Conflict Resolution

Front 1

Realistic group conflict theory

Back 1

previous school of conflict resolution - a very rational interaction between people - hostilities arise as a result of conflicting goals and competition over limited resources

Front 2

missing info of Realistic group conflict theory

Back 2

realistic group conflict theory doesn't take into account other factors that could cause conflict i.e:

sides don't trust each other

sides hate each other

the conflict cannot be resolved in a realistic way

Front 3

Relative depravation theory

Back 3

one side belives they are deprived of what they should rightfully have - everything is relative to how you perceive it.

Front 4

basic psychological needs theory (Maslows)

Back 4

people aren't fighting for physical or material things but for psychological needs of security,equality, identity, feeling of confidence. recognition and respect. - these basic needs cannot be negotiated away

Front 5

in group and out group

Back 5

the group you and the other group

Front 6

intractable conflict

Back 6

total violant protracted conflict - unsolvable and sero sum in nature. - requires extensive investment from all aspects of society.

Front 7

Scapegoat

Back 7

establishment of a conflict with an outside rival to end an internal conflict.

Front 8

minimal inter-group situation ( UK + USSR = unite against Nazi Germany)

Back 8

potential for conflict between a divided group that can be solved by creating a super-goal or common enemy for both groups -

Front 9

Zero-Sum Game

Back 9

A situation in which one person's gain is equivalent to another's loss -

Front 10

Win-Win game

Back 10

the perception that both sides have won

Front 11

two level game (

Back 11

balance between managing and resolving the in-group conflict and dealing with the out-group conflict as well

Front 12

social identity theory

Back 12

people want to have a positive self-image and define themselves as both individuals and part of the the in-group - what the group is about inflences my self image. done by comparing in group to other group

Front 13

who do we compare ourselves to in the "social identity theory"

Back 13

people in the in-group compare themselves to other groups that will make the in-group look better. the comparisson must be a justifiable one - a college student cant compare himself to a kid in kindergarden.

Front 14

what do you do when the comparison of the "social identity theory"

Back 14

1. leave your group

2. change the group that is being compared to

3. change the group from within for the better.

4. change the content of comparison.

Front 15

Ethos of Conflict

Back 15

a society in conflict shares with one another the central beliefs that provide a guide for a society that shows the shared state of mind and aspirations for the future:

Front 16

8 aspects of ethos of conflict

Back 16

1. Justification of own goals

2. delegitimization of the opponent

3. self-victimhood

4. positive self-image

5. social belief about security

6. patriotism

7. unity

8. perception of the in-group as peace oriented

Front 17

functions of the Socio-psychological infrastructure

Back 17

it helps society involved in conflict meet chalenges like stress deprived needs and withstanding the enemy

Front 18

elements of socio-psychological infrastructure

Back 18

1. illuminates the conflict

2. justificaiton of in group behaviour

3. differentiation between in-group and out-group

4. preparedness

5. motivation for unity and mobilization

Front 19

1. illuminates the conflict

Back 19

society seeks a meaningful understanding of the situation - in order to have an organized and coherent perspective of the world

Front 20

2. justification of in group behaviour

Back 20

justifies otherwise morally unacceptable behaviour - enabling the in-group to harm and even commit attrocities against the out-group

Front 21

3. differentiation between in and out group

Back 21

in-group's superiority over the out-group:

attributing blame for the conflict on the out group.

out-group is delegitimized as evil while glorfying the victims of the in-group

Front 22

4. preparedness

Back 22

society is alert and ready for threats and violence and is ready for difficulty of life during conflict -

Psychological preparedness, coping mechanisms

+ low expectations

Front 23

motivation for unity and mobilization

Back 23

focusing on the goals and delegitimizing the out-group

Front 24

importance and role of group narrative

Back 24

gives a story that explains who the (in-group) is and what they have in common. conflicts require a lot of time, energy and resources - it requires a organized story to match all levels of the group - it needs to be encouraging, Easy, black and white - it renforces ethos of conflict

Front 25

construction of conflict supporting narratives

Back 25

methods used to achieve simplified and distorted group narratives:

1. reliance on supportive sources

2. magnification of supportive themes

3. marginization of contradictory infomration

4. biased interpretations

5. omission of contradictory contents

6. omission of contradictory contents

7. using of framing language

Front 26

1. reliance on supportive sources

Back 26

disregarding and minimization of sources that contradict the themes of the in-group

Front 27

2. magnification of supportive themes

Back 27

exaguration of:

justness of goals,

delegitimization of out-group

patriatsim

new information that supports one of these three themes is brought to front line.

Front 28

3. marginalization of contradictory information

Back 28

hiding or minimization of exposure of information that contradicts the themes of the narrative

Front 29

4. biased interpretations:

Back 29

events will be rpesented in manner that supports the themes of the narrative

Front 30

5. fabrications of supportive contents

Back 30

information that does not have actual evidence will be used to create stories that promote major themes

Front 31

6. omission of contradictory content

Back 31

suppresion of content that contradicts the themes

Front 32

7 using framing language

Back 32

using specific language dictating the way people will perceive reality

Front 33

Collective amnesia

Back 33

groups in conflicts suppress evidece that contradicts it's narrative - and would shatter the justness of the goals in the conflict/undermine the moral image of the group

Front 34

mirror image bias

Back 34

assumption that the other side thinks the same way that we do.

Front 35

homogeneity bias

Back 35

view of the out-group as uniform - all the people are the same and believe the same thing - all palestinaians are hamas

Front 36

tendency to see gaps between the groups as much bigger

Back 36

belief that in-group and out-group are much more different than what they really are - these imaginary gaps are enlarged during times of conflict

Front 37

attribution errors

Back 37

the difference in how we attribute qualities to ourselves compared to others - in-group looks at behavior in a positive light while when the out-group does the same thing they look at it in the negative light

Front 38

fundamental attribution error

Back 38

when in-group does something good it is because of good nature

when in-group does something bad it is because of circumstance

when out-group does something good it is because of circumstance

when out-group does something bad it is because of bad nature.

Front 39

hostile media effect

Back 39

information from a third party is percieved as subjective and contradicting the in-group narrative

Front 40

biased assimilation

Back 40

each side interprets information as something that confirms their narrative (position). each side will interpret the same info differently.

Front 41

double standard

Back 41

The tendency to think that when we do something it is alright but when the other party does it is considered wrong.

Front 42

stereotype

Back 42

instinctive process of giving attributes and perceptions that are connected to a category that we make and attribute to people and groups - can be positive or negative.

Front 43

acceptance confirmation process

Back 43

evaluating information in a way that will strengthen narrative

Front 44

false consciousness

Back 44

the stronger group tells the weaker group that they are weaker and the weaker group begins to believe this situation. this is done through

1. education and socialization

2. Rationalism - the weaker state convinces itself that the situation is like the stronger group says it and can not be changed

3. role of gatekeeper- leadership of weaker group want to keep the status-quo as they keep the power.

Front 45

culture of conflict

Back 45

brought about by the prolonged experience of life in a intractable conflict - determines what people find valuable, how to behave, how to wage dispute: made up of 4 aspects

1. extensive sharing

2. wide application

3. apperance in the educaiton system

4. expression in cultural products

Front 46

extensive sharing

Back 46

establishment of group emotions

emotions are shared via families, teachers and all agents of socialization

Front 47

wide application

Back 47

When the conflict plays a role in all aspects of life and is always present in some form.

Front 48

apperance in the education system

Back 48

The conflict starts to appear in the education system (text books, teachers) that's how new generation is exposed to ethos of conflict

Front 49

expression in cultural products

Back 49

The conflict is expressed in things such as books, TV etc.

Front 50

conflict prevention

Back 50

The process of stopping a conflict before it even starts. almost never works - we are actually trying to prevent the conflict from escalating (conflict management)

Front 51

institutional conflict prevention

Back 51

Power sharing and assimilation through institutions and hereby creating limits of activity.

Front 52

federalism/confederation

Back 52

the federal government gives loca/regional power or autonomy to specific groups - minority groups may not have representation in the federal level but they have minority autonomy on local level - maintain culture langauge and identity

Front 53

problem with federalism/confederation system

Back 53

dividing up territory and empowering separate groups may just create even larger gaps between groups

Front 54

consociationalism/confessionalism (switzerland)

Back 54

groups recieve proportional representation in the government - ensures different factions in society that are in conflict to have an avenue to express themselves

Front 55

problem with consociationalism/confessionalism (switzerland)

Back 55

building a government structure on the fact that groups are in conflict - while trying to prevent future conflict between the groups - permanently entrenching this structure of government

Front 56

Ad-Hoc conflict prevention

Back 56

relates to the steps right after the conflict became violent

Front 57

a priori conflict prevention

Back 57

steps right before the conflict became violent

Front 58

types of conflict prevention

Back 58

measures taken to keep low-level or long-term disputes from escalating -

1. structural conflict prevention - done from within the system and llong before escalations.

2. immediate intervention: right before escalation

Front 59

Peace-Keeping

Back 59

international civil and military operation aimed to reduce the cause of conflict among belligerents - employees a diverse spectrum of objectives to encourage peace.

Front 60

structural conflict prevention

Back 60

aims not only to reduce violence but addresses its root causes and the environment that produced it

Front 61

conflict management

Back 61

effort to descalize the conflict not to prevent/bring it to an end all togethor.

Front 62

controlled violence

Back 62

fighting is a given in a conflict - the aim of leadership is to prevent confrontations that escalate, reducing mutual defensive measures that create security dilemmas and finding bases for cooperation

Front 63

deterence

Back 63

taking actions that convince the other state not to act

1. people and states are rational actors

2. outsiders can influnece the choices and decisions of another group

3. the other side understands what you're saying in the way you intend it to mean

Front 64

unilateralism

Back 64

one sided action to reduce the conflict - as the in-group don't feel that they have a partner to resolve the conflict

Front 65

unilateralism and disengagement

Back 65

several types of territorial disengagements:

1. dispute is between two parties with no border and there is a unilateral disengagement (redrawl of forces) without an agreement the conflict will end (vietnam)

2. this is not the case with parties that share borders (israel and Gaza)

Front 66

when and how do conflicts end

Back 66

1. both sides come to an agreement/ceasefire

2. one party achieves military vicotry

3. both parties are given external incentives to cease the conflict

Front 67

Ripeness

Back 67

readiness to conduct negotiations two things have to happen

1. mutually-hurting stalemate - both sides need to realize they cant win

2. both sides need to have the perception that no way out + there is a partner to work with

Front 68

Ending conflict in peaceful ways

Back 68

1. direct negotiations

2. mediation

3. arbitration

Front 69

third party intervention

Back 69

used when the parties to the conflict can't resolve it on their own. they

intervene in disputes not only to appease or end a conflict but to support one side or try to win both sides over (get something out of it)

Front 70

binding vs. non binding procedures

Back 70

arbitration is considered binding it can however be none binding if their decision cannot be imposed on the parties and the arbitrator remains totally removed from the settlement process

Front 71

motivations for mediators to get involved

Back 71

1. economic

2. ideological

3. strengthening rleations with one or multiple parties

4. expanding influnece into the region

5. denying another third party to get involved

6. fears that not intervening means the conflict will become something that harms them

7. fears that not intervening will escalate the conflict and draw others into it.

8. want to ensure the outcome of the conflict will be specifically good for them

Front 72

parties motivation for mediation

Back 72

1. dont trust the other side and believe a third party will be objective

2. perhaps by having a third party present the can reach an agreement that's better for them

3. the professionalism and expertise the third party may bring to the table

4. the third party can act as a scapegoat - to blame for the concessions.

5. a third party may guarantee the outcome of the negotiations and ensure the parties stick to the agreement

Front 73

role of neutrality in mediations

Back 73

mediator's neutrality is not the most important aspect (none existant) of the third party. what is really important is the party's ability to deliver and make things happen.

Front 74

activities in the work of mediators

Back 74

1. communication - conveys messages from each party

2. formulation - gives suggestions to the agreement

3. manipulation - actually can remove and add stuff to the agreement (incentives and threats)

Front 75

factors that affect which strategy the third party uses

Back 75

1. previous relationship with the parties and between the parties

2. objectives of the mediation (for the third party)

3. intensity of the conflict (more intense conflict higher involvement)

Front 76

negotiations by representatives

Back 76

representatives tend to be more conententous than a person representing himself - they believe that the people they are representing favour contentous behaviour

Front 77

intermediaries

Back 77

group representatives act as the intermediaries between the representatives of the other group and their own group, conveying messages and advocate their side to the other side.

Front 78

measuring success of mediation

Back 78

objective - if violence is reduced, an agreement has been reached.

subjective: if participants can say that they're satisfied with the process

Front 79

Narcotic effect

Back 79

when sides become totally dependent on the third party and can't do anything without them.

Front 80

chilling effect

Back 80

when the presence of a third party causes the side to present more extreme positions (as he is on their side)

Front 81

international adjudication

Back 81

a method of international dispute settlement that involves the referall of the dispute to an impartial third-party tribunal - BINDING DECISION

Front 82

arbitration and litigation

Back 82

when two sides have a third party, usually a judge settle a specific dispute. decision is binding. the parties agree ahead of time that any decision made is the decision that stands

Front 83

courts

Back 83

a tribunal presided over by a judger or judges. parties to a conflict will often refer to a court to settle disputes the ruling of court is binding

Front 84

biases of courts

Back 84

althought courts were costructed to be objective, in many cases they aren't. often judges have subjective opinions that can be depedent on sociatal norms - even more extreme in countries with juries

Front 85

international courts

Back 85

these exist to settle international disputes, though countries rearely go to international courts

Front 86

ICJ

Back 86

international court with 15 judges from 15 countries. the court only settles disputes when both sides have accepted its role - NO APPEALS

Front 87

agreed arbitraton

Back 87

the arbitrator decides upon an outcome based on what they believe is fair. very flexible can be from within or out of the proposals of the parties to the conflict.

Front 88

final offer arbitartion

Back 88

each party must give a final offer and the arbitrator must choose from the two or more proposals. - encourages the parties to make a fair proposal since the arbitrator wont choose it otherwise.

Front 89

double final offer arbitration

Back 89

each party hands in two potential final offers - arbitrator chooses winning side and losing party chooses from the two proposals of the winner .

Front 90

mediation - arbitration

Back 90

arbitrator begins as mediator and if that fails he becomes arbitrator and forces a resolution on the parties to the conflict

Front 91

arbitration - medation

Back 91

third party makes a decision and puts it in an envelope. if mediation fails then envelope is opened and the conflict is resolved according to the arbitration.

Front 92

international arbitration

Back 92

method used to resolve disputes arising from international commercial agreements and other international relations/agreements. enables parties to resolve their disputes without formalities of formal legal systems. (IT STILL IS BINDING)

Front 93

Pre-negotiations

Back 93

steps taken to make sure that parties to a conflict come to the negotiations table:

1. building bridges between both sides.

2. preconditions before negotiations (ceasefire/mutual acknowledgements)

3. identifying the problem

4. setting an agenda

5. choosing the representatives

6. deciding on third party and his roles

7. setting dates and locations and other logistics

Front 94

Negotiations

Back 94

direct communication between the parties to the conflict aiming to reach an agreement that will settle the conflict.

Front 95

BATNA

Back 95

best alternative to negotiating agreement - course of action that will be taken by a party if the current negotiations fail and an agreement cannot be reached/ A party should generally not accept a worse resolution than its BATNA

Front 96

positions vs. interests

Back 96

interests - what you really want from negotiations

positions - what you declare as important when talking to the other side.

positions are usually tougher than actual interests

in many negotiations the negotiator forgets the interest and only focuses on the positions making it hard to come to an agreement

Front 97

red lines

Back 97

the point beyond which a person/group is not prepared to negotiate

Front 98

negotiation about negotiation

Back 98

a large part of negotiations are not about the actual negotiation or deal, but about how the process itself will be

Front 99

leaders in conflict

Back 99

leaders must help the society cope with the conflict psychologically - represent the narrative - explaining the conflict to the people and maintaining unity

Front 100

leaders in negotiation

Back 100

leaders will decide where negotiations will go, sometimes they have to change the perspective of the constituents if up until now they said there is no partner but want to try negotiations they have to change the entire constituents opinion

Front 101

leaders in agreement in peace

Back 101

leaders must enforce the agreement and publicly support it. even if during the negotiation process they where not for it but now they have to support it.

Front 102

conservative leaders

Back 102

tend to maintain the existing political institutions and policies

Front 103

reformist leaders

Back 103

promote moderate changes in institutiosn and policies

Front 104

revolutionary leaders

Back 104

strive for FUNDAMENTAL CHANGES in existing institutions and policies.

Front 105

Ideological leader

Back 105

specific goals and solutions for every problem - less flexible than other leaders - harder to negotiate with

Front 106

strategic leaders

Back 106

have goals and solutions - take into account political timing and consider if it is possible to implement their goals

Front 107

Pragmatic leaders

Back 107

leaders who don't have only a single agenda but do what they think the constituency want - easy to negotiate with as they are not ideologically rigid or committed.

Front 108

questions and ethical dilemmas of reaching an
agreement

Back 108

There can be a few ethical dilemmas regarding the
reaching of an agreement:
- What if the sides reach an agreement but the
mediator doesn't believe it's a good agreement?
- What if certain rules are broken?
- What if the sides have reached a certain
agreement (E.G a ceasefire) but a longer
negotiation could have reached a better
agreement?

Front 109

Tactical barriers to agreements

Back 109

two main barriers to reaching an
agreement; Secrecy and hardball tactics.

Front 110

secrecy or deception

Back 110

tendency of negotiators to negotiate in secrecy because they do want the other side to know what their real red lines are (out of an effort to maxamize potential benifits of negotiations )

Front 111

hardball tactics and intransigence

Back 111

both sides are not willing to compromise over things they theoretically could compromise on. sides make it hard to find a point of agreement - stalemate - no agreement or bad blood

Front 112

psychological barriers to reaching agreements

Back 112

not the actual disagreements but factors that inhibit progress in the achievement of peace

1. equality or justice-seeking barrier

2. biased assimilation

3. certainty effect

4. reactive devaluation

5. judgemental or optimistic overconfidence

6. group-think

7. cognitive dissonance

8. prisoner's dilemma

Front 113

equality or justice-seeking (desire for equality) barrier

Back 113

a party to the resolution wont want to sign the agreement if they feel that agreement as unfair and liening towards the other side - not always the best policy because - your better off with something unfair than nothing unless it is past the BATNA

Front 114

biased assimilation

Back 114

tendency of each side to interpret information as something that confirms their position.

Front 115

certainty effect

Back 115

the tendency to request something that would be a 100% sure thing rather than accepting something that's likely to be certain (100% peace) we wont reach an agreement because we are unwilling to budge on the 100% certainty thing.

Front 116

loss aversion

Back 116

decision makers tend to
attach greater weight to prospective losses than to
prospective gains of the same magnitude.

Front 117

reactive devaluation

Back 117

tendency to assess an offer based on who made it rather than the offer itself. a final resolution can may be reached via negotiations almost identical to the original offer but prefered as the in-group took part in making it.

Front 118

judgemental or optimistic overconfidence

Back 118

we are optimistic that our requests will be accepted as we believe our positions are moderate and correct.

Front 119

group think

Back 119

a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an incorrect outcome. group members minimize interntal conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative ideas or viewpoints

Front 120

cognitive dissonance

Back 120

mental distress experienced by individual who holds two or more contradictory beliefs or is confronted by contradictory information at the same time.

Front 121

prisoners dilemma

Back 121

You don’t trust the other side, and therefore you
reach a worse situation than it could have been.

Front 122

institutional and structural barriers to reaching an agreement

Back 122

barriers that reflect that fact that conflicts involve individuals and interest groups other than the principal actors.

1. agent problem

2. restriction of channels of info or communication

multiple interest groups

Front 123

agent problem

Back 123

the person representing you in the negotiations doesn't necessarily have the same interests as you

Front 124

restriction of channels of info or communicaiton

Back 124

Sometimes there is a restriction of information channels between the parties by not being able to communicate with each other

Front 125

Multiple interest group

Back 125

The more parties that are involved,the more difficult it is to reach an agreement

Front 126

Mediator's role in overcoming barriers

Back 126

a third party can help a situation of stuck negotiations and bring both parties to an agreement

Front 127

three rules for conflict resolution

Back 127

1. seperation of people and problem/ interest from positions

2. variety of solutions

3. objective criterias

Front 128

rule 1: conflict negotiations differentiation between people and problem, interests and positions

Back 128

one of the basic rules for overcoming obstacles is conflict negotiations. first you must alleviate tensions by seperating the people from the problem and focusing on interests rather than positions.

Front 129

rule 2 negotations: examination of variety of options

Back 129

another rule to overcome conflicts is negotiations - try to find as many options as possible + view situations as two sides sitting togethor against the problem rather than each side against the other

Front 130

rule 3 importance of objective criteria

Back 130

rely on more objectives measures when thinking about the conflict. each side thinks about things differently it's important to be able to apply objective measures where possible

Front 131

back-channel negotiations

Back 131

negotiations that are done by official representattives but carried out in secret - dont take public response into account

Front 132

track one negotiations

Back 132

negotiations between official representatives of the parties to the conflict usually people like heads of state, rebel leaders, foreign ministers

BINDING and Public AGREEMENTS

Front 133

Track two negotations

Back 133

Not official representatives of parties to the conflict (academics, journalists, ex soldiers) people with influence but don't have formal power

more flexible as they don't represent the sides and can think more outside the box

outcome - what is said in these negotiations doesn't represent what society really thinks/ no funding for negotations

Front 134

track three negotiations

Back 134

grassroots, individuals or private groups: meet to try and reach an understanding between the groups - no influence what so ever in public sector - just a bridge between the people.

Front 135

track 1.5 negotiations

Back 135

mix between track 1 and track 2 - none official negotiations between officials (back-channel negotiations) enalbes them to speak off the record and come up with new ideas. interest rather than principles

Front 136

globalization and its influence on conflicts

Back 136

viewed as an obstacle because it means

1.an increase in outsiders intervening in the politics of different countries

2. growth of media influences the enhancement of violence

3. decreases the power of sovereign state in an exchange to increasing power of NGOS and MNCs

Front 137

advantages of Globalization

Back 137

1. media can have positive affect: social media allows people to come togethor and discuss and act upon something they oppose

2. NGOs and MNCs can offer positive hanges as well

Front 138

role of NGOs

Back 138

1. to influence education positvely

2. fund negotiations

Front 139

role of MNCs

Back 139

MNCs can advance different regions and countries economically

Front 140

outline/ basic principles of agreement

Back 140

2 stages to signing agreement

1. sides sign a broad outline on how to end the conflict

2. sides write the actual agreement - negotation over how to write the final agreement

Front 141

writing an agreement

Back 141

7 things that need to be in every peace agreement

1. reaching agreement about how to solve all issues in the conflict.

2. agreeing on timeline of implementation

3. establishment of joint institutions monitor or implement aspects of the treaty

4. making sure the infrastructure, resources, money are availabe for the treaty to be implemented.

5. establishing a mechanism for managing ongoing dispute - groups inside each group will disagree to the agreement and systems need to be established to cool things down

6. deciding if we need a third party and who it will be

7. establishing a mechanism that monitors proper implementation of the plan

Front 142

peace treaty

Back 142

the finale stage in mediation process - if agreement is accepted by the wider public of all parties there is a high chance that it will go through.

Front 143

components of peace treaty

Back 143

1. essential component: what is the agreement about and what does it change in comparison ot the previous situation.

2. procedural component: how are things going to be changed.

3. organization component: who is going to do what in the agreement

Front 144

cold peace

Back 144

an agreement signed that ends the conflict - no true reconcilation or peace - leaves conditions for societies to erupt in conflict again

Front 145

stable peace

Back 145

a situation in which the probability of war is so small that it does not really enter into calculations of any people involved. reconciliations is necessary.

Front 146

conflict vs. peace repertiore

Back 146

each person has a socio-political emotional toolbox that helps them through conflict. one of essential struggles of societies in conflict is how to reconstruct this toolbox from one of war to one of peace

Front 147

culture of peace

Back 147

requires a context of peace and an ethos of peace. a gradual and long process that requires a complete cessation of violence. establishing mechanism for resolving disagreements, constructing massive social education. - building cooperative relations.

Front 148

ethos of peace

Back 148

the achievement of reconciliation requires changes in at least 5 themes of societal beliefs that were formed during the conflict:

1. societal beliefs about the groups goals

2. societal beliefs about the rival group

3. societal beliefs about the relationship with the other group

4. societal beliefs about the history of the conflict

5. societal beliefs about peace.

Front 149

1. societal beliefs about the groups goals in ethos of peace

Back 149

change the beliefs in the justness of the goals that led to the outbreak and maintenance of the conflict. new beliefs must present new goals that allow compromise and peaceful resolution

Front 150

2. societal beliefs about the rival group

Back 150

it is important to legitimize and personalize the members of the adversary

Front 151

3. societal beliefs about the relationship with the other group

Back 151

new beliefs must emphasize the importane of cooperation and friendly relationships. zero sum replaced by win-win perception

Front 152

societal beliefs about the history of the conflict

Back 152

a need for a change in the collective memories that were dominating the societes during the conflict. revise the narratives into an understanding of the past that is in synch with the other group.

Front 153

transitional justice

Back 153

kinds of transitions a society goes through during reconciliation process. judicial and none judicial measures implemented by states in order to address their legacy of human rights violations.

1. criminal prosecutions

2. truth commisions

3. reparation programs

the focus of which is giving all sides the confidence of the new system.

Front 154

restore justice

Back 154

an approach to justice that focuses on the needs of the victims rather than abstract legal principles or punishing the offenders. the state does not seek restitution for itself but the individual or community is seen as the victim. victims take active role in the process - offenders are encourage to take responsibility for their actions. - healing the wounds and fostering dialogue between the victims and offenders

Front 155

truth commisions

Back 155

focus on telling the story and giving victtims a public opportunity to examine the past and tell their stories to share their side of what happened in the conflict. aimed to change the dialogue within society and create a new collective memory + build nation together to build a new common future

Front 156

TRC SA 1996

Back 156

restorative justice body established after the end of apartheid in SA that held public hearings on human rights abuses. - viewed as a crucial component of the transition to an open and free democracy.

Front 157

critique of TRC

Back 157

TRC failed to achieve true reconciliation between white and black community. many black South Africans were outraged by the lack of justice and that the perpetrators of the crimes were not punished through this process

Front 158

Reconciliation

Back 158

process that deals with the deep psychological issues of the conflict's narrative. it's focused on changing the perspectives and the way that both sides view each other.

Front 159

importance of reconciliation

Back 159

1. agreements are signed between leaders and elites and not regulat people - neccessary for both sides to accept the agreement

2. fear that without this process, the agreement wont survive - without an effort to understand the other side the stereotypes and supporting narratives of the conflict will still exist

3. there will always be exterimsts who will attempt to continue the conflict

Front 160

tools for reconciliation

Back 160

1. compensations - perps dont only acknowledge wrong doings but also pay for them

2. shared writing of history:

3. mass media

4. joint projects

5. tourism

6. cultural exchanges

7. education

Front 161

compensation in reconciliation

Back 161

1. compensations - perps dont only acknowledge wrong doings but also pay for them

Front 162

shared writing of history in reconciliation

Back 162

the aim is for future generations to learn history through shared narrative for both sides.

Front 163

Mass Media in reconciliation

Back 163

media is used to change the mind of the people. if the attitude change is implemented in the media, it will influence the public.

Front 164

joint projects - economic peace in reconciliation

Back 164

work together on projects that are not conflict oriented - only way to see the other side as equal

Front 165

tourism in reconciliation

Back 165

if you go to the other side's land, you can see that they are not much different from you. becoming a tourist = economically investing in the country.

Front 166

cultural exchange in reconciliation

Back 166

sharing each other's culture: translating songs or books

Front 167

Education in reconciliation

Back 167

two ways to change the way the story is told:

1. directly: learning about the conflict but in a different light: teach the facts + narrative of the other side as well. dont delegimitize the other side.

2. indirectly: try to educate the children through values that promote tolerance, peace, and acceptance - without directly discussing the conflict.

Front 168

Justice

Back 168

one of the difficulties of reconciliation is that every side sees justice differently.

some argue that justice is irrelevant - just sign the agreement and be done with it.

scholars disagree about definition: measured by objective criteria or perception of the sides

should justice be done before or after peace is achieved.

Front 169

forgiveness and apology:

Back 169

two approaches:

1. forgiveness is not something you can ask for. reconciliation is a way to create it. - look for things like justice and truth instead.

2. simply ask for an apology. sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness after time has passed (generation change). the new generations feel less attached to the events of the past and it's easier for them to apologize

Front 170

3 types of apology

Back 170

1. expression of contrition: expression of regret, authentic will to fix things that were done - rare type of apology as it is a genuine apology that confesses guilt

2. formal apology: usually more technical, in order to restore relations, its not authentic but its still important

3. Non-Apology: completely technical process in which the sides agree on the words that will be in the apology.

Front 171

cultural aspects of apoogy

Back 171

apologies are percieved differently from culture to culture. there is no single universally valid paradigm of apology

Front 172

reparations

Back 172

the obligation of perpetrators to address the damages it caused to the victims:

1. compensation

2. restitution

3. rehabilitation

4. satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition

Front 173

compensation

Back 173

the most commonly known form of reparations, which is payment for any form of damage done to the victims.

Front 174

restitution

Back 174

restoring the victim to the situation that would've existed if the crime dident happen (regaining citizenship, returning homes, returning old job).

Front 175

Rehabilitation

Back 175

Mental and Psychological care as well as legal a social services

Front 176

satisfaction and gurantees of non-repetition

Back 176

individual and collective actions like revealing the truth, public acknowledgement of the facts, acceptance of responsibility, prosecution of he perpetrators, activities aimed at remembrance and education and prevention of similar crimes

Front 177

group meetings

Back 177

idea is to take different groups in society and make them meet - making the relationship between the groups become personal, the groups should be defined as equal in status and work togethor toward a common goal. 4 models for inter-group contact

1. coexisting model

2. joint project model

3. confrontation model

4. narrative model

Front 178

1 coexisting group meeting model

Back 178

based on emphasizing interpersonal similarities and what is common to both of them. underlying idea is to support notions of togetherness and cooperation. problem with this model is it avoids touching the real issues of the conflict. continues the status quo

Front 179

2. joint project meeting model

Back 179

make two groups work together on a project, which shows them they can cooperate on something more significant than just talking. focus is not on the conflict, but looking at the future rather than the past.

Front 180

3. confrontation model

Back 180

two sides confront the problematic issues face on.

make each side play the other side and live their side of the conflict.

problem - it can make people more extreme and stronger believers of the narrative

Front 181

4. narrative model

Back 181

effort to combine all other models - you don't need to confront the other group - but both sides can learn from one another. different conflict reach different stages.

Front 182

ADR and mediation

alternative dispute resolution

Back 182

an approach to resolving conflicts that does not involve litigation and seeks an outcome that is at least minimally satisfactory to all of the parties - mediation is one kind of ADR.

Front 183

Domestic vs. International Conflict.

Back 183

usually reconciliation processes are more relevant and acceptable in domestic conflicts. two different societies do not necessarily want to know or to understand one another and their narrative. in domestic conflicts both sides often speak the same language or have similar cultures - usually just want to live peacefully with one another.

Front 184

new wars

Back 184

fought both by state and non-state actors: use identity politics as a reason to fight rather than ideology; sides attempt to achieve political rather than physical control of the other population through fear and terror. no longer financed only through state but through other predatory means that seek the continuation of violence

Front 185

old wars

Back 185

conventional warfare between states in which the aim is to inflict maximum violence - clear distinction between internal and external, civilian and combatants, economic and political.

Front 186

spoilers

Back 186

parties that seek to disrupt the peace process because they feel that a peaceful settlement of dispute will threaten their interests, power and reputation.

Front 187

2 types of spoilers

Back 187

1. inside spoilers - parties that are included in peace negotiations.

2. outside spoilers: those who are exluced from the peace negotiations

Front 188

three categories of spoilers

Back 188

1. total spoilers ( ideological spoilers) - can only be satisfied by achieving total power and exclusive recognition of authority. non negtionable demands and oppose all compromise

2. limited spoilers (strategic spoilers) - limited goals - demands can usually be met by adjusting the peace process so that it better reflects their interests.

3.greedy spoilers (pragmatic spoilers) - more opportunistic; their demands will change depending on the conditions on the ground and a calculation of risk and costs.