Gandhi-logo
  1. Home
  2. Articles
  3. Relevance of Gandhi
  4. Importance and Relevance of Gandhian Principles in 21st Century International Cross-country Dispute Resolution

Importance and Relevance of Gandhian Principles in 21st Century International Cross-country Dispute Resolution

- Anjali A.R.*

Abstract

Gandhi, an influential leader from 20th century, had brought about a revolutionary non-violent way of conflict resolution. This paper will analyse Gandhian principles with a view on its relevance in 21st century globalised world and whether his teachings could have an actuality considering the growing tensions in today’s modern world. Various important teachings of Gandhi imbibing values like peace, truth and non-violence will be looked on. Also, an attempt at the adaptation of methods reflecting these values like mediation, arbitration etc will be made on cross-border conflicts and other civil matters across the world. Also, a preliminary analysis of the success of such application in today’s world will be made.

Introduction

Gandhi has been often termed as the prophet of the 21st century. His methods of non-violent approach to dispute resolution is an important area in peace research. He proposed ideas like Sarvodaya which can be achieved through truth and non-violence. He also brought about various ideologies focusing on empowering and making villages self-sufficient, women empowerment, sanitation etc. In today’s modernized world, world problems are not just limited to internal conflicts and matters. Issues ranging from border management to nuclear issues are emerging around the world and poses a threat to the peaceful existence of humankind. Past examples have proved that war and violent ways to resolve such conflicts is not always a good idea. It will lead to bloodshed and a loss to human life and resources and slow down the process of our development. In this scenario, there is a need to look for alternative and innovative ways to settle disputes among countries. Gandhian peace teachings have a very high significance in this situation. His methods like satyagraha could be adopted in international cross-country conflicts among nations and super powers. There are various dynamics associated with his teachings which could be analysed and adopted according to the requisites of the situation. This paper looks to analyse his teachings and adapt it into this 21st century globalised world.

Gandhian Principles and Conflict Resolution

Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, one of the greatest personalities of 20th century had a huge and profound influence on world population with regard to many issues. He had an interest in everything and anything that concerns individuals and society. He had a set of principles and values to which he adhered to. These include his believing in the power of truth, non-violence, satyagraha, Sarvodaya etc. He also promoted a positive reform in the education system, decentralization of democracy, women empowerment etc.

He was a staunch believer of truth. In fact, the very naming of his autobiography, “My Experiments with Truth” reflects his life-long observance and experimentation with truth. Another important philosophy he promoted was that of Non- violence. His full political strategy was based on this. He was completely against the use of violence in achieving one’s goal. This is an important principle put forward by Gandhi as it helped avoiding bloodshed in various pursuits. This was based on the superiority of the soul over the physical body. Violence arises from ignorance or untruth, truth conversely arises out of non-violence.

For Gandhi, truth was equal to God. Ahimsa (Non-violence) constitutes the core value of Gandhian Philosophy. Mahatma Gandhi’s five pillars of nonviolence1 : respect, understanding, acceptance, appreciation and compassion are basic to our existence. These are simple habits and if we all start trying to nurture these, we could make a difference in the world. Truth, non-violence, freedom, equality, full-employment, bread labour, trusteeship, decentralization, swadesh, service and co-operation are perceived as cardinal principles of Gandhi. His ultimate aim was the welfare of all of the individuals. R.K. Sen2 talked about the economic theory of Gandhi and level of living. His economic theory is a part of his teachings related to truth and non-violence. He also discussed that Gandhi’s economic theory depends on the development of the inner traits. Gandhi also proposed various constructive programmes in a community like removal of untouchability, promotion of khadi and village products, sanitation and hygiene, women empowerment, promotion of education and literacy, and a lot more.

Sarvodaya is a Sanskrit word; means of this word is ‘welfare of all’ or ‘rising of all’. The world Sarvodaya is the effective solution of all social conflicts. It is a dynamic philosophy. Sarvodaya seeks to build a new society on the foundation of old spiritual and moral values of India and attempts to meet the challenges of the contemporary problems. It aims at the transformation of one’s mind from ego-centric to altruistic in nature. In a Sarvodaya society, there is no space for inequality, untouchability etc. Socialism is another basic philosophical entity of Gandhianism. Although Gandhian view of socialism is not radical in its approach but it aspires for a classless society with no poverty, no hunger, no unemployment and education and health for all.

G. Pontara observed rejection of violence in conflict resolution3. He stated that Gandhi denies the alleged necessity of using violence by showing to the world that non-violent methods of solving group conflicts work, and actually work in a far better and more sure way than violent ones. In this article, he quoted the conclusive statements like Gandhi often argues as though he rejected violence because of its consequences and as though his whole ethical inception were, nevertheless his non-violent ethics of conflict resolution is fundamentally deontological. A serious study of Gandhi offers, as a lens, a critical intervention into changing moral concepts within the historical field of Enlightenment, the shaping beliefs behind a hazardous opportunity for making progress towards human development as freedom, and a heightened sense of the responsibility of conserving and transmitting a humanist and democratic heritage that can be sustained exclusively by unremitting struggle but never taken for granted4.

The straightforward truth is that as opposed to reducing in pertinence, Mahatma Gandhi has really become even more appropriate in the 21st century. He has proved that there is always an alternative way to resolving conflicts which will ensure peace in a long run.

Satyagraha: The Gandhian Approach to Conflict Resolution

The term Satyagraha was first coined by Gandhi in South Africa to express the tendency of the Indian minds and methods of meeting violence, injustice or of thwarting unjust laws of racial discrimination practiced by the white minority there. It is essentially a method which involves breaching of law, but without violence and harming of the agents of the law. The purpose is to undermine the system so as to give rise to reforms and positive changes. Satyagraha is a relentless search for truth and determination to reach truth not by inflicting of suffering on the opponent, by on one's self. Non-violence is the core principle of Satyagraha. from reacting out of fear in the mindless reflex action"5. Violence have the tendency to be self-perpetuating through the cycle of revenge. A conflict resolution through satyagraha is more likely to be attained as it leaves "no aftermath of resentment, bitterness, or revenge, no necessity for further threats of force"6.

In conflict situations, success through peaceful activity can be accomplished in three separate manners: (1) settlement, where the adversary doesn't trust in the progressions made however all things considered, accepts that it is ideal to give in on a few or all points to pick up harmony or to cut misfortunes; (2) peaceful pressure, where the rival need to proceed with the battle but can't on the grounds that they have lost the power of influence and methods for control; and (3) transformation, where the rival has changed his attitude positively deep down to the extent that they need to achieve their goal by the peaceful dissident7. Although preferable to coercion based on physical force or threat, the first two modes of nonviolent conflict resolution are based on power that respective parties can exert on each other. Powerlessness of one party to a conflict means by necessity that a truly productive outcome will rarely be arrived at. Conversion, on the other hand, operates outside the framework of the interplay between power and powerlessness - the touching of the conscience involves a totally different dynamic.

Involving violence in an issue has the potential to deviate from an original issue and create further problems while non-violent methods will provide a platform to discuss and resolve the issue at hand without bloodshed. Gandhi, therefore, propagates to "Hate the sin and not the sinner8." According to this, Gandhi spreads the idea of encouraging one’s opponent to see their full potential to bring in a reformative change in them so as to resolve the conflict in hand.

Many regard this method of conflict resolution which is based on moral appeals as a non-successful technique in political scenario. However, Gandhi was a staunch believer that nobody was outside the limits of such moral appeal whatever be the scenario. This leads to a lot of confusion in modern times as it is difficult to identify which all crisis can be averted through this technique and there is no guarantee or method to determine the rate of success of adoption of this method. Satyagraha played a huge role in Indian Independence movement. It was a novel method in achieving our demands without violence whose ultimate aim was the realisation of truth. Many a times, the colonial Government had to give in to the demands of the Satyagrahis. However, it cannot be said that it will successful all the time as the scenario varies vastly with respect to the Indian one. Therefore, there is an ambiguity in its application. But, it can be said that there is nothing wrong in trying out this method first in case of a resistance in some situations as it will bring out the stance of the opponent and its motive which will give shape to the rest of the movement. Satyagraha, in its application, not only aims to resolve the conflict at hand, but also helps to develop a mutual understanding between the stakeholders which is highly essential to their smooth functioning in the future.

The basic precepts, rules and principles of conflict resolution through Satyagraha can be outlined in the following ten points:

  1. Violence is invited from opponents if they are humiliated or provoked. "It is never the intention of a satyagrahi to embarrass the wrong-doer. The appeal is never to his fear; it is, must be always his heart.9"
  2. A satyagrahi would not adopt violent techniques if they understood the essential points of their proposed case and truth behind it. The sincere undertaking of a conflict along Gandhian lines requires an affirmative answer to the question: "Is my motive when starting this new direct action unmixed - is it just to realize the goal of the campaign, and not also to wish to injure the opponent or due to other deviant motive?"10
  3. Making the opponent understand the viewpoint of the Satyagrahi is an important step as it will likely discourage them from opting violent methods.
    ...an essential ingredient of non-violent persuasion is the honest and straight-forward dissemination of information.... the withholding of information, the making of unsubstantiated charges... the packaging of an issue, and appeals to greed, prejudice and hatred cannot under any circumstances be reconciled with the philosophy of nonviolence.11
  4. Co-operation among the opponents should be established by analysing the common issues and characteristics between them. These common interests can be used to establish a platform for discussion and negotiation.
  5. The opponents should not be judged harder than the self. There should be a self-introspection of our aim and issues at hand.
  6. Trust begets trust. A satyagrahi trusts their opponent to bring in a positive reformation which will help in resolving the issue without violence.
  7. There should be a willingness to compromise without giving in to bad methods.
  8. Opponents are more likely to resort to violence if they believe that the Satyagrahi has no just cause.
  9. One of the ways to convince the opponent of one’s sincerity is to make adequate just sacrifices for the cause.
  10. Manipulation or taking advantage of one’s opponent should be avoided. In a pure fight the fighters would never go beyond the objective fixed when the fight began even if they received an accession to their strength in the course of the fighting, and on the other hand they could not give up their objective if they found their strength dwindling away12.

Gandhi was successful in adopting these techniques in many of his struggles and protests against various issues in both South Africa and India.

Global Challenges and Conflicts around the world

There are many issues around the world that transcend regional differences and affect large number of our population. Some of them are food security and starvation around the world, Child Health and Primary Education, the need for gender equality, Environmental issues and climate change, Water scarcity and Ocean conservation, ensuring human rights etc. There are many reasons behind this- racism, nuclear proliferation, boundary disputes, population growth, etc. The tackling of these issues require a joint movement and hard work from each and every individual from around the globe. Gandhi himself played a very important role in ensuring sustainability. The practices he adopted in his ashram is an apt portrayal of developing a holistic environment of living and survival. However, there are many other issues which threaten the peaceful co-existence of humankind. In a 21st century globalised world with very advanced technologies ranging from a mobile game to a nuclear bomb, there is a need for resolving the conflicts arising between nations and superpowers lest the consequence could be life-threatening to a large population.

Conflicts around the world serve as a mirror for global trends. They highlight various issues within the international system which the world is obsessed with and which the world, at times, ignores. China exhibits the patience of a nation confident in its gathering influence, but in no hurry to fully exercise it. It chooses its battles, focusing on self-identified priorities: domestic control and suppression of potential dissent (as in Hong Kong, or the mass detention of Muslims in Xinjiang); the South and East China Seas; the brewing technological tug of war with the U.S.13

Moscow seems to be opportunistic abroad as it looks to turn any crisis to its favour when the opportunity arrives. Depicting itself as a more genuine and more solid accomplice than Western forces, it backs a few partners with direct military help while sending in private temporary workers to Libya and sub-Saharan Africa to flag its developing impact.

To these forces, strife avoidance conveys insufficient worth and value. They survey emergencies as far as how they may progress or hurt their inclinations, how they could advance or undermine those of their adversaries. Europe could be a stabilizer, yet at accurately the second when it needs to fill the gap, it is battling with local disturbance, friction among its pioneers, and a particular distraction with psychological oppression and relocation that regularly slants strategy. The outcomes of these geopolitical patterns can be savage. Misrepresented confidence in outside help can twist nearby entertainers' computations, pushing them toward inflexible positions and urging them to court perils against which they accept they are safe. In Libya, an emergency dangers hazardous metastasis as Russia mediates for the benefit of a renegade general walking on the capital, the U.S. sends tangled messages, Turkey takes steps to act the hero, and Europe – a short distance away – shows weakness in the midst of inward cracks14. In Venezuela15, the administration's persistence, fuelled by confidence that Russia and China will pad its financial defeat, conflicts with the restriction's absence of authenticity, controlled by U.S. recommendations it will expel President Nicolás Maduro. In Syria, a country hugely affected by war and politics, the U.S promised help to the Kurds but they were disappointed. In this conflict, countries like Russia stood with the ally and Turkey took advantage of the conflict. Syrian war16 can be seen a situation in which not just the initial stakeholders had a part, but the whole world especially the major powers took sides which led to wide ramifications not just in Syria but all around the world. Saudi Arabia, initially supported by U.S but later because of its unresponsiveness had to seek a settlement in Yemen and slight misunderstanding with Iran. There is also the issue of Taliban and U.S troops in Afghanistan. Although there were attempts at diplomacy and negotiation, it didn’t give rise to a solution as the parties involved refuse to co-operate and consider and analyse various issues. One of 21st century’s worst humanitarian crisis came up in Yemen17 and even though the Stockholm Agreement18 helped a bit, there were still a wide array of issues that had to be taken care of. East Africa’s most populous country, Ethiopia19 is facing a huge ethnic conflict, killing hundreds and displacing millions. Burkina Faso is the latest country to fall victim to the instability plaguing Africa’s Sahel region. Islamic militants have been carrying out an insurgency since 201620. Violence has spread, affecting much of the north and east, displacing about half a million people and threatening to destabilise regions further afield, including the south west. The violence in the country could significantly affect the upcoming elections scheduled to happen in November 2020, lessening their credibility. There have been reports of cruelty by even the state soldiers. The turmoil will eventually spread to unaffected parts if immediate actions are not taken. After Libya spread into two parallel administrations following the election in 2014, there has been a threat of violence in the country ever since. Not just the participating countries, but the world word is at an alert because of the tensions between U.S and North Korea. Both countries have been showcasing their militant and nuclear capabilities. Although there were attempts at negotiation, it can’t be clearly said that they were a success. Another conflicted area is the country of Venezuela. The UN estimates that 7 million Venezuelans need humanitarian aid, many of them in border areas patrolled by armed groups, including Colombian guerrillas21. There also exists a tiff between Russia and Ukraine which needs to be solved for the stability of the masses of both the countries.

Gandhian methods of Conflict Resolution and its implications in 21st century

Gandhi is always supported in modern concept of alternative dispute resolution. Gandhi advocated the important of adopting non-violent methods like Satyagraha to resolve disputes and conflicts. Thomas Weber wrote that “the first step of Satyagrahi is to send confront the aggressors and talk to them if possible, tell them that they are wrong in their actions”22. Second is during the time of armed attack, Gandhi was of the opinion that the non-violent side should fight without any aggression and manipulation. His aim was to weaken the moral defense of the opponent. Third stage is involving methods like non-cooperation and civil disobedience after the aggressor invades the other party. This would involve refusal to take part in the administrative functions and silently opposing thus creating a sense of obligation from the aggressor. Conflict transformation is the most important and recent forms of problem solving method. Many of transformational contents are included in Gandhian Satyagraha. From the past, there are several examples where such methods were found to be successful. Under the guidance and visualization of Abdul Gaffar Khan, the Pathans were able to adopt non-violent and peaceful practices. The Khudai Khidmatgar movement had tremendous effect on the Pathan society. During the second world war, the Norwegians protested against the German occupation peacefully. The example of Martin Luther King and other Black leaders in their struggle for civil rights has once again demonstrated the effectiveness of Satyagraha in solving social problems. It is pertinent to recall that though fully engaged in India’s freedom struggle Gandhi never turned his attention away from the world and international security issues. He disapproved of the 1938 Munich agreement and wrote with prophetic foresight “The agreement that has been signed is a peace that is no peace. The war is only postponed. England and France have quailed before the combined violence of Germany and Italy”.

Disputes are solved in a variety of ways, which includes coercion, avoidance, mediation, adjudication, arbitration and negotiation. Mediation, arbitration and negotiation can be seen as non-violent ways in resolving a dispute which also includes an in-depth analysis of the issue which in turn lead to insightful and innovative solutions. However, care should be taken so as to not to involve the third party into the issue and also to avoid biasness. Gandhi was an avid promoter of such non-violent methods of dispute settlement. Conflicts can be ceased in two ways: one being both parties win and lose something and the other one being only one party winning their side and other party losing theirs. Negotiation is a suitable method for both the parties to reach a solution that is acceptable by both the sides. Of course, to achieve it, there should be an adequate give and take. Parties should be ready to give in or give up some demands to reach a common consensus and that’s how the success of negotiation can be achieved successfully. This method has the advantage of being a method which helps in bringing a solution that can last long. Essentially, a lack of communication is the root cause of most problems and this method helps in bringing out various aspect and initiate a discussion on the issue. Gandhi was a big believer in this philosophy. One of the criticisms received by his method of satyagraha and community resistance is regarding the direction of the resistance without the lack of a leader.

International negotiation is a platform of powerful dialogue exchange aimed at conflict settlement. A talk among the Afghans and pressing for U.S troop withdrawal along with a peace talk with the Taliban, if possible could pave some way. A Taliban- U.S agreement would mark the start of a long road to a settlement among Afghans, which would pave way for peace in Afghanistan. It’s not certain but it’s definitely a good start. In Yemen, there is a chance that the peace-making efforts till now would be futile if the Government’s weak deal with the STC in the south or with the Huthis along the Red Sea. The opportunity of peace should be seized as soon as possible. In Ethiopia, the efforts of Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has opened up some ways to bring in peace in the country. He has ended a decades-long standoff with neighbouring Eritrea, freed political prisoners, welcomed rebels back from exile, and appointed reformers to key institutions. He has won accolades at home and abroad – including the 2019 Nobel Peace Prize. It’s a sign of hope in a conflicted area but there still exists some threats. Some experts warn that the country might split like Yugoslavia with very negative and disastrous after-effects. The country’s international well-wishers could help it by providing requisite help which can include giving financial aid and cutting incendiary rhetoric etc. In Burkina Faso, there is a high chance that the turmoil will spread further if adequate measure like border control, intelligence sharing and better policies in affected areas. In Libya, there is a need for foreign powers to stop fuelling the dispute by giving support and arming the allies. This is hugely in contradiction to Gandhi’s principle of non-violence. Instead, they could press the allies into negotiations. As far as U.S- Iran tensions are concerned, atleast one of the parties should be willing to make the first move. The French President is keen to help both the parties to a diplomatic talk regarding the issue at hand but there is a necessity for better efforts from all the stakeholders. With regard to U.S- North Korea tensions, Trump and Kim should steer clear of high-level pageantry and high-drama provocations, and empower their negotiators to get to work. In Venezuela, there should be a compromise from all the parties involved; which would include the opposition dropping its demand that Maduro leave and at the same time, the Govt should promise to take steps in ensuring the smooth and credible functioning of the parliamentary election in 2020. The U.S government would need to reduce sanctions gradually. This would be an acceptable way to avoid a big disaster.

Hence, it can be said that there is always a non-violent way out of disputes and conflicts as long as the stakeholders are ready to adopt it.

Conclusion

We have looked on the various teachings of Gandhi like non-violence, satyagraha etc which can be manipulated and modernized into negotiations among conflicted countries. Many of ideas in Gandhian Satyagraha is related to modern conflict transformation. Gandhi’s nonviolence has a positive aspect of love to the opponent. The time has come to make rational, intelligent and practical choice of fighting for peace the nonviolent way. Solution ranging from peace talks to third party involvement can be adopted instead of exercising physical power in conflict situations. This will save human life and resources.

Notes and References

  1. Mahatma Gandhi: A lesson for contemporary society. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://gandhi.gov.in/lesson-for-society.html
  2. Sen, R.K. (1997). Level of living and Gandhian economic theory. International Journal of Social Economics, 24(7/8/9), 791–798. doi: 10.1108/03068299710178856
  3. Pontara, G. (1965). The Rejection of Violence in Gandhian Ethics of Conflict Resolution. Journal of Peace Research, 2(3), 197–214. doi: 10.1177/002234336500200301
  4. Fernée, T. (2014). Gandhi and the heritage of enlightenment: non-violence, secularism and conflict resolution. International Review of Sociology, 24(2), 309–324. doi: 10.1080/03906701.2014.933029
  5. Deming, B. (1985). On revolution and equilibrium (1st ed.). New York: A.J. Muste Memorial Institute.
  6. Gregg, R.B., & Tully, J. (2018). The power of nonviolence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  7. Sharp, G. (1973). The politics of non-violent action; with ... Marina Finkelstein. Boston, MA, Porter Sargent: Porter Sargent.
  8. Gandhi, & Desai, M.H. (2009). An autobiography, , the story of my experiments with truth. New Delhi, India: Prakash Books.
  9. Desai, M.H., Pyarelal, Mashruwala, K. G., & Desai, M. P. (1952). Harijan. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Press.
  10. Naess, A., & Glasser, H. (2005). Gandhi and group conflict: explorations of nonviolent resistance, Satyāgraha. Dordrecht: Springer.
  11. Pelton, L.H. (1974). The psychology of nonviolence. New York: Pergamon Press.
  12. Gandhi. (1961). Satyagraha in South Africa: M.K. Gandhi. Ahmedabad: Navajivan Pub. House.
  13. 10 Conflicts to Watch in 2020. (2020, January 20). Retrieved from https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/10-conflicts-watch-2020
  14. El-Gamaty, G. (2020, January 18). Turkey, Russia and the Libyan conundrum. Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/turkey-russia-libyan-conundrum-200118144000930.html
  15. Venezuela crisis: How the political situation escalated. (2020, January 13). Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36319877
  16. Syria: The story of the conflict. (2016, March 11). Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26116868
  17. Yemen crisis: Why is there a war? (2020, February 10). Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29319423
  18. Yemen and the Stockholm Agreement: Background, Context, and the Significance of the Agreement. (2019, May 31). Retrieved from https://www.asil.org/insights/volume/23/issue/5/yemen-and-stockholm-agreement-background-context-and-significance
  19. Gedamu, Y. (2019, April 2). Abiy's year one: Ethiopia faces the threat of ethnic conflict. Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/abiy-year-ethiopia-faces-threat-ethnic-conflict-190401081955303.html
  20. Burkina Faso's war against militant Islamists. (2019, May 30). Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-39279050
  21. 10 Conflicts to Watch in 2020. (2020, January 20). Retrieved from https://www.crisisgroup.org/global/10-conflicts-watch-2020
  22. Weber, T. (2001). Gandhian Philosophy, Conflict Resolution Theory and Practical Approaches to Negotiation. Journal of Peace Research, 38(4), 493–513. doi: 10.1177/0022343301038004006

A R Anjali, is a second year law student pursuing BSW.LLB (Hons.) at Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar. Her interests lie in the convergence of law with policy making as well as Alternate Dispute Resolution and International Law. | Email: anjali.vinayaka1008@gmail.com