Competing Narratives about Competing Narratives: Psychology and Palestinian–Israeli Conflict

In their professional and academic roles as well as their personal and political efforts, many psychologists seek to understand, and ultimately help resolve, the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis. Too often, however, they overemphasize the centrality of competing narratives, partly in response to depoliticizing academic norms that demand the appearance of objectivity and neutrality. As a result, conflict‐resolution approaches such as dialog and mediation and common suggestions based on split‐the‐difference compromise favor a status quo in which the side with more power, Israel, remains dominant. In contrast, a critical psychology perspective consistent with justice‐based conflict transformation understands that even‐handed empathy‐seeking and negotiations prioritizing procedural minutiae can achieve neither justice nor reconciliation.