Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Is Transformative Dialogue a Possible and Justifiable Intervention for Resolving Intractable Conflicts?—A Practitioner's View

2024; Wiley; Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/crq.21464

1541-1508

Erik Weststrate,

Global Peace and Security Dynamics

This commentary responds to the article by Bekkers (2024), titled 'Is Transformative Dialogue a Possible Intervention for Resolving Intractable Conflicts?' in Conflict Resolution Quarterly. The article explores how identity-related conflicts might be approached through transformative dialogue rather than conventional negotiation or rational discourse. As the article argues, although promising evidence supports small-scale applications of transformative methods, further research and development are needed to scale these strategies to broader or societal levels without infringing on autonomy. With experience as a diplomat in similar processes involving representatives of groups within countries or between multiple countries, I would like to offer insights from practical experience and propose an idea for the scalability of transformative dialogue. A note of caution at the outset: I am not a scholar, and although I have strived to adhere to scholarly standards, this commentary may differ slightly in tone. I hope this will be understood. An essential element of the concept is identity, which, according to the article, "refers to what someone considers or experiences as essential for who he or she is, or how people understand themselves." It has been widely argued that identity is often defined by contrasting one's social group against other groups, the so-called "other." Although this is a natural part of identity formation, it can also contribute to polarization and, in extreme cases, dehumanization—often a precursor to war or even genocide. I argue that in intractable conflicts where identity is at stake, identity is not the last thing to address but the first. Specifically, the contrasting element of identity needs to be addressed. As long as people perceive the "other" as engaging in irrational reasoning, supporting illogical points of view, or even as less than fully human, it becomes exceedingly difficult for them to engage in meaningful dialogue about substantive issues. It is, therefore, paramount that before delving into the substantive matters of the conflict, people are enabled to see the "other" as human beings—flesh-and-blood individuals who share similar hopes and dreams, and who, like themselves, desire a better world for their children. During my diplomatic career, I have often summarized this perspective by quoting a line from Sting's song "Russians": "…the Russians love their children too." This can be achieved by bringing together people from opposing groups in a neutral and safe space to engage in activities and conversations unrelated to the conflict itself. These interactions allow participants to view each other as fellow human beings with dreams, hopes, struggles, and difficulties. This approach aligns with Phase 2 of the transformative dialogue process as described in the article: "Understanding each other: a fusion of horizons." From my experience, this understanding not only fosters mutual recognition but also leads to insight and even personal transformation in individuals themselves. This method has been applied successfully in various international contexts, including Northern Ireland, South Africa, and Colombia. It includes key elements such as building trust through informal interactions, focusing on personal stories, promoting active listening and respect for differing perspectives, and cultivating a culture of mutual respect and understanding. These activities, often referred to as "peacebuilding," are common to many of the methods outlined in Table 1 of the article. One critical element I wish to highlight from my experience is the importance of offering participants the skills they will need during later phases of the process, when they engage substantively with the conflict's core issues. This can be achieved in various ways, some of which have already been employed in the methods described in Table 1. Examples include teaching basic negotiation skills (e.g., the Harvard method), joint mediation training, scenario exercises, or training in crucial conversation skills, a method I have been involved in for several years. By engaging in these skill-building activities together, participants acquire practical tools while simultaneously fostering dialogue and collaboration. To scale transformative dialogue to a broader audience, I propose leveraging the potential of media, as suggested by Daniel Yankelovich in 1999. At the time Yankelovich wrote his article, reality television was still in its infancy. In the years since, reality TV has evolved significantly into one of the most widely loved television concepts, and has even incorporated elements of bringing different groups together. For example, in 2006, the reality television show Survivor featured participants from both Turkey and Greece for the first time. This concept could be adapted to follow participants of a peacebuilding activity, such as negotiators from different groups, throughout a reality show. Accompanied by social media coverage, viewers could identify with the protagonists and vicariously experience the transformative dialogue process. By proxy, they would also learn some of the skills participants acquire, fostering a broader societal understanding of the principles and practices of peacebuilding. Although the actual negotiations following these activities would likely need to occur in secrecy due to their sensitive nature, selected elements or personal stories from the negotiators could be shared thoughtfully. This would maintain public engagement and reinforce the principles of empathy and understanding. Such a process would require careful process design and execution of this design, involving experts in peacebuilding, mediation, negotiation, and media. Too often, negotiations have been conducted with a strong focus on substance experts while neglecting the importance of process experts, which has led to failures in achieving sustainable outcomes. Transformative dialogue offers a promising approach to resolving identity-based intractable conflicts. By starting off with human connection and understanding before immediate substantive negotiation, it creates a foundation for meaningful engagement and potential for actual transformation. Scaling these efforts through innovative media strategies could extend the benefits of transformative dialogue to a broader audience, fostering societal empathy and skill-building. Although challenges remain in implementation, particularly in maintaining a balance between transparency and confidentiality, the potential for using media, and in particular the concept of reality TV, in transformative dialogue justifies further exploration and investment. The author has nothing to report. The author has nothing to report. The author has nothing to report. In my work as a diplomat and civil servant. Not applicable as no material is re-used. Not applicable. The author has nothing to report.