review dealing with conlfict ii yunizar adiputera

7/30/2019 Review Dealing With Conlfict II Yunizar Adiputera

1/3

Yunizar Adiputera

Review Peace and Conflict Studies

DEALING WITH CONFLICT (PART II)

Non-Western Conflict Resolution Approach

Contemporary mindset on conflict resolution rests upon the premise that the conflicting

parties need third-party involvement to resolve their conflict, or in other words, they need to

be told what they suppose to do in conflict situation. Inherently, study on conflict resolution

has been directed at providing people with necessary ability and tool to assist parties in

conflicts to settle their issues peacefully. This results in what often called industrialization of

conflict resolution, which is characterized by the rise of many experts individuals as well

as organizations in conflict resolution. However, there seems to be an integral problem

within this approach to conflict resolution. Not only it ignores the fact that some communities

do have their own specific way to deal with conflict, but it also fails to capture the perception

of those communities on what it means to resolve conflict. It is sometimes useful to examine

the way certain communities perceive conflict resolution and then, in some cases, utilize the

existing internal mechanisms of those communities to resolve conflicts. The former approach

is often dubbed western-style approach, while the latter is called traditional approach or non-

western approach.

The main difference between these two approaches is the way they are constructed. Western

approach takes the form of scientific construct while traditional approach rest upon practical

specificity and uniqueness. Consequently, western approach attempts to find a universally-

applicable formula to conflict resolution by examining patterns and dynamics of conflicts.

The traditional approach, on the contrary, may not be applicable to many cases, but it offers

strong legitimacy in its application and, thus, is more holistic and comprehensive.

In practice, traditional conflict resolution takes various forms depending on local culture andwisdom. In Papua, there is the tradition ofBakar Batu to symbolize the first step to end war

among them. Besides that, Papuans also have big-man culture where certain individuals are

highly respected by society and become someone society listens to. In Sulawesi, familial

relations become an important tool in amending relations between conflicting parties in

villages. Vigilantism also part of the culture in several villages in South Sulawesi in dealing

with conflicts. Thieves and robbers are dealt with capital punishment by the vigilante

organization formed by villagers, oddly this practice is said to be in reference with Syariah

Law. On other issue, like gender and marriage, some communities in Indonesia enforce a


2/3

Yunizar Adiputera


local tradition that when a man has done intimate physical encounter with a woman (this does

not necessarily mean coitus), the woman has the right to demand the man to be responsible

by marrying her. If the man fails to fulfill this, the man will face execution (that is, being

murdered) by the womans family. However, with the help from local influential figure and

communication between both families, sometimes the man can replace his punishment by

paying some sort of fine. Aceh also has its own way of resolving conflict through

musyawarah. In this process, the role of nobleman and ulama is very important. Besides that,

there is social institution called kedai kopi talks, which highlights the importance of local

coffee shop as a place to sit down and solve conflicts.

Traditional approach also exists outside Indonesia. In Botswana, there is tradition called

Kgotla, which resembles some kind of public meeting. It stands as the institutions where local

elders and ordinary people gather to resolve conflicts and develop the culture of peace. It also

brings consensus and collectiveness to the forefront of conflict resolution.

From several practices of traditional conflict resolution approach drawn above, there are

several integral components that could be extrapolated. These are:

1. Respected figure/leader/individual usually informal figures that have real social

influence as opposed to formal figures that might merely have formal/legal standing.

2. Informal hierarchical institutions social institutions that grow from grassroots, not the

ones imposed by the state.

3. Consensus-based / collectiveness the decision-making is inclusive and invite more

participations.

4. Shared values conflict resolution departs from similarity of values adhered by the

conflicting parties.

5. Ceremony put importance on symbolism

6. Non-rational having different rational standard with those of the west.

7. Violence violence becomes instrument to resolve conflict.

Among those components, the most controversial one that put traditional approach at odd

with western-style is the employment of violence as means to resolve conflict. Honor killing


3/3

Yunizar Adiputera


in Pakistan, or Papuan war resolution (even kills for both parties), are considered barbaric in

reference to current/western civilization. These practices, therefore, are far from being within

western conflict resolution text book. Traditional approach, on the other hand, considers that

restoration of relations and harmony stand above anything else. The use of violence, if it

results in betterment in relations and harmony, is justifiable.

The success of either approach, then, is contingent upon what kind of society they are applied

in. Traditional society maintains order and resolves conflict through traditional informal

approach embedded in their culture (chaotic order), while modern society does it by

formulating positive law (legal order). The position of one society/community could be

drawn in a continuum, traditional on the one end and modern on the other.

While both ends of the spectrum have different approach in maintaining order and peace in

society, both approaches are in fact effective within their respective context. Peculiarly,

though, society that is located in between both ends marked by x often develop

problems in their efforts of creating order. This society has progressed from traditional way

of life, yet has not managed to reach the status of being modern. Indonesia is a perfect

example of this society. From simple observation, it could be seen that Indonesians in general

do not feel bound by the existing legal norms regulating them how to, say, drive car in public

roads. This is especially noticeable from the impacts, such as heavy congestion and high

traffic accident rate. On the other hand, Indonesians are hardly bound by traditional values

anymore. The culture of prioritizing common interest over individual interest is not at all

reflected in how they drive cars, as people race with each other to get to their destinations.

This example confirm the hypothesis that non-traditional pre-modern societies have more

problems in maintaining order and peace compared with strictly traditional or strictly modern

society.

Traditional Modern

Chaotic order Legal order

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

review dealing with conlfict ii yunizar adiputera

Documents