1

Gandhi’s Concept of Conflict Resolution

Abstract: Modern world is full of multidimensional and multidisciplinary conflicts
involving use of physical and psychological violent tools. The panacea for
conflict resolution requires revivalist research approach in context of philosophy
of Mahatma in conflict situation, as per his philosophy conflict starts in the mind
of an individual and physical outburst is only subsequent expression of this
conflict. Gandhian approach addresses the issue of conflict at individual level.
The paper discusses the conflict resolution in different levels namely, individual
and collective which takes form of individual violent action, industrial conflicts
and conflicts between states. We find that Gandhi’s approach is still very relevant
in modern complex resolution and there is a need to revive and resurrect the
philosophy at the level of institutions that are working for conflict resolution.

Keywords: Violence, Satyagraha, Conflict, Non-cooperation, Perseverence.

Source: http://www.notable-quotes.com/g/gandhi_mahatma.html

Nonviolent Action

Nonviolent action is the most important method in the process of conflict resolution. It has a
long history, it was evolved not by Gandhi but it was widely used by Gandhi in Indian freedom
struggle. Gene Sharp pointed out that the technique of nonviolent action conducts protest,
resistance and intervention without physical violence by:

(a) acts of omission – that is, the participants refuse to perform acts which they usually perform,
are expected by customs to performs, or are required by law or regulation to perform
Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2927388

 2

(b) acts of commission that is, the participants perform acts that they usually do not perform, are
not expected by custom to perform, or are forbidden by law or regulation from performing

(c) a combination of both.[1]

Nonviolent action is an important technique for conducting social, economic and political
conflict without the use of physical violence. It served as a tool of empowering parties in
conflicts with oppressive and powerful opponents. Famous Salt Satyagraha is the one of the
important example in nonviolent action. This struggle conducted under the leadership of
Mahatma Gandhi in 1930. Gandhian Satyagraha is included in several form of nonviolent actions
like non cooperation, boycotts, picketing, leafleting, strikes, civil disobedience, fasting, the non-
violent occupation of various government facilities, vigil and fasts, mass imprisonments, refusal
to pay taxes, and a willingness at all times to be abused by the authorities and get to respond non
violently, with politeness, courage and determination. It also has a positive meaning as people
strive to remove causes of violent conflict, both human and environmental.

Nonviolent action is classified in three forms is like nonviolent protest and persuasions, non
cooperation, and nonviolent intervention. Nonviolent protest and persuasions are intended to
communicate protest against some action, policy or condition. These include such methods as
distribution of leaflets, holding vigils, conducting a march and maintaining silence. The second is
the noncooperation, is the more powerful method. This method, parties temporally withdrawing
cooperation from their opponent that enabled the social, economic or political relationships to
function as they did previously. Social non cooperation includes prevention of cooperation on the
social level, by applying such forms as social boycotts and boycotts of social occasions and
functions. The impact of social boycotts is primarily psychological, especially on those
boycotted. The impact may also be symbolic, as in refusing to attend ceremonies and occasions
sponsored by opponents in a conflict. The economic non cooperation includes both economic
boycotts and labour strike. Political non cooperation includes parties not participating political
matters like opponent group or government. It involved in boycott elections, walking out
government bodies, civil disobedience and a work stoppage by civil servants. The third is
nonviolent intervention; these are the methods that actively disrupt the normal working system.
The intervention may take psychological, physical, social, economic and political forms. The
widely diverse types of action include hunger strikes, sit-ins, creating new social, economic or
political institutions, establishing new forms of social behaviour and parallel government80.
Then the last two centuries, the technique of non violent action was widely used in highly
diverse conflicts, such as colonial rebellions, international political and economic conflicts,
religious conflicts and antislavery resistance. This type of struggle has been used to gain national
independence, to bring about economic gains, to resist genocide, to undermine dictatorships, to
gain civil rights, to end segregation and to resist foreign occupations.

Satyagraha in terms of Conflict Resolution

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2927388

 3

Gandhian Satyagraha is the effective weapon for prevent violence and tackles the conflict.
Satyagraha is Gandhi’s technique of nonviolent activism. The term has variously been translated
as passive resistance, nonviolent resistance, nonviolent direct action and even militant
nonviolence. The ultimate aim of Gandhian Satyagraha is the reach the higher level of truth in a
nonviolent manner. The essence of nonviolent techniques is that it seeks to liquidate antagonism
but not the antagonists. Satyagraha is not encouraged in any such violence. Violence seeks to
destroy the opponent or at least to in injure him, and this not the way to convert or reform him.
RR Diwakar pointed out that Gandhi conceived and practiced the Satyagraha is a way of life, and
for him, Satyagraha as a weapon for fighting against evil and for bringing about social change
was a byproduct. Relentless pursuit of truth through love or nonviolence alone would be the
normal way of life or a Satyagrahi. Gandhi called satyagraha is a moral weapon to be used not
only by individuals but also by groups and masses to fight against corruption, exploitation,
imperialism, social, economic and political injustice. When a Gandhian concept of conflict
resolution, Satyagrahi not to attack or humiliate his opponent. The Satyagrahi should try to avoid
all intentional injury to the opponent in thought, word and deed. Thus he should not harbour
anger, hatred, ill-will, suspicion, vindictiveness or other similar divisive feelings. As regards
speech, he should avoid all abusive, insulting, haughty, or needless offensive language. In his
actions he should not rely on brute force, for to do so is to cooperate with the evil doer and lend
him support. In spite of all provocation the Satyagrahi should not vindictive, and should not
frighten the opponent. If assaulted, he should not prosecutes his assailant, and he should not call
in outsiders to assist him, for either course would means that he is depending on physical force.
Joan Bondurant’s words ‘Satyagrahi seek to strengthen interpersonal relationships and
interpersonal satisfaction through acts of support and, where appropriates, through service to the
opponent. This approach goes well beyond the nebulous and often platitudinous insistence that
all men are brothers and that love for the opponent dominates the feelings and dictates the action.
He is based upon a psychologically found understanding about suffering and the capacity of man
to change. The aim is to convert the opponent, to change his understanding and his sense of
values so that he will join whole heartedly with the nonviolent resister in seeking a settlement
truly amicable and truly satisfying to both the parties.’ [2] The nonviolent resister seeks a solution
under which both sides can have complete self-respect and mutual respect, a settlement that will
implement the new desires and full energies of both parties. Misunderstandings, coercive tactics,
poor communication, suspicion, perception of basic difference in values, increasing the power
differences are the main reasons in behind the conflict. Conflict is resolved in a constructive or
destructive way. Gandhian concept of conflict resolution is based in constructive way of problem
solving. Gandhian Satyagraha is considered the weapon of the strongest person’s and it excludes
in every form of violence and hatred behaviour. A Satyagrahi exhausts all other means before he
resorts to Satyagraha. Gandhi also used it as his last weapon against injustice, after having
exhausted all other possibilities of persuasion and conciliation. The Satyagrahi loves the
opponent as a human beings and aims at rousing him to a sense of equity by an appeal to the best
him. Satyagraha implies that the opponent realizes his mistakes, repents and there takes place a

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 4

peaceful adjustment of differences. A Satyagrahi will always try to overcome evil by good, anger
by love, untruth by truth, himsa by Ahimsa. Satyagraha stresses four basic ideas

(a) it is essentially the use of soul force

(b) it excludes the use of physical force

(c) through the suffering of the Satyagrahi it appeals to the heart and thus seeks convert the
wrong-doer and

(d) means and ends are convertible terms “as the means so the end’.[3]

A good result can be produced only by good means. Thomas Weber elaborated some conflict
resolution norms. First norm is that party identifies real issue of the conflict. Party states his goal
and tries to understand opponent’s intention and his position. It is the positive approaches of
conflict resolution. The next step is party is seek to negotiation and not to be use any type of
violence. Opponents should see conflict is positively as an opportunity for personal and social
transformation and act in a nonviolent manner, neither humiliating or provoking the other side
nor letting them is provoked or humiliated. The purpose is should not be coercion but
conversion. In this section party should define their conflict well and not to cooperate evil. Not to
polarize the situation and should distinguish between antagonism and antagonists. If the
opponent gives any indication of changing his position and altering his behavior in any direction,
this indication must be given full recognition. In this stage party move towards to a position of
conflict resolution. Weber evolved third norm is that the resolution of the conflict. “In this stage
opponent must be understand his wrong and be open to admit their error. Finally the both parties
accepted in conflict resolution. Conflict is cannot be resolved through mere decision making
process and that, being an essential element for bringing out change society; we should not
attempt to suppress the conflict.” [4] Gandhian concept of conflict resolution is did not seek to end
up with conflict, which he valued positively, nor to build conflict free society. He simply claimed
that we should target at the roots of conflict and aim at solving its underlying causes. Emerged
incompatibility in between the parties, is the main issue of the conflict. Tackling the central cause
of the conflict is the basic process in the development of future approaches of conflict resolution.
Conflict resolution is aims at the elimination of the source of conflict. Temporary arrangement of
conflict resolution is not being existed. Settling the immediate disputes with the underlying
conflict cannot be viewed. Basic issue or human needs is never be considered in this approach.
Fulfillment of human needs will emerge in the form of a mutually satisfied solution. Gandhian
Satyagraha is same as that in win-win approaches of conflict resolution. A win-win approach of
conflict resolution is referred in previous chapter. In this approaches neither party in win, nor
party is lose. Satyagraha is the zero-sum technique, where one person’s victory is another
person’s defeat. Satyagrahi must conduct themselves on the highest moral plane. They must
show more concern for their adversary than ever for themselves. Satyagraha is the vindication of

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 5

truth not by infliction of suffering on the opponent but on one’s self. The ultimate goal of
Satyagrahi is not victory over the adversary, but the victory of each side.

Applications of Satyagraha

Same general principles of Satyagraha apply in various conflict situations for their resolution.
However, each category of conflict has characteristics specific to it and hence may also require
an approach more specific to it. Salient features of application of Satyagraha in different
categories of conflicts are given below.

A. Interpersonal Conflicts

Satyagraha in such situations depends on the degree to which its values have been internalized
rather than on a conscious adoption of tactics. This "presupposes great study, tremendous
perseverance and thorough cleansing of one's self of all impurities" "through living the creed in
your life which must be a living sermon" and through a wide and varied experience of internal
conflict. For reconciling the duty of resistance to evil with that of Ahimsa, Gandhi advised that
It is in personal relationships that we can start practicing nonviolence-"he who fails in the
domestic sphere and seeks to apply it only in the political and social sphere will not succeed" and
replace the deep-seated emotion of FEAR with TRUST. In most conflicts both parties want to
dominate. Satyagrahis cannot adopt rigid attitudes but while hoping to win over the opponent
should be willing to change their own attitudes as the issues and underlying causes become
clearer.[5]

When interpersonal conflicts arise, whether between parties having similar or differing levels of
authority, the usual ways of resolving these are either authoritarian-parties try to impose their
will on each other- or permissive-one of the parties gives in. The former may produce resentment
and hostility in the loser, require heavy enforcement, foster dependence and submission out of
fear and make the winner feel guilty. The latter may foster feeling of guilt and helplessness in the
loser and lack of respect for the loser in the winner. In either case, those without power tend to
cope by retaliation, dishonesty, submission, regression or rebelling. Only cooperative approach
of Satyagraha avoids such negative outcomes. In it, one’s minds one's own behaviour more than
the opponent's attitude and tries to grasp the opponent's viewpoint.
It is through success in interpersonal conflicts that one progresses in theory and practice of
Satyagraha: "For it will be by those small things that you will be judged."[6]

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 6

B. Legal Disputes: the Adversary System of Resolution

The legal system is the primary institutional solution to conflict resolution among individuals or
groups. It generally precludes the Gandhian dialectic from coming into play because it is
concerned with 'sanctions' and not with reconciliation and compromise, least of all conversion.
One of the parties in conflict risks total loss and usually both incur costs. Gandhi, himself a
lawyer, saw lawyers as mediators rather than mere conductors of legal proceedings. Talking of
his first case which took him to South Africa and which he helped resolve out-of-court through
an independent arbitrator and a time schedule for settling the agreed upon debts, he said: "I
became disgusted with the profession. As lawyers, the counsels on both sides were bound to rake
up points of law in support of their clients. The winning party never recovers all the costs. I felt it
was my duty to befriend both parties and bring them together." He settled down into his legal
practice in his singular way: "I realized that the true function of a lawyer was to unite parties
driven as under. The lesson was so indelibly burnt into me that a large part of my time during the
twenty years of my practice as a lawyer was occupied in bringing about private compromises of
hundreds of cases. I lost nothing thereby, certainly not my soul." [6]
Courts are the means of solving those conflicts that nevertheless still occur. Even so, where
courts can be avoided they should be, because satisfaction of both parties cannot come from
defeat of one of them. Only the antagonists themselves can be parties to the dialectic out of
which Truth and justice emerge. As Gandhi said: "Truly, men became more unmanly and
cowardly when they resorted to the court of law. Surely, the decision of a third party is not
always right. We, in our simplicity, imagine that a stranger, by taking our money, gives us
justice."[7]
The courts may not be even doing their intended job a common perception. Hence, in the
absence of alternative effective modes of resolving disputes, disputants may resort to violence,
avoidance or 'lumping-it'. As it is, many traditional forms of dispute settlement mechanisms have
disappeared from our urbanized society, e.g., respected elders, trusted priests, village leaders.
The case of Satyagrahis arraigned in a court arising out of civil disobedience against a law seen
as immoral falls in a different category. Because of the basically law-abiding nature of
Satyagrahis, they (civil resisters) as a rule, voluntarily submit to arrest, do not seek bail, avoid
lawyers and willingly accept the legally laid down consequences for such a breach. Gandhi's
advice was: "It is much to be wished that people would avoid litigation. But what when we are
dragged to the courts? In fact Gandhi even saw benefits in incarceration due to Satyagraha: "The
discipline that they will be acquiring in prison will help the nonviolent organization of the people
outside and instill fearlessness among them." His statement in the court, in his famous trial for
'seditious' writing, in March 1922 has become memorable: “Non Cooperation with evil is as
much is as much a duty as cooperation with good.” Nonviolence implies voluntary submission to
the penalty for non co-operation with evil." He wanted civil resisters to "make no distinction
between an ordinary prisoner and himself", but to "civilly resist such regulations as are not only
irksome or hard to bear but are humiliating or specially designed to degrade non co-operators."

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 7

C. Industrial Conflicts

Conflicts within industry that often lead to strikes have economic or social determinants, e.g.
wages, management policies, employee-employer relations and feeling of powerlessness in
employees. He wanted the workers to be organized: "When labour is intelligent enough to
organize itself and learns to act as one man, it will have the same weight as money if not
greater." Once this has come about through nonviolent means of Satyagraha, the 'owners' will not
drive the labour to strike but will embrace them as partners. But this calls for patience, restraint,
discipline, unity and, faith in the organization and institutions therewith.
For good relations, neither side should have the power to dominate. Gandhi believed that to a
large extent, such domination rests on the acquiescence of the oppressed.
Satyagrahis must fight what they see as injustice at all costs firmly. Gandhi stressed on honesty
in this context: "in Satyagraha the minimum is also the maximum and as it is the irreducible
minimum, there is no question of retreat, and the only movement possible is an advance." But the
Gandhian technique also provides for reconciliation and a shifting of the position as the
perception of Truth alters. Mediators may help by forcing the parties, including Satyagrahis, to
get a clearer mandate and realization of Truth in the process.
If all else failed, Gandhi noted that "strikes are an inherent right of the working men but must be
considered a crime immediately the capitalists accept the principle of arbitration." But STRIKES
(= nonviolent non-co-operation with employers) may be resorted to only after all legitimate
means of settling the dispute-moral appeals to employers' conscience, offer of voluntary
arbitration etc.-have been tried. Gandhi warned: "Public has no means of judging the merits of a
strike, unless it is backed by impartial persons enjoying public confidence."
During the 1918 Mill strike which Gandhi led, he wanted answers to the following questions for
deciding the sought after wage increases: (a) Wage increase necessary for the labour to lead a
simple but contented life; and (b) Can the mills give this increase? If not, how much can they
afford?
He laid down following general principles for the conduct of overt disputes with the
management:

 Workers and their leaders (among whom there should be perfect understanding) should
not exaggerate demands and be ready for correction if convinced by the opponent.

 Strikes should be resorted to as the last weapon if negotiation, reconciliation and

arbitration have failed. During strike, labour should remain ready for settlement or
arbitration.

 Labour must remain nonviolent even under provocation and bear no ill-will towards
employers.

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 8

 Strikers should, out of self-respect, not rely on alms, public funds or union funds but find
any available alternative work to maintain them.

 Strikers, as Satyagrahis, must not submit before force or hardship.

 Strikers should be truthful, courageous, just, free from hatred or malice and ready for
voluntary work with faith in God.[8]

In group conflict, action to be taken before adoption of Satyagraha includes impartial analysis of
the conflict and of essential interests common between the opponents, definition of reasonable
long-range aims which the opponents could agree to and their precise understanding by them,
and in case of one party refusing to accept the so defined aims, an attempt at compromise by
accepting among the contesting parties of contextual non-essential changes.
Gandhi claimed that Civil Disobedience could be used as a technique for the redress of local
wrongs or to rouse local consciousness or conscience but alone it could never be used in a
general cause, such as for 'independence'. For Civil Disobedience, "the issue must be definite and
capable of being clearly understood and within the power of the opponent to yield." For general
and large nonviolent causes or campaigns, Constructive Programme/Work becomes a key
weapon, and perhaps such campaigns are not fully nonviolent unless accompanied by some
constructive activity. Constructive work is only the other side of mass Satyagraha and essential
to its conduct. Nonviolence, to be creative, can never express itself in mere resistance.
In campaign against war or nuclear armament, the constructive work could take the form of
education of public opinion and building up of cadres for a movement.
Gandhi saw that any oppression or exploitation-political, economic, racial or sexist-rests to a
large extent on the acquiescence of the exploited. For example, "exploitation of the poor can be
extinguished not by effecting the destruction of a few millionaires but by removing the ignorance
of the poor and teaching them to non cooperate with the exploiters".
Gandhi's theory of Trusteeship is another major element in his view of the way social conflicts
should be resolved: we must seek to "destroy capitalism, not the capitalist", i.e., to convert and
not to coerce. 'Trusteeship' depends on a realization of the oneness of humanity and on the belief
in the moral correctness of non-possession and voluntary poverty, and, hence, may be rather
difficult to get across in an industrialized consumerist society. But there would be no other way
to build a nonviolent social order. If the rich refused to become 'trustees' of the poor, Gandhi
endorsed nonviolent non co-operation and civil disobedience as the "right and infallible"
solution. "Rich cannot accumulate wealth without the cooperation of the poor in society". And,
"No one is bound to cooperate in one's own undoing or slavery." Of course, Gandhi did see the
difficulty of making Trusteeship a practical reality: "I adhere to my doctrine of trusteeship in
spite of the ridicule that has been poured upon it. It is true that it is difficult to reach. So is
nonviolence."[9]

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 9

E. Satyagraha against the State: Civil Disobedience

In the political field, nonviolent social struggles generally consist in opposing 'evil' in the shape
of unjust laws, i.e., Satyagraha takes the form of Civil Disobedience (or Resistance). Gandhi
believed that the seeming breaking of a law is really not so, provided that

(a) a higher law, that of the conscience, is followed;

(b) the law is broken nonviolently; and

(c) the violator is happily prepared to pay full penalty for violation.[10]

Gandhi emphasized that to be 'civil', disobedience "must be sincere, respectful, restrained, never
defiant, must be based on some well-understood principle, must not be capricious and above all
must have no ill-will towards one another or even the hatred behind it."
Here too, "a Satyagrahi exhausts all other means before he resorts to Satyagraha." He remains
ready for negotiations, which may, however, never come about for no fault of the Satyagrahi. He
will then "appeal to public opinion, educate public opinion, state his case calmly and coolly
before everybody who wants to listen to him." And only then resort to Satyagraha. The moral
pressure and public opinion paves the way for the possibility of conversion.
Gandhi believed in the state authority in a democratic society. Here, Civil Disobedience is
Satyagraha only if carried out openly. One had a duty to obey laws except those which are
contrary to the conscience or cause tangible harm to people's welfare: "It is only when a person
has thus obeyed the laws of society scrupulously that he is in a position to judge as to which
particular rules are good and just and which are unjust and iniquitous." Further, "Civil
Disobedience is not a state of lawlessness but presupposes a law-abiding spirit, combined with a
self-restraint."[11]
In a democratic state, only 'defensive' civil disobedience-"involuntary or reluctant nonviolent
disobedience of such laws as are in themselves bad and obedience to which would be
inconsistent with one's self-respect or human dignity"-may be resorted to. "Aggressive, assertive
or offensive civil disobedience", i.e., "nonviolent, willful disobedience of laws of the state,
whose breach does not involve moral turpitude and which is undertaken as a revolt against state",
is resorted to where the state is corrupt, repressive or dominated by an imperialist power.
Summing up, progressive steps in a civil disobedience Satyagraha could be: negotiation,
arbitration and exhaustion of all established channels, preparation for group action, agitation
such as propaganda, marches, etc, an ultimatum to the opponent if no agreement is reached,
economic boycott and strikes, non co-operation, non-payment of taxes, boycott of public
institutions, civil disobedience, usurping the government's functions, and parallel government.

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 10

F. Inter-nation Conflicts

In relation to World War II, Gandhi said: "While all violence is bad and must be condemned in
the abstract, it is permissible for, it is even the duty of, a believer in Ahimsa to distinguish
between the aggressor and the defender. Side with the defender in a nonviolent manner' because,
"the [violent] defence has to resort to all the damnable things that the enemy does, and then with
greater vigour if it has to succeed." Gandhi saw that for a less armed world "some nation will
have to disarm herself and take large risks." In the present political state, complete unilateral
disarmament’ Since armaments are largely controlled by economic factors, Gandhi said: "real
disarmament cannot come unless the nations of the world cease to exploit one another." Gandhi's
ideal society would aim to resolve international conflicts by helping its neighbours alleviate their
economic problems and try to remain friendly with them. It would not exploit any other nation.
Gandhi's definition of exploitation encompasses the belief that he who claims as his own "more
than the minimum that is really necessary for him is guilty of theft." If simple help is not
adequate, we must invite our neighbours "to come and share our resources."
Civilian defence concedes the physical taking over of the country (though Gandhi also did not
oppose the idea of a 'living wall' at the border to stop the invading army) substituting political
struggle for aggressive war. The aggressor becomes akin to a domestic tyrant and civil
disobedience and non co-operation become the methods of fight.
Gandhi clarified "that a state can be administered on a nonviolent basis if the vast majority of the
people are nonviolent." If a nonviolent society were attacked, according to Gandhi it has two
options: "to yield possession but not cooperate with the aggressor by the people who have been
trained in the nonviolent way. They would offer themselves as fodder for the aggressor's
cannon." The second way could be effective only if undertaken by a community of true
Satyagrahis who "by laying down their arms they feel courageous and brave" and "It was this
unalloyed self-suffering which was the truest form of self-defence which knows no surrender."
The aggressor would soon realize "that it would not be paying to punish the other party and his
will could not be imposed in that way." He claimed: "if there is no danger of being killed
yourself by those you slay, you cannot go on killing defenceless and unprotesting people
endlessly. You must be down to your own gun in deep self-disgust."
Answering his critics, Gandhi said: "Everybody seems to start with the assumption that the
nonviolent method must be set down a failure unless he lives to enjoy the success thereof."
The essential nature in war is killing. Gandhi reminds all that war "demoralizes those who are
trained for it. It brutalizes men of naturally gentle nature." Even if the nonviolent of a country
remain a "hopeless minority" and cannot wean masses from war, they must still "live
nonviolence in all its completeness and refuse to participate in war." Gandhi wanted the
individual to play the role at two levels. First, to actively non cooperate with the warring state,
whether own or an outside aggressor: "Merely to refuse military service is not enough. Those
who are not on the register of military service are equally participating in the crime if they
support the state otherwise."[12] The hardcore Satyagrahis should lead the masses so that "even
common people would ultimately begin to subscribe inwardly to nonviolence as a faith."

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 11

As Horsburgh said, though "the achievements of nonviolence in India owe as much to Gandhi's
moral greatness as to the techniques of Satyagraha, the right method, if persisted in, can do much
to produce the right man." As Gandhi said, training for violence could never do so.

Gandhian Concept of Conflict Transformations

Conflict transformation is the most important and recent forms of problem solving method.
Many of ideas in Gandhian Satyagraha is related to modern conflict transformation. Main
focuses of this study is comparison with the modern conflict transformation and Gandhian
Satyagraha. Many of transformational contents are included in Gandhian Satyagraha. Gandhi’s
nonviolence has a positive aspect of love to the opponent. Satyagrahi loves the enemy and tries
to win him over to his side by transforming him. There is no victory and there is no vanquish.
Many of the internal and external factors can have the cause of the conflict transformations.
Gandhi’s concept of conflict transformation maintains self-purification and reformation. Self
purification could be made internal transformation of the parties. Gandhi emphasized self
purification is training their followers in nonviolence. He stressed personal cleanliness, self-
discipline and proper conduct in the face of conflict situation. Gandhi used nonviolent resistance
as a great symbolic gesture to help increase Indians self awareness, raise their pride and unity,
and give all of them a chance to participants in the national resistance effort. Gandhi’s
constructive programme is the best example of external transformation of the parties.
Constructive programme was made major change in the parties; it was emphasized in conflict
transformation process. Constructive programme is to build a new social and economic order
through voluntary constructive work. Gandhi consider it was important than resistance. Gandhi’s
constructive programme included a variety of specific measures aimed at social improvements,
education, decentralized economic production and consumption, and improvement in the lot of
the oppressed sections of the population. Self purification and constructive programme can
transform the individual and through the society. All these programme is gradually transform
violent to new nonviolent society. Non violent resistance stresses, when the agitation leads to
changes that not only resolve the conflict but also transform the relation between the opponents.
Transformation of power is the important aspect in the Gandhi’s problem solving method.
Transforming power seeks to completely alter the structure of conflicting relationship by
winning the hearts and minds of the opponent, not by destroying them. Conflict transformation,
Gandhi meant not the elimination of maladjustment. It rather meant for him progress towards
more and more meaningful adjustments. This can be achieved only when violent relationships
are transformed into nonviolent relationships, where energies of the opponent are utilized in a
higher integration. This calls for a modification of attitudes and requires fulfillment of needs is
both an objective and a means for effecting fundamental change. Behaviour of the Satyagrahi is
could have made major development in the transformation of the parties. Nonviolent
transformation is depends on how its practitioners insist on treating the other. Nonviolence insists
on seeing the self in the other on loving, understanding and respecting other. Nonviolent views

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 12

and treats the opponent much differently than violence. Since the practitioners of nonviolence
acknowledge there own selves in others and seek not to hurt the opponent but to treat them
instead with respect. By doing so, they avoid dehumanizing the opponent their actions change
the structure of the conflict. Gandhi pointed out the new and dynamic way of nonviolence to end
conflicts and to transform our thoughts and actions. He added a new dimension to nonviolence
and thus converted a passive principle into a dynamic doctrine of Satyagraha to fight against
injustice, exploitation and different other forms of violence.

Mediation is one of the important forms in third party intervention. Mediation provides a form
of third party intervention aimed at facilitating the resolution of the conflict; it is more consistent
with the aims and principles of Satyagraha. Mediator’s job is to assist the parties to come to their
own resolution of their dispute. Mediators may take a step with close relationship between the
parties. The Gandhian mediators would act as a Satyagraha catalyser, helping the parties to
jointly reach an agreement upon and mutually satisfactory solution, aiming to resolve the
underlying conflict, to reach a higher degree of truth, and to achieve transformation in both the
opponents and their larger social environment. Gandhian model of mediation would be located to
the development of skills and attitudes in the parties that contributes to the building of a
nonviolent society. The Gandhian mediators would aspire at both fostering empowerment of the
disputing parties and recognition between opponents. Gandhi is always supported in modern
concept of alternative dispute resolution. It is avoiding legal adjudication or legal establishment.
It is the system third party’s job to assist the parties to come to their own resolution of their
disputes. There is not outside compulsion in alternative dispute resolution, parties in mutually
accommodating each other and finally get into a settlement with the help of third parties. This
ADR movement is very close to Gandhian Satyagraha.

References
1. Gene Sharp, Gandhi's views - Peace, Nonviolence and Conflict Resolution
http://wagingnonviolence.org/2013/12/gene-sharp-departed-gandhi-leaves-us/
accessed on November 22, 2016.

2. Joan Bondurant ‘Conquest of Violence: The Gandhian Philosophy of Conflict’

Bondurant, Joan

3. Ibid
4. Thomas Weber, 'Conflict Resolution and Gandhian Ethics', The Gandhi Peace
Foundation, New Delhi, 1991.

5. Raghvan Iyer, ‘Essential Writings of Mahatma Gandhi’.

6. Mark Juergensmeyer, ‘Gandhi Ways: A Handbook of Conflict Resolution.’

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur

 13

7. Donald Duncan, ‘Selected Writings of Mahatma Gandhi.’

8. Judith Brown, ‘Gandhi: Prisoner of Hope.’

9. Louis Fischer, ‘Life of Mahatma Gandhi’

10. Judith Brown, ‘Mahatma Gandhi and Civil Disobedience: The Mahatma in Indian
Politics’

11. Thoreau, ‘On the Duty of Civil Disobedience.’

12. Jack Homer, ‘The Gandhi Reader.’

Manoj Kumar, Second in Command, is serving in BSF; presently he is doing M Phil in Conflict
and Security Studies at Center for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur.

Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Jaipur