Abstract
Who is the most suitable mediator to create a peacemaking change in difficult situations of intractable conflict? Realists will argue that an effective mediator is an intermediary with leverage who can impose settlement on the opposing sides. Pluralists and human needs theorists will claim that a suitable mediator is a problem solving facilitator who could help political elites of opposing parties find solutions to fundamental needs, fears and concerns that constantly fuel the conflict. Contractualists will suggest a consensus-building mediator who could help in establishing an effective peacemaking coalition from major elements in the opposing parties. This paper takes the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a case study to examine the advantages and disadvantages of each proposal. It presents the different mediators and analyzes the negotiating processes that each of them suggests. It shows that no mediator can create the foundations of an effective peacemaking process by himself alone. The perfect mediator is built of a sophisticated mixture of prominent qualities of different types of intermediaries, which enables him to lead various peacemaking interactions simultaneously. The paper concludes that a multifaceted approach to peacemaking, which utilizes various types of mediation simultaneously, has the greatest potential to approach the ideal of the perfect mediator and create the conditions for an effective peace process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“‘Revolution’ as Eugen Rosenstock-Hussy has written, “brings on the speaking of new, unheard of language, another logic, a revaluation of all values.”” (Friedrich 1966: 4)
- 2.
- 3.
Scanlon (2000: 5), who suggests a somewhat narrow perspective of moral contractualism, points that the contractualist project is “finding principles that others similarly motivated, could not reasonably reject.”
- 4.
The idea of a mediator as a coalition builder intermediary is inspired by the peacemaking work of Senator Mitchell in Northern Ireland as described in Curran and Sebenius (2003). However, I do not know if the authors will agree to categorize their description and analysis as contractualist.
- 5.
For example, the idea to establish a consensus building institution – such as a major Israeli-Palestinian public negotiating congress – was never examined seriously by the relevant decision makers. This peacemaking institution could be a Middle Eastern version of the multi-party talks that prepared the ground for a revolutionary transformation of entrenched conflicts in Northern Ireland and South Africa during the 1990s (Handelman and Pearson 2014; Handelman 2016).
- 6.
See, for example, Azar et al. (1978: 45): “[…] to understand the present and potential futures of the conflict in the Middle East (and elsewhere in the Third World), one must understand the ‘rules’ of the international political game, as established by the superpowers who dominate the theory and practice of international relations.” It is quite acceptable that Azar is not a classical realist thinker. However, he provided a realist analysis of the phenomenon of intractable conflict. This paper presents a modified and actual version of Azar’s view which was formulated during the cold war.
- 7.
Hayek F.A ., interviews in El Mercurio (Santiago, Chile, 1981) from http://coreyrobin.com/tag/el-mercurio
- 8.
Handelman (2009) argues that not every manipulation is indecent. There are manipulations that could be desirable, even from a liberal perspective.
- 9.
A “failed state” is a term used to describe a failure of the central authority to maintain law and order and meet basic needs of the population. Inbar (2006) claimed that the Palestinian Authority met the criteria for a failed entity. The disfunction of the Palestinian Authority led to a civil war between Hamas and Fatah in 2007 and a political division between Gaza and the West Bank for about 7 years.
- 10.
One pf the highlights of the Realist paradigm was Kennedy’s peaceful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which threatened to destroy the world in 1962 (Allison 1971).
- 11.
- 12.
Scholars, who have endorsed a pluralistic approach to the study of destructive social conflicts and their resolution, developed various methodological approaches to peacemaking and named them differently. For example, Burton (1969) named his version “control communication”; Fisher (1977) called his understanding of the peacemaking process “interactive conflict resolution”; Kelman (1996) labeled his approach “interactive problem solving workshop.”
- 13.
Compare to Agha et al. (2003), who distinguish between “soft” and “hard” track-II interactions. The first is “aimed at an exchange of views, perceptions, and information between the parties to improve each side’s understanding of the other’s positions and policies.” The second is intended to “help negotiate political agreements between governments.”
- 14.
In peacemaking literature, classical track II diplomacy is supposed to include unofficial elites from both sides. Since the Palestinian delegation included officials, some scholars suggested labeling the Oslo talks as track 1.5 diplomacy. The important issue is that that the first stage of the Oslo process (the unofficial talks) had almost all the important characteristics of track II meetings. They were secret, not obligatory, and mediated by a third party (Norwegians) that did not have any direct interest in the region. Compare to Agha et al. (2003, 2–3).
- 15.
Agha et al. (2003) claim that “the Oslo talks can be considered “the mother of all track II talks” in the Middle East.”
- 16.
- 17.
There is a lot of literature focused on the question of why the Oslo peace process failed. I present only one hypothesis that certainly does not give a complete picture. My main point is that political-elite diplomacy, diplomatic interactions between elites involving a problem solving facilitator, cannot bring a sustainable peace by itself alone in the complicated situation of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle.
- 18.
Indeed, violence in different forms, shapes and variations carried out by the enemies of the peace process appeared during the all-party negotiations in Northern Ireland (Mitchell 1999: 117), the multi-party talks in South Africa (Sparks 1994; Sisk 1994:52), and the Oslo accords in the Israeli-Palestinian case (cf. Kelman 2007b: 292).
- 19.
The endless debate between populism, elitism and liberalism is beyond the scope of this paper.
- 20.
Public surveys show that most Israelis and Palestinians wish to end the conflict by peaceful means. However, the majority on both sides believe that it is not possible. See for example: http://www.timesofisrael.com/survey-most-israelis-palestinians-support-2-states
- 21.
For example, the settlement project, in the Israeli-Palestinian case, was born in a political vacuum (cf. Gorenbeg 2006).
- 22.
In both cases there were various forms of multi-party negotiations. The South African assemblies were: Convention of Democratic South Africa (CODESA) and Multiparty Negotiating Forum (MPNF) (Sparks 1994). The Northern Ireland’s multi-party negotiations are known as the ‘all-parties talks’ (Mitchell 1999).
- 23.
In a quite similar way, Huntington (Huntington 2006) noted that revolutions in the East and revolutions in the West tend to grow and develop differently.
- 24.
Senator Mitchell was an envoy to the Middle East for a very short time. In 2001, he tried to initiate a peace process by suggesting general principles for negotiation similar to the Mitchell Principles in Northern Ireland (Deane 2009).
- 25.
Mini-scale congresses included 14–20 negotiators and audience; mid-scale congresses included 40–100 negotiators and audience; mass-scale congresses included, at least, 500 negotiators and audience.
- 26.
Zartman (1995) labeled the transition of South Africa – ‘negotiated revolution.’
References
Agha, Hussein, Shai Feldman, Ahmad Khalidi, and Zeev Schiff. 2003. Track-II diplomacy: Lessons from the Middle East. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Allison, Graham. 1971. Essence of decision; explaining the Cuban Missile crisis. Boston: Little Brown.
Alon, Ilay, and Jeanne Brett. 2007. Perceptions of time and their impact on negotiations in the Arabic-Speaking Islamic World. Negotiation Journal 23: 55–73.
Azar, Edward, Paul Jureidini, and Ronald McLaurin. 1978. Protracted social conflict: Theory and practice in the Middle East. Journal of Palestinian Studies 8 (1): 41–60.
Banks, Michael. 1984. In The evolution of international relations theory in conflict in world society: A new perspective in international relations, ed. Michael Banks. Sussex: Wheatsheaf books.
Bar-Siman-Tov, Yaacov. 2007. Dialectic between conflict management and conflict resolution. In The Israeli-Palestinian conflict: From conflict resolution to conflict management, ed. Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bar-Tal, Daniel. 2001. Why does fear override hope in societies engulfed by intractable conflict, as it does in the Israeli society? Political Psychology 22: 601–627.
Bickerton, Ian and Carla L. Klausner. (2007) A Concise History of the Arab Israeli conflict, 5th.edition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Buchanan, James. 2001. Moral science and moral order, Vol. 17 of The collected works of James M. Buchanan. Indianapolis: Liberty fund.
Bueno de Mesquita, Bruce, and David Lalman. 1992. War and reason: Domestic and international imperatives. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Burton, John W. 1969. Conflict and communication: The use of controlled communication in international relations. London: Macmillan.
———. 1988. Conflict resolution as a function of human needs. In The power of human needs in world society, ed. Roger A. Coate and Jerel A. Rosati. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.
Courtney, Jung, Ellen Lust-Okar, and Ian Shapiro. 2005. Problems and prospects for democratic settlements: South Africa as a model for the Middle East and Northern Ireland? Politics and Society 33 (2): 277–326.
Curran, Daniel F., and James K. Sebenius. 2003. The mediator as coalition-builder: George Mitchell in Northern Ireland. International Negotiation 8 (1): 111–147.
Curran, Daniel, James Sebenius, and Michael Watkins. 2004. Two paths to peace: Contrasting George Mitchell in Northern Ireland with Richard Holbrooke in Bosnia–Herzegovina. Negotiation Journal 20: 513–537.
Deane, Shelley. 2009. Instituting peace: Third party principles and Mitchell Effect. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 3 (1): 65–91.
Fisher, Ronald. 1977. Interactive conflict resolution. New York: Syracuse University Press.
Friedrich, Carl, ed. 1966. Revolution. New York: Atherton Press.
Galtung, Johan. 1976. Three approaches to peace: Peacekeeping, peacemaking, and peacebuilding in peace. War and defense: Essays in peace research. Vol. II. Copenhagen: Christian Ejlers.
Gilboa, Eytan. 1998. Secret diplomacy in the television age. Gazette: The International Journal of Communication Studies 60 (3): 211–225.
———. 2008. Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (March): 55–77.
Gorenbeg, Gershom. 2006. The accidental empire: Israel and the birth of the settlements, 1967–1977. New York: Henry Holt and Company, LCC.
Hamdan, Nahlah, and Frederic Pearson. 2014. Arab approaches to conflict resolution. London/New York: Routledge.
Handelman, Sapir. 2009. Thought manipulation: The use and abuse of psychological trickery. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
———. 2011. Conflict and peacemaking in Israel-Palestine: Theory and application. London/New York: Routledge.
———. 2012a. The minds of peace experiment: A laboratory for people-to-people diplomacy. Israel Affairs 18 (1): 1–11.
———. 2012b. Between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the East-west Pakistan struggle: a challenge to the conventional wisdom. Israel Affairs 18 (1): 25–26.
———. 2014. People-to-people diplomacy in Israel and Palestine. London/New York: Routledge.
———. 2016. Peacemaking contractualism: A peacemaking approach to cope with difficult situations of intractable conflict. Global Change, Peace & Security 28 (1): 123–144.
Handelman, Sapir, and Fredric Pearson. 2014. Peacemaking in intractable conflict – A contractualist approach. International Negotiation 19: 1–34.
Hayek, Friedrich. 1994. The road to Serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hirst, D., and I. Beeson. 1981. Sadat. London: Faber and Faber.
Hobbes, Thomas. [1660] 1985. Leviathan. ed. Tuck Richard. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hopmann, Terrence. 1995. Two paradigms of negotiation: Bargaining and problem solving. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 542 (1): 24–47.
Huntington, Samuel. 1968 [2006]. Political order in changing societies. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Inbar, Efraim. 2006. Israel’s Palestinian challenge. Israel Affairs 12 (4): 823–842.
Ionescu, Ghița, and Ernest Gellner, eds. 1969. Populism: Its meanings and national characteristics. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Kelman, Herbert. 1981. Reflections on the history and status of peace research. Conflict Management and Peace Science 5 (2): 95–96.
———. 1996. Negotiation as interactive problem solving. International Negotiation: A Journal of Theory and Practice 1 (1): 99–123.
———. 1997. Some determinants of the Oslo breakthrough. International Negotiation 2 (2): 183–194.
———. 2005. The psychological impact of the Sadat visit on Israeli society. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology 11 (2): 111–136.
———. 2007a. Social-psychological dimensions of international conflict in Peacemaking in international conflict: Methods & techniques (rev. ed.), ed. William Zartman. Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace.
———. 2007b. The Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its Vicissitudes: Insights from attitude theory. American Psychologist 63 (4): 287–303.
Kriesberg, Louis. 2001. Mediation and transformation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Journal of Peace Research 38 (3): 373–392.
Landau, Simha. 2006. Settings, factors and phenomena of conflict in the Israeli society. In Conflicts and conflict resolution in Middle Eastern societies – Between tradition and modernity, ed. H. Albrecht, J. Simon, H. Rezaei, H. Rohne, and E. Kiza. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot.
Machiavelli, Niccolo. [1532] 1979. The Prince. In The portable Machiavelli, ed. Bondanella Peter and Musa Mark. New York: Penguin Books.
Mandela, Nelson. 1994. Long walk to freedom: The autobiography of Nelson Mandela. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Mansergh, Martin. 1999. The early stages of the Irish peace process. Conciliation Resources, http://www.c-r.org/accord8/early.htm.
McKittrick, David, and David McVea. 2002. Making sense of the troubles: The story of the conflict in Northern Ireland. Chicago: New Amsterdam Books.
Mitchell, George. 1999. Making peace. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Mnookin, Robert. 2003. Strategic barriers to dispute resolution: A comparison of bilateral and multilateral negotiations. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 159 (1): 199–220.
Murshed, Mansoob. 2002. Conflict, civil war and underdevelopment. Journal of Peace Research 39: 387–393.
Nye, Joseph. 2009. Understanding international conflicts: An introduction to theory and history. 7th ed. New York: Pearson Longman.
Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization 42: 432.
Rubin, Barry. 1999. The transformation of Palestinian politics: From revolution to state-building. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sadat, Anwar. 1977. Statement to the Knesset by President Sadat. Special Meeting of the Knesset: The Forty-Third meeting of the Ninth Knesset (November 20, 1977), Jerusalem.
Savir, Uri. 1998. The process: 1,100 days that changed the Middle East. New York: Random House.
Scanlon, Thomas. 2000. What we owe to each other. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schelling, Thomas. 2005. Nobel Prize Lecture. Available at: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2005/schelling-lecture.pdf.
Sisk, Timothy. 1994. South Africa’s national peace accord. Peace and Change 19 (1): 50–70.
Smith, Adam. 1976. An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sparks, Allister. 1994. Tomorrow is another country: The inside story of South Africa’s negotiated revolution. Sandton: Struik Book Distributors.
Thompson, Leonard. 2001. A history of South Africa. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Vanberg, Viktor. 2005. Market and state: The perspective of constitutional political economy. Journal of Institutional Economics 1 (1): 23–49.
Wantchekon, Leonard. 2004. The paradox of “Warlord” democracy: A theoretical investigation. American Political Science Review 98 (1): 17–32.
Zartman, William. 1995. In Negotiating the South African conflict in Elusive peace: Negotiating an end to internal wars, ed. William Zartman. Washington: Brookings.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Handelman, S. (2017). The Perfect Mediator and His Limitations: Toward a Multifaceted Approach to Peacemaking in the Israeli-Palestinian Struggle. In: Bar-Am, N., Gattei, S. (eds) Encouraging Openness. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 325. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57669-5_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57669-5_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57668-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57669-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)