Complexity in World Politics: Concepts and Methods of a New Paradigm

3. Complexity and Conflict Resolution

43 C H A P T E R 3 Complexity and Conflict Resolution Dennis J. D. Sandole The events of September 11, 2001, undermined much conventional analysis in world politics and international relations (IR). Much as the fall of the Berlin Wall was not anticipated by IR scholars, the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington did not neatly fit within conventional explanations of international conflict. In this paper, therefore, I attempt to (1) respond theoretically and pragmatically to the events and aftermath of September 11, 2001; (2) deal with Realpolitik (and one of its concomitants, ethnocentrism) and conflict resolution as traditionally contending, but potentially complementary, approaches to dealing with threats to order and security at the domestic and international levels; and (3) provide a theoretical and pragmatic basis for further research, theory building, and practice in domestic and world affairs, with a view to dealing effectively with both the deep-rooted causes and the very clear symptoms of the “new” terrorism and related identity-based conflicts fueled by the ending of the Cold War. To make sense of the attacks and to illustrate the potential complementarity of Realpolitik and conflict resolution approaches, I draw on several complexity concepts, including emergence; nonlinear, “catastrophic” responses to initial conditions; and synergistic coexistence of traditionally competing frameworks and ideas. REALPOLITIK Realpolitik is the traditional power paradigm governing efforts to manage the uncertainty and disorder inherent in “Hobbesian space.” At its most virulent extreme, it is expressed as dictatorship domestically and as imperialism internationally , with all the attendant manifestations of structural, cultural, and physical violence—including genocide—implied by the defense and perpetuation of a preferred status quo at the expense of those who do not benefit from it (see Galtung 1969, 1996). Realpolitik has a long lineage, going back in recorded history to at least 416 BC, the midpoint of the Peloponnesian War, when Athens attempted to negotiate control over the neutral island state of Melos, a situation chronicled eloquently by Thucydides: [S]ince you know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must . . . the contest not being an equal one . . . but a question of self-preservation and of not resisting those who are far stronger than you are . . . of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever they can. And it is not as if we were the first to make this law, or to act upon it when made: we found it existing before us . . . all we do is make use of it, knowing that you and everybody else having the same power as we have, would do the same as we do . . . it is certain that those who do not yield to their equals, who keep terms with their superiors , and are moderate towards their inferiors, on the whole succeed best. (1951, 331–36) This is clearly an old story, which has been repeated thousands of times up to the present day, with Hans Morgenthau (1973, 4) being one of the more “recent ” successors to Thucydides and reminding us all about the “laws” that govern human behavior to Realpolitik effect. He says, • Political realism believes that politics, like society in general, is governed by objective laws that have their roots in human nature. • Human nature, in which the laws of politics have their roots, has not changed since the classical philosophies of China, India, and Greece endeavored to discover these laws. In other words, for Morgenthau and other realists, human nature—which makes “statesmen think and act in terms of interest defined as power” (1973, 5)— has not changed since Thucydides made his observations in 416 BC. Hence, the “key concept of interest defined as power is a objective category which is universally valid” (8). In the modern Westphalian world, power as interest is usually reserved for the protection of the nation-state, but it has also been used in defense of the tribe and the ethnic group. 44 DENNIS J. D. SANDOLE Ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism is a natural corollary of Realpolitik: power is used by the privileged to maintain themselves and their groups at the expense of others. According to William Graham Sumner (1906), who coined the term, ethnocentrism is the technical name for this view of things in which one’s own group is the center...