Mending the Vase

In badly managed conflicts, relationships are often damaged. The pain and hurt inflicted on the parties often lead to mistrust, anger and hate. Friends, colleagues, and family members no longer see each other as loved ones but as arch-enemies. In these situations the parties generally do not contemplate reconciliation - but rather retribution.

Reconciliation does not come cheaply. I don't believe a simple apology leads to genuine reconciliation. In the cases where it leads to reconciliation, it is fairly certain that conflict will emerge at a later stage, leading to a breakdown in the relationship again. An apology without an understanding of the issues, the pain and the hurt caused, will not heal the wounds inflicted by harsh words and rash actions.

In thinking about reconciliation I often think about a vase that has been broken. The pieces need to be reassembled to give shape to the original vase. However, the cracks will still be evident. In time the eye will become used to the new lines formed on the reassembled vase, or a new vase will have to replace the old one. In reconciling people, the broken pieces of the relationship need to be reassembled. The cracks will be the reminders of the scars suffered because of the badly managed conflict. The parties need to decide if they want to articulate a new relationship, and when and how this will happen.

As a process for reconciliation I want to suggest the following:

Firstly, there must be a commitment to restore the relationship, not just an emotional need to say 'sorry'. There must be a sincerity in wanting to understand and come to terms with the issues or problems that resulted in the polarisation. There must be an openness to listen and to hear the other side of the story. Finally there must be a willingness to change or enter into a process of change.

It is often difficult for parties to start this process of reconciliation themselves. Parties involved in deeply entrenched conflicts hold fast to their positions. They have gone too far down the track - if they are going to make moves towards reconciliation it may look as if they are giving in, or admitting to being 'wrong'. In these cases, a catalyst is very important. Conciliators are the parties that help the parties explore the possibility of moving into a process of reconciliation. They also play the role of the 'listening ear'.

At this stage the parties need an opportunity to give utterance to their feelings, to their anger. It is helpful during this process of ventilation for the parties to tell their story over and over, so that they can come to terms with the pain, the anger and the hurt. Following this, the one party is more open to a process of reconciliation with the other party. The conciliator can also check with each party what they would need to enter into a discussion with the other party. This is very important in creating a safe environment for the parties when they enter into dialogue.

The meeting between the parties needs to be very sensitively managed. Often parties may request to meet with each other without the presence of a third party. This often happens between friends or family members. In these cases I want to believe that the parties are calling upon the past relationship and experience with each other - the good experiences. It is an attempt to go it on their own. We often hear conflicting parties say, "we know each other." Even in the midst of conflict, and though the relationship has been damaged, there is still an acute awareness of the other party. In the case where parties want to talk to each other without a third party the following could be done:

1) Role play the discussion with the parties and find creative ways to deal with the potentially difficult areas;

2) Assist parties in developing constructive communication and listening skills;

3) Train parties to talk about their needs instead of making demands.

In the case where there is a facilitator involved in the discussion between the parties, the facilitator needs to make sure that the parties address the deep underlying issues fuelling the conflict. This discussion will be characterised by high degrees of emotion and posturing. The facilitator needs to sensitively guide the parties to deal with the issues, as well as the emotional damage they have done to each other. If this has been done, the facilitator needs to challenge the parties to find their own ways of reconciling with each other.

I believe that reconciliation is immensely personal - and that parties must not be theorised into an act of reconciliation. After having confronted their own ghosts and monsters, they need to create their own "happily ever after", or at least a relationship they can live with.

Craig Arendse is coordinator of the Mediation Training Services project at CCR.

CONTENTS    HOME