Wolfgang Dietrich

Movement-oriented Approaches to Elicitive Conflict Transformation

‘Breath is a promiscuous lover. The breath you just took was in someone else a moment ago, and when you let go, it’ll move on and become part of someone else. Breath keeps everything moving; without it there can be no dance.’1 Breath is an expression of life, precisely speaking, of the moving nature of universal life energy. Breath is movement: the relative expansion of the body’s contact boundaries in inhalation and their contraction in exhalation. This spatial dimension is accompanied by a temporal one expressed by the rhythm of breathing. And, finally, breath also has a qualitative dimension. Breathing is an existential action at the contact boundary involving space, time, and power. It is not only necessary to survival, but also for experience; that is, the subjective experience of a situation not only expresses itself through the breath, but is also determined in a circular fashion by the function of the breath.2 When conflict is understood as relational, the breath of the involved parties is relevant to the dynamics, perception, and transformation of the conflict. It therefore seems quite natural to discuss methods of conflict transformation in terms of the fundamental function of breath.

On the Transrational Turn in Peace Research: Themes, Levels, and Layers of Elicitive Conflict Transformation

Transrational peace research is concerned with a systemic balance of harmony, justice, security, and truth. At the center of its epistemology is the following question: What specific meaning do these terms have in a given situation? Transrational peace studies operate on all four sides of Lederach’s pyramid in a descriptive, not a prescriptive, fashion. Therefore, the epistemic subject of transrational peace studies is the systemic examination of the interrelations among individual and societal behavior in the four horizontal fields (harmony, justice, security, truth) and on all vertical levels, from the grassroots to middle and regional levels of administration and management to the highest-ranking representatives of state and society.

Humanistic Psychology, the Foundation of Elicitive Conflict Transformation

I begin this chapter by addressing the aspects of humanistic psychology that I consider key in understanding the methods of elicitive conflict transformation. I do so while giving full credit to the extensive groundwork done by modern behaviorism and psychoanalysis, which I will not address here. I do so, equally, in the knowledge that psychoanalysis is greater than what is advocated by unrelenting traditionalists. There are methodologically innovative and politically relevant approaches to psychoanalysis, such as those of Vamik D. Volkan1 and Otto Kernberg.2 Their practices have a kinship with humanistic psychology, and I will therefore address them here. Finally, I recognize the multiple bifurcations and innovations in the theories and practices of humanistic psychology that have occurred since the work of the great founding figures: describing these aspects would require more than one volume. Here, it is important to outline the philosophical and psychological principles that serve as the basis for recent work. Much recent work is derived from shamanism, Zen, Tao, or Tantra, but since the 1950s it has been interwoven with Western approaches in a number of experimental contexts following a broad movement to integrate spiritual wisdom with Western thought in science, philosophy, religion, and psychotherapy.

Conclusions of the Second Volume

At the outset of this book I identified the following questions: How can the philosophical foundations of transrational peaces be translated into ways of behaving, communicating, and acting that are conducive to peaces? What is elicitive conflict work? What is the qualitative basis and the legitimate goal of elicitive conflict transformation? What is the meaning of elicitive conflict transformation in the teaching and practice of contemporary peace work? On what basis are interventions into the disputes of third parties carried out in elicitive conflict transformation?

On the Transrational Turn in International Peace Work

Although the methods of elicitive conflict transformation have proven to be effective on numerous occasions, and its representatives count among the most successful and renowned conflict workers of our times, the question of its practical relevance keeps recurring. This is because elicitive conflict transformation does not claim universal applicability as prescriptive methods do. However, in contextual applications its relevance is much greater than might be expected at first sight. Elicitive methods only seem unorthodox when seen in relation to the superficial maskings of behaviorist conflict tinkering.

Energetic Interpretations of Peace

Open image in new window The symbol for yin and yang is an ideal type representation of energetic peaces. Everything is contained within everything. Peace implies the sublation of all dualities and a comprehensive harmony between heaven, the human being, and earth.

Modern Interpretations of Peace

Open image in new window The perception of the world as clockwork or machine is characteristic of modernity. Modern concepts of peace correspondingly believe that peace can be produced through repairing broken social relations; that is, via conflict resolution. The basis for this is the belief in a reason that is presupposed to the visible world and provides the guiding principle of human action.

Moral Interpretations of Peace

Open image in new window The eye of God symbolizes the moral understanding of peace that finally refers to a God standing outside of the world who is identified with the human traits of a loving and punishing father and is omnipotent and omniscient. He is the True, Beautiful, Good. Whether human beings do justice to his peace is interpreted in the manifest world by an elite group of spiritual leaders.

Transrational Interpretations of Peace

Open image in new window The Indian Sri Yantra is counted among one of the yogis’ favored tools for meditation. It stands for the inner peace of the All-One. The multidimensional triangles within the circle symbolize the connection between the energetic and the rational. The downward-facing triangles stand for Shakti-energy, the upright ones for Shiva-form. The unification of the two results in the rational-energetic harmony of the All-One. The Sri Yantra derives from an ancient peace culture and represents the contemporary insights of transrational peace philosophy.

Postmodern Interpretations of Peace

Open image in new window Contrary to a commonly held view, the most widespread peace symbol of the twentieth century is not based on a rune, but on the letters N and D of the semaphore flag. It was designed by the British artist Gerald Holtom in 1958 on the occasion of a protest march against the Atomic Weapons Establishment at Aldermaston. The N stands for nuclear, the D for disarmament. The symbol of the “Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament” was adopted by the Civil Rights Movement in the USA and found its way into the protest movements against the war in Vietnam and into the subcultures of the 1960s. Its origin in the resistance against the rational-belligerent technology of progress turns this symbol as expression of “No, thanks!” into the ideal type symbol for postmodern thinking of peace (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, 2008).