Article in Sociology · August 000 doi: 10. 1177/S0038038500000304 citations 37 reads 5,200 author

The multidimensionality of conflicts

To decide which conflicts have been powered by ethnic hostility it would be

necessary to find a way of differentiating the conflicts that were not motivated by

ethnic sentiment. Of those covered in Brogan’s study, the 1945 civil war in Greece

might be considered non-ethnic since, if his description is correct, it arose from a

Communist attempt to control the state. Among the conflicts included in his count

there are civil wars occasioned by attempted secessions with an ethnic or potentially

national character, like those of Bangladesh, Biafra and the Sudan, and others (like

those over the Falkland Islands/Malvinas and India’s border disputes with China and

Pakistan) in which two countries disputed sovereignty over territory; they were

political disputes, but, since the parties were distinguished by their culture, their

nationality (and possibly their ethnicity), they were more than struggles for political

advantage and could be accounted ethnic conflicts. Israel’s conflicts with her

neighbouring states have presumably had this quality plus an additional factor

rooted in religious differences. Very many of the conflicts recorded in Brogan’s

survey had arisen when imperial powers could no longer guarantee the political

frameworks they had earlier established, as in Sri Lanka, Cyprus, Chad, the Western

Sahara, the Kurdish region and several republics of the former Soviet Union. With

greater trade, closer contact between peoples, and new means of communication,

sentiments of group belonging, and of opposition to rule by foreigners, had grown.

484

m i c h a e l  ba n to n

---

They had fostered the burgeoning sentiments Europeans call nationalistic and had

motivated individuals to support collective political struggles.

A conclusion to be drawn from this summary review is that large-scale conflicts

are between groups that are distinctive on more than one dimension, and this

multidimensionality makes it easier for their members to act collectively. The

conflicts were all political, by definition, and the political struggle often followed

ethnic lines, but it would be futile to try to classify them in any way that did not allow

for their many facets. Nor may it be justifiable to differentiate a sub-class of conflicts,

called ethnic conflicts, as if they have a characteristic which distinguishes them from

other conflicts.

For example, it is generally accepted that there is a conflict of some sort in

Northern Ireland. Old tensions were revived in 1969 when a group marched to draw

attention to what they considered violations of their civil rights. They were attacked

for doing so, and the police failed to protect them. An opposition then escalated.

Most of those on the one side of it considered themselves Catholic, while most of

those on the other side considered themselves Protestant, but that did not make it a

religious conflict. Representatives of both Catholic and Protestant churches

deplored many of the methods employed by the opposed groups. The sharpest

opposition was that constituted by the Republicans, who held that their grievances

could not be met within the prevailing political structure and that the only satis-

factory solution would be a united Ireland. They were opposed by the Unionists who

insisted on maintaining the union with Great Britain. There had been systematic

discrimination in the allocation of resources based on the assignment of individuals

to religious categories, but the underlying motivation was political. Nor was it a

conflict between two homogeneous blocs, for many of those on the one side who

believed that they had legitimate grievances would have been satisfied without a

united Ireland, and many of those on the other side distanced themselves from

extreme expressions of Unionism. On both sides there was more than one political

party competing for votes, quite apart from the party which was trying to bridge the

divide. Over the years there were issues that mobilised varying degrees of support

either for protest or for the repression of what was perceived as a terrorist movement.

Some sort of conflict continued, but it varied in intensity. Different individuals had

different motives for participating in the conflict. Individual identification with the

groups, and with the actions which expressed the conflict, varied continually.

If a broad definition is employed, it could be said that Northern Ireland provides

an example of an ethnic conflict, but ethnicity is scarcely its distinguishing character-

istic, and a classification as ‘ethnic’ does not contribute anything of value to the

analysis of events there. All persisting conflicts, indeed, all persisting social groups of

the kind called communities, are almost certain to be multidimensional, by com-

parison with the unidimensional definitions of groups in laws to prohibit dis-

crimination. The Northern Ireland example illustrates the variable of individual

Ethnic Conflict

485

---

commitment to conflict. There has been substantial emigration from the province.

Those who wearied of the conflict and sought better prospects for their families have

left for the British mainland, North America or Australia. The more urbanised of the

areas characterised by continuing conflict, like Sri Lanka, Cyprus, Chechnya and the

Kurdish areas of Turkey, all appear to have contributed disproportionately to inter-

national migration. It is the exit option. Without allowing for variations in indivi-

dual motivation there can be no explanation of why some conflicts escalate, as when

secondary ethnicity becomes primary, why others conflicts persist without major

change, while yet other conflicts decline as the parties reach an accommodation.

Human beings are socialised to seek particular ends. Some of these they may be

able to attain on their own, by individual action. To attain others they have to

combine, and engage in collective action. Relations within a local community, like

the relations between neighbours, are usually based on the exchange of services

between individuals, or relatively small groups, like families, in which individuals co-

operate. Ethnic mobilisation is a form of larger-scale collective action by which

people seek ends they cannot attain by individual action. It can also be a form of

collective action by which members of elites pursue their individual ends with the

sometimes reluctant support of followers who have less interest in the desired

outcome. The processes of mobilisation can be examined within a single theoretical

framework even though the nature of the underlying sentiment varies from case to

case.

It is worth reflecting on the decision an individual makes whether or not to utilise

an exit option because it serves as a reminder that conflicts persist only when

individuals invest resources in collective struggles. Sometimes there is an option of

internal exit, but the possibility of emigration poses the issue more sharply. One

person may decide that his or her career, life-style, family aspirations and so on are

just too important relative to an aspiration he or she shares with other group

members. This rests on assessments of relative preferences and of the chances of

attaining the shared objective. Other variables come into play because preferences

are rarely static, but to find out more about what powers ethnic conflict it can be

helpful to look more closely into preferences for ethnic association.