| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
167452
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
President Clinton was deeply engaged and invested in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, and this commitment seems to transcend administrations as Presidents Bush, Obama, and more recently Trump have made considerable efforts to mediate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. This article addresses the question of why would a US president risk his own legacy and the reputation of the office as an international mediator to try to solve this complicated case in the face of expected and proven failures? This study traces efforts made by recent US Presidents to mediate the long-standing protracted conflict between Palestinians and Israel understand the reasons for the ongoing US commitment to this process, and why different presidents and their administrations persist in their mediation attempts where their predecessors failed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
087570
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2009.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Increasingly, scholars have taken note of the tendency for women to conceptualize issues such as security, peace, war, and the use of military force in different ways than their male counterparts. These divergent conceptualizations in turn affect the way women interact with the world around them and make decisions. Moreover, research across a variety of fields suggests that providing women a greater voice in international negotiations may bring a fresh outlook to dispute resolution. Using experimental data collected by the GlobalEd Project, this article provides substantial support for hypotheses positing that females generate significantly different processes and outcomes in a negotiation context. These findings occur both in terms of female negotiation behavior and the impact of females as negotiation facilitators/mediators.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
149495
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
On 12 July 2006, Hezbollah operatives crossed into Israel and attacked a military patrol, killing three soldiers and kidnapping two more. In retaliation to this incident Israel launched a military operation that resulted in 34 days of fighting between Hezbollah and Israel. The Israeli retaliation has been deemed to be severe and surprising. Furthermore, a public investigation commission established by the Israeli government implicated key decision-makers, and especially Prime Minister Olmert, as guilty of hasty and irresponsible decision-making. This article views this case through the lens of prospect theory, showing how the decision was made at the framing stage, and suggesting that this decision was not hasty but, rather, was consistent with the logic of loss-aversion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|