Advertisement

The Jewish–Israeli Ethos of Conflict

  • Neta OrenEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Peace Psychology Book Series book series (PPBS)

Abstract

One of Bar-Tal’s main contributions is the concept of ethos of conflict. Ethos is defined as configuration of central societal beliefs that provides central characterization to the society and gives it a particular orientation. Ethos of conflict evolves during an intractable conflict. It is a major component of the psychological repertoire that allows a society to cope effectively with the stressful conditions produced by a conflict. But at the same time, the ethos functions as a barrier to the peace process by providing an epistemic basis for continuation of the conflict. It includes the following specific themes: shared beliefs about the goals in the conflict, security, own victimization, positive self-image, delegitimization of the opponent, patriotism, the need for national unity, and peace. The chapter elaborates on the content of these shared beliefs while focusing specifically on the Israeli–Jewish ethos during the years 1967–2013. The way ethos of conflict changes is also discussed as are potential causes of changes in ethos. In this context, the chapter refers to major events and major information as causes of change in ethos. It further discusses the reciprocal relationship between ethos of conflict and conflict resolution.

Keywords

Gaza Strip Israeli Society Peace Treaty Peace Process Arab State 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Abelson, R. P. (1968). Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  2. Apter, D. E. (Ed.). (1997). Legitimization of violence. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Arviv-Abromovich, R. (2010). Societal beliefs about the Israeli-Arab Palestinian conflict transmitted in national ceremonies -1948-2006. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Tel-Aviv University. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
  4. Bar-Tal, D. (2000). Shared beliefs in a society: Social psychological analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Bar-Tal, D. (2013). Intractable conflicts: Socio-psychological foundations and dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bar-Tal, D., & Antebi, D. (1992a). Beliefs about negative intentions of the world: A study of the Israeli siege mentality. Political Psychology, 13, 633–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bar-Tal, D., & Antebi, D. (1992b). Siege mentality in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 251–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bar-Tal, D., & Halperin, E. (2011). Socio-psychological barriers to conflict resolution. In D. Bar-Tal (Ed.), Intergroup conflicts and their resolution: Social psychological perspective (pp. 217–240). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bar-Tal, D., Halperin, E., & Oren, N. (2010). Socio-psychological barriers to peace making: The case of the Israeli Jewish society. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4, 63–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bar-Tal, D., Jacobson, D., & Klieman, A. S. (Eds.). (1998). Security concerns: Insights from the Israeli experience. Stamford, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bar-Tal, D., & Oren, N. (2000). Ethos as an expression of identity: Its changes in transition from conflict to peace in the Israeli case. Jerusalem: The Leonard Davis Institute for International Relations, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  12. Bar-Tal, D., Raviv, A., Raviv, A., & Dgani-Hirsh, A. (2009). The influence of the ethos of conflict on Israeli Jews’ interpretation of Jewish-Palestinian encounters. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 53(1), 94–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bar-Tal, D., & Sharvit, K. (2007). Psychological earthquake of the Israeli Jewish society: Changing opinions following the Camp David Summit and Al Aqsa Intifada. In J. Bar-Siman-Tov (Ed.), The Israeli-Palestinian conflict: From conflict resolution to conflict management (pp. 169–202). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  14. Bar-Tal, D., & Sharvit, K. (2008). Psychological foundations of Israeli Jews’ reactions to Al Aqsa Intifada: The role of the threatening transitional context. In V. M. Esses & R. Vernon (Eds.), Explaining the breakdown of ethnic relations: Why neighbors kill (pp. 147–170). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bar-Tal, D., Sharvit, K., Halperin, E., & Zafran, A. (2012). Ethos of conflict: The concept and its measurement. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 18(1), 40–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bar-Tal, D., & Staub, E. (1997). Patriotism in the lives of individuals and nations. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Bar-Tal, D., & Teichman, Y. (2005). Stereotypes and prejudice in conflict: Representation of Arabs in Israeli Jewish society. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bar-Tal, D., Zoran, H., Cohen, H., & Magal, T. (2010). Expressions of ethos of conflict in Sabbath leaflets of synagogues during the Cast Lead operation in the Gaza Strip. Israel Studies in Language and Society, 3(2), 33–55.Google Scholar
  19. Ben Meir, Y., & Bagno-Moldavsky, O. (2010). Vox populi: Trends in Israeli public opinion on national security 2004-2009. Memorandum No. 106, Tel Aviv: Institute for National Security Studies.Google Scholar
  20. Ben-Shaul, N. S. (1997). Mythical expressions of siege in Israeli films. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
  21. Burton, J. W. (Ed.). (1990). Conflict: Human needs theory. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  22. David, O. (2007). The crystallization and transformations of Jewish-Israeli identity: A study of identity reflection in Hebrew readers of the 20 th century. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Tel-Aviv University. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
  23. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row.Google Scholar
  24. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic, and political change in 43 societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kelman, H. C. (2007). The Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its vicissitudes: Insights from attitude theory. American Psychologist, 62(4), 287–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kriesberg, L., Northrup, T. A., & Thorson, S. J. (1989). Intractable conflicts and their transformation. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Landman, S. (2010). Barriers to peace: Protected values in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In Y. Bar-Siman-Tov (Ed.), Barriers to peace: The Israeli-Palestinian conflict (pp. 135–177). Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies.Google Scholar
  29. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Levinson, H., & Katz, E. (1993). The Intifada is not a war: Jewish opinion on the Israel-Arab conflict. In A. A. Cohen & G. Wolfsfeld (Eds.), Framing the Intifada: People and media. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  31. McClosky, H., & Zaller, J. (1984). The American ethos: Public attitudes toward capitalism and democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morris, B. (2001). Righteous victims: A history of the Zionist-Arab conflict, 1881-2001. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  33. Oren, N. (2005). The impact of major events in the Arab-Israeli conflict on the ethos of conflict of the Israeli Jewish society (1967-2000). Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Tel- Aviv University. (in Hebrew)Google Scholar
  34. Oren, N. (2009). The Israeli ethos of conflict 1967–2005. Working Paper #27. Fairfax, VA: Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University. See http://scar.gmu.edu/wp_27_oren.pdf
  35. Oren, N. (2010). Israeli identity formation and the Arab-Israeli conflict in election platforms, 1969-2006. Journal of Peace Research, 47(2), 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oren, N. (Forthcoming). The Israeli ethos and the Arab-Israeli conflict 1967–2013.Google Scholar
  37. Oren, N., & Bar-Tal, D. (2006). Ethos and identity: Expressions and changes in the Israeli Jewish society. Estudios de Psicología, 27(3), 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Oren, N., & Bar-Tal, D. (2007). The detrimental dynamics of delegitimization in intractable conflicts: The Israeli-Palestinian case. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 31(1), 111–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Porat, R., Halperin, E., & Bar-Tal, D. (2015). The effect of sociopsychological barriers on the processing of new information about peace opportunities. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(1), 93–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pruitt, D. G. (2005). Whither ripeness theory? Working Paper #25. Fairfax, VA: Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution, George Mason University. See http://scar.gmu.edu/wp_25_pruitt.pdf
  41. Pruitt, D. G., & Kim, S. H. (2004). Social conflict: Escalation, stalemate, and settlement (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  42. Rokeach, M., & Ball-Rokeach, S. J. (1989). Stability and change in American value priorities, 1968-1981. American Psychologist, 44(5), 775–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sandler, S. (1988). The protracted Arab-Israeli conflict: A temporal-spatial analysis. Jerusalem Journal of International Relations, 10, 54–78.Google Scholar
  44. Schori-Eyal, N., Klar, Y., & Roccas, S. (2013, January). Effects of perpetual ingroup victimhood orientation on cognition in current conflicts. Poster presented at the fourteenth annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. New Orleans, LA, USA.Google Scholar
  45. Shamir, J., & Shamir, M. (2000). The anatomy of public opinion. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  46. Sharvit, K. (2014). How conflict begets conflict: Activation of the ethos of conflict in times of distress in a society involved in an intractable conflict. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 252–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tetlock, P. E. (1986). A value pluralism model of ideological reasoning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(4), 819–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zartman, I. W. (2000). Ripeness: The hurting stalemate and beyond. In P. C. Stern & D. Druckman (Eds.), International conflict resolution after the Cold War (pp. 225–250). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Conflict Analysis and ResolutionGeorge Mason UniversityArlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations