Ethnic conflicts test security
By Anak Agung Banyu Perwita
BANDUNG (JP): A major problem facing pluralistic nation-states is rising ethnic conflict among their people. Since the Cold War, conflict between ethnic groups and states has posed major challenges to domestic and international security in most parts of the world.
Conceptually, ethnic conflict is a permanent form of modern economic, social, and political struggle. In more acute manifestations, it may turn to murderous violence and destruction. A recent study demonstrates that since World War II, 40 ethnic groups in various parts of the world have been victimized. Some have suffered genocide.
Ethnic conflict varies. It generally involves a struggle over economic rights, political representation, freedom of religion, preservation of ethnic identities or self-determination.
In other words, according to Stephen Ryan, no single factor causes ethnic conflicts.
Graham Fueller of the RAND Corporation argues that conflict between minority and majority groups are driven by unequal distribution of power, prosperity and influence.
In many pluralistic communities, minority groups may find their traditional interests suddenly questioned by the ethnic majority. Ethnic minorities are frequently the victims of dis crimination.
Most ethnic conflicts are started by minority groups. In authoritarian regimes, violence escalates quickly because official responses are more likely to be repressive than reformist.
Furthermore, in most cases of ethnic conflict the state is not an impartial arbiter, it takes sides in the conflict. In multi- ethnic communities, the state is usually controlled by the majority ethnic group which causes ethnic nationalism. This condition exacerbates ethnic conflict and domestic security.
Most ethnic conflict in the Third World starts as intrastate conflict, but it may develop into interstate conflict if external parties interfere. Here, ethnic conflict spills across territorial borders. States with close emotional ties to ethnic groups in another State will often intervene in a conflict.
States often regard it as their right and duty to become involved in other states' ethnic affairs. Ethnic conflict in South Asia is an example of intrastate conflict that became interstate conflict which, in turn, destabilized regional security.
External involvement by other states will always have a negative influence on ethnic conflict. Evidence suggests that external intervention is likely to escalate a conflict and introduce new conflicting issues and parties.
How can we resolve ethnic conflict without causing interstate conflict or war?
Many analysts argue that the most radical way to resolve ethnic conflict is to reconstruct state-systems so that traditional territorial borders correspond more closely to the social and cultural boundaries of people.
A pluralist paradigm contends, in this case, that there would be a fundamental change from territorial-state to territorial community. The state-system would also alter from an international system to an intersocietal system.
A more open and constructive way to resolve conflict is to recognize and strengthen communal groups within an existing state's system.
Elise Boulding, for instance, argues that devolving authority of communal groups will not only resolve fundamental structural problems of modern states but will strengthen nationalism.
Nationalism, in this case, is the key to building a country's nationhood. Above all, we need to develop an open society in order to facilitate economic, political and cultural differences among people. An open society is based on democratic values which acknowledge differences in the community.
In conclusion, ethnic differences challenge international relations as well as statesmen and policy makers. We need a better understanding of the complexities of changing domestic and international situations, which are highly relevant at the end the twentieth century.
The writer is a lecturer at the Department of International Relations, Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung.