Conflict and Resolution: Contest, Cost, and Change

Abstract

Regional conflicts can be thought of in three different ways, each suggesting a different approach to their resolution. One is as a clash of conflicting unilateral solutions, which then require a formula for a joint or multilateral outcome satisfactory to both parties. A second is as a succession of opposing policies based on cost-benefit calculations, which then require a ripe moment—comprising specific components of mutually hurting stalemate, impending catastrophe, and a formula for a way out—for resolution. A third is an an event in a process of change, requiring the negotiation of a new regime to replace an old one that previously embodied certain expectations and behaviors. These different notions are illustrated with many examples of regional conflicts and their attempted—and sometimes successful—resolution.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 71 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.