1 00:00:00,450 --> 00:00:06,420 Okay. Thank you so much, Isabella. So coming to the final presentation of the day. 2 00:00:06,430 --> 00:00:09,420 Now then, we've been talking about this, these various actors. 3 00:00:09,440 --> 00:00:16,139 But, uh, for the whole day and for the final talk, Daniel's going to talk about probably one of the most important actors, 4 00:00:16,140 --> 00:00:24,240 which is combatants themselves, or if not direct combatants, at least those whose identity is in some way defined by their opposition to an enemy. 5 00:00:24,600 --> 00:00:28,950 And Daniel's going to give us a psychological insight into what the process went by, 6 00:00:28,950 --> 00:00:33,930 which, uh, there might be transformation in that, uh, identity of enmity. 7 00:00:34,590 --> 00:00:40,290 So Daniel Schaefer is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Experimental Psychology here at Oxford. 8 00:00:40,770 --> 00:00:45,840 And before joining Oxford, he was a postdoc at the University of Bristol, also where I was before now. 9 00:00:45,870 --> 00:00:50,729 And, um, he taught at the University of Oslo for a semester as well. 10 00:00:50,730 --> 00:00:59,910 So thanks so much for joining us today. Thank you. Thanks a lot for the professional interaction. 11 00:01:01,380 --> 00:01:08,340 I will be talking about intractable conflicts, which marks the most difficult conflicts to tackle the worst by definition. 12 00:01:08,340 --> 00:01:17,490 And um, especially about focus at first on the escalation of conflict and the psychological mechanisms involved in this escalation. 13 00:01:18,280 --> 00:01:26,309 Second part will be, um, various approaches of reducing these hostilities and finally talking about differences 14 00:01:26,310 --> 00:01:32,370 which are remaining even if we are successful in reducing hatred and hostilities. 15 00:01:33,750 --> 00:01:44,550 So escalation of conflicts. So the mere escalation or mere categorisation to groups and outgroups was psychologically found to elicit, 16 00:01:44,610 --> 00:01:48,540 um, some preference for the groups or so-called in groups. 17 00:01:48,810 --> 00:01:54,720 So typically they are evaluated being more positive than other groups. 18 00:01:54,750 --> 00:02:07,050 We see that in case of many nations and also, um, in sports clubs, sports leagues and um, when it comes to the outgroups, 19 00:02:07,500 --> 00:02:17,010 they are particularly evaluated if there are some group competition about if there are some, um, competing interests. 20 00:02:19,630 --> 00:02:28,090 So looking shortly at the case of political scientists and why, um, conflicts, uh, 21 00:02:28,090 --> 00:02:35,320 actually happening on a large political scale, there are various taxonomies and theories. 22 00:02:35,350 --> 00:02:44,499 One, uh, summary of the taxonomy, um, um, that distinguishes classical interstate wars like between India and Pakistan, 23 00:02:44,500 --> 00:02:54,600 for example, around, um, Kashmir, secession conflicts like in the former Yugoslavia, or ideology conflicts as in Afghanistan, 24 00:02:54,600 --> 00:03:02,500 and so in what society did want to live, to want to live in a democratic state's geographic state or maybe in the socialist state, 25 00:03:03,430 --> 00:03:15,130 the family, factual economic conflicts, these, uh, conflicts around, um, different factions who are competing for power and for resources. 26 00:03:15,910 --> 00:03:23,979 Um, the commonality is that most of time, the conflict parties, um, think that, um, they are right. 27 00:03:23,980 --> 00:03:30,880 And what they are doing, or at least, uh, publicly justifying on model values why they are doing what they are doing. 28 00:03:31,540 --> 00:03:34,840 And psychologically, for subcultures. Interesting. 29 00:03:34,930 --> 00:03:40,540 How much, um, the identities are becoming defined in terms of group identities. 30 00:03:41,050 --> 00:03:44,260 Otherwise war wouldn't be possible in war. 31 00:03:44,290 --> 00:03:52,510 You clearly have one enemy, clearly have, uh, you know, who belong to over it, and otherwise you wouldn't know who to fight. 32 00:03:53,140 --> 00:03:58,570 Um, uh, people are often even sacrificing their personal interests for the group. 33 00:04:02,080 --> 00:04:06,940 So group competition evaluation involving the evaluation of artworks. 34 00:04:07,150 --> 00:04:12,220 Um, so what are the steps which are actually fuelling the escalation? 35 00:04:12,760 --> 00:04:18,820 One important step is when parties with conflicting interests are starting to threaten one another. 36 00:04:19,510 --> 00:04:28,629 So that's field escalation because people, um, are in a situation of fair and massive competition and, 37 00:04:28,630 --> 00:04:34,630 uh, worst case, um, situations that leads to so-called preventive strikes. 38 00:04:35,710 --> 00:04:44,260 Um, um, mutual threats and spirals can, um, pile up to the degree that the parties are just saying, 39 00:04:44,290 --> 00:04:51,760 if you don't do what I want, I will do something which you won't want, like preventive strikes. 40 00:04:52,930 --> 00:04:56,680 And as soon as the thresholds of killings is transgressed. 41 00:04:56,690 --> 00:05:03,819 So we have crossed the Rubicon. So to say that brings the conflict to a totally different level, cause, uh, 42 00:05:03,820 --> 00:05:09,610 people often feel as, uh, um, group members or grown family members actually have been lost. 43 00:05:10,120 --> 00:05:15,070 So it could be seen in the Western world by, um, the attacks in London on the buses. 44 00:05:15,670 --> 00:05:23,950 Um, many different situations. Um, nations had that turning points where the conflict went into a new escalation phase. 45 00:05:24,880 --> 00:05:34,060 And that means, of course, intense threats like threats to your own life, to your economic interests that will save the lives of your family members. 46 00:05:34,990 --> 00:05:40,660 Um, why that is so significant is related to the so-called sanctity of life. 47 00:05:40,750 --> 00:05:47,260 That's one way of putting it. Sacredness of life linked to the reversibility of death. 48 00:05:47,530 --> 00:05:54,850 Because, um, you know, killings, killing off innocents in particular, uh, taboo in practically any society. 49 00:05:56,170 --> 00:05:59,650 And so that it's necessarily the spiral of escalation. 50 00:06:01,780 --> 00:06:05,950 Um, and that's in turn leads to outrage, moral outrage. 51 00:06:06,130 --> 00:06:15,340 Sometimes the desire for revenge. And luckily, um, that cycle, both sides are claiming that they are just defending themselves. 52 00:06:16,030 --> 00:06:19,030 Um, what they are doing is attacking us. 53 00:06:19,460 --> 00:06:22,830 Um, um, they are bad in their character, 54 00:06:22,840 --> 00:06:29,229 but what we are doing is actually trying to find a way to peace by destroying the 55 00:06:29,230 --> 00:06:34,900 sanction potential of their opponents and clearing the path towards negotiations. 56 00:06:36,400 --> 00:06:40,270 And, um, the focus is typically on own victims. 57 00:06:40,600 --> 00:06:44,620 Um, that feeds into this perception that we are the good ones. 58 00:06:44,620 --> 00:06:52,240 We are the bad ones. Um, um, we can see that clearly also in the current, um, conflict between Israel and Hamas. 59 00:06:52,930 --> 00:07:00,550 Um, so that, um, sides which are focusing on the, um, Palestinian side, 60 00:07:01,180 --> 00:07:08,590 pointing out the massive victims that children, hunger, catastrophes, humanitarian catastrophe in the Gaza Strip. 61 00:07:09,280 --> 00:07:17,440 Whereas the focus of many Israelis and those who are associated with that sort, um, they are pointing to the fate of the, 62 00:07:17,650 --> 00:07:26,200 um, of the hostages, of the mass rapes and mass atrocities and maiming of hostages, um, of people. 63 00:07:26,740 --> 00:07:35,379 And last October, um, from the vessel perspective, of course, we should feel moral outrage by any of those states, 64 00:07:35,380 --> 00:07:42,460 by any victims, which are, um, victims on the civilian side of massive escalation. 65 00:07:44,820 --> 00:07:52,890 So what also keeps up hostilities on any sides is, um, as what some call collective traumas. 66 00:07:53,250 --> 00:08:05,490 So remembering these events, like not far from the Palestinian side or past wars in Gaza, or on this recent of drones dating back to the 19th century. 67 00:08:05,940 --> 00:08:09,240 Um, Holocaust in Germany, Yom Kippur war. 68 00:08:09,780 --> 00:08:15,640 Um, these are lands which are by um, memorials and by memory days. 69 00:08:15,660 --> 00:08:21,080 Um, part of the public consciousness and which are kept alive and increasing. 70 00:08:21,090 --> 00:08:24,660 Actually these include upward thinking we against them. 71 00:08:26,760 --> 00:08:31,480 So these collaborations also lead to certain emotions. 72 00:08:31,500 --> 00:08:36,090 So it confirms the belief that we are the victims and they are the perpetrators. 73 00:08:36,750 --> 00:08:42,690 Um, these um, emotions which are entails like rage, hatred and fear. 74 00:08:43,200 --> 00:08:50,640 They are the concrete barriers which makes it so difficult for negotiations for us mediators or third parties. 75 00:08:53,190 --> 00:08:58,620 So what are the, um, the traditional conflict resolution approaches? 76 00:08:59,400 --> 00:09:05,640 Many of them are based on the idea that we just have to look at the underlying interests and needs. 77 00:09:05,940 --> 00:09:11,069 So basic principle being when we look at the top, we find there are contradictory positions. 78 00:09:11,070 --> 00:09:17,700 But if we look deeper, we find that some interests are actually shared, that there are common needs. 79 00:09:18,120 --> 00:09:28,380 And based on these needs, we can build actually, um, agreements due to the fact that people share fundamental needs like security and recognition. 80 00:09:29,010 --> 00:09:38,960 And these are non-zero-sum in nature, meaning that we can find an integrative solution where, uh, after ceasefires, after demilitarisation, 81 00:09:39,010 --> 00:09:47,040 the security of one party, this action of taking away security from the other party that's helping us to achieve more security. 82 00:09:47,400 --> 00:09:54,210 And same with recognition. It's also not serious. Um, we can have recognition for everyone if we engage in mutual recognition. 83 00:09:55,110 --> 00:09:59,370 But the more escalated conflict is, the more difficult, 84 00:09:59,370 --> 00:10:06,029 it says to convince people that they actually don't need to continue fighting for they don't 85 00:10:06,030 --> 00:10:10,890 need to threaten the other person anymore because it's perceived as an existential threat. 86 00:10:11,790 --> 00:10:15,660 And nice way of depicting that is so-called outcast class model. 87 00:10:16,320 --> 00:10:21,350 So at the top you can see, um, state of non escalation. 88 00:10:21,390 --> 00:10:29,820 So just the difference in opinion. For example, the difference in values um, is um, there there's broad space for peace building. 89 00:10:30,630 --> 00:10:34,770 But as further the conflict escalates, what's the middle of the hourglass? 90 00:10:35,190 --> 00:10:40,530 The more difficult it gets of, the more narrow the space of actions becomes. 91 00:10:41,220 --> 00:10:48,570 So once we are colliding into a situation of violence, of war, the space becomes very limited. 92 00:10:48,900 --> 00:10:53,340 And there is, um, just violence containment, which can be attempted. 93 00:10:54,000 --> 00:10:57,060 And then that stage is getting into a ceasefire. 94 00:10:58,410 --> 00:11:03,569 When we are moving further across the ceasefire, down to normalisation, um, 95 00:11:03,570 --> 00:11:09,300 then the space increases again for more opportunities towards reconciliation, ideally, 96 00:11:09,810 --> 00:11:15,210 where we have enough space to structure all the cultural peacebuilding that ironically, 97 00:11:15,330 --> 00:11:25,500 lots of our attention is in this area where we can do at least so far less area, uh, far less attention is going into the area of prevention. 98 00:11:25,930 --> 00:11:31,050 And that's just part of the human condition. Our attention is attracted by violence, by action. 99 00:11:32,100 --> 00:11:39,330 Um, um, so the result is that not only media attention staying there, but also large resources are getting that. 100 00:11:39,870 --> 00:11:46,920 So natural resources again to prevention. That's looking at the Greenland war or Afghanistan Iraq war. 101 00:11:47,340 --> 00:11:50,730 Literally billions of dollars are flooding into this area. 102 00:11:51,550 --> 00:12:03,030 And um, whereas in the area of prevention and post-conflict peace building or post violence case building, it's likely to be more effectively stand. 103 00:12:05,370 --> 00:12:14,760 So, um, what are now, um, in more detail, what can we do about these psychological barriers to conflict resolution? 104 00:12:15,330 --> 00:12:22,710 So, interestingly, on a substantial level, um, parties are often more willing for compromise, as we might think. 105 00:12:23,310 --> 00:12:33,150 So this, Paul was done in Israel, different town points and the Palestinian areas like Gaza and the West Bank in 2006 and 2017. 106 00:12:33,600 --> 00:12:43,320 And so we can see two things. On the one hand, the support for two state solution along the, um, roughly along the borders between. 107 00:12:43,360 --> 00:12:48,430 The six States Force. Um. Some ports support a surprisingly high. 108 00:12:48,490 --> 00:12:58,800 So it was in 2006 when 71% of Palestinians, 68 of Israelis, Israelis, and in 2007 still around 50%. 109 00:12:58,810 --> 00:13:06,190 And even before, um, the current war, 50% of people in Gaza said, um, 110 00:13:06,400 --> 00:13:14,080 that they wanted Hamas to stop calling for the destruction of restaurants that accept a permanent two state solution based on the 67 borders. 111 00:13:15,370 --> 00:13:24,370 Um, that's although, um, in theory, many people and sometimes leaders are also supportive for solutions for negotiations. 112 00:13:25,030 --> 00:13:28,509 Um, often they distrust the other parties to such a degree. 113 00:13:28,510 --> 00:13:33,840 If they say it's just not possible, it would be possible with us, but it's not possible. 114 00:13:33,850 --> 00:13:42,700 But um, so there is being fear threat to see, um, existence and take threats, perceiving other group as immoral and evil. 115 00:13:43,960 --> 00:13:48,190 And these emotions can be more important than substantial issues. 116 00:13:50,050 --> 00:13:53,710 So what do we do about that there uh, different approaches. 117 00:13:53,920 --> 00:14:01,659 One approach is more coming from a political direction, strategic thinking, um, that is trying to be rational. 118 00:14:01,660 --> 00:14:06,220 We're trying to internally think about in the group what can be done. 119 00:14:07,150 --> 00:14:15,610 Intergroup contact coming from a psychological perspective, um, bring people together and improve their attitudes to one another. 120 00:14:16,660 --> 00:14:23,290 Mutual concessions, small political changing views by um indicates and goodwill. 121 00:14:24,430 --> 00:14:32,409 So what does that mean? So very quickly we have a closer look at different approaches to strategic thinking in space on the idea. 122 00:14:32,410 --> 00:14:40,240 Well, in these situations, people just are very far apart in their emotions and very far pops and their positions. 123 00:14:40,900 --> 00:14:44,770 And that's why they are not willing to negotiate, at least not yet. 124 00:14:45,970 --> 00:14:59,320 What can be done once the proposal strategic thinking is we promote dialogue with ending the conflict parties, and we support strategic thinking. 125 00:14:59,320 --> 00:15:02,170 Also, potentially as third party mediators, 126 00:15:02,170 --> 00:15:12,040 we try to encourage them also to see the chessboard from the other side in order to understand what the best strategy is to move forward. 127 00:15:13,120 --> 00:15:17,390 And one help us that's in this motivations. 128 00:15:17,680 --> 00:15:24,340 You see the chessboard from the other side just because of the motivation of wanting to win. 129 00:15:24,910 --> 00:15:30,130 Um, there's already something embedded, which is the reminder of perspective taking, 130 00:15:30,220 --> 00:15:36,370 such trying to understand what the best move us requires to understand the perspective of the other. 131 00:15:37,300 --> 00:15:44,770 But the problem of that is, if we only look internally, um, there's no feedback of what the other side actually wants. 132 00:15:45,130 --> 00:15:50,200 It's more based on what we think and what the other side thinks the other side is like. 133 00:15:50,740 --> 00:15:55,660 And so it needs some big feedback from the other side and needs some correction. 134 00:15:56,290 --> 00:15:59,560 And that's where contact can come into play. 135 00:16:00,220 --> 00:16:08,590 So, um, the help of the contact hypothesis or the assumption of the contact hypothesis as that contact improves attitudes towards other things. 136 00:16:09,280 --> 00:16:13,300 And it's lost. Some parents even pose as a kind of miracle track. 137 00:16:13,930 --> 00:16:20,980 So we see sorry, we see, um, disagreements between parties, massive disagreements. 138 00:16:21,550 --> 00:16:25,030 We bring them into contact. That's our magic potion. 139 00:16:25,690 --> 00:16:35,620 And that leads to intergroup harmony. Of course, reality is often more complex and sometimes works better, sometimes does not work so well. 140 00:16:36,160 --> 00:16:39,280 It works quite good when we are engaging with children. 141 00:16:39,280 --> 00:16:50,739 Yes, properly. At that age they are not so fixed and the assumptions about the out of the group yet and also, um, the situation has to be cooperative. 142 00:16:50,740 --> 00:16:53,920 It must not be, um, competitive. 143 00:16:53,920 --> 00:17:02,890 So if it's competitive, if people don't feel well, there is some unpleasant feeling that sometimes snakes think things even worse. 144 00:17:03,940 --> 00:17:09,820 And so it's important there's some element of cooperation, some element of similarity. 145 00:17:11,890 --> 00:17:18,100 But if facts are sometimes small and the reach can be limited, uh, reach can be limited. 146 00:17:18,100 --> 00:17:23,380 Meaning that we are not able to bring all opinions and Russians together in contact. 147 00:17:23,770 --> 00:17:28,060 And we it's also impossible to track shots of all Palestinians of this race. 148 00:17:28,690 --> 00:17:32,410 Um, so it can be only gradual environmental long term, 149 00:17:32,980 --> 00:17:42,580 although it's not help of the negotiators from both sides are brought together at the beginning in a more, uh, friendly environment, widely. 150 00:17:43,360 --> 00:17:46,600 Share similarities. That's the question. Us? 151 00:17:46,990 --> 00:17:52,750 Um, to what degree? They're really willing to not talk immediately about the difficult issues. 152 00:17:54,190 --> 00:17:59,560 But the basic idea is, um, that you bring people together, that they discover similarities. 153 00:18:00,100 --> 00:18:07,610 They might discover commonalities in terms of common humanity, and that's humanity in terms. 154 00:18:07,630 --> 00:18:19,510 It's inclusive of the in-group and the outward. And, um, and that can encourage reducing animosities and supporting the discovery of similarities. 155 00:18:23,160 --> 00:18:27,670 Due to the limited ness of that approach, in terms in terms of numbers we can reach. 156 00:18:28,120 --> 00:18:34,840 It's also important to signal to the wider audience goodwill by mutual concessions. 157 00:18:35,380 --> 00:18:41,590 So that's part of something for mantle. Approach of small concessions can actually change the view of the other. 158 00:18:41,590 --> 00:18:46,160 So if the other makes small concessions which change our perception of the other. 159 00:18:46,180 --> 00:18:54,459 Most of the others like ideally. And that'll turn this old feeling turn and also change our own goals. 160 00:18:54,460 --> 00:19:00,150 So if we don't have the impression anymore that the others are just there to destroy us totally. 161 00:19:00,740 --> 00:19:11,800 Changes also are strategic decisions. So looking at that together, um, the strategic thinking can help to think more rationally. 162 00:19:12,010 --> 00:19:20,229 Um, about the conflict. Options can reduce the emotional barriers towards conflict resolutions by being more reflective, 163 00:19:20,230 --> 00:19:26,470 by being trying to be less guarded by exaggerated fear hatreds and outrage. 164 00:19:27,340 --> 00:19:32,290 Um, but in order to arrive at a more realistic picture of what the others are actually like, 165 00:19:32,290 --> 00:19:41,530 what the real names us contact has place different levels to us at the civil society level, as well as the lead US level, 166 00:19:42,310 --> 00:19:50,140 which sort of concessions are important because they help to, um, signal a real goodwill to a broad variety of people, 167 00:19:51,430 --> 00:20:00,280 and then maybe there's more space for building agreements on shared and trust, shared needs like security recognition needs, shared economic needs. 168 00:20:02,500 --> 00:20:05,079 That's in many conflicts like, 169 00:20:05,080 --> 00:20:14,080 and what's typical of the intractable conflicts us that they have also elements of positions which just simply don't fit together. 170 00:20:14,740 --> 00:20:22,840 So if both parties want to have the same territory and if they want to have the answer territory, whereas, um, 171 00:20:22,930 --> 00:20:29,620 a real disagreement, which is not just a matter of misunderstandings, which is not just a matter of exaggerated fears, interests. 172 00:20:30,520 --> 00:20:38,110 And so what do we do with that? What do we do with disputes about rights and territories, distributions of resources. 173 00:20:39,430 --> 00:20:46,060 And again, procedural framework must be an approach for that incremental approach. 174 00:20:46,960 --> 00:20:52,200 Um, so the purpose, the trick here properly that this, um, 175 00:20:52,210 --> 00:21:01,660 this procedure is perceived by both parties as being just insofar as it's based on moral concerns and in fact, 176 00:21:01,960 --> 00:21:07,870 insofar as it improves the costs, benefits ratio in the eyes of the parties involved. 177 00:21:08,440 --> 00:21:14,890 Um, that's practically what happened in Northern Ireland. So that conflict was also for a long time perceived as being intractable. 178 00:21:15,490 --> 00:21:20,740 And violence was escalated to such a high degree that there was huge pessimism. 179 00:21:21,190 --> 00:21:30,429 And at some point in the 90s, during the Oslo Accords, Northern Ireland was even envious, um, about Israel. 180 00:21:30,430 --> 00:21:38,950 And people involved from Northern Irish conflict were partially looking at the role model of Israel Palestine, which is unthinkable today. 181 00:21:39,550 --> 00:21:42,610 And, um, looking at how well that works there. 182 00:21:43,480 --> 00:21:48,760 And so things turned out a little bit different, which can occasionally happen in history, apparently. 183 00:21:49,390 --> 00:21:52,750 And, um, now people tend to look the other way round. 184 00:21:52,810 --> 00:22:01,780 What went well, Northern Ireland. And they managed with, uh, peace agreement Belfast, Good Friday agreement to have, uh, tasks, 185 00:22:01,780 --> 00:22:08,320 something which is perceived as being just by power sharing, by more participation of the Catholics, 186 00:22:08,770 --> 00:22:17,620 by having a unionist government, including the Irish representatives, and seen as a factor, um, 187 00:22:17,620 --> 00:22:25,780 insofar as that was the sum of our aid, which was very important for the um, Protestant community. 188 00:22:26,470 --> 00:22:33,910 And what was important for the IRA was that there was the prospect of a referendum and saying, 189 00:22:33,910 --> 00:22:37,540 okay, um, the future in a couple of years, we might have a referendum. 190 00:22:37,960 --> 00:22:42,760 And if the majority is in favour of reunification with Ireland, so be it. 191 00:22:43,430 --> 00:22:51,200 And that's what it's made at. Um, that's a better cost benefit ratio for the IRA and the arts. 192 00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:56,720 And what lesson for giving us was that the moment it stays the same. 193 00:22:56,840 --> 00:23:05,450 And as they thought they would have the maturity for the time being, that they were quite happy or it was acceptable. 194 00:23:05,990 --> 00:23:10,610 Um, give them that's what they also got was the end of violence. 195 00:23:12,740 --> 00:23:16,340 So, um, the trick was you could trace it a lot of way to loss. 196 00:23:16,370 --> 00:23:22,760 Um, in terms of irreconcilable issues like referendum about the status, getting some hope for the future. 197 00:23:23,570 --> 00:23:32,390 And that was basically what was done there, saying, okay, we concede that we can't solve everything for now, 198 00:23:32,990 --> 00:23:40,710 but that's why we're having a procedure which is moving you for mentally for that and maybe in the future. 199 00:23:40,730 --> 00:23:46,770 So that's the hope, which was not explicitly out of that, but which I would say also things change. 200 00:23:46,790 --> 00:23:52,930 There will be new generations for which maybe there's questions to which parts not now belongs. 201 00:23:52,940 --> 00:23:59,330 It's not so important anymore. Um, um, plus economic situation is improving. 202 00:23:59,900 --> 00:24:03,230 Um, plus the political framework is changing. 203 00:24:05,030 --> 00:24:12,589 So in summary, um, approaches can be should be parallel and complementary. 204 00:24:12,590 --> 00:24:17,810 Should should not be either or that they properly have to complement one another. 205 00:24:18,290 --> 00:24:26,780 So teaching thinking can help to be more rational and cutting back the emotional barriers and to have contact and help to make, 206 00:24:26,900 --> 00:24:32,090 um, the expectations more realistic, to get to know the other group and to release the hatreds. 207 00:24:32,740 --> 00:24:38,940 Mutual concessions are important as a sign of goodwill, building agreements and shared interests. 208 00:24:38,960 --> 00:24:45,970 It's essential to move forwards and to come to a solution and for the very hard core issues, 209 00:24:45,980 --> 00:24:51,920 creating a procedural framework in which the first and most controversial issues of the future can be, 210 00:24:51,920 --> 00:24:55,340 um, uh, way forward, as was demonstrated in Northern Ireland. 211 00:24:55,670 --> 00:24:56,660 So thank you very much.