Ethnic Conflict: An Overview of Analyzing and Framing Communal Conflicts From Comparative Perspectives

Murer, Jeffrey Stevenson

doi:10.1080/09546553.2012.700614

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taking Brubaker and Laitin's (1998) approach further that in such a conflict "at least one party was not a state. Murer (2012) argued that in such conflicts, the other side is also defined in ethnic terms and not as a state. This is the reason why Murer states the Chechen conflict was described as the Russian versus Chechen conflict and not Chechens struggling for independence against Russia, the state (Murer, 2012).…”

Section: Ethnopolitical Conflicts: a Conceptual Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When exactly the group members identify themselves with their ethnic identity? According to Vamik Volkan, individuals are more likely to relate to their ethnic identity and ethnic group when the group is under threat: … under conditions of threat individuals become more defined by their large group identities to the point where it may far outweigh any concerns for individual needs, even survival (Murer, 2012).…”

Section: Ethnopolitical Conflicts: a Conceptual Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What the Instrumentalists Got Wrong? Ethnopolitical Violence, Ethnic Leadership and Ethnopolitical Conflicts

Zeb¹

2021

Progressive Research Journal of Arts & Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As per the instrumentalists, ethnic identity is not primordial and is based on ethnic elite’s political and social construction. They argue that only because there are differences and inequality among the groups is not a sufficient reason for the emergence of a conflict between them. An ethnopolitical conflict would emerge when the elite of a particular ethnic group would make a concentrated effort to highlight this difference and rally the masses on it. The paper argues that Instrumentalist theory fails to explain the timing of politicization and mobilization of ethnicities. Questions such as how significant is the role of history? Could collective memory or history of past injustices generate ethnic mobilization? Why the masses believe and follow the ethnic elite? And why only at a certain time, the efforts of the ethnic elite to mobilize the masses are successful? Are raised and addressed using two case studies of ethnopolitical conflicts: Tamil-Sinhalese conflict, and the Rohingyia-Buddhist conflict. The key finding is that it is the ethnic elite that play the most significant role in shaping the conflict and whether it would get violent using a grievance based narrative and a sparking event

show abstract

Section: Ethnopolitical Conflicts: a Conceptual Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ethnopolitical Conflicts: a Conceptual Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

What the Instrumentalists Got Wrong? Ethnopolitical Violence, Ethnic Leadership and Ethnopolitical Conflicts

Zeb¹

2021

Progressive Research Journal of Arts & Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, individuals ascribe themselves to a particular group -self-ascription -and secondly the group makes a determination as to whether the individual belongs to the group or not -ascription by the collective. 18 That determination is often based on the assessment of a performance associated with the group. Individual members of groups enact their identity in such a way that others will recognize these enactments.…”

Section: One Of Us?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Criminological Approaches to International Criminal Law

Bantekas¹,

Mylonaki²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter explores the motivations for joining violent groups across a range of circumstances. In particular the chapter will explore the similarities in both entry and exit among groups as diverse as street gangs and terrorist organisations. Frequently membership in violent groups is explained in terms of individual material gain or the attainment of individual fame. Indeed many of these studies treat joining these groups and the deployment of violent as being antisocial. However, much can be gained by seeing these groups in completely the opposite light: gangs, factions, militias, even terrorist organisations can be highly social environment, especially for those who feel that they have limited opportunities for social capital accumulation or mobility, or indeed have even been expelled from a social milieu for mobility altogether. Within such social milieus violence is but one form of social action among a whole range social acts; or to put it more succinctly, in such circumstances violence itself is a social act. For those who experience family instability, or otherwise experience low social status, joining a violent group might become one of the means of accumulating social capital, and experience upward social mobility. Violence itself may be the act that produces social capital, and at the same time reinforces group membership. It does so in a number of ways. Violent imaginaries join groups together. Demonstrations of this shared violent imaginary become the means of expressing group belonging. Similarly violence becomes the means of communicating with group members, as the means of reinforcing collective solidarity, and demonstrating distance and distinction from other groups that become the targets of violence. Those who commit violence may not be making an individual decision to be "bad" or "evil"; they may be responding to social expectations and norms in a specific environment. They may be performing their identity.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, perhaps strangely, the academic literature has relatively little to say about how the immediate parties to the conflict -Israelis and Palestiniansperceive it with respect to the issues at its core and how to measure this perception. The literature includes a limited number of studies that deal with the cause of the conflict (Corstange and York, 2016;Esteban and Mayoral, 2011;Murer, 2012). These are roughly divided between studies that emphasize the identity aspects of the conflict (Auerbach, 2009) and those that emphasize material aspects as a cause (Dowty, 2007;Nie, 2003;O'Lear, 2005;Selby, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict perception: a new scale with evidence from Israel and Palestine

Khatib

Canetti

Rubin

2018

IJCMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The current work aims to introduce the concept of conflict perception and construct a scale that measures individual differences in perceptions about conflicts along religious, national and material dimensions. The concept and the measure are developed in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. Design/methodology/approach The research design combines three methodological elements: 14 focus groups in Israel and the West Bank, which represent diversity in place of residence, religion, age and political background; an expert panel review; and a survey of 411 student respondents that was conducted between September 29 and October 9, 2013, among university students in Israel and Palestine. Findings The findings show that conflict perception is an individual’s subjective view regarding the essence of the conflict and its central issues, the identities of the parties involved and their motivations, which may include material, ideological or symbolic motives, or any combination thereof. A novel scale consisting of five statements that can measure conflict perception that was developed, validated and implemented via a survey sample showed that Palestinians in the West Bank and in Israel have a religious perception of the conflict, whereas Jews have a national perception of the conflict. Originality/value First, the paper introduces a new concept that sheds additional light on the micro foundations of peoples’ attitudes in conflict situations. Second, it develops and validates a measurement tool for conflict perception that may be usable, with necessary adjustments, in other conflicts. Third, it demonstrates that parties to the conflict do not necessarily share similar perceptions about the conflict, a finding with far-reaching consequences for conflict resolution at both the scholarly and policy levels.

show abstract

Ethnic Conflict: An Overview of Analyzing and Framing Communal Conflicts From Comparative Perspectives

Cited by 11 publications

References 18 publications

What the Instrumentalists Got Wrong? Ethnopolitical Violence, Ethnic Leadership and Ethnopolitical Conflicts

What the Instrumentalists Got Wrong? Ethnopolitical Violence, Ethnic Leadership and Ethnopolitical Conflicts

Criminological Approaches to International Criminal Law

Conflict perception: a new scale with evidence from Israel and Palestine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About