Keys to Conflict Resolution: Engagement

In the field of war, the word “engagement” refers to specific, limited tactical combat between opponents. It is sword against sword, rifle against rifle, army against army, and so forth. It can involve full-scale, well-planned battles, or unexpected direct combat on the ground.

“Engagement” means something else in the field of home and community conflict resolution.

To be clear, engagement in war is not conflict resolution, even if, as a result, the war might end. That’s not a resolution, it’s just a cessation, with one side winning and the other suffering defeat. These are not the recipe for lasting peace or progress.

Sometimes, when individuals enter into arguments with family members or neighbours, that’s what they think they are looking for; but, in fact, they ought not to – not, at least, if, on any level, they want their relationships to become better in the end.

Though countries have occasionally managed to replace conflict with compassion after the war has ended, it’s neither the objective nor the most likely outcome; whereas, in the home and in the community, finding resolutions that preserve and improve relationships is typically the principal desire. Otherwise, people could walk away from the situation and choose not to bother with each other at all.

Engagement in those circumstances is not about lobbing bombs but listening ears; not about undermining an enemy but understanding a friend. It involves communication rather than competition, empathy instead of aggression. Therefore, it is important in resolving family and community disputes, that people set aside both defensive and aggressive postures and demands, and focus instead on direct and active participation in open-minded, intentional, and constructive dialogue.

That is resolution-focussed engagement, which helps to win the war over conflict in the village and the home, and promote the prospect of lasting peace. [Image is AI generated.]