Understanding the Dynamics of Israeli-Palestinian Grassroots Dialogue Workshops: the Contribution of a Habermasian Approach

  • Hélène PfeilEmail author


In the post-Oslo context, Israeli-Palestinian people-to-people programmes based on dialogue (re-)create vital spaces of communicative action not always directly available at other levels. By enhancing the overall deliberative quality of the system, they can generate a shift away from discourses of violence in the public sphere and contribute significantly to peace-building dynamics. Conceptual frameworks developed by Jürgen Habermas are useful in understanding the opportunities and challenges faced by such initiatives both at the micro- and macrolevel.


Peace building Civil society Dialogue Habermas Communicative action Israel-Palestine 


  1. Abu-Nimer, M., & Lazarus, N. (2007). The Peacebuilders’s Paradox and the dynamics of dialogue: a psychosocial portrait of Israeli-Palestinian encounters. In J. Kuriansky (Ed.), Beyond bullets and bombs, grassroots peacebuilding between Israelis and Palestinians. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  2. Adwan, S., & Bar-On, D. (2004). Shared history project: A PRIME example of peace-building under fire. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 17(3), 513–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge: Perseus books.Google Scholar
  4. Amir, Y. (1969). Contact hypothesis in ethnic relations. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 319–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson, M. B., & Olson, L. (2003). Confronting war: critical lessons for peace practitioners. Cambridge: The collaborative for development action.Google Scholar
  6. Bar-Natan, I., (2004). Does friendship between adversaries generalize? Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Haifa University.Google Scholar
  7. Bar-On, D., Litvak-Hirsh, T., & Othman, R. (2007). Within-Group variance as a facilitator of dialogue: A Jewish-Arab Israeli Encounter Group focused on family stories. Journal of International Cooperation in Education, 10(1), 33–51.Google Scholar
  8. Bargal, D. (1990). Contact is not enough—the contribution of Lewinian Theory to inter-group workshops Involving Palestinian and Jewish Youth in Israel. International Journal of Group Tensions, 20(2), 179–192.Google Scholar
  9. Baskin, G., & Al Qaq, Z. (2004). YES PM: years of experience in strategies for peace making. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 17(3), 543–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Behrendt, S. (2007). The secret Israeli-Pal negotiations in Oslo, their success and why the process ultimately failed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Bekdash, H., (2009). Grassroots Reconciliation in Palestine and Israel. The Palestine Center, Information Brief.Google Scholar
  12. Bekerman, Z. (2002). The discourse of nation and culture: its impact on Palestinian-Jewish encounters in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 409–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Biton, Y., & Salomon, G. (2006). Peace in the eyes of Israeli and Palestinian youths: Effects of Collective Narratives and Peace Education Program. Journal of Peace Research, 43(2), 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Buber, M., (2004). I and Thou. Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  15. Burton, J. W. (1987). Resolving deep-rooted conflict: a handbook. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  16. Dryzek, J. (2009). Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comparative Political Studies, 42(11), 1379–1402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dryzek, J. S., & Goodin, R. E. (2006). Deliberative impacts: the macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics and Society, 34, 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Edwards, G. (2004). Habermas and social movements: what’s ‘new’? The Sociology Review, 52(1), 113–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Feuerverger, G., (1997). An Educational Program for Peace: Jewish-Arab Conflict Resolution in Israel. Theory into Practice, 36:1, Teaching Conflict Resolution: Preparation for Pluralism, pp. 17-25.Google Scholar
  20. Finlayson, J. (2005). Habermas: a very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fisher, R. J. (1997). Interactive conflict resolution. New York: Syracuse University.Google Scholar
  22. Flyvbjerg, B. (1998). Habermas and Foucault: thinkers for civil society? British Journal of Sociology, 49(2), 210–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fultner, B. (2001). Intelligibility and conflict resolution in the lifeworld. Continental Philosophy Review, 34, 419–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gawerc, M. (2006). Peace-building: theoretical and concrete perspectives. Peace & Change, 31(4), 435–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Green, L. (2007). Compassionate listening with Israelis and Palestinians. In J. Kuriansky (Ed.), Beyond bullets and bombs, grassroots peacebuilding between Israelis and Palestinians. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  26. Habermas, J. (1985). The theory of communicative action, Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society (trans. T. McCarthy). Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  27. Habermas, J. (1987a). The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and system: a critique of functionalist reason (trans. T. McCarthy). Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  28. Habermas, J. (1987b). The philosophical discourse of modernity (trans. F. Lawrence). Cambridge: The MIT.Google Scholar
  29. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (trans. C. Lenhardt and S. Weber Nicholson). Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  30. Habermas, J. (1992). Further reflections on the public sphere (trans. T. Burger). In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy (trans. William Rehg). Cambridge: The MIT.Google Scholar
  32. Habermas, J., Lennox, S., & Lennox, F. (1974). The public sphere: an encyclopedia article. New German Critique, 3, 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hanafi, S. (2007). Dancing tango during peace building: Palestinian-Israeli People-to-People Programs for conflict resolution. In J. Kuriansky (Ed.), Beyond bullets and bombs, grassroots peacebuilding between Israelis and Palestinians. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  34. Hassassian, M., & Kaufman, E. (1999). Israeli-Palestinian peace-building—lessons learnt. In European Centre for Conflict Prevention (Ed.), People building peace. The Netherlands: The Hague.Google Scholar
  35. Head, N. (2008). Critical theory and its practices: Habermas, Kosovo and International Relations. Politics, 28(3), 150–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Herzog, S. and Hai, A., (2005). What do people mean when they say ‘people-to-people’? Origins, definitions, goals and methods. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics, and Culture, 12-13(4, I):8-15.Google Scholar
  37. Hirschfeld, Y., & Roling, S. (2000). The Oslo process and the people-to-people strategy. Development, 43(3), 23–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hubbard, A. S., (1992). Personal change and political action: the intersection of conflict resolution and social movement mobilization in a Middle East Dialogue Group. Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University.Google Scholar
  39. Institute for Strategic Dialogue (2011 and 2012). Europe-China Media Exchange reports. Accessed 16 Aug 2013.
  40. Jabri, V. (1995). Agency, structure and the question of power in conflict resolution. Paradigms, 9(2), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jabri, V., (1996). Discourses on violence—conflict analysis reconsidered. Manchester University.Google Scholar
  42. Jacobson, T. L., & Storey, J. D. (2004). Development communication and participation: applying Habermas to a case study of population programs in Nepal. Communication Theory, 14(2), 99–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Johnson, P. (2006). Habermas: rescuing the public sphere. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  44. Jones, D. (1999). Cosmopolitan mediation? Conflict resolution and the Oslo Accords. New York: Manchester University.Google Scholar
  45. Kahanoff, M., Salem, W., Nasrallah, R. and Neumann, Y., (2007). The Evaluation of Cooperation Between Palestinian and Israeli NGOs: an assessment. UNESCO, Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies and International Peace and Cooperation Center.Google Scholar
  46. Kaye, D. D., (2005). Rethinking track two diplomacy: the Middle East and South East Asia. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations, Clingendael Diplomacy Papers No.3.Google Scholar
  47. Kelman, H. (2008). Evaluating the contributions of interactive problem solving to the resolution of ethnonational conflicts. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 14(1), 29–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kemmis, S. (2006). Exploring the relevance of critical theory for action research: emancipatory action research in the footsteps of Jürgen Habermas. In P. P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  49. Kittrie, O. F. (2003). More process than peace: legitimacy, compliance, and the Oslo accords. Michigan Law Review, 101(6), 1661–1714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Kuttab, J. (1988). The Pitfalls of dialogue. Journal of Palestine Studies, XVII(2), 84–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lederach, J.-P. (1997). Building peace: sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.Google Scholar
  52. Lederach, J.-P. (2005). The moral imagination: the art and soul of building peace. Oxford: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Mackenzie, M., & Warren, M. (2012). Two trust-based uses of minipublics in democratic systems. In J. R. Parkinson & J. J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. Theories of Institutional Design (pp. 95–124). Cambridge: Cambridge University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Maddy-Weitzman, E. (2007). Coping with crisis: seeds of peace and the Intifada. In J. Kuriansky (Ed.), Beyond bullets and bombs, grassroots peace-building between Israelis and Palestinians. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  55. Maia, R. (2012). Deliberation, the media, and political talk. New York: Hampton.Google Scholar
  56. Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., et al. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. R. Parkinson & J. J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. Theories of Institutional Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  57. Maoz, I. (2000). An experiment in peace: reconciliation-aimed workshops of Jewish-Israeli and Palestinian Youth. Journal of Peace Research, 37(6), 721–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Maoz, I. (2004). Peace building in violent conflict: Israeli-Palestinian post-Oslo people-to-people activities. International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, 17(3), 563–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Maoz, I., Bar-On, D., Bekerman, Z., & Jaber-Massarwa, S. (2004). Learning about ‘good enough’ through ‘bad enough’: a story of a planned dialogue between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. Human Relations, 57(9), 1075–1101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Maoz, I., Steinberg, S., Bar-On, D., & Fakhereldeen, M. (2002). The dialogue between the ‘self’ and the ‘other’: a process analysis of Palestinian-Jewish encounters in Israel. Human Relations, 55(8), 931–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. McCormick, S. (2006). The Brazilian anti-dam movement: knowledge contestation as communicative action. Organization Environment, 19(3), 321–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McMahon, S. F. (2010). The discourse of Palestinian-Israeli Relations—persistent analytics and practices. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  63. Mendonça R. F., (2013). The Conditions and Dilemmas of Deliberative Systems. Paper presented at the 2013 APSA Annual Meeting. Chicago, August 29th–September 1st.Google Scholar
  64. Montville, J. (1987). The arrow and the olive branch: a case for track two diplomacy. In J. McDonald & J. D. Bendahmane (Eds.), Conflict resolution: track two diplomacy. Washington, DC: Foreign Service Institute, US Department of State.Google Scholar
  65. Nadler, A., Malloy, T. E., & Fisher, J. D. (2008). The social psychology of intergroup reconciliation. New York: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Niemeyer, S. (2011). The emancipatory effect of deliberation: empirical lessons from mini-publics. Politics & Society, 39(1), 103–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Parkinson, J. (2006). Deliberating in the Real World: problems of legitimacy in deliberative democracy. New York: Oxford University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Parkinson, J., & Mansbridge, J. (Eds.). (2012). Deliberative systems: deliberative democracy at the large scale. New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  69. Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup Contact Theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Raschdorf, AC., (2005). Transcending discourses on violence: Peace-constitutive practices of truth, justice and authenticity in Rwanda: 1998-2002. PhD, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of International Relations.Google Scholar
  71. Risse, T. (2000). “Let’s Argue!”: communicative action in World Politics. International Organization, 54(1), 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Rothman, J. (1992). From confrontation to cooperation, resolving ethnic and regional conflict. Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
  73. Rothstein, R. L. (1999). In fear of peace: getting past maybe. In R. L. Rothstein (Ed.), After the peace: resistance and reconciliation. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  74. Rouhana, N., & Korper, S. (1996). Dealing with the dilemmas posed by power asymmetry in intergroup conflict. Negotiation Journal, 12(4), 353–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rouhana, N., & Korper, S. (1997). Power asymmetry and goals of unofficial third party intervention in protracted intergroup conflict. Journal of Peace Psychology, 3(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ryan, C. (1991). Prime time activism. Boston: South End.Google Scholar
  77. Rynhold, J. (2008). The failure of the Oslo process: inherently flawed or flawed implementation? Mideast Security and Policy Studies, 76, 1–26.Google Scholar
  78. Said, E. (1995). Peace and its discontents. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  79. Salomon, G. (2004). Does peace education make a difference in the context of an intractable conflict? Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 10(3), 257–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Saunders, H. (1991). Officials and citizens in international relationships: The Dartmouth Conference. In V. Volkan, J. Montville, & D. Julius (Eds.), The Psychodynamics of International Relationships, Volume II: Unofficial diplomacy at work. Lexington: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  81. Saunders, H. (1999). A Public Peace Process: sustained dialogue to transform racial and ethnic conflicts. New York: St. Martin’s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Schlosberg, D. (1995). Communicative action in practice: intersubjectivity and new social movements. Political Studies, XLIII, 291–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Schulz, W. (1997). Changes of mass media and the public sphere. Javnost/The Public, 4(2), 57–69.Google Scholar
  84. Shemesh, A., (2011). Citizen diplomacy—creating a culture of peace: the Israeli-Palestinian Case. Paper prepared for The Academy for Cultural Diplomacy Annual Academic Conference 2011, Berlin.Google Scholar
  85. Slater, J. (2001). What Went Wrong? The collapse of the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process. Political Science Quarterly, 116(2), 171–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Snyder, J. L., (2000). A critical theory of peace practice: discourse ethics and facilitated conflict resolution. PhD, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of International Relations.Google Scholar
  87. Sonnenschein, N., Halabi, R., & Friedman, A. (1998). Legitimization of national identity and the change in power relationships in workshops dealing with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. In E. Weiner (Ed.), The handbook of interethnic coexistence. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  88. Steinberg, S., & Bar-On, D. (2002). An analysis of the group process between Jews and Palestinians using a typology of discourse classification. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 26, 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Steinberg, S., & Bar-On, D. (2007). Dialogue in the midst of an ongoing conflict: a group process of Israeli Jewish and Palestinian students. In J. Kuriansky (Ed.), Beyond bullets and bombs, grassroots peacebuilding between Israelis and Palestinians. Westport: Praeger.Google Scholar
  90. The Olive Branch, (2009). Teacher’s Guide, Educational Supplement to the Youth Magazine of Seeds of Peace. In Daniel Noah Moses & Inessa Shishmanyan (eds).Google Scholar
  91. Thomassen, L. (2010). Habermas: a guide for the perplexed. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  92. Wallace, J. (2000). The enemy has a face: the seeds of peace experience. Washington, DC: United States Institute for Peace.Google Scholar
  93. Warren, M. E., & Pearse, H. (Eds.). (2008). Designing Deliberative Democracy: The British Columbia Citizens’ Assembly. New York: Cambridge University.Google Scholar
  94. Wehrenfennig, D. (2008). Conflict management and communicative action: second-track diplomacy from a Habermasian perspective. Communication Theory, 18, 356–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wehrenfennig, D., (2009). The missing link: citizen dialogue in Northern Ireland and Israel/Palestine. PhD, University of California, Irvine, Department of Political Science.Google Scholar
  96. Yordán, C. (2009). Towards the deliberative peace: a Habermasian critique of contemporary peace operations. Journal of International Relations and Development, 12(1), 58–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of International RelationsLondon School of EconomicsCity of Westminster, LondonUK

Personalised recommendations