POLITIK

INTERNASIONAL
Konflik Dalam Politik Internasional

POLITIK INTERNASIONAL

Mahasiswa dapat memahami

fenomena konflik sebagai salah
satu pola interaksi dalam politik
internasional

SUBTOPIK
Sumber konflik internasional
Resolusi konflik internasional
Institusi dan prosedur dalam penyelesaian konflik

internasional
Tragedi kemanusiaan konflik kekerasan

DEFINITION
The term conflict in IR generally refers to armed conflict.

Conflict itself is ever present in the international systemthe condition against which bargaining takes place.
Conflict may be conceived as a difference in preferred
outcomes in a bargaining situation.
In such conflict bargaining, states develop capabilities

that give them leverage to obtain more favorable

outcomes that they otherwise would achieve.
Whether fair or unfair, the ultimate outcome of the

bargaining process is a settlement of the particular

conflict.

TYPES OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT

Six types of International

Conflicts:
1. Ethnic Conflict

Religious Conflict
3. Ideological Conflict
2.

Territorial Conflict
5. Governmental Conflict
4.
6.

Economic Conflict

The first Three are conflicts

over ideas
The last Three conflicts over
interests
These six types of conflict
are not mutually exclusive,
and they overlap
considerably in practice.

TYPES OF INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT

Conflict Between Russia and Ukraine after the 1991

Soviet breakup were complex:

Experienced ethnic conflict

Religious Differences, different form of Christianity

A territorial dispute, the Crimean Peninsula
Over trade and Money after the Soviet Breakup, which

created new borders and currencies.

These multiple conflicts did not lead to the use of military

force

TYPE OF WAR
Hegemonic War

Is a war over control of the entire world order the rules of

the international system as a whole, including the role of
world hegemony. This class of wars is also known as world
war, global war, general war or systematic war.
The last hegemonic war was WW II. Largely because of the
power of modern weaponry, this kind of war probably
cannot occur any longer without destroying civilization.

TYPE OF WAR
Total War

Is a warfare by one state waged to conquer and occupy

another. The goal is to reach capital city and force
surrender of the government, which can then be replaced
with one of the victors choosing.
The 2003 Iraq War is a clear case. The last total war
between great powers was WW II.
In total war, with the entire society mobilized for the
struggle, the entire society of the enemy is considered a
legitimate target.
Germany attacked British civilians with V-2 Rocket, while
British and US strategic bombing killed 600.000 German
civilians.

TYPE OF WAR
Limited War

Includes military actions carried out to gain some objective

short of the surrender and occupation of the enemy. For
instance, the US led war against Iraq in 1991 retook the
territory of Kuwait but did not go on Baghdad to topple
Saddam Husseins government.

TYPE OF WAR
Civil War

Refers to war between factions within a state trying to

create or prevent a new government for the entire state or
some territorial part of it (the aim may be to change entire
system of government, to merely replace the people in it,
or to split a region off as a new state).

TYPE OF WAR
Guerrilla War

Which include certain kinds of civil wars, is warfare without

front lines. Irregular forces operate in the midst of, and
often hidden or protected by, civilian populations. The
purpose is not to directly confront an enemy army but
rather to harass and punish it so as to gradually limit its
operation and effectively liberate territory from its control.

DEFINITIONS AND MODELS OF CONFLICT

Johan Galtung: Conflict Triangle and the Life Cycle of

Conflict
Professor Johan Galtung, who is considered as one of the key
founding figures of peace and conflict studies as an academic
discipline, developed the following model - called Conflict
Triangle - describing the architecture of conflict
(Johan
Galtung, Peace by Peaceful Means. Peace and Conflict,
Development and Civilization, International Peace Research
Institute Oslo, London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage
Publications, 1996, p. 72):

DEFINITIONS AND MODELS OF CONFLICT

According to Galtung, a conflict consists of behaviour (B),

assumptions (cognitions) and attitudes (emotions) (A) and a
contradiction (C). While the B-component is manifest (behavior is by
definition visible), both A and C are latent. Conflicts take the form of a
triangle and there are flows and interactions between the three corners
of the triangle which illustrates the dynamic nature of conflicts.
Connected to this triangle, Galtung describes conflict as something
almost
organic,
that
has
its
ownlife
cycle:

CONTRADICTION
refers to the underlying conflict situation, which includes the actual or
perceived incompatibility of goals between the conflict parties
generated by what Chris Mitchell calls a mis- match between social
values and social structure (1981a: 18).

ATTITUDE
covers emotive (feeling), cognitive (belief) and conative (desire,
will) elements.
Analysts who emphasize these subjective aspects are said to
have an expressive
view of the sources of conflict (for example: a social conflict
exists when two or more parties believe they have incompatible
BEHAVIOR
objectives;
Kriesberg 1982:

It can involve cooperation or coercion, gestures signifying conciliation or

hostility. Violent conflict behavior is characterized by threats,
intimidation and destructive attacks.

STAGES AND PHASES OF CONFLICT

The potential for conflict exists whenever people

have different needs, values, or interests; this is

the "latent" conflict stage.
The conflict may not become apparent until a

"triggering event" leads to the emergence

(or beginning) of the obvious conflict.
Emergence may be followed quickly by

settlement or resolution, or it may be followed by

escalation, which can become very destructive.

STAGES AND PHASES OF CONFLICT

Escalation, however, cannot continue indefinitely. De-

escalation can be temporary or can be part of a broader

trend toward settlement or resolution.
Or escalation may lead to a stalemate, a situation in

which neither side can win.

If the pain of continuing the conflict exceeds that of

maintaining the confrontation, the parties are in what

Zartman calls a "hurting stalemate," which often
presents an ideal opportunity for negotiation and a
potential settlement.
Finally, if and when an agreement is reached, peace

building efforts work to repair damaged relationships with

the long-term goal of reconciling former opponents.

In the aftermath of the

Cold War*

The bipolar world war ended, opening the way to internal

conflicts often characterized by extreme violence

The past decades conflicts were characterized more by

irrational and predatory violence while earlier rebellions
were mainly rationally-motivated and progressive
-Mary KaldorThe risk of falling into civil war by looking at variables such
as the abundance of natural resources, poor
economic performance, lack of democracy, and rentseeking behaviors.
-Paul CollierThis theorization of conflicts relies on the key distinction
between greed(rebellions) and grievances (protest
movements), claiming that modern wars are mainly led by
greed.
The new wars can be contrasted with earlier wars in terms
of their goals, their methods, and how they are
financed.
-Mary Kaldor-

 Indonesias dramatic democratic transition also had an impact

on the ways in which conflict was (and is) managed:

SUPPRESIO
N

SOEHARTO
S ERA

LIMITED
PUBLICATION

ROLE OF
CIVIL
SOCIETY

HABIBIES
ERA

DECENTRALI
SING
POWER

CONT.
These models have been crucial in understanding
how the globalized era has impacted conflicts and
gained a special resonance in the political sphere.
Many policy-makers have been inspired by this
analytical framework, which is reflected in several
conflict resolution approaches.
Although valuable, these models fail to provide a
comprehensive explanation of the genuine causes
of conflicts.

*(Marie Doucey, 2011)

CONT.
To a very large extent, the US-led invasions and
occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq (especially the
latter)
seem to be addressing only the symptoms of the
conflicts
that have torn these Muslim countries apart;
furthermore,
those interventions may actually be worsening the
causes
of 9/11-type terrorism. Such counter productivity is the
price that policy-makers might continue to pay for
rejecting
or otherwise avoiding conceptual tools that transcend
and capture the complexity of complex
*(Marie symptoms
Doucey, 2011)

CONT.

According to Kelman, conflicts should be considered

as a process driven by collective needs and fears
rather than motivated by rational calculation and
national interest
-Herbert KelmanProfessor of Social Ethics, Emeritus, at Harvard University

*(Marie Doucey, 2011)

NEEDS
All human beings have basic needs. Part of these needs are
physical, like the need for food, water or shelter, but
essential needs go beyond these few elements because they
cover the psychological sphere.
John Burton, defined four needs in particular that are universal
and nonnegotiable:
1. security or safety, meaning both stability and freedom from
fear;
2. Identity, defined by needs theorists as a sense of self in
relation to the outside world;
3. recognition, including the recognition of ones identity and
recognition from the others;
4. family and community; and personal development, which
includes a dimension of personal fulfillment, or in other words
the need to reach ones potential in all areas of life.
Commonly, these needs are naturally fulfilled through the
community, or through the policies, public goods, and services
by the state.
*(Marieprovided
Doucey, 2011)

NEEDS
However, if these needs are unfulfilled because the state fails
to properly address them, or if a group feels that these needs
are unmet, or perceives a threat to these needs, violence can
emerge.
The perception, rational or not, of any injustice regarding the
distributive system can quickly lead to an identity-based
struggle. This extends far beyond dialectic greed versus
grievances.
Because it is a matter of universal needs, it is similarly a
matter of survival, so people will go to great lengths to satisfy
them, according to Celia Cook-Huffman, professor of peace
studies and

*(Marie Doucey, 2011)

FEARS
Having raised the question of needs fulfillment, it is relevant to
underscore the psychological dimension of conflicts,
particularly analyzing the weight of fear in escalating violence.
Fear, in its literal definition, is
an unpleasant emotion caused by the threat of danger, pain, or
harm. Fear is a natural and common feeling that allows people to
identify a potential danger
However, healthy fear (or fear that has a protective function)
can evolve into unhealthy or pathological fear, which can lead to
exaggerated and violent behavior.

*(Marie Doucey, 2011)

NEEDS AND FEARS

Therefore, collective fears, which are fueled by the denial of
basic needs, can lead to violent reactions, as an ultimate
attempt of a people to secure the necessities of life and rectify
the perceived injustice.
In addition, violent actions are reinforced by massive
mobilization: the larger the group that takes up arms, the more
legitimate the violence appears to be to the rest of the
population.
This can create a rapid domino effect and provoke large-scale
struggles; de-escalating violence then becomes even more
challenging.

*(Marie Doucey, 2011)

THANK YOU . . .