Understanding Conflict Escalation, Dynamics and Procesesses

Sometimes we learn from unexpected sources of knowledge and insights. TV sitcoms and experiences of latent conflicts are examples of these unconventional feeders of information and learnings.

With the help of the popular American TV-sitcom, Friends, and the Cold War, the three escalation models – contender – defender model, conflict spiral model and structural change model - are elaborated. Escalation of conflict can transform from light to heavy, small to large, specific to general, doing well to wining till hurting Other, and from few to many.

The contender-defender model distinguishes the Party (contender) and the Other (defender). Although the example given (school shootings) is too obvious, it still provides an idea of the model which starts from the Party initiating some action of change. If the action does not result to the desired goal, a heavier tactic is implemented until the Other submits to the desire of the Party.

The conflict spiral model refers to the vicious cycle of actions and reactions between the Party and Other. The Palestine-Israel conflict comes to mind for this model. One side does something as a retaliatory act of the other side. The other side responds with a heavier tactic, then comes the full circle of action and reaction marked with increased intensity.

The structural change model describes the escalation as persistent and recurring. This is due to psychological changes, changes in groups, and changes in communities. Under psychological changes, there are emotional changes and hostile attitudes, perceptions, and goals towards each side. Changes in groups also contribute to the persistence of escalation of conflict. One example of this is group polarization. Continuous escalation of conflict creates distinct and extreme groups that have hostile attitudes and perceptions of each side. Changes in communities also play role in this model. If there is a group polarization, there is also a community polarization wherein community members tend to support either of the side. In community polarization, becoming neutral is out of the question since the conflict is reduced to “you’re with us or against us” position.

These models do not propose solution to the conflict. What they do is to analyze and shed light on the conflict, which is a critical step towards conflict resolution.