The Instrumentalist Theory Of Ethnic Conflict In Aceh

In his writing, he stated that war is intrinsically vast, communal (or political) and violent. It is an actual, widespread and deliberate armed conflict between political communities, motivated by a sharp disagreement over governance” (p.135)

Conflict will always exist in the modern world. One of the biggest motivators in the approach to conflict is fear. Conflict shapes the formation and intensity of fear. Fear can bring about ideas or actions that one normally would not ever think or implement.As fear builds up people will often go to extremes to try as much as possible to mitigate their fear. Eventually fear grows so large that it may consume all of one’s thoughts. This will motivate someone to resort to desperate plans to try and assuage their fear. The fear caused by war can do many things to the human body mentally and physically. In “ All The Light We Cannot See”, Anthony Doerr proves in times of conflict, fear becomes one of the motivating factors.

In order for conflict to be resolved both sides must understand one another’s concerns and be willing to compromise, thus understanding is the first step to resolution. According to Varshney (2001), “promoting communication between members of different religious communities, civic networks often make neighborhood-level peace possible. Routine engagement allows people to come together and form organizations in times of tension” (p. 375). Additionally, the Varshney (2001) article states that if institutions are created that cater to the cultural, economic, and social needs of both sides then the support for peace in the community become strong. Getting people to try to see eye to eye and co-exist without conflict is a great solution to ethnic conflict. According to constructivists ethnicity and in turn ethnic conflict is what people make of it and that race can be made and erased. According to this idea, resolution can come from getting people to see ethnicity and ethnic conflict differently by promoting communication.

War is easily explained through the lens of social conflict theory, a sociological theory that suggests society tends toward conflict because it is made up of groups with competing interests and unequal resources. The theory proposes that a

This does not mean to exclude those economic and other related institutions, but focuses this dissatisfaction on the political institutions as key to this process. This dissatisfaction is only exacerbated by the government’s inability or unwillingness to engage with this segment of the population in order to resolve the emerging conflict early in its development. Instead, the government ignores or even attempts to repress this expression of dissatisfaction, resulting in allegations of human rights abuses, among other symptoms. This only fuels a greater desire for secession in this marginalized and underrepresented segment(s) of society, as secessionism is seen as the only option available for the group to alleviate the injustices it feels is levied against it. This results in a “balkanization” of ethnic and religious groups as the

Theoretically significant to conflict is social identity theory. It allows “predictions to incorporate who is likely to perceive and act in group terms, to remain committed to the group in times of crisis” Turner (1999), Doosje & Ellemers, (1999). Bar-Tal stresses conflict exists when an incompatible goal exists between two groups. The question of when incompatibility sets become important in understanding the cause of inter-ethnic or communal conflicts for instance, even more importantly; conflict within ingroup. Inter-ethnic or communal conflict because within the scope of peacebuilding, that is the point where building peace thrives the most. There is an assumption that for peacebuilding to be

The literature entitled “the narcissism of minor difference” gives an in depth analysis into ethnic nationalism along with many sufficient examples to back up it's position on the argument that ethnic nationalism is not a natural occurrence but rather a societal construct. It provides insight into ethnic nationalisms roots, effects, presence on modern day life and how it has shaped societal interaction for many years. My personal stance on the Ignatieff's analysis of ethnic nationalism is generally of agreement. The idea that the overwhelming pride and exclusivity included in the worldwide demonstration that is ethnic nationalism is socially constructed has more solid evidence to support

With the great diversity in the world disagreements over race and religion are ubiquitous. Consequently, opinions over these subjects are the biggest contributors to war and bloodshed. Changes made in long standing traditions were greeted with hostility. Religion and Absolutism caused disharmony in European countries as well as strife over religion and government.

In Four Sociological Traditions, Randall Collins (1994:47) states that the tradition of conflict is an unpopular theory in reference to society. Collins introduces conflict theory by briefly mentioning that, “dominance is determined by the distribution of social and economic resources” (1994:3). The theory revolves around the idea that societies have groups that will oppose each other due to differing statuses of power, ideology, and interests.

The conflict in Myanmar is best described under a “soft” rational choice/instrumental approach. The conflict in Myanmar has incredible historical context that can specifically be related to Horowitz’s causal mechanisms of conflict. In an article by Donald Horowitz, he explains the “hard” and “soft” approaches to violence. The conflict in Myanmar can be understood using a “soft” approach because it is apparent that Muslims and Buddhists in Myanmar “ can be decomposed into the motives of their members, that they are instruments for the pursuit of those motives, and that their actions need to be explained in terms of individual calculations of utility in specific

Conflict between and within nations is proven by history to be expected, but the answer to which countries are at a higher risk for conflict depends on whom you are asking. The reading “Ethnicity, Insurgency and Civil War” by James D. Fearon and David D. Laitin, argues that the conditions that favour insurgency are better predictors of which countries are at risk for internal conflict. Determining which countries are at a higher risk depends on multiple logical factors for the perfect environment for rebellion to occur. These factors are based on the political, economic, and organization of the state in question. Fearon and Laitin dissect the formula for rebellion piece by piece over the course of the entire article. By the end it left me in

“Us and Them” by Jerry Muller discusses the pervasive, historical, and growing significance of ethnic nationalism in politics; “Is Ethnic Conflict Inevitable?” contains two responses to Muller’s article by James Habyarimana et. al. and Richard Rosecrance et. al. Muller and his critics reach radically different conclusions the role of ethnic nationalism. Such differences can be explained by their assumptions of ethnic identity formation. The three’s disparities on ethnic conflict result from different theories of identity, namely: Muller to primordialism, Habyarimana to constructivism, and Rosecrance to a rational instrumentalism.

In this day and age, we find ourselves at odds with our “identity” as we find that not only are we representing ourselves, but we also have ties to religion, sect, tribe, and family (Angrist). This shows that despite the cohesiveness and threads that attach us, it has the power to pull people, families, and in some cases countries apart. This conflict comes to a head when religion and ethnicity are interwoven. Hence when divisions occur, this can lead to violent wars that destroy trust between individuals. This can ingrain a sense of uneasiness and distrust that plagues people’s ideas and leaves a country divided. This is particularly evident in Lebanon. Ethnic and religious division led to the festering of feelings of marginalization and discrimination, which boiled over into the Lebanese civil war, a war that claimed the lives of 150,000 people (Szekely). The anger and frustration birthed from this to chaos, and conflict has in turn increased the division between ethnic and religious factions and led to the crumbling of Lebanese nationalism. This essay is specifically aimed at assessing the relationships between ethnic and religious divisions in Lebanon and explores how it contributed to the civil war. This is done by identifying and analyzing the main actors and makes an explanation of the historical divisions stemming from the National Pact, branching out to include the consequences of the civil war on the political structures and the identities of the

The study of Collier & Hoeffler of 1998 will not be subject of this paper, as only four proxies were examined, namely per capital income, the natural resource endowment, populations size and the extent of ethno-linguistic fractionalisation. And also due to the fact, that is was mostly based on the economic model of a rational cost-benefit analysis: A rebellion will be conducted if the assumed benefit is greater than the cost of it (Collier& Hoeffler, 1998). This assumption is quite inaccurate, as it will be argued in the following, that the decision and motivation to engage in an armed conflict is not necessarily a rational one. Also, the study of 2007, which formulated the

The author looks at the sources leading to survival or collapse of ethnofederal states, and is seeking to explore the casual mechanisms leading to instability of ethnofederal state by examining the factors leading ethnofederal states to disintegration or civil wars. Hale argues that ethnofederal states that have a core ethnic region (CER) are highly prone to collapse. He defines CER as “a single ethnic federal region that enjoys dramatic superiority in population” (Hale 166). Hale posits that the presence of CERs in ethnofederal states is likely to cause three main challenges. These include ‘dual