This op-ed by Daniel Shapiro, "Modern tribes - the new
lines of loyalty" (2008) was fairly early at recognizing that tribalism is
growing around the world, becoming a key basis of conflict. His article is
mostly about conflicts abroad, yet it is also recognizes forms of tribalism
that we now see distorting matters here at home.
Here’s his key argument:
"In this complex situation,
the key is to recognize that the fault lines of modern conflict revolve around
tribes. But not traditional notions of tribes. The modern tribe is an
identity-based group held together by a sense of kinship. As such, we all
belong to multiple tribes based upon our religion, ethnicity, political stance,
nationality, and other dividers.”
And he rightly observes that “tribes” come in all sorts of
shapes and sizes in the modern world, even corporations and terrorist groups:
“…Multinationals such as the big
oil companies resemble a tribe, and their presence alone in a nation-state can
have an impact on intrastate and international conflict. Well-networked
terrorist organizations often function as tribes, and 9/11 demonstrates the
extent to which people are willing to sacrifice for their tribe.”
He also observes that “many current security measures fail
to address the tribal motivations of groups in conflict”, and thus asks “how do
we deal with this new tribal reality?” His answers are sensible but also quite
conventional — find ways to “reduce emotional tensions”, “bind groups together
in a new, overarching identity of solidarity”, and expand institutions so as to
“create the conditions for divided tribes to come together, listen to one
another’s stories, and jointly develop processes for moving forward.”
Accordingly
“…policymakers dealing with tribal
conflict must answer three critical questions. First, where are the tribal
lines of loyalty? Second, what are the primary substantive and emotional
interests of each tribe? Third, in what ways do the various tribes share a
common identity or historical narrative that can draw them together toward
peace?
He is not particularly optimistic, concluding that “These
are difficult questions. But if they are not addressed, conflicts will escalate
and terrorist attacks will increase.” But at least he was urging policymakers,
strategists, analysts, and activists to recognize the tribal paradigm and take
it seriously.
I first saw the article at the website of the Harvard
International Negotiation Program, which the author directs. But it was first
published as an op-ed in the Boston Globe, September 11, 2008.
To read for yourself, go here:
http://www.internationalnegotiation.org/modern-tribes-op-ed/
[I posted an earlier write-up of this reading on my Facebook
page, on March 25.]
No comments:
Post a Comment