This paper seeks to present a reflection of research and its process in order to determine whether the set objectives were fulfilled. The research study investigated the role played by the intervention of third parties in light of solving conflicts. Essentially, it seeks to determine whether such interventions reduce or increase the duration of dissolving the prevalent conflict. Importantly, the study established that the intervention of third parties when solving these conflicts tend to increase the duration rather than reducing it. However, it is indicated that a biased approach to intervention, whereby the intervener supports one party rather than the other, can substantially reduce the duration of settling the conflict. In essence, I agree that the intervention of third parties in light of solving conflicts can increase the duration of its existence and dissolution. In addition, I learned that neutral interveners are likely to increase the time as opposed to the biased ones. Nevertheless, the reduction of time by use of biasness might be a critical fault when it comes to creating a compromise and a lasting solution. In essence, the objectives of the research were met entirely as regards to the research questions that formed the basis of the study.
We will write a custom Essay on Third Parties in Conflict Resolution specifically for you
807 certified writers online
Ineffectiveness of Outside Military or Economic Interventions
From the findings of this research study, it is evident that the military or economic interventions do not help to reduce the time of conflicts. There is much evidence that arose from the research showing that the interventions do not have a substantial reduction of the conflict duration.
Based on the empirical findings, the discussion part concluded that the use of intervention to solve conflicts does not have time-reduction effects. In that regard, it established that employing a strategy that would essentially reduce the duration of the conflict may be deemed insignificant. This insignificance is incurred because the mere presence of interveners is expected to increase the duration of the conflict in contrast to their absence. This implies that the strategy of intervention does not help to cut on time because the entire approach (intervention) is unsuitable in the first place.
In addition to the inability of the intervention approach to reduce the time of conflict, it is evident that the use of neutral interveners is also unsuitable when it comes to reducing the time of conflict. In this regard, the research has presented evidence showing that most of the conflicts that employed impartial interveners from outside took more time than expected. Additionally, it was noted that the deployment of biased interveners could only reduce the time under specified conditions. For example, to reduce the time of conflict successfully, the prejudiced interveners must be supporting the government rather than the rebels. Even in this condition, the timing of the support must be set in a calculative manner in order to reduce the time duration of that conflict. That being the case, it is evident that the factors affecting the effectiveness of the intervention as a strategy of settling conflict lead to increased duration of the conflict.
It is evident that the objectives of the research were met because the study answered the most critical question that necessitated the study. In this case, it answered the question as to whether the use of intervention reduces the duration of the conflict. It was established that most of the factors of intervention, such as neutrality, increases the time of conflict rather than reducing it (Byrne 20). Importantly, also, it was discovered that the use of biases in conflict resolution presents the opportunity to reduce the duration.
Byrne, Sean. “Conflict Regulation or Conflict Resolution: Third‐party Intervention in the Northern Ireland Conflict – Prospects for Peace.” Terrorism and Political Violence 7.2 (1995): 1-24. Print.