Constructive confrontation is a strategyfor approaching intractable conflicts that are not ripefor resolution. Developed in the context of large-scale public policy and international conflicts, this approach parallels transformative mediation in several ways. Most important is an emphasis on empowerment and recognition (though constructive confrontation uses d8erent terms) and afocus on constructive processes rather than resolution us the primary goal. This article describes constructive confrontation and compares it to transformative mediation, highlighting both similarities and dwerences.The greatly expanded use of mediation and other alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques has been one of the great success stones of recent years. Mediation and other ADR techniques have been immensely effective (and widely accepted) in a number of arenas-for instance, labor-management conflicts (where their use dates back to the early 19OOs), family and community disputes, consumer and commercial disputes, and some environmental, public policy, and even international disputes (where mediation has a long history as well).Some types of conflicts, however, appear to be highly resistant to even the best dispute resolution processes. Particularly difficult are public policy conflicts involving unavoidable win-lose elements: irreconcilable moral differences (regarding abortion or gay rights, for example), high-stakes distributional questions (over the federal budget or social program funding, for example), and domination conflicts (where people struggle for ever-higher positions in the social hierarchy).Although individual dispute episodes (over what abortion procedures are allowed and when or whether federal funds can be used to provide or counsel about abortions, for example) may be temporarily decided, the underlying conflict continues. Similarly, budgets are set and money is spent, but the conflict between the rich and the poor, the young and the old, conservatives and MEDIATION QUARTERLY, vol. 13. no. 4, Summer 1996 OJossey-Bass Publishers 305 306 Burgess, Burgess liberals, Republicans and Democrats, remains. Racial and ethnic groups, too, can live in apparent peace when the stable power relationships make it clear who dominates whom. Breakdowns in these power relationships are, however, likely to set off a new wave of bitter confrontations-witness the former Soviet Union and Yugoslavia.Even some interpersonal conflicts are quite intractable: between husbands and wives, between parents and children, and between neighbors, roommates, or former friends. Often people get caught in an increasing cycle of escalation, distrust, and misunderstanding that becomes so severe that a one-stop, settlementoriented approach to dispute resolution provides only a Band-Aid over a gaping wound. Often, disputants will not even accept that Band-Aid-they want victory, not compromise! Puzzled by the question of how to better address such resolution-resistant conflicts, we and several colleagues at the University of Colorado's Conflict Research...

Through this essay and its accompanying commentaries, we offer a focal point for a wide‐ranging dialogue about how those with conflict‐related expertise might do more to contribute to efforts to slow, and ultimately reverse, the hyper‐polarization spiral now threatening so many developed democracies. In addition to exploring ways for promoting the more widespread utilization of the conflict field's existing insights and practices, we consider strategies for better dealing with the enormous scale and complexity of contemporary society‐wide conflict, and for countering powerful, bad‐faith actors who, for personal profit, are deliberately amplifying our deep divisions. We propose a “massively parallel” approach that seeks to cultivate large numbers of independent but mutually reinforcing projects each addressing particular aspects of hyper‐polarization in specific contexts.

Intractable conflicts are those that lie at the frontier of the field-the conflicts that stubbornly seem to elude resolution, even when the best available techniques are applied. We discuss the nature of intractabilityits causes and why it is so important to learn more about it. We also discuss why it is essential that we address the problem of intractability head-on rather than ignoring these conflicts because they are viewed as impossible.

No abstract

Frames play a central role in how parties to a conflict make sense of their situation and how they interact. How they interact in turn affects possible outcomes. This article addresses a set of challenges to teaching about frames, framing, and their link to conflict assessment, and offers a web‐based solution that addresses some of these challenges. The training material incorporates aspects of simulation exercises and case stud‐ies to create a realistic environment in which students conduct assessments of conflict dynamics and frames. This free, publicly‐available product can be integrated into in‐class training modules, assigned as an out‐of‐class project, or explored through individual study. The materials allow for self‐pacing, backtracking, review, and repeated tries, made possible by the web medium.