Mason Archival Repository Service

Cutting Losses: Reflections on Appropriate Timing

Show simple item record Mitchell, Christopher 2017-05-19T13:35:20Z 2017-05-19T13:35:20Z 1995-12
dc.identifier doi:10.13021/G8Q899
dc.description.abstract “The field of conflict resolution has reached a point in its evolution where hunches and intuitive guesses are being transformed into testable theoretical propositions. Nowhere is this more important than in the debate about when conflicts are ‘ripe for resolution.’ The conventional wisdom is that early intervention is preferable to late intervention since conflicts are more tractable when there is cognitive flexibility, when the structural conditions are conducive to settlement and the issues are clear and unclouded, and when the protagonists have not lapsed into a malignant spiral of violent hostility. If this wisdom is correct, and there is much evidence that it is so, then conflict revolutionaries should direct most attention to the prevention of violent conflicts. If conflict resolvers fail to prevent the occurrence of violence, however, the question of when it is timely and appropriate for third parties (or the antagonists themselves) to initiate peace processes remains. This is a vital issue, since premature or tardy interventions may impede rather than advance positive peace processes.”
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries Working Paper;9
dc.title Cutting Losses: Reflections on Appropriate Timing en_US
dc.type Working Paper en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search MARS


My Account