This article examines the Modernization program of transition in the Central and Eastern Europe region and discusses the problems and limitations of this framework of development. In particular, it examines the role of conflict resolution efforts within and apart from this framework and suggests that local and international conflict resolution activities can complement the strengths of Modernization while moving beyond its limitations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Journal of Economic Development and Cultural Change.
2.
2. So, Social Change and Development.
3.
3. Ibid.
4.
These studies are further discussed in So, Social Change and Development.
5.
5. Ibid.
6.
6. G. Pridham, E. Herring, and G. Sanford, eds., Building Democracy? The International Dimension of Democratization in Eastern Europe (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994).
7.
7. Boutros Boutros-Gali, Development and International Economic Cooperation: An Agenda for Development, presented to the United Nations General Assembly, 48th sess., agenda item 91, A/48/935, 6 May 1994.
8.
8. Paul Lewis, “Democratization in Eastern Europe,” in Transitions to Democracy, ed. G. Pridham, E. Herring, and G. Sanford (Brookfield, VT: Dartmouth, 1995), p. 391.
9.
Benjamin Barber , “Jihad vs. McWorld,”Atlantic Monthly, 269(3):53-65 (Mar. 1992).
10.
10. A. Agh, “The `Comparative Revolution' and the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe,”Journal of Theoretical Politics, 5(2):231-252 (1993).
11.
11. Benjamin Barber, Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986), p. 6.
12.
12. Frank Dukes, “Public Conflict Resolution: A Transformative Approach,”Negotiation Journal, 9(1):47 (Jan. 1993).
13.
13. Mary McIntosh, Martha Abele MacIver, Daniel Abele, and Dina Smeltz, “Publics Meet Market Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe, 1991-1993,”Slavic Review, 53(2):483-512 (Summer 1994).
14.
14. E. Meiksins Wood, Democracy Against Capitalism (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
15.
15. Aleksander Smolar, “Democratic Institution-Building in Eastern Europe,”Problems of Communism, 41(1-2):70 (Jan. 1992).
16.
16. Philippe C. Schmitter, “More Liberal, Preliberal, or Postliberal?” in The Global Resurgence of Democracy, ed. L. Diamond and M. Plattner (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996), p. 328.
17.
17. Daniel Nelson, “Civil Society Endangered,”Social Research, 65(2):356 (Summer 1996).
18.
18. Schmitter, “More Liberal, Preliberal, or Postliberal?” p. 328.
19.
19. Barber, Strong Democracy, pp. 251-260.
20.
20. Nelson, “Civil Society Endangered,” p. 356.
21.
21. Paul Stubbs, “90's Croatia: Globalization, Humanitarianism, and Professionalism” (Paper delivered at the Second European Conference on Sociology, Budapest, Hungary, Aug. 1995).
22.
22. Miguel Angel Centeno and Tania Rands, “The World They Have Lost: An Assessment of Change in Eastern Europe,”Social Research, 65(2):369-402 (Summer 1996).
23.
23. “Life Feelings and Attitudes of the Slovak Population in the Year 1993” (Selection from the results of public opinion research implemented by the Institute of Public Opinion, Bratislava, Slovakia, 1994).
24.
24. Similar questions were addressed in Richard Rubenstein, “Dispute Resolution on the Eastern Frontier: Some Questions for Modern Missionaries,”Negotiation Journal, pp. 205-213 (July 1993).
25.
25. As Burton and Dukes have noted, making distinctions within the field of conflict resolution is complicated by a confusion of terminology: “We have not yet arrived at a common language by which to communicate either the differences in dispute and conflict situations or the remedial processes we wish to describe and match.”John Burton and Frank Dukes, Conflict: Practices in Management, Settlement, and Resolution (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990). While describing the diversity and overlapping terminology within the field is not within the scope of the present article, the following discussion draws upon distinctions that have been noted by Burton and Dukes in this and other works.
26.
John Paul Lederach , Preparing for Peace: Conflict Transformation Across Cultures (New York: Syracuse University Press, 1995).
27.
27. Christopher Mitchell, “Necessitous Man and Conflict Resolution: More Basic Questions About Basic Human Needs,” in Conflict: Human Needs Theory, ed. J. Burton (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1990), p. 150.
28.
28. F. Dukes, “Public Conflict Resolution: A Transformative Approach,”Negotiation Journal, 9(1):49 (Jan. 1993).
29.
29. Although the table emphasizes the differences between Modernization and conflict resolution efforts, it should be noted that there is significant overlap between these theories and that they should not be considered mutually exclusive.
30.
30. Petr Sztompka, “The Intangibles and Imponderables of the Transition to Democracy,”Studies in Comparative Communism, 24(3):295-311 (1991).
