Abstract This paper is a socio-political study of Louis Kriesberg’s model on protracted conflicts and the crisis in Darfur. The project is based on a discussion of the chosen theories, and should therefore not be seen as a case study. The core focus of the project lies within the paradox, that we from the beginning did not see Kriesbergs model as wholesome in the explanation of the happenings in Darfur. In the search for explanation of this paradox we use several other theories. We use political scientist Edward Azar’s theory on protracted social conflicts, to define the Darfur Crises as protracted. Moreover, we use Coleman’s et al. theory on intractable conflict as an attractor to analyze the elements of Kriesberg’s model - which does not explain the actions of the conflict fulfilling. In that context we also conclude that these elements’ lack of explanation, furthermore is a result of the Darfur conflict consisting of many conflicts. We use both theories to discuss whether the model is fulfilling, and in that discussion we bring in Hannah Arendt, to question the theory’s point of view, on human destructiveness. Finally, we conclude, based on our analysis and discussion of the model, that it does not describe the process of the Darfur conflict. This is a critique of the model, but also a question of definition. Because, the question of whether you can use the model or not, might lie within the definition of a conflict. The Darfur conflict consists of many conflicts – and therefore it is obvious, that it brings difficulties when analyzing it through Kriesbergs model. Working with this project has given us an understanding on the complexity of the Darfur conflict. Elements such as international linkages, the role of UN and China, have not been the chief focus of this paper.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Samfundsvidenskabelig Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis|
|Udgivelsesdato||17 jun. 2010|
|Vejledere||Birthe Thykier Møller|
- Louis Kriesberg