NOTE: This paper, which was prepared (under the title: The
World-Wide-Web: A Tool for Building Grassroots Diplomacy Skills) for the United States
Institute of Peace Conference on Virtual Diplomacy (April 1997). It explains the
theoretical foundations of this on-line training program.
International Online Training Program On Intractable Conflict:
Theoretical Foundations
by
Guy Burgess, Ph.D. and Heidi
Burgess, Ph.D.
- Co-Directors
- Conflict Research Consortium
- University of Colorado
- Campus Box 327
- Boulder, CO 80309-0327
- Phone: (303)492-1635, Fax: (303)492-2154
- E-mail: crc@colorado.edu, World-Wide-Web:
http://www.colorado.edu/conflict
- Copyright ©1997 by Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess
April 1997
Perhaps the most important feature of the telecommunications revolution and the
Internet is its ability to dramatically reduce the cost while simultaneously increasing
the speed at which information can be distributed. In our work we have experienced roughly
a thousand-fold decrease in information dissemination costs with a comparable increase in
speed. It is hard to underestimate the qualitative importance of quantitative changes of
this magnitude. [1] While high speed communication has long been available to top-rung
government and business diplomats, the broad extension of these capabilities to other
segments of society is extraordinary. The question, which this conference addresses, is
how can these capabilities be best used to advance the cause of peace and justice.
Clearly, there are a great many exciting opportunities to be pursued. This paper describes
the work that we are doing to pursue one such opportunity thanks to grants from the United
States Institute of Peace and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The system
can be accessed at:
http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace
Broadly, our goal is to use the Internet to put a better handle on the knowledge base
of the peace making and conflict resolution fields. We want to make it much easier for
people at the grassroots level get the information that they need when they need it.
Specifically our work is based upon the following assumptions:
- Unconventional, "Grassroots" Diplomats Play a Crucial Role
- Relationships (and conflicts) between peoples and countries are, in large part,
determined by the actions of large numbers of people from all sectors of society who work
at the grassroots level. The vast majority of these individuals do not consider themselves
to be diplomats in the traditional sense of the word even though they frequently encounter
conflicts in the course of their activities. The efforts of these individuals and the
organizations in which they work proceed along a proliferating series of diplomatic
tracks. Such inconventional diplomats include, for example: religious leaders, conflict
resolution professions, advocacy groups working on behalf of many different interest
groups, political groups, humanitarian relief organizations, non-governmental peacemaking
teams, commercial interests, academics, and even tourists. These are the people to whom
the Internet is giving extraordinary new capabilities.
-
- Too Many People Have to "Reinvent the Wheel"
- Relatively few of these informal diplomats have received significant formal training in
diplomacy or conflict resolution. As such they are often unaware of the many proven
strategies for avoiding destructive conflict dynamics while still advancing their
interests in conflictual situations. Because of this lack of knowledge, these individuals
are often forced to go through the painful process of "reinventing the wheel."
In many cases they, tragically, fail to find solutions before it is too late. To limit
these problems we clearly need better ways of disseminating the knowledge base of the
diplomacy, peace research, and conflict resolution fields.
-
- Dissemination Opportunities are Limited
- People involved in diplomacy and conflict are generally operating under tight resource
constraints and even tighter time constraints. For many dealing with conflict is a
part-time, do-it-yourself job that has to compete with other equally important
responsibilities. As a result people have only the most limited opportunities to learn new
and better ways of dealing with conflict. As a result any effective dissemination program
must be precisely focused to quickly give them the information that they need while
avoiding distracting information overload.
-
- One-Size-Fits-All Solutions Are Unworkable
- Conflict processes are complex and highly variable with each situation presenting unique
challenges in which each party has only limited opportunities to improve the situation.
Different approaches are, therefore, needed for adversaries and intermediaries, for
tractable and intractable conflicts, for differing cultural orientations, for the various
substantive issues, and for differing power contexts. Persons involved in conflict can't
be expected to how to deal with all situations. The goal needs to be to teach
them how to better deal with their specific situation.
-
- Training and Educational Resources are Limited
- The ability to disseminate the field's knowledge base is also limited by the number of
university degree programs available as well as the number of professional
training sessions offered. There are also "train-the-trainer" bottlenecks
as well as limited number of students entering the field of college teaching. The are also
difficult and important issues of quality. Many currently available programs fail to
present state-of-the-art techniques or offer insights which are not adequately tailored to
the user of individual students. In short the field is now able to train only a small
fraction of the people who could benefit from the field's knowledge.
Strategies for Overcoming Dissemination Limits
Overcoming these dissemination limits will require either 1) substantial increases in
the field's overall funding level, or 2) significant increases in the efficiency of
dissemination programs. Here we believe that the most promising, currently available
approach involves exploiting the Internet's ability to provide large number's of people
with information that is
- virtually free (for those with access to the net),
- instantly available,
- easy to access,
- largely complete (full-text executive summaries mean that users don't need to consult
other information sources),
- customized to the specific needs of individual users, and
- sensitive to user differences in languages and culture.
In addition to spreading information on general, face-to-face strategies for dealing
with conflict, the Internet can also be used to share how-to information on various
virtual diplomacy techniques.
Advanced, Internet-Based Distance Learning
The core of our program is an advanced, Internet-based, distance
learning program. The program combines the telecommunications power of the
Internet, the time-tested principles of correspondence (or distance) learning, and a
sensitivity to cross-cultural communication and translation problems. Our approach
occupies a useful middle ground between interactive, face-to-face training and the
lower-cost option of simply reading a book or article on a subject of interest.
We recognize that the foundation of any educational process is the desire of students
to learn. People interested in a topic will pursue, within the limits of available
resources, whatever opportunities are available. While some can arrange to travel abroad
to study or bring teachers in from other countries, most cannot. While they may be able to
obtain copies of one or two key books in the field, such self-guided reading is limited by
difficulties in identifying and obtaining copies of appropriate works. Individual study
also fails to draw the reader into a wider community of people with similar interests.
Our project is provides a low-cost solution to these problems. First, it provides the
user with easier access to the field's key concepts along with a custom-tailored reading
program suggesting profitable routes for further study. The project also provides
participants with connections to the larger community of people who are interested in the
field. (Scenarios describing how we expect that the system will be used are included at
the end of this article.)
The basic training program, with its online modules, assignments, and exercises is
roughly equivalent in scope to a three-hour, upper division university course. By using
the course's optional additional reference materials, exercises, and assignments, the
scope of the program could be expanded considerably beyond this basic level. This allows
us to provide far more information than is available in a standard 40 hour, one-week
training program. The program also includes a more tightly focused interface which quickly
guides users to suggestions for dealing with specific problems. This is for those who lack
the time to take the full course. More specifically, the program consists of the
following:
- Customizable Core Course Modules
- The core training program consists of a series of six basic units--one for each major
topic. Each unit contains an overview section and a number of more specialized
sub-sections describing common problems and potential solutions. Also included is a
customization module which allows the computer to tailor the program to individual user
needs. There are two principal versions of the materials--one for people who approach
conflict from the perspective of first-party adversaries and a second for those more
interested in a third-party, intermediary perspective. A number of different examples
illustrate how each key point could be applied in different settings. For example,
different illustrations of the escalation process are used in modules oriented toward
labor-management disputes, political conflicts, or military confrontations.
-
- These materials are provided online in easily understandable and translatable English.
Also included are citations for more detailed supplementary resource materials (see next
section). Exercises and role plays are included in the belief that many small groups will
elect to take the course together. Online exercises are also planned.
-
- Supplementary Resource Materials
- The course provides an extensive, annotated listing of recommended resource materials.
These include: 1) original sources for many of the ideas presented in the course modules,
2) more detailed information on specific topics, and 3) references to publications in
other languages. Full bibliographic citations are included, allowing the user to obtain
the materials directly from the publishers. The Consortium also acts as a
"one-stop" clearinghouse through which these materials could be ordered. New
materials are added as they are identified by the Consortium's research projects or
suggested by participants.
-
- This aspect of the program supplements the online modules; it also complements
conventional training programs by providing a reference library service for those who want
to follow up on conventional training programs that they may have taken.
-
- Instruction, Evaluation, and Certification
- Formal University credit for the basic three-hour college course is available through
the University of Colorado's Division of Continuing Education at standard University
tuition rates. Certificates of Completion are available from the Consortium for the cost
of hiring instructors. Since we recognize that this may be prohibitively expensive for
many potential users, we will also seek funding for "scholarships" to reduce or
eliminate these costs.
-
- Participants receive feedback from course instructors through an exchange of e-mail
messages and written assignments. Basic instruction is handled by a team selected by the
project directors for their knowledge of conflict resolution processes. Instructors are
recruited via the Internet from different parts of the U.S. and from students at the
University of Colorado. The course is also be structured so that it may be used on a free,
"do-it-yourself" basis without benefit of online instruction. These
"no-cost" participants can, however, participate in online discussions.
Online Seminar
An on-line seminar will also be conducted in conjunction with the University, for
credit, class. The seminar will focus upon a series of recent news stories describing
current conflict problems. Our goal is a thoughtful on-line discussion in which
participants are asked to suggest the most constructive ways of dealing with particular
conflicts. Participants are also asked to critique and then help develop suggestions made
by others. Specific topics will vary from time to time so that we can always focus upon
issues which are prominent in the news and of widespread interest.
- Interactive Feedback Loop
- The knowledge base is not a stock of ideas which emerges
from academia and is then disseminated throughout the world. It grows, rather, from an
interactive process in which practitioners are continually trying, evaluating, and
revising the ways in which they approach conflict. For this reason we have built a
feedback loop into our Internet-based information management system. We actively solicit
comments and ideas from system users through questionnaires and case study descriptions.
There responses will then be added to a user information component of the system.
-
- User Support
- The Consortium administers an online discussion group through which participants could
exchange information both about the course and about conflict in general. Program
materials also include modules describing ways in which users can, once they have learned
how to use the system, help make it available to others within their communities.
Boulder-based training in the use of the system is also available to foreign visitors who
could then return to their countries and serve as local liaisons for the project.
-
- Easy Access Guides
- Also available is a guide describing how to access the system in
different parts of the world. These guides describe options ranging from high-end,
state-of-the-art computer systems to creative uses of older, low-cost technologies. This
effort builds off the accomplishments of both the Internet and the Association for
Progressive Communications, the international affiliate of PeaceNet and ConflictNet, which
has made impressive progress in extending the benefits of computer networking to poorer
regions of the world.
Course-Based Interface
The course is organized following the model of intractable conflict that we use in our
training programs for foreign visitors and in our graduate seminars. We go beyond a
discussion of ways of negotiating mutually acceptable, win-win solutions to tractable
conflicts and consider more constructive ways of dealing with deeply-rooted, intractable
conflicts--those that have an irreducible win-lose element.
We begin by helping the parties diagnose specific conflict-related problems and then
identify moderating strategies designed for implementation by either intermediaries or the
parties themselves. Some of these strategies can be used unilaterally while others require
the cooperation of contending parties or the intervention of intermediaries. While we
discuss the role alternative dispute resolution (ADR) strategies can play, we also discuss
conflict approaches (such as non-violent action) that rely upon coercive power and force.
The course raises important and difficult issues about the difference between legitimate
and illegitimate sources of power. Course modules are offered in the following sequence:
- Conflict Assessment and Mapping
- Conflict is a complex process involving 1) people in widely varying roles, 2) different
issues and sub-issues, 3) a continuing series of dispute episodes within the context of
the long-term, underlying conflict, 4) many complex interactions, and 5) legal, political,
military, economic, religious, and other institutions. The goal is to give students the
common vocabulary needed to discuss alternative approaches to conflict. We then use this
vocabulary to show users how to map the key features of typical conflicts.
-
- Control of Overlying Conflict Problems
- In our teaching we distinguish between core issues at the root of a conflict and a
series of overlying problems which exacerbate the conflict and obscure the core issues.
This course segment explores possible solutions to overlay problems in the following
areas:
- Interest Clarification and Position Development--forming positions
which truly advance the underlying interests of the parties,
- Constructive Framing--understanding and adjusting for the fact that
people in different positions see a conflict differently,
- Limiting Misunderstanding--identifying and correcting perception and
communication failures,
- Assuring Procedural Fairness--understanding why conflicts intensify
when people regard the resolution process as unfair, and how to avoid such problems,
- Fact Finding--identifying what aspects of a conflict are amenable to
resolution through commonly accepted fact-finding procedures, and
- Controlling Escalation and Polarization--illuminating how the cycle of
provocation and counter-provocation can intensify a conflict and transform substantive
discussions of difficult issues into hostility and violence motivated by fear and desire
for vengeance. Strategies for blocking and reversing these destructive processes are also
considered.
- Negotiation Opportunities and Limits
- This segment first discusses how and why negotiation and meditation facilitate the
pursuit of options for mutual gain--win-win solutions. It then shows how to identify
conflicts which are less amenable to negotiation because of their zero-sum (win-lose)
character. We explain how, in such cases, alternatives to a negotiated agreement may
reduce negotiation potential or delay the time when a dispute is "ripe" for
resolution.
-
- Power Alternatives To Negotiated Agreements.
- Although alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has been billed as an alternative to
adjudication, negotiation is often not a realistic alternative to power contests. Rather,
negotiation must operate within the context of ongoing power struggles. If one or more
parties thinks they can achieve a better outcome through force, they will use that
approach, not negotiation. In examining power contests the course concentrates upon
non-violent alternatives to military force and confrontation, building on the traditions
of Gandhi and King. The goal is to help users develop less violent power options for
pursuing justice.
-
- Legitimating Power
- The use of power to advance principles which are broadly regarded as legitimate tends to
reduce the backlash effect which usually results from the illegitimate use of power. Since
backlash can greatly exacerbate conflict, strategies for its moderation or avoidance are
crucial. Conflicting parties need to understand how to develop legitimate sources of
power.
-
- Bringing It All Together
- The final course segment considers strategies for creatively mixing trading power,
persuasive power, and forcing power, and for moving back and forth between power contests
and negotiation strategies.
Problem/Solution-Oriented Interface
We recognize that many potential users will be involved in crisis situations and will
simply not have the needed to time to take the full course. Their need is for quick and
helpful suggestions on how to deal with immediate problem. For these individuals we are
offering an optional, problem/solution-oriented interface where users will be asked a
series of questions identifying typical conflict problems. Users could indicate which
specific problems they were encountering and the program would provide them with
information explaining the typical sources of the problem and general strategies for
dealing with it. It also offered would be concrete example of successful efforts to
mitigate the destructive effects of this particular problem. Examples of the
problem/questions are listed below. All the user need to is "click" on a problem
to see the analysis of possible solutions.
- Stereotypes
- Do other people, especially opponents, continue to view your group with the same old
inaccurate and derogatory stereotypes?
- Destructive Interactions
- Do meetings and other interactions between opposing sides tend to degenerate into angry,
destructive confrontations in spite of the best of intentions?
- Misunderstandings
- Does your group have trouble making itself understood by others?
- Problems with Extremists
- Are your group's efforts to build better relationships undermined by
extremists who, clinging to the old hostilities, do things that rekindle the old
animosities?
- Fact-Finding
- Do opposing parties have trouble agreeing on the basic facts associated with a conflict?
(Such factual issues are distinct from issues of opinion and values.)
- Moving from Bitter Confrontation to Negotiation
- Is your group locked in a costly and destructive stalemate with no one wanting to admit
that it is time to negotiate a compromise?
- Developing Opportunities for Mutual Gain
- Is your community looking for ways to quit fighting over limited existing resources and
pursue cooperative efforts to expand the resource base?
- Sharing Principles
- Is your community struggling to find generally acceptable principles for sharing the
wealth of society?
- Building Collaborative Relationships
- Do you have an idea for a joint project that would benefit all parties but need help in
deciding how to approach potential partners?
- Religious Coexistence
- Are members of your community, who adhere to different and incompatible religions,
looking for ways to coexist without threatening each other's faith?
- Resisting Human Rights Violations
- Is your group looking for nonviolent ways to resist repression and discrimination?
Relationship with Face-to-Face Training
Use of telecommunications-based distance learning programs is new,
especially for those who have relied on face-to-face training programs in the past. While
we do not pretend that this online system is as good as face-to-face training, we do
believe that its low-cost allows it to fulfill an important void. We also believe that it
is an important supplemental resource for face-to-face training programs. Often these
programs are of short duration, with either students or trainers returning to the other
side of the world once the program is completed. The proposed program provides a valuable
follow-on resource which students users could use to answer the inevitable additional
questions which arise as they try to apply their new skills. This Consortium system also
contains much more information than could be included in a face-to-face program.
Accessible English
Course materials are written in a simple style, which can be easily
understood and translated by persons with limited English skills. We minimize the use of
jargon, idiomatic phrases, overly complex sentence structures, and illustrations unlikely
to be widely understood. All terms essential for the understanding of conflict processes
are being carefully defined using vocabulary commonly found in translation dictionaries.
Special attention is given to common terms (such as escalation, conflict, or dispute)
which are used in precise ways which differ from common dictionary meanings. We are also
seeking funding beyond USIP to translate the core materials into principal international
languages--French, Spanish, and Russian. Multi-lingual fliers and electronic announcements
advertise the potential benefits and easy translation features of this program.
Supplementary resource materials also include non-English works.
Cross-Cultural Training Considerations
While many processes of conflict and conflict resolution are human
universals, some are society-specific. Despite our best efforts to develop a truly
multi-cultural program there is, inevitably, a bias toward the United States' view of the
field. An introductory course module acknowledges this bias and suggests ways in which
users might adapt the materials to their particular situations. This module summarizes
multi-cultural conflict research and illustrates how different cultures approach similar
aspects of conflict in different ways. We also include in the supplementary resource
materials articles, books, and exercises exploring the multi-cultural character of
conflict.
User Scenarios
In closing we offer three scenarios describing how we hope that the
system might be used.
- Scenario #1
- Narayan is the mayor of a small city in Southern India. In 1997 he
participated in a tour of conflict resolution institutions sponsored by the United States
Information Agency and Meridian International. As part of this tour he came to the
University of Colorado where he witnessed a demonstration of the online training system
along with a brochure describing ways of accessing it in Southern Asia. On returning to
India, Narayan began to work with others with similar interests to establish a conflict
resolution center to build on Gandhian conflict approaches while incorporating more recent
ideas from around the world. Based upon information provided by the Consortium, he was
able to identify someone working with the regional affiliate of the Association for
Progressive Communications, and a person in the computer science department of a nearby
university. This group was able to arrange several hours of access to the global computer
networks each week. They were also able to obtain modest funding for acquisition of
printed resource materials from the Consortium. Thanks to a small "scholarship"
grant the Consortium was able to provide these materials at affordable prices. Over the
next several years, the Center increasingly used the system to teach people better ways of
dealing with difficult conflicts. The users' comments enabled the Consortium to improve
the system by incorporating useful ideas which the Indians had developed into the system.
Through the system's electronic discussion groups, the Indian group made contact with a
similar organization operating in Pakistan. This relationship has since developed into a
significant non-governmental effort to reduce tensions between the two countries.
-
- Scenario #2
- Shimon, an Israeli, and Abdul, a Palestinian, are members of a
citizen's organization established to reduce Palestinian/Israeli violence and to
constructively address the issues which divide their two societies. They wish to learn
what they can from others who have had to deal with similar ethnic, religious, and
territorial conflicts. They recognize that their situation is unique and that
"turn-key" systems imported from other nations will not work. What they need is
an efficient way to learn how others might have approached similar problems so that they
can begin the work of selecting the most useful ideas and adapting them to their needs.
They obtain modest funding for computer access, supplementary resource materials, and
translation services and become a training group in the Consortium network. Study groups
of Palestinians and Israelis then begin using the system to develop a better background in
the conflict resolution field. They write several essays outlining how specific ideas
might be adapted to their specific situation. These essays then serve as a basis for an
electronic discussion which further advances the knowledge base offered by the program and
provides an opportunity for several people to work simultaneously on the
Israeli-Palestinian problem. The ability of electronic networks to span political divides
also permits the two sides to conduct an online discussion that would be very difficult to
conduct in a face-to-face format.
-
- Scenario #3
- Maria is a human rights activist in Guatemala. Through her work with
Amnesty International, she has, for years, been using the global electronic mail
capabilities of the Internet. She first became aware of the Consortium system through an
advertisement distributed to users of the Amnesty International system. Since she knew
that escalation dynamics play an important role in sustaining the cycles of violence that
encourage human rights abuses, she was very interested in exploring strategies for
breaking these cycles. Through the course materials she began pursuing a new approach to
her human rights work which she described in one of the course assignments posted by the
Consortium. She has persuaded a number of her associates to use the Consortium system as a
basis for more effective community conflict moderation.
Endnote
[1] We should, at the onset, be clear that these benefits accrue only to those with
Internet connections. In spite of the Internet's explosive growth there are, and will
continue to be, a great many people who are left out. Still, this is a paper about the
potential contributions that the net can make to those with access. Other important papers
can be written about strategies for extending the reach of this system to the
disadvantaged.
Azar, E. C. (1990). The Management of Protracted Social
Conflict. Hampshire: Dartmouth.
Boulding, K. E. (1989b). Three Faces of Power. Newbury
Park: Sage Publications.
Burgess, Guy, "Telecommunications, Information Storage and
Retrieval, and Peace and Change Research," by Peace and Change, October
1992, pp. 458-477.
Burton, J. (1990a). Conflict: Readings in Management and
Resolution. New York: St. Martin's Press.
Burton, J. (1990b). Conflict: Resolution and Prevention.
New York: St. Martin's Press.
Bush, R. A. B., & Folger, J. P. (1994). The Promise of
Mediation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1991). Getting to Yes. New
York: Penguin Books.
Kolb, D. M., & and Associates (1994). When Talk Works:
Profiles of Mediators. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Kriesberg, L., Northrup, T. A., & Thorson, S. J. (1989). Intractable
Conflicts and Their Transformation. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press.
Kriesberg, L., & Thorson, S. J. (1991). Timing the
De-Escalation of International Conflicts. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University
Press.
Sammons, Morris and Charles Kozoll, Preparing and Teaching
Distance Education Courses, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1994.
Ury, W. L., Brett, J. M., & Goldberg, S. B. (1988). Getting
Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Wehr, P., Burgess, H., & Burgess, G. (Ed.). (1994). Justice
Without Violence. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Wehr, Paul, Guy Burgess, Heidi Burgess, and Marty Gonzales,
"The Many Paths to Conflict Knowledge: Surmounting Information Overload,"
presented at the American Sociological Association War and Peace Section Conference and
published by the Conflict Resolution Consortium, Working Paper 94-70, 1994.
Wehr, Paul, Guy Burgess, Heidi Burgess, and Marty Gonzales,
"Pathways to Conflict Knowledge" presented at the International Studies
Association Western Regional Conference and published by the Conflict Resolution
Consortium, Working Paper 95-20, 1995.