1: Conflict Intervention Case Study Topic: India and Pakistan’s Kashmir DisputeSimranjit Singh GillSullivanUniversityCMM 521: ManagingOrganizational ConflictDecember 12th, 2017 Introduction India and Pakistan Kashmir dispute is 69years old, world’s longest running conflict in history. Kashmir is referred as dangerousplace on the earth. The two countries have been fighting over Kashmir sincethey both got independence in 1947. So far India and Pakistan have fought threewars against each other since 1947. Aside from India and Pakistan, China alsoclaim Aksai Chin which is part of Kashmir. This conflict continues today, whichinvolves three nuclear powers – India, Pakistan and China. Due to this territorial conflict, more than 70,000 people havebeen killed and around 8,000 are still missing after 1988 (in 1988 bothcountries became nuclear powers). BATNA between India and PakistanThere is no doubt to say that a Negotiated Agreementbetween India and Pakistan would save two large humanities and help themsurvive, not to starve and develop, reduce international tensions and both thecountries will cease to be market places or play grounds for weapon dealers (Babu, 2010).
But to achieve this peace between both countries,both parties should be ready to understand and face best and worstalternatives. Figure 1: Mapview of Kashmir occupied by India, Pakistan and China Parties (aka stakeholders) Interests BATNA India Britain relinquished Kashmir control of the Indian subcontinent in 1947, splitting it into a predominantly Hindu India and a Muslim Pakistan. So, India still claim Kashmir based on it’s both Hindu and Muslim population. BATNA for India could be reclaiming of Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and eternal peace, while worst could be to continue with terrorism or losses in War like losing some more territory etc. (Khan, 2017). Pakistan Pakistan claims Jammu and Kashmir based on its majority Muslim population. For Pakistan, BATNA could be separation of Kashmir to wreck vengeance against India for it helped separation of Bangla from Pakistan in 1971 (Khan, 2017). China China claim Aksai Chin as it took it over during the Sino-Indian War of 1962 BATNA for China could be keep Aksai Chin from Kashmir and don’t intervene in India & Pakistan Kashmir dispute.
Figure 2. Chartshowing the parties involved, their interest and BATNA’s (Best Alternative forNegotiated Agreement)Figure 3: Spiralof Unmanaged Conflict Kashmir conflict falls at the very topof the spiral chart (Figure 3), because it’s been long time since this disputeis going on and currently dispute is at highest intensity which is stillcausing wars and unresolved problems. For India and Pakistan, Kashmir is integralpart of their countries so for them it shouldn’t be open for dispute. And toresolve this dispute, both parties don’t show any flexibility or involvement.
Another reason, Kashmir conflict keepson exaggerating till now is due to aggressive and derogatory marks passed by governmentrepresentative and agencies, this behavior from both parties leads to avoidanceand competition which is not appropriate to resolve this dispute. The governments of India failed to bringpeople of Kashmir into fold rather they always treat them always considered this to be a bi-party issue involving India andPakistan. Over time, this conflict has grown so big that it’s seemsimpossible to resolve this longstanding conflict now. This conflict could be resolvedwith different conflict intervention strategies like collaboration or compromiseand this is possible if both parties willing to accommodate each other’s needs.Between collaboration and compromise, collaboration is the best conflictintervention strategy because, compromise can result in temporary solution butnot good for long term. As you can see in the figure 4 below, cooperative behaviorbetween both parties should be really high to reach the conflict resolution throughcollaboration or compromise. Figure 4: Different approaches to manage conflict To handle conflict resolution, partiescan go for different strategies like forcing, accommodating, avoiding, compromisingand collaborating but research shows that from these fives strategies, conflictparties often go for one or two strategies more than others. For example, collaborationand compromise always great to resolve interpersonal disputes, and collaborationcan resolve any trivial dispute where both parties understand each otherconcerns and find satisfactory and win-win solution.
When both parties collaborate to resolve a conflict,they openly express their concerns and work to find a mutually beneficialsolution. This is how one can break free of the “win-lose” paradigmand seek the “win-win.” This can be effective for complex scenarios whereyou need to find a novel solution. However, compriseresolution strategy is the “lose-lose” scenariowhere neither party really achieves what they want.
This requires amoderate level of assertiveness and cooperation. It may be appropriate forscenarios where you need a temporary solution, or where both sides have equallyimportant goals. The trap is to fall into compromising as an easy way out, whencollaborating would produce a better solution (Hawke, Roc & Ridgway, 1992). ReferencesBabu, D.
S. (2010). TheKashmir conflict.
Delhi: Routledge India.Hawke, K., Roc, M.
, &Ridgway, J. (1992). Conflict resolution.
South Melbourne: Macmillan EducationAustralia.Khan, M. A. (2017).
KashmirConflict: Tracing the History Suggesting the Solution. Retrieved December 15,2017, from http://www.academia.