8b

       Conflict Escalation

 

Explaining Conflict Escalation

As a background to conflict resolution, we need to understand the mechanisms by which conflicts can enter into this destructive cycle. This diagram shows a vastly simplified conflict cycle chart. We know that most conflicts have their ups and downs, but for the sake of illustration we're looking at this simpler version and using the assumptions that what goes up must come down and that conflicts generally do find a settlement of some form or another.

So to help understand this, we will need to trace this process through latent conflict, conflict escalation, and back down through de-escalation. The conflict cycle chart plots intensity versus time, and shows that conflict starts with latent conflict, then increases in intensity as it goes through the stages of conflict emergence, conflict escalation, and institutionalization, until it reaches maximum intensity at the stage of (hurting) stalemates, at which point the intensity decreases, and the conflict goes through the stages of de-escalation/negotiation, dispute settlement, and post-conflict peacebuilding.

8b-chart-1
Conflict Escalation Chart

Emotional Involvement and Communication

John Paul Lederach, a well-known peace scholar and practitioner, suggests that the level of emotional involvement of those involved in the conflict can impact the conflict in different ways. His ABC model plots ability to communicate accurately and understand versus conflict intensity and emotional involvement. If we are not emotionally involved at all in a conflict then we likely will not have very good communication. On the other hand, if we are full-out emotionally defensive and aggressive and so is our adversary, then communication is also likely to be very poor. However, between these two levels of emotional involvement is a level involving a certain creative tension that might bring out increased communicative ability and understanding.

8b-chart-2
Emotional Involvement and Communication Chart

Conflict Escalation Patterns

John Paul Lederach presents another way to illustrate and understand conflict escalation by tracing through some important steps in conflict escalation.

  • The other person starts to become the problem: We stop talking about discrete issues and instead it becomes about the other person and their personality or character
  • Issues proliferate and become more general: We start to draw more issues into the picture and speak in ever more general terms. For example, what may start as one smaller issue soon becomes a whole list of issues and then grows into vast generalizations
  • Communication deteriorates: We communicate in less direct and accurate ways, becoming more accusatory and less constructive in the way we speak and arguably more distorted
  • Triangulation occurs as others are drawn into the conflict: Triangulation usually happens when we stop talking directly to the person we have a conflict with and instead talk to others about that person, trying to bring them in and over to our side. This can be seen at the macro level when trying to form alliances, and on the micro level when trying to bring in friends and relatives to our conflict and see our side.
  • "Reciprocal causation" starts to happen: We start reacting to the other side in a tit-for-tat way
  • Hostility increases: Along the lines of reciprocal causation, we respond to hostility with hostility
  • Polarization starts to happen: Polarization leads to changes in our social organization. Understanding conflict escalation and ways to overcome it is at the very core of conflict resolution practice. If we can recognize how the conflict is growing, we can more easily identify ways of stopping it effectively and addressing the issues.

Reality and Perception: Both Matter

The practice of conflict resolution pays a great deal of attention to perception, and the need to understand misperceptions. The idea is that where we stand affects what we see, which in turn affects how we react.

Earlier on in the course we talked about attribution error or attribution bias, the idea that if we both are using similar types of actions that someone might perceive as aggressive we are more likely to come up with a positive explanation for ourselves than we are for the other person. The implications of this for conflict resolution are that we tend to externalize responsibility — "they" are responsible more than "us," and psychologically we rationalize heavy tactics used by those we are close to.

Reality and perception are both important because both impact how we escalate and diffuse conflict.

Psychological Dynamics

In conflict analysis and conflict resolution, we must be careful not to create negative psychological dynamics that may impact how we deal with conflict.

Often where there is a history of a conflict gone wrong in the past, there are certain residues of distrust, anger, fear, etc. that reinforce the tension and make it harder to engage effectively or to communicate effectively. Enemy images or a deep-seated dehumanization of the counterpart may also impact our ability to deal with conflict. The impact of conflict on relationships can be illustrated by the rubber band analogy. If you stretch a rubber band once, it goes back. Do it twice and it still goes back. If you stretch it over and over again, it begins to lose its shape and stop returning to normal. Relationships can show this wear as well, which is considered the "residues of conflict".

Potential Conflict Escalators and De-Escalators

Here we will summarize some behaviours and tendencies that either escalate or de-escalate conflict.

Potential Escalators

  • Multiply issues
  • Polarize by stereotyping and generalization
  • Threaten and use coercive tactics
  • Agitate with others outside of mediation
  • Perceive only available outcomes as win/lose
  • Believe that conflicts are contests
  • Feel victimized by others

Potential De-Escalators

  • Increase direct contact between participants
  • Improve communication
  • Build momentum by working on easier issues first or dividing bigger issues into manageable pieces
  • Identify common interests
  • Identify superordinate goals and values
  • Change what isn't working
  • Offer face-saving opportunities that permit modification of behaviour and stated positions
  • Work on the limited, selective perceptions of participants so their views of each other are more complete

Conclusion

To conclude, conflict analysis asks us to think deeply about relationships, and the underlying issues that can fuel and perpetuate destructive conflict. This week, we looked at different sources of conflict as well as different perspectives on the causes and nature of conflict. We applied theories to macro-level cases of violent conflict, but you could probably think of a situation in your life where theories on the sources of conflict and conflict escalation also apply. When we take this all into consideration, processes of conflict resolution can begin to create change and new opportunities for peace. Let's keep that in mind as we dive more into conflict resolution next week!