Nonviolent Conflict Escalation

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21173
• Author: Jørgen Johansen,Majken Jul Sørensen
• Date: 01 August 2016
• Published date: 01 August 2016

C R Q, vol. 34, no. 1, Fall 2016 83

© 2016 Association for Confl ict Resolution and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21173

Nonviolent Con ict Escalation

Majken Jul Sørensen

Jørgen Johansen

Escalation of confl ict is frequently deemed undesirable and problem-

atic, as it is often assumed to refer to the escalation of violence. How-

ever, there exists a diff erent form of escalation that we call “nonviolent

confl ict escalation.”  is occurs when previously unrecognized confl icts

are intensifi ed using nonviolent means to a point where the confl ict can

no longer be ignored. Five aspects of nonviolent escalations of meth-

ods are examined through case studies, showing how diff erent forms of

intensifi cation can work together to escalate the confl ict. Nonviolent

escalations of unrecognized confl icts can serve as potent tools in struggles

against tyranny, injustice, and human rights violations.

A ll confl icts are born equal with the same right to recognition.  is

paraphrase of the UN Declaration of Human Rights highlights how

many confl icts that deserve attention and a resolution remain below the

radar because the people who hold grievances have not yet managed to

bring it to the public agenda. Although exceptions exist, confl ict escala-

tion is frequently regarded as problematic and undesirable in mainstream

peace and confl ict studies. One reason for the prevailing negative view of

confl ict has been the fi eld ’ s focus on violent confl ict and the subsequent

sidelining of nonviolent resistance to oppression and violence. We follow

 e authors would like to thank Sean Chabot, Henrik Frykberg, Martin Jank, Brian Martin,

Jason MacLeod, Christine Schweitzer, Daniel Ritter, Michael Schulz, Stellan Vinthagen, and

the editor of Confl ict Resolution Quarterly, as well as the anonymous reviewers for conversa-

tions and comments on drafts which helped us clarify our thinking about nonviolent confl ict

escalation. We are also grateful to Sarah Freeman-Woolpert who assisted in improving the

language considerably.

84 SØRENSEN, JOHANSEN

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq

in the footsteps of the exceptions and emphasize that confl ict can be both

desirable and necessary for human and societal development.

In a recent article in Journal of Resistance Studies, Richard Jackson ( 2015 )

criticized peace studies as a fi eld for embodying a Eurocentric focus on

top-down solutions and liberal interventions in violent confl ict by external

actors. Consequently, peace studies have neglected to explore, both empiri-

cally and theoretically, existing forms of local resistance, in particular those

carried out without the use of violence. Jackson reminds us of the radical

origin of peace studies and their commitment to emancipation and calls

for more research on nonviolent resistance to injustice and oppression.

One way to counter both the association of confl ict with violence and

contribute to a deeper understanding of nonviolent resistance is to inves-

tigate how confl icts can be escalated using nonviolent means. Struggles

against oppression and injustice, and campaigns for freedom and human

rights, have a long history of relying on nonviolent campaigns that aim to

escalate the confl icts. Once colonialism was the order of the day, and few

within the colonizing states questioned this system. Today colonialism is

generally acknowledged to be a stain in human history, and few defend it.

However, this shift in perception was unlikely to have taken place without

the resistance to colonialism by subalterns in the colonized world. With-

out their eff orts to show that colonialism was a system of oppression and

exploitation, few would have noticed that there was a confl ict. In order

to make their demands for freedom and self-determination heard, they

forced everyone, both in the colonies and among the colonizers, to have

an opinion about it. Much of the resistance to colonialism was carried out

through armed struggle, but the Indian struggle against British rule is a

classic example of nonviolent resistance. It is also a clear example of how

the Indians used nonviolent means to escalate the situation and how this

intensifi cation eventually led to a resolution of the confl ict in the Indians’

favor as they gained independence from the British colonizers.

In order to better understand the dynamics of campaigns such as the

Indian liberation struggle, as well as contributing to making them more

eff ective in the future, we propose a framework of confl ict escalation using

nonviolent means. We begin with a discussion about escalation, deescala-

tion, and prevention of confl icts and the problems that arise when the

two concepts of violence and confl ict are not clearly distinguished from

one another. We proceed with presenting the theory and practice of non-

violent action before we discuss the diff erence between escalation of the

means used in a confl ict and the confl ict itself. Subsequently we intro-