Peace talks are an intricate dance—often choreographed by third-party mediators—among conflict parties to gradually exchange war for peace. Over the past decade, more armed conflicts than ever ended at the negotiation table instead of on the battlefield. This is one of the most significant trends in conflict termination during this century, and it is a welcome change.
However, many obstacles still impede the process. One is that many leaders are afraid of being perceived as weak by their adversaries, if they appear to negotiate with them. Leaders may also worry that their opponents will adapt their strategy in response to negotiations, thus thwarting them.
Another obstacle is the difficulty of reconciling the positions of the conflicting parties. For instance, it is difficult to imagine a Sudanese state that is both Islamic, as many in the North want, and multiethnic, as some Southers seek. In addition, underlying grievances often defy rational analysis. For example, some people are driven by pathological hatred toward their enemies, and this passion is hard to overcome.
Finally, a number of barriers exist in the form of domestic and international pressures. For example, while European officials have tried to increase their pressure on Israel to end its military campaign against the Gaza Strip, they are constrained by the US’s unconditional support for the Israeli government. Moreover, the EU’s reluctance to push for an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestine has diminished its credibility in that country and throughout the Middle East.
About the Author
