Peace-less reconciliation

Abstract

Reconciliation is commonly viewed either as a step toward peace, taken in the aftermath of violent conflict, or as a closing note of the move from war to peace, constituting a definitive feature of a just peace. This article posits an alternative role for reconciliation during times of conflict and suggests that, in certain cases, it may be a necessary first step out of hostilities. We suggest three elements - recognition of asymmetry, determination of victimhood, and, most crucially, a narratively based acknowledgment - to distinguish such peace-less reconciliation from its more conventional counterpart in the context of transitional justice. Using the Israeli-Palestinian ongoing, violent conflict as an illustrative case in point, we investigate these factors at work in current attempts at reconciliation before the cessation of violence and claim that the dearth of such efforts may explain the persistence of that unattenuated enmity. Whether the specific idiosyncrasies of the Israeli-Palestinian story can be generalized to a more comprehensive theory of peace-less reconciliation remains an elusive question.