Conflict and Negotiation The Bophuthatswana crisis of 1994

Conflict & Negotiation The Bophuthatswana crisis of 1994 The Bophuthatswana crisis of 1994 entailed a devastating political crisis which started when the Bophuthatswana president, Lucas Mangope, made an attempt at crushing the widespread demonstrations and labor unrest from the people of South Africa as they demanded incorporation of the Bophuthatswana territory into the South African region pending the first multiracial election in 1994 (Holomisa, 2011; Lawrence & Manson1, 1994). Lucas Mangope was a Bantustan (Lentz, 2014).

The crisis provoked violent protests after President Mangope made an announcement in 7th March 1994 to the effect that Bophuthatswana was intending to boycott the general elections in South Africa (Appiah & Gates, 2010). The violence quickly escalated into mutiny from local based armed forces and striking of civil servants. The crisis was further complicated when the right-wing extremists arrived with an intention to push for the preservation of Manope’s Bophuthatswana government (Cawthra, 1997).

The confrontations lasted close to 4 days before Mangope succumbed to the pressure and consented to allowing the people of Bophuthatswana to participate in the forthcoming elections (Marina, 1993). A few moments afterwards Mangope reversed that decision. The defense force of South Africa responded to the sudden change of heart by deposing Mangope and taking over control of Bophuthatswana in 12 March 1994. This crisis in Bophuthatswana confirmed that the government of Mangope was unpopular and the fall of Bantustan system of government for most of the residents (Cawthra, 1997).

The Bophuthatswana crisis is often remembered for the memorable shooting of 3 AWB (Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging) militants live on television. The shooting demoralized the AWB movement whose primary intention was to preserve the minority rule of the whites. The shooting of the AWB was done by a black South African police officer (Wood, 2007). Reason for choosing this conflict At the height of racial conflict and negotiations for South African liberation Lucas Mangope was obsessed about maintaining control of the Bophuthatswana region.

His adamant determination to ignore the bigger picture of a united front against white minority rule led him to unite forces with the right-wing extremists in the quest to keep Bophuthatswana out of the 1994 multiracial elections. During his rule, Lucas Mangope deprived Bophuthatswana of political freedom and those who opposed the state were banished, subjected to extrajudicial harassment, and arrested. ANC (African National Congress) was also considered illegal by Mangope’s government.

Rather than negotiate with the interest of the black South Africans at heart, Mangope chose to collaborate with the right-wing extremist backed by white minorities. This demonstrated the selfish character of Mangope which resulted to bloodshed and destruction of his leadership regime. The main theories of conflict that will inform the research paper According to Fisher and Ury (1991) the first principle in conflict resolution is separating the population from the current problem.

In order to amicably arrive to a conclusive conflict resolution people must be separated from the conflict as the two warring parties engage in negotiations. There are three categories to this principle and they include communication, emotion, and perception. Fisher and Ury (1991) allude to the fact that the people negotiating are first of all people who have emotions, cultural background, and values that vary. Resolving conflicts means that these human aspects may be disastrous or helpful. Negotiations can help build understanding and trust where positive relationships are established.

Negotiations could also result to dissatisfaction or frustration. Fisher and Ury (1991) discuss the way relationships between people get affected by the problem being discussed by the parties. Fisher and Ury (1991) also discuss the principles of focusing on interests and not positions. Fisher and Ury (1991) recommend the importance of focusing on interests that inform a position held by both parties. The parties ought to focus on interests and be open to the arguments of the opponents.

The third principle discussed by Fisher and Ury (1991) is exploration of options that will facilitate mutual gain. This principle seeks to assist the parties in finding the option capable of impacting all party positively. Neither party should feel taken advantage of. The 4th principle by Fisher and Ury (1991) is the principle of employing objective criteria in negotiation. The conversation should be productive. Decisions must be based on practical and objective criteria. The 5th principle by Fisher and Ury (1991) is the principle of BATNA (Best Alternative to Negotiated Agreement).

Fisher and Ury (1991) argue that there is no method that is likely to provide successful solutions if one side has all leverage. Fisher and Ury (1991) suggest that each party should first protect themselves and then employ the power within the ranks of their assets for negotiations and victory against the opponents. Ramsbotham, Woodhouse and Miall (2016) offer an assessment of modern conflict landscape. The researchers identify the transnational conflict patterns and propose a response that is founded on cosmopolitan style of conflict resolution.

Cosmopolitan conflict resolution entails the promotion of cosmopolitan values wherein the life hopes and welfare of the generations to come is dependent on. Klare (2001) argues that conflict over the natural resource is the foundation of intra and interstate conflicts. Ideology may have been the primary consideration during the cold war although Klare (2001) believes that modern conflicts will be based on the scramble for limited natural resources. Galtung (1990) defines cultural violence as any cultural aspect that might be employed for the purpose of legitimizing violence in its structural or direct form.

According to Galtung (1990) symbolic violence cultivated in a culture isn’t deadly as direct violence or the kind of violence that is cultivated into cultural structure. Violence is a tool used to legitimize one or both aspects. Sagan & Valentino (2015) found that the commitment by the public to principles of due care, proportionality, and distinction are biased fundamentally often favoring protection of Americans and selfish security interests that contravene the just war theory.

Goldstein & Pinker (2016) point the diminishing of chaos and war carnage in 2016 hence resulting to global peace. The past war escalation seems to be abating. Goldstein & Pinker (2016) gave examples of the cease fire in Ukraine and he formation of a unity government in South Sudan. Goldstein & Pinker (2016) believe that peace talks are a current proof that war violence can be overcome. Marc, A., (n.d.) offers statistical facts proving that conflict and prolonged war keeps results to poverty.

Since 2010 conflicts have increased sharply affecting more civilians in comparison to WWII. Korovin, Tsiskaridze & Voronkov (2009) assert that when conflict is identified and faced sooner than later the likelihood of escalation is alleviated fundamentally. Weinstein (2018) also discusses the principles of conflict resolution from the start of a conflict to its escalation.

These principles and perspectives from different authors will inspire an in-depth understanding of the Bophuthatswana crisis and the steps that Lucas Mangope ought to have taken to avert conflict and war in the wake of multiracial elections and victory against apartheid. References Appiah, K. A., & Gates, H. L. (2010). Encyclopedia of Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cawthra, G. (1997). Securing South Africa's democracy: Defence, development and security in transition. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Fisher, R., Ury, W., & Patton, B.