Table 1
Critique of the South African conflict resolution process measured against the analytical conflict resolution school (Bradshaw 2007).
| Conflict Resolution Theory | South African Practice |
|---|---|
| Procedurally - the conflict is resolved according to analytical problem-solving workshop process, which make negotiation possible. | Analytical workshops were used, between 1985 and 1990, though not always in accordance with Burton’s prescriptions. There were very good transfer mechanisms, however, that might be said to offset this weakness. It is felt that the pre-negotiation interventions were an important factor in enabling negotiations. |
| Evidence of restored relationships, and ‘valued relationships’ exists. | Evidence collected in opinion surveys, during 2004, 2005 and the outcome of elections since 1994 indicates that there is a lack of trust, especially with regard to interracial, political collaboration. Social distance is high, and Government is seen as ‘distant.’ |
| High level of identity needs satisfaction, maximization of autonomy and self-determination | Clearly, a lack of needs satisfaction in South Africa remains a cause for concern, especially as far as physical needs are concerned. The fact that government is perceived as not heeding the demands of the people for services, etc. is also problematic from an identity and control needs, and valued relationships perspective. |
| A high degree of distributive justice. | Distributive justice was compromised in the TRC process, and in the country generally, with regard to human rights abuses and oppression of the past. Gross economic inequality is still the order of the day in South Africa. |
| A high degree of security needs fulfilment | In South Africa, security remains problematic. High levels of violent crime, and violent means of conflict settlement in schools persist. Farm killings continue. |
| Ongoing analytical ‘provention’ processes, to bring about basic human needs satisfaction continue. A problem-solving decision-making framework predominates. | There is a serious lack of attention to ongoing conflict resolution processes of any kind, in the country, by the government, and perhaps insufficient interest in conflict resolution shown by strategic sectors within South African society. The NPA was discontinued. There is a need for institution-building in the conflict transformation management and resolution field in South Africa. A ‘power’ or ‘deterrence’ framework still persists. |
| Political Institutions need to be structured to give protection to minorities. | There is very little evidence of such restructuring in South Africa. It is essentially a unitary state. The first five years saw an accommodation of opposition interests in a Government of National Unity, but subsequently, minorities have not received special protection, except through respect for the equal status of languages. |
| Resolved conflict does not imply a future without any form of conflict | Current levels of conflict behaviour in South Africa seem to be sustainable, although certain areas, mentioned above, give cause for great concern, and may deteriorate if not specifically addressed. |