Page 1 of 24
ROLE OF HISTORICAL CONFLICTS IN SHAPING MODERN REGIONAL
SECURITY DYNAMICS
Introduction
Historical conflicts' lasting impact on regional relations
In history, even the relations between the countries and nations have left lasting effects in
their relations even after the wars that they waged. These lingering impacts are not only a result
of enmity that arose during the specific battles, but also due to the trauma that occurs in the
societies’ memories during the period of the war. Even when the last bullet was fired, hatred
between two races, ethnic groups or sects can linger deep down for generations and impact the
relations between the countries in the region. For instance, the historical relation between France
and Germany saw some periods of war-like relations that produced strongly held prejudices in
both the countries even after the Second World War. Only the deliberate and sustained process of
‘coming to terms with Europe’s divided past’, of reconciliation and integration, of building
mutual trust which manifested itself not only in political and economic cooperation but in such
institutions as the European Union and NATO, made possible to overcome this acrimonious past
in European history. However, vestiges of past hostility may be found in ethnic rhetoric from
time to time, which only serves to remind the viewer that healing processes are continuous and
often painfully so. The India-Pakistan rivalry is even more clearly an example, given the
periodically escalating conflicts – both between conventional military forces and via terrorism –
that persist as a result of the bitter, ongoing dispute over the territory of Kashmir as a result of
the Partition in 1947. Once more, the genuine normalization is still unattainable even 70 years
since the birth of these states as independent entities proving the high persistence of regional
enmity as a result of large-scale historical conflicts. Leaders have however at times been able to
Page 2 of 24
provide a blind eye to these antagonistic histories for some transient intermissions of
cooperation, yet relations remain intrinsically acrimonious in a nuclearized context that is
essentially a product of both nations’ violent decolonization processes.
Importance of understanding past to navigate present
Outline of key aspects influencing current security dynamics
As for the significance of history in presenting today’s regional security picture, it is
quite versatile and diverse. The existing structural relations and resentment from previous
conflicts can deeply condition the post–Cold War security relations and threats perceptions of
countries and non-state actors in a particular region. For instance, long standing hostility and
mutual animosity between India and Pakistan which owes more to the Partition in 1947 and wars
that ensued periodically after that keeps military buildups and crisis instability in South Asia
even though the two countries may enter periods of diplomatic détente occasionally. Likewise,
hatred arising from Japanese imperialism in China in the 1930s-1940s perpetuates current
animosity and frames each nation’s view of the other in terms of potential hostility. For example,
the India–China border conflict that escalated to a major war in 1962 or the Korean war can be
characterized by the ‘frozen’ conflicts today but they still hold risks for sudden outbreak and
escalation. There are always leftover grievances and instability in a region when conflicts are not
well addressed, which offer opportunities for radical groups to mobilize and rally the aggrieved
sections of the society for retributive action and thereby create additional security challenges in a
region. At least one major, massive catastrophic event can set up a supportive climate for
militancy and insurgency long after the event has occurred. Specifically, the
Page 3 of 24
compatibility/incompatibility of agendas and approaches forged during critical wars often endure
and shape the nature of affiliation and antagonism between adversaries or friends. Hence,
knowing the character and development of the principal historical events that have led to the
contemporary security environment, as well as the consequences of the chief incidents is critical
to identifying the capabilities and risks of future warfare among the different regions’
stakeholders.
Legacy of Colonial-Era Conflicts
Arbitrary borders fueling ethnic and territorial disputes
Despite the fact that the drawing of national boundaries has not been a very systematic
process, but rather an arbitrary one, where the colonial powers of the early centuries mapped out
the territorial boundaries of Africa and the Middle East with no regard to ethnic, religious or
cultural differences. This has led to occurrence of several conflicts in the post-colonial societies,
subjection of the colonized societies and colonization of the subjugators. When boundaries are
demarcated by external forces and divide ethnic or social groups which are compact and
contiguous, it results in cartographic lands that are occupied partly by one ethnic group and
partly by another, minorities find themselves in the ‘wrong’ side of the border, and a divided
people that were not the creators of their political divisions. All of these dynamics spin the
society and can, over time, lead to conflicts. A good example is the Kurds with an estimated
population of 30 million who live in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria, etc. The Kurdish people have their
own culture, ethnicity and language which makes them stand out from other nations such as the
Turks, Arabs and Persians that they live among but have no state of their own. Kurdistan has
experienced a number of uprisings with militant organizations demanding more autonomy or
independence to reduce the control that national governments exert on its resourceful borders.
Page 4 of 24
Like the above ethnic irredentist movements, they continue to provoke violence from the
Baluchis of Pakistan to the Tuaregs of Mali. When people of a particular ethnicity or race feel
that they have been marginalized in terms of economic or even political opportunities by borders
drawn by colonial masters on their map, then war is often fought right along those borders. Even
when separatist violence is not present, borderlines tend to cause tensions between nations on
where exactly to draw the line on the map. This has been particularly sensitive in the disputed
territory of Kashmir, which is part of India and Pakistan’s territorial dispute and over which the
two nuclear powers have fought several wars. Virtually every spot on the surface of the globe
has been claimed by one country or another, but there are dozens of quirkily shaped border
peculiarities that still result in periodic bursts of geopolitical tension – such as the disputed
British Spanish territory of Gibraltar, or the Japanese South Korean islands of Liancourt Rocks.
As long as mankind continues to draw artificial lines on the map that does not group people
according to their natural cultural/ethnic race, the tensions of people separated or people grouped
together against their own free will means that the borders will always be hot zones.
Exploitation of resources leading to economic instability
The appropriation of natural resources by colonial powers has left many countries
formerly colonized with negative economic trends in the long run. In the olden days, Europeans
lastingly and ruthlessly exploited Africa, Asia and Americas for precious metals, cash crops, oil
and minerals respectively without many thoughts about depletion of these resources and the
welfare of the indigenous peoples. In the short run it was very beneficial to the colonizers but in
the long run it posed significant negative impacts on the local community disrupting a traditional
economy that had been in existence for many centuries. When colonial rule ended, the newly
independent states were only able to inherit a number of post war economic disasters and little
Page 5 of 24
opportunity to forge a sustainable path to prosperity. For instance, the Belgian’s colonization of
the Congo aimed at unauthorized exploitation of natural resources such as rubber and other
products to benefit the Belgians. This entirely wiped out traditional economic activities as the
Belgian rulers also hired natives through force as labor to develop the rubber plantations under
forced and horrendous situations. When ultimately granted liberty in 1960, Congo was left
impoverished and ill-prepared due to the exploitative nature of such resource acquisition. With
no access for their natural wealth and with distorted Agriculture, manufacturing and trading, the
independent Congolese economy was a struggle. This pattern of resource exploitation and then
disorder once the colonizers left was seen time and again across Africa, Asia and other regions.
The other critics have also voiced their opinion regarding the fact that colonialism was also
instrumental in setting the later conflict and resource curse patterns in the developing states.
Novick opined that Oil, minerals, and gemstones are important and because of these the colonial
masters and postcolonial rulers did not spare the people but used force and oppression. These
profits went to corrupt governing bodies and delivered the strongest of kicks to any nation
attempting to construct democracies. The European model of exploiting natural resources as the
basis of empire building of the colonialism age remains a source of economic imbalance and
conflict in the modern world. Most of the contemporary developing countries are in a constant
endeavor to forge for development because their monetary and fiscal systems were bent and
distorted for the requirements of the resource-hungry colonial powers with no regard to
development. It is a legacy from which many countries are yet to fully liberate themselves even
after several years of attaining independence. In the colonial period, the colonizers focused on
‘getting the most out of the colony’ as fast as possible hence they engaged in exploitative
Page 6 of 24
resource extraction hence limiting economic development and thus resulting in economic
instability in the colonized territories.
Cultural tensions arising from imposed Western ideologies
The question of colonialism raises certain cultural conflicts inherited in many regions of
the world that were colonized. European powers in the past insulated indigenous communities to
incorporate and adapt to European norms, values, and beliefs. This could assume many forms;
physical transformation of native populace to Christianity, prohibition of native customs,
introduction of European forms of justice and government that did not exist. The changes
entailed the devaluation and disruption of local cultural meanings, orientations, and practices that
defined communities’ identities and lifeworlds. Anger at having such impositions imposed on it
has brewed in some post-colonial societies for generations. In many places, the tension and
ethnic relations that were created by the colonial powers are still affecting the existing communal
relations. For instance, conflicts between the Christian and Muslims in African and Asian
countries can be attributed to the colonialists who discriminated against some religions and gave
the privileged to others. The conflicts and animosities that occur between the followers of
different religions today are normally instigated by such colonial behaviors that sought to divide
people along religious lines. In the same way, the adoption of government and education using
colonial languages such as English and French instead of the local language contributed to the
formation of a cultural gulf between the colonial educated elites and the traditional people who
can be seen in parts of India, Algeria, and Rwanda to this day. Even the geographical borders of
many African states including those that were established by the European colonizers are
ethnically and linguistically diverse without significant cultural interaction, thereby guaranteeing
future ethnic strife. Other issues such as human rights, especially those of the lesbians, gay,
Page 7 of 24
bisexual, and trans people, secularism, and women rights also arouse pro or anti-western
sentiments in societies that were colonized. Imperial powers brought in what they considered as
the right or civilizing norms while local traditionalists resist such imperial impositions. Conflicts
arising from or over social issues are colored with this history. Therefore, the cultural differences
being felt today are a result of the conflicts whereby other groups imposed cultural shifts. The
colonial wounds inscribe such disagreements in the post-colonial world in cultural memories and
therefore the discourses that surround values and identity are anything but innocent.
World Wars and Their Geopolitical Consequences
Shifting global power dynamics post-World War II
Germany’s surrender was the decisive turning point of the World War II which ever
placed the world in the new world order and influenced the relations and the map of the world in
the following decades. The superpowers coming out of the world war two were America, the U.
S. S. R, Britain and France. But soon the Soviet and its Eastern Bloc countries were to clash with
the U.S. and the Western Bloc countries to usher in the cold war period in international relations,
which was to dominate international politics for over four decades. The damage done by WWII
was beneficial for the United States to become the unbeatable world power in the post war with
robust manufacturing base and a pool of economic resources. When the Cold War emerged
where the world separated into capitalist and communistic blocs, America led the ‘free world’
and this led to formation of strong alliances such as NATO and other international organizations
based on democracy and free market economy. The Soviet Union aimed at strengthening its
control over Eastern Europe as well as spreading communism to the Third World states in Latin
America and Asia as well as in Africa. This led to indirect confrontation in what was known as
proxy wars in different parts of the world without the two superpowers confronting each other in
Page 8 of 24
full-scale wars. As the Cold War progressed both powers possessed enough nuclear weapons to
destroy each other, but the fear of total annihilation between the two nations was kept in check
by the policy of mutual assured destruction. The Cold War was characterized by balance of
power between the Eastern Bloc led by USSR and the Western Bloc led by USA until the early
1990s when the Soviet Bloc and the Berlin Wall was dismantled thus bringing to an end
communism in Eastern Europe. Over the course of the following decade, American imperialism
was firmly established, and the post-Soviet states plunged into a vortex of conflict and turmoil.
The twenty first century again witnesses the multipolarity in the wake of economic liberalization
and expansion of China as a super power along with other emergent powers such as India and
Brazil halting the post-Cold war unipolar world led by United States for the decade of nineteen
nineties.
Formation of international organizations for conflict prevention
The creation of international organizations with the specific task of preventing warfare
has emerged as a key goal and focus in the post-Cold War period. It is common knowledge that
globalization has led to the interconnectivity of different countries hence any conflict
experienced in one country may lead to the disruption of other countries in the region. It poses a
danger not only to the principles of peace and human rights but also to the economic growth and
wealth. In response, states have joined collectively to form official bodies and treaties with
aimed of providing diplomatic resolution to conflicts among states prior to the actual outbreak of
a war. The United Nations can provide one example, which has an entire Department of Political
and Peace-building Affairs dedicated to conflict prevention and facilitating negotiations.
Similarly, supranational organizations of the African Union, the European Union, or the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations also have early warning systems to identify countries
Page 9 of 24
most prone to civil wars or interstate conflicts. When signs of tensions appear, both sides are
represented by envoys that negotiate in a diplomatic manner such as in the form of arbitration
and joint sittings. It can be used for example for simple prevention of conflicts, providing help
for development in order to reduce economic tensions, or for monitoring of elections in order to
ensure stable change of power. The belief is that through the introduction of mediation, people
will be encouraged to work at the roots of teachings that lead to cleavages, before new vortexes
of violence are initiated. This also improves relation between nations in the long-run through
exercising positive interactions devoid of aggressive components. However, the effectiveness of
preventative diplomacy has been mixed and sometimes criticized for being too slow and not
proactive enough as seen with the failure of the UN to respond more proactively in crises like
Rwanda or Syria. It means that additional change may be required to empower these institutions
and endow them with enforcement capacity. However, the mere presence of escalation
prevention mechanisms in any conflict shows how much norms have evolved from a state of
affairs where states can prosecute a war at any time without the intervention of other
international actors. The message that is now being conveyed clearly is that force should never
be the end of it and that it should be the last resort ever. Even if further progress is slow, the
creation of organizations that are primarily aimed at preventing wars wherever they are already
in full swing is an important step for mankind.
Cold War tensions influencing regional alliance structures
The cold war was perhaps one of the most stressing periods for the Americans as well as
the Soviets as powers were evidently polarized according to political, economic, as well as
military ideologies. This grand geo-political antagonism and animosity characterized the
relations between nations of the world as they partnered and formed regional blocs in support of
Page 10 of 24
either side. More concretely, the atomic menace coming from the other superpower forced
countries into cooperative defense organizations whose goal was to offer security collectively.
For instance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was signed in 1949 at the
beginning of the Cold War to promote collective security through the establishment of an
alliance between Western European countries and their North American counterparts based on
the principles of democracy and common interests. NATO was instrumental in the reinforcement
of the western block as it sought to counter what was considered a soviet advance in Europe.
Likewise, the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), was signed in 1954 with the allied
countries including the United States, United Kingdom, France, Australia, and New Zealand
along with Thailand, Philippines and Pakistan with the aim to check the infiltration of
communism in Southeast Asia region. Thereby it offered a perspective for multilateral reaction
to Communism insurgencies patronized by China and Soviet Union. To the East, the Warsaw
Treaty Organization was established in 1955 as a mutually defensive alliance which linked the
USSR with Central and Eastern European satellite countries. War Warsaw pact equal to NATO
in Europe with countries aligned to the Soviet Union starting from Poland, Czechoslovakia up to
Romania and Bulgaria. It was established by Soviets’ need to strengthen their grip into ‘their’
world with NATO expanding its reach. It is therefore the tensions of the cold war that defined
and fostered the development of tight and distinct regional security complexes of bipolar rival
alliance systems and defense cooperation between states with similar ideological and strategic
orientations against a dominant hostile superpower and its allies. The clear-cut division of the
world’s geography into two camps during the Cold War wasn’t only logical but also forged
countries in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Latin America into taking sides and aligning themselves
Page 11 of 24
with alliances that defined international relations for more than forty years before the Cold War
ended.
Post-Colonial Independence Struggles and Civil Wars
Emergence of new states with fragile institutions
Information and communication technology as an enabling environment has continued to
experience rapid growth and development especially in the new born states which have had a bad
history of colonialism, independence struggles and civil wars thus they have developed frail
structures of governance. The colonial powers, as they began to decolonize their empires in the
twentieth century, bequeathed to the new states borders that were drawn without any
consideration for the ethnic, religious, or other cultural differences within the newly independent
state. As a result, it weakened the process through which the new governments could consolidate
legitimacy and construct institutions that would be effective across disparate groups of people.
For instance, some new states in Africa were formed with hundreds of ethnic and linguistic
communities in their respective territories. When these states became independent, the absence
of a strong national identity and weak civic associations throughout the country resulted in the
central governments’ inability to assert control and deliver on services beyond cities. This made
corruption and patronage politics possible because leaders used sectionery rather than ability.
The absence of a professional civil service and insufficient accountability mechanisms for
executive successes and failures meant that institutions remained fragile. In other cases
independence led to civil wars as the suppressed groups and areas fought for their freedom from
domination from the larger ethnic group. For instance, in Sudan, the Southern people who were
predominantly Christians and animists did not want to be associated with northern Arabs after
the independence of the country from Britain. These civil wars disrupted the development of
Page 12 of 24
state infrastructures and discouraged the emergence of institutions as the regimes were
preoccupied with insurgent threats. The same process was seen in the states like Angola,
Lebanon, Sri Lanka, and Guatemala. In the worst-case scenarios, the civil wars led to state
failure such as in Somalia; after the toppling of the military junta factions engaged in a thirty-
year clan war. In failed states the governing bodies and infrastructure such as courts, taxes and
other forms of revenue, health and schools all shut down and the population becomes hungry and
destitute. Although in several cases after many years of civil war long lasting peace settlements
are negotiated the states are faced with immense tasks of state building, as new national
institutions have to be constructed from the ground up while at the same time efforts are
underway to use the country’s institutions to facilitate reconciliation to heal social divides.
Whereas native self-rule was conceived of as a positive good after colonialism, the formation of
new states in the twentieth century was fraught with difficulties because the frontier did not align
with ethnic settlement patterns and because it lacked the governing institutions necessary to
effectively and peacefully manage diverse ethnic groups. Those that initiated civil wars shortly
after becoming independent had even more formidable challenges to surmount while developing
their institutions. For most of the post-colonial state, despite the triumph of the principle of self-
determination, most of them have faced the challenges of the weak governmental institutions that
have remained as a perennial source of instability and under-development for many decades after
the initial attainment of independence. Mitigating these challenges has been a herculean task that
has taken a lot of time to overcome.
Ideological conflicts shaping political landscapes long-term
Ideological tensions have been decisive in determining political realities in the long run –
in reference to the liberation struggles and civil wars in post-colonial states. When European
Page 13 of 24
colonial masters relinquished their colonies in the twentieth century, they drew arbitrary borders
which put together ethnic and /or religious groups with different nationalistic sentiments into
new states which led to heated ideological debates about the nature of the state and its direction.
For instance, the syncretic and relativist dream of India’s pioneers with the ideas of Nehru and
Gandhi was diametrically different from the Hindu chauvinism of the right-wing organizations.
This fault lines remains alive and active, manifest in episodes of sectarian violence and the
structuring of party politics. In like manner, Nigerian, Sudanese, or Congolese ethnic or regional
groups had conflicting visions for the state – centralized and decentralized political authority,
capitalist and socialist economies, and the like The above mentioned ideological struggles often
played out in civil wars, military coups, and instability post-independence. The civil war in
Nigeria that took place between 1967 and 1970 was as a result of ethno-nationalism which led to
a fight for the yeast of Biafra by the Igbo people that felt they had been marginalized in the post-
colonial state. After the fight, the people were still divided this time on ideological lines and this
continued to influence the political landscape for decades to come. Ideological polarization has
been experienced especially during the Cold War since Soviet and American interferences
supported similar ideological factions. For instance, the US backed the right-wing Contras
fighting the Nicaragua Sandinista government of the 1980s that was branded as socialist. The
atrocities committed by both sides were carried out in a view of ideological extremism. The war
was in fact a determinant of the Nicaraguan political environment during the next three decades.
Ideological confrontation sometimes brought terror to the people, but unlike in other countries, it
was possible to conduct an ideological struggle in a democratic way, as in India. However,
secularism or anti-secularism and Hindu nationalism, center state relations, and capitalist or
socialist economies remained the main themes of discussion. Thus, the ideological struggles,
Page 14 of 24
which began mainly due to postcolonial instability, solidified their positions as permanent
political cleavages in several developing states. They kept on influencing political affiliations
and the harshest politics even as days turned to weeks, months and years. From civil wars where
ideology was a precursor to governance and succession or through ballots in democratic systems,
ideological polarization became intertwined with politics and decided post-independence
struggles.
Displacement and refugee crises affecting neighboring countries
Displacement and refugee crises arising from post-colonial independence struggles and
civil wars have greatly affected the states’ neighboring countries. Whenever the clashes occur,
the citizens are left with no option but to run away from the violence hence resulting in an
increased number of IDP’s or refugee influx. For instance, the creation of India and Pakistan as
separate states in 1947 led to one of the biggest instance of migration with more than 10 million
Hindus and Muslims displaced due to communal violence. These were massive displacements,
and the neighboring countries were in no way ready to host them. Temporary shelter facilities
were put up in some border areas and yet none of them had food, proper hygiene facilities or
even medical services. Living conditions in the camps were cramped, and the people caught
different contagious diseases such as malaria and tuberculosis. Other similar crises have however
been repeated in the post-colonial Africa and Asia. The Nigerian Civil War which lasted for
three years from 1967 to 1970 resulted in the displacement of more than 1 million Nigerians, the
biggest percentage of whom were living in camps in neighboring Cameroon and Chad. These
countries experienced scarcity of food and diseases in the camps, which was still evident even
after Nigeria’s rebuilding. Interethnic clashes that were recurrent in Burundi, Rwanda and
Democratic Republic of Congo in the later part of the twentieth century caused the waves of
Page 15 of 24
refugees into Uganda, Tanzania, and Zambia. Here matters such as cutting down trees and
hunting of wild animals in and around camps created severe environmental concerns. The birth
of unauthorized arms sales markets and minerals were also witnessed. More than 85 per cent of
refugees continued to live in asylum countries more than 10 years after these conflicts as it was
suggested were over because of return and reintegration policies were not priorities of these
emergent weak states. Neighboring countries thus remained locked in long-term crises far past
when the actual warring factions sat down for surrender. Thus while the roots of displacement
and forced migration lie in nations in turmoil, other nations in the post-colonial Global South
continue to pay for the ‘price’ through the costs borne in their economies and societies.
Consequently, there is an increase in complex crises with climate change and demographic
pressures, and there is a need to enhance burden-sharing and crisis response with solutions that
address the displacement-affected developing countries. Their story shows the kind of
interconnection now where the instability of one country can bring spillovers to another. With
regional instabilities continuing to affect even the most developed countries, it is high time to
invest more in conflict resolutions and post-conflict reconstruction.
Religious and Ethnic Conflicts' Enduring Effects
Sectarian divisions exacerbating regional security challenges
Religious and ethnic conflicts have been major rate limiting factors for security and
stability of many regions in the world. However, in the recent past, such splits have evolved into
sharp political and social divides in various countries in the Middle East, North Africa, and some
parts of Asia, which has gone a long way in aggravating volatile security situations where they
existed in the first place. In Iraq and Syria the newly established ISIS and other associated
groups capitalized on the perceived injustices and discrimination by the Shiite dominated
Page 16 of 24
governments on the Sunni peoples provoking insurgencies and terrorist acts that have led to the
deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. Despite most of ISIS having been defeated and the
group being forced out of most of the territories it occupied, sectarian strife continues to simmer
and this makes reconstruction and healing processes a challenge. In the same way, the civil war
in Yemen has seen Houthi rebels allied to Shia interests fighting another government that is
recognized internationally, but supported by a Sunni coalition led by Saudi Arabia. In other
countries conflict and power struggle has also acquired sectarian characteristic’s due to political
instability. In Lebanon there is a power-sharing system that divides the main political powers
between Christian, Sunni and Shia parties and this power-sharing system is threatened by the
tensions from the Syrian civil war neighbors. In the case of the minority Shia population, Sunni
militant groups have reportedly targeted them in Pakistan, and the support of the Pakistani
government for Afghan Taliban fighters has strained its relations with the Kabul regime. There
has been sectarian conflict between the Shia majority and the Sunni minority in Bahrain against
the monarchy. In scattered South East Asian countries such as Myanmar and Indonesia, there are
instances of Buddhist-Muslim riots, which signify the difficulty of forming a unity of the nation.
With these sectarian identities now taking root from the grassroots level to the global level, they
only pose a threat in deepening divisions in societies and in hampering political measures to
counter insecurity within and across nations in these volatile regions. To surpass these divides
entails understanding and painful internal transformations in order to promote minority and
human rights as well as power-sharing and pluralism. It also entails leveraging the rivalry of
neighboring countries such as Iran and Saudi Arabia. Leaving this basic motivation unsolved,
attempts aimed at preventing violent extremism, or rebuilding peace and stability in many
countries, would remain deep-rooted challenges.
Page 17 of 24
Minority group marginalization leading to ongoing tensions
One social issue that arises as a result of minority group integration is tension within
society due to inequality; such tension usually persists for years. If a minority group is
experiencing prejudice, discrimination, exclusion from opportunities, and infringement on rights,
there is bound to be resentment, anger and activism that correspond to the mistreatment. But the
elites with most of the political, economic and social power look the other way or just dismiss
the appeals of minorities for equal treatment and fairness and so unjust and oppressive practices
continue through generations. To mention but a few, colored people in many societies suffer
from discrimination in employment, housing, health care, and education. There have always been
negative trends for the minorities in any data collected but the hegemonic racial groups have not
been ready to accept the race disparity and change. Ordinary citizens in this country protest
peacefully to draw attention to the oppression and neglect they face, but their efforts are
suppressed instead of acknowledged. It escalates to riots and aggressive police actions against
the ethnic and or racial minorities. Lacking improvements regarding the equality and
reconciliation, minorities remain resentful of their conditions. Likewise, ethnic and indigenous
people constantly suffer from dominance and aggression from other ethnic groups which took
years and years of abuse and oppression hence, ethnic minorities and indigenous people feel no
trust or harmony with other ethnic groups. The minorities have also had their share of suffering
as the dominant religion over the years has seen to it that minority beliefs were suppressed
through legal means and sometimes through ‘lynching’ by other members of the same religion,
who are eager to preserve the religious identity within the given culture. As the minorities
remember historical injustices committed against them, there is no space for denials as long as
reconciliation and restorative justice are not actively sought. In the end, even when legal equality
Page 18 of 24
is attained, prejudice still remains, and minorities will continue to be justified in their wrath
against their oppressors. In all cases, since dominant groups maintain power and never accept
responsively for wrongdoings, minority people remain marginalized through generations. Organs
of mediation and power-sharing are generally deficient or are half-efforts at best. This cycle of
protest and backlash is ongoing, in which protest may turn into violent and unstable situation but
never comes to a conclusion. It is important to stress that public remorse and compensation for
the suffered sins from the part of the majority populations that at least for some time had profited
out of the minorities’ sufferings are a phenomenon which, to say the least, is rather an exception.
Therefore, conflicts, unfairness, bravado, and wars followed each new generation without a hope
for change.
Radicalization and extremism stemming from unresolved grievances
Studies suggest that radicalization and extremism are results of groups or individuals
having underlying political or social issues that are unaddressed for long periods. Such people
may turn to violent extremism as the only logical solutions to their political and social injustices
when legal processes constantly let them down and fail to address their concerns. For example, if
an ethnic minority has suffered discrimination, injustice, and lack of opportunity for many years,
and when they try again and again to find a way to draw attention to this or to change the laws at
least for the better, year after year, a dangerous cycle occurs. Anger and hopelessness sets in and
this allows for extremist organizations to step in and brandish solutions that are destructive. The
desperate will listen to such radical calls, especially isolated and hopeless youths who have
grown with no hope of social acceptance or any chances of making a living. The feeling of
frustration and despair is another factor that charismatic extremist leaders and groups latch on to
in order to offer the illusion of meaning, identity, and value in extremism. Their rhetoric also
Page 19 of 24
declares that the frustrated person is capable of doing it themselves, of turning the other cheek to
the methods of the establishment that have given nothing and instead demanding a revolution
v/through violence. Taking such approaches with the emphasis on the ‘us’ against the ‘them’ is
easy to depersonalize the ‘other’ to rationalize the strategies in the undermining of the enemy or
preemptive strikes against the ‘innocent civilians’ and other essential structures. In this process
that follows, the actual unaddressed grievances and the perceived oppression are masked and
twisted by extreme narratives attributing fault to such social structures, prejudice, policies,
warfare, or external interference. It only leads to a more solidification of rift and increased waves
of violence coming from a conducive environment created by these unresolved issues that have
long been neglected. Addressing such profound problems is immensely challenging since it takes
coordinated societal actions across political, cultural, economic and social domains– but when it
is done it allows preventing this alarming tendency of people turning to extremism with
grievances that are not easily wash away and mostly serve as a source of radicalization solely.
Border Disputes and Territorial Claims
Contested regions as flashpoints for potential conflicts
Areas termed as conflict areas in the global map make good candidates to contain
possible conflicts given the territorial disputes and ethnic issues such as the state of Kashmir,
which has been under the territorial dispute between India and Pakistan since the end of British
domination in the Indian subcontinent in 1947. Both the countries have sovereignty over this
Muslim-majority territory but have actual control over a portion of this region only which has
created decades of rivalry, the buildup of weapons and arms, and at times, the occurrence of
conflict. The nature of the territory of Kashmir, specifically the intention of both Pakistan and
India being the rightful owners of this region has remained a major source of conflict between
Page 20 of 24
the two nations and is today considered as one of the world’s most dangerous flash points given
the fact that both countries are nuclear weapon states. Likewise, the regions of Abkhazia and
South Ossetia are in a debate between Georgia and Russian Federation which is larger state.
These two regions are part of Georgia that the Georgians still consider as part of their sovereign
territory but these two regions are now under the control of Russian-backed separatists while
Russian soldiers are stationed both in the two areas. Due to the contested status, Georgia began
military operations against Russia in 2008. Russia on the other hand sustains the separatists
while at the same time ensuring that these territories does not get integrate again into Georgia
diplomatically or militarily. This has considerably affected the Georgia-Russia relations since
both countries have been held at a deadlock. In the South China Sea, China has sovereign stakes
in huge and disputed geographical territories over islands and waters that are also occupied by
some of the ASEAN member states such as Vietnam and the Philippines. China is here asserting
its dominance in the region, constructing artificial islands and expanding its navy, thus
provoking similarly scaled neighbors. The South China Sea is one of the most travelled maritime
routes which therefore has fishing grounds and possibly oil and gas deposits hence the reason for
the conflict in this region. Military power of claimant states is on the rise and experts have
expressed more often that the two powers may soon engage in a conflict that is accidental. Hence
those hot spots like Kashmir, Abkhazia, South China Sea and the like are regional strategic areas
where absence of definite boundaries and rivalry over land or resources or ethnic groups
increases potential for conflict between the adversaries and the likelihood of violent outcome.
Resource competition in disputed areas heightening tensions
There is the risk that conflict may arise between groups interested in the exploitation of
the resources, particularly in areas that have overlapping boundaries or where claims to
Page 21 of 24
sovereignty remain ambiguous. This is because when what has been regarded as potential
income such as oil, minerals, timber or productive agricultural land is occupied or claimed by a
number of people, the tendency of striving to gain control is likely to increase. These means can
be diplomatic and legal where the group ensures its claim by secure diplomatic and legal
recognition of the land or resources that the two parties are competing for, or through force
where the group will unilaterally develop the said land or resources in order to demonstrate
dominance over the other party. For instance, when mineral deposits are found across the rather
vague internal borders between regional officials, the latter will begin to make very assertive
statements that this or that piece of ground belongs to their people while large-scale mining gets
on with things extremely rapidly, staking a claim. Or perhaps for border zones that initially
contained forests that are rich in timber may experience a sudden increase of illicit felling since
groups will seek to exploit the resources before the exact jurisdiction is determined. Such waters
experience more incidents of aggression with fishing vessels claiming for the fishing rights over
the same waters. Oil exploration and drilling activities might be conducted in unclaimed water
bodies and this may trigger cases of illegality. A discovery of big water basins which are
international comes with a plan for development of infrastructure such as dams or irrigation
networks by more than one country in the region in bid to consolidate on the resource. Political
instability, especially in areas of recent conflict history, is more likely to lead to localized
resource competition which may trigger larger scale violence. The people who had to flee their
homes because of the previous fighting may also be pulled into the new battles regarding the
territories that are now valuable because of the natural resources. However, shared interest in
exploiting resources can also been seen as a motivation to solve disputes amicably as opposed to
escalating to war. Such clear legal and cooperative structures are often absent or weak in the
Page 22 of 24
development of contentious resource regions to mediate these conflicts. The management of
conflict very much requires cautious handling and refraining from taking actions that only one
side wants, while negotiation is ongoing so that stakes are not raised and the situation becomes
even more confrontational. Since natural resources form the bedrock of economic development
and stability, addressing potential threats to such zones of conflict entails consideration by heads
of state.
Nationalistic sentiments complicating diplomatic conflict resolution efforts
Nationalism is one factor that can worsen diplomatic relations since individuals in
different countries are likely to be proud of their country and be ready to defend it in any
situation. That is why in relations between countries during their conflict passions and
identification with the nation of their own and the enemy state only grow among the population.
This puts the citizens in a situation where they are very much aligned towards conflict instead of
negotiating, they deem compromise as a sign of treachery to the interests of their country.
Therefore, even in this case if some of the political leaders, who are in the leadership of the
respective countries, understand that the most appropriate course to take is diplomacy, they find
themselves under immense pressure from their citizens to persevere with the aggression against
the adversary country. This could limit their maneuverability in negotiations, and thus; the
likelihood of getting into substantive compromises would be quite small. Moreover, real power
concessions in leaders also bear domestic political costs and controversies regardless of the
fairness or logic of these actions on the international level. Politics is not played in a vacuum
where passion has no bearing on the outcome of the event. There is a problem here of ‘perceived
legitimacy’ in that if the citizens proclaim an agreement as violating what they consider the
nation rightfully deserves by right of history or morality, then however good the agreement is in
Page 23 of 24
strategic terms it lacks legitimacy. In reality, nationalism based on identity conceptions is more
likely to reduce the scope for negotiations based on interests. It is for this reason that, even in
cases where a diplomatic solution has been reached, inasmuch as it considers and or deals with
substantive concerns such as borders or resources, symbolic concerns such as acknowledgement
and recognition of national narratives can derail reconciliation. Each and every concession is
considered as an affront to the sovereign nation hood that the citizens cherish. Thus, no matter
how diligent the diplomatic professionals are in working on resolution, the cultural bias and
arrogance that is inherent in nationalism can derail the process. At its worst, belligerent
mobilization on a grand scale can also intimidate the normal and precipitate acts of aggression
such as reciprocal economic or military brinkmanship. Thus, while the need for diplomacy in
conflict-solving is not over, nationalist views are becoming more rigid, setting practical limits to
negotiations and striving for the sake of national imagery.
Conclusion
The history of conflicts has not been erased from the contemporary security system as it
affects the relations between states and nations, regions, and the world at large. Even today, the
consequences of previous wars, division of territories, and different political and economic
systems’ confrontation may be felt in security strategies and visions of threats. These works
analyze various historical periods’ security constructs of the post-WWII world until the modern
conflicts over the Middle East and Asia. There has to be permanent solution to the root cause of
such conflicts if there is to be no recurrence of the same war. It is based on understanding of past
evils, cultural no-no’s and other matters that trigger conflict. Thus, studying the reasons that have
contributed to the emergence of conflicts for generations the policymakers and the security
experts will be in a position to come up with more result-oriented measures in respect of the
Page 24 of 24
management and prevention of conflicts. Again this is so because threats that face the world
today are often entwined and multifaceted, therefore the solutions have to equally be global. The
problem, given in a certain area, entails consequences for the adjacent states and even distant
nations because of the interconnected unity of the space of commerce, migration, and
memberships. As such, stakeholders have no option than to encourage multilateral relations,
exchange of information, and ‘together, we can’ build up capacity to wholly address multifaceted
security threats. Such a cooperative model should not only include the officers of the military
and the diplomats, but include a much broader contribution from civil society, scholars and
experts, and representatives of the business world. On this basis, it is proposed to state that
through the unity of efforts and experience, nations can create more effective and lasting
approaches to addressing deeply rooted security threats. It is pertinent to solve the historical
conflicts and their core issues to maintain the international peace in order, which involves the
willingness to communicate, forgive, and engage in planning on a long-time horizon. In the same
way, education, economic development, and social inclusion are among the measures that can
prevent the emergence of the mentioned conditions. In conclusion, the way to build the future
free from conflicts is to study the causes of past wars, resolve them, and unite for the sake of
stability both in regions and in the entire world.
