In each case, different levels of analysis and explanation are relevant: from the level of individuals to groups, social organizations and institutions, states and state systems (e.g., the European Union), military alliances (e.g., NATO), and collective security systems (e.g., the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe [OSCE]).
), in terms of domains like power, wealth, access to raw materials and markets, cultural or religious values, honor, dignity, or recognition.
An important factor is the different points of view of the conflict parties, such as when behavior that is based on positive intentions is perceived by the opponent as aggressive and therefore contributes to escalation.
[7] Conflicts can be intensified specifically through the construction of enemy images, psychological warfare, and propaganda promulgated by the media, political elite, educational systems, socialization, cultural symbols and other means.
One can distinguish between strategies on the official level (e.g., measures of tension reduction and trust build such as Charles E. Osgood's "Graduated and Reciprocated Initiatives in Tension Reduction" [GRIT], negotiations, mediation), approaches of unofficial diplomacy (interactive problem-solving workshops), and strategies at the level of peace and conflict civil society (e.g., peace journalism, contact between social groups).
One party publicly announces and performs a verifiable, concrete step to reduce tension, and asks or invites the other side to do something similar (developing a spiral of trust).
GRIT was designed to reverse the tension involved in the nuclear arms race by having each side engage in graduated and reciprocal inititiatives.
[10] While there is no firm evidence, it has been suggested that U.S. President Kennedy and the Soviet leader Khrushchev based their negotiations after the Cuban Missile Crisis on this concept.
In this case, a third party (e.g., a social scientist or reputed politician) can serve as a mediator in order to facilitate conflict management.
A team of social scientists (e.g., psychologists) initiate and promote a problem-solving process with the elements of conflict diagnosis, generation of alternatives, and development of nonviolent solutions that results in outcomes that are satisfactory to all parties involved.
Peace journalism, in contrast, has the objective of investigating and using the influence of the media as a means of encouraging the constructive, non-violent resolution of conflict.
Under asymmetric conditions, when the root causes of the conflict cannot be sufficiently addressed, structural violence persists.
The psychological consequences include, in particular, traumatization (mainly of the civilian population, but also members of the military), cognitive and emotional damage, and the destruction of trustful social relationships.
[24] Even when violence has been stopped or a Peace Treaty reached, to prevent the risk of a renewed escalation, physical and economic reconstruction as well as socio-political and psychosocial interventions are required.
These interventions aim to cure psychosocial wounds of war, build trust, develop a common collective memory, recognize past wrongdoing, and achieve reconciliation and/or forgiveness.
[26] The following cultural characteristics are obstacles to the development of sustainable peace: the view of one's own group (ethnicity, religion, nation, etc.)
to be superior and more valuable and others as inferior and of little value (or in the extreme case: no value); the development of enemy images, dehumanization of others, legitimization of violence and damage; underlying beliefs (ideologies) such as ethnocentrism, social dominance orientation, authoritarianism, nationalism, militarism, and an education system that promotes these ideologies; power differentials that are defended or increased by the powerful and that create unequal conditions in areas such as wealth, health, education, and political participation (structural violence).