Showing papers by "Thomas L. Saaty published in 2022"

The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Beyond “Getting to Yes” in Conflict Resolution

Abstract: A challenge for dealing with controversies as intractable as the Israeli–Palestinian conflict is how to measure the influence intangible factors have on the conflict, which may even have more influence over the outcome than the tangible factors. Because the importance of such factors changes from one problem to another, and because intangible factors do not have known measurement scales, what is needed are relative scales, which in turn yield relative priorities, developed for each problem within the context of its own diversity of factors, and their influences on the actors involved and the concessions that they exchange.

Retributive Conflicts and the AHP: The Trading Mechanism

Abstract: The second kind of conflict is called retributive, with one or both parties harboring ill will toward each other (Saaty, ORiON 4:3–25, 1988). The idea is particularly relevant in long-drawn-out conflicts, which in the end fester and create almost ineradicable resentments. Here a party may be willing to give up much of its demands, if misfortune can be brought to its opponent through some means, including justice as dispensed by the court system. Should the enemy die, they may forgive and forget, or sometimes they may be resentful because they have not extracted their pound of flesh.

Strategic Communications: Communicating Internally and Externally

Abstract: Over the course of both official and unofficial (Track II) negotiations, one of the most critical points of controversy has been the articulation, or lack of, regarding the desired end goal. This is true with respect to both overarching strategic negotiations and tactical implementation negotiations whose purpose was to resolve on-the-ground issues. The challenges are relevant to communicating with different audiences and publics. One of the most challenging aspects of the negotiating process—whether strategic or tactical—was recognizing the seminal importance of communication. To address this issue, this chapter is divided into the following sections: 1. Introduction; 2. National Leadership; 3. Drafters–Implementers Communication; and 4. Final Thoughts.

Laying the Groundwork

Abstract: This book introduces a process to address the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. It does so in two ways that are different from past efforts. The first is by formally structuring the conflict, and the second is the way discussions are conducted and conclusions drawn. The effort is to create an objective, rather than subjective, model for resolving the conflict. As aspirational as that sounds, if not improbable as it may be, we believe that we have developed a workable model that is applicable to the conflict. We are confident because we have seen it in action; the model enables decision makers to engage in negotiations dramatically different from the traditional “zero-sum game” approach that has largely defined Israeli–Palestinian negotiations.

Implementation of the Principles: Getting Down to Earth

Abstract: While even a detailed implementation plan will require further discussion between the parties, the participants in our study, who are significant members of the Israeli and Palestinian communities, believe that the level of detail presented below will facilitate agreement on these issues, even if some modifications are required. To develop each of the principles into a working model, we follow the same process used to arrive at the principles described in Chap. 7.

Lessons Learned: The AHP Can Help Achieve Peace

Abstract: The approach will help create a solution to the conflict and provide negotiators with a unique pathway to consider the thorny issues and corresponding concessions underlying the deliberations, together with their implementation.

The Middle East Conflict: Origins, Evolution, and Attempts to Resolve

Abstract: When future Israeli Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion (born David Grun, he adopted the Hebrew name Ben-Gurion, after the Jewish leading figure Joseph ben Gurion of the Great Jewish Revolt against the Romans) arrived in Palestine in 1906, he ignored the fact that the land was populated by a non-Jewish majority. While the Land of Israel has powerful religious, historical, social, and cultural importance for Jews—religious and non-religious alike—the majority population in 1906 was Moslem. That is a fact. However, that fact does not diminish the 5000-year Biblical connection between the Land of Israel and the Jewish people. That, too, is a fact. These are not competing truths for both are true; these truths—while largely not in dispute—do not prevent an ongoing battle of the narrative. In many ways, that battle is at the root of the conflict; each side claims its historical superiority, each side stakes a claim that it “was here first,” and each side believes its claims to be the mantel of historical ascendency.

The Palestinian Refugee Problem: Compensation and Reparation Program

Abstract: We are not interested in studying how and why those departures took place. Our sole objective is to study the refugee problem in the context of Principle 7 of the Pittsburgh Declaration of Principles—August 2011.

Structuring the Hierarchy to Make Trade-Offs: Benefits, Costs, Perceived Benefits, and Perceived Costs

Abstract: (a) They had no way to measure the importance and value of intangible factors which can dominate the process; (b) They had no overall unifying structure to organize and prioritize issues and concessions; (c) They had no mechanism to trade off concessions by measuring their worth; (d) They had no way to capture each party’s perception of the other side’s benefits and costs; (e) They had no way to provide confidence for the other party that the opposing party is not gaining more than they are; (f) They had no way to avoid the effect of intense emotions and innuendoes which negatively affect the negotiation process; and (g) They had no way to test the sensitivity and stability of the solution to changes in their judgments with respect to the importance of the factors that determined the best outcome. The AHP is about breaking a problem down and then aggregating the solutions of all the sub-problems into a conclusion. It facilitates decision-making by organizing perceptions, feelings, judgments, and memories into a framework that exhibits the forces that influence a decision.