No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
The Madrid Quartet: An Effective Instrument of Multilateralism? The Madrid Quartet: An Effective Instrument of Multilateralism?
Abstract
On April 10 th 2002, Colin Powell announced the formation of a Madrid "Quartet", reviving the agenda of the 1991 Madrid conference with the UN Secretary-General, the EU High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, and the Russian Foreign Minister; the focus of this approach was on pursuing a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with the active engagement of outside actors. Since the creation of the Quartet the G-8 has supported its role in the peace process and emphasised the need for the parties to follow the indications of the so-called Roadmap for Peace. The objective of this paper is to analyse the rationale behind the creation of the Quartet, its activities and ultimately its effectiveness. Participation of the Quartet to the peace process underlines the commitment of the international community to the achievement of an equitable settlement of the conflict. The paper focuses on the concept of "multilateralism", and tries to establish if the Quartet creates a genuine multilateral framework for the negotiations. It argues that ultimately what the Quartet really offers is a multilateral "control framework" for bilateral negotiations, and that these bilateral negotiations are supposed to aim at implementing pre-established steps agreed upon by the Quartet without the parties to the conflict. It is the contradictory nature of the Quartet's action that until now has prevented it from becoming an effective instrument of multilateralism.
This book addresses the challenges of international intervention in violent conflicts and its impact on groups in conflict. When the international community intervenes in a violent internal conflict, intervening powers may harden divisions, constructing walls between groups, or they may foster transformation, soften barriers and build bridges between conflicting groups. This book examines the different types of external processes and their respective contributions to softening or hardening divisions between conflicting groups. It also analyses the types of conflict resolution strategies, including integration, accommodation and partitioning, and investigates the conditions under which the international community decides to pursue a particular strategy, and how the different strategies contribute to solidification or transformation of group identities. The author uses three case studies, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), Northern Ireland and Israel-Palestine, to reveal how different types of external interventions impact on the identities of conflicting groups. The volume seeks to address how states and international organizations ought to intervene in order to stimulate the building of bridges rather than walls between conflicting groups. In doing so, the book sheds light on some of the pitfalls in international interventions and highlights the importance of united external process and inclusive identity strategies that promote transformation and bridge differences between conflicting groups. This book will be of much interest to students of intervention, peace and conflict studies, ethnic conflict, security studies and IR.
Vom „Krieg gegen den Terror“ über die Intervention im Irak bis hin zu den Nuklearverhandlungen mit Iran und Nordkorea werden drängende sicherheitspolitische Fragen seit dem 11. September 2001 zunehmend außerhalb etablierter Institutionen durch informelle Koalitionen und Konzerte bearbeitet. Als institutionelle Antwort auf die dramatischen Umwälzungen im internationalen System seit dem Ende des Ost-West-Konflikts bieten diese hochspezialisierten ad hoc Formate einen Rahmen zur situativen Flexibilisierung und Fokussierung überkommener Prozesse und Verfahren. Gerade in Krisensituationen können sie so kurzfristig helfen, Blockaden zu überwinden, Positionen anzunähern, kritische Ressourcen zugänglich zu machen und damit effektives politisches Handeln nach innen wie nach außen überhaupt erst zu ermöglichen.
This thesis is meant as a contribution to resolving the puzzle regarding the actual clout of pro-Israel U.S. special interest groups by studying their influence in relation to the Middle East Peace Process. This author builds on his first hand experiences of living in Palestine and the U.S., and analytical tools he has acquired by studying the role of United Nations in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as U.S. history, politics and society. This study combines a qualitative analysis of U.S. official policies toward the Peace Process from 1991-2011, with a quantitative investigation of the Peace Process-related activities of pro-Israel U.S. special interest. The quantitative data is collected from public opinion polls, the Congressional Record, government documents, the reports of the Federal Election Commission, and the monthly publications of the non-partisan Washington Report on Middle East Affairs from 1989-2011. The qualitative data is based on experts’ and scholarly reflections about the Peace Process and the influence of special interest groups on the making of U.S. foreign policy.
El conflicto israelo-palestino es probablemente el conflicto todavía activo más largo de la historia contemporánea. A lo largo de décadas se ha convertido en una herida abierta y en el principal problema que contamina toda la región de Oriente Medio generando violencia y sufrimiento a millones de personas. En todo este tiempo la esencia misma del conflicto y sus principales manifestaciones no han variado: Israel ocupa ilegalmente territorios palestinos, cerca de la mitad del pueblo palestino son refugiados a los que se niega su derecho al retorno y más de un millón de palestinos con ciudadanía israelí sufren discriminación
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.