On September 13, 1993, Palestinian and Israeli officials met in Washington, DC to sign the Oslo Accords or Declaration of Principles (DOP). President Clinton oversaw the historic moment, and confirmed support from the world’s last reaming superpower, but it was principally the work of Norwegian officials and Israeli academics who managed to sustain the negotiations. As seen by violence in Gaza only months ago, the DOP did not fix the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, however its accomplishments remain significant. For one, the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) formally recognized Israel's right to a peaceful existence. Secondly, the Palestinians acquired some level of self-governance throughout the Gaza Strip and West Bank. However, the …show more content…
Viewing the Israeli and Palestinian conflict through this lens of social-psychology was essential to the mediation process at Oslo. The two parties sitting at the negotiating table in a track-1 form of diplomacy would not be enough. The negotiators had to approach the conflict in a way that took into consideration the idea of conflict as a complex, inter-societal dynamic that respects the collective fears and needs of the parties involved.
It is also noted that there are two types of social-psychological processes that influence the intensification of conflict, these are normative and perceptual and also required consideration during the Oslo Accords. Normative processes entail the social factors that encourage conflict. By drawing on people's needs for security, leaders may be able to build group loyalty. This may be what helped drive both Israeli and Palestinian commitments towards education for