Beyond Diplomacy: Conflict Management in a Diverse World
Daniel Wehrenfennig
Department of Political Science
University of California, Irvine
3151 Social Science Plaza
Irvine, CA 92697-5100 USA
+1 323 788 1603
## email not listed ##
ABSTRACT
In this paper we will explore the actual practice of
communication in conflict management and contemplate
the changes in the diffusion of power, networking and
communication in the network society for the purpose of
evaluating the challenges and opportunities for current
practices of conflict management that grow out of these
changes. Finally, the model of Perpetual Communication
will be introduced as a possible solution to these
challenges and a way of enhancing democratic principles
in a diverse conflict environment.
Keywords
Conflict Management, Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT), Networks, Perpetual Communication
INTRODUCTION
Since the end of the cold war, half of all conflicts have
been ended through communication and peace talks
between the conflict parties, whereas 100 years ago
roughly one in five was resolved through negotiation (Sisk
2001). Working communication is, however, not just a
means to end conflicts but the absence of communication
is also one of the main reasons that conflicts start in the
first place. Communication must be functioning in order
for solutions and change even to be possible and is
therefore one of the primary issues for conflict
management. However, as Manuel Castells describes it,
“our world, our lives, are being shaped by the conflicting
trends of globalization and identity. The information
technology revolution and the restructuring of capitalism
have induced a new form of society, the network society”
(Castells 1997, 1). This network society, which is shaped
by the enormous technical changes of the last decades as
well as the changed political circumstances after the end of
the cold war, has triggered many changes in conflict
environments. Especially when it comes to the diffusion of
power, social networking and communication, does the
diversity and vibrancy of today’s conflicts offers new
opportunities and challenges for the use of communication
in conflict management. In this paper I will first introduce
where these new possibilities and challenges fit in the
theory and practice of conflict and crisis management. In a
second step, I will introduce the adopted business model of
Perpetual Communication and consider how it could be a
significant tool in solving conflicts and preventing or
mediating crises in the network society and also further the
cause of democracy in this aspect.
USE OF COMMUNICATION IN CONFLICT
MANAGEMENT
Many scholars have studied the effect and use of
communication in social contexts; among others, Karl
Deutsch (1953), Paul Watzlawick (1962), Fritz von Thun
(1981) and Jürgen Habermas (1985, 1998). All of them
acknowledge its importance for the building and
maintaining of social networks and thereby creating social
reality. This research has led to the systematic
understanding that communication is not just the simple
exchange of information (as understood in traditional state
diplomacy) but also a powerful tool and factor in
transforming groups and populations and in building
social capital. Habermas notes that communication,
especially when it continues over a longer period, defines
its own structures and “truth” (cf. Habermas 1998, 367-
373). In his famous article “Let’s Argue”, Thomas Risse
tries to apply this concept to the practices of political
discourse and international relations. He argues for an
argumentative discourse “where interests and identities are
no longer fixed, but subject to interrogation and challenges
and thus, to change. The goal of discursive interaction is to
achieve argumentative consensus with the other, not to
push through one’s own view of the world and moral
values” (Risse, 10). Differing from Habermas, however,
Risse argues that, even when communication partners are
in unequal “power” positions (Foucault’s critique), the
power of the better argument can still prevail, thereby
emphasizing the importance of communication in bringing
change. As Elinor Ostrom writes, ”exchanging mutual
commitment, increasing trust, creating reinforcing norms,
and developing a group identity appear to be the most
important processes that make communication efficacious”
(Elinor Ostrom in Risse, 13). This broader and more
developed understanding of communication has important
implications for conflict management, particularly in light
of the power of communication to change the conflict-
reality into a peace-reality. As Lederach states, “conflict is
never a static phenomenon. It is expressive, dynamic, and
dialectic in nature. Relationally based, conflict is born in
the world of human meaning and perception. It is
constantly changed by ongoing human interaction, and it
continuously changes the very people who give it life and
the social environment in which it is born, evolves, and
perhaps ends” (Lederach 1997, 63). Furthermore, as some
contact theorists also note, “results also show that inter-
group contact can improve attitudes, even under the
conditions of realistic conflict over scarce resources“
(Maoz, 733).
Thus, we see that study and research on communication
has underlined the important role it has in defining and
changing social realities and shown it to be one of the
main factors for conflict management, especially when
used systematically to redefine the relations between the
conflict parties and provide a forum for argumentative
discourse. The first systematic application of the use of
Page 1 of 12 
Convention