THERE were two very difficult paths from which to choose to resolve a conflict that had lasted for centuries.

A peaceful settlement necessarily meant that all parties to the conflict had to make concessions. A war path would have meant total destruction and loss of lives.

In the 1990s South Africa chose the former path. All interested parties gathered at the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa). It was not easy. The battle of ideas ensued. They fought until some agreement was reached about the way forward.

Not satisfactory enough to all parties,but not sufficiently annoying to warrant a war.

The end product was hailed the world over - incorrectly referred to as a miracle.

As part of the deal, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established to help heal the wounds of the violent past.

A constitutional assembly drafted an interim constitution, a precursor to the current supreme law of a civilised Republic.

Elections are held every five years and whoever runs the government needs to be elected by the majority of the people.

Through the rule of law, the courts mediate conflict in society and prescribe the necessary remedies. Courts are the final arbiter of conflict. In short, South Africa's evolution to a politically civilised country was dependent on the resolution of conflict through discussion and mediation.

We depended on soft power of moral persuasion rather than a hard military power to arrive at a democratic outcome.

Now, nearly two decades since we became a democracy, negotiation as a tool to settle conflict is teetering on the brink.

Violence - once the instrument of the apartheid state against which many fought - is re-asserting itself.

Soft power - the edifice for a political civilisation - is cracking under the weight of seemingly insurmountable tensions.

We see nothing wrong when senior leaders sing with no regard from whence we come, calling for machine guns.

Others, through songs, call on other citizens to be shot. Didn't we shun this route? Where are the songs for peace?

To cover their own incompetence, some leaders - known for acting as microphone bearers at Codesa - have begun to spread lies about how flawed the Codesa negotiations were.

They claim that the negotiations were meant for expedient purposes and the outcome ought to be reviewed. Even the power of courts, according to this dangerous theory, needs to be reviewed! How society will resolve conflict is not clear.

But the truth is that South Africa developed a model for conflict resolution. We exported it to other countries.

We pride ourselves on having been at the forefront of conflict resolution on the African continent. We are not even ashamed to export it raw, without "beneficiating" it.

Former president Nelson Mandela took it to Burundi. He introduced Marthinus van Schalkwyk, former prominent member of the racist National Party, to Burundi's warring ethnic factions to prove it was not impossible to work with a former enemy.

As Thabo Mbeki's envoy, Cyril Ramaphosa exported it to Ireland. Mbeki himself took it to the rest of the African continent.

He is trying to get it accepted by the Sudanese.

Having done all of this, and having realised that it works, why then rubbish something that made it possible for our county to achieve a relatively peaceful transition - the warlords in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng's East Rand notwithstanding?

Significantly, why have we not entrenched this model in our communities and in every sector of society?

Why the extreme animosity and little conversation about the way forward? Why talk past each other?

Why all the screaming, marches and name-calling between leaders and citizens, and among citizens themselves?

The ubiquitous violence that has become synonymous with service delivery protest suggests we are unable to tap into the rich history that turned the country into a civilised Republic.

During the political negotiations, various factions from disparate backgrounds had to learn to trust each other in order to find solutions to our seemingly intractable problems.

The violent service delivery protests that have turned schools and libraries into ashes are indicative of the breakdown of trust in communities. Citizens have also lost hope in their ability to change things, thus resorting to suicidal tactics.

Relations be-tween the government and business is at an all-time low - a situation that is not ideal for progress.

Trust - the glue that keeps people together - seem to have lost its self-adhesive element. The social fabric is tearing.

It gets worse when the leaders who should restore it are themselves walking symptoms of everything that has gone wrong in our society.

Reported crimes are violent. Family fights are getting ugly and deadly.

More spousal conflicts result in deaths. We seem to be accepting violence as a means to resolve conflict.

Ironically, the more violent we become, the more violence we demand the state to unleash on us to stop our violence.

Was this not white South Africa's response to anti-apartheid violence; demanding the state to unleash its might?

Because the state is one entity that has the legitimate use of violence to protect its territorial integrity and citizens, we are demanding it be more violent beyond the call of duty.

That's how Marikana happened. That's how Andries Tatane was killed. The list goes on and on.

• As part of finding solutions to the problems we face as a country and as a way to preserve negotiation as a tool of conflict resolution, Sowetan will soon launch a national dialogue series. Watch this space.