in that the cause of conflict had been explained in basic terms such as ancient tribal hatreds, omitting many of the deeper and modern cases such as international economic policies, power politics and corruption of the elite among the various reasons. This case is not unique to the other common contributing causes of conflict elsewhere in Africa. The 1994 genocide in Rwanda was the worst of the twentieth century as over 800,000 people, mostly Tutsis (an ethnic tribe in Rwanda) were killed by the Hutu-controlled government, another ethnic tribe in Rwanda. Bringing us back to the vivid images of the Hotel Rwanda film which brought us all closer to realizing just how serious and bloody value conflict is quick to escalate into violence, one may tend to simply choose to avoid any form of conflict to begin with. Contrary to media and many government reports, the genocide was a result of the country’s political and economic position in a capitalist world. It involved such monetary factors as its colonial history and Robbins (2002) goes further by adding that the price of coffee, World Bank and International Monetary Fund policies, the global interests of Western nations, particularly France and the interests of international aid agencies and Western attitudes all did not help the situation in Rwanda and in turn, made the conflict worse. 6

The genocide resulted from the deliberate choice of modern elite to encourage hatred and fear to hold onto power. This small privileged group first set the majority against the minority to counter a growing political opposition within Rwanda. Then faced with success on the battlefield and the negotiating table, they changed the strategy of ethnic division into genocide by believing that the massacre of Tutsis would re-establish the solidarity of the Hutus under their leadership and help them win the war and in turn improve their chances of negotiating for favorable peace. According to the Human Rights Watch (1999), they took control of the state and used its machinery and authority to carry out the killings. Robbins (2002) like Cohen (2000) agreed on one aspect and explain that for as long as conflict is referred to as inter-ethnic violence, the core states, whose actions and economic policies triggered the violence, were able to distance themselves. As for Rwanda, the United States and European leaders went to great lengths not to use the word genocide as it would have required military intervention as agreed upon in the United Nations Genocide Convention of 1948 which unfortunately, it was only several months later, after some 800,000 lives were lost that the government in the West began to acknowledge the killings to genocide. Development affected due to Value Conflict and Conflict Resolution Just like other types of conflict, value conflict can be resolved through one of the following means as appropriate: i.

Negotiation

ii.

Mediation

iii.

Facilitation

iv.

Arbitration

Value Conflict can be seen to either hamper or negatively affect development but it can also be argued that value conflict can also bring about positive change especially when solved at the right time, by a neutral party. Conclusion With various scholars taking the keen interest to study the various types of conflict and all concluding that value conflicts are the most difficult to stop, owing to their deep rootedness 7

cause of perceived or actual incompatible belief systems, values used to explain what is "good" or "bad," "right" or "wrong," "just" or "unjust," one is able to conclude that differing values need not cause conflict. People can live together in harmony with different value systems and it has been seen from the case studies used that value disputes arise only when people attempt to force one set of values on others or lay claim to exclusive value systems that do not allow for divergent beliefs. It is of no use to try to change value and belief systems during relatively short and strategic mediation interventions but it can, however, be helpful to support each participant's expression of their values and beliefs for acknowledgment by the other party. In closing, the group two students discussing this paper equally encountered our own “value conflict” episode as the group comprised of very strong personalities all needing their views to be heard and once we all realized and set our minds to the overall goal of presenting this paper successfully, we in turn adopted a common value to our conflict and opted to respect one another’s’ views and values and this made it easier to effectively water down the bloody conflict before it erupted. Fisher and Ury’s (1981) book Getting to Yes is that it asserts that mutual agreement is possible in any conflict situation—if people are willing to negotiate in authentic ways. It is not unusual that each time we think of conflict in simple terms, we think of a struggle between people, groups, organizations, cultures, or nations. Conflict involves opposing forces, pulling in different directions. Many people believe that conflict is disruptive, causes stress, and should be avoided. While conflict can be uncomfortable, it is not unhealthy, nor is it necessarily bad. But after examining the devastating effects of value conflict if left to reach its boiling point, one is able to conclude that this type of conflict is definitely one to deal with immediately it manifests.

8

References

Assefa H 1993. Peace and reconciliation as a paradigm: a philosophy of peace. Nairobi: NPI

Burchard, S. (2014). The Central African Conflict is about Far More than Religious Article (online)

Available

url:http://thinkafricapress.com/central-african-republic/identity-politics-

coding-religion. Accessed on December 24th, 2014.

Coser, L.,(1956). The Function of Social Conflict. New York: Free Press.

Fisher, R. (2000) Sources of Conflict and Methods of Conflict Resolution International Peace and Conflict Resolution School of International Service. The American University.

Fisher, R., Ury, W. and Patton, B. (1991). Getting to Yes: negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. Second Edition. New York: Penguin Books.

Fisher, R.J. (1990) The Socio Psychology of Intergroup and International Conflict Resolution. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1990.

Hampson, S., F., & Babbitt, E., (2011). Conflict Resolution as a field of inquiry: Practice Informing theory. International Studies review (13) 46-57

Licklider R., (2005). Comparative studies of long wars. In Graspping the nettle, analyzing cases of intractability. Edited by Chester A. Crocker, Fen Osler Hampson and Pamela Aall. Washington: United States Institute of Peace Press Mark A., (1993). Practical Peacemaking: A Mediator’s Handbook. Kenwyn: Juta. Monograph Series. Navran Associates © 2010 • 73 Zephyr Lily Trail • Palm Coast, FL 32164 • (386) 503-5926

9

Pearce, W.B., & Littlejohn, S.W. (1997). Moral Conflict: When social worlds collide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Wilmot, W. and Hocker, J. (2011). Interpersonal Conflict. Paperback – January 12, 2010. McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages; 8 edition.

10