Sat, Jul 30, 2005 - Page 9 News List

The long, tough road from violent conflict to democratic politics

By Alastair Crooke  /  THE GUARDIAN , LONDON

In the wake of the London bombings it is difficult to deal with issues of political violence; nonetheless, these need to be addressed from a perspective of critical thinking. This is nowhere more pertinent than in the Middle East, where this week I have been taking part in meetings to bring Americans and Europeans together to promote engagement with Hezbollah and Hamas.

It is axiomatic: As armed movements, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, find success at the ballot box, strident calls are heard for them to put aside their guns.

"You can't have it both ways," the West argues. "You can't be both democratic and violent."

For a few, these demands are intended to speed the transition of these groups into conventional politics, even if privately those making the calls may be sceptical that their message will be heeded. But for most, the call is based on a misunderstanding of the psychology of groups engaged in conflict. Yet history shows that more peace processes have been destroyed by premature attempts at disarmament than from any other cause.

On the face of it, the demand for those at the ballot to give up violence seems legitimate. For those of us living in stable societies it appears self-evident that politics and guns do not mix. We simply cannot understand why such groups, say in the disordered context of Palestine or Lebanon, fail to see why it is self-evidently in their best interest to give up violence. It often seems to us that owing to some mysterious personal defects, they somehow cannot seem to perceive their own self-interest correctly.

To those inside such societies, however, the reason is clear. Conflict and the experience of trauma and humiliation generate intense feelings that can be overwhelming. Here we could usefully differentiate between psychological and strategic motives.

During the last Palestinian intifada it was possible to see an entire community presenting the symptoms of trauma: an inability to sleep, deep depression, lack of motivation and loss of appetite.

Psychologists tell us that humiliation and trauma typically generate feelings of violence that endure for years even among those living in stable societies.

Most of us have little experience of armed conflict, and so we do not appreciate how hard it is to make transitions under the bitter weight of anger and irreparable personal loss. If we wish to obtain our political goals we should factor this in.

Transitions from conflict to politics never occur in a moment. They take time. They require broad-based community support and a commitment to inclusiveness. Without a process that is inclusive, it is difficult for any community to overcome the feelings of anger that persist beyond any formal resolution of a conflict.

Psychology also suggests that movements that see themselves as underdogs, as pursuing a just cause against overwhelming odds, are often trapped in a victim psychology -- and so look to the stronger party for a gesture that will change the direction of events. This perception of victimhood leads to a deep mistrust, which makes it nearly impossible for them to disarm immediately, as it increases their sense of insecurity and thus the possibility of increased violence.

At a strategic level, this perception of the "asymmetry of power" -- the conclusion of armed groups that disarmament is surrender -- has its impact on the political processes. In this calculation, retention of arms is the one way of ensuring that, once a political process begins, it will be fair, because both sides will respect the other's strength. This search for mutual respect underlies the Islamist approach to negotiations. Islamists do not believe that a durable or just solution can emerge from negotiation unless both sides bestow at least grudging respect on their adversary. "Unjust" solutions are inevitable if one side views the other with disdain or contempt for its weakness.

This story has been viewed 2865 times.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top