Search results

This paper explores the possibilities of intercultural dialogue as a means of peace building on the people‐to‐people level. With its focus on the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict the work assesses a number of efforts, which have utilized cultural dialogue rooted in religion to facilitate dialogue, relationship building, and perception change during the period subsequent to the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993 and prior to the outbreak of Israeli‐Palestinian violence in September 2000. Utilizing an interdisciplinary theoretical framework and questionnaire‐based quantitative data collected from Israeli and Palestinian students, the work suggests that the religiously based dialogue has the potential to move mutual perceptions to more favorable positions based on the similarities between Islam and Judaism. Such dialogue can also clarify to both sides the identification which each side has with the same land. We believe that our exploratory data might encourage the further use and study of religious cultural elements to facilitate peace building in both the Israeli‐Palestinian context and in other acute interethnic conflict venues.

This paper explores the possibilities of federalist and multicultural theory as a basis to generate perception change within Israeli‐Jewish society. In an innovative course, student subjects were exposed to the narratives of a variety of subgroups, participated in a workshop, and studied various examples of federalism and multiculturalism as an alternative to Israel's historic melting pot model. Their opinions on Israeli society and cultural outlook were analyzed based on qualitative methods and consensus theory (which is being introduced as a measurement of attitudinal change). The data indicates that the course was able to generate empathy for the “other,” encourage the students to identify commonalities between disparate subgroups and to consolidate the consensus and change some opinions toward a more federalist multicultural viewpoint. Based on this experiment, we suggest that there is a foundation to consider a federalist multicultural model as a vehicle to reduce social tensions in Israel and elsewhere.

The current work aims to introduce the concept of conflict perception and construct a scale that measures individual differences in perceptions about conflicts along religious, national and material dimensions. The concept and the measure are developed in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

The research design combines three methodological elements: 14 focus groups in Israel and the West Bank, which represent diversity in place of residence, religion, age and political background; an expert panel review; and a survey of 411 student respondents that was conducted between September 29 and October 9, 2013, among university students in Israel and Palestine.

The findings show that conflict perception is an individual’s subjective view regarding the essence of the conflict and its central issues, the identities of the parties involved and their motivations, which may include material, ideological or symbolic motives, or any combination thereof. A novel scale consisting of five statements that can measure conflict perception that was developed, validated and implemented via a survey sample showed that Palestinians in the West Bank and in Israel have a religious perception of the conflict, whereas Jews have a national perception of the conflict.

First, the paper introduces a new concept that sheds additional light on the micro foundations of peoples’ attitudes in conflict situations. Second, it develops and validates a measurement tool for conflict perception that may be usable, with necessary adjustments, in other conflicts. Third, it demonstrates that parties to the conflict do not necessarily share similar perceptions about the conflict, a finding with far-reaching consequences for conflict resolution at both the scholarly and policy levels.