The Causes and Solutions to Ethnic Conflicts
The Causes and Solutions to Ethnic Conflicts
Scholars of International Security have been trying to develop a theoretical approach to explain the causes of ethnic conflict for a long time. These studies have led to contentious debates but have also probed so deeply that their findings help shed new light on these issues, providing better understanding and possible solutions. Ethnic groups are defined as a community of people who share cultural and linguistic characteristics including religion, language, history, tradition, myth, and origin. This paper will explore the realist explanations of ethnic conflicts and then see how critical theory explanations offer new insight and answers to puzzles that could not be previously be explained. It will then explore several of the possible solutions used to end incidents of ethnic violence. Finally, it will focus on the debate surrounding partition as a possible solution to ethnic conflict, concluding that it is in fact a viable option for peace when implemented judiciously. According to realist explanations, ethnic conflicts are deeply rooted in cognitive and situational needs. In his article, “The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict,” realist scholar Barry Posen claims that anarchy creates competition and hostility between ethnic, religious and cultural groups. Ethnic fractions act to preserve their identity and physical security through the accumulation of resources and military power. Interestingly, Posen notes that social cohesion is viewed as a larger threat than material assets in military competition. Social cohesion, he claims, derives from historical accounts of identity building which often are inaccurate and biased; thus perpetuating cultural differences and hatred of the other.[1] Accordingly, ethnic tensions are inevitable but can quickly magnify to warfare when one group coerces or dominates the other militarily or ideologically. Realists, such as Posen do not ignore the fact that
Scholars of International Security have been trying to develop a theoretical approach to explain the causes of ethnic conflict for a long time. These studies have led to contentious debates but have also probed so deeply that their findings help shed new light on these issues, providing better understanding and possible solutions. Ethnic groups are defined as a community of people who share cultural and linguistic characteristics including religion, language, history, tradition, myth, and origin. This paper will explore the realist explanations of ethnic conflicts and then see how critical theory explanations offer new insight and answers to puzzles that could not be previously be explained. It will then explore several of the possible solutions used to end incidents of ethnic violence. Finally, it will focus on the debate surrounding partition as a possible solution to ethnic conflict, concluding that it is in fact a viable option for peace when implemented judiciously. According to realist explanations, ethnic conflicts are deeply rooted in cognitive and situational needs. In his article, “The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict,” realist scholar Barry Posen claims that anarchy creates competition and hostility between ethnic, religious and cultural groups. Ethnic fractions act to preserve their identity and physical security through the accumulation of resources and military power. Interestingly, Posen notes that social cohesion is viewed as a larger threat than material assets in military competition. Social cohesion, he claims, derives from historical accounts of identity building which often are inaccurate and biased; thus perpetuating cultural differences and hatred of the other.[1] Accordingly, ethnic tensions are inevitable but can quickly magnify to warfare when one group coerces or dominates the other militarily or ideologically. Realists, such as Posen do not ignore the fact that
Cited: Kaufmann, C.D. (1998). When All Else Fails: Ethnic Population Transfers and Partitions in the Twentieth Century International Security 23(2), 120- 156. Kaufman, S. J. (2006). Symbolic Politics or Rational Choice? Testing Theories of Extreme Violence. International Security, 30(4), 45-86. Kumar, R. (1997). The Troubled History of Partition. Foreign Affairs, 76(1), 22-34. Posen, B. (1993). The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict. Survival, 35(1), 27-47.