|
 Henry Maine has been quoted as saying that “war appears to be as old as mankind….” But pure conflict, such as a difference of opinions, is a daily affair. And, as an exchange of hot words may develop into blows and more, so conflicts if allowed to fester may balloon into a fully-fledged war.
Yet wars do not end a conflict. Only when the casus belli is removed can peace be ensured. The Treaty of Versailles is a case in point. It ended the First World War, but spawned the germs of the Second and a more dreadful one. For the same reason intellectuals in Sri Lanka are careful about treating the LTTE’s rout by army action as a guarantee to enduring peace.
Shell-shocked by the horrors of WWII, Western intellectuals realized the value of studying the subject of conflict-resolution as a discipline, with micro and macro research into the factors that ignited and sustained a conflict. They founded institutions and think tanks to carry out research into conflicts and the ways to their resolution.
Title: Conflict Resolution Research in South Asia
Editor: Dr. Moonis Ahmar
Publisher: University of Karachi (2010)
Pages: 240, Hardcover
Price: PKR. 400
ISBN: 978-969-8550-08-0
South Asia is a crucible of conflicts, both inter-and intra-state. The Indo-Pakistan standoff over Kashmir and the struggle of the people of Kashmir for independence are among the world’s longest running conflicts. India remains further plagued by the ULFA and Maoist insurgencies. It has an uneasy peace with China. And it remains in a dormant environment of conflict with Bangladesh.
In Nepal, the Maoist conflict has only recently ended in peace. But ethnic conflict has erupted in the terai since the new government suddenly declared Nepal a secular state, shedding its Hindu credentials. Pakistan is engaged in fighting the Taliban, besides combating sectarian and ethnic violence, while Afghanistan remains mired in bloody conflict since the Saur Revolution of 1978 to the present day.
Yet, this region lacks the wherewithal to conduct any meaningful research in conflict resolution and even a “culture of research,” per se. Against this backdrop the Karachi University held a Regional Workshop on Conflict Resolution Research in South Asia, in collaboration with the Hans Seidel Foundation.
The book, Conflict Resolution Research in South Asia, edited by Prof. Dr. Moonis Ahmar, of the International Relations Department of the Karachi University, is a collection of the papers presented at the workshop by participants from six SAARC nations.
Out of the eleven essays, a few discuss the whole gamut of the issue, -including the definition of conflict, the conceptualization, theory and practice of CR Research, its scope and importance for South Asia. Others are country-specific, where the authors discourse on the actual conflict situation, the status of CR Research, and the hurdles encountered in its way, in their respective countries.
In his opening essay The rationale of conflict resolution research, Dr. Ahmar discusses at some length, how CRR evolved, what it can accomplish, the impediments in its way and its future as he sees it. He lists the factors that can help establish a vibrant CRR culture, the issues that can “help conceptualize the field of conflict resolution research” and the fields which CRR attempts to focus upon.
His caveat about impediments is particularly thought provoking. For example, opposition by the state or other influential groups can nix any CRR effort. As Suba Chandran argues in his paper, Security and Conflict Resolution Research in India, the Kashmir conflict and other insurgencies have been perceived by the government as “law and order” issue. Besides, the government and the Hindu extremists would reject any CRR finding that ran counter to their claim that Kashmir is India’s integral part.
Rabia Akhtar examines the linkages and gaps in CRR. Arshi Saleem Hashmi offers a useful and thought-provoking insight into CRR in developed and developing countries that goes beyond the boundaries of South Asia.
Ivan Gyozo Somlai’s essay is based on his own experience in the research to resolve the conflict between the government and the Maoists that had bedeviled Nepal for many years. Supported by illustrations, the essay highlights the “Advantages of links with weak peripheral groups in an environment of conflict,” which should prove extremely useful for any credible CR Research.
Following these academic discourses are “country studies” on the subject. Maria Saifuddin Effendi of Pakistan lists, respectively, the institutions and think tanks where CR is taught and researched, the appalling inadequacies and hurdles in the way of any purposeful effort at CRR in the country and concludes with recommendations to make it meaningful.
In India, as Sub Chandran argues, Security and Conflict Resolution are treated as inter-related. Recounting the history of India’s security and threat perceptions, he points out that the state equated military security with national security but it ignored the threats from within, treating issues of insurgencies as “merely problems of law and order.” That is why independent research organizations were unknown until the 1990s. And even thereafter CRR has only limped forward.
Mohammad Ajmal Khan provides a searching study of the conflict in Afghanistan from 1978 to the present day and discusses the importance and scope of CRR for “understanding of conflict in Afghanistan.”
The paper by Dr. Abul Kalam Azad, titled, “the trajectory of peace and conflict studies in Bangladesh: A critical overview,” discusses how Bangladesh tackles the multifarious sources of conflict at various levels and points out that peace and conflict studies in the country are still in a formative stage.
Conflict Resolution Research and Practices in Nepal by Nishchal Pandey is another fascinating study of how the prolonged face off between the government and Maoists in Nepal came to a peaceful conclusion in 2006 after many years.
The author attributes the absence of CRR culture in Nepal to the fact that as the birthplace of Lord Buddha, it never saw violent conflict in the modern period of 1950-1996. But now its need is being acutely felt, as new ethnic conflicts have reared their heads.
As S.I. Keethaponcalan notes in his paper, CRR has been more developed in Sri Lanka, though it focused chiefly on the ethno-political conflict between LTTE and the government. But since the LTTE’s demise, the interest in CRR appears to have waned. But ethnic riots continue to plague the country to which an answer has to be found.
The book ends with Lok Raj Baral’s “Reflections on Conflict Resolution Research in South Asia.” It sums up the conflict situation in the Region and offers some very useful suggestions such as the need for “flexibility and a changed mindset on the part of Indian and Pakistani leaders” in order to resolve their festering conflict.
While the importance of the essays dealing with the CRR theory and concept are illuminative in their own way, students of history will find a lot of information, both fascinating and valuable, in country-specific papers, on some little known issues. Among them are the Pashtun code of conduct, -Pashtunwali, and its practical features, besides the proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran in Afghanistan, prior to the US invasion; how Bangladesh suffers under the darkness of India’s shadow; the chronicle of failed negotiations between Maoists and the government in Nepal; the security tussle between the military and bureaucracy in India, and the ethnic riots between Muslims and Hindus (Tamils) and between Sinhala and Muslims in Sri Lanka.
The Karachi University and Hans Seidel Foundation have blazed the trail. It is now for the states and corporations in the region to hold the torch aloft. In the U.S. there are Carnegie Center, Rand Corporation and Brookings Institutions, among others that engage in CRR. There are people in South Asia who could fund similar think tanks. 
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
