This chapter examines the period from the Second Intifada (2001) to nowadays, following the failure of the implementation of the Oslo Accords. It suggests that a politics of ‘no war, no peace’ has been established and normalized, while cultural violence has deepened despite the efforts of the longest peace process in contemporary history. It examines the effects at the observable level of the stalemate of the protracted peace process and the institutionalization of dehumanization as a radical political agenda. One of the main effects of the now stalled peace process, it explores how peace has been subcontracted by the very actors of the dying peace process that act as donors and sponsors of an increasing number of civil society organizations (CSOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that have been involved in the peacebuilding process by bridging reconciliation in the societal level. The argument developed is that the dual and simultaneous processes of dehumanization and peace-less reconciliation that work in parallel in this conflict suggests that in the almost absence of the peace process there have emerged and intensified several activities that seek to counteract the already verified tendency of dehumanization in the societal level, pointing to alternative routes and their potential for peacemaking.

No abstract

No abstract

This chapter dives deeper into the theoretical framework proposed in this book by identifying, characterizing and proposing concrete indicators at the observable level for assessing and analyzing the elements of identity in conflict. The argument developed is that an empirical examination of the processes of identity building in protracted conflicts shows that these feature two main elements—and coexisting dynamics—which can be seen as opposing poles that might contribute to deepening the conflict or promoting its transformation instead. By identifying the dimensions and observable indicators that allow for an assessment of these processes of dehumanization and peace-less reconciliation, this chapter offers a tool for empirical analyses of protracted conflicts and policy development toward their positive transformation.

This chapter analyzes the brief, although game-changing, Oslo Era. This chapter argues that the Oslo period has operated a rupture in the already existing tendency of dehumanizing the ‘other’, as discourses and narratives connected to dehumanization in the elite level deeply impacted perceptions on the societal level, creating the environment for the positive transformation of the conflict. However, its conclusions point to the pernicious impact of the disappointment connected to the feelings of loss of expectations and hope, as well as the emergence of new narratives about blames and responsibilities, which have added new grievances to the already existing ones.

This introductory chapter aims to situate the research puzzle by positioning its main object in the state-of-the-art. It introduces the main argument of the book which is that protracted peace processes occupy a central position in the cycle of protractedness insofar as the policies, narratives, norms and practices associated with them have the double potential of affecting identities in conflict by promoting dehumanization or reconciliation. While the former is the dominating feature of othering in protracted conflicts, what tends to be reinforced by the interactions and new grievances sparked by protracted peace processes through time, their parallel and coexisting dynamics point to the appearance of empirically observable activities and practices that have emerged alongside—as a consequence—and within the very framework—as a desired outcome—of the protracted peace process. By exploring the dual process of dehumanization and peace-less reconciliation in ongoing conflicts, this chapter delineates the contribution of the book connected with the analysis of the conditions that have allowed for one process to prevail over the other, which points to avenues for positive conflict transformation.

This chapter focuses on the concepts of identity and conflict. Drawing from many others who place identity as the central factor explaining the mutually reinforcing dynamics of protracted conflicts and protracted peace processes, this chapter suggests that the processes of identity building in protracted conflicts bear specific characteristics due to the multigenerational aspects of these contexts. The argument developed is that peace processes in this kind of conflicts tend to become protracted themselves, turning into a structure of their own that impact perceptions about the ‘self’ and the ‘other’, thus influencing the negative dimension of identity—the detachment or difference from others—and, therefore, the very behavior and interests of actors involved in the conflict. For this reason, identity and violence must be read as mutually constituted in the cases of historical conflicts, making it impossible to discuss conflict transformation without addressing the main categories of identity and violence, as well as their interconnectedness.

This chapter explores the first phase of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its impact on identities in conflict by analyzing the period that starts with the Partition Plan and lasts during the Cold War, until the First Intifada (1947 to 1987). The Cold War period is considered a phase of its own as it marks an important moment in terms of the formulas for solving this conflict—the two-states solution—and the definition of actors that were deemed relevant for such solution. The argument developed is that the reinforcement of dehumanization processes in this period is connected with a defensive reaction of the two competing identities to developments in the international level related with the peace process, that was mainly restricted to elite-driven negotiations toward reaching an agreement regarding the governments and boundaries of the now partitioned territories.