Conflict is rarely a simple, straightforward process. It evolves, escalates, and transforms through distinct stages that require different approaches at each phase. Adam Curle, a British Quaker peace activist and the founding professor of Peace Studies at the University of Bradford, developed a framework in 1971 that helps us understand this complex journey. His Conflict Progression Model reveals how conflicts move from hidden inequalities to open confrontation, and potentially toward sustainable peace.
Table of Contents
- The foundation of Curle’s conflict progression model
- From latent conflict to overt confrontation
- The role of conscientization
- The negotiation stage and strategic power balance
- Reaching strategic power balance
- The challenge of moving beyond negotiation
- The trap of positional bargaining
- The path to sustainable peace
- Preventing relapse into confrontation
- Practical implications for peacebuilders
The foundation of Curle’s conflict progression model
At the heart of Curle’s model lies a critical insight: conflict progression is never static or linear. Instead, conflicts move along a continuum from unpeaceful to peaceful relationships, charted through a matrix that examines two key dimensions.
The first dimension is the balance of power between conflicting parties. This doesn’t mean both sides have identical resources. Rather, it refers to whether either party can impose its will on the other. In a balanced relationship, neither side can act successfully on contentious issues without the support or acquiescence of the other.
The second dimension is awareness-the degree to which relevant actors recognize the conflict, understand its sources, and can identify viable solutions. This awareness extends beyond just the aggrieved group to include adversaries and potential allies. Surprisingly, even those directly experiencing injustice may not fully grasp the structural causes of their situation or believe change is possible.
By mapping these two variables, Curle created a framework showing four distinct stages: latent conflict, confrontation, negotiation, and sustainable peace. Understanding where a conflict sits within this matrix helps intermediaries and stakeholders determine appropriate peacebuilding approaches.
From latent conflict to overt confrontation
The journey begins in the first quadrant: latent conflict. Here, significant power imbalances and structural injustices exist, but people remain largely unaware of them. They may accept their circumstances as natural or inevitable, even when those circumstances involve systematic oppression.
This unawareness isn’t always accidental. Those experiencing injustice may fear the consequences of challenging the status quo. When survival itself feels precarious, even recognizing exploitation can seem too dangerous. The little that people have may feel too precious to risk.
The role of conscientization
Breaking through latent conflict requires what Curle and peace scholar John Lederach call “conscientization”-a process where the dominated become aware of the unjust imbalance in their status and power. This is where educators, activists, and community organizers play a crucial role.
Education at this stage takes various forms. Members of aggrieved groups need information about the sources of their oppression and training in constructive response strategies. Potential allies must understand both the strength of the case for justice and how they can support it. Even adversaries may need to recognize how their actions create or worsen injustice.
As awareness grows and people begin asserting their rights, conflict becomes overt. The situation moves into the second quadrant: confrontation. What was once hidden beneath the surface now breaks into open dispute. This transition from latent to overt conflict represents a critical shift-power remains imbalanced, but awareness has increased dramatically.
The negotiation stage and strategic power balance
Confrontation serves a vital function in conflict transformation. It highlights the strength of the aggrieved group and begins equalizing the power imbalance. Since disadvantaged groups typically draw power from numbers rather than wealth or institutional control, their collective strength may only become apparent through confrontation.
Confrontation can range from nonviolent protest to more forceful resistance. The key is making it uncomfortable or impossible for the dominant party to continue business as usual. Through sustained pressure, confrontation gradually shifts the balance of power.
Reaching strategic power balance
Eventually, parties may reach a realization: they cannot eliminate each other. Neither side can impose its will unilaterally. This recognition opens the door to the third quadrant: negotiation. At this stage, both awareness and power balance have increased.
When parties enter negotiations, they’ve achieved what Curle calls a strategic power balance. However, this balance often proves unstable. Conflicts rarely progress in a perfectly linear fashion. Instead, parties frequently move back and forth between negotiation and confrontation stages. A breakdown in talks may lead back to confrontation. Renewed pressure may bring parties back to the negotiating table.
This non-linear progression is normal, not a failure. It reflects the complex reality that changing deeply entrenched power structures and relationships takes time. Progress rarely follows a straight path.
The challenge of moving beyond negotiation
Reaching the negotiation stage is significant, but it doesn’t guarantee lasting peace. Many negotiations fail or produce agreements that don’t hold. Understanding why requires looking at what happens-or fails to happen-during negotiations.
The trap of positional bargaining
Negotiations often fail because parties lock themselves into positional bargaining. They focus on stated demands rather than articulating underlying needs and core values. Each side stakes out positions and refuses to budge, creating deadlock.
This approach misses the deeper work required for genuine transformation. Parties may reach tactical agreements about specific demands without addressing the fundamental concerns driving the conflict. Such agreements tend to be fragile, breaking down when new challenges emerge or when parties feel their core needs remain unmet.
The path to sustainable peace
The true challenge in conflict transformation, Curle argues, is helping parties accept each other’s needs and move toward sustainable peace-the fourth quadrant where both awareness and power balance are high and stable. This stage requires more than just negotiated settlements.
Curle emphasizes the importance of conciliation-a process through which parties overcome antipathy, hatred, distrust, and resentment. During prolonged conflict, especially when violence has occurred, parties develop deeply negative feelings toward each other. Without addressing these feelings and rebuilding relationship foundations, agreements may lack durability.
Sustainable peace requires what Curle calls “development”-restructuring unpeaceful relations to create conditions where individuals can fully develop their capacities for creativity, service, and enjoyment. This goes beyond absence of violence to building genuinely cooperative relationships.
Preventing relapse into confrontation
The risk of sliding back into open confrontation remains real even after agreements are reached. Several factors can trigger such relapses. Agreements may prove superficial, addressing symptoms rather than root causes. Implementation may lag or fail entirely. New grievances may emerge. Changed circumstances may destabilize carefully crafted balances.
Preventing relapse requires ongoing attention to both relationship building and structural change. Parties need mechanisms for addressing new issues as they arise. They need continued dialogue even when things seem peaceful. They need to maintain the power balance achieved through earlier confrontation and negotiation.
The shift from negotiation to sustainable peace also demands patience. Deep transformation takes time. Structural inequalities built over generations don’t disappear overnight. Cultural attitudes and psychological wounds need healing. New patterns of interaction must become established and normalized.
Practical implications for peacebuilders
Curle’s model offers practical guidance for those working to transform conflicts. Different stages require different interventions. At the latent stage, education and awareness-raising are paramount. During confrontation, advocacy and pressure tactics may be necessary. Negotiation calls for mediation and facilitation skills. Moving toward sustainable peace requires relationship building and structural reform.
Understanding conflict as a process helps identify factors that need addressing to prevent violence. It reminds peacebuilders that achieving a ceasefire or signing an agreement doesn’t equal peace. Real transformation involves sustained engagement across all dimensions of the conflict.
The non-linear nature of conflict progression also has implications. Setbacks don’t necessarily mean failure. Movement between stages is normal. What matters is maintaining overall direction toward greater awareness and power balance, even when the path winds.
What do you think? Can you identify conflicts in your community or workplace that seem stuck in particular stages of Curle’s model? What specific interventions might help them progress toward more peaceful relationships?
Leave a Reply