Benjamin Gidron, Stanley N. Katz, and Yeheskel Hasenfeld (eds)
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195125924
- eISBN:
- 9780199833894
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195125924.001.0001
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
Peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) are civil society organizations dedicated to resolving protracted conflicts. Teams of local researchers coordinated by an international advisory ...
More
Peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) are civil society organizations dedicated to resolving protracted conflicts. Teams of local researchers coordinated by an international advisory board, investigate the characteristics, roles, similarities, and differences of P/CROs in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and Israel/Palestine in the last third of the twentieth century. Comparative research of this sort throws up definitional, conceptual, and methodological difficulties. A historical overview of the three conflicts reveals shared features: disputes over land; forced settlements; ethnonational divisions; and the intersection of class and race. In South Africa, P/CROs engaged in antimilitarization activities, mediation, promoting contact between white and black communities, encouraging dialog between elites, and research, and with other antiapartheid nongovernmental organizations and the mass‐based resistance movements formed a “multiorganizational field.” In Israel, P/CRO activities included consciousness raising and protest, dialog promotion, some professional service provision, and the articulation of propeace arguments, but received little credit for any contributions they made to the peace process. Palestinian P/CROs were few and weakly developed as a result of Palestine's sociopolitical culture, although they performed human rights advocacy, international diplomacy, and domestic consciousness raising. Northern Ireland's voluntary sector was large, and included many P/CROs, which tended to focus on the symptoms of the conflict rather than the cause, and had little impact on the peace process beyond bringing an “inclusivist” philosophy to the political arena, fostering political debate, and providing some progressive leadership. Across the three regions, some P/CRO similarities emerged: foreign funding was crucial; charismatic leadership was important; almost all P/CROs became more professional and formal over time; and most P/CROs employed the same sorts of tactics, with some variation according to political context, but framed their conflicts differently. In general, it seems P/CRO impact was minimal: they played no direct role in the resolution of their respective conflicts but made indirect contributions.Less
Peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) are civil society organizations dedicated to resolving protracted conflicts. Teams of local researchers coordinated by an international advisory board, investigate the characteristics, roles, similarities, and differences of P/CROs in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and Israel/Palestine in the last third of the twentieth century. Comparative research of this sort throws up definitional, conceptual, and methodological difficulties. A historical overview of the three conflicts reveals shared features: disputes over land; forced settlements; ethnonational divisions; and the intersection of class and race. In South Africa, P/CROs engaged in antimilitarization activities, mediation, promoting contact between white and black communities, encouraging dialog between elites, and research, and with other antiapartheid nongovernmental organizations and the mass‐based resistance movements formed a “multiorganizational field.” In Israel, P/CRO activities included consciousness raising and protest, dialog promotion, some professional service provision, and the articulation of propeace arguments, but received little credit for any contributions they made to the peace process. Palestinian P/CROs were few and weakly developed as a result of Palestine's sociopolitical culture, although they performed human rights advocacy, international diplomacy, and domestic consciousness raising. Northern Ireland's voluntary sector was large, and included many P/CROs, which tended to focus on the symptoms of the conflict rather than the cause, and had little impact on the peace process beyond bringing an “inclusivist” philosophy to the political arena, fostering political debate, and providing some progressive leadership. Across the three regions, some P/CRO similarities emerged: foreign funding was crucial; charismatic leadership was important; almost all P/CROs became more professional and formal over time; and most P/CROs employed the same sorts of tactics, with some variation according to political context, but framed their conflicts differently. In general, it seems P/CRO impact was minimal: they played no direct role in the resolution of their respective conflicts but made indirect contributions.
Benjamin Gidron, Stanley N. Katz, and Yeheskel Hasenfeld
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195125924
- eISBN:
- 9780199833894
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195125924.003.0002
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
This study investigated peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) in three protracted conflicts in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and Israel/Palestine. P/CROs are citizen‐initiated ...
More
This study investigated peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) in three protracted conflicts in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and Israel/Palestine. P/CROs are citizen‐initiated voluntary organizations that promote peace, reconciliation, and coexistence between parties to their conflicts, and the mutual recognition of the rights of each side. Comparative research on P/CROs faces theoretical and methodological challenges. They can be analyzed as elements of civil society, as social movement organizations, and as organizations focused on the resolution of conflict. P/CROs activities include service delivery, advocacy, dialog promotion, and consciousness raising. The study examined P/CRO characteristics such as membership, ideology, structure, financial and human resources, relations with other organizations, risks encountered, and impact on the conflict. Study methodology was evolutionary and iterative, and involved a three‐phase selection procedure, research by local teams, and oversight by an international advisory board.Less
This study investigated peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) in three protracted conflicts in South Africa, Northern Ireland, and Israel/Palestine. P/CROs are citizen‐initiated voluntary organizations that promote peace, reconciliation, and coexistence between parties to their conflicts, and the mutual recognition of the rights of each side. Comparative research on P/CROs faces theoretical and methodological challenges. They can be analyzed as elements of civil society, as social movement organizations, and as organizations focused on the resolution of conflict. P/CROs activities include service delivery, advocacy, dialog promotion, and consciousness raising. The study examined P/CRO characteristics such as membership, ideology, structure, financial and human resources, relations with other organizations, risks encountered, and impact on the conflict. Study methodology was evolutionary and iterative, and involved a three‐phase selection procedure, research by local teams, and oversight by an international advisory board.
Tamar Hermann
- Published in print:
- 2002
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780195125924
- eISBN:
- 9780199833894
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195125924.003.0005
- Subject:
- Political Science, International Relations and Politics
In the late 1960s, and especially after the 1973 war, peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) concerned to resolving the Arab–Israeli conflict, peacefully began to emerge in Israel, and ...
More
In the late 1960s, and especially after the 1973 war, peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) concerned to resolving the Arab–Israeli conflict, peacefully began to emerge in Israel, and in the 1980s, P/CROs became an integral, although mainly unpopular part of Israeli political life. P/CROs’ activities included consciousness raising and protest, dialog promotion, some professional service provision, and the articulation of propeace arguments. Discord amongst P/CROs over the Oslo Accords of 1993, and the conservative turn taken by the Israeli government and society after Rabin's assassination, left Israeli P/CROs weak and ineffectual by the mid 1990s. Furthermore, they had always been hamstrung by the public's perception of the P/CRO political agenda as naïve and idealistic, by their extraparliamentary status in a country that prioritized parliamentary politics, and by their homogeneous membership – older, middle class, highly educated, urban, secular Ashkenazi Jews, many of them born in the USA. While the Israeli government ultimately took advantage of the propeace attitude fostered by the P/CROs and adopted much of the program advocated by P/CROs, it consistently denied them any credit for or role in the peace process.Less
In the late 1960s, and especially after the 1973 war, peace and conflict‐resolution organizations (P/CROs) concerned to resolving the Arab–Israeli conflict, peacefully began to emerge in Israel, and in the 1980s, P/CROs became an integral, although mainly unpopular part of Israeli political life. P/CROs’ activities included consciousness raising and protest, dialog promotion, some professional service provision, and the articulation of propeace arguments. Discord amongst P/CROs over the Oslo Accords of 1993, and the conservative turn taken by the Israeli government and society after Rabin's assassination, left Israeli P/CROs weak and ineffectual by the mid 1990s. Furthermore, they had always been hamstrung by the public's perception of the P/CRO political agenda as naïve and idealistic, by their extraparliamentary status in a country that prioritized parliamentary politics, and by their homogeneous membership – older, middle class, highly educated, urban, secular Ashkenazi Jews, many of them born in the USA. While the Israeli government ultimately took advantage of the propeace attitude fostered by the P/CROs and adopted much of the program advocated by P/CROs, it consistently denied them any credit for or role in the peace process.
