This paper will deal with some important problems facing the current study of conflict. There are, as generally known, controversial issues in theorizing conflict situation. One is over the social role of conflict. We can observe two different ideas in this issue as follows.
The first is the negative approach; where it is possible to consider conflict an abnormal behavior. This should be eliminated from international relations. The second is, to the contrary, the positive approach; where we regard conflict as a useful social means. In this case, conflicts tend to function to contain opposing interests within the intra-social system, thereby contributing to harmonize the conflict situation.
Another is over the nature of conflict. There are again twofold ideas. The first is a
personal conflict whose root lies in human minds. The second is a
structural one whose cause is correlated with social mechanism. Along with theoretical developments in models of “linkage” and “integration”, our study has also been sophisticated to clarify the meaning, the role, and the function of conflict. As a matter of fact, there is still no appropriate way of explaining how conflicts actually operate.
For this heuristic purpose, the “Barringer Model” was newly proposed to handle controversial issues mentioned above. We find many important implications in the “Barringer Model” of conflict. For example, it argues that there must be an empirical difference between the phases of
ending and that of
resolving conflicts. This is certainly an interesting proposition. Therefore, we shall introduce this innovative model into the analysis of conflicting environments in international relations.
In this paper, we will make efforts to examine respective ideas observed in Barringer's model. In so doing, a theoretical contribution may be possible for rebuilding the theory of conflict. However, an empirical test of this model remains to be seen. Thus, this preliminary attempt was made in this essay.
抄録全体を表示