Suchergebnisse

This article focuses on the evaluation of transfer from Track Two diplomacy to negotiations and policymaking by examining four Track Two initiatives between Israelis and Palestinians over the issues of water and Jerusalem. The article first discusses the transfer process for the water and Jerusalem cases and then presents lessons drawn from the comparative study. The comparative assessment reveals similarities concerning transfer in terms of what the contributions of Track Two are to the process of negotiations, which transfer strategies are used, and what conditions are necessary to make a contribution to the outcome. Initiatives in both cases employ primarily the strategy of working with influential people and they are more successful in impacting the process of negotiations rather than the outcome. Their contribution to the process of negotiations shows regularities in the types of learning acquired and used. Successful transfer to outcome is observed in one occasion when transfer strategies were implemented effectively, the negotiators were open to outside information, and there was political willingness. Asymmetrical transfer of people, and of ideas, from Track Two initiatives to negotiations was a barrier to effective transfer.

Abstract
In this article, building on the earlier research on procedural justice (PJ) and civil society inclusion, we assess the effectiveness of various civil society inclusion modalities based on their impact on durable peace (DP). A set of hypotheses concerning civil society inclusion is evaluated using the fifty-case peace agreement dataset assembled by Druckman and Wagner (2019). Their study showed that PJ was a key predictor of DP. We take their model as the base and add inclusion variables step by step using a hierarchical regression model. Results show that inclusive commissions (ICs) add significant explained variance to the prediction of DP. None of the other modalities add significant variance to the prediction. A possible explanation is that ICs ensure the continuation of civil society inclusion between the negotiation and implementation phases of a peace process. As well, they optimize breadth and depth in an inclusive negotiation process. The article concludes with discussions of next steps in the research and develops implications for policy makers.

AbstractThis article argues that the scholarly study of "transfer" from track-two workshops to track-one negotiations is highly applicable to the study of transfer from other modalities of participation to track-one in inclusive peace negotiations. During the last decade, other approaches to make negotiations more inclusive have also been increasingly employed, such as national dialogue conferences, variety of consultation mechanisms, or a diverse set of peace commissions. In this paper, we aim to expand the conceptualization of transfer beyond ICR workshops and discuss how the knowledge accumulated concerning transfer in the ICR literature during the last decades can be applied to understand and evaluate transfer from other inclusion modalities used in peace negotiations today. We therefore make a distinction between the first generation of transfer (1.0) developed by the ICR workshops scholars and practitioners and the transfer process from other modalities used in inclusive negotiations (2.0). To apply the lessons learned from transfer 1.0 to 2.0, we start with an overview of the concept as developed in track-two literature. We then suggest a conceptualization of transfer 2.0, based on insights from how it has unfolded in five of the seven inclusion modalities examined in our comparative case study. We discuss the similarities and differences between transfer 1.0 and 2.0 and how transfer 2.0 can be studied, including and beyond track-two initiatives. We conclude by suggesting a number of directions for future research on transfer 2.0 that are relevant to several inclusion modalities.

This paper examines Turkey's increasing involvement in the Israeli–Syrian and Israeli–Palestinian conflicts as a third party in the last decade. The paper first discusses the underlying reasons and motivations behind the change inTurkish foreign policy. Inthis section we answer the following question: While the traditional Turkish policy in the Middle East was nonintervention, what factors contributed to this recent change? We discuss these as systemic factors and domestic factors. In the second section of the paper we summarize the theoretical literature on third party intervention and mediation especially focusing on strategies, modes, activities, and tactics used. This section lays the background for the following section which classifies the various Turkish third party strategies and activities in the Israeli–Syrian and Israeli–Palestinian conflicts so far. In the final section we focus on the challenges to this new Turkish role from Turkish, Israeli, and Arab perspectives. We also discuss the crises between Israel and Turkey in the last year and how they constitute a barrier to Turkey acting in an effective third party role.

Personality approaches to politics are often criticized for not examining the effect that institutional role constraints have on individual beliefs and preferences. When leaders appear to change their stance when they change roles, it is assumed that roles have a determining influence. Modern personality theory and contemporary sociological role theory, however, view the effects of roles as interacting with agents' personalities. In this article, we investigate this question by comparing personality profiles of three Turkish leaders (Özal, Demirel, and Gül) during their tenure as prime minister and during their subsequent time as president. For Gül, we perform an additional comparison during his time as foreign minister. The personality profiles are in the form of quantitative scores generated from machine‐coded content analysis of leaders' words using the Leadership Trait Analysis method. We hypothesize that different leaders will be more susceptible to changing role contexts, depending on core personality traits, and that different traits are more likely to change with new roles. Overall, our results suggest that leaders' traits are fairly resistant to changes across roles and that task orientation is the most likely trait to change as leaders adapt to different role demands and expectations. This study makes a contribution to our understanding of the interaction between personality and political contexts by offering specific theoretically derived hypotheses and by empirically and statistically examining a preliminary set of expectations that could be applied more broadly to other leaders.