Despair is Not Enough

Abstract

In what ways does intensified violence change attitudes in protracted conflicts? When does it harden attitudes and when does it moderate them? This question is tested for the post-1967 period in Israeli–Palestinian relations, with emphasis on the two intifadaperiods (1987–93 and 2000 to the present). A clear distinction emerges between ‘expressive’ issues, those with a short-term focus and a high emotive content, and the ‘primary’ issues in the conflict. Violence produced a hardening of positions on expressive issues in both intifadaperiods, as would be predicted in escalation theories. On primary issues, however, violence engendered moderation in the search for an overall solution, in line with ‘ripeness’ theory, when the two major conditions of ‘ripeness’ — perceptions of a mutually hurting stalemate and a ‘way out’ — were met. Thus the first intifadaaccelerated moderating trends on primary issues, while in the second intifada,where perception of a ‘way out’ was much weaker, attitudes on basic issues did not moderate until a basic structural change occurred in late 2004.