ection 2. Argument and study cases; the framework as a tool for policy agendas
Conflicts in the Global South carried out through different actors and procedures; from the post-colonial Sub-Sahara and North Africa, to South-East Asia and Latin America. After understanding the basis of framework´s dichotomy and its interaction between each position, dynamics of conflict in the Global South can reflect different outcomes from the framework and how its function cannot be used to address a conflict, but can be seen as a useful tool to detect ‘who’ and ‘how’ is intervening in conflicts in the Global South . Cross-border violence and illegal groups’ activities, presence and empowerment of lootable and unlootable resources (Ballentine and Nitzschke, 2004); contrary to what was appointed in previous analysis of how stakeholders can benefit from resources (Le Billon, 2001), feeds the dichotomy of the greed versus grievances as a whole and not as individual theories. The emerge of these illegal activities in deserted areas had led criminal organisations to corrupt the system and deliver ‘negative peace’ which means the “absence of violence, absence of war” (Galtung, 1964, page 2), to small communities, unchaining an endless crossfire with the state, civil-resistance groups and other criminal organisations looking after the control of territory.
Although the framework has considerably supported the understanding of new actors in geopolitics in the Global South, the essence of greed versus grievance is not routed to address a conflict but to facilitate the recognition of interests in new wars. Below, two study cases will be shortly reviewed and how the greed and grievance can be detected either in one of any perspectives of the framework, but should not be considered as the main driver in the creation of action plans from policy makers. The argument of this essay states that geopolitics will prove that conflicts can´t be seen as a double-headed dragon, or simply basing them through an isolated theory.
There are two main phrases from the well-known 17th century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza that can refer to this context:
“Peace is not an absence of war; it is a virtue, a state of mind, a disposition for benevolence, confidence, and justice.” (Spinoza, n.d.)
This reflex leads to his second phrase, suggesting that aid should come from a collaborative effort, and not from personal addressing:
