Worldview

The Conflict Continuum by Andra Medea

DISCLAIMER: Andra Medea was a guest on the May 6, 1999, edition of Worldview. The opinions expressed here are strictly those of Medea. They do not necessarily represent the opinions of WBEZ.

Return to Worldview 1999 Audio Archive

Return to Worldview's page on the statements of Osama bin Laden

A brief introduction: I'm a theorist in conflict management, having taught at Northwestern and DePaul Universities. In the late 1980s, I began identifying patterns in conflicts and their solutions, including a rare, abnormal form of unusual destructiveness. By 1990 it had become clear that this unusual pattern was developing in Yugoslavia.

My model says that there are different types of conflict that operate by different rules. Diagnosing the conflict incorrectly is like trying to put out an electrical fire by dosing it with water. The results leave a good deal to be desired. But electrical fires certainly can be extinguished. However, they don't respond to the usual methods.

As we've all observed, the War in Yugoslavia has not responded to the usual methods. Certainly if we're facing a leader who thrives on conflict, we should think well about what kind of conflict to offer him.

We've noticed that Milosevic is relentless, but not that he's incompetent; that he's willing to destroy other nations, but not that he can be encouraged to dismantle his own; that his regime appears invulnerable, but may be riddled with fault lines in unexpected places.

It's not that the information isn't there, but that we've been overlooking it in favor of the melodramatic.

The following outlines this model, which includes a chart. Consider the fourth category on the chart, then look at the capsule analysis after the chart. A brief explanation on Serbia follows.

Essentially, the chart maps four levels of conflict. Ordinary ethnic conflicts happen at level three, and respond to the usual procedures that NATO and the UN have employed. Yugoslavia is happening at level four, which is closely related to patterns seen in Iraq, North Korea, or the religious cults of David Koresh or Jim Jones.

In April of 1994 I documented a list of predictions for the war in Yugoslavia, at a time when NATO airstrikes were believed to be about to bring a speedy end to the war. My predictions included that airstrikes, economic sanctions and negotiations would all prove ineffective; that Milosevic was the center of the problem, not the solution; and that if the war was put out in Bosnia, Serbia would find a new conflict somewhere else, probably in Kosovo or Macedonia.

None of these statements are now very remarkable, except that they were made five years ago. And that they weren't made by any conventional political or economic approach, but by looking for patterns along these lines.

Paradigm theory says that when a problem can't be solved by conventional means, that an unexpected solution can come forward from an unexpected place. All this really says is that diversity works, and that a fresh point of view can make quite a difference. -- Andra Medea

THE CONFLICT CONTINUUM
by Andra Medea

There are different types of conflict that operate by different rules. Four levels of conflict are outlined in the following chart. First degree is Problem-solving conflict, which is relatively sane and stable. Second degree loses track of problem-solving and focuses instead on Domination. Third degree progresses into Blind behavior and ultimately Tyranny. Fourth degree is the Rogue Leader, or a rare, specific type of megalomania. Like using water to put out an electrical fire, solutions that work well at one level may prove futile or even dangerous at a higher level.

The first two levels, Problem-solving & Domination, make up the normal range of human behavior. Individuals readily shift back and forth. People tend to use Problem-solving behavior when they are feeling secure and comfortable, then shift to Domination when they feel frustrated or threatened. When feeling respected or safe again, the same individuals are likely to move back to Problem-solving.

Level one conflict uses problem-solving skills, which include negotiation, listening, communication, or brain-storming. Level two conflict is primarily concerned with psychological warfare, with skills such as reality games and power plays. Negotiation or listening skills are not particularly effective against psychological warfare.

Higher levels of conflict are increasingly abnormal. At levels three or higher, people lose their ability to return to Problem-solving. They become increasingly mired in unmanageable problems, often of their own making.

The solution is to identify the pattern and use techniques that work at that given level. The enclosed chart helps diagnose forms of conflict, while the capsule analysis on the back lists dangers and suggested interventions.

Reading the Chart:
Genuine strength and maturity reads from left to right. Problem-solving behavior is stronger and more mature than Domination, Domination is stronger and more mature than Blind behavior, and so on.

However, the ability to win conflicts reads in reverse order, from right to left. Blind behavior tends to thwart mere Domination, Domination tends to deadlock Problem-solving, and so on. With knowledge, this unfortunate state of affairs can be reversed.

Normal Range : Movement up and down continuum

THE CONFLICT CONTINUUM:
CAPSULE ANALYSIS

FIRST-DEGREE CONFLICT: PROBLEM-SOLVING
Identifying signs: Rationality, relative restraint
Key issues: Internal strength, self-respect
Intervention: Improve communication, address problem
Dangers: Unexpected depth of opposition Poor understanding of other systems
Prognosis: Responds well to solutions or proposed solutions. Conflict may be ennobling.

Copyright 1993-6, Andra Medea. Medea & Associates, 28 E. Jackson, #1101, Chicago, IL 60604. All rights reserved.

Explanation of Capsule Analysis

Since the intervention section is so important- and space is so limited- I'll elaborate on this part.

This model is derived from a variety of cases, from Pol Pot and Idi Amin to Joseph McCarthy and David Koresh. Note that as destructive as they were, rather few were invested in ethnic hatreds. They took whatever clay they had at hand, religion or fear or simple greed, and built with that.

If you look at the methods used by various authorities to oppose these people, you will discover they have consistently used the right tactics at the wrong level of conflict. NATO and the UN have not been making foolish mistakes; they have been making the same mistakes that everyone else has made, faced with this pattern. We have not learned from these failures. Chamberlain tried the tactics of levels one and two with Hitler, with dismal results. We, however, can make good use of these costly mistakes. We have paid a high price for this knowledge, in lives, economies, cities and cathedrals. In the past have not gotten our money's worth from these mistakes, but we can make use of them now.

This system metastasizes. Early intervention critical. Rogue Leaders are useless without followers, so they gather those they need. The rapid co-optation of otherwise normal, responsible people is a crucial part of the process. This part of the process is the easiest point to disrupt, but since Yugoslavia is past that point, I'll go on.

Avoid the arms, isolate the head. In the Gulf War against Saddam Hussein, the allies may have kill or captured many thousands of people, but they were all the wrong ones. We were fighting the arms instead of the head.

The head does not care about losing arms. He doesn't experience it as damage. All of Serbia could be destroyed without unsettling Milosevic, while disrupting Milosevic could cause Serbian war machine to critically malfunction.

One doesn't have to kill or even capture the Rogue; it is enough to isolate him. The followers function surprisingly poorly when cut off from contact with the Rogue. The situation at Waco could have been avoided by waiting until Koresh could be lured outside the compound and physically separating him from his followers. With as many problems as it has, Uganda has stabilized with Idi Amin in exile.

Disrupting communications and disabling the propaganda machine is one way of separating the head from the body and rendering it ineffective. NATO is doing something very wise in targeting television and radio stations. Joseph McCarthy lost his head when the Senate denied him television coverage. Communications were vital to keeping his grip on the country.

Target gaps left by leader's incompetence. It is painful to face, but the Rogues who have done such damage and led us on such a dance are actually incompetent. Joe McCarthy never uncovered a single communist. As obsessed as Hitler was about war, the man never seemed to do any work. Yet their exceptional skills in attacking and meeting attacks has masked this underlying incompetence.

We have been handing Milosevic conflicts, and he has thrived on them. A better course might be to ration the conflicts, and hand Milosevic logistical problems. If there's a fight, he may do well in the fight. But if he has to move troops around a blocked mountain pass to get to the fight, then the incompetence can begin to take its toll. Considering that Milosevic has been replacing generals with personal loyalists, there's a good deal of incompetence to work with.

Guard defenders from exhaustion/ attrition. It is not to be pleasant to be targeted by a Rogue Leader, or to have the job of opposing one. People crack under the strain. Like the FBI specialists surrounding David Koresh at Waco, those with overwhelming physical superiority begin to feel besieged and helpless, and they start making mistakes. Many people have noted that NATO's credibility or even its existence is jeopardized if it can't succeed against this small country with outmoded guns. Since the Rogue's preternatural staying power is a given, it's important to prepare against that reversal of roles.

Rapid Growth/ Rapid Destruction. The juggernaut effect. At his prime the Rogue appears unstoppable, but that's not true. Largely this appears true because the defenders have such a flat learning curve. They keep trying sensible methods that are inappropriate to this level of conflict. An electrical fire would appear unstoppable, if you kept throwing water on it.

Defenders immobilized or blindly provoked by futile negotiations. Another hard truth is that Rogue Leaders do no negotiate. All these hundreds- if not thousands- of negotiations that were to have brought stability to the region have all proved essentially empty. This isn't a coincidence. Rogue leaders are capable of many things, including convincing, manipulating and threatening, but they don't do give and take.

There are few things less effective than negotiating with someone who isn't negotiating back.

Institutionalized theft; vacuuming of resources. We're well aware of the black marketeers who have become Serbia's power elite. While it means that economic sanctions fail (since they deliver wealth to the black marketeers), it also creates a crucial fault line. The Rogue system can crack here.

Attacks others but destroys own supporters. This is an extremely self-destructive system. Hitler did great damage to Jews and communists, but he also reduced Germany to a smoking ruin. David Koresh shot several federal agents, then annihilated his own compound. Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, even Joe McCarthy all had done far more damage to their own side than they had to anyone else. This capacity can be harnessed.

Copyright 1999, Andra Medea. All rights reserved.

Return to Worldview 1999 Audio Archive