Internal conflict

Internal conflict refers to a struggle or tension occurring within a single entity, such as an individual, group, organization, or state. This broad concept encompasses various domains, including psychological tensions within a person's mind, narrative conflicts in literature and storytelling, and social or political strife within societies or states. The article explores these dimensions, from cognitive and emotional aspects to civil wars and intra-state violence. In the political and social context, internal conflicts often manifest as non-international armed conflicts, defined under international humanitarian law as protracted armed confrontations within a single state's territory between government forces and organized non-state armed groups, or between such groups, where at least one party is non-state.^[1] Unlike international armed conflicts involving multiple states, these are confined to one country and require thresholds of organization and intensity to apply relevant legal rules.^[2] The primary legal framework is Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, requiring humane treatment for non-combatants, prohibiting violence, torture, and degrading treatment, binding all parties equally.^[1] For more intense conflicts, Additional Protocol II (1977) offers expanded protections like civilian safeguards and proportionality, though with limited ratifications.^[2] Customary international humanitarian law further addresses protections for cultural property and the environment.^[2] Such armed internal conflicts predominate global armed violence, outnumbering interstate wars. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), 52 states experienced armed conflicts in 2023, mostly internal, with fatalities reaching 170,700—the highest since 2019.^[3] By the end of 2024, UNHCR reported 123.2 million people forcibly displaced worldwide, many due to intrastate conflicts.^[4] Captured non-state combatants lack prisoner-of-war status but receive basic protections, balancing state sovereignty with international norms.^[2] Resolution efforts focus on negotiation, peacekeeping, and root causes like inequality, though recurrence is common.^[3]

Definitions and Concepts

Core Definition

Internal conflict, also known as a non-international armed conflict (NIAC), refers to protracted armed violence occurring within the territory of a single state between government forces and organized non-state armed groups, or between such non-state groups aiming to control territory or government, provided the conflict meets thresholds of intensity and organization under international humanitarian law (IHL).^[1] Unlike lower-level internal disturbances or riots, NIACs trigger specific IHL protections, as outlined in Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and, where applicable, Additional Protocol II (1977).^[2] The term "conflict" derives from the Latin conflīctus, the past participle of conflīgere, meaning "to strike together" or "clash," from con- ("together") and flīgere ("to strike").^[5] In the context of international law, "internal armed conflict" emerged in the 20th century to describe intra-state violence distinct from interstate wars, formalized in the Geneva Conventions to address the growing prevalence of civil wars and insurgencies.^[2] Under IHL, internal conflicts are classified into state-based (involving the government and at least one non-state actor) and non-state (between two or more organized armed groups). Academic datasets like the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) further define state-based armed conflicts as incompatibilities over government or territory involving armed force, with at least 25 battle-related deaths in a calendar year, ensuring focus on significant violence.^[6] These definitions emphasize the organized nature of parties and the sustained intensity of hostilities, excluding sporadic unrest.

Distinctions from External Conflict

Internal conflict differs fundamentally from external (international armed) conflict in its territorial scope and parties involved. Internal conflicts are confined within one state's borders and involve at least one non-state actor against the government or between non-state actors, such as an insurgency challenging state authority. In contrast, external conflicts occur between two or more states, like wars over borders, or include international elements such as occupation or foreign intervention recognizing a non-state group as a belligerent power.^[7] This distinction is crucial under IHL, as international armed conflicts (IACs) invoke the full Geneva Conventions, while NIACs are governed by more limited rules.^[2] The causes of internal conflicts often arise from domestic factors, including ethnic divisions, resource disputes, or governance failures leading to organized rebellion. External conflicts, however, stem from interstate rivalries, such as territorial claims or alliances. For instance, the Syrian civil war began as an internal conflict but elements became internationalized through foreign state interventions, blurring lines but not altering the core classification unless a non-state actor is treated as a state proxy under IHL.^[1] In manifestations, internal conflicts may involve guerrilla tactics, urban warfare, or sieges within national borders, often prolonging due to asymmetric power. External conflicts typically feature conventional state armies clashing across frontiers, with potential for broader alliances. Despite distinctions, hybrid cases exist where external involvement escalates an internal conflict, such as foreign troops supporting a government, potentially triggering IAC rules for those specific interactions while the base remains NIAC.^[7] These overlaps highlight the need for case-by-case IHL application to protect civilians and combatants alike.^[2]

Psychological Perspectives

Cognitive Dissonance and Theories

Cognitive dissonance, a key psychological framework for understanding internal conflict, refers to the mental discomfort experienced by an individual when holding two or more contradictory cognitions, such as beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors.^[8] This tension arises because people strive for internal psychological consistency, and inconsistencies create a drive to reduce the resulting unease.^[8] Introduced by Leon Festinger in his seminal 1957 book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, the theory posits that the magnitude of dissonance is determined by the number and importance of the conflicting elements.^[8] To alleviate this discomfort, individuals engage in dissonance-reduction strategies, such as changing one of the conflicting cognitions, adding new consonant information, or minimizing the perceived importance of the inconsistency.^[8] Festinger's model frames internal conflict as a motivational state akin to a drive, prompting behavioral or attitudinal adjustments to restore harmony.^[8] This theory has profoundly influenced social psychology by explaining phenomena like decision-making regrets and post-purchase rationalizations.^[9] Related theoretical perspectives on internal conflict include Sigmund Freud's intrapsychic model, outlined in his 1923 work The Ego and the Id, which describes conflicts among the id (primitive impulses), ego (rational mediator), and superego (moral standards).^[10] These structural tensions within the psyche generate anxiety and internal strife as the ego navigates incompatible demands from the other components.^[10] Similarly, Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, proposed in his 1943 paper "A Theory of Human Motivation," highlights disruptions in self-actualization when lower-level needs (e.g., safety or belonging) conflict with higher aspirations for personal growth and fulfillment.^[11] Such hierarchical mismatches can produce internal conflict by thwarting the progression toward peak experiences and self-realization.^[11] Empirical support for cognitive dissonance as a driver of internal conflict comes from studies demonstrating reduction through attitude change. In Festinger and Carlsmith's 1959 experiment, participants who performed a boring task and then lied about its enjoyability for a low reward ($1) showed greater attitude shifts toward liking the task compared to those paid more ($20), as the low reward amplified dissonance and motivated belief change to justify the behavior. A historical illustration is Festinger's 1956 study of a doomsday cult in When Prophecy Fails, where members who had publicly committed to a failed prophecy (the world's end on December 21, 1954) reduced dissonance by proselytizing more fervently and reinterpreting the event as a divine intervention that spared humanity due to their faith.^[12] These findings underscore how internal conflict from belief-behavior inconsistencies propels adaptive psychological responses.^[12]

Emotional and Moral Dimensions

Internal conflict in psychology often manifests through intense emotional responses, such as anxiety arising from competing pulls between fear and loyalty in decision-making scenarios. For instance, an individual facing an ethical dilemma—such as choosing between personal gain and protecting a loved one—may experience heightened anxiety due to the fear of negative outcomes versus the loyalty to relational bonds, leading to emotional paralysis and stress.^[13] Guilt similarly emerges as a core emotional dimension when internal conflict involves perceived breaches of personal moral standards, amplifying self-reproach and emotional distress in situations like betraying one's values for external pressures.^[14] Moral internal conflict arises from clashes between different stages of moral reasoning, as outlined in Lawrence Kohlberg's theory of moral development. At the preconventional level, individuals prioritize self-interest and avoidance of punishment, while postconventional reasoning emphasizes universal ethical principles and social justice; tension occurs when these orientations collide, such as when adhering to higher principles demands sacrificing immediate personal benefits or societal norms.^[15] This developmental framework illustrates how advancing through Kohlberg's stages can intensify internal moral strife, particularly during transitions where lower-stage impulses conflict with emerging principled judgments.^[16] Neuroscientific research underscores the amygdala's pivotal role in processing these emotional dimensions of internal conflict, with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies revealing amygdala activation during moral decision-making that tracks the emotional aversiveness of harmful actions.^[17] These findings highlight how the amygdala integrates affective signals, contributing to the subjective experience of anxiety and guilt in internal struggles.^[18]

Literary and Narrative Applications

Role in Character Development

Internal conflict serves as a fundamental mechanism in narratives, deepening character portrayal by exposing underlying motivations, facilitating personal growth, or precipitating tragic outcomes through the character's inner turmoil.^[19] This psychological tension allows authors to illustrate how protagonists grapple with desires, fears, and ethical dilemmas, making their journeys more relatable and multifaceted.^[20] In dramatic structures, internal conflict frequently occupies a central position, propelling character arcs while providing a counterpoint to external events that drive the plot forward. For instance, in Shakespeare's Hamlet, the protagonist's profound indecision—stemming from moral hesitation and existential doubt—intensifies the tragedy, delaying action and amplifying the consequences of his eventual choices.^[21] This inner struggle not only heightens dramatic tension but also underscores the character's complexity, distinguishing it from mere reactive responses to outside forces. The depiction of internal conflict has evolved across literary genres, beginning with classical tragedy where Aristotle identified hamartia—a character's inherent moral flaw or error in judgment—as the catalyst for downfall, reflecting an internal weakness that leads to ignorance and ruin.^[22] In modern realism, this shifted toward more nuanced explorations of everyday psychological strains, emphasizing realistic inner divisions in ordinary lives amid societal pressures. By the 20th century, stream-of-consciousness techniques in works by authors like James Joyce and Virginia Woolf intensified this focus, immersing readers in fragmented thought processes to reveal the chaotic, disintegrating nature of internal conflicts in the modern psyche.^[20]

Examples in Literature

In William Shakespeare's Hamlet (1603), the protagonist grapples with profound internal conflict between his duty to avenge his father's murder and his philosophical doubts about action, mortality, and moral legitimacy, as exemplified in soliloquies like "To be or not to be," which reveal his paralyzing introspection.^[23] This tension drives the narrative, transforming personal hesitation into a catalyst for tragedy, where Hamlet's inner turmoil contrasts with the external demands of revenge.^[24] Fyodor Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment (1866) centers on Raskolnikov's psychological torment, pitting his self-justified theory of extraordinary individuals against overwhelming guilt following the murder of a pawnbroker, leading to a descent into feverish rationalization and eventual confession.^[25] The novel portrays this internal schism as a battle between intellectual arrogance and human conscience, underscoring how unresolved conflict erodes the self.^[26] Among modern works, Toni Morrison's Beloved (1987) explores Sethe's haunting internal struggle between the trauma of slavery—manifest in her infanticide to spare her child from bondage—and the elusive pursuit of healing and remembrance, embodied in the spectral figure of Beloved who forces confrontation with suppressed pain.^[27] This conflict illustrates the lingering scars of historical oppression on individual psyche, where maternal love clashes with survival instincts.^[28] J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye (1951) captures Holden Caulfield's adolescent angst through his internal war between a desire for authentic connection and disdain for societal "phoniness," resulting in alienation and a fantasy of protecting innocence amid his own loss of it.^[29] Holden's erratic narration highlights this rift, emphasizing identity formation as a source of profound personal discord.^[30] Cultural perspectives on internal conflict appear in non-Western literature, such as the Tang dynasty poetry of Du Fu (8th century), where verses like "To My Retired Friend" depict the poet's anguish between personal ambitions for scholarly duty and the harsh realities of societal chaos during the An Lushan Rebellion, blending individual frustration with collective suffering. Du Fu's work reflects a Confucian tension between self-cultivation and civic responsibility, often expressed through imagery of exile and unfulfilled ideals.^[31]

Civil Wars and Intra-State Strife

Civil wars represent a form of internal conflict characterized by armed violence occurring within the borders of a single state, typically involving the government and non-state actors or factions challenging its authority. According to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP), a state-based armed conflict—often synonymous with civil war in this context—is defined as a contested incompatibility over government or territory where armed force between at least one government and an organized non-state group results in at least 25 battle-related deaths in a calendar year.^[32] This threshold distinguishes sustained violence from sporadic incidents, emphasizing organized, protracted strife rather than isolated clashes. Such conflicts have been the predominant type of organized violence globally since World War II, underscoring their role in shaping modern political instability. The causes of civil wars are multifaceted, often rooted in ethnic divisions, resource scarcity, and ideological splits that exacerbate grievances and enable mobilization. Ethnic divisions, for instance, can fuel insurgencies when groups perceive discrimination or seek autonomy, as seen in conflicts like the Rwandan Civil War (1990–1994), where Hutu-Tutsi tensions escalated into genocide.^[33] Resource scarcity, particularly over valuable commodities such as oil or diamonds, provides both motive and financing for rebels, with studies showing that resource-rich but institutionally weak states face heightened risks; the Sierra Leone Civil War (1991–2002) exemplifies how diamond exploitation prolonged fighting.^[34] Ideological differences, especially during the Cold War era, drove many civil wars, as communist insurgencies challenged capitalist regimes, evident in the Nicaraguan Revolution (1979).^[35] Historical patterns from 1946 to 2024, per UCDP and PRIO data, reveal that intrastate conflicts have comprised the vast majority of state-based armed conflicts—over 90% in recent decades—with interstate wars remaining exceptional after decolonization; in 2024, a record 61 state-based conflicts were active, reflecting a shift toward internal strife driven by these factors.^[36]^[37] Key characteristics of civil wars include their classification as non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) under international humanitarian law, governed primarily by Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which mandates humane treatment of combatants and civilians but applies fewer protections than in international conflicts.^[38] Unlike interstate wars, which involve sovereign states and trigger the full Geneva Conventions along with broader international obligations, civil wars pose unique sovereignty implications by directly threatening a government's monopoly on legitimate violence within its territory. This internal nature often leads to blurred lines between combatants and civilians, prolonged durations averaging over seven years, and higher civilian casualties, as governments may prioritize regime survival over restraint.

Group and Organizational Conflicts

Group and organizational conflicts manifest as non-violent tensions within social groups, organizations, or communities, often arising from differing values, resource allocation, or power dynamics. These conflicts can disrupt cohesion but also serve adaptive roles, such as clarifying boundaries or prompting reforms. In political parties, ideological rifts frequently emerge, as seen in the deepening polarization between progressive and conservative factions in the U.S. Democratic and Republican parties, where debates over policy priorities like economic regulation exacerbate internal divisions. Similarly, cultural clashes in communities occur when divergent norms collide, such as disputes over religious practices or immigration integration in multicultural neighborhoods, leading to social fragmentation without escalating to violence.^[39]^[40] Bureaucratic infighting in firms represents another common type, involving turf wars over budgets, authority, or project control among departments, which can stifle innovation and efficiency. For instance, sales and IT teams may clash over technology implementation priorities, resulting in delayed outcomes and heightened stress. Sociological frameworks, notably Lewis Coser's 1956 analysis in The Functions of Social Conflict, posit that such conflicts perform positive functions, including reinforcing group boundaries by heightening awareness of internal differences and external threats. Coser argued that conflicts within groups, like those in labor unions, can integrate subgroups by channeling hostilities outward or prompting structural adaptations that strengthen overall solidarity. A historical example is the 2005 split of major unions such as the Service Employees International Union and Teamsters from the AFL-CIO, driven by strategic disagreements over organizing efforts, which ultimately aimed to revitalize the broader labor movement despite initial fragmentation.^[41]^[42] In modern contexts, corporate whistleblower dilemmas exemplify internal organizational conflicts, where employees face ethical tensions between loyalty and exposing misconduct, such as financial irregularities or safety violations, often leading to isolation or retaliation within the firm. Factional disputes in non-governmental organizations (NGOs) similarly arise from ideological or resource-based divisions, as illustrated by competing political factions in Palestinian communities using traditional conciliation practices to navigate sulh arbitration amid broader tensions. Post-2020, the shift to remote work has amplified intra-team conflicts, primarily due to communication breakdowns and reduced informal interactions. These trends underscore how digital transformations exacerbate existing group dynamics, prompting organizations to adopt mediation strategies for resolution.^[43]^[44]

Resolution and Management

Therapeutic Approaches

Therapeutic approaches to internal conflict focus on psychological and counseling methods that help individuals identify, process, and resolve dissonant thoughts, emotions, and behaviors within themselves. These interventions aim to alleviate the distress caused by conflicting beliefs or values, often manifesting as anxiety or indecision, by promoting self-awareness and adaptive coping strategies. Common modalities include structured talk therapies and mindfulness practices, which emphasize practical tools for long-term management rather than mere symptom suppression. One primary technique is cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which targets internal conflicts by helping individuals reframe dissonant thoughts and align behaviors with core values. In CBT, therapists guide clients to examine automatic negative thoughts that fuel dissonance, using techniques such as cognitive restructuring to challenge irrational beliefs and replace them with balanced perspectives. ^[45] This approach is particularly effective for conflicts arising from cognitive dissonance, where opposing ideas create psychological tension, as it equips individuals with skills to monitor and modify thought patterns in real-time. ^[46] Meta-analyses indicate CBT shows moderate to large effect sizes in reducing anxiety symptoms, with recovery rates of 57–77% observed 2–8 years post-treatment in some studies.^[47] Another widely adopted method is mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), developed by Jon Kabat-Zinn in 1979 at the University of Massachusetts Medical Center as an eight-week program integrating mindfulness meditation, body awareness, and gentle yoga. MBSR addresses internal conflicts by cultivating non-judgmental awareness of present-moment experiences, allowing individuals to observe conflicting thoughts and emotions without reactive escalation, thereby reducing associated stress. ^[48] This technique draws on the emotional dimensions of conflict, such as ambivalence or guilt, to foster acceptance and detachment from unhelpful mental patterns. ^[49] A 2020 meta-analysis specific to young people found a small but significant reduction in anxiety symptoms following MBSR (standardized mean difference = -0.14), though effects on stress and long-term benefits require further research.^[49] Resolution of internal conflicts typically progresses through distinct stages in these therapies. The first stage involves identification of conflict sources, where individuals, often with therapist guidance, pinpoint specific dissonant elements like clashing values or unmet needs through initial assessments or self-reflection exercises. ^[50] Exploration follows, utilizing tools such as journaling to document thoughts and emotions or talk therapy sessions to unpack underlying motivations, promoting deeper insight into the conflict's roots. ^[51] The final integration stage emphasizes goal-setting and behavioral experiments, where clients develop actionable plans to harmonize conflicting aspects, such as prioritizing values or practicing new habits, to achieve sustained equilibrium. ^[52] These outcomes underscore the value of tailored therapeutic interventions in enhancing psychological well-being. Mediation in social and political settings involves structured interventions to resolve internal conflicts within groups, organizations, and states, often through neutral facilitators who promote dialogue and mutual understanding. These approaches aim to address underlying tensions arising from group and organizational conflicts by shifting focus from positional demands to shared interests, thereby fostering sustainable resolutions.^[53] One key method is facilitated dialogue in organizations, exemplified by the Harvard Negotiation Project's interest-based bargaining, developed in the early 1980s by Roger Fisher and William Ury. This approach emphasizes identifying and addressing the underlying interests of parties rather than their initial positions, using techniques such as brainstorming options and establishing objective criteria to generate value-creating agreements. It has been widely adopted in organizational settings to de-escalate intra-group disputes, promoting collaborative problem-solving over adversarial tactics.^[54]^[55] In political contexts, particularly for civil strife, the United Nations peacekeeping operations serve as a primary mediation tool, deploying multinational forces to monitor ceasefires, protect civilians, and facilitate negotiations in internal conflicts. Since the end of the Cold War, UN peacekeeping has increasingly targeted intra-state wars, with missions like those in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Liberia demonstrating how impartial intervention can stabilize volatile environments and support political transitions. Research indicates that such operations significantly reduce violence and the risk of conflict recurrence, particularly for robust missions. As of 2024, there were 61 active peace operations amid a record-high number of global conflicts.^[56]^[57] Truth and reconciliation commissions represent another critical political tool for mediating post-conflict internal divisions, allowing societies to confront past atrocities through public testimony and amnesty processes in exchange for full disclosure. South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established in 1995 under the Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act following apartheid, investigated human rights violations from 1960 to 1994, granting amnesty to over 800 perpetrators while providing reparations recommendations to victims, thus aiding national healing and preventing further strife. Recent studies suggest TRCs can contribute to de-escalation and healing when combined with institutional reforms, though their impacts on recurrence vary by design and context.^[58]^[59]^[60] Social applications of mediation often employ community restorative justice circles to address intra-group disputes, drawing on indigenous and consensus-based practices to rebuild relationships. These circles bring affected parties, including victims, offenders, and community members, into equal dialogue to discuss harms, express needs, and agree on restorative actions, emphasizing empathy and collective accountability over punishment. Implemented in settings like schools and neighborhoods, such as in New Zealand's family group conferencing model adapted for communities, restorative circles have proven effective in resolving disputes by fostering consensus and strengthening social bonds, preventing escalation.^[61]^[62]