CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

This is the analysis and solution of the case-study which is

available on the internet.

Danish
Sultan
mrk56@live.c
om
+92 312
51100 56

CASE STUDY: GUATEMALA

DETAILED DIAGNOSIS

SYNOPSIS
• The Guatemalan armed conflict was essentially a political and military
conflict between the state and an insurgent movement (the
Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity or URAIG).
• Guatemalan conflict was intrinsically of ideological and political nature,
with roots in the violent US intervention in Guatemala (1954) aimed to
overthrown the democratic and legally elected government of
President Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán.
• It was perceived by Washington at that time as a “communist”
government mainly because of the agrarian reform (that affected US
owned plantations and corporations).

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF THE ARMED CONFLICT IN GUATEMALA

• In 1821 the independence from Spain allowed the establishment of the
Central American Federal Republic until 1838, when the federation was
dissolved and the five Unitarian states of the republics of Guatemala,
El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua and Costa Rica came to life.
• There was a constant intervention of foreign powers such as the United
States and Great Britain.
• The primarily interest of both powers in the region, at that time, was
the construction of an inter-oceanic canal using the San Juan River and
the Great Lake of Nicaragua as an inter oceanic water way.
• William Walker, an American soldier led a military expedition to
Nicaragua and took possession of the country, where he stayed several
years until his defeat (and subsequent death by shooting) by a Central

pg. 1
mrk56
 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

American army under the command of the Guatemalan Marshall

Zavala.
• The war of Augusto Cesar Sandino against the U.S. intervention and
occupation of Nicaragua in the 20's and the US intervention in
Guatemala in the 50's are two historical examples of the “big stick”
policy that Washington applied to Central America.
• US did this because of the economic interest of US corporations with
investments in agriculture (banana plantations), communications
(railroads, telegraphs) and electricity, and partly because of
geopolitical reasons.
• The Guatemalan Civil War (1960-96) involved the government, right-
wing paramilitary organizations, and left-wing insurgents. A variety of
factors contributed: social and economic injustice and racism against
the indigenous population, the 1954 coup which reversed reforms,
weak civilian control of the military, Marxist ideology advocating
violent revolution instead of democratic participation and reform, the
United States support of the government, and Cuban support of the
insurgents.
• The Guatemalan war started in 1960 and continued for decades. A
large number of causalities happened during the war
• The CEH (Commission for Historical Clarification) estimates that the
number of persons killed or disappeared as a result of the fratricidal
confrontation reached a total of more than 200,000.

The Stage of Pre-negotiations and the Role of the Internal Mediator:

1990-1994
• At the national level the democratization process started in 1986 and
the peace processes opened by Esquipulas in both Nicaragua and El
Salvador continued to exert pressure on the Guatemalan government
in order to open bilateral talks with the rebels.
• Then preliminary negotiation talks were held. These preliminary
negotiation talks were held with representatives of different sectors of
the civil society: leaders of the legal
political parties, entrepreneurs and businessmen, religious priests and
church members, trade union and popular organization leaders,
scholars and professors from the academic community.

GROUP OF FRIENDLY NATIONS AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY ASSEMBLY

• The Guatemalan peace process was innovative also in the new types of
third party intervention that it produced. The idea of the Group of
Friendly Nations was probably the result of the different kind of
participation that they have had in the recent past concerning the
peace process.

pg. 2
mrk56
 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

• Like United States, for instance, changed its role after the fall of the
Berlin wall and the end of the cold war.

PEACE AGREEMENTS
• Another interesting feature of the Guatemalan peace process is that
the parties agreed to negotiate on a very complex list of agenda items,
and that most of them were “substantive matters,” that is to say, both
parties agreed to negotiate those issues concerning the causes of the
conflict.
• Several agreements took place in the 90’s

POSSIBLE OPTIONS FOR RESOLVING THE CONFLICTS

Three options are presented.

Option # 1
As the formation of cannel is one of the major issues that gave rise to the
conflict the parties must know the fact that this cannel would provided
benefit to all the states of the region and instead of violence they could
have settled for convention for building the cannel with mutual
corporation of all the states of the region and party involved. The merits
and demerits of adopting this procedure would be:

Option # 2
The cannel raised the conflict and was built in South America by the USA
due to geographical reasons, but USA could have utilized any other
location for the construction of the cannel which could have been nearer
than Guatemala.

Option # 3
The dialogue and negotiations held in 1990’s could have stated earlier to
reduce the conflict and tension in the region and then the tension would
have not reached the boiling point and this option could have saved a lot
of lives.

ANALYSIS

Five Styles of Conflict Management

#2 #1 pg. 3
mrk56

Issu
Resolv #3
 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

Relationshi
ps
Diagram showing three options presented in terms of the conflict management styles.

1.As the first option presented to solve the conflict is regarding the equal rights and
focuses on mutual cooperation for the problem solving by all the parties that is why
it is placed in the ‘Collaborate’.

2.The second option talks about USA should build cannel in their own region
instead of raising this conflict, as this option gives issue the priority that is
why it lies in ‘Competitor’.
3.Third option states that after the birth of the issue the parties could have
negotiated earlier so that is why it is located in ‘Compromise’.

Methodologies for Managing Conflicts

Negotiation and Third party assistance would be finest methods as in this
case, Third party decision-making can also be applied but as presented by
the options it would create more complexities so Negotiations would have
been the best method.

Tools for Resolving Conflict

Looking in the perspective of “Tools for Resolving Conflict” I would say that
Use of Power and Enforcement of Rights cannot be implemented in this case
as it would create a win/loss situation and this would create more conflict
rather than resolving it.
Third tool which is Satisfaction of Interests would be best to follow in this
case as:
• Each party seeks to achieve their individual interest while assisting the
other party in achieving their interests.
• Interests are mutual of both parties involved.
• All the parties will get benefits from the cannel.
• Interests of the parties need to be satisfied.

SUGGESTION RECOMMENDED FOR RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT

Looking from the perspective of the analysis option # 1 would have been
best as it would have involved mutual understanding and the war would
have been avoided.

pg. 4
mrk56
 CONFLICT MANAGEMENT

mrk56 is used by Danish in the documents written originally by him.

pg. 5
mrk56