It is evident that diversity, the variety, the extensive panoply of conflicts, the different areas in which they operate, can not make us to believe it’s easy to find the nexus of all conflicts. If we reflect a moment on the cast conflictual that invades our gnosis will find: family conflict (with its different variants: parents and children, members of the couple between Yes, adolescents with grandparents); conflicts communal (disputes at the heart of the neighbourhood by the most varied subjects), municipal tensions by seeking solutions to the deficiencies of municipal services); fights in the same building of houses by the use and/or abuse of the communal elements; clashes in the workplace by the allocation of tasks, schedules control, productive premiums determination; fight policy in the bosom of the parties by accessing the management and control of these social organizations; fight policy in national parliaments to support or attack the constituted Government; disputes between countries for the possession of territories, issues that sometimes sink their beginnings in centuries of history. It is possible before such heterogeneity of issues to arise an ark common or, at least, similar? It has been said that the root cause of the conflict is the shortage of resources. As the economy has been calling itself the science of scarcity, because you must manage limited resources, Conflictology poses that since resources are scarce, their administration, the elections that this entails, are the cause of conflictual tendency. We can admit that much of the conflict are developed around elections over priced alternatives. These choices may not only refer to material elements that extend to behavioural components. The struggle of the Nations to expand, grow, seizing territories rich in raw materials, or equipped with unique strategic characteristics, there is no doubt that could encompass on the motivation of the conflict on the basis of finite elements, in this case the territory. .