Grass‐Roots Conflict Resolution Exercises andConstituent Commitment

Abstract

A basic assumption behind intergroup conflict resolution theory and practice is that representatives of communities in conflict who successfully find common ground through conflict resolution exercises will then work symmetrically to commit their own constituents to that same agreement. This paper argues that such beliefs are based on a general model of conflict resolution derived from official conflict resolution exercises such as mediation and international negotiation. Rather, grass‐roots conflict resolution groups find that constituent commitment is hindered by organizational problems inherent in such groups. They may, in fact, demonstrate a different pattern whereby participants use the bridge they build to cross over and address constituents on the other side. This paper is based on a six‐year participant‐observation study of a U.S.‐based Middle East dialogue group.