Stratification, Political Rivalry and Ethnic Insecurities: Theoretical Insights for Conflict Resolution

• Author: Deryck Bernard
• Pages: 231-239

Deryck Bernard 231231

231231

231

Stratification, Political Rivalry and Ethnic Insecurities:

Theoretical Insights for Conflict Resolution

14 DE R Y C K B E R N A R D

University of Guyana

Introduction

Post-war analysts of the political

circumstances of the state created from the

disintegration of the colonial empires noted

that the legitimacy of a state and its power

and authority was not a matter which could

be assumed but rather was a goal to which

states aspired and concerning which there

were a variety of theories, ideologies and

strategies. It was recognized by more

thoughtful and realistic observers that neither

elegant constitutional structures nor material

progress guaranteed the transferral of loyalty

and allegiance from the myriad tribal,

linguistic, religious and territorial loyalties

which pre-existed the creation of the

postcolonial state. The preoccupation of

workers in the 1960s and 1970s with the

legitimacy of state institutions was not justified

or demonstrated by the history of the twentieth

century. Realistic analysis recognized the reality

that the natural outcome of the conditions in

which new states found themselves was chaos

and disintegration.1 This explains why attempts

over the decades of the twentieth century to

create loyalty to state institutions and the

development process have not proved to be

universally successful exercises..

..

.

The recognition of the tendency towards

chaos and disintegration has manifested itself

in analyses of the causes of that disintegration

in the characteristics of fragile states and the

extreme manifestation of failure, the failed

state.

The assumptions of this paper are rooted

in the assumptions of the analyses of that

period which argued that fragility was the

normal and natural result of creating a state

out of disparate segments where there is no

history of common loyalty, accommodation

and cultural allegiance. We then explore some

of the literature that has emerged on the

issues relating to the creation and

strengthening of national legitimacy and

reconstructing fragile or fractured and chaotic

national situations. We subscribe to the view

that:

• The stability of any underdeveloped

country is an extremely fragile structure,

readily susceptible to sectarian violence,

military overthrow, external destabilisation,

and institutional disintegration from which

very few undeveloped countries can

assume that they are free.2

• The victory of the forces of integration

over disintegration is often long delayed

over many decades, even centuries, and

is never guaranteed.3

The building of a coherent state is a

complex architectural activity, not a passive

or intermittent observational exercise. There

is nothing passive about either the concept or

existence of a state in reconciliation.