Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Assignment-On-Conflict-Management-Studi

1. i
Student Name
Lecturer’s Name:
Assignment Title:
Due Date:
Date of Submission:
An Essay Submitted in Partial Fulfillment for the Course of Conflict Management Studies at the
Department of International Relations and Diplomacy at the Graduate School of SIMAD University
Ali Hussein Mohammed
Dr, Hassan Sheikh Nur
Ethnicity Conflict and Conflict Resolutions in Somalia.
30/11/2019
25/11/2019
SIMAD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF POSTGRATUATE STUDIES
Assignment on Ethnicity Conflict and Conflict Resolutions in Somalia.

2. ii
Table of Contents
Contents
1.1 Introduction and Historical Background................................................................................... 1
1.2 The Nature of Conflict.............................................................................................................. 2
1.3 The Evolutionary Nature of Conflict ........................................................................................ 2
1.4 The Causes of Conflicts in Somalia.......................................................................................... 4
1.5 The Tools of Conflict Resolutions in Somalia.......................................................................... 5
1.6 Approaches of Conflict Resolutions......................................................................................... 8
1.7 Conflict resolution approaches ................................................................................................. 9
1.8 FORCING:................................................................................................................................ 9
1.9 WIN-WIN / COLLABORATING:........................................................................................... 9
2.1 COMPROMISING: ................................................................................................................ 10
2.2 WITHDRAWING:.................................................................................................................. 11
2.3 SMOOTHING......................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 12
2.5 References............................................................................................................................... 13

3. 1
1.1 Introduction and Historical Background
Ethnic conflict, a form of conflict in which the objectives of at least one party are defined in ethnic
terms, and the conflict, its antecedents, and possible solutions are perceived along ethnic lines. The
conflict is usually not about ethnic differences themselves but over political, economic, social,
cultural, or territorial matters.
Ethnic conflict is one of the major threats to international peace and security. Conflicts in the
Balkans, Rwanda, Chechnya, Iraq, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India, and Darfur, as well as in Israel, the
West Bank, and the Gaza Strip, are among the best-known and deadliest examples from the late
20th and early 21st centuries. The destabilization of provinces, states, and, in some cases, even
whole regions is a common consequence of ethnic violence. Ethnic conflicts are often
accompanied by gross human rights violations, such as genocide and crimes against humanity, and
by economic decline, state failure, environmental problems, and refugee flows. Violent ethnic
conflict leads to tremendous human suffering (Reuter, N.D).
Ethnic conflict is a concept that is difficult to define and perhaps, more difficult to comprehend.
Conflict between ethnicities is a phenomenon that has occurred for hundreds of years and in all
corners of the earth. Yet, for an in-depth understanding ethnic conflict it is critical to address the
following questions: What precipitates bloodshed between ethnic groups? Why are some parts of
the world more susceptible to conflict, whereas others enjoy relative tranquility? And finally, why
does ethnic conflict continue to exist in modern society? In Ethnic Conflict authors Karl Cordell
and Stefan Wolff define ethnic conflict as such: “The term conflict describes a situation in which
two or more actors pursue incompatible, yet from their individual perspectives entirely just, goals.
An ethnic conflict is one particular form of this: that in which the goals of at least one party are
defined in (exclusively) ethnic terms, and the primary fault line of confrontation is one of ethnic
distinctions”(5). Throughout Africa myriad ethnic groups exist, each with its unique culture,
customs, and political institutions. Given its diversity, it is not surprising that Africa has, therefore,
experienced a vast number of civil wars and genocides directly related to fissures that have
developed along ethnic lines (John, J. Stremlau, 2016).

4. 2
1.2 The Nature of Conflict
Conflict: Varied Perspectives; Belief Systems and Values; Interests
There is, perhaps, nothing more common than conflict. As a mediator, conflict may constructively
be viewed as resulting from:
Varied perspectives on the situation;
Differing belief systems and values resulting from participant's accumulated life experience and
conditioning; and differing objectives and interests.
Effectively dealing with conflict requires the expression and management of participants' varying
perspectives, interests, belief systems and values. It is important to meet the participants exactly
where they are. Hear from them fully before trying to lead them anywhere. You cannot effectively
move toward resolution until each participant experiences themselves to be heard on "their
perspective," "what they want," and "why."
Common Ground - Overlapping Interests and Interdependence
Along with their sometimes too well-known differences, people in conflict share much common
ground, including: Overlapping interests -- participants share in their own relationship, typically
have common friends and colleagues, and also have interest in resolving the conflict in an
expeditious and economic way; Interdependence no single participant has the ability to unilaterally
impose a resolution on another without paying a very substantial price for doing so; and points of
agreement even when there are many disputed issues, there may still be a number of points of
agreement or possible agreement. The wise mediator assists the parties to identify what they may
be easily able to agree on as a foundation for additional discussions (Mediate.com, N,D).
1.3 The Evolutionary Nature of Conflict
Through the integration of participants' perspectives, interests, belief systems and values, conflict
and conflict resolution play important roles in individual and social evolution and development.
Conflict arises when one or more participants view the current system as not working.

5. 3
At least one party is sufficiently dissatisfied with the status quo that they are willing to own the
conflict and speak up with the hope of being able to influence the situation to arrive at an improved
condition. Conflict may be viewed as a process we put ourselves through to achieve a new
condition and self-definition. Through conflict we have opportunities to be creatively self-
defining. If nothing else, conflict allows us to do things differently in the future. Through the
resolution of conflict, we can, if we choose, evolve and redefine ourselves, our relationships, our
community, our society and our world. It is no accident that we most often find ourselves in
conflict with those with whom we spend the most time family, friends, business associates, and
fellow organizational members. There is a great benefit, in terms of the quality of our lives, in
being able to constructively resolve conflict with those around us.
Conflict should also be recognized as existing at two levels:
 The interpersonal level; and
 The intrapersonal level.
In addition to the typically obvious interpersonal dispute, there almost always exists some measure
of intra-personal conflict within each disputing party as that party seeks to assert varied, sometimes
contradictory, interests. This inner conflict may be evidenced by confusion, inconsistency or lack
of congruity. In this condition, the participant has failed to effectively integrate their various
"parts" or "voices" to achieve an effective and comfortable representation of personal interests
(Mediate.com, N,D).
Facilitating a Convergence of Means Conflict Resolution represents a convergence of means (or
arrangements for the future), not necessarily participants' interests or perspectives. Participants
will commonly come to support the same arrangement or agreement for very different reasons.
Conflict resolution does not necessarily resolve tensions between parties. Conflict resolution may
simply sufficiently align matters to allow each participant to make enough progress toward his or
her desired ends to prefer declaring there to be a state of agreement" rather than the uncertain and
stressful "state of disagreement (Mediate.com, N,D).

6. 4
1.4 The Causes of Conflicts in Somalia
IN the early 1990s when the Soviet Union disintegrated many people expected that peace in a
unipolar world would prevail. Instead, many intra-state wars broke out in different parts of the
globe. Different factions, identity groups and regions challenged existing states' monopoly over
violence. As a result, a number of states collapsed and many others to this day remain precipitously
on the verge of failing. Somalia, Sierra Leone, Liberia, the former Yugoslavia, Congo and
Cambodia are examples of states that experienced total collapse. Many African countries such as
Ethiopia, Sudan and Zimbabwe are under extreme pressure from domestic and external forces.
Many scholars and some important political actors often characterize these conflicts as identity-
based civil wars (Michael, 2008).
After Somalia President Mohamed Siyad Barre was overthrown in 1991, most of the country's
institutions, as well as law and order, were destroyed. Anarchy spread in the country. While
successful in overthrowing the regime, opposition factions failed to fill the power vacuum because
no faction (including the United Somali Congress that expelled Siyad Barre from Mogadishu) had
the power to dominate the other groups militarily. They also failed to reach a negotiated settlement.
As a result, the factions kept fighting against each other for different motives. Most of the major
factions have been fighting for domination, while smaller ones have been fighting for survival
(Barise, N,D).
Outside urban centers, different clans contest over resources such as water, livestock and grazing
land. In the past Somali nomads have fought over the ownership of camels because of their utility
for survival in Somalia's harsh environment. In this context, clan identity is useful because to
obtain and keep a large number of camels one needs to rely on the support of one's clansmen. As
Abdala Omar Mansur notes, after urbanization, the type of assets seen as important changed
(Afyare, N,D). State power, weapons, jobs and foreign aid became important resources for which
clans and other groups competed. To access these, again one had to rely on the relationships that
clan identity provided. In relying on clan identity, clan lines were strengthened.
Political, Economic, and Social problems are some of the root causes of the Somali civil war.
Somalia is a county who has known war after war and famine after famine. If you ask most Somalis
today, they will tell you that they want peace (Pike, 2012).

7. 5
It’s time to put down the gun and pick up the pen. The international community has held countless
peace conferences, provided millions of aid, but still has failed to bring peace. The only people
who can bring peace to themselves are the Somali people. Maybe they can finally learn lessons
from the past and start thinking about the future. The Somalis in the diaspora is using education to
fight back right now. This young generation today can maybe store hope one day (Pike, 2012).
1.5 The Tools of Conflict Resolutions in Somalia
Conflict resolution, as a coherent term, real-life process, and field of study, is at once strikingly
simple and staggeringly complex. Its simplicity is in its definition and intent: put a stop to violent
and political conflicts in a way in which all parties are satisfied and everyone’s needs are met. The
complexity stems from nearly every other aspect of its implementation. While general principles
of conflict resolution do exist, the players, circumstances, and provisions of each conflict
necessarily dictate the means which must be employed to bring it to a close. The intricacies
associated with each conflict, however, also ensure that there is much to be learned from each one
and hopefully applied to other disputes in the future (Bavoso, N,D).
Ironically, a real-world opportunity - to learn from and experiment with tools of conflict resolution
- goes relatively unnoticed by the greater international community. The Somali
Civil War is an example of a unique and sustained conflict which has lasted several decades and
has also garnered little international attention compared to other conflicts around the globe.
From a humanitarian perspective, Somalia has been in a perpetual state of anarchy since the civil
war began there in 1988 and has created an environment which facilitates the creation of issues
such as piracy, a problem that extends the violence and disruption beyond Somalia’s borders.
In order to understand the conflict and the attempts made at resolving it, one must understand the
history and major players that comprise the Somali Civil War. Beyond the occasional news
headline or what has been portrayed in the media by films such as "Black Hawk Down," many
citizens of Western societies know very little about the country officially known as the Somali
Republic and of the complexities of the conflict, which has been going on there since 1988.
The internationally-recognized central government, the Transitional Federal Government

8. 6
(TFG), exists in name but in reality lacks a national parliament and controls only a small region of
the country.
In fact, Somalia is generally regarded in the academic and policy communities as an example of a
"failed state" and a "stateless society," which means that the government is unable to collect taxes,
pass laws, enforce regulations, or keep warlords under control even with outside intervention and
aid.
Outside of the central government's weak control, the rest of the regions are fairly autonomous and
independent. Arguably, the most functional region, Somaliland, which used to be a British
protectorate rather than an Italian colony like the rest of Somalia, views itself as an independent
republic but lacks the formal recognition it needs from the international community to officially
secede.
The Somali Civil War initially grew out of the Somalian Revolution which began in 1986 as a
violent response to the repressive regime of US-friendly Siad Barre. Following his being deposed
in 1991, a counter-revolution began to restore him to power and the country has been embroiled
in violence and factionalized ever since.
The UN led multiple military and humanitarian interventions in the country in the early to mid-
1990s, officially known as the United Nations Operation in Somalia (UNSOM) I and II and the
Unified Task Force (UNITAF). This event highlights one facet of the international nature of the
conflict which has made finding a resolution difficult - at the time of the UN’s actions many critics
around the world decried the US' involvement in the mission as the US had much to gain from the
oil contracts which would be restored along with Siad Barre's regime.
Beginning in 1998 and continuing on into 2006 various regions of Somalia began to claim
autonomy as separate states, though only Somaliland has claimed outright independence.
These states included the regions of Puntland, Jubaland, Southwestern Somalia and
Galmudug, each of which has created their own militaries and power structures.
While there have been attempts at reconciliation and reunification, Somalia remains divided,
which has made resolving the conflict difficult based solely on the sheer number of states, groups
and militaries involved.

9. 7
The most recent sustained period of violence has occurred between a few core groups: the
Sharia-law oriented Islamic Courts Union (ICU) which took control of the capital, Mogadishu in
2006; the Alliance for the Restoration of Peace and Counter-Terrorism (ARPCT), which is a group
of secular warlords formed in 2006; and the TNG, which is backed by the government and the
military of Ethiopia, adding yet another international player into this conflict. Not only does the
number and nature of parties currently involved in the situation make conflict resolution difficult,
it also makes the mere act of following it as an interested outsider a challenge.
However, these challenges and difficulties posed in the Somali case highlight many of the key
principles of conflict resolution.
For instance, with so many domestic and international groups involved, communication is of vital
importance. Recently Somalian leaders have asked that the UN give them more information about
the UN peacekeepers being deployed in the region and have stated that the civilian population
must accept the force before it arrives.
Also, the power struggle between international organizations and local leaders is common to many
conflicts, including Somalia's. Sometimes this struggle can be exacerbated when sovereign
countries working unilaterally get involved.
While international assistance can obviously be helpful in ending conflicts and providing
humanitarian aid, Ethiopia's involvement has caused tension between domestic groups inside
Somalia.
In addition to main conflict itself, extraneous violence spawned by the chaos must be addressed.
All in all, any strategy aimed at bringing this conflict to a close must be holistic and far-reaching,
addressing both the humanitarian and political causes and effects of years of anarchy, factionalism
and bloodshed.
Now, as new fighting has broken out in Mogadishu, it becomes even more necessary for the
international community to take a closer look at the conflict in Somalia and consider new and
inventive techniques which might be used to bring this decades-long fighting to a peaceful close.

10. 8
1.6 Approaches of Conflict Resolutions
Although different conflicts may require different ways to handle them, this is a list of fundamental
Tools that may be implemented when handling a conflictive situation:
Reaching agreement on rules and procedures Establishing ground rules may include the following
actions: a. Determining a site for the meeting; b. Setting a formal agenda; c. Determining who
attends; d. Setting time limits; e. Setting procedural rules; f. Following specific do(s) and don't(s).
Reducing tension and synchronizing the de-escalation of hostility In highly emotional situations
when people feel angry, upset, frustrated, it is important to implement the following actions: a.
Separating the involved parties; b. Managing tensions – jokes as an instrument to give the
opportunity for catharsis; c. Acknowledging others’ feelings – actively listening to others; d. De-
escalation by public statements by parties – about the concession, the commitments of the parties.
Improving the accuracy of communication, particularly improving each party’s understanding of
the other’s perception a. Accurate understanding of the other's position; b. Role reversal, trying to
adopt the other's position (empathetic attitudes); c. Imaging – describing how they see themselves,
how the other parties appears to them, how they think the other parties will describe them and how
the others see themselves.
Controlling the number and size of issues in the discussion a. Fractionate the negotiation – a
method that divides a large conflict into smaller parts: 1. Reduce the number of parties on each
side; 2. Control the number of substantive issues; 3. Search for different ways to divide big issues.
Establishing Common Ground Where Parties Can Find A Basis For Agreement a. Establishing
common goals or superordinate goals; b. Establishing common enemies; c. Identifying common
expectations; d. Managing time constraints and deadlines; e. Reframing the parties’ view of each
other; f. Build trust through the negotiation process.
Enhancing The Desirability of the Options and Alternatives That Each Party Presents to the other
a. giving the other party an acceptable proposal; b. asking for a different decision; c. Sweeten the
other rather than intensifying the threat; d. Elaborating objective or legitimate criteria to evaluate
all possible solutions.

11. 9
1.7 Conflict resolution approaches
A conflict is a common phenomenon in the workplace; as mentioned before, it can occur because
of the most different grounds of diversity and under very different circumstances. However, it is
usually a matter of interests, needs, priorities, goals or values interfering with each other; and,
often, a result of different perceptions more than actual differences. Conflicts may involve team
members, departments, projects, organization and client, boss and subordinate, organization needs
vs. personal needs, and they are usually immersed in complex relations of power that need to be
understood and interpreted in order to define the more tailored way to manage the conflict. There
are, nevertheless, some main approaches that may be applied when trying to solve a conflict that
may lead to very different outcomes to be valued according to the particular situation and the
available negotiation resources:
1.8 FORCING:
When one of the conflict's parts firmly pursues his or her own concerns despite the resistance of
the other(s). This may involve pushing one viewpoint at the expense of another or maintaining
firm resistance to the counterpart's actions; it is also commonly known as “competing”. Forcing
may be appropriate when all other, less forceful methods, don't work or are ineffective; when
someone needs to stand up for his/her own rights (or the represented group/organization's rights),
resist aggression and pressure. It may be also considered a suitable option when a quick resolution
is required and using force is justified (e.g. in a life-threatening situation, to stop an aggression),
and as a very last resort to resolve a long-lasting conflict.
However, forcing may also negatively affect the relationship with the opponent in the long run;
may intensified the conflict if the opponent decides to react in the same way (even if it was not the
original intention); it doesn't allow to take advantage in a productive way of the other side's
position and, last but not least, taking this approach may require a lot of energy and be exhausting
to some individuals.
1.9 WIN-WIN / COLLABORATING:
Collaboration involves an attempt to work with the other part involved in the conflict to find a
win-win solution to the problem in hand, or at least to find a solution that most satisfies the
concerns of both parties. The win-win approach sees conflict resolution as an opportunity to come

12. 10
to a mutually beneficial result; and it includes identifying the underlying concerns of the opponents
and finding an alternative which meets each party's concerns. From that point of view, it is the
most desirable outcome when trying to solve a problem for all partners.
Collaborating may be the best solution when consensus and commitment of other parties is
important; when the conflict occurs in a collaborative, trustworthy environment and when it is
required to address the interests of multiple stakeholders. But more specially, it is the most
desirable outcome when a long-term relationship is important so that people can continue to
collaborate in a productive way; collaborating is in few words, sharing responsibilities and mutual
commitment. For parties involved, the outcome of the conflict resolution is less stressful; however,
the process of finding and establishing a win-win solution may be longer and should be very
involving.
It may require more effort and more time than some other methods; for the same reason,
collaborating may not be practical when timing is crucial and a quick solution or fast response is
required.
2.1 COMPROMISING:
Different from the Win-Win solution, in this outcome the conflict parties find a mutually
acceptable solution which partially satisfies both parties. Compromising may be an optimal
solution when the goals are moderately important and not worth the use of more assertive or more
involving approaches.
It may be useful when reaching temporary settlement on complex issues and as a first step when
the involved parties do not know each other well or haven't yet developed a high level of mutual
trust. Compromising may be a faster way to solve things when time is a factor. The level of tensions
can be lower as well, but the result of the conflict may be also less satisfactory.
If this method is not well managed, and the factor time becomes the most important one, the
situation may result in both parties being not satisfied with the outcome (i.e. a lose-lose situation).
Moreover, it does not contribute to building trust in the long run and it may require a closer
monitoring of the kind of partially satisfactory compromises acquired.

13. 11
2.2 WITHDRAWING:
This technique consists on not addressing the conflict, postpone it or simply withdrawing; for that
reason, it is also known as Avoiding. This outcome is suitable when the issue is trivial and not
worth the effort or when more important issues are pressing, and one or both the parties do not
have time to deal with it. Withdrawing may be also a strategic response when it is not the right
time or place to confront the issue, when more time is needed to think and collect information
before acting or when not responding may bring still some winnings for at least some of the
involves parties. Moreover, withdrawing may be also employed when someone know that the other
party is totally engaged with hostility and does not want (can't) to invest further unreasonable
efforts.
Withdrawing may give the possibility to see things from a different perspective while gaining time
and collecting further information, and specially is a low stress approach particularly when the
conflict is a short time one. However, not acting may be interpreted as an agreement and therefore
it may lead to weakening or losing a previously gained position with one or more parties involved.
Furthermore, when using withdrawing as a strategy more time, skills and experiences together
with other actions may need to be implemented.
2.3 SMOOTHING
Smoothing is accommodating the concerns of others first of all, rather than one's own concerns.
This kind of strategy may be applied when the issue of the conflict is much more important for the
counterparts whereas for the other is not particularly relevant. It may be also applied when
someone accepts that he/she is wrong and furthermore there are no other possible options than
continuing an unworthy competing-pushing situation. Just as withdrawing, smoothing may be an
option to find at least a temporal solution or obtain more time and information, however, it is not
an option when priority interests are at stake. Unfortunately, there is a high risk of being abused
when choosing the smoothing option. Therefore, it is important to keep the right balance and to
not give up one own interests and necessities. Otherwise, confidence in one's ability, mainly with
an aggressive opponent, may be seriously damaged, together with credibility by the other parties
involved. Needed to say, in these cases a transition to a Win-Win solution in the future becomes
particularly more difficult when someone.

14. 12
2.4 Conclusion
The Isaak and Hawiye ethnic groups caused the first wave of unrest after the government was
overthrown by the Isaak clan and the Hawiye clan took over southern Somalia. Eventually, all 5
main clans and several sub-clans are involved in the conflict. There is no clear majority group, but
all of the clans are fighting with the same goal - to gain more land in Somalia, despite famine, lack
of supplies, and poverty.
Government in Somalia has caused all clans to claim land as their own; resulting in violent disputes
between ethnic groups. This civil war has been a series of battles among the clans. Poverty-stricken
groups have moved in to refugee camps in hopes of safety, although there is little food. This war
has continued for 28 years (from January 26, 1991 to present day).
The women of Somalia have been especially affected by the war. They have no rights, and have a
lower life expectancy (only 51). In addition, they are outcasts of society due to the fact that the
majority of them are forced to go through a procedure known as circumcision.
Refugees are faced with famine, and are malnourished due to lack of protein. Enemy soldiers seize
food, property, and weapons from citizens, leaving them in poverty.
People have emigrated from Somalia, but many countries are unaware or uninformed of the
conflict between the clans. The involved countries aren't affected by the problem, but attempt to
control the country, ultimately failing. There is fighting dispersed throughout Somalia, causing
intense violence and brutal deaths to be a common theme within the country. In addition, the unrest
is destroying any government or system of order to improve the turmoil in Somalia. The largest
casualty is among the locals of Somalia. Impoverished groups migrate to refugee camps, barely
having the supplies to survive through the catastrophic strife unfolding around them. Women have
no rights at all, being outcasts and abused with death threatening all. There are no distinct opinions
on the Somalia conflict other than each clan's desire for territory. None of these claims are
legitimate; each clan has high expectations for their personal amount of land. Possible
compromises: A more effective central government is the ultimate goal.

15. 13
2.5 References
1. Afyare, A. E. (N,D). Understanding the sources of the Somali conflict.
https://www.twn.my/title2/resurgence/2011/251-252/cover04.htm.
2. Barise, E. a. (N,D). The Somali Conflict. https://www.twn.my/title2/resurgence/2011/251-
252/cover04.htm.
3. Bavoso, J. (N,D). Strategies for conflict resolution in. https://css.ethz.ch/en/services/digital-
library/articles/article.html/88466/pdf.
4. John, J. Stremlau. (2016). International Journal. 34.2 (1979). 332-33, Ethnicity and Ethnic
Conflict.
5. Mediate.com. (N,D). Nature of Conflict. https://www.mediate.com/divorce/pg15.cfm.
6. Michael, E. B. (2008). The Causes of Internal Conflict: An Overview.
https://www.twn.my/title2/resurgence/2011/251-252/cover04.htm.
7. Pike, J. (2012). Military." Somalia Civil War. Global Security.
https://sites.google.com/a/umn.edu/historpedia/home/politics-and-government/the-causes-of-
somalia-s-civil-war-fall-2102.
8. Reuter, T. K. (N.D). Ethnic conflict. https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethnic-conflict.