Paths to Peace? Theories of Conflict Resolution and Realities of International Politics

2019 ◽  
pp. 105-132
Author(s):  
K. J. Holsti
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
International Politics

A Hermeneutic Understanding of Dialogue as a Tool for Global Peace

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 23-39
Author(s):  
J. Chidozie Chukwuokolo ◽  
Victor O. Jeko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Human Communication ◽  
Will To Power ◽  
Normative Foundation ◽  
Contextual Understanding ◽  
The Social ◽  
Diverse World ◽  
Global Peace ◽  
Violent Conflicts

The problem of threat to international politics and global peace has undermined the effectiveness of the power of dialogue. The world seems to be in the condition of will to power derivable from the mutually assured destructive (MAD) tendencies. Is it possible to extend global peace? How can this be achieved? In this paper, we posit that dialogue is a fundamental medium for conflict resolution and peaceful coexistence in a diverse world. We contend that monologue in international politics understood in terms of might is right undermines the effectiveness of dialogue and often leads to violent conflicts within and between countries. Our world today is at a crossroads. Dialogue, however, foregrounds the medium of conflict resolution and the social consciousness of human communication. We present a hermeneutic understanding of dialogue that follows from relevant works of Hans Georg Gadamer and Jűrgen Habermas. This paper espouses the power of dialogue as a basis for the normative foundation of an emancipated social global order. The dialogical sequence has a cobweb of social interconnectedness and the ethics of global peace. We present a literal and philosophical understanding of dialogue and a contextual understanding of dialogue within the hermeneutic tradition.

Comparison of Intranational and International Politics

1963 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 406-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chadwick F. Alger
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Game Theory ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
International Relations ◽  
International Politics ◽  
The Social ◽  
Cross Fertilization

The study of international relations has been considerably advanced in recent years by the application of findings from other areas of the social sciences. These have included decision-making, game theory, conflict, bargaining, communication, negotiation, systems, geography, attitudes, and simulation. International relations scholars such as Morton Kaplan, Charles McClelland, Richard C. Snyder, and Harold Sprout have built important bridges between international relations and other disciplines. It has been fortunate that such innovators have often found men from other disciplines, such as Kenneth Boulding, Harold Guetzkow, Charles Osgood, and Anatol Rapoport, in the middle of the bridge. The volumes of the Journal of Conflict Resolution offer one example of how far this remarkable effort at cross-fertilization has gone.

China and southeast Asia in the 2000s: Tension management in the maritime space

2021 ◽  
pp. 136914812098094
Author(s):  
Daojiong Zha ◽  
Lina Gong
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
South China ◽  
International Politics ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Cooperative Interaction ◽  
Security Discourse ◽  
Tension Management

Viewed through the standard prisms of international politics, escalation of security tensions is the definitive feature in the evolution of relations between China and Southeast Asia over the last decade. Disagreements over territorial ownership of and rights to the South China Sea sharpened and arguably became the defining feature of regional geopolitics. Yet, China and Southeast Asia have also managed to prove predictions of fateful conflict to be premature. In this article, we study Chinese and Southeast Asian strands of security discourse, which provide political and diplomatic cover for cooperative interaction in parallel with little or no compromise on security principles. Then we select interactions between China and the Philippines and China and Vietnam as cases to illustrate our observations. We conclude by postulating that, at least in the maritime space, tension management rather than conflict resolution is more likely to be the continuing feature into the future.

scholarly journals Non-human humanitarians

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Meiches
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Humanitarian Intervention ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Mass Violence ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
Human Actors ◽  
The University

AbstractThe study of humanitarian intervention typically focuses on the human victims and saviours in armed conflict and natural disasters. Moreover, explanations of the virtues of humanitarian norms and ethics emphasise the importance of the university of suffering and the empathic nature of humanitarian efforts. In contrast, this article explores the neglected world of ‘non-human humanitarians’. Specifically, the article outlines three cases of non-human actors that expand and complicate international humanitarian practices: dogs, drones, and diagrams. Drawing on new materialist and posthuman literatures, the article argues that non-humans possess distinct capacities that vastly expand and transform humanitarian efforts in ranging from relief, to medicine, to conflict resolution. Highlighting non-human humanitarians thus offers a new perspective on the resources available for redressing mass violence and conflict, but also complicates existing definitions of humanitarian norms. To the contrary, the article demonstrates that non-humans often maximise humanitarian services to a degree greater than their human counterparts, but have also introduced changes into humanitarian practices that have problematic unintended consequences. Non-human humanitarians reveals previously discounted participants in international politics and the key roles they play in various international interventions.

Self-determination and Secession: Human Rights-based Conflict Resolution

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoilo A. Velasco
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Modern History ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Effective Power ◽  
Per Se

Abstract Throughout its development as an international law principle, there prevailed an assumption that self-determination gives rise to secession. This assumption, which has fuelled the most violent ethno-national conflicts in modern history, is however misleading. Self-determination does not lead to secession. Self-determination is conceptually and legally separate and independent from secession. Its association with secession actually makes self-determination a legal anomaly. Whether a “nation” can secede is not a function of self-determination but is dictated by an entirely different variable – effective power or authority in international politics. There is a need to break the link between self-determination and secession, and instead recognise self-determination as a human right per se rather than a principle that justifies, confuses, and exacerbates ethno-national conflicts. The result is a change in our way of understanding, and hopefully resolving, existing secessionist struggles and ethno-national conflicts worldwide.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document