With reference to examples, describe how, and explain why expression of conflict varies.
With reference to examples, describe how, and explain why expression of conflict varies. Conflict is an actual or perceived state of opposition, disagreement or incompatibility (in terms of goals, needs, desires, values, beliefs and/or attitudes) between two or more groups of people. The outcome of a conflict can range from a disagreement or clash, discussion, argument or political and diplomatic activity, to a fight, which may consist of harsh words or may involve the use of force, armed conflict or war, showing us how varied the expression of conflicts are. There is a big overlap between the origin/nature of the conflict, and the expression on conflict that then follows. The level of expression can be dispersed on a
continuum, where conflicts can range from very violent, to very peaceful, depending on a number of factors specific to that conflict. For example, a peaceful conflict could be The Orange Revolution in Ukraine, where the use of force was not involved, and instead civil disobedience, sit-ins and general strikes occurred. This was a successful expression of conflict, and the outcome was successful, with Viktor Yushchenko (opposition) being elected. This conflict was contained, and showed how goals can be achieved without the necessary route of war. However, a violent conflict such as the one in Libya caused terrible problems that are ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
continuum, where conflicts can range from very violent, to very peaceful, depending on a number of factors specific to that conflict. For example, a peaceful conflict could be The Orange Revolution in Ukraine, where the use of force was not involved, and instead civil disobedience, sit-ins and general strikes occurred. This was a successful expression of conflict, and the outcome was successful, with Viktor Yushchenko (opposition) being elected. This conflict was contained, and showed how goals can be achieved without the necessary route of war. However, a violent conflict such as the one in Libya caused terrible problems that are still going on today. The origin of this conflict meant that from early on, violence was breaking out, uncontrollably. It started by the arrest of a Libyan human rights campaigner In February 2011, with protests by those who opposed the ruler, Muammar Gaddafi, who is known for his violently capricious rule for 4 years. The people of Libya only knew violence, due to the actions of its ruler, therefore providing reasons as to why this conflict broke out so violent. It later became a conflict between the government and rebel forces (e.g. North Atlantic Treaty Organisation NATO) where its member states agreed to mutual defence in response to an attack by any external party. There were protests, where security forces fired tear gas and baton rounds at protesters to battle for territory by air strikes, helicopter gunships, with the rebels force responding with tanks, artillery and coalition bombing missions. Muammar Gaddafi declared a speech, through state TV, saying he would fight until the last man, taking no mature control over the country, and instead encouraging the use of violence in order to get your own way. The people of Libya had no morals to follow, and so reacted in the way they saw their ruler act. Terrorism, such as the 911 bombings, is another form of expression, and is the systematic use of fear among the public as a means of trying to force the ruler into action in order to achieve a political or more frequently ideological end. There are a number of factors that can cause difference in the expression of one conflict to another. For example, parties’ awareness of their differences, perceptions and attitudes towards each other, has a big effect on the amount of violence occurring. This is due to the fact that people with more respect for each other and their views, will protest in a peaceful way, showing their opinions through ways that don’t directly affect the opposition. The level of political mobilisation and organisation behind the parties’ positions also indicates how a conflict will take place. For instance, a stable government, in which order is conducted, will encourage peaceful ways to protest. These conflicts are generally more democratic, with the government taking into account the views of many different people, and so the outcome is usually more welcoming to the country as a whole. Overall, the expression of conflict varies considerable across the globe, ranging from peaceful street marches, to wars. The outcome of these expressions is generally down to the cause of the conflict, and severe the reason behind the issue, taking into account the number of people involved.
