Item Details
Skip Navigation Links
   ActiveUsers:362Hits:19887442Skip Navigation Links
Show My Basket
Contact Us
IDSA Web Site
Ask Us
Today's News
HelpExpand Help
Advanced search

In Basket
  Journal Article   Journal Article
 

ID148544
Title ProperSovereignty as it should be
Other Title Informationtheoretical gaps and negotiations for peace in Israel/Palestine
LanguageENG
AuthorKibrik, Roee
Summary / Abstract (Note)This study suggests that one of the basic elements motivating political actors is their desire to minimize the tension caused by the theoretical gap between their theoretical knowledge and their perception of reality. In order to demonstrate this, the present study compares three different arenas of negotiations which reveal and represent the social construction of the concept of sovereignty: the peace agreement between Israel and Egypt (1979), the peace agreement between Israel and Jordan (1994), and the Oslo agreements between Israel and the PLO (1993–1995). The comparison herein demonstrates how the need to deal with the theoretical gap can explain the sides’ behavior in reaching an agreement. Likewise, the comparison reveals that the concept of sovereignty has destabilized over the course of time. It also shows how political actors in these arenas chose to cope with the theoretical gap – mainly by changing reality – although the destabilization of the concept of sovereignty allowed them to be more creative, theoretically speaking, in the context of globalization processes.
`In' analytical NoteInternational Negotiation Vol. 21, No.3; 2016: p.440 – 472
Journal SourceInternational Negotiation Vol: 21 No 3
Key WordsGlobalization ;  Sovereignty ;  Egypt ;  Jordan ;  Negotiation ;  Middle East Peace Process ;  Conflict In Israel/Palestine ;  Theoretical Gap


 
 
Media / Other Links  Full Text