Mediating International Conflicts: Is Image Change Necessary?

Abstract

A basic assumption of much literature on international conflict, mediation, and social psychology is that the process of mediation can break down stereotypes or images which conflicting parties hold of each other; this breakdown is argued to facilitate settlement. The article proposes a method for the systematic testing of this assumption. This approach is then explored with a `plausibility probe' consisting of three case studies: the Israeli-Egyptian conflict from 1973 to 1979; the conflict between Greek and Turkish Cypriots from 1979 to 1983; and the Iran-Iraq war from 1980 to 1985. In all three cases, the predictions of hypothesized relationship were upheld. In the one case (Egypt-Israel) where resolution was reached, images did change, correlated with mediation efforts over time. In cases (Cyprus, Iran-Iraq) where no resolution was obtained, no image change occurred despite mediation efforts. These results suggest that the previously untested hypothesis of mediation theory regarding the importance of image change is a plausible one, and should be pursued with further research in the form of more case studies and large-N analyses.