View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

Harris and Reilly give two reasons for the coming about of conflict within a
state, or intrastate conflict. The first one is the mobilisation ofpeople according to their
race, religion, culture, language, etc. Identity-based conflict is very persistent and not
easily solved through negotiation. The second reason is conflict because the resources
available are not equitably shared. When both these factors are present we get what is
called "deep-rooted conflict." This was the case in South Africa where the problem of
unequal distribution of resources was caused by the apartheid political order, which
divided the population into racial groups and treated them accordingly.
Thompson (1998) categorises negotiation into three types:
pure conflict, pure
coordination or mixed-motive negotiation
Pure Conflict
"In pure conflict negotiations, parties' interests are directly opposed: whatever
one person wins, the other loses." (Thompson 1998:44) This is also called "fixed-sum
situations." If the one party's interest is increased, the other party's interest is
decreased. Thompson (1998) makes an example of a seller who wants more money for
his car while the buyer wants to pay less. He says pure conflict is not common in
negotiations.
Win-win agreements
The outcomes of many negotiations are said to be win-win outcomes especially
in integrative negotiations. However, Thompson (1998) believes a win-win agreement
cannot be equated to an integrative agreement. A win-win agreement implies, according
to Thompson (1998:48) that resources were equally distributed during negotiation, or
that the participants were "happy and satisfied with the outcome". However, it may be
true that resources and money were wasted. Also when two people who are interested
\26