Transition from conflict: The importance of pre‐negotiations in the Oslo peace process

Gewurz, Ilan

doi:10.1080/13537120008719578

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on pre-negotiation in interstate and intrastate conflict cases such as the talks prior to the Oslo process between Palestinian and Israeli officials (Gewurz, 2000), or talks ahead of the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks between the Soviet Union and the United States (Griffiths, 1979), scholars have developed theories about the onset, development, and effects of pre-negotiation (see also Corbacho, 2008;Schiff, 2008;Fisher, 2007: 317; Chigas, 1997;Saunders, 1996;Stein, 1989a,b).…”

Section: Debated Scope Of Pre-negotiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15

Doyle

Hegele

2020

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pre-negotiation is widely accepted as a means to convince intrastate conflict parties to negotiate formally; however, research has not yet established a causal link between early efforts to bring warring parties together and the outcome of any negotiated settlement. This gap begs the question: To what extent do activities during the pre-negotiation phase contribute to the signing of a peace agreement? Theory on interstate conflict suggests that pre-negotiation reduces risk, thereby convincing conflict parties that they have more to gain from negotiating than from fighting. However, in conflicts between governments and non-state armed actors, this article argues that reciprocity paves the way for reaching peace agreements. This article introduces a new dataset on pre-negotiation including nearly all intrastate armed conflicts between 2005 and 2015. Confirming previous findings, mediation is significantly and positively correlated with reaching a type of peace agreement; conflicts over government are more likely to end in a negotiated agreement than conflicts over territory or both government and territory. In contrast to existing qualitative research, this study finds little evidence that pre-negotiation increases the likelihood that conflict dyads sign peace agreements. Future quantitative research on this topic requires more nuanced measures of the conditions under which conflict parties shift from unilateral to joint decisionmaking.

show abstract

Section: Debated Scope Of Pre-negotiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15

Doyle

Hegele

2020

Journal of Peace Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, it may be even more beneficial to establish rapport before negotiators actually meet. One of the central functions of the pre-negotiation period is to address the emotional and psychological barriers that impede official negotiations and create an atmosphere of common understanding (Gewurz, 2000).…”

Section: How Do Emotional Displays Influence Interpersonal Dynamics?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Power of Presence: Strategic Response to Displayed Emotions in Negotiations

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter extends the literature on the strategic display of emotions (Kopelman, Rosette, & Thompson, 2006) and investigates how negotiators can optimize both their relational and economic outcomes through strategic responses to displayed emotions. First, we consider what information can be gained from observing the emotional display of someone during the negotiating process. Next we review what the negotiation literature suggests someone should do when faced with an individual displaying emotion-both positive and negative. We conclude by suggesting that future research needs to account for both the behavioral strategy a negotiator employs and the personal qualities of the negotiator. We suggest that the recommendations in the literature overemphasize strategic tactics and underemphasize the person employing those tactics. We argue that the success or failure of a strategic response to displayed emotions during the negotiating process pivots on the negotiator's ability to balance strategic tactics with his or her authentic presence.

show abstract

Identifying parameters of foreign policy change: An eclectic approach

Blavoukos

Bourantonis

2014

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines foreign policy change, identifying structural parameters of domestic and international origins that bring about major foreign policy shifts. Domestic structural parameters comprise the politico-institutional setting and advocacy groups in support of alternative foreign policy options. International structural parameters refer on the one hand to systemic changes that may bring about foreign policy realignment and, on the other hand, to the country's role in the international system and its interactions with other countries that may activate foreign policy changes. We posit that this eclectic approach is necessary to account for major, multidimensional and complex, foreign policy decisions. We use this analytical framework to examine the Israeli re-orientation that enabled the signing of the Oslo Peace Agreement in the early 1990s.

show abstract

Transition from conflict: The importance of pre‐negotiations in the Oslo peace process

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15

Talks before the talks: Effects of pre-negotiation on reaching peace agreements in intrastate armed conflicts, 2005–15

The Power of Presence: Strategic Response to Displayed Emotions in Negotiations

Identifying parameters of foreign policy change: An eclectic approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About