Skip to main content

Role of Communication in conflict and its resolution

To underline the significance of communication, it is said very often that ‘Communication is the first fatality in any conflict’. The idea behind this statement brings about the positive role communication plays in resolving conflicts very efficiently. The statement presents a clear observation which is evident in many if not all the conflicts. Very often, Parties in conflict do stop communicating. The positive force behind communication is considered so pious that absence of communication is often related to the existence of a dormant conflict. Thus, ‘communication is treated as a utilitarian device employed in pursuit of resolution.’

However, what is often glossed over is the part communication plays in introducing a conflict. Communication is indeed an irreplaceable tool when it comes to resolving a conflict but it would be naïve to believe that all communication leads to resolution. As a matter of fact, communication not only resolves conflicts but also acts a divisive force which may break relationships, ideas, and institutions. Just as communication can act as a force for reconciliation, it can also mislead people into believing in lies and falling for propaganda. Which communication leads to what is very much dependent upon what and how something has been communicated.

The ubiquitous importance of communication in the conduct of human affairs is best represented by the idea that “You cannot not communicate”.  Interestingly, Communication is needed for a conflict to become apparent. Innumerable conflicts may exist in the hearts and minds of people. If it were not for communication, how is one supposed to know about the existence of a conflict? It takes someone to communicate for someone else to know about a conflict.  Thus, communication plays as important a role in causing a conflict as it does in its resolution.

To better understand communication; it may be defined as the exchange of meaning. Communication is not a one-time but an ongoing process. Symbols play a crucial role in communication. All symbols denote something, they stand for something. The existence of a conflict can be sensed because there are symbols that indicate so. Symbols themselves are part of the larger culture of a society. For example, if two individuals were to shout and scream at each other, they will be interpreted as fighting with each other in most cultures. It is because shouting and screaming as symbols are associated with animosity. All of us use symbols and those symbols represent one or another meaning.

Evidently, all symbols represent something but interestingly, all symbols also stand for innumerable things that they do not represent.  Humans are the ‘inventor of the negative’ (Burke). Furthermore, from the power of negative originated the capacity to classify things. Classification has assisted humans to organize and arrange the world around them in a ‘meaningful’ pattern. Often, classification is used to separate one group from other. Mammals and Amphibians are two different groups with their own definitive characteristics.

While classifying, humans intend to handle large amounts of data and put certain tags on them. However, this classification itself is not always accurate.  Moreover, the propensity to introduce classification brings in a certain degree of plasticity. Thus, while classification organizes large data and information into groups, resulting into easing up the process of handling such data, the problem of inaccuracy looms large. Classification does leave a gap. The intermittent gaps in classification are the result of generalization.

The manner in which something or somebody is perceived is of much significance when it comes to communication. Perception is not independent of the person receiving it. Irrespective of what has been conveyed or said, the way a message has been received depends a lot on the way it has been perceived. Thus, understanding how perception affects communication can come handy in resolving a conflict. Perception has a profound effect on communication which goes beyond mere communication and affects decision-making process as well.

More importantly, perceptions are not constructed in isolation. Everybody with a perception about something has been affected by those around him/her.  The collective force of the group surrounding a person constantly affects the process of making of the perceptions. On one hand, perception differentiates one group from another while on the other hand it also helps tie bonds in interesting ways.

People often resort to heuristics in order to compensate for the lack of information.  With the lack of information, uncertainty arises. Especially when a situation involves complex decision-making, uncertainty pulls strings. In such circumstances, although, heuristics simplify the situation and make the process of decision-making simpler, they do result in to bad decisions sometimes. Often, Heuristics provide quick and correct insights to make decisions, but there is always a possibility of being misled looming around. Thus, bad decision-making yet again affect the process of resolution adversely. ‘What people perceive is not necessarily objectively so, nor is it even necessarily rational.’

A rather ‘negative’ and yet significant aspect of communication is ‘Propaganda’. There is rarely a conflict in which one or both parties do not want to influence an audience and peddle a favorable opinion. It is a mistake to believe that propaganda as a tool is only used by states and other large entities. There is propaganda of some sort around us all the time. Propaganda is a part of human life. ‘Publics are created, in part, out of language and the process of classification.’

However, Propaganda also has a positive side to it, which is often glossed over. For example, a group of marginalized workers can use it to voice their concerns to the management. In doing so, they can add larger numbers to their groups in order to gain an upper hand on the negotiating table. Propagandists yet again work on the principle of forming groups that may have not existed in the past.

Burton argued; the origin of conflict lies in the needs that were not fulfilled. However, language is the tool through which it may be conveyed whether those needs can be catered to. Communication and language are at the centre of any negotiation, reconciliation, or dispute resolution effort. Thus, the positive role communication plays in resolving a conflict cannot be undermined. However, the larger role that communication plays including acting as the origin of a conflict cannot be diminished either. To conclude, ‘there can be no societal conflict without communication, just as there can be no conflict societal resolution of that conflict without communication.’   


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Non-Violence as a strategy

It cannot be said with certainty whether the idea to put the other cheek up after receiving a slap on one is still celebrated or not. However, it can be safely assumed that if there were a choice between returning the slap to the perpetrator and giving him another chance to repeat the attack, few would choose the latter. Arguably, it was the New Testament that first proposed this idea, which was then followed and propagated to the public at large to varying degrees by leaders around the world. The idea of non-violence has taken many different shapes and forms as it has translated into the real world. It is interesting to investigate how an idea that leaders and thinkers like Gandhi and Tolstoy held so close to their hearts came to be under the purview of strategy.  To many, pacifism is a tool of the weak as it dissociates from the idea of using strength in its conventional form. It is argued; those lacking the traditional means to confront the established authority seek refuge in non

REALISM: THE BALANCE OF POWER

The term ‘Balance of Power’ is attributed to Otto Van Bismarck who while uniting Germany paid special attention to not disturbing the balance of power in erstwhile Europe. The term has since become part of commonly used vocabulary in media and academics alike. Balance of Power (BoP) says that states act to preserve a balance or equilibrium of power in the system. Kenneth Waltz talks about BoP in his book “Theory of International Politics”. BoP itself appears as a part of structural realism in Kenneth Waltz’s book. Waltz argues that the Anarchical world order breeds mistrust in the international structure where increase in the power/resources of one state is seen with caution. According to Kenneth Waltz, the self regarding states act to maximize their power by all possible means. Some states do succeed in aggregating greater power to the envy of other nation-states in the system. As soon as a state acquires power more than other states, a wave of discomfort runs through the system alarm