Simplified decision-making or concealed strategy? A test of Peter Coleman’s Attractor Landscape Model using a comparative case study of the Israel-Palestine peace process 2007-2011.
| Název práce v češtině: | Simplified decision-making or concealed strategy? A test of Peter Coleman’s Attractor Landscape Model using a comparative case study of the Israel-Palestine peace process 2007-2011. |
|---|---|
| Název v anglickém jazyce: | Simplified decision-making or concealed strategy? A test of Peter Coleman’s Attractor Landscape Model using a comparative case study of the Israel-Palestine peace process 2007-2011. |
| Klíčová slova: | the Palestine-Israel conflcit, Israel, Palestine, borders, Middle East |
| Klíčová slova anglicky: | the Palestine-Israel conflcit, Israel, Palestine, borders, Middle East |
| Akademický rok vypsání: | 2015/2016 |
| Typ práce: | diplomová práce |
| Jazyk práce: | angličtina |
| Ústav: | Katedra politologie (23-KP) |
| Vedoucí / školitel: | doc. Martin Riegl, Ph.D. |
| Řešitel: | skrytý - zadáno vedoucím/školitelem |
| Datum přihlášení: | 15.06.2016 |
| Datum zadání: | 15.06.2016 |
| Datum a čas obhajoby: | 22.06.2017 00:00 |
| Místo konání obhajoby: | Jinonice, U Kříže 8 |
| Datum odevzdání elektronické podoby: | 10.05.2017 |
| Datum proběhlé obhajoby: | 22.06.2017 |
| Oponenti: | PhDr. Michael Romancov, Ph.D. |
| Kontrola URKUND: | |
| Zásady pro vypracování |
| Topic Characteristics / Research Question(s):
This thesis will investigate the apparent lack of creativity in diplomatic efforts to end the Palestine-Israel conflict through the general research question: why is the final proposed border solution to the conflict limited to two states? The research agenda will be focused on the three-state solution as an alternative which is not discussed, yet logically viable. Given the many social, economic and political differences between Gaza and the West Bank, which have been diverging rapidly since 2005, and the geographical distance between the two territories, a three-state solution is a reasonable alternative; yet it is part of no publically visible negotiation process. This thesis will make a qualitative survey of diplomats in order to determine if the three-state solution was discussed informally and to determine the reason for their unanimous support of the two-state solution. The study will have a comparative element, and will also analyze differences deriving from the nationality of diplomats and their proximity to negotiations. The theoretical base for this study will be drawn from the field of conflict resolution, focusing on Zartman’s (2008) conceptualization of the negotiation process as necessarily fluid as to the agenda in conflict situations; as opposed to the iterative convergence process centered over the two-state solution. In addition, theories of peacebuilding and statebuilding will be used as evidence that a two-state solution, if at all possible, would result in an extremely fragile state due to the large cleavages between the two territories. Working hypotheses: 1. Hypothesis #1: The three-state solution has not been seriously considered 2. Hypothesis #2: Solutions to the Israel-Palestine conflict have crystallized (become inflexible) after many years of negotiations. 3. Hypothesis #3: Diplomats are coordinating their support of the two-state solution, either formally or informally. 4. Hypothesis #4: The three-state solution is not seriously considered because it is politically untenable 5. Hypothesis #5: At least some of the stake-holders would prefer the three-state solution were it politically tenable 6. Hypothesis #6: Diplomats from 3rd party countries will be less familiar with the three-state solution. Methodology: The methodology will be qualitative and focus on primary sources. Data collection will be in the form of extended interviews. An interview protocol will be created based on a theory-based deconstruction of the research agenda and social science best-practice methods. The interview protocol will include both closed and open questions, which will be sequenced according the goals of the study. This study will aim to interview around 30 diplomats, but the number may be larger or smaller depending on the results of the interviews. Diplomats will largely be chosen based on membership of countries involved in the conflict and those involved in external negotiations, such as the USA. This study will aim to interview both current diplomats in Tel Aviv and retired diplomats from the target countries who have taken part in negotiations in the past. The data will then be coded and analyzed. The results will be presented comparatively. |
| Seznam odborné literatury |
| Allegra, M. & Napolitano, P., 2011. Two States or Not Two States? Leadership and Peace Making in the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict. Mediterranean Politics, 16(2), pp. 261-278.
Chataway, C., 1998. Track II Diplomacy: From a Track I Perspective. Negotiation Journal, 14(3), pp. 269-287. Eiland, G., 2008. Rethinking the Two-State Solution, Washington DC: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Hasson, S., 2010. Gaza Enclave: Victim, Enemy, Rival. Geopolitics, 15, pp. 385-405. Musu, C., 2010. European Union Policy towards the Arab–Israeli Peace Process. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan O’Malley, P., 2015. The Two-State Delusion: Israel and Palestine - A Tale of Two Narratives. New York: Viking OECD, 2011. Supporting Statebuilding in Situations of Conflict and Fragility, s.l.: OECD Publishing. Zartman, I., 2008. Negotiation and Conflict Management: Essays on theory and practice. Abingdon: Routledge. |
| Předběžná náplň práce |
| 1. Introduction
2. The history of Israel-Palestine peace negotiations a. Overview of major negotiations b. Israeli and Palestinian bargaining positions c. The positions of third party actors * The USA, the EU, the Quartet and the Arab League d. The current status of the peace process * The Obama Era and Roadmap for Peace versus the Arab Peace Initiative 3. Negotiation and conflict resolution theory a. Conflict resolution and negotiation b. Statebuilding 4. The three-state solution a. The three-state solution and conflict resolution theory b. Literature review of the three-state solution * Both in negotiation proposals and academic works 5. Research agenda and methodology a. Research question b. Hypotheses c. Methodology 6. Results a. The three-state solution in track-II diplomacy b. Perception of the three-state solution by nationality c. Perception of the three-state solution by status of the diplomat * Active/retired, directly/indirectly involved 7. Interpretation 8. Discussion 9. Conclusion |
| Předběžná náplň práce v anglickém jazyce |
| Allegra, M. & Napolitano, P., 2011. Two States or Not Two States? Leadership and Peace Making in the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict. Mediterranean Politics, 16(2), pp. 261-278.
Brinkman, S., 2013. Qualitative Interviewing: Understanding qualitative research. Oxford: Oxford University Press Chataway, C., 1998. Track II Diplomacy: From a Track I Perspective. Negotiation Journal, 14(3), pp. 269-287. Deutsch, M., Coleman, P. and Marcus, E., 2006. The Handbook of Conflict Resolution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Eiland, G., 2008. Rethinking the Two-State Solution, Washington DC: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Eisenber, L. and Caplan, N., 2010. Negotiating Arab-Israeli Peace: Patterns, Problems, Possibilities. Bloomington: Indiana University Press Foddy, W., 1993. Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires: Theory and Practice in Social Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Hasson, S., 2010. Gaza Enclave: Victim, Enemy, Rival. Geopolitics, 15, pp. 385-405. Hemmer, C., 2010. Balancing, Bonding, and Balking: The European Union, the United States, and the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process. Mediterranean Quarterly, 21(2), pp. 47-60 Musu, C., 2010. European Union Policy towards the Arab–Israeli Peace Process. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan O’Malley, P., 2015. The Two-State Delusion: Israel and Palestine - A Tale of Two Narratives. New York: Viking OECD, 2011. Supporting Statebuilding in Situations of Conflict and Fragility, s.l.: OECD Publishing. Salem, W. & Kaufman, E., 2009. From diagnosis to treatment: toward new shared principles for Israeli–Palestinian peacebuilding. In: D. Sandole, S. Byrne, I. Sandole-Staroste & J. Senehi, eds. Handbook of Conflict Analysis and Resolution. London: Routledge, pp. 437-455. Zartman, I., 2008. Negotiation and Conflict Management: Essays on theory and practice. Abingdon: Routledge. |