The Moynihan Institute and the Program on the Analysis and Resolution of Conflicts have begun a project to assess the state-of-the-art of non-official third party interventions in identity-based conflicts known as Track Two Diplomacy. This project has two goals. The first is to bring a series of practitioners representing various applications of Track Two Diplomacy to the Maxwell School to profile their theoretical orientation and methodological work. The second is to categorize and further develop effective means to gauge the effects of such interventions on peace-building and peace-making efforts around the world. This project was begun at the instigation of a group of graduate students who were interested in improving their skills in transnational conflict resolution and in finding innovative dissertation topics. These students have been joined by a mix of faculty members from several of Maxwell’s academic programs also interested in the question of whether unofficial third parties can contribute to the resolution of transnational and intercommunal conflicts.

Central to the project is the recognition that many conflicts in the world today involve large-scale inter-communal struggles that partially revolve around issues of identity. In many instances, official mechanisms are in place to deal with these conflicts. Increasingly such “Track One” approaches to conflict management are being paralleled by a range of “unofficial” techniques which have been designed by non-governmental organizations, foundations, and academics to help bridge the gap between the parties and to help each side to become more familiar with the other. While often described as “Track Two Diplomacy” these processes vary greatly in terms of intent, application, and circumstances.

The great range of theoretical approaches, methodological applications, and goals of Track Two processes has given rise to a rich multi-disciplinary discourse about the role of third party intermediaries in peace-building and peace-making activities. This discourse, however, continues to challenge practitioners and policy makers alike to adequately understand the relevance, role, and outcomes of Track Two Diplomacy in different conflict stages and contexts. Central to this discussion are the following types of questions. What constitutes Track Two? How should practitioners account for culture, structural inequalities, and historical legacies in their search for reconciliation? What are the possible relationships between Track Two and Track One processes? Finally, how can the outcomes of Track Two interventions be assessed and categorized so that policy makers and project funders haev a clear grasp of the policy relevance and potential impact of particular interventions?

In 2004 the project received a grant from the US Institute of Peace (USIP) to study the way that Track Two Diplomacy has been used to augment the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. (Click on "USIP Workshop" tab at top of page for full description.) The goal of this grant is to increase our understanding of the types of strategies that Track Two practitioners used to impact the Israeli – Palestinian peace process, to consider the impacts that these strategies actually had, and to consider how Track Two specialists might more effectively transfer their ‘products’ to the Track One level, to the community level, and to other peace-building initiatives organized by non-governmental actors. The project, just completed, concluded with two workshops held with organizers of Track Two initiatives.