Is Ethnic Conflict inevitable?

The earliest human groups must have been formed after realizing that the chances of survival increase considerably by cooperation with other individuals and groups. The scarcity of resources for survival forced them to compete with each other. As a result of this competition, the conflicts were born. We can say that as long as there is a society with scarce resources, the conflicts can never be avoided.

The literature in social sciences defines the term ‘conflict’ in a number of ways. According to George Simmel (1955) ‘If every interaction among men is a sociation, conflict must certainly be considered as sociation.’ A.W. Green (1956) defines conflict as ‘the deliberate attempt to oppose, resist or coerce the will of another or others’.

As the mankind started forming association with larger groups, the formation of communities and societies gave birth to the ethnic identity and the conflicts started arising due to a group’s ethnic identity. Bates at al. (2003) has defined ethnic conflict as any episode of sustained violent conflict in which national, ethnic, and religious or other communal minorities challenge governments to seek major changes in status.

The universality and ubiquitous nature of ethnic conflicts has been evident throughout the known history of human civilization. There has been extensive research on the causes of ethnic conflict. Some researchers posit that ethnic conflict is a result as different culture comes close due to globalization and ultimately come into clash with each other. According to Samuel Huntington (1993) “conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating civilizations.” The modern technology has made global communication much easier and cheaper resulting in more interactions between people who have different nationality and culture, which leads to further civilization consciousness. As a result of this increased civilization, the differences between civilizations would become more apparent and will invigorate animosities leading to conflict (Huntington 1993). When empirically studied, it was found that only a small minority of all ethnic conflicts was caused by civilizational conflicts and that there is no statistically significant evidence that points to civilization clashes as increasing the likelihood of ethnic conflicts (Fox 2002). However, people having conflicting practices in their cultures when interact with each other and become aware of such practices which may be directly or indirectly in conflict with their culture may give rise to enmity or hostility with each other. 

The relationship between the availability or scarcity of natural resources and ethnic conflict may be another dimension to this issue. When a nation-state is largely dependent on agricultural produce and natural resources, it is much more prone to internal violence. Since natural resources are always dependent on the natural phenomenon and their production is not always in human control, their availability and production may not be as much as needed by the people of that society. This scarcity is bound to create competition and then conflict between the ethnic groups of that state arising due to the need or greed of a certain ethnicity. Humphreys (2005) explains such conflict caused by greed or grievances where there are feelings of ethnic or political marginalization as one group is disadvantaged by another group in terms of access to natural resources. When there is an intolerable gap between what people feel they deserve and what they get in terms of goods or economic power, dissatisfied people will join together and revolt (Davies 1962). Some researchers suggest that that the economic inequality can lead to violence as well. However, Marie Besançon (2005) posits in her research that economic equality and not inequality actually precedes the escalation of ethnic violence. This suggests that there is no relationship between availability or scarcity of resources, or economic inequality, with ethnic conflict. In this case, it seems fair to conclude that conflicts are bound to arise regardless of the availability of natural resources in a nation state.

The role of religion however small it may seem in the modern day global politics, is still a factor that is central to many ethnic conflicts in the history and even in the present. Fox (2004b) states that religion has a significant influence on ethnic conflicts. Religion based conflicts between ethnicities and even nations have been observed not only in the history but even today. Although secularism has been the central political ideology in most modern nations and countries, there are still many states in the world who identify themselves with a certain religion or even the sect of a religion, and also form their constitutions and laws as per the teachings and practices of the particular religion of the majority of population of that state. Examples of such countries are Israel, Iran, Bhutan, Pakistan, Ukraine, Syria and Iraq. These nation states identify themselves as Islamic, Christian, Hindu or even the sects or denominations of Christianity or Islam. Rummel (1997) notes that when political power is centralized and highly dependent upon one’s social group membership, such as religion, then collective violence is also highly likely in terms of guerilla or revolutionary warfare. In the presence of such nation states who possess strong identity with their religion, it would be highly unlikely that there would be no conflicts in future unless they cultivate tolerance and willingness to accept the existence of differing concepts and ideas with open-mindedness.  

References

Habyarimana, J., Humphreys, M., Posner, D. and Weinstein, J., 2008. Is Ethnic Conflict Inevitable-Parting Ways over Nationalism and Separatism. Foreign Aff., 87, p.138.

Brown ME. Causes and implications of ethnic conflict. The ethnicity reader: Nationalism, multiculturalism and migration. 2010 Jan 11:93-109.

Taras, R. and Ganguly, R., 2015. Understanding ethnic conflict. Routledge.