Abstract
Negotiation and conflict resolution theories do little to shed light on the role of understanding in resolving violent political conflicts. A useful complement is Hans-Georg Gadamer’s hermeneutics. The question addressed in the essay is this: How is a shared understanding reached in a negotiation process aimed at resolving conflicting issues? In Gadamer’s view, understanding is important, because conflict resolution engages the parties to a conflict in a dialogue of interpreting meaning and values. Any mediators involved will also take part in the interpretation of meaning: theirs is a job of a translator; that is, they will interpret and transfer meaning between the language games the parties in conflict play. The Gadamerian model is, however, limited because it does not tackle the issue of asymmetry and power in international conflict resolution. Despite its limitations, the theoretical model can be translated into practical policy implications, which suggest that an outside party cannot force the parties into a dialogue. Attempts at conflict settlement that rely on force are unlikely to be successful.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.