Critical Analysis of Pruitt and Kim’s Theory of Reconciliation

Over the span of recorded history, humankind has inflicted horrors upon itself. Attempts at ending these brutal conflicts usually involved a great deal of violence; problem solving entailed an “off with his head” approach. We would like to think that we are better than that today, but look no further than newspaper headlines to see that human behavior has not come very far since the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, there has been a positive development in modern day problem solving that Pruitt and Kim (2004) call “reconciliation” (p. 218). Simply put, this is the process of relationship repair. The importance of this theory cannot be understated. Reconciliation of divided people and societies is vital to preventing the reoccurrence of violence and building long-term, sustainable peace (Sustainable reconciliation, 2013). If people do not reconcile, conflicts will continue to arise time after time after time.
Pruitt and Kim (2004) maintain that there is a consensus among theorists that there are two requirements necessary for reconciliation to be effective and sustainable. The first requirement is that the parties must deal with the pains of the past and together develop a shared future. The second requirement is that there should be at a minimum the following set of elements: truth, forgiveness, justice and peace (p. 218). In my additional reading on the subject, I found that there is certainly a consensus regarding the first requirement. As to the second requirement, I assert that the authors are basing some of their arguments on several unsupported assumptions.
Pruitt and Kim (2004) make an assumption that there is consensus [emphasis added] among theorists that truth, forgiveness, justice and peace must [emphasis added] ...

... middle of paper ...

...ation. In D. Bloomfield, T. Barnes & L. Huyse (Eds.), Reconciliation after violent conflict: A handbook (pp. 19–39). Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/publications/reconciliation/loader.cfm?csmodule=security/getfile
&pageid=5766
Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (2004). Social conflicts and collective identities. (pp. 218–225). New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
Schaar, J. & Nordström, L. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Division of Humanitarian Assistance and Conflict Management. (2003). Reconciliation - theory and practice for development cooperation (SIDA2982en). Retrieved from SIDA website: http://www.uu.se/digitalAssets/17/17054_SIDA2982en_ReconWEB_brouneus.pdf
Sustainable reconciliation. (2013, January 16). International institute for democracy and electoral assistance (international idea). Retrieved from http://www.idea.int/conflict/sr/