Reconciliation in national politics

CONFLICT resolution at the national level is a demand of the day, especially in the context of political impasse in today's Bangladesh. In the school text there is a tale of an old man who in his death bed provided a morale to his feuding sons 'united you stand, divided you fall.' In this account, every son was separately asked to break a bunch of sticks tied together, but none could succeed. In the light of big examples set by great minds, the present article would argue about the strength of 'unity out of diversity' and the merits of 'integration rather than assimilation' in a pluralistic democracy.
The earliest reconciliation amongst the conflicting parties dates back to 620AD when Prophet Muhammad (SWA) forgive His challengers after about 66 battles in 23 years. Following the victory of Mecca by Prophet's army, the Charter of Medina turned a historical document between Muslims, and their arch rivals Jews, Christians and pagans. It set the foundation of unity and brought to an end the bitter animosity amongst the Arab tribes on their religious faith. It instituted a number of mutual rights and obligations for all the clans and communities within the fold of first Islamic state in Saudi Arabia.
If a government is to manage diversity well in politics, it must overcome discrimination of any particular quarter and prevent their marginalisation. David J. Whittaker in his book Conflict and Reconciliation in the Contemporary World (2002) examines the processes of dispute resolutions and compromise in eight countries from four continents. In each of these case studies the author looks at likely causes of the conflict, outlines developments and considers the likely risks in the long-term healing process at the reconciliation stage.
Whittaker shows harmonious co-existence achieved in almost half of the countries whereby politically minorities were not forced to follow the tune of the majority dictatorship. To resolve differences and hostile action, the author observes the importance of the psychological willingness for building understanding and tolerance to live together in a new framework of peace and well-being.
Led by Archbishop Desmond Tutu the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) laid the foundation of latest successful examples in post apartheid South Africa. Comprising 17 high profile members in three committees, the TRC functioned in line with the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act of 1995. TRC procedures represent a ventilating process -- to hear testimonies about human rights abuse, to document them, to present them publicly, and to facilitate the granting of amnesty.
Much other similar settlement had been reached in different parts of Europe at the early stage of the modern era. The ideal of 'fraternity' used in the French Revolution of 1789 became the basis of French nationalism that combined working class people with nobility in the post-revolutionary period. During the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, Vladimir I. Lenin urged the members of the Russian bourgeoisie and the Czarist monarchy to help construct a socialist society in Russia. Instead of placing defeated forces into death squads, Lenin slated the importance of their support in a critical juncture.
The unspeakable barbarity and atrocity of the Khmer Rouge and its leader Pol Pot filled everyone with dismay and disgust after Prince Norodom Sihanouk was overthrown in a military coup in Cambodia in 1970. Upon resuming his power, Sihanouk's Royal Government saw 'national reconciliation' as the ultimate solution for burying hatchets and bringing unity to rebuild the Cambodian economy.
The fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989 marked the integration of East and West Germany after four decades of Cold War hostility. After ten years, Charles Hermann, et.al. (eds.) book Violent Conflict in the 21st Century: Causes, Instruments and Mitigation focuses further accounts on the subject. In line with this amity much of the large scale violence that had occurred during the Cold War era came to an end in Eastern Europe and Russia apparently in a non-violent manner by the early 1990s.
Atrocities in Kosovo by the armies of Slobodan Milosevic were mounting before he decided in June 1999 to accept NATO's conditions for terminating the conflict. In his book The Conflict Over Kosovo: Why Milosevic Decided to Settle When He Did Stephen T. Hosmer (2001) examines the reasons why the then president of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia went for a surrender. In the Nuremburg spirit, Milosevic faced trial at The Hague, but he was found dead in his cell on March 11, 2006 before a verdict was implicated for his crimes against humanity.
Many fleeing leaders of the Nazi Army have been tried by the Nuremburg Court for their atrocities during the World War II. Nevertheless, there has not been even a mock trial organised against the pilots for dropping of atom bombs that killed about 166,000 people in Hiroshima and 80,000 in Nagasaki in August 1945. No reparation was also made by the British authorities for their ruthless policies that took 10 million human lives in 1770 alone and caused many other deaths in the resistance wars against the British in 190 years.
Having discussed the successful practices of conflict resolution and reconciliation in the post-revolutionary societies across the globe, we should raise our awareness to resolve our differences amicably in the domestic environment. Otherwise, low morale, ambiguity, conflict, tension, and confusion will lead us to acute instability problems from which nobody can avoid his or her responsibilities. People from different thought-process have the right to develop a shared goal in a pluralistic democracy and effective participation in the political process.

The writer is a Professor of North South University.
E-mail: [email protected]