Abstract
Track two diplomacy is designed to deal with conflicts that are deemed to be intractable, because the rational calculation
of the antagonists leads to a zero-sum game. Track two diplomacy is non-official, it acts on the perceptions and beliefs and
is expected to change the way each actor perceives their strategic interests and threats to their core values. We apply the
conceptual frames derived from track two diplomacy theories to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because it was a typical case
of an intractable conflict transformed with track two diplomacy initiatives. Successful track two diplomacy initiatives were
initiated by a third party that socialised the antagonistic elites – i. e. US official and non-official actors, or think tanks. They
were combined with track one-and-a-half diplomacy, with an effect on the track one, i. e. the official diplomatic negotiations
on peace. Nevertheless, that did not lead to the in-depth transformation on the grassroots level advocated by peace and conflict resolution organisations.
Publisher
Belarusian State University
Reference41 articles.
1. Nohra F. Le conflit israélo-palestinien a la lumière des élections de 2006. Enjeux Diplomatiques et Stratégiques. 2007;3(1):83–99.
2. Davidson W, Montville J. Foreign policy according to Freud. Foreign Policy. 1981;45(4):145–157.
3. Walter B. Explaining the intractability of territorial conflict. International Studies Review. 2003;5(4):137–153.
4. As’ad Razzouk. The greater Israel: a study of expansionist thought. Beirut: PLO Research Centre; 1968. 663 p. Arabic.
5. Melamid A. The Shatt al-‘Arab doundary dispute. Middle East Journal. 1968;3:350–357.