self-perpetuating dynamics of conflict. Conflicts, including violent ones, take on a life of
their own, and escalate beyond the control of the participants. As conflicts are abstracted,
the stakes are also raised, so that each party considers itself to be fighting for a righteous
cause, rather than for their own personal gain. Gandhian efforts to break the spiral of
escalation involve an identification of the needs and aspirations of all involved, even if
one risks "losing" the conflict.
There are always risks in conflict, whether violent or nonviolent. One may,
however, have more to lose in being sensitive to the opponents' point of view if one is
clearly the stronger adversary. That is why Gandhi insisted on the "nonviolence of the
brave," rather than operating from a position of weakness. For him, nonviolence was not
a strategy of last resort for those without weapons and resources, but a way of life--and of
conflict--that is appropriate for all people at all times.
Most importantly, Gandhi's approach to conflict is a long-run strategy designed
not so much for short-term gain as for long-term security. This is an obvious limitation
of the perspective, because psychologically it is difficult to make evaluations, especially
in the heat of a battle, in terms of eventual, as opposed to immediate, gains.
The core of Gandhi's approach to conflict lies in his insistence on the separation
between the deed and the doer (or “the sin and the sinner”), which are for him two
distinct things. Attacks in nonviolent conflict thus target behavior, systems and structures
rather than individuals and involve the denunciation of actions and patterns of action
rather than their agents: "Whereas a good deed should call forth approbation and a
wicked deed disapprobation, the doer of the deed, whether good or wicked, always
deserves respect or pity as the case may be." This perception of conflict is for Gandhi
Convention