For many reasons, identity constitutes nowadays vigorous and effective source of conflict. Rapid rise and fall of great powers, the end of the Soviet empire and the demise of communism, and the technological and communications revolution have led not to the end of history, as Francis Fukuyama has argued, but to the return of history in the form of clashes over identity among individuals, groups, and nations. Such clashes can happen at three levels-over trans-national identities, like Islam, national identities, as in Russia, and sub-national identities based on
religious, ethnic, or linguistic divisions, as in Africa or the former Yugoslavia. These have challenged conflict management institutions on each level trans-national, national, and sub-national (12).
The dominant ideologies in the world are Islam, Christianity, Communism, capitalism and others in Asia. The different beliefs of people have been fertilizing source of conflicts particularly of religions which tend to be frequent. A population might be of the same ethnic and cultural background, but divided along religious lines or sometimes within the same religion along sectarian lines. There are many cases in countries such as Sudan, Cyprus, the Balkans, India, the Philippines among other conflictual relationships between the ideologies mentioned above that effectively contribute to creating several strife and turmoil all over the world.
Conflicting perspective on the national identity, especially the ones based on religion is much harder to harmonize. In some instances, the Sudan is an outstanding example where religion, ethnicity, and culture become so intertwined that they are not easy to disentangle. The Zero-Sum conflicts generate challenge in the very notion of sovereignty and the survival of the nation (13)
Contests over seizure power in Africa and other continents are conducive to many crises. Many related facts lead us to say governance is an important source of conflict as reflected by the following facts:
• Recurrent coupd’eats.
• Legitimacy is a debatable issue.
• Power-in sometimes monopolized by certain ethnic groups.
• The absence of real democracy.
• The absence of free and fair elections and institutionalization.
• Political leadership and elites fail to address the fundamental issues and root of the problems as well as aspiration of the citizens.
We can find the reaction in Central and South America, such as the Chiapas in Mexico, and the manifestation of fundamentalism in the Middle East and North Africa particularly Algeria, Egypt, and Sudan.
Types of Conflicts
Demonstrating the types of conflict is necessary. In our classification, we rely on the formal criterion, in other words; we examine the category of parties to a conflict. In this context, we can treat these parties regarding great power conflicts, regional conflicts, and domestic conflicts. However, our emphasis will be on internal conflicts because this category is relevant to the situation in the Sudan.