Such preconceptions have been the main reason for the inability to resolve such ethnic conflicts. Three s of such preconceptions are singled out: the predisposition of ethnic groups as pre-modern, the frequently assumed command character of the mandate executed by the administrators who are appointed to deal with minority ethnic growth and the majority group’s self-conception that they are not ethnic in the society. These preconceptions have greatly contributed to the ineffectiveness of efforts that are directed at interethnic conflict resolutions (Ada & Aharoni, 2013).
An example is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel has constantly portrayed itself as ethically superior in all the conflict resolution talks and hence has not been ready to compromise so as to reach a decision. They have constantly excluded the principle or rule of identity recognition that often regarded as a fundamental metarprinciple of interethnic relations. Approaches to conflict resolution such as negotiation often work effectively when they are presided over by this metarprinciple (Machover, 2010). In addition, the effectiveness depends on the state’s participation in interethnic conflict resolution especially by means of policies relating to identity recognition. Full understanding of the more extensive nature of the phenomenon of ethnicity is an essential requirement for the development of a mentality that would prompt an effective negotiation process the two conflicting ethnic groups (Ada & Aharoni, 2013).
According to the article “The Conversation Israel and Palestine Needs to Have” retrieved from http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/12/03/the-conversation-israel-and-palestine.html, the conflict resolution approaches being reviewed is negotiation.