am pessimistic enough to suppose that members of human groups will persist in hurting and killing members of other human groups who they define as different from themselves. But there are policies which constrain such collective mischief. They work only under clearly specified conditions and only from time to time and from place to place. have managed to identify a few such policies. One of them is considered in this essay. There is no need to study history in order to discover the mistreatment an ethnic group can impose on its neighbours. In the last decade of the millennium we witnessed, among others, Rwanda, Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, the less publicized massacres perpetrated by Mexican soldiers on Mayan villagers and the vicious attacks on Chinese and their property in Indonesia. There is no end to it. Of is there? Given enough time even the most persistent and hopeless of conflicts such as those between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland and between Muslims and Jews in the Middle East show faint glimmers of hope. But from time to time we find more than faint glimmers. There are sometimes peoples who manage not to hurt one another and this is the positive if less dramatic story have to tell. In all of the gloom there are bits of light.(2) Although do not consider this to be an essay on conflict resolution, do share some of the objectives of that movement. Louis Kriesberg, a pioneer in the study of conflict resolution insists that Noting successes, not just failures, may embolden a variety of actors to attempt early preventive actions. Mirroring with precision my own concerns, Kriesberg (1997: 232, 233) reminds us that: Relatively little attention is given to relationships that are peaceful or nonviolently contentious. Attention, however, should be given to such cases so that we might learn what prevented them from becoming bloody and protracted struggles, and so that they might serve as models for what human beings can and do achieve. Social scientists labour furiously to define the thing they call ethnicity. Even the most sophisticated and experienced of them stumble in the effort(3) while those less astute produce little that is useful (Riggs, 1991). prefer to follow the lead of one authority who reminds the reader that ethnicity is no more than a social construct -- a shifting set of definitions of a group by itself or by others. Nagel (1995:147, n1) goes on to confess that, I also use the terms `race' and `ethnicity' somewhat interchangeably. The model of described here, may in fact have become a by the time this essay appears. As learned while evaluating social programs, success is as dynamic and transient a phenomenon as its counterpart, failure (Deutscher, 1999: Ch. 10). This in no way diminishes the value of such models which can be demonstrated to have succeeded under certain conditions in certain places at certain times. That such successes may not endure forever is irrelevant to their usefulness. The Swiss have survived a territorial and linguistic based pluralism for centuries without internal violence. They have not necessarily liked one another, but as long as the linguistic cantons could remain isolated in their mountain valleys, from one another and from the rest of the world, they found it expedient to tolerate one another. The romantic image of a peaceful Switzerland is widespread. It is seen as a model of reasonable accommodation in a nation composed of people who speak different languages and differ in other cultural characteristics. The model works among these people who are located in homogeneous communities and are physically removed from one another. The German, French, Italian, and Romansch valleys of mountainous Switzerland provide an ideal setting for such a federation. Outside of Switzerland the myth persists that this is a nation of tolerant multilingual peoples. Nothing could be further from the truth. …