Escalation is an increase, expansion, strengthening, proliferation of something

What does escalating a dispute, conflict, incident, war, tension or issue mean?

Escalation is, definition

The escalation of the conflict is term (from the English. Escalation letters. climbing with a ladder), denoting a gradual increase, increase, build-up, aggravation, expansion of something. In the Soviet press, the term became widespread in the 1960s in connection with the expansion of the US military aggression in Indochina. Used in relation to armed conflicts, disputes, various problems.

Escalating conflict- this is gradual increase, growth, expansion, build-up (of armaments, etc.), spread (conflict, etc.), aggravation of the situation.

The escalation of the conflict is consistent and steady growth, increase, strengthening, expansion of struggle, conflict, aggression.

The escalation of the conflict is expansion, build-up, increase of something, intensification.

Escalation is the development of a conflict that progresses over time; aggravation of confrontation, in which the subsequent destructive effects of opponents on each other are more intense than the previous ones.

The escalation of war is the militaristic concept of the gradual transformation of a military-political conflict into a crisis situation and into a war.

The escalation of the problem is bringing the problem for discussion to a higher level if it is impossible to solve it at the current one.

Escalation of the customs tariff is increase in customs tax rates depending on the degree of processing of the product.

The structure of tariffs in many countries primarily provides protection for national producers of finished products, especially without hindering the import of raw materials and semi-finished products.

For example, nominal and effective tariffs on food are USA 4.7 and 10.6%, respectively, in Japan - 25.4 and 50.3%, in the European Union - 10.1 and 17.8%. Almost a twofold excess of the actually existing level of taxation of food products over the nominal level is achieved due to the imposition of imported duties on the food products from which they are made. Therefore, it is the effective and not the nominal level of customs protection that is the subject of negotiations during the emergence of trade conflicts between the three centers of the modern market economy.

Tariff escalation of the conflict - an increase in the level of customs taxation of goods as the degree of their processing increases.

The higher the percentage increase in the tariff rate as we move from raw materials to finished products, the higher the degree of protection of manufacturers of finished products from external competition.

Tariff escalation of the conflict in developed countries stimulates the production of raw materials in developing countries and preserves technological backwardness, because only with raw materials, the customs taxation of which is minimal, can they really get through to them. In the same time market finished products are practically closed for developing countries due to the significant escalation of the tariff conflict, which takes place in most developed countries.

So, the customs tariff is an instrument of trade policy and state regulation of the country's internal market in its interaction with the world the market; set of rates systematized in accordance with the commodity nomenclature of foreign economic activity customs fees applicable to goods transported across the customs border; the specific rate of customs tax payable on the export or import of a certain product to the customs territory of the country. Customs taxes can be classified according to the method of collection, taxable object, nature, origin, types of rates and method of calculation. Customs is imposed on the customs value product- normal the price a product that develops on the open market between an independent seller and a buyer, by which it can be sold in the country of destination at the time of filing the customs declaration.

The nominal duty rate is indicated in the import tariff and only roughly indicates the level of customs protection of the country. The effective tariff rate shows the real level of customs taxation of final imported goods, calculated taking into account the duties imposed on intermediate goods. To protect national manufacturers of finished products and to stimulate the import of raw materials and semi-finished products, a tariff escalation of the conflict is used - an increase in the level of customs taxation of goods as the degree of their processing increases.

For example: the level of customs taxation of leather goods, built according to the principle of the production chain (hide - leather - leather products), increases as the degree of processing of the hide increases. V USA the scale of tariff escalation of the conflict is 0.8-3.7-9.2%, in Of Japan- 0-8.5-12.4, c The European Union- 0-2.4-5.5%. According to the GATT, tariff escalation of the conflict is especially strong in developed countries.

Import developed countries from developing countries (import tariff rate, in%)

Escalating conflict

Escalation (from Lat. Ssala - "ladder") means the development of a conflict that progresses over time; aggravation of confrontation, in which the subsequent destructive effects of opponents on each other are more intense than the previous ones. Escalation represents that part of it that begins with the incident and ends with the weakening of the struggle, the transition to the end of the conflict.

Escalation is characterized by the following features:

1. Narrowing of the cognitive sphere in behavior and activity. In the process of escalating the conflict, there is a transition to more primitive forms of display.

2. Displacement of an adequate perception of the other, by the image of the enemy.

Escalation is

The image of the enemy as a holistic view of the opponent, which integrates distorted and illusory features, begins to form in process the latent period of the conflict as a result of perception determined by negative assessments. As long as there is no resistance, until the threats are realized, the image of the enemy is mediated. It can be compared to a poorly developed photographic image, where the image is fuzzy and pale.

V process As the conflict escalates, the image of the enemy manifests itself more and more clearly and gradually replaces the objective image.

Escalation is

The image of the enemy that dominates in a conflict situation is evidenced by:

Mistrust;

Laying blame on the enemy;

Negative expectation;

Identification with evil;

The representation of "zero sum" ("everything that is beneficial to the enemy hurts us" and vice versa);

Deindividualization (“everyone who belongs to this group is automatically our enemy”);

Condolence denial.

Escalation is

Strengthening the image of the enemy is facilitated by:

Growth of negative emotions;

Expectation of destructive actions from the other side;

Negative stereotypes and attitudes;

The severity of the object of the conflict for the person (group);

The duration of the conflict.

Escalation is

It arises as a reaction to the growing threat of possible damage; reduced controllability by the opposite side; inability to realize their interests in the desired volume in a short time; opponent's resistance.

4. The transition from arguments to claims and personal attacks.

Escalation is

When the opinions of people collide, people usually try to argue for them. Others, evaluating a person's position, thereby indirectly assess his ability to reason. A person usually adds significant personality color to the fruits of his intellect. Therefore, criticism of the results of his intellectual activity can be perceived as a negative assessment of him as a person. Criticism in this case is perceived as a threat to the person's self-esteem, and attempts to defend oneself lead to a shift in the subject of the conflict to the personal plane.

5. The growth of the hierarchical rank of interests is violated and protected, its polarization.

More intense action affects the more important interests of the other side. Therefore, escalation can be viewed as deepening contradictions, i.e. as a process of growth of the hierarchical rank of interests is violated.

Escalation is

In the process of escalating the conflict, the interests of opponents seem to be diverted to opposite poles. If in the face of a conflict situation they could somehow coexist, then with the escalation of the existence of some it is possible only by ignoring the interests of the other side.

6. The use of violence.

The characteristic sign of escalation is the use of the last of the arguments - violence. Many violent acts are driven by revenge. Aggression is associated with the desire for some kind of internal compensation (for lost prestige, decreased self-esteem, etc.), compensation for damage. Actions in a conflict can be triggered by a desire for retribution for damage.

7. The loss of the original subject of disagreement lies in the fact that the confrontation, which began through the disputed object, develops into a more global clash, in the process of which the original subject of the conflict no longer plays a major role. The conflict becomes independent of the causes, it was caused, and it continues after they have become insignificant.

8. Expanding the boundaries of the conflict.

There is a generalization of the conflict, i.e. transition to deeper contradictions, many different points of contact arise. The conflict is spreading over a large area. There is an expansion of its temporal and spatial boundaries.

9. Increase in the number of participants.

This can happen in the course of escalation through the involvement of more and more participants. The transformation of an interpersonal conflict into an intergroup one, a quantitative increase and a change in the structure of the groups participating in the confrontation, changes the nature of the conflict, expanding the range of means used in it.

With the aggravation of the conflict, there is a regression of the conscious sphere of the psyche. This process is undulating in nature, based on the unconscious and subconscious levels of mental activity. It develops not chaotically, but in stages, according to the concept of ontogeny of the psyche, but in the opposite direction).

Escalation is

The first two stages reflect the development before the conflict situation. The importance of one's own desires and arguments grows. The fear arises that the ground for a joint solution to the problem will be lost. Mental tension is growing. The measures taken by one of the parties to change the position of the opponent are understood by the opposite side as a signal to escalate the conflict.

The third stage is the actual beginning of the escalation of the conflict. All expectations are centered on actions that replace futile discussions. However, the expectations of the participants are paradoxical: both sides hope by pressure and toughness to cause a change in the opponent's position, while no one is ready to voluntarily yield. A mature view of reality is sacrificed in favor of a simplified approach that is easier to maintain emotionally.

True conflict issues become less important as the face of the adversary becomes the center of attention.

Age levels of emotional and social-cognitive functioning of the human psyche:

The onset of the latent phase;

Latent phase;

Demonstration phase;

Aggressive phase;

Battle phase.

At the fourth stage of functioning, the psyche regresses to approximately the level corresponding to the age of 6-8 years. The person still has the image of the other, but he is no longer ready to reckon with the thoughts, feelings and state of this other. In the emotional sphere, the black-and-white approach begins to dominate, that is, everything that “not me” or “not us” is bad, and therefore leans back.

At the fifth stage of the escalation of the conflict, clear signs of progressive regression are manifested in the form of absolutizing a negative assessment of the opponent and a positive one of oneself. Sacred values, beliefs and higher moral obligations are at stake. Force and violence acquire impersonal forms, the perception of the opposite side freezes in the solid image of the enemy. The enemy is devalued to the state of things and is deprived of human traits. However, these same people are able to function normally within their group. Therefore, it is difficult for an inexperienced observer to perceive deeply regressed perception of others, to take measures to resolve the conflict.

Regression is not inevitable for any person in any difficult situation of social interaction. A lot depends on upbringing, on the assimilation of moral norms and all that is called the social experience of constructive interaction.

Escalation of interstate conflicts

The escalation of an armed conflict has a tactical role in military conflicts and clear rules for the use of armed force.

There are six stages of interstate conflicts.

Escalation is

The first stage of a political conflict is characterized by the formed attitude of the parties regarding a specific contradiction or group of contradictions (this is a fundamental political attitude formed on the basis of certain objective and subjective contradictions and the corresponding economic, ideological, international legal, military-strategic, diplomatic relations regarding data contradictions expressed in a more or less acute conflict form.)

The second phase of the conflict is the determination of the strategy by the opposing sides and the forms of their struggle to resolve the existing contradictions, taking into account the potential and possibilities of using various, including violent means, of the internal and international situation.

Escalation is

The third stage is associated with the involvement of other participants in the struggle through blocs, alliances, agreements.

Escalation is

The fourth stage is the growth of the struggle, right up to a crisis that gradually embraces all participants on both sides and develops into a nationwide one.

Escalation is

The fifth stage of the conflict is the transition of one of the parties to the practical use of force, at first for demonstrative purposes or on a limited scale.

The sixth stage is an armed conflict, starting with a limited conflict (restrictions on the goals, territories covered, scale and level fighting used by military means) and is capable, under certain circumstances, to develop to higher levels of armed struggle ( wars how to continue politicians) of all participants.

In international conflicts, the main actors are predominantly states:

Interstate conflicts (both opposing sides are represented by states or their coalitions);

National liberation wars (one of the parties is represented by the state): anti-colonial, wars of the peoples, against racism, as well as against governments acting in contradiction with the principles of the rule of the people;

Internal internationalized conflicts (acts as an assistant to one of the parties in an internal conflict on the territory of another state).

Escalation is

Interstate conflict often takes the form of war. It is necessary to draw a clear line between war and military conflict:

Military conflicts are less widespread. The goals are limited. The reasons are controversial issues. The cause of the war is deep economic and ideological contradictions between states. Wars are bigger;

War is the state of the entire society participating in it, military conflict is the state of a social group;

War partially changes the further development of the state, a military conflict can lead only to minor changes.

Escalation of World War II in the Far East

The leadership of a distant Asian country, which for millennia did not know military defeats, made the most important conclusions for itself: the Republic of Germany is finally winning in Europe, Russia is disappearing as a factor in the world politicians England is retreating on all fronts, isolationist and materialistic America will not be able to turn into a military giant overnight - such a chance happens once in a millennium. Moreover, dissatisfaction with the United States' sanctions has spread in the country. AND Japan made her choice. 189 Japanese bombers came in from the direction of the sun over the main American base in Hawaii.

Escalation is

A tectonic shift took place in the world struggle. , the military power of which Stalin feared so much, by her actions brought a great overseas power to the camp of the opponents of the "axis" Berlin-Tokyo-Rome.

The self-blinding of the samurai, the criminal pride of Japanese militarism, turned events in such a way that at the edge of the abyss Russian Federation a great ally appeared. The rapidly expanding US military has so far served 1.7 million people, but that number has grown inexorably. The US Navy had 6 aircraft carriers, 17 battleships, 36 cruisers, 220 destroyers, 114 submarines, and the US Air Force had 13,000 aircraft. But much of the American military was chained to the Atlantic. Actually in the Pacific Ocean, the Japanese aggressor was opposed by the joint forces of the Americans, the British and the Dutch - 22 divisions (400 thousand people), about 1.4 thousand aircraft, 4 aircraft carriers with 280 aircraft, 11 battleships, 35 cruisers, 100 destroyers, 86 submarines.

Escalation is

When Hitler learned of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, his delight was genuine. Now the Japanese will completely bind the United States in the Pacific and the Americans will have no time for the European theater of war. United Kingdom will be weakened in the Far East and on the eastern approaches to India. America and England will not be able to help isolated Republic of Germany and Japan Russian Federation... The Wehrmacht is absolutely free to do whatever it wants with its enemy.

Escalation is

The United States has entered the world struggle. Roosevelt sent to Congress has a military budget of $ 109 billion - no one, anywhere, has ever spent so much money a year on military needs. Boeing began to prepare for the release of B-17 (Flying Fortress), and later - B-29 (Super Fortress); Consolidated produced the B-24 bomber (Liberator); organization "North American" - P-51 ("Mustang"). On the evening of the first day of 1942 F. Roosevelt, W. Churchill, USSR Ambassador M.M. Litvinov and the Chinese Ambassador T. Sung signed a document in the Roosevelt cabinet called the "Declaration of the United Nations." This is how the anti-Hitler coalition took shape.

Escalation is

And the Japanese continued a phenomenal streak of victories throughout the first months of 1942. They landed in Borneo and continued to spread their influence over the Dutch East Indies, taking the city of Manado on Celebes with the help of an air assault. A few days later, they entered the Philippine capital Manila, launched an offensive against American forces at Bataan and struck Rabaul, a strategically located British base in the Bismarck archipelago. In Malaya, British troops left Kuala Lumpur. All these messages filled the German leadership with delight. They were not wrong. The Wehrmacht received the necessary time to recover from the Battle of Moscow and decide the fate of the war against the USSR in a carefully prepared summer campaign.

Escalation is

Escalation is

Escalation of the Chechen War 1994-1996

The First Chechen War is a military conflict between Russia and the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria, which took place mainly on the territory of Chechnya in period from 1994 to 1996. The result of the conflict was the victory of the Chechen armed forces and the withdrawal of Russian troops, massive destruction, casualties and the preservation of Chechnya's independence.

Escalation is

Escalation is

The Chechen Republic seceded from the USSR following the secession procedure and the basic law of the USSR state. However, despite this, and the fact that the governments of the USSR, the RSFSR, these actions were recognized and approved, decided not to take into account the norms of international law and its own. Recovering from the political crisis in the country since the end of 1993, the Russian special services begin to exercise increasing influence on the top leadership of the state, and begin to actively intervene in the affairs of the independent states of neighbors (the former republics of the USSR). With regard to the Chechen Republic, an attempt is being made to annex it to the Russian Federation.

Escalation is

Escalation is

A transport and financial blockade of Chechnya was established, which led to the collapse of the Chechen economy and the rapid impoverishment of the Chechen population. After that, the Russian special services began an operation to foment the internal Chechen armed conflict. The anti-Dudaev opposition forces were trained at Russian military bases and supplied with weapons. However, although the anti-Dudaev forces accepted Russian help, their leaders stated that the armed confrontation in Chechnya was an internal Chechen affair and in the event of Russian military intervention they would forget their contradictions and, together with Dudayev, would defend Chechen independence.

Incitement of a fratricidal war, moreover, did not fit into the mentality of the Chechen people and contradicted its national traditions, therefore, despite the military assistance from Moscow and the passionate desire of the leaders of the Chechen opposition to seize power in Grozny on Russian bayonets, the armed confrontation between the Chechens never reached the desired level of intensity, and the Russian leadership decided on the need for its own military operation in Chechnya, which turned into a difficult task given the fact that the Soviet army left a significant military arsenal in the Chechen Republic (42 tanks, 90 units of other armored vehicles, 150 guns, 18 Grad installations, several training aircraft, anti-aircraft, missile and portable air defense systems, a huge number of anti-tank weapons, small arms and ammunition). The Chechens also created their own regular army and began release own machine - "Greyhound".

Escalation is

Escalating conflicts in the Middle East: Iran and Afghanistan (1977-1980)

1. Iran. The relatively successful actions of American diplomacy in the Far East were canceled out by the losses that the United States suffered in the Middle East. Washington's main partner in this part of the world was Iran... The country was ruled authoritarianly by Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who carried out a series of reforms for economic modernization in the 1960s and 1970s. Iran, and also took measures to limit the influence of religious leaders, in particular, by expelling R. Khomeini from the country. Not receiving support for his reforms in the requested amount in the West, the Shah turned to the USSR.

However, the "oil shock" of 1973-1974. gave Iran the necessary resources for economic development - Iran was one of the largest suppliers of "oil" to world markets. Tehran has developed an ambitious plan for the construction of prestigious facilities (nuclear power plants, the world's largest petrochemical plant, metallurgical plants). These programs exceeded the capabilities and needs of the country.

Escalation is

A course was taken to modernize the Iranian army. By the mid-1970s, arms purchases in the United States consumed $ 5-6 billion a year. For about the same amount in the second half of the 1960s, orders were placed for weapons and military equipment in the UK, France and Italy. The Shah, with the support of the United States, achieved the transformation of Iran into the leading military power in the region. In 1969 Iran declared territorial claims to neighboring Arab countries and in 1971 occupied three islands in the Strait of Hormuz when leaving the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean.

Escalation is

Thereafter, Tehran de facto installed the Shatg al-Arab river over a part of the water area of ​​the border with Iraq, which led to the severance of diplomatic relations with Iraq. In 1972, a conflict broke out between Iran and Iraq. Iran began to support the Kurdish opposition movement in Iraq. However, in 1975, Iranian-Iraqi relations were normalized, and Tehran stopped providing assistance to the Kurds. The United States and, considering Iran as an ally, encouraged the Shah's government to play a leading role in the zone Persian Gulf.

Although the Carter administration did not approve of the Shah's repressive policies at home, Washington valued the partnership with Tehran, especially after the threat of the use of "oil weapons" by Arab countries arose. Iran cooperated with the United States and Western European countries to stabilize the energy market. The rapprochement with the United States was accompanied by the penetration of American culture and way of life into Iran. This was in conflict with the national traditions of the Iranians, a conservative lifestyle, a mentality based on Islamic values. Westernization was accompanied by the arbitrariness of the authorities, corruption, structural breakdown of the economy, and a deterioration in the material situation of the population. This multiplied discontent. In 1978, a critical mass of anti-monarchist sentiments accumulated in the country. Spontaneous rallies and demonstrations began to take place everywhere. To suppress the demonstrations, they tried to use the forces of the police, special services and the army. Rumors of torture and murder of arrested activists of anti-Shah protests finally blew up the situation. On January 9, an uprising began in Tehran. The army was paralyzed and did not come to the aid of the government. On January 12, Tehran, captured by the rebels, announced the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran. On January 16, 1979, the Shah, accompanied by family members, left the country.

February 1, 1979 to Tehran from emigration to France the great Ayatollah R. Khomeini returned. Now they began to call him "imam". He instructed his associate Mohammed Bazargan to form an interim government. On April 1, 1979, the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) was officially proclaimed.

On November 4, 1979, Iranian students broke into the US embassy in Tehran and took the American diplomats there as hostages. The protesters demanded "from Washington to hand over the Shah to Iran, who was in the US. Their demands were supported by the Iranian authorities... In reply the president J. Carter on April 7, 1980 announced break diplomatic relations with Iran. Sanctions were imposed against Tehran. J. Carter imposed a ban on import Iranian black gold and announced the freeze of Iranian assets (about $ 12 billion) in American banks. In May 1980, the countries of the European Community joined the sanctions against Iran.

The events in Tehran sparked a second "oil shock" associated with fears of a possible halt in the export of Iranian black gold. Prices prices for oil from 12-13 dollars in 1974 soared to 36 and even 45 dollars in the free market in 1980. until 1982

The international situation has become even more tense after the escalation of the conflict in Afghanistan. Throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s, Afghanistan was shaken by political crises. The situation in the country remained very tense when the coup d'état took place on July 17, 1973. King Zahir Shah, who was undergoing treatment in Italy, was declared deposed, and by authorities King's brother Mohammed Daoud came to Kabul. The monarchy was abolished, and the country was proclaimed the Republic of Afghanistan. The new regime was soon recognized by the international community. Moscow greeted the coup approvingly, since M. Daud was well known in the USSR for many years, holding the post of Prime Minister of Afghanistan.

In relations with the great powers, the new government continued its policy of balancing, giving no preference to any of them. Moscow has stepped up economic and military assistance to Afghanistan, expanding its influence in the Afghan army and providing tacit support for the Afghan People's Democratic Party. M. Daud's visit to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics () in 1974 demonstrated the stability of Kabul's ties with Moscow, loan payments were postponed and new promises were made. Despite Daoud's gradual departure from orientation towards the USSR, the USSR was three times larger than the United States in terms of the amount of assistance provided to Afghanistan. At the same time, Moscow supported the People's Democratic Army of Afghanistan (PDPA, which positioned itself as a local communist party), helping to rally its factions and pushing them to take decisive action against M. Daoud.

Escalation is

On April 27, 1978, in Afghanistan, army officers - members and supporters of the PDPA - staged a new coup d'état. M. Daoud and some of the ministers were killed. in the country passed to the PDPA, which declared the events of April 27 "national democratic revolution". Afghanistan was renamed the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA). The supreme body of power was the Revolutionary Council, headed by the General Secretary of the PDPA Central Committee, Nur Mohammed Taraki.

The USSR, followed by a number of other countries (about 50 in total) recognized the new regime. Relationship with Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (CCCP), based on the principles of "brotherhood and revolutionary solidarity", were proclaimed a priority in the foreign policy of the DRA. In the first months after the April revolution, a series of agreements and contracts were concluded between the USSR and the DRA in all areas of socio-economic, cultural and military-political cooperation, and numerous advisers from the USSR arrived in the country. The semi-allied nature of Soviet-Afghan relations was enshrined in the Treaty of Friendship, Good Neighborliness and Cooperation term for 20 years, signed by N.M. Taraki and L.I.Brezhnev on December 5, 1978 in Moscow. provided for cooperation of the parties in the military field, but did not specifically stipulate the possibility of deploying the armed forces of one side on the territory of the other.

Escalation is

However, within the PDPA itself, a split soon occurred, as a result of which Hafizullah Amin came to power. The socio-economic reforms carried out in the country by force and ill-considered, as well as repression, the number of victims of which, according to various estimates, may exceed a million people, led to the crisis. The government in Kabul began to lose influence in the provinces that came under control leaders of local clans. The provincial authorities formed their own armed units capable of resisting the government army. By the end of 1979, the anti-government opposition, operating under traditional Islamic slogans, controlled 18 of Afghanistan's 26 provinces. There was a threat of the fall of the Kabul government. Amin's positions fluctuated, especially since the USSR stopped considering him as the most convenient figure for implementing socialist transformations in the country.

Escalation is

The Afghan leadership has repeatedly during 1978-1979. appealed to Moscow with a request for an increase in military assistance and the introduction of troops. However, the scenario for the entry of troops was carried out differently than X. Amin had expected. On December 27, 1979, a contingent of Soviet troops entered Afghanistan, along with which one of the formerly exiled leaders of the PDPA, Babrak Karmal, arrived in Kabul from Moscow, whom it was decided to nominate in the USSR for the role of the new Afghan leader. The palace of X. Amin in Kabul was taken by the forces of Soviet special forces, and he himself was killed during the assault.

Soviet interference in Afghan affairs was condemned. He was especially harshly criticized by the United States, and the countries of Western Europe... The leaders of the leading Western European communist parties condemned Moscow.

The most serious consequence of the Afghan events was the deterioration of the international situation in general. In the United States, one suspects that Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (CCCP) preparing for a breakthrough in the area Persian Gulf, to install control over its oil resources. Six days after the start of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, on January 3, 1980, the president J. Carter sent an appeal to the US Senate with a request to withdraw from ratification the signed in Vienna contract SALT-2, which as a result was never ratified. At the same time, the American administration officially announced that it would remain within the limits agreed in Vienna if the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (CCCP) followed suit. The severity of the conflict was a little smoothed out, but the detente came to an end. The tension began to rise.

On January 23, 1980, J. Carter delivered the annual State of the Union Address, in which he announced a new foreign policy doctrine. The Persian Gulf region has been declared a zone of US interests, for the protection of which the United States is ready to use military force. In accordance with the "Carter Doctrine", attempts by any power to establish its own over the Persian Gulf region were previously declared by the American leadership as an encroachment on the important interests of the United States. Washington has clearly stated its intention "to resist such attempts in any way, including the use of military force." The ideologist of this doctrine was Z. Brzezinski, who managed to convince the president that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (CCCP) was forming an “anti-American axis” in Asia within the USSR, India and Afghanistan. In response, it was proposed to create a "counter-axis" (USA-Pakistan-China). The contradictions between Z. Brzezinski and Secretary of State S. Vance, who still considered the priority of the United States to maintain constructive relations with the USSR, led to the resignation of S. Vance on April 2), 1980.

Escalation is

Reacting to the Afghan events, Washington made changes in its approach to the military-political issues of world politics. In the secret presidential directive No. 59 of July 25, 1980, the main provisions of the "new nuclear strategy" of the United States were outlined. Their meaning was to return to the idea of ​​the possibility of winning a nuclear war. The directive emphasized the old idea of ​​counterforce strike, which in the new interpretation was supposed to become a key element of "flexible response". The American side began to proceed from the need to demonstrate to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (CCCP) the US's ability to withstand and win a prolonged nuclear conflict.

The USSR and the USA had a distorted idea of ​​the intentions of the opposite side. The American administration believed that the invasion of Afghanistan meant Moscow's choice in favor of a global confrontation. The Soviet leadership was confident that the Afghan events, which, from their point of view, were of a purely secondary, regional significance, served for Washington only as a pretext for the resumption of the global arms race, which it allegedly always secretly aspired to.

There was a lack of consensus among NATO countries. Western European countries did not consider Moscow's intervention in Afghanistan to be a global event. Detente was more important to them than to the United States. Realizing this, J. Carter constantly warned the European allies against the "mistaken belief in detente" and attempts to maintain constructive relations with Moscow. States of the Western Europe did not want to join American sanctions against the USSR. In 1980, when the United States boycotted the Olympic Games in Moscow, only European countries followed their example. FRG and Norway. But in the sphere of military-strategic relations, the West continued to follow the line of the United States.

Escalation of the war in South Vietnam

On March 8, 1965, under cover of darkness, amphibious assault ships of the US Navy approached the shores of South Vietnam, from which the marines with artillery, tanks, rocket launchers and other military equipment landed on the coast. Helicopter assault forces were deployed in the depths of the territory. Four years later, he admitted that the decision on the actual entry of the United States into the "big war" was made only on the basis of "an analysis of the situation."

Escalation is

As the conflict of aggression escalated, American regular units were more and more involved in hostilities. Any disguise and talk that the Americans were supposedly helping the Saigon authorities only with "advice" and "advisers" were discarded. Gradually, US troops began to play a major role in the fight against the national liberation movement in Indochina. If at the beginning of June 1965 the American expeditionary force in South Vietnam numbered 70 thousand people, then in 1968 there were already 550 thousand people.

Escalation is

But neither the more than half a million army of the aggressor, nor the latest technology used on an unprecedentedly large scale, nor the use of chemical warfare agents on large areas, nor the brutal bombing, crushed the resistance of the South Vietnamese patriots. By the end of 1968, according to official American data, in South Vietnam, more than 30 thousand were killed and about 200 thousand were injured.

Escalation is

More and more people in Washington became convinced that their adventure was doomed to failure. Opposition to the "dirty war" grew and grew in the country, which embraced all strata of American society, including members of the US Congress. This forced Washington to reconsider its approach to the Vietnam War. In the summer of 1969, the reduction of the expeditionary force in South Vietnam began. The Americans embarked on the "Vietnamization" of the ongoing war.

Escalation is

Such tactics of American imperialism followed from the "new policy" of the United States in Asia set out by President Nixon in July 1969. He promised the American public that Washington would not take on new "obligations" in Asia that American soldiers will not be used to quell "internal uprisings" and that "Asians will decide their own affairs." In relation to the Vietnam War, the "new policy" meant an increase in the number, reorganization and modernization of the military-political machine of the Saigon regime, which bore the brunt of the war against the South Vietnamese patriots. The United States provided air and artillery cover for the Saigon forces, cutting back on American ground forces and thereby reducing their losses.

Escalation is

Sources and links

interpretive.ru - National Historical Encyclopedia

ru.wikipedia.org - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

uchebnik-online.com - Tutorials online

sbiblio.com - Library of educational and scientific literature

cosmomfk.ru - Bitter project

rosbo.ru - Business training in the Russian Federation

psyznaiyka.net - fundamentals of psychology, general psychology, conflictology

usagressor.ru - American aggression

history-of-wars.ru - Military history of the Russian Federation

madrace.ru - Crazy Race. Course: World War II

Investor encyclopedia. 2013 .

Synonyms:

• Dictionary of foreign words of the Russian language - (English escalation) expansion, build-up (weapons, etc.), gradual strengthening, spread (conflict, etc.), aggravation (provisions, etc.). Political Science: Dictionary Handbook. comp. Prof. Paul Sanzharevsky I.I .. 2010 ... Political science. Dictionary.
• 
  
  

  We are using cookies for the best presentation of our site. Continuing to use this site, you agree with this. OK

An escalation of a conflict is an increase in confrontation between the parties. Models, types, phases and tactics of behavior may vary.

It is impossible to avoid conflict situations. The problem of their development has been repeatedly raised by professional psychologists and specialists in this field. They often use the term "escalation". What it is, the type and models, how it develops and what it leads to - you can find out about this by carefully studying the article.

What it is

An escalation of a conflict is the development of a conflict situation that progresses over time. The concept is used to define the growing confrontation between the parties, which may result in their negative impact on each other.

The escalation of a conflict situation is understood as a part of it that begins from the moment of a collision of interests and ends with a weakening of the struggle, its end.

Models and types of conflict escalation

Spiral escalation is characterized by the following features:

• the cognitive sphere in behavior or work is significantly reduced, in the process there is a transition to a primitive form of display;
• adequate perception is supplanted due to the implantation of an "enemy" image;
• signs include a shift from argumentation to attacks;
• the use of violence;
• loss of the original subject of the conflict. It is replaced by the desire to win in a conflict situation, to "lower" the enemy.

The enemy image is a representation of the opposing side. He distorts the traits about him, begins to take shape during the latent stage of the conflict situation. The image is supplied with extremely negative ratings.

If there is no threat from his side, then the image may be of an indirect nature. Some experts compare it to a fuzzy and blurry photograph in which there is a faint image.

Conflict escalation models:

1. "Offense - defense"- one of the parties begins to make demands, the second refuses them and advocates the preservation of its interests as a principle. Failure to comply with the requirements put forward by one of the parties sets up the nomination of repeated requests, more stringent in nature. Harshness begins to be accompanied by irrational behavior, which contributes to the manifestation of anger, despair and anger.
2. "Attack - Attack"- a typical conflict situation, manifested in the alternate intensification of the aggressive behavior of the parties. Example: In response to a specific request, a more stringent request is made. Both sides are "captured" by negative emotions that they cannot get rid of. At the same time, even the harmless proposals of the other side are rejected as unacceptable, unacceptable. Both participants are driven by the desire to "punish" the enemy for his thoughts and actions.

Stages and phases of development

The escalation of the conflict goes through the following development phases:

1. "Gain"- the interests of the parties begin to clash more and more often and noticeably stronger, the tension between the opponents becomes noticeable, which can be removed by conversation. The stage is characterized by the absence of parties or separate camps, the parties are ready to cooperate, and this desire exceeds the desire for competition.
2. "Polemics"... Essential characteristics: contradictions begin to be expressed in debates, different points of view lead to a clash of views. Both sides believe that they are using rational confirmation, but verbal abuse is beginning to be observed. Groups are formed around the sides, the composition of which often changes.
3. Third stage conflict occurs if during a period of controversy the problem has not been resolved. Its signs are: the transition to proving one’s rightness in practice, through deeds, the fear of being wrong, the prevalence of pessimistic expectations.
4. "Image"- stereotypes are included in the conflict, false rumors are spread, the image of the enemy is created, the recruitment of supporters, the irritation of the parties.
5. "Loss of face"... Features of the stage: integrity is lost in terms of moral thinking, experience, not only the image of the enemy, but also the image of "I" becomes distorted, does not correspond to reality. Other features of the fifth stage: a feeling of disgust develops towards the rejected person, the rejected, in turn, lose receptivity, try to isolate themselves, “get lost”.
6. "Threat Strategy"- characterized by the fact that supporters take various actions aimed at showing decisiveness, creating actions of a forced nature, initiative is lost, the time required for making a decision is significantly reduced, panic is gradually increasing, the parties are guided by other people's advice, and are less and less independent. At this stage, the conflict becomes a direct clash, it already carries a threat.
7. "Limited strikes"- in psychology, it is believed that at this stage, when making decisions, the moral qualities of a person are not perceived, the harm done is perceived as some kind of "gain" for their side.
8. "Defeat"- the name of the eighth phase. It has the following features: the desire to destroy the enemy's system, the total destruction of the other side in the physical, material, social, spiritual planes.
9. "Together into the abyss"- the sides do not see the way back, a total confrontation begins, the main thing for the side is the destruction of the enemy. At this stage, a characteristic sign is observed - the willingness to harm the enemy at the cost of his own fall.

Behavior tactics

The escalation of the conflict involves the use of the following behavioral tactics by the parties:

1. Capture and the subsequent retention of the object of the conflict situation. This tactic is used when the subject of the conflict is material.
2. Violence... With this behavior, the following techniques are used: bodily harm, damage to property values, infliction of pain.
3. Psychological abuse: the desire to hurt the feelings of the other side (self-esteem, pride).
4. Coalition... This tactic provides for strengthening your own rank in a situation by joining your group with a larger number of participants: leaders, friends, etc.
5. Pressure... Behavior is based on demands and orders, accompanied by threats. This category includes blackmail, issuing ultimatums.
6. Friendliness... This behavior provides for a correct treatment, a willingness to resolve the current situation, to apologize.
7. Deal... The tactic is based on mutual apologies and promises. The mechanisms of such behavior allow resolving a conflict situation.

The ladder (escalation) of conflict can have both negative and positive consequences. Each of them will have an impact on the further development of opponents and their "camps".

Video: Escalating Conflict: What It Is

In my article "How to write a good SLA", I mentioned that the SLA simply asks to add an escalation procedure. I want to say a few words for escalation.

In my opinion, few people understand the escalation in IT. In ITIL, it is somehow vaguely defined. Accordingly, further, when trying to introduce it, the degree of turbidity only increases. Neither Google nor Yandex helps to find anything intelligible. Instead of explaining escalation simply and clearly (as I will), the authors begin to introduce some new terms, indicate the difference between functional and hierarchical escalation (why bother?), Broadcast something about automatic escalation, nothing without explaining and diverting to the side. And at the same time, from the context, we can assume that escalation is either a synonym for transferring a request to another executor, or to another department, or attracting additional resources, or increasing priority. And sometimes I just get lost to understand the meaning. All this makes me personally feel either "twist and twist, I want to deceive", or banal incompetence.

The automatic "escalation" of a request to another level of support if (sic!) The current executor does not meet the deadline specified in the SLA looks especially nice (I can’t resist and give this example). That is, being a performer, we accept the request and hold on with all our might, do nothing about it until it is about to be almost expired, and ... bam! - an automatic "escalation" is triggered, which reassigns the request to someone else. Profit! .. The main thing is to control yourself and do nothing. One could laugh heartily, but in some places it is precisely this "escalation" scheme that is used, passing off as the best IT practices!

So what is escalation, who needs it and why? Now I will tell you my understanding, after which you, I hope, will love escalation as much as I do. Hold on tight to the chair.

First, I will debunk the above, why this is is not an escalation.

Escalation is not request reassignment. If only for the simple reason that reassigning a request to another executor is called "reassigning a request to another executor". Not escalation. And in general, it is absolutely impossible to reassign a request if the contractor has already started work. The only correct way to transfer the request, which I know, is when the new performer takes the request for himself voluntarily, and only after the prior consent of the current performer. Because you took (gave) a request - decide to the bitter end. And to sort out the consequences "for that guy" after the reassignment is still a pleasure. This event is more of a force majeure than an ordinary one. Moreover, no automatic reassignments. Otherwise, the performers will run from work.

Also escalation is not a priority increase. Because even a person who does not own the situation (but who possesses logic) immediately raises the question, how then to escalate the requests of the highest priority? And, if we have only four priorities in numbers from 1 to 4, then you can escalate a maximum of three times, changing the priority from 4 to 3, from 3 to 2 and from 2 to 1 and that's it, right? It looks suspicious and illogical. And then, if the performer does not respond to us on the third priority from vacation, then why will he suddenly start on the second?

What, then, is escalation? Definition:

Escalation is a procedure for drawing attention to an individual request when the progress of the request is not satisfied with something.

That's it, and not otherwise. To draw attention. With the naked eye, a connection with an increase in priority is visible - a suddenly increased priority, like other similar awkward actions, will attract attention, so this behavior partly looks like an escalation. But only if the performer did not go on vacation. Well, do not forget that to the awkward actions of one side, the other can react symmetrically. To any of your questions, so to speak, our arbitrary answer. So it is more correct to understand escalation precisely as attracting attention. And there, a competent person will figure out whether to increase the priority, whether to attract additional expertise, or simply to give the performer the necessary acceleration, up to a complete change of his composition. That is, this definition is consistent with previous attempts to determine escalation.

But this definition is better because it allows you to escalate requests as many times as needed, regardless of a finite number of priorities and support levels.

Move on. Every escalation must have a reason... In other words, something is wrong with the request, for some reason it was necessary to draw attention to it. The initiator must indicate this reason during the escalation. There are no escalations without a reason. Typical examples of reasons for escalation are:

• dissatisfaction with the progress of work, it is required to indicate what exactly (example: no action was taken on a critical issue for a week)
• new essential circumstances of the problem to be solved have emerged: the timing, volume and other characteristics of the problem being solved have changed, which translate the problem into a new quality (example: not one record in the database is damaged, but many records)
• one of the VIPs is involved (example: the department director took the decision under his personal control)
• other significant circumstances.

If the reason for the escalation is a deadline, then it is necessary to indicate these deadlines and clearly state why this deadline is important, and what happens if the deadline is violated.

The reason for the escalation is not:

• the user escalated the request (and where, in fact, is the reason?)
• I want a solution right now (why not yesterday? or tomorrow?)
• escalated (by whom and for what reason?)

and other similar meaningless phrases.

If the initiator did not indicate a clear reason for the escalation, then the first question when analyzing the escalation should be exactly the request to indicate the reason. Well, everyone has it, the person worried, missed an important thing. Seriously, escalations are often done under harsh stressful conditions. But if the reason is still not specified, then the escalation should be closed, because there is no reason for the escalation. If you can't formulate a clear reason for escalation, then this is a good reason to think, maybe you really don't need to escalate anything?

The reason for the escalation is usually stated not technical language, you need to state where and how the problem hinders the business. This is the so-called business reason. Agree that a minor technical problem can actually cause a lot of trouble for a business, and vice versa. Compare:

• tech., Several records in the GL_JE_LINES table are damaged, you need to fix it before the 20th of the month.
• business, The transactions in the ledger have been damaged, it is impossible to close the period and provide accounting and tax reporting, enter operations for the next period, from the 20th the Tax Service will begin to charge penalties and fines.

The first reason will be clear only to a narrow circle of technical specialists (and often only after a long analysis), while the second tells everyone that the whole business has already stopped, and soon it will also get money.

Providing a clear reason for the escalation is a great filter that will skip all cases when you really need it and cut off most of the inadequacy.

What should happen after someone escalates the request. Escalation needs to be considered. The executor of the request or someone more competent should appear (especially if the reason for the escalation is the actions of the executor himself) and respond clearly. Generally speaking, “react clearly” means the following: analyze the current situation with the request in the light of the cause of the escalation and propose to the initiator a plan of further actions that will suit both parties and eliminate the cause of the escalation. Then proceed according to this plan. Consideration of escalation must be prompt, unavoidable and of good quality. There is no joke here.

By the way, the initiator of the request may not necessarily escalate, sometimes essential information may come from someone else. Also, for the sake of completeness, I note that escalation does not necessarily lead to an increase in priority or replacement of the performer, rather it usually does not. Priority is only matched when necessary, if you missed the mark earlier or the circumstances have changed. It may also turn out that the entire plan of action will be "continue further in the same mode" if the escalation was not in the business, or it may turn out that the priority will be downgraded as part of the escalation. Of course, you have to increase priorities during escalations more often, this action requires efficiency and, possibly, other adjustments in the work on the request, but you can also lower the priority in a regular manner. The main thing in escalation is that attention was attracted and led to action to eliminate the cause of the escalation and restore order. Escalation considerations also often act as arbitration on a project if the initiator and implementer cannot agree. The initiator sometimes wants the strange, and sometimes the impossible.

And here we are already smoothly approaching the question, why do we need escalations at all?

The initiator is more or less clear. For the initiator of the request, this is an opportunity to express his displeasure and disagreement, as well as to resolve any abnormal situation. This is in good agreement with the intuitive understanding of the word "escalation", which allows the use of escalations, including for ordinary users of IT systems, they can use escalation quite competently and in time without even reading any regulations and instructions.

But why does the performer need escalation? And is it necessary? Performers often do not understand this, and therefore do not like escalation. But in vain.

At first glance, the situation seems to be asymmetrical. For the initiator, this is an opportunity to knock on the table with his fist and make a row, and for some reason the performer must jump up and react to this. Moreover, jump quickly and respond appropriately. He has nothing else to do?

Let's see what happens if there are no escalations. If the initiator has reason for dissatisfaction, then he will wait, wait, wait until patience runs out. And then we have a scandal, swearing, gut blood, complaints about everything that can be remembered up to the third generation, the involvement of bosses, stress, nerves and other industrial horrors. And if, at the same time, there really is a reason for dissatisfaction, and in the past there were flaws (as often happens because nobody "s perfect), then it will not seem enough to anyone. In addition, during such showdowns, it becomes very difficult to return The initiator is not ready to cooperate, does not want to compromise and give up anything, the solution is required right now and in the best possible way, on a silver platter. Resolving such scandals is, oh, how difficult it is.

Now we consider what will happen in the same situation if there is a well-tuned and well-functioning escalation mechanism. The initiator, instead of enduring to the last, will escalate the request as soon as it realizes that something is wrong with it. The reason for the escalation will be investigated, the situation considered, the necessary actions planned. The work will not decrease, this is a fact, but it will remain in the normal mode, and the interaction will remain constructive. If the plan is not good, then most likely another escalation will follow, that is, mistakes are unpleasant, but not fatal. The chance to improve will be maximum. And even if the initiator, for whatever reason, did not use the escalation, then instead of all the horror from the previous paragraph, the situation will be resolved with one question to the initiator himself (and, possibly, his leader): "why didn't you escalate?"

And so it turns out that a working escalation mechanism allows the contractor to be guaranteed to avoid complaints about their work. Moreover, qualitatively and systematically. I will repeat it again for better memorization and even put it in a frame:

A working escalation mechanism allows the contractor to be guaranteed to avoid complaints about their work

Few? When escalating the initiators themselves show which requests the executor should pay special attention to... Moreover, in advance, before it exploded, and precisely at the moment when they themselves are ready to work constructively on their part. Themselves. In advance. Constructively. Just some kind of holiday.

Still not enough? For the project manager (department, department, group), participation in escalations gives an understanding of the current situation on the project and invaluable information for assessing the work of subordinates. It is precisely in those circumstances where the qualities of the performers' work are manifested most clearly. And the manager knows all the current potentially conflicting requests. They are known at the level at which he himself participates in escalations.

So it turns out that in fact the executor needs the escalation mechanism almost more than the initiator. In my opinion, for the sake of this it is worth tormenting with a prompt and high-quality review of escalations.

Still not escalating? In vain ...

P.S. Changed the title of the article to a more understandable one

Tags: Add Tags

The section is very easy to use. In the proposed field, just enter the desired word, and we will give you a list of its meanings. I would like to note that our site provides data from various sources - encyclopedic, explanatory, word-formation dictionaries. Also here you can get acquainted with examples of the use of the word you entered.

Escalation

escalation in the crossword dictionary

New explanatory and derivational dictionary of the Russian language, T. F. Efremova.

escalation

f. Gradual increase, expansion, growth.

Encyclopedic Dictionary, 1998

escalation

ESCALATION (English escalation) expansion, build-up (of armaments, etc.), gradual strengthening, spread (conflict, etc.), aggravation (situation, etc.).

Escalation

(English escalation), expansion, build-up (of armaments, etc.), spread (conflict, etc.), aggravation (provisions, etc.).

Wikipedia

Escalation

Escalation- a gradual increase, strengthening, expansion of something (for example, corruption in power, or the escalation of war); building up.

The concept of "escalation" became widely used during the Cold War era. There is also the term “escalation of the conflict”. Conflict escalation plays a tactical role in military conflicts and has clear rules for the use of armed force.

Examples of the use of the word escalation in the literature.

For every escalation of our efforts, for each expansion of the front of the attack on the Khtorran infection, it responds with a new spread in breadth and new adaptations that nullify all our efforts.

Reagan responded to Gorbachev's program of building a nuclear-free world escalation military programs, the actual withdrawal from the SALT II Treaty and the bombing of Libya.

This resulted in escalations socio-technical methods: bombs exploded with bombnieres and fragrant bouquets, and votolkovniki and reproaches rattled like Jericho trumpets.

And if we proceed from the premise that Wilhelm's military propaganda, incendiary provocations, an almost mystical cult of the army and the proclamation of Pan-German ideas, combined with escalation weapons in Germany, became the fault of the First World War, it should be assumed that his brain damage also had a share in this.

But after the introduction of armed detachments in Sukhumi, virtually uncontrolled processes began in Abkhazia, which caused escalation wars and subsequent phenomena.

One of the important points demonstrated using the proposed scheme is the fact that no open conflict can last indefinitely, for each conflict there is a limit escalations, which is determined by the balance of forces of the parties, the environment in which the conflict proceeds, the governing influences on the conflict, and many other factors.

There are no patterns according to which the conflict must necessarily develop to the limit escalations on the contrary, the meaning of the conflictological examination is precisely to identify the ways and mechanisms of either conflict prevention or its early de escalations.

With such a development of events, a protracted ethnic conflict is usually formed, for which such destructive consequences are not characteristic as for a conflict at the limit escalations, but it represents the path to a socio-ethnic crisis, and often of a regional nature, even if the conflict itself was local in nature.

About a month later, Milosevic's position changed - he no longer wanted to escalations conflict, asked to stop the war.

Attempts by the Moldovan authorities to restore order on the left bank led to open resistance, which quickly escalated into sporadic military actions with daily escalation.

In our time, there have been two famous cases of surprise attack without provocation from the victim, which ended in failure: the German campaign of a phased escalations aggression against the rest of Europe and an attack by the Japanese in the Far East.

She knew from past experience that every week of delay in writing a thank you note resulted in escalations the inconvenience she was experiencing.

Anne believes that the translators began to root for the participants in this damned dispute among spiders, and the spread of rot became only escalation the usual disagreement of zipheads.

You'd better not remind me about yesterday, - I start to boil, but Seryoga makes a peaceful hand gesture - they say, everything is forgotten, and I decide not to study escalation conflict.

It is good that nature itself poses a barrier to psychopharmacological escalations.