THE EFFICACY OF TRADITIONAL PEACEMAKING AND RECONCILIATION AMONG

THE MUNDARI PEOPLE OF SOUTH SUDAN: AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH TO

PEACEBUILDING AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

BY

JULIUS NYAMBUR WANI

SUBMITTED TO THE

SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL SERVICE OF AMERICAN UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE

OF

MASTER OF ARTS

IN

INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION

COURSE NUMBER:_______________

COURSE TITLE:____________________

CREDIT HOURS:___________________

SEMESTER OF

REGISTRATION:____________________

GRADUATE OFFICE CERTIFICATION:

____________________________________

DATE:______________________________

EVALUATION AND CERTIFICATION:

____________________________________

GRADE: ____________________________

REMARKS:_________________________

____________________________________

SIGNATURE OF FACULTY MEMBER:

____________________________________

DATE:______________________________

2014

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20016

ii

© COPYRIGHT

by

JULIUS NYAMBUR WANI

2014

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

iii

THE EFFICACY OF TRADITIONAL PEACEMAKING AND RECONCILIATION AMONG

THE MUNDARI PEOPLE OF SOUTH SUDAN: AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH TO

PEACEBUILDING AND GOOD GOVERNANCE

BY

JULIUS NYAMBUR WANI

ABSTRACT

Conflict resolution interventions in any conflict situation in Africa have proved difficult due to

competing and conflicting cultural values and practices. Besides the Western-Indigenous binary,

there are also the local variations across nationalities and tribes. Whereas the Western techniques

have been bitterly criticized for their individualistic, neo-imperial, and low-context orientations,

the traditional systems have equally fallen short in majoring up to the imperatives of modern

statehood. The notion of 'statehood' is foreign and almost untenable. Claiming sovereignty and

constitutionalism in highly ethnicized societies is nearly becoming hypothetical. Plainly granted,

African ancient institutions of governance recognized only two levels: individual and society.

On the other hand, the purely indigenous governing structures have been impacted and

nearly eroded to extinction, both culturally and geopolitically. There are however isolated

exceptions. This paper examines the Mundari Model of peacemaking and reconciliation as an

evidence-based qualitative case study. The Mundari Model provides a compelling argument

because it substantially continues to resist the crippling and delusory effect of colonialism. Not

only is the Model rooted in the democratic traditions of African culture and history, but it is also

practically voluntary, collectivistic, raw and therefore cheap. Its inadequacies to accommodate

and weather national and international regimes, however, demand a renegotiated social contract.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are many people who deserve a thank-you mentioning for helping seeing me

through the journey that has finally brought me to accomplishing this academic achievement. My

determination to get educated and potentially contribute to global peace, justice and ecological

integrity started in 1988, when I escaped the Khartoum-based government's targeting of male

children for extermination. At this point, my first thanks go to Dr. Anthony Wanis-St. John,

director of the International Peace and Conflict Resolution program at American University's

School of International Service, for approving, reviewing, and guiding the development of this

project through all stages. Special gratitude goes to Nonviolence International for awarding me

the Randall Research Scholarship in order to conduct this research. Equally meriting a particular

heartfelt appreciation are Patricia and Gerald Mische for granting me the Pat and Jerry Mische

Family Scholarship in recognition of my potential to make a significant contribution to peace and

conflict resolution in Africa. In addition, I dedicate votes of thanks to Donald and Elaine Stanton,

for being such amazing mentors who stood by me during dire circumstances.

Finally, I would like to recognize the support of my lovely fiancée, Treza Clement, for

serving as a source of inspiration and motivation during my last year of graduate studies. Yet it

will be sheer injustice to not mention the best wishes and prayers by my parents and siblings,

even though their main concerns were my safety and health.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS……………………………………………………………………....iv 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………6 1.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………….......6 1.2 Purpose of the Study.………………………………………………………….8 1.3 Problem Statement…………………………………………………………...10 1.4 Importance of the Questions…………………………………………………13 1.5 Objective and Significance of the Study……………………………………..13 1.6 Limitations of the Study……………………………………………………...15 2. LITERATURE OVERVIEW OF CONFLICT AND PEACEBUILDING.……..17 2.1 History and Cohesive Orientation of the Mundari People…………………...17 2.2 Theoretical Concepts Pertaining to Conflict…………………………………18 2.3 The Three-Dimensional Perspectives of Conflict……………………………19 2.4 Critical Perspectives of Traditional Conflict Management Systems………...22 3. DESIGN OF THE STUDY………………………………………………………….24 3.1 Design Methodology…………………………………………………………24 3.2 Assumptions and Rationale of the Design…………………………………...26 3.3 Role of the Researcher……………………………………………………….28 3.4 Information Collection Procedure…..……………………………………….29 3.5 Procedures for Analysis and Verification……………………………………30 4. OUTCOMES OF THE STUDY AND DISCUSSION..……………………….......30 4.1 Description and Interpretations of Phenomena Studied……………………..30 4.2 Replication and Comparative Analysis of Disputes Systems…………….....38 4.3 Relation to International Peace and Conflict Resolution Field……………...39 5. CONCLUSION….…………………………………………………………………..42 5.1 Significance of Research Findings………………………………………......42 5.2 Implications for Future Research and Practice.…………………………......43 5.3 Policy Recommendations …………………………………………………...45 APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………………..48 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………50

6

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Traditional Peacemaking and Reconciliation processes are part of the indigenous mechanisms

dedicated to resolving and managing local conflicts in a web of contextualized social

relationships. Just as they are variably practiced by segmented communities of Africa, traditional

mechanisms are equally observed by the Mundari people of South Sudan. The Mundari tribe is

one of the seven Bari-speaking communities that occupy the Central Equatoria State of South

Sudan. The ethnic group is geographically situated north of Juba and shares several borders with

different tribes in five out of the ten states that make up the Africa's and world's newest nation.

There are at least three reasons why the Mundari provides an interesting research agenda.

First, the group exhibits relative peace, both within itself and with its numerous neighbors.

Second, the Mundari is socio-culturally peculiar. Its cultural practices and language versatility

resemble those of the nilotic Dinka. Genealogically, however, the Mundari is part of the larger

Bari nationality. Thirdly, the Mundari lacks a Diaspora community. They are passionately

attached to their land.

Terekeka, the county predominantly inhibited by the Mundari, falls within the confines of

Eastern, Central, Western, Lakes, and Jonglei states. Their entrepreneurial and survival

endeavors constitute in livestock breeding, hunting, and cultivation of consumer and cash crops.

As social beings, their social and political control is therefore of interest, both for peace and

security guarantees, and for research purposes. This substantial research project investigates the

effectiveness with which the Mundari entity manages and governs its affairs. Special attention

focuses on ways in which traditional strategies have historically and contemporarily been

tailored towards addressing disputes and maintaining cultural felicity. Establishing the optimum

7

efficacy of these ancient and relevant techniques, and to what extent might they be replicated in

the contaminated arena of national and international politics, informs the basis of this research.

The quest for sustainable peace is indisputably the most sought-after noble enterprise of

modern time. It has taken and continues to consume the energies of both contemporary and

traditional peacebuilding advocates. Yet dialectically, the business of conflict prevention,

peacemaking, peacebuilding, and reconciliation has attracted schematic debates between

scholarly inquiry and policymaking. As well, the mission pities traditionally conservative against

evolutionary adaptive peace builders. Whichever the case, the search for a reasonable and

durable solution to post independent warfare in Africa is an ongoing undertaking.

An overarching research question of interest, then, is: How did African societies re-

solved their differences before the influence of foreign cultures? Given the quagmire of

ubiquitous conflicts, questions are abound as to whether the pristine inhabitants of the

supposedly "cradle of mankind and human civilization" had some unadulterated systems of

encouraging peaceful coexistence and progress. The presumptuous framework leading to this

project prefers to claim that there must have been age-old, yet effective techniques of societal

structuring and control. Else, it would be preposterous that the grand home of 'first tools, jewelry,

fishing, astronomy, mathematics, and animal domestication' is ironically inept in fostering peace

and progress within its boundaries. Assuming the critical rationale stands, taking the Mundari as

a case study may provides imperatives to analyzing how traditional African societies managed

their disputes prior to the colonization of Africa. The ultimate goal here is the illumination of the

significant roles traditional African conflict resolution methods have in dealing with today’s

communal wars.

In contrast or comparison, there are the western-inspired peacebuilding approaches.

8

Whether they are fit or not in handling African domestic and regional wars, offers a suitable

yardstick against which to weigh and measure the effectiveness of the ancient forms. As shall

become apparent in the following sections, it is safe to note upfront that neglected methods of

peacemaking and reconciliation are not outrageously dissimilar with western techniques, except

that advocates for the latter have tended to treat the former with spiteful skepticism. As Myers

and Shinn (2010, 2) protest, most westerners and "many western-educated Africans have also

retreated from traditional concepts of conflict resolution in favor of solutions offered by formal

court systems, binding arbitration, official sanctions, and western-style mediation."

To dispel the notion that traditional African conflict resolution mechanisms are barbaric

and thus have no place in the contemporary world, this research undertakes to compare some

relevant worldviews and norms as practiced by the Mundari with the western-ordained, classical

precepts of liberalism, republicanism, and statism. The unconventional concepts discussed here

include: (1) Lömi, fear of spiritual curse; (2) Ƞ'ara/Gi'dö, sharing or rotational mechanism; (3)

Pakä, sanctity of intervention in conflict; (4) Chula/Baga, indemnification and reconciliation; (5)

Duar, hunting expedition or retreat. In the outcomes section, it is revealed that these traditional

pillars prioritize order, truth, justice, self-restraint, coexistence, reciprocity and sustainability.

1.2 Purpose of the Study

By examining the Mundari way of conflict management and nonviolence philosophy, this project

endeavors to establish answers to the “what” and “how” questions in the context of African

traditional peacebuilding systems. The main purpose of the research is to explore, retrace, and

propagate often, overlooked yet essentially ameliorative dispute resolution mechanisms, which

have historically worked at community level. The ultimate goal is to conduct a sound analysis of

those predated forms in hope of understanding, preserving, and replicating them. In other words,

9

there is a special need to ascertaining linkages with modern prescriptions so that a sequence of

modalities or hybridization for convergence may be accorded due consideration.

The implicit proposition being advanced here rests in the presupposition that there could

be historical nonviolent approaches, which if adopted and modified have the potential of

sustaining and institutionalizing peace, good governance and stability at the local, national and

international domains. Granted, the contention is whether a bottom-up peace and conflict

resolution efforts are suitable to settling macro-level state crises. More specifically, the project

seeks to promulgate the effects of combined ancient and contemporary nonviolent paradigms in

period of tranquility, during crisis, and in post-conflict societies. Accessible literature indicates

that at times the approaches have been undertaken in parallel; at other times, concurrently.

Whichever the case, the bottom line remains: different circumstances may require compatible

prescriptions that align with the predominant practices and customs of the localized actors.

Essentially, it could be argued that there is no an internationally fit-all, conflict

extinguisher model. Rather, it should be observed that certain resolution mechanisms are

remedially fit to managing or settling some disputes better than others. It matters more or less

whether particular cultural orientations can be regarded as ethnorelativist (Bennet 1993) or

ethnocentric (William Sumner 1906). Because in the end, the whole notion of ethnocentrism

versus ethno-relativism, or traditional versus modern, all attempt to fix what is fundamentally

missing in human cultural orientations. Proponents of ethnorelativism contend that “culture can

only be understood relative to one another and that particular behaviors can only be understood

within a cultural context” (Bennet, p. 46). Further, the concept advances that there is no absolute

standard of rightness or goodness of a cultural attitude. Neither is there something inherently

good nor bad about a culture; it is just different, with some cultures being more adaptable than

10

others.

The notion of ethnocentrism (Sumner 1906), on the other hand, depicts the proclivity to

believe that one's ethnic or cultural group is centrally important, and that all other groups are

measured in relation to one's own. It is the tendency for people to differentiate between the in-

groups and others. The implication here is that people have different cultures. Viewed in this

context, culture can be a double-edged sword: it unites and divides. This could be in line with the

warnings by various theorists (Galtung 1990; Mac Ginty 2008) that, local cultures, norms, and

practices may themselves pave way to conflict dynamics on one hand, while on the other, they

can equally embody norms and practices which, to large extent, enhance reconciliation. The urge

for an enhanced reconciliation calls to mind the need to conduct an exploratory analysis of a

specific culturally relevant forms of nonviolence promotion in order to ascertain aspects of best

practices and recommendations, if any.

1.3 Problem Statement

Conflict in Africa and more so in South Sudan, has become increasingly inter-communal, ethnic,

intrastate, and 'intractable' (Coleman 2006; Kriesberg, Northrup & Thorson 1989). Despite many

intervening efforts by international community, there remained a plethora of unresolved disputes

across the continent. The former Sudan, or even the newest South Sudan, the macro entity within

which the Mundari is found, has been a devastated society at least since the Turko-Egyptian

invasion of 1821 (Machar 1995). Then, the Sudan consisted of Kingdoms and tribal communities

without modern forms of governments that exist today. In other words, Sudan in its present

boundaries did not exist, and so was South Sudan. Even shortly before independence in 1956, the

Sudan has been a scene of civil wars and inter-tribal clashes.

On the macro level, the military confrontation has pitied successive Islamic-oriented

11

governments in Khartoum against the predominantly Christian and animist Southern Sudan. On

the micro stage, there have been numerous ethnic rivalries predating back before the country's

independence from British in 1956. All these conflicts have become intertwined, making efforts

to address them very complex. The state-level wars, for instance, were in two phases. The first

started in 1955 and ended in 1972 with the Addis Ababa agreement, which granted the South a

degree of regional autonomy. The second phase arose in 1983, citing widespread marginalization

in the context of discourses of peace and pursuit of political, social and economic opportunities.

This protracted conflict ended in 2005, ushering in the popular Comprehensive Peace

Agreement, or CPA, in Nairobi, Kenya. Although the CPA did lead to a decisive self-

determination referendum that resulted in South Sudan independence, the prospects for the

country's stability are at stake following the December 2013 alleged coup. The coup, or its

absence, has since plunged the fledgling state into chaos.

The impacts of all the macro wars on indigenous communities and local practices have

been surmountable and frustrating. For defense and survival, communities were persuaded to

eventually devise ways of self-protection. Because of the nature of the enemies and weapons

used against these indigenous societies, main groups subsequently forfeited long-held

nonviolence philosophies. The subject of analysis here, the Mundari, were actually forced to

sporadically rescind their normative observance. It became a matter of existential imperative. It

follows, therefore, that the emergence of newer forms of warfare and the undisciplined behaviors

of militarized groups led to adaptive ways of dealing with the strange developments. Sadly, this

led to drastic shifts in the traditionally instituted conflict management systems.

It is against this background that this qualitative analysis strives to retrace and reexamine

those indigenous techniques of peace sustainability and conflict management. The quandaries

12

and inability to prevent, manage, and resolve frozen and ongoing warfare in Africa, timely and

decisively, requires thorough evaluations of methodological approaches to both ancient and

contemporary conflict orientations. The potency of national and international diplomatic efforts

notwithstanding, priority should be given to local mechanisms at first instances, particularly

when ethnically vexing issues are at stake. Given their relevance and sanctity, indigenous

systems are important as they determine the process outcomes, yet in much less expensive but

durably efficient means. Exemplary groundbreaking peace and reconciliation initiatives purely

conducted in the traditional manner included the Wunlit and Tali Conferences. The Wunlit Peace

and Reconciliation Conference of 1999 between the Dinka and Nuer, and the Tali Peace

Conference of 2005 between the SPLM/A and Mundari, emphasized the need to stop fighting,

build understanding and cooperation, and commencing practical steps toward building peace that

recognizes the cordial relationships premised on traditional principles. Despite prospective

headways to pragmatic peacebuilding, the two accords were, unfortunately, underfunded and

ignorantly undermined.

Taking the Mundari as a case study, the problem statement asks: What were the

traditional media of disputes resolution and reconciliation in non-westernized societies? How did

these systems succeeded or failed in sustaining inter- and intra-communal crises? What are some

possible lessons that can be learned from these modalities? And, how may these tools be adopted

and incorporated into contemporary strategies of mediation? The objective, as stated above, is to

explain the principles and practices of traditional peacemaking processes; to stress the need for

their recognition, adoption, and influence on good governance and peacebuilding; and to

advocate such recommendations as applicable to the nonviolence movements and peace

campaigns globally. That having been said, it is worth pointing out that local dictums are not

13

always in close sync with modern, legalistic rules--state-based or international. As Seligman and

Seligman (1932, 243) confided, “A great difficulty with which the Bari (Mundari included) have

to contend is the relatively large foreign settlement at Province headquarters and the strict

administration of the white man's law.”

1.4 Importance of the Questions

Asking the “what” and “how” questions permits for the following: 1) identification, definition,

and evaluation of what constitutes in traditional and indigenous peacemaking, beginning with,

first, understanding the possible causes of conflict and how they are prevented, resolved, or

maintained traditionally; 2) in-depth analysis of effectiveness or limitations of traditional and

indigenous mechanisms of disputes management and resolution; 3) compare and contrast the

above instruments with modern techniques, thereby taking stock of incidences of

complementarities or incompatibility; 4) categorization of solutions in order to match specific

problems through hybridization and; 5) identifying instances of shifts in approach, or dilution of

traditional and indigenous forms with western systems. Each of these aspects is sufficiently

discussed in chapter two.

1.5 Objective and Significance of the Study

The primary objective of this research is to explore possible ways of assessing durable and

sustainable solutions to the ceaseless conflicts bedeviling ethnic groups in South Sudan. There is

no doubt that African leaders and the international community are faced with formable dilemmas

insofar as seeing the implementation of the peace agreement between the Sudan People’s

Liberation Movement/Army and the government of Sudan is concerned. Moreover, each of the

two Sudans is endlessly confronted with serious internal challenges posed by intercommunity

14

fighting. As leaders struggle to address these issues, there is urgent need to consider a more

pragmatic role for traditional African conflict resolution, which, to an extent, should be the lead

or useful reinforcement to modern ways of solving today’s crises on the continent. Without

naively dismissing international interventions in civil and ethnic wars, this project recognizes the

need for both traditionally advanced and Western sophisticated systems of peacebuilding.

Priority should, however, be paid to the internal, given the latter's intrusion into localized forms

of resolution have failed.

In discussing the research agenda, further investigation and elaboration are rendered

about why numerous peace agreements proved hard to implement and hence easily dishonored.

As things stand now, international approaches to the Sudan's problems have led to failures in two

major peace agreements (Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972 and CPA in 2005). Even the

subsequent, euphoric independence South Sudan attained has just erupted into a politico-ethnic

faceoff in late 2013. Questions are in bundles as whether the two Sudans should be encouraged

to try internal consensus. As much as attention is lent to the political root causes of the crisis,

dedicated efforts must mindfully be expended on the best possible options to inventing a holistic

solution to both local and national players, as well as internal and external stakeholders.

Incorporating indigenous peacemaking processes into the national or international strategies is

seemingly a potential way to lending recommendations for assuaging the fears and

apprehensions of those concerned. They should actually be the starting point.

In striving to do this, this study describes the ancient forms of peacebuilding including

their strengths and limitations. Just how these ancient systems have historically functioned and

continue to do so, but in the subnational context, is the main focus. Equally, the analysis seeks to

explore the legitimacy of the process in both traditional and contemporary orientations. The

15

thought provoking question here is whether modern concepts are problematic to Africa due to

difficulty in institutionalization, lack of structural credibility, and impractical representation and

participation in the national dialogues and negotiation processes.

The significances for this research can be numerous. First, South Sudan's identity is still

based on tribal and ethnic lines. Emphasizing the principle of "do no harm" in the grassroots

level could have more impacts than in the national level. Second, the rapidly growing

nonviolence and peace studies field has more adherents in the traditional environments than at

the international politics where competition and anarchy are practically the norm. Third, the

findings of this research can serve as useful resources for the immature Government of South

Sudan policy formulation, particularly regarding conflict management. The same could apply to

the Sudan, with its Darfur, Nuba Mountains, and Eastern Sudan crises. The East Africa regional

intergovernmental body, IGAD, could equally benefit from the study given that it continues to

face formidable challenges, insofar its attempts to address regional conflicts in the Great Lakes

Region is concerned. More specifically, the Mundari offer an interesting case because: 1)

indigenous political institutions are partially still intact; 2) external or modern forms of

administration came in late, partly due to stiff resistance as well as due to “inaccessibility and

difficult conditions of the interior” (Buxton 1963, ix). The community is sparsely and

extensively spread across and along both east and west of the Nile River and; 3) reorganization

in the context of contemporary political institutions has been slower because legitimacy of

foreign authority was sorely contested.

1.6 Limitations of the Study

There are quite a number of limitations experienced in this study. At least four of these are worth

admission, namely: 1) insufficient, prior written research studies on the community; 2) the

16

researcher did not come in physical contact with the interviewees during the research process; 3)

there are internal language variations within the group, causing phrasal and semantic problems

and; 4) cultural incompatibilities between the group studied and some of its neighbors led to

violent reactions at certain points of time, thereby diluting the nonviolent credentials. All these

limitations have practical impacts in the overall outcome of the research findings.

The lack of sufficient written accounts has the primary effect of not tracing deep-seated

socio-anthropological and historical narratives of each section of the Mundari people. Origins of

the subtribes are so contradictory, and this is reflected in the day-to-day practices and

orientations. Consequently, a sweeping generalization as regards nonviolence is almost hard to

make, technically because some sections, depending on who they border, are quite reactionary.

The second limitation stems from the fact that most of the interviews were gathered via phones

and through email correspondences. Had I travelled to the field and interacted with the people at

the time, perhaps more concrete information could have been obtained by conducting focus

groups, in which case participants' interview could have been possible, thus permitting

evaluations of their attitudes. Thirdly, the Mundari is subdivided into at least seven big sections,

each comprising of several clans. Depending on points of origins or geographical influence, there

are substantial language variations that some Mundari in east bank barely understand their

colleagues in the west bank of the Nile River. This is clearly apparent in the Buxton's collection

where pronunciations and phrases are so incoherent and troubling. Equally, Buxton's analysis is

etic, the author being a western from Britain. Finally, it is true that, internally the Mundari are

well structured and value relationship and interdependence, but some parts of the community

have had bitter experiences with hostile neighbors, where upon self-defense was warranted.

17

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE OVERVIEW OF CONFLICT AND PEACEBUILDING

2.1 History and Cohesive Orientation of the Mundari People

Historically, less is known and written about the Mundari. The reason is because the entity has

been understudied and written accounts expounding on its origin, history, and cultural

manifestations are very scanty and often inconsistent. Genealogical and anthropological accounts

of the Mundari people narrate that the group is intrinsically an admixture of Nilotic and Nilo-

Hamitic, and that they are both pastoralists and farmers. Political and sociological analysis by

Buxton (1963, 1) provides that “the name Mundari refers to the pastoralists who occupy two

separate and distinct lands” in the now Central Equatoria State of South Sudan. Geographically,

the populations exist on both sides of the Nile River, north of the country's capital, Juba. The

Nile's eastern bank Mundari lives along the water-frontage, fifty miles away from the city. The

western bank stocks inhabit the vast, sprawling country inland to the west. Besides being the

most neighbored nation among all the 64 tribes of South Sudan, the Mundari are also so diverse,

with multiple sections and at least six dialects variation.

The community shares borders with at least eight different ethnic groups, namely the Bor

Dinka (Northeast), Aliab and Atuot Dinka (North and North West), Moru (West), Nyangwara

(Southwest), Bari (South), Lokoya (Southeast), Pari (East). The interaction of Murle and

Mundari through cattle raiding by the former is contestable since geographically the two do not

seem to share any physical border. The northern neighbors are predominantly Nilotes while the

southern tribes are Nilo-Hamitic. The location of the Mundari between these sizeable blocks has

made the country subject to influences from across both sides. In the end, the Mundari are

18

culturally and linguistically been impacted. The cultural affinities exhibited and practiced by the

Mundari comprise substantial offshoots of the surrounding ethnicities; for, fortunately, each of

the neighbor's claims to have cognatic relatives within the Mundari sub-tribes or clans. The

Mundari do not deny this historical fact. In fact, the sub-tribes that make up the larger Mundari

entity include the Dereget, Chierra, Kobora, Yambara, Lokweni, and Bari-Mundari. The

implications, in terms of conflict avoidance and disputes settlement techniques, are derived from

these branches' past encounters with other tribes or their origins. Surprisingly, and despite its

internal diversity, coupled with its unparalleled external relations, the Mundari nation remains

one of the most relatively stable and conservative societies in the country. Yet its tranquility has

less to do with deterrence by the central government.

Administratively, the Mundari are organized into traditional "village-chiefdoms" (Buxton

1963, 34). Each chiefdom serves as a political unit with elements of hierarchical dominance over

several hamlets. The traditional political boundaries operate as spheres of influence, and are of

supreme importance to the social lives of the Mundari people. The chiefs were consulted in

social, economic, and juristic matters. Although force has been used as a punishment by

publically approved chiefdoms in certain circumstances, it is generally forbidden, particularly

against women. Force is also sanctioned in defense against land trampling. The land rights of a

chiefdom, Buxton confides, are still jealously guarded by its members, and the transgression of

rights over natural resources, particularly over water and grazing, leads to fighting (36).

2.2 Theoretical Concepts Pertaining to Conflict

The need to develop suitable instruments of intervention strategy necessitates this study. The

gateway to building any such mediation and negotiation structures as the basic procedures for

conflict containment and settlement must begin with identifying the actors and understanding the

19

issues involved. This is because ordinarily, conflict does not occur in the vacuum. As Deutsch

(2006) posits, conflict only arises in situations where people are interdependent. By virtue of this

theory, people hardly fight where there is no contact and interaction with one another. It is just

almost impossible. In other words, no man is an island; only that there is asymmetric

interdependence in relationships. The Mundari tends to be aware of this reality. In recognition,

they value and ritualize norms that prioritize human relations as opposed to self satisfaction.

Thus, conflict may loosely be defined as a social phenomenon caused by competing or

incompatible interests. Contrary to the modern causes of disputes, traditional triggers are quite

different. Possible conflict setters among the Mundari, for instance, include competition over a

girl, demand for exorbitant dowry price, and quarrel over grazing land, accusations of stolen

livestock, and sometimes lost items like a spear. Different causes notwithstanding, it is critical to

note that human perceptions are heavily influenced by subjective predispositions. At the heart of

most disputes, Ury (1995) confides, are emotions: frustrations, fear, anger, and distrusts. Jonsson

(2002) observes that it is very difficult to convey messages that are inconsistent with what others

already believe.

2.3 The Three-Dimensional Perspectives of Conflict

According to Friedrich Glasl (1994), a social conflict may be defined as an interaction between

actors (individuals, groups, organizations, etc), where at least one actor sees incompatibilities in

the thinking, imagination, perception, and feeling with another or other actors: translation CS.

Conflict may be caused by multiple reasons, depending on the context. For the purpose of this

study, Mayer's theoretical propositions are relied upon. For Mayer (2000), there are at least three

patterns by which conflict may transpire. These include: 1) cognitive (perceptual); 2) emotional

(feeling); and 3) behavioral attributes. These dimensional perspectives provide alternative lens

20

with which analysts and practitioners can better comprehend the complexities of a conflict and

why it sometimes seems to proceed in the opposite direction. Other influential theorists who

have espoused on the issue are Collier 2007; Berdal & Malone 2000; Doyle & Sambanis 2000;

Gurr 1993; Malone & Sherman 2007; Stewart 2001, 2008; Zartman 2005; among others.

Writing in 1990s during which time civil strife was at peak, Robert Guur explores the

root causes of conflict through the lens of relative deprivation theory. Essentially, discrepancy

between what citizens think they deserve and what they do end up getting in a society begets

frustrations, which eventually culminates in incidences of collective political violence by social

groups. Similar line of argument has also been espoused by Frances Stewart, whose

ascertainment posits that conflict is convincingly driven by horizontal inequalities between

identity groups, thus the need for policies that reduce those inequalities; for instance, affirmative

action and investment in marginalized areas. Contributing to the debate, Zartman reasons that the

outbreak and evolution of war are brought about due to sequencing of need, creed, and greed. To

this, he recommends early intervention, lest related interests build up to perpetuate protracted

conflict.

Amplifying the notion of greed is Paul Collier's influential work, which describes civil

wars as caused by greed, not social grievances. The author argues that conflicts are necessitated

by financial and military feasibility. To this, he blames vertical inequality, thus recommends

promoting a strong economy and transparency in extractive industries. Berdal and Malone's

volume equally underscores the political dimensions of internal conflict, but additionally

identifies and persuasively emphasizes the economic and social factors underlying the

perpetuation of civil wars, exploring as well the economic incentives and disincentives available

to international actors seeking to restore peace to war-torn societies. As long in war there are

21

economic strategies and profits, they argue, belligerents and elites will prefer to continue to fight

in order to sustain their positions. The authors strive consistently for policy relevance in both

their analysis and their prescriptions.

The cognitive theory hypothesizes that conflict, as a set of perceptions, is a belief or the

understanding that one's own values, needs, wants, or interests are basically at variance with

someone else's (Mayer 2004). Objectively or subjectively this notion of incompatibility entails

that conflict could be initiated by one person as long as there is a preconceived illusion of

unmatched interests. Alternatively, brewing conflict could remain frozen (Crocker, Hampson, &

Aall 2009) so that with time it could ripe into a full-scale violent encounter. Whether the

situation has been brought to rest, resolved, or fully addressed depends on the disputants' view,

perception and interpretation. Absent sensual flexibility and admission of fault by one side, a

cycle of successive grievances develops due to anchoring on emotional responses.

In turn, conflict invokes feelings (Mayer 200; Ury 1995). Fear, bitterness, or frustrations invite

reaction and interaction, which cement disagreements of sort. These feelings may or may not be

reciprocated. What is important however is how such experiences are catered for during

intervention. Guarding and taming anger and emotional energy is the hard job for mediators.

Because genuine emotional resolution can only be arrived at if enraged parties adopt some

apology and forgiveness, unconditionally.

Mayer's third element of conflict is action. Action is the undertaken endeavor to express

one's feelings, articulate perceptions, get needs met, or direct attempt to influence occurrence at

someone else's expense. It is possible that someone's ability to get their needs met could be

interfered with by such move. Crucially, then, behavioral resolution requires that conflict must

first be discontinued before embarking on efforts to resolve it. Meeting each other's needs can

22

pave new ground for interaction with one another. In the contemporary societies, this is

implemented through demobilization and cantonment of combatants. Traditionally, among the

Mundari, disputants are deprived of weapons of any kind, including denying access to those of

their relatives. The sum effect, a ceasefire, is the creation of a conducive climate for cooling off,

in meantime which peace and security then ensue. Yet regardless the nature of societies, peace

and security are almost zero guaranteed if the three--social, economic, and political--dimensions

of conflict are not critically balanced within the state and across ethnic groups.

2.4 Critical Perspectives of Traditional Conflict Management Systems

The literature on indigenous conflict resolution and reconciliation systems, though focuses on

non-Western societies, has been fairly dominated by Western scholars. Part of the explanation

emanates from the reality that African history is almost wholly undocumented. Instead, much of

it is transmitted orally. In addition, justice and conflict mitigation in the African's style is viewed

with great skepticism by Westerners. Moreover, the western-educated African intellectuals also

tend to shy away from the traditional precepts of dispute regulation in favor of contemporary

official sanctions, formal court systems, and western-styled binding arbitration. These attitudes

are however being challenged by the growing field of integrated peacebuilding. Among leading

scholars in the field of peace study in general, and indigenous management in particular, are

Galtung, Ury, Zartman, Muruthi, Mac Ginty, Kiplagat, Wanis-St. John, Malan, Shinn, Trujillo,

Boland, Myers, Richards, and Roy, among others. Variably, these authors emphasize the

importance of traditional strategies in the context of congruent framework, in which order,

harmony, peace, justice, sustainability, and values for truth are the hallmark of human progress.

Like the Bushmen in Ury's seminal report (Ury 1995), conflict resolution among the Mundari is

essentially consensual. Settlement involves genuine cooperation of disputants. Reminiscently,

23

Buxton (1958) witnessed that "Both parties to the dispute put their case before the congress

mediated by the chief or offer personal testimonials" (130) before the audience in a system of

traditional legal mechanism known as "the meeting-tree 'A' courts or toket" (129). In order to

preserve one's good name in the community, every aggrieved party has the audacity to listen,

refrain from escalation, and exercise tolerance amid frustrations. Such forms of traditional and

indigenous conflict management systems deserve explanation.

In dissecting and conceptualizing the precise meanings of 'tradition' and 'indigenous,'

Mac Ginty and Darby (2008, 121) educate that "traditional denotes a practice or norm that has a

heritage of considerable duration." On the other hand, "indigenous suggests that an activity or

norm is locally inspired." Indigenous activities, the authors claim, need not be traditional because

they are capable of adapting new forms of social, economic, and political practices. Zartman

(2000) conceptualizes 'tradition' along the 'cultural relativism' versus 'human universalism'

dichotomy. He argues that traditions are cultural practices, which are not imported but rather

continue to be practiced and reproduced. The implicit common point of these postulations is the

possibility of a tradition to be reinvented with a view to positive change. Other theoreticians and

practitioners (Galtung 1975; Ury 1995; Muruthi 1999; Kiplagat 1998; Wanis-St. John 2012;

Malan 1997; Shinn 2005; Trujillo et al 2008) emphasize the urgency of peacebuilding in any

society, whether through modern, traditional, or hybrid institutions. Advocates of postmodern

strategies however cite the inadequacy of traditional approaches in preventing and settling large-

scale disputes, or what Zartman (2000) terms as conflicts within or between systems. In effect,

the larger the magnitude of the conflict, the less opportunity there is for traditional efforts alone

to succeed in ending the problem (Myers & Shinn 2010).

24

CHAPTER 3

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

3.1 Design Methodology

The information presented in this paper has been collected through three methodologies. The

first method is the primary source of direct interview of chiefs, headmen, women groups, youth

leaders, community leaders, cattle camps leaders, and historical experts from the sub-tribes.

Interviewing, according to Bruce Berg and Howard Lune (2012, 105) is "a conversation with

purpose," the purpose of which is to gather information. Due to logistical issues and

geographical diverse spreads of the Mundari sub-country, most of the interviewing was

conducted via telephone, emails, forum sharing and facebook chat. Each of these instruments

was tactfully tailored to specific group, taking into account language skills, technological

literacy, and subject knowledge of the interviewees. In presenting the questions, a mixed set of

dramaturgical styles were employed, namely standardized (formally structured),

semistandardized (informal), and undstandardized (guided-semistructured) interviews (Berg &

Lune 2012, 108-114). This was critically important for both uniformity of queries and flexibility

of informants' curiosity. Some of the questions presented to the interviewees included the

following: (1) How many conflicts do you remember that the Mundari have had with their

neighbors? (2) How protracted and destructive were these conflicts, if any? (3) How were the

disputes ultimately resolved? (4) Who were the opponents? (5) What were done to compensate

those who lost relatives and properties? The answers obtained from these interviews are

integrated, aggregated, and availed in the analysis.

The second technique employed constitutes a review of social and political history of the

Mundari as well as a survey of the literature in the field of peace studies and conflict resolution.

25

Secondary sources dealing with how contemporary conflict resolution and peace mechanisms

have succeeded or failed were also reviewed, and either compared with or contrasted against the

traditional system. By definition, literature review is the "comprehensive review of previous

works on the general and specific topics considered in the study" (Berg & Lune 2012, 397). This

is very crucial since it provides prior insights put forth by other researchers, possible limitations,

and the overall intellectual progression of the peace and nonviolence field. Thus, on the Mundari

specifically, few authors (Petherick 1864; Whitehead 1929; Seligman 1932; Nadler 1937; Beaton

1936-48; and Buxton 1963) have noted the political organization and social control in various

chiefdoms within the Mundari. The accounts are however littered with irreconcilable

discrepancies, precisely because the information was collected and documented by foreign

travelers, most of whom were not researchers. On the wider peacebuilding enterprise, indigenous

or western, a number of volumes have however been produced. Those whose work have been

cited here include Galtung 1975; Ury 1995; Muruthi 1999; Kiplagat 1998; Wanis-St. John 2012;

Malan 1997; Shinn 2005; Trujillo et al 2008. Although the procedural mechanisms tend to differ

across cultures in Africa, the ultimate utility is the same: peaceful harmony.

The third procedure is through my actual experiences observing three historical peace

dialogues (the CPA 2002-2005, the South-South Dialogues 2004, and the Tali Peace and

Reconciliation Conference 2005). As well, my earlier recollections as a young boy in the village

of Korchomba, before escaping the Arabs' plot to exterminate Southern Sudanese young males,

provide some real-time insights. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement, hitherto the CPA, was

negotiated and signed between the Southern Sudan rebel moment, the SPLA/M, and the National

Congress Party, the NCP. The Sudan People's Liberation Army/Movement was dominated by

educated elites just as their rivals, the NCP, on the opposite site. The negotiations were fraught

26

with political competitions and sycophancies. The expert advisors on the subject matter of the

negotiations were from the West, particularly the Scandinavia, UK and USA. Suffice it to

conclude that the CPA was a product of Western approaches to conflict resolution. The South-

South Dialogues, on the other hand, were peace talks between the Southerners who were in the

Khartoum-based government and their ideological opponents in the SPLA/M and other militia

factions operating in the South at the time. Though most attendees were the same as those to the

CPA, at least traditional Chiefs and Kings were invited. The tones and atmosphere were

massively different from that of the CPA. The deliberations were honest, sober, and direct. The

Tali Peace and Reconciliation Conference was between the Mundari, led by their patron, the

current governor of Central Equatoria State, Clement Wani Kong'a and the SPLA/M. Although

the SPLA/M was represented by the current Vice President James Wani Igga, the interactions

and terms of engagements were deeply rooted in traditional understanding. The Mundari cited

atrocities and damages committed against them by the SPLA/M, specifically the Dinka, but

sincerely promised to forgive and herald a new era of peace and coexistence. Sure, it did! It was

only broken in 2008 by the Dinka.

3.2 Assumptions and Rationale of the Design

The main assertion in this study is that indigenous peacebuilding strategies are fundamentally

different from contemporary approaches, insofar as human relationships and cultural values are

concerned. Such a contention presupposes at least four assumptions, namely:

a) Traditional peacebuilding practices value human relationships and social harmony.

b) Peacemaking and reconciliation in the indigenous context are rooted in the democratic

traditions of African culture and history.

c) African ancient institutions of governance recognized only two levels: individual and society.

27

d) Conflict resolution approaches in the traditional sense are voluntary, raw and therefore cheap.

A) Traditional peacebuilding practices value human relationships and social

harmony. To affirm or invalidate this hypothesis, the designs attempt to comprehend the social

and political orientations of the Mundari cultural stratification. Specifically, the research looks at

inter-and intra-personal relatedness, whether individuals and clans are responsive or reactive; the

binary of individualism and collectivism, whether there is a culture of sharing, openness,

connectedness and trust as opposed to selfishness, isolation, acquisitive and deceitfulness; and

whether the society is feministic or masculinist.

B) Peacemaking and reconciliation in the indigenous context are rooted in the

democratic traditions of African culture and history. This hypothesis assumes that the

Mundari community is egalitarian, with every adult person having equal rights and say in the

affairs of the society. In effect, this entails that consequential adjudications are dialogical, and

the chiefs are honorary, fair problem solvers who lack authority to threaten anybody with any

serious consequences. Thus, the entire institution of Chiefship composed of free and interested

ordinary members of the chiefdom, acts as the jury. This should run contrary to the western

systems of legal jurisprudence and government, which are highly complex and absurdly vertical

and authoritative.

C) African ancient institutions of governance recognized only two levels: individual

and society. The dual concepts of nation-state and internationalism are explicitly absent in

African agro-pastoral societies. The emphasis on sovereignty, national interest, dominance, and

material accumulation to determine sphere of influence is therefore strange to Africans, and so to

their systemic organization. Consequently, relationships are anchored on the interdependence of

chiefdoms and transformation and integration of individuals back into the community. The

28

rationale here assumes that group interest is superior to that of individual, although individuals

are equally protected against oppression by the powerful and tyranny of majority. Resolution

techniques, hence, strive for justice and stability of only individual and the society, not state.

D) Conflict resolution approaches in the traditional sense are voluntary, raw and

therefore cheap. For the claim of efficacy to hold, certain propositions must be true. These

include variables such as affordability, reliability, pace, authenticity, and competence of

indigenous juristic systems. Whose access to justice is impeded or enhanced, and how durable

and balanced are the verdicts of these voluntary, raw and cheap reconciliatory processes? While

chiefs act as arbiters of matters at hand, all court cases are free to the public, and any interested

party is free to offer their opinion about a particular proceeding for consideration. As well, there

are no filing fees, court fees, restraining orders, probations, and pre-trials.

3.3 Role of the Researcher

In collecting the data for this study, I utilized Kvale's (1996) seven steps of research process.

These stages are thematising, designing, interviewing, transcribing, analyzing, verifying and

reporting. Since the goal of this research is to establish what possible traditional peacebuilding

techniques are out there, why they are important, and how they operate, my role is to frame the

research questions and their importance and significance, by categorizing them into the what,

why, and how context. This is called thematising. Equally, I designed the methodological criteria

of how to collect the information. Here, I relied on text analysis of written accounts and

interviews with chiefs and other wise people in the community, by initially using snowball

sampling tactic. Next, I conducted the interviews. Except for the youth, most interviews were in

the Mundari dialects. Given my language skills, I did the translation myself.

As much as there could have been transcriptions, this was not the case. Instead, much of

29

the information was noted down during the interviews. The beauty of it was that I did the

recording in both English and the target language. To produce a meaningful structure and

comprehensive report, I integrated the literature overview and the raw interviews in order

produce the final analysis. Given my personal knowledge and experience, a precise interpretation

of the exact terms, phrases and enunciations has been rendered. This contrasts with earlier, etic

narratives where both spelling and pronunciation are erroneous. To confirm that indeed major

lexical and conceptual semantics issues were committed in previous studies, I performed serious

verification aimed at reconciling the emic and etic contextual analysis. Overall, I synthesized the

huge data to fit the purpose and length of the project. Ultimately, a final copy of the report will

be made available to Nonviolence International and a version of it will also be presented in the

Sudan Studies Association Conference in San Francisco in May 2014.

3.4 Information Collection Procedures

As mentioned in the method's introduction, information presented here was collected using three

means, namely interview, text review, and direct observation. Under this subsection, only

interview merits description, because it allows for procedural exposition. Purposefully, 15 people

were interviewed: 6 chiefs, 1 clerk, 2 youth leaders, 2 camp leaders, 2 women, and 2 politicians.

Each of these participants was asked literally the same questions, with slight modifications in the

tone and phrasing, so as to fit cultural dictum of modesty and decorum. All the interviewees were

informed that the survey was for the purpose of investigating ancient and authentic forms of

dispute management. Among those asked were chiefs who represent the six Mundari sections;

one clerk at random; 2 youth who are politically active; 2 politicians from the community; 2

women at random; and 2 cattle camps leaders at reach, who are technically youth.

30

3.5 Procedures for Analysis and Verification

To ensure iteration and congruence of the outcomes, and for future research undertaking, a

systematic analysis and verification of the data have been offered. The analysis breaks down the

different concepts of peacemaking and reconciliation into five parts, though there are other types

left out to ensure conciseness. These concepts are discussed in the outcomes section. Equally,

they are compared and contrasted against contemporary forms of peacebuilding. The verification

process took the form of juxtaposing what the anthropological literature offers with the data

collected during the recent interviews. Equally, the narratives gathered from the participants

were harmonized, analyzed, and corroborated in order to ensure consistency and accuracy.

Verification as such, concerns the validity, reliability and generalisability of the research

findings. It is surprising that despite internal variations within the Mundari, the overall practices

were consistent and easily generalized to apply to the entire community.

CHAPTER 4

OUTCOMES OF THE STUDY AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Description and Interpretations (Outcomes) of Phenomena Studied

The primary objective of this research is to discern ancient forms of peacemaking and

reconciliation that could be nurtured, preserved, and potentially replicated in other societies,

domestically or internationally. The study strives to establish these strategies by reviewing the

characteristics of primordial vis-à-vis modern conflicts, their causes, characterizations and the

administrative designs via which they were managed, settled, or deferred. Because contemporary

conflicts and their features have been discussed in the previous chapter, this section concerns

itself with traditional structural designs used to control indigenous affairs.

31

Although understudied, the Mundari turned out to be a modestly sophisticated society. It

has rich socio-anthropological history, which is unfortunately less documented. As both a

pastoral and agricultural community, its social and administrative controls are characterized and

moderated by dual leadership in the chiefdoms and in the cattle camps. The distinction between

the two is that chiefdoms are in charge of permanent territorial units that are engaging in farming

while leadership in the cattle camps regulates the relations between the groups of herdsmen,

which move back and forth across political boundaries in search for grazing pasture. Territorial

chiefship of a village is quasi-hereditary and the office bearer is selected and prepared by mature

people, including women. Buxton (1963, 34) chronicled that Chiefs were chosen either because

of their heritage claimants from the most powerful families or because they were, as individuals,

considered suitable for office. Each of chiefdom is responsible for a number of duties including

religious, social, political, and judicial (67). On the other hand, cattle-camp affairs focused

largely on the youth, remote from chiefdom administrative control. Regulatory systems in the

camps are suited to dynamic needs prevalent within those mobile conditions, usually guiding the

relations of young men from different chiefdoms. Authority here is vested upon a son, a younger

brother of a chief or a charismatically influential person in the camp. He is often knowledgeable

about cattle husbandry, an effective organizer, and competent in preserving peace in the camp.

Whereas disputes triggers in either chiefdoms or cattle camps may tend to differ, the

means of resolution and reconciling parties are similar. First and foremost, individual office

bearers are "distinguished from the office and the office demands support because it is bound up

with the interests of the whole chiefdom" (70). Second, the sanctity of life and coexistence

springs from customary heritage so that trust in tradition and respect for cultural morality is

sanctimonious. Finally, rulership is by popular consent and the chief acts as the arbitrating elder,

32

though his pronouncements are deemed to carry the blessings of God due to the virtue of

personality he has attained during the installation ceremony. All these recorded assertions have

been confirmed by recent interviews with several chiefs (Awan Kwajok of Gumeiza, Lodu

Mutuk of Lokweni, Lukoojo Luko of Muni, Amor Kulang of Tali, and Lomogga Legge

Lokolong of Korchomba).

The interviews gathered a huge data that would not even fit the scope of this study.

Therefore, and for the brevity of this project, only five of the several techniques of traditional

conflict management systems are bracketed, elucidated, and analyzed. These unconventional

concepts include, but not necessarily limited to: (1) Lömi, fear of spiritual curse; (2) Ƞara/Gi'dö,

sharing or rotational mechanism; (3) Pakä, sanctity of external or femininity intervention in

conflict; (4) Chula, indemnification and reconciliation; (5) Duar, hunting expedition or retreat.

These norms are narrated and juxtaposed against related theoretical models that closely serve

similar purpose.

4.1.1 Lömi, Fear of Spiritual Curse

The principle of lömi, as Marko Wani, a district adjutant, narrated (interview 2013), discourages

evil commissions, thereby instilling due consideration before executing any unscrupulous action

by any person. The belief is that Ngun (God) knows and watches every plan, divine or vile.

Regardless of one's situation, one must always shy away from engaging in actions that may bring

curse to oneself, family, clan, and the community at large. In this vein, humankind, through fear

of godly curse, must honor the spirit above as well as the one below, including everything in

between as being purposeful, pious, and consecrated. Granted, the philosophy rests in the

salience of ecological balance.

33

Though an ancient concept, ecological balance has been amplified in the late 1960s by

peace scholars (Vandana Shiva in Wapner, Ruiz, & Falk 2000) as an international

interdisciplinary and normative perspective that stresses the pursuit of social justice, economic

well-being, cultural and bio-diversity for the purpose of harmonious coexistence. It is about a

commitment toward war avoidance through both negative and positive peace (243). A more

precise rendition would embellish that ecological balance is the state of dynamic equilibrium

within a community of organisms in which species and ecosystem diversity remain relatively

stable as wished by their destiny or creator. Traditionally, lömi is a supreme ritual of imperative

observance. Every Mundari is afraid of committing malevolence for the fear of being lömö or

spiritually cursed. This ritual is also extended to non-human, living things, including trees. Some

trees are a preserve of holiness and must not be logged.

In Pagan Tribes of the Nilotic Sudan, Seligman and Seligman (1932) describe the duality

of Ngun (God) as being attributable to omnipotence and omnipresence; that is, “Ngun-in-the-

above” and “Ngun below” (274). The God above is understandably benevolent whereas the God

below can readily exact punishment upon digression. The severity of curse ranges from poverty,

insanity, excommunication, sterility, and reincarnation in non-human object. Nor was this

specter limited to ordinary citizens. Chiefs, Buxton (1963) intimates, were equally not spared if

they err in executing their duties righteously. In cases of social, political, and litigation disgrace,

the chiefs or the accused have to undergo ritual cleansing or else risk losing spiritual potency.

4.1.2 Ƞara/Gi'dö, Sharing or Rotational Mechanism

Disputes over camp site, grazing lands and water points are some of the most common causes of

conflict among the Mundari. Other issues include violation of customary behaviors, elopement of

34

a virgin girl, failure to pay dowry price, and neglectfully letting one's livestock to trample on

another's crops. Some of these incidences do occur within a community or between any of its

numerous bordering tribes. When disputes between members of different chiefdoms trying to

encamp on the same large grassland arise, camp leaders meet and settle them peacefully. Various

strategies of resolution do apply. One form is that, herds of cattle from different chiefdoms or

tribes must be moved to new sites, out of the contested camp or grazing land. Second, when it is

extremely unavoidable to abandon the common site, sharing becomes necessary but chiefdoms

with histories of enmity only do so by camping between friendly groups. While their cattle will

always graze in different directions, bitter memories are gradually phased out by attending to

each other's dances together. This sharing design is known as ƞara na keji. The same technique

applies when issues of similar nature concerning intercommunity are at stake. Finally, there is

the principle of alternating camping and grazing, also known as gi'dö. It constitutes arrangements

that allow rival or friendly groups to occupy and graze the camping territory each season, one at

a time. Chiefdom A, for instance, could inhabit a camp during the summer while another, say B,

takes over in winter, and so forth.

4.1.3 Pakä, Sanctity of External or Femininity Intervention in Conflict

Given their inevitability, conflicts are never eradicated anywhere. How they are managed across

various societies makes all the difference. The observation of pakä forms the basic ground rule

for immediate ceasefire among the Mundari. Like modern intervention and mediation, pakä is

the interposition of non-aggressive or external party in an active conflict. It assumes three unique

orders: by impartial party, by a female person, or by a third interposer who is not a member of

the rival groups. The most effective of them all is the intersession by femininity. The role of

35

external intervener and the sanctity of femininity in any dispute is a social and cultural norm of

great reverence. In accordance with Mundari custom, women signify the spring of continuity.

Their involvement in a conflict entails preservation of life. No conflict may proceed when a

female goes in between the antagonists. Defying a woman's prayer to stop the fight, chasing a

maimed opponent, or injuring her in the course of resistance, is a distasteful abomination. In an

interview with Mogga Legge Loku, the paramount Chief of the greater Korchomba, a section of

the Mundari along the eastern bank of the River Nile, he proffers that the notion of paka in any

disagreement is highly respected and honored. According to the Chief, "paka is very important

because you never know when you are going to win or lose the fight." It is, he added, "a disgrace

to resist the interposition of any third party in a quarrel."

Alternatively, third party involvement is regarded as a partnership gesture. The Mundari

distinguishes between an enemy and an opponent. Both chiefs Lomogga and Awan Kwajok of

eastern bank Mundari affirmed that an enemy will never interfere in internal crisis. Instead, he

celebrates, hoping to conquer the remaining, distressed population in the future. Murle, a

notorious cattle-raiding tribe from a different state of Jonglei, is singled out as an historical

enemy because of its envious lust for other people's cattle and young children. An opponent, on

the contrary, will come to rescue and separate fighting parties. Logically, an opponent sees

contending rivals as real or prospective competitors whose existence and exchange service are

vital for future partnership. The Mundari regards all the neighbors as partners for two reasons:

wrestling match competitors and hosts or guests for grazing lands during dry or wet seasons.

Further, the Mundari values the notion of 'what goes around comes around'; meaning, listening

and respecting outsiders' intervention effort is reciprocal, for you never know what the reception

36

terms would be when you available your good will in trying to stand in their affairs should

destiny present them with exigencies. Recognizably, intervention is an honor.

4.1.4 Chula, Indemnification and Reconciliation

Though an egalitarian society, the Mundari acknowledges the existence of power imbalance,

especially in pursuit of certain individual interests. As contemporary idealists would argue,

conflicting interests are mutual problems that require the persistent and collaborative effort of all

members of a society in order to facilitate the recognition of the legitimacy of each party's needs

and how to realize them in the face of constraints. In the course of striving for survival, it is

widely confessed that certain torts become unavoidable. Intentional or inadvertent, wrongs

against the person of another do occur. The gesture, or genuine healing accorded those adversely

injured is called chula, or compensation. Surveyed Mundari wise persons recounted of how

certain offences justifiably warrant chula.

The indemnification of chula is seldom offered to the bereaved family due to injury of

death, loss of eye, tooth, broken limbs, libel or destroyed property as a direct consequence of

malicious intent or unpremeditated action. At the heart of the rationale is the needs to sooth

anger, heal emotional wounds, regain trust, and possibly restore social relationships. The

reparation could be in the form of cattle, human children, or any other payments, the magnitude

of which negotiated claim varies depending on the seriousness of the injury or crime committed.

Buxton (1958, 119) also talks of "female children" being delivered as reparation. The utility of

this tool is that it instills discipline and deters would-be offenders in undertaking similar, reckless

acts. As odd as this may sound, it captures Moore's (2003) rendition on legitimacy in conflict,

37

which asserts that mutual recognition and acceptance of each other's interests and real emotions

must conform to standard practices and norms.

4.1.5 Duar, Hunting Expedition or Retreat

Whether personal or corporate conflict, it is largely recognized among the Mundari that most

significantly injurious fighting are instigated and executed by males. Chief Awan Kwajok

confided that rarely do men battle in the absence of female audience. In turn, stopping and

reconciling disputants amidst mixed audience, especially if two camps are involved, becomes

almost untenable. Only separation is possible, but not resolution. Pride dictates that compromise

after painful damages is synonymous to cowardice, at least traditionally. Invincibility, by

contrast, is heroic; hence rigidity to concede and forgive. Yet this is not to say individuals in the

community are praised if they caused trouble; instead, the contrary is true. Trouble shooters are

actually shunned by girls, admonished by elders. It is against this background that the Mundari

embraces the principle of duar in order to mend fences in the distant seclusion, far from women.

Duar is a hunting expedition that is usually embarked upon during dry seasons. It could

be planned for the general purpose of acquiring games for balanced diet, elephant tusks, ostrich's

feathers or strategically to parade rival camps at a neutral ground. Although each village moves

as a block during the expedition, interaction casually takes place. It is the customary policy of the

expedition that all games killed are eaten while away in the jungle. Three aspects are explicitly

unique. One, every game killed is split into whichever the number of groups attending the duar

so that each does the cooking or roasting under their own tree. Second, the ready meal is divided

into whichever the number of groups attending the hunting trip. Thirdly, the meal is served by

members of opposite camps, the main antagonists playing a more proactive role. During and

38

after the feast, lively interaction is highly encouraged, though it often occurs automatically.

Immediately after the eating, the elders, chiefs, and family representatives of the victim or villain

offer sober submissions, confessing or pledging peaceful dispensation. In non-hunting

purification treaties, an ox is slaughtered and eaten by both parties to the dispute. Comparatively,

the duar meal ritual is equivalent to contemporary retreats except that the caterings and servings

are performed by the participants. Narrators and living witnesses concur that the process is

marked with sincerity and commitment.

4.2 Replication and Comparative Analysis of Disputes Systems

Questions abound whether the Mundari techniques could be replicated anywhere else. Studied

cases of other ethnicities ((Malan 1997; Tsega 2002; Shinn 2005; Myers 2008; Trujillio et al.,

2008; Ury 1995) demonstrate precisely relative orientations as the Mundari. Different names and

tactics notwithstanding, a stark generalization is that, above average, peace sustainability in

Africa follows similar patterns. There are isolated hostilities among and across some

communities, however. For the Mundari, positive reputation and interdependent relationships are

jealously guarded. Buxton (1963) reminiscently witnessed that "Both parties to the dispute put

their case forth, or offer personal testimonials" (130) before the audience in a system of

traditional legal mechanism known as "the meeting-tree 'A' courts or toket" (129). Under "the

meeting-tree 'A' Courts," every attendee has an equal say should they choose to express their

viewpoints. In order to preserve one's good name in the community, antagonists have the

audacity to listen, refrain from escalation, and exercise tolerance despite frustrations. This is

called kuka, or simply respect. In a reflexive rejoinder, the Bushmen in Ury's report avert conflict

through either hxaro or xotla principles of gift exchange and convention, respectively. Same case

applies to Tsega's michu institution at Metekkel, Ethiopia and Shinn's narration of the Somalis

39

guurti and Rwanda gacaca process. At the continental level, there does not seem to be any sharp

aberration between approaches. The problem is that such practices are not being applied to

resolve continental issues. It is either they are simply ignored, or assumed as too localized.

Conflict resolution among the Mundari is lucidly consensual. Settlement involves

genuine cooperation of disputants. Equally, other Africanists (James & Shinn 2005; Trujillio et

al., 2008) established that indeed indigenous peacebuilding in Africa reflects principles of

reconciliation based on long-standing relationships and values. Trujillio et al argue that the

traditional methods actually tend to be effective in addressing intra-community and even inter-

community conflict, where relationships and shared values are part of the reconciliation process.

Such conclusions are incongruous to the western ideals of post-conflict peace-building

approaches, which tend to value liberal and republican economic and political models. These

models, as explained below, emphasize the principles of state and internationalism--all abstract

notions strange to African original existence.

4.3 Relation of Topic and Results to International Peace and Conflict Resolution Field

Peace studies and conflict resolution have increasingly become universal. This makes sense since

the essence of peace is in itself universal. However, it may be argued that given differing

political structures and regime systems, certain societies have adopted distinctive means of

managing their differences. While this research is not essentially about comparative political

studies, but rather about integrative ways of sustainable peacebuilding, a comparison of the

modern and traditional tools of governance is crucial. After all, the goal is the same: peace.

In the traditional setting, peace and security are safeguarded by tribes or ethnic identity.

In modern political societies, state is the sole provider of the same services. Call (2012) offers

the dominant techniques by which state may organize and streamline the competing interests

40

within a state. These approaches are liberal, republican, state, and critical peacebuilding. The

notion of liberal peacebuilding dictates "the promotion of democracy and of market-based

economic reforms in postwar societies" (31). Politically, liberalization entails respect for civil

liberties, constitutional curb on excessive powers by government, and periodic elections. The

urge to minimize governmental interference and to encourage business freedom is the economic

component of liberalization. Other than basic freedom of speech, conscience and trade, the

contrast between traditional norms and coercive powers of the state is clear.

Republican peacebuilding, as postulated by Michael Barnett (2006), prioritizes the role of

state in maintaining stability. Its core elements of deliberation, constitutionalism, and

representation undergird the supremacy of the state and all the discretionary mandates bestowed

upon it. If deliberation dictates patriotism as opposed to voluntarism, then participation is

eschewed as it privileges the elites to the detriment of masses. Constitutionalism, worse still, is

almost always the preserve of the nobilities, who design the rules and institutions to maintain the

political order. The common theme with traditional fabric, fortunately, is the felicity of

community belonging. The third principle of peacebuilding as governance closely rhymes with

the traditional structure of self-sustaining peace. Indigenous peacemaking sanctifies local

institutions, just as much as state building proposes, except that each applies and relies on unique

paradigms. Although the former is provincial while the latter is cosmopolitan, both focus on

legitimacy of an entity, which in essence ranks group interest above that of the individual

(Fukuyama 2004, among others).

Finally, there is the fourth element of critical peacebuilding. Accordingly, this concept

dismisses liberal peacebuilding model as being inherently neo-imperial in character, because it

carries with it the world's dominant bilateral and multilateral actors. Critics of this model, among

41

them Richmond and Franks (2009, 6) assert that by citing liberal peacebuilding, "international

actors draw on the epistemic knowledge that liberalism supplies and represents in order to

reorder the distribution of power, prestige, rules and rights." This conceptualization, in a cynical

tone, is pregnant with the adverse theories of hegemony, balance of power, institutionalism and

constitutionalism. In comparison with the findings contained in this study, it is quite acceptable

that, indeed, liberal peacebuilding focuses on state and international levels, but not ideal for local

peacebuilding--the very bedrock of traditional governance. This creates a leap. Critical theorists

(Paris 2004; Trujillo et al 2008; Richmond and Franks 2009) also provide a plausible argument

in contrasting liberalism against state building, and even thrashing them both aside as being

ineffective in leveraging peace and peacebuilding in non-Western societies.

On state building, the critique recognizes the limitations placed on individual rights,

while valuing collectivism and institutional strength as the pillars to effective governance.

Despite Western assumptions and values, state institutionalization reflects some rather

conservative, republican ideals of order; it overlooks individual rights and freedom. Political

liberalism, on the other hand, emphasizes liberal civil rights, takes individual as the unit of

analysis, and elevates elections as the ultimate determinants of individual preferences (Call

2012). Indigenous peacebuilding and state building concur on the collective rather than

individual primacy. However they differ on the scope of operations. One is locally based while

the other is nationally overreaching. Critical theory, given, is where traditional theory finds

abode. They sound almost synonymous. They are both rooted in the cultural and social context.

By drawing attention to the particularities of local needs and priorities, critical theories call for

not just "a detailed understanding of local culture, traditions, and ontology" (Richmond and

Franks 2009, 33), but also a renegotiation and reintegration of indigenous methods into the

42

national consensus. As a form of critical theories, traditionalist approach prefers a social contract

in which local institutions retain generational practices but donate certain powers for integration

into state and international relations. Dialogue should however occur before the donation of such

powers.

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

5.1 Significance of Research Findings

Standing alone, as well as in comparison with modern strategies of peacebuilding, this study has

revealed a plethora of peacemaking techniques that can be instrumental in structuring or

reshaping African contemporary settings. The five ideals espoused above are techniques long

held and practiced by the Mundari since time immemorial. They have glued together in peace its

internal diversity, as well as regulating its external relations with neighbors. Yet these are not

isolated norms confined to specific community. Rather, they exhibit replications apparent across

numerous societies in the continent. Their characteristics and intellectual dexterity offer both

opportunities and limits of indigenous governance and conflict resolution systems, particularly in

postmodern or postwar Africa. It can boldly be argued, nevertheless, that the positive remedies

of traditional practices by far outweigh the social injustices they impose on individuals.

Philosophically, such deontological ethics are normatively acceptable, as long as the moral utility

permits few evils and preserve more goodness. Unknowingly utilitarian, the Mundari value the

greatest benefit of the many by prioritizing collectivism over individualism. James (1974)

established that the designs for living reflect the importance of the collective and has been

43

observed as a generalized ethos documented in early research on cultural ideology and helping

systems in traditional African cultures across the continent.

From optimum perspectives, each of the strategies elaborated above reflects a cultural

worldview in which humanism and legitimacy rest in encouraging tolerance and mutual

coexistence; invocation of rituals as a way of sanctifying spirituality; settling disputes amicably

and acknowledging the value of friendship; providing equal opportunity for the guilty to repent

and for forgiveness to voluntarily occur; recognizing and accepting the fallibility inherent in

human by reintegration of villains, and valuing the role of women in intervention and peace

processes; humbling oneself and realizing that there are scarcities and abundances that need be

shared; and that people are all equal regardless of fortunes, thus the need to uplift the destitute

and permitting promotion of self-determination as virtues worth celebrating. As much as there

are such common themes among the Mundari, history is replete with examples drawn from

classical African civilization. In describing sympathy and empathy of cosmopolitanism, which

are the hallmark for universal understanding, Kwame Appiah (2006) proffers that all human

conflict could benefit from such wise traditions as they contribute to improved, harmonious

social conditions and increased cosmopolitanism. Contextually, the concept of cosmopolitanism

entails two ethoses: responsibilities and understanding. The first requires that human obligations

should go beyond kinship and citizenship. The latter invites for mutual tolerance of different

customs and beliefs. In a world compartmentalized into states, citizenship is central and so the

worldview frames.

5.2 Implications for Future Research and Practice

The overall assessment and analysis of this research established that the Mundari are centrally

located and hence highly neighbored. The community has been less penetrated into by foreign

44

influence and thus it still maintains its ancient institutions; it is traditionally agro-pastoralist;

despite the protracted civil wars, its strong affinity to its culture has meant the community does

not have Diaspora community; and finally, its education rate is disproportionately minimal. All

these undisputed realities have had practical impacts in terms of impeding a shift toward

Western-oriented institutionalization. Nor can the few learned members of the Mundari tribe

influence an overhaul of any cultural transformation from traditional to the contemporary

structuring. The ancient institutions have become deeply rooted that any erratic member who

finds conformity unsuitable can only escape the system by joining town life. How citizens are

managed in towns is the role of the state. It is true the indigenous systems are cheaper,

integrative and less frustrating. However, how their influence can be extended to manage state

and national politics requires further research and sound policy recommendation.

In the meantime, given the efficacy with which the Mundari guide their affairs, coupled

with a deontological and utilitarian cosmopolitanism inherent in it, traditional systems are

redemptive. In contrast, post-independent states have failed to effectively reconfigure and direct

matters by relying on foreign methods. This is indicative of both mismatch and incompatibilities.

There is a mismatch of solutions to problems because modern mechanisms are suited for local

issues.

Unfortunately, modern theorization on good governance and peacebuilding either

disregards or completely ignores traditional approaches as substandard and obsolete. This creates

both moral and legal dilemmas with regards to how international campaign for global peace may

operate. Relatively, one could say that the Mundari subscribe to the Appiah's emphasis and

essence of cosmopolitanism; Or perhaps if he were to research on this and similar cases, he

would find congruence of classical philosophy in ancient practices. Peace scholars may therefore

45

need to reinvent the wheel. Because it is true that certain traditional approaches are incapable of

directing complex national and international matters, just as some macro policies are overbearing

to handling local issues, a sound demarcation of domains is probably urgently needed for a

pragmatic realization of an integrative peacebuilding and good governance. This is imperative

because whereas the local techniques, which are largely directed towards reintegration, are

ignored, the modern strategies, which underpin hard politics, have increasingly become volatile

and devastating.

5.3 Policy Recommendations

This research provides an interesting contribution to the quest for sound, conflict management

systems in Africa. Overall, it makes a vivid analysis of the potential value of traditional conflict

settlement techniques practiced by the Mundari. Undergirding the sustainability of indigenous

practices are some observations, which should be recommended for adoption in the national and

international levels. These include social contract, inclusivity, and integrated governance.

5.3.1 Social Contract: Through Cooptation, Integration and Specialization

All African national governments, like traditional chiefdoms, must recognize that their formation

and existence are wholly attributable to social contract among the governed and between the

governed and the governing. The conduct of governing affairs is the grand functioning of

integrated relationships, co-opted into the specialized or gifted hands of a few, but for the benefit

of all. Cooptation connotes not dealing the stakeholders or principals out of the game, but

transforming them from aspiring to be opponents to supporters of reforms. Integration process

entails policy coordination and sealing of administrative gaps in the course of service delivery.

46

For effective working formula, a coordination, collaboration, and partnership need to be

entrusted in the custody of specialized experts, just like chiefship bestowed upon the wise chiefs.

5.3.2 Integrated Governance and Peacebuilding

Integrated peacebuilding and governance go hand in hand. The former constitutes a set of

processes and tools used by civil society and governmental actors to transform the relationships,

culture, and institutions of society to prevent, end, and transform conflicts. The latter describes

the structures of formal and informal relations to manage affairs through joined up approaches,

which may be between government agencies, non-government sectors, or across levels of

governments—local, county, state, national, regional, or international. Zelizer (2013) affirms this

when he posits that peacebuilding focuses on transforming relationships and structures in society

to decrease the likelihood of future conflicts. To instill some measures of order and policy

coherence, both vertical and horizontal integration need to be pursued concurrently, but with

considerable observation of where national domains stop and local authority begins.

5.3.3. Global, Inclusive Thinking and Approach

The mismatch of solutions to problems in conflict resolution and good governance partly rests

with international actors involved in peacebuilding operations. It is their insistence on both

Western-inspired approaches and horizontal coordination of efforts across and among the

relatively thin set of international campaigners that derails the train of peacebuilding. Instead,

there should be a more globally inclusive thinking and approach, which is receptive of every

durable traditional system committed to order and responsible leadership, in regardless of

47

whether it is indigenous or Western. An inclusive, global thinking recognizes the imperatives of

cosmopolitanism and vertical integration.

Cosmopolitanism glorifies responsibilities and understanding, all emphasizing human

obligations and mutual tolerance of different customs and beliefs. Equally, an inclusive thinking

appreciates the differences as well as the similarities. In this vein, vertical integration of

peacebuilding is more recommendable than horizontal approach. Vertical integration refers to the

need for improved partnership and coordination up and down the chain of relationships that link

international-, state-, and local-levels actors in the peacebuilding endeavors. It acknowledges the

salience of coordination across the international-local binary and, strives to bridging the top-

down and bottom-up peacebuilding strategies. Such an expansive vision is in line with John Paul

Lederach's (1997) proposition that peace must be built simultaneously from the bottom up, the

top down, and the middle out as well as on the emerging debate on "hybrid peace governance"

(Jarstad and Belloni 2012). Exemplary countries attuned to this strategy may include Botswana

and Ghana, both of which exhibit good governance credentials grounded in ancient traditions.

Given their numerous traditions, both Sudan and South Sudan can redeem themselves from the

tragedy of state failure if they value the prerequisites of a social contract, adopt integrated

governance and peacebuilding mechanisms, and engage in an inclusive thinking approach.

48

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: LIST OF ACRONYM

AAA Addis Ababa Agreement

CES Central Equatoria State

CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement

NCP National Congress Party

SPLA/M Sudan People's Liberation Army/Movement

SSA Sudan Studies Association

SSD South-South Dialogues

TPRC Tali Peace and Reconciliation Conference

UK United Kingdoms

USA United States of America

APPENDIX B: SAMPLE OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRES

1. How does your community (Mundari) manage and resolve conflicts?

2. How many conflicts do you remember that your community (Mundari) has had with your

neighbors?

3. How protracted and destructive were these conflicts, if any?

4. How were the disputes resolved?

5. Who were the opponents?

6. What were done to compensate those who lost, reputation, relatives or properties?

49

APPENDIX C: LIST OF INTERVIEWEES

Categories and Designation Number of

interviewees

Chiefs 6

Women 2

Cattle camp leaders 2

Youth leaders 2

Politicians 2

Clerk 1

Total 15

50

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aall, P. R. Ready for Prime Time: The When, Who, and Why of International Mediation.

Negotiation Journal, 151-167.

Addis Ababa Agreement. (1972). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Appiah, A. (2006). Cosmopolitanism: ethics in a world of strangers. New York: W.W. Norton &

Co.

Barnett, M. N. (2006). Power in Global Governance (Reprint. ed.). Cambridge U.K.: Cambridge

Univ. Press.

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards Ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural

sensitivity (revised). In R. M. Paige (Ed.), Education for the Intercultural Experience.

Yarmouth, Me: Intercultural Press.

Berdal, M. R. (2000). Greed & grievance: economic agendas in civil wars. Boulder, Colo.:

Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Buxton, J.C. (1963). Chiefs and Strangers: A Study of Political Assimilation Among The

Mandari. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Call, C. T. (2012). Why Peace Fails: The Causes and Prevention of Civil War Recurrence.

Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Carbonnier, G. (2012). Special Issue: Hybrid Peace Governance. Boulder, Colo: Rienner.

Coleman, P.T (2006). Cooperation and Competition, Chapter one. In The Handbook of Conflict

Resolution, second edition, edited by M. Deutsch, P.T. Coleman & E.C. Marcus. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Collier, P. (2007). The bottom billion: why the poorest countries are failing and what can be

done about it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

51

Comprehensive Peace Agreement. (2005). Nairobi, Kenya.

Deutsch, M. (2006). The handbook of conflict resolution: theory and practice (2nd ed.). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Fukuyama, F. (2004). State-building: Governance and World Order in the 21st Century. Ithaca,

N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

Galtung, J. (1990). 60 Speeches on War and Peace. Oslo, Norway: PRIO.

--- (1975). Peace: research, education, action. Copenhagen: Ejlers.

Garon, R. Crocker, Chester A., Fen Osler Hampson et Pamela Aall (dir.), Leashing the Dogs of

War. Conflict Management in a Divided World, Washington, dc, United States Institute

of Peace Press, 2007, 728 p.. Etudes Internationales, 437.

Glasl, F. (1994). "Sozialer Konflikt ist eine Interaktion zwischen Aktoren (Individuen, Gruppen,

Organisationenusw.), wobei mindestens ein Aktor Unvereinbarkeiten im Denken/

Vorstellen/ Wahrnehmen und/oder Fuehlen und/oder wollen mit dem anderen Aktor

(anderen Aktoren) in der Art erlebt, dass im Realisiereneine Beeintraechtigung durch

einen anderen Aktor (die anderen Aktoren) erfolge." (14).

Gurr, T. R. (1993). Minorities at risk: a global view of ethnopolitical conflicts. Washington,

D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.

J. Malan. (1997). Conflict Resolution Wisdom from Africa, Durban: African Centre for the

Constructive Resolution of Disputes.

John, Wanis-St. (2012). “Indigenous Reconciliation Rituals: Complementarity and Tension with

International Transitional Justice Practices,” paper presented at Indigenous Conflict

Management Conference, Kennesaw State University, Atlanta, GA, April 21, 2012.

52

Jonsson, C. (2002). Cognitive Theory, Chapter Sixteen. International Negotiation, second

edition, edited by V.A. Kremenyuk. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kiplagat, B. (1998). “Is Mediation Alien to Africa?” The Ploughshares Monitor 19(4).

Kriesberg, L. (1989). Intractable Conflicts and their Transformation. Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse

University Press.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. Thousand

Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Lederach, J. P. (1997). Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies.

Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Leonardi, Cherry. (2013). Dealing with Government in South Sudan: Histories of Chiefship,

Community and State. Rochester, NY: Boydell and Brewer Inc.

Linda James Myers, David H. Shinn. Appreciating Traditional Forms of Healing Conflict in

Africa and the World. Diaspora Black Review, 2.

MacGinty, R. (2008). Traditional and Indigenous Approaches to Peacemaking. Basingstoke:

Palgrave MacMillan.

Machar, R. (1995). South Sudan: A History of Political Domination - A Case of Self-

Determination. University of Pennsylvania-African Studies Center.

Malone, D.M. et J. Sherman (2007). "Economic Factors in Civil Wars: Policy Considerations",

Management in a Divided World (p. 637-652), Washington, D.C., United States Institute

Mayer, B. S. (2000). The dynamics of conflict resolution: a practitioner's guide. San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Moore, C. W. (2003). The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict (3rd

ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

53

Muruthi, T & Pain, D. (1999). African Principles of Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation

(eds). Addis Ababa: Shebelle Publishing.

Myers, L. B. (2008). “Toward Fuller Knowledge in Peace Management and Conflict Resolution:

The Importance of Cultural Worldview.” In M. Trujillo, S. Boland, L. J. Myers, P.

Richards, and B. Roy (eds.), Re-Centering Culture and Knowledge in Conflict Resolution

Practice. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Nalder, L. F. (1937). A Tribal Survey of Mongalla Province. By Members of the Province Staff

and Church Missionary Society. Published for the International Institute of African

Languages and Cultures. London: Oxford University Press.

Paris, R. (2004). At war's end: building peace after civil conflict. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge

University Press.

Richmond, O. P., & Franks, J. (2009). Liberal Peace Transitions Between Statebuilding and

Peacebuilding. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Sambanis, N. International Peacebuilding: A Theoretical and Quantitative Analysis. The

American Political Science Review, 779.

Seligman, C. G.; Seligman, Brenda Z. (1932). The Pagan Tribes of the Nilotic Sudan. London:

George Routledge & Sons, Ltd.

Shinn, David H. (2005). “Traditional Forms of Healing Conflict in Africa.” Paper delivered at

the International Conference on African Healing Wisdom: From Tradition to Current

Black Diaspora Review 2(1) Fall 2010 13 Applications and Research. Sponsored by Pro-

Cultura Inc., The George Washington University Medical Center, PROMETRA, and

Bioresources Development and Conservation Programme.

54

Stewart, F. (2008). Horizontal inequalities and conflict: understanding group violence in

multiethnic societies. Basingstoke [England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sumner, W. G., & Keller, A. G. (1906). Folkways: a study of the sociological importance of

usages, manners, customs, mores, and morals. Boston: Ginn.

Trujillo, M., S. Boland, L. J. Myers, P. Richards, and B. Roy. (2008). Re-Centering Culture and

Knowledge in Conflict Resolution Practice. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Tsega, E. (2002). Conflict Resolution through Cultural Tolerance: An Analysis of the Michu

Institution in Metekkel Region, Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Organization for Social Science

Research in Eastern and Southern Africa.

Ury, W. L. Conflict Resolution Among The Bushmen: Lessons In Dispute Systems

Design. Negotiation Journal, 379-389.

Wapner, P. K. (2000). Principled World Politics: The Challenge of Normative International

Relations. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

Wunlit Peace and Reconciliation Conference. (1999). Wunlit: South Sudan.

Zartman, I. (2005). Peacemaking in international conflict: methods & techniques (Rev. ed.).

Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press.

Zartman, W. (1999). Traditional Cures for Modern Conflicts: African Conflict ‘Medicine’,

Boulder, Colo: Lynne Rienner.

Zelizer, C. (2013). Integrated peacebuilding: innovative approaches to transforming conflict.

Boulder, CO: Westview Press.