Search results

Intractable conflicts are characterized as protracted, irreconcilable, violent, of zero‐sum nature, total, and central. They are demanding, stressful, exhausting, and costly both in human and material terms. Societies involved in this type of conflict develop appropriate psychological conditions which enable them to cope successfully with the conflictual situation. The present paper proposes the following societal beliefs which are conducive to the development of these psychological conditions: beliefs about the justness of one's own goals, beliefs about security, beliefs of delegitimizing the opponent, beliefs of positive self‐image, beliefs about patriotism, beliefs about unity and beliefs about peace. These beliefs constitute a kind of ideology which supports the continuation of the conflict. The paper analyzes as an example one such intractable conflict, namely the one between Israel and Arabs, concentrating on the Israeli society. Specifically, it demonstrates the reflection of the discussed societal beliefs in the Israeli school textbooks. Finally, implications of the presented framework for peaceful conflict resolution are discussed.

This paper explores the possibilities of intercultural dialogue as a means of peace building on the people‐to‐people level. With its focus on the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict the work assesses a number of efforts, which have utilized cultural dialogue rooted in religion to facilitate dialogue, relationship building, and perception change during the period subsequent to the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993 and prior to the outbreak of Israeli‐Palestinian violence in September 2000. Utilizing an interdisciplinary theoretical framework and questionnaire‐based quantitative data collected from Israeli and Palestinian students, the work suggests that the religiously based dialogue has the potential to move mutual perceptions to more favorable positions based on the similarities between Islam and Judaism. Such dialogue can also clarify to both sides the identification which each side has with the same land. We believe that our exploratory data might encourage the further use and study of religious cultural elements to facilitate peace building in both the Israeli‐Palestinian context and in other acute interethnic conflict venues.

This paper aims to examine the variation in Arab/Muslim consumers’ willingness to buy (WTB) from product’s origins (POs) involved in the Arab/Muslim-Israeli animosity case despite their common nationality and religious affiliation.

Qualitative research methodology is used. A total of 30 Arab and Muslim individuals were interviewed, and web documents were analysed. A grounded theory approach is adopted to analyse the data collected.

The results reveal that the variation in WTB from offending PO among Arab/Muslim consumers is influenced by the intensity of animosity (IOA) as perceived by the individual consumer towards the PO. IOA is a variable affected by the antagonistic emotional impact which is evoked by the egregiousness of the PO’s actions (PO involvement) and consumer connection with the political issue (consumer involvement) and is moderated by the time of the PO’s egregious actions.

Politically favourable POs in the Arab/Muslim world need to target consumers who perceive greater connection with the political issue, whereas politically unfavourable POs need to target consumers who perceive weaker connection with the political conflict, in addition to distancing themselves from it.

This is an original attempt to gain insight into the different levels of willingness of fellow nationals to buy a product from an offending nation in the context of Arab/Muslim-Israeli animosity which is explained through the IOA model of foreign product purchase.

On 1 April 1978, the Israeli peace movement burst into world consciousness when an estimated 25,000 Israelis demonstrated in Tel Aviv to urge the administration of Prime Minister Menachem Begin to continue peace negotiations with Egypt. A grassroots group called Peace Now is credited with organizing and leading that demonstration. Today, the “peace camp” refers to left‐wing political parties and organizations that hold dovish positions on the Arab‐Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue. While some figures in the Labor Party view themselves as the peace movement's natural leader, political parties further to the left like the Citizens Rights Movement (CRM) and Mapam are more dovish. In the last 10 years, many grassroots peace organizations have, like Peace Now, formed outside the political party system, with the goal of influencing public opinion and eventually having an impact on policy makers. Peace Now is still the largest, most visible and influential of those organizations.

The focus of this article is on non‐coercive means (i.e. reward and persuasion) for pursuing international conflicts. The article uses case studies of six Middle East peace efforts to analyse the conditions which affect the utilisation and contribution of non‐coercive means. It looks at the factors that account for the limited use of non‐coercive means by adversaries in trying to induce the enemy to yield what was desired and at factors affecting the success of those efforts that are made.

This study aims to test the role of the state of occupation, represented in Israel, as one of the most significant challenges, which faces the Jordanian water security. Where Israel expands in its policy and ideology everyday its hydro-hegemony over the Jordanian waters. Hence, its acts result in negative consequences on the Jordanian water and food security, which in turn affects the Jordanian national security as a whole.

This study relied on the following two approached to tackle its problem: first: descriptive approach: the descriptive approach depends on defining the apparent features and describing their nature and the type of the relationship between its variables. It aims to achieving a better and deeper understanding on the situation of its future policies and measures. And research uses the system analysis approach to handle the subject matter. Given the influence of water on the development, Jordan, as an organic or a political and social state, takes into account the reasons and causes of development. Jordan turns into an active political state, with water as an influencing factor on it. This premise represents the core of the system analysis approach.

The research concluded that the Israeli theft of the Jordanian waters is the main factor in the Jordanian water crisis. If Jordan had received its usurped water rights by Israel, it could have been able to solve its water issue represented in the increasing deficit in its water balance. Therefore, the Israeli hydro-hegemony on the Jordanian water resources caused the imbalance in its water security and, in turn, caused the development process to falter in general.

The value of the research lies in the fact that it addresses the most important reasons behind the water crisis in Jordan, represented in the Israeli control over the Jordanian water resources and the research shows that the amount of water stolen by Israel is enough to solve the water crisis in Jordan.

As the Arab/Muslim-Israeli animosity case is attracting international attention, citizens of non-Arab and non-Muslim countries around the world, referred to as third-country nationals (TCNs), are increasingly joining the boycott against Israel. The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of empathy for the citizens of the countries offended by Israel, namely Palestine and Lebanon, as a potential factor affecting TCNs decision to boycott Israeli products.

In total, 20 in-depth interviews were conducted with non-Arab, non-Muslim, and non-Israeli informants from different national and religious backgrounds, supported by secondary data sources. The qualitative grounded theory approach was employed to analyse data in order to answer the research questions.

TCNs decision to boycott Israeli products is affected by their empathic concern for the citizens of Palestine and Lebanon rather than by animosity towards Israel. Such concern is evoked by their awareness of the animosity case and further strengthened by their self-transcendence/universalism values and interaction with the case which activate their altruism towards the citizens of the offended countries, and consequently motivates them to relieve or reduce the suffering of these citizens by avoiding Israeli products. Greater emphasis is given to the Arab/Muslim-Israeli animosity case as a result of the greater empathic emotional impact it generates compared to other cases.

This is an original attempt to distinguish empathy from animosity as a factor which can affect TCNs decision to buy from a country engaged in hostile actions against another country other than their own. As the boycott campaign against the country under examination is growing internationally, this study can help international marketers in setting strategies to either exploit or combat the boycott campaign.

For more than nine decades, the Jewish–Palestinian conflict has dominated all aspects of life in the Arab world. The Arabs have disregarded and neglected their political, economic, and social development since 1916 because of their obsession with defeating the Jews or driving them into the sea. When the Arab armies collectively failed to destroy the newly established Jewish state in 1948, the dynamics of the conflict changed. On the one hand, Arab rationalists such as King Abdullah ibn al-Husyan (King Abdullah-I) (d 1951) of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (HKJ) suggested accepting the United Nations Partition Plan as proposed by the UN General Assembly on November 29, 1947. On the other hand, most Arab countries followed the lead of Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nassir, who advocated the destruction of Israel. The latter view was also adopted by the PLO during Ahmad Shukeiri's reign (1964–1967) and later by Yasir Arafat (1969–2004) and most Palestinian armed factions.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the concept of customer discomfort in service settings when employees and customers who share social incompatibilities, stemming from war, nationalism, religious differences or terrorism, work together in service settings.

The authors engage in triangulation research to understand how Israeli Arabs and Jews experience comfort/discomfort in services. Study 1 uses an experimental design to show how comfort differs when Israeli Jews work with Arabs and Jews in three different service settings. Study 2 employs survey methodology to explore how comfort differs among Israeli Arabs when they work with either an Arab or a Jewish employee. Study 3 uses grounded theory methodology to provide a theoretical framework that explains reasons for customer discomfort occurrence between Israel’s Arabs and Jews, its impact on customers’ attitudes and behaviors and suggestions for increasing comfort.

Israeli Arabs and Jews express various feelings of discomfort when working with each other, and Druze, in service settings. Israeli Jews express higher levels of discomfort when working with Arabs than vice versa, while Israeli Arabs express discomfort when working with Druze employees. Five strategies for increasing customer comfort are defined and developed.

Social incompatibilities prevent many consumers and employees from experiencing comfort during service exchanges; however, managers can alleviate some of the factors that exacerbate customer discomfort.

Managers need to realize that customer discomfort leads to place avoidance and thus should implement strategies to assuage it.

Unabated service situations that result in customer discomfort may lead to customer ill-being, including fear.

This study is the first to explore customer discomfort due to social incompatibilities in depth.

The extent to which opposition movements engaged in contention are able to broaden the scope of their struggle has garnered the attention of scholars of ethnic conflict, social movements, and contentious politics alike. The ability to broaden the scope of contention is known as scale shift. It is of paramount importance in cases of ethnonationalist movements, given the nature of their claims and the oppressive and repressive sociopolitical setting in which they are often situated. Our study advances social movement theory by developing a more nuanced understanding of the process by analyzing rich historical evidence from a failed attempt of scale shift: the case of Israeli-Arab 1976 Land Day. Utilizing Tarrow and McAdam's (2003) model, we analyze scale shift and its constituent mechanisms of brokerage and diffusion as they operate across different political opportunity structures and encounter different levels and types of repression. Based on our findings, we modify the model by highlighting a set of intermediary mechanisms, namely individualization, segmentation, resource restriction, exclusion, co-optation, defection, and internalization/externalization. We argue that these intermediary mechanisms largely account for the failure of scale shift in the specific repressive settings of the Arab minority in Israel.