We often talk about peace as if the concept is self-explanatory. Yet people can have various theories about what peace “is.” In this study, we examine the lay theories of peace of citizens embroiled in a prolonged ethnonational conflict. We show that lay theories of peace 1) depend on whether one belongs to the high-power or low-power party and 2) explain citizens’ fundamental approaches to conflict resolution. Specifically, we explore the link between power asymmetry, lay theories of peace, and preference for conflict resolution strategies within large-scale samples of Palestinian residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and Jewish residents of Israel. Results reveal that members of the high-power group (in this case Jewish-Israelis) are more likely to associate peace with harmonious relationships (termed “positive peace”) than with the attainment of justice (termed “structural peace”), while members of the low-power group (in this case Palestinians) exhibit an opposite pattern. Yet both groups firmly and equally interpret peace as the termination of war and bloodshed (termed “negative peace”). Importantly, across societies, associating peace with negative peace more than with positive or structural peace predicts citizens’ desire for a solution that entails the partition of land (the Two-State Solution) whereas associating peace with structural or positive peace more than with negative peace predicts citizens’ desire to solve the conflict by sharing the land (the One-State Solution). This study demonstrates the theoretical and policy-relevant utility of studying how those most affected by war understand the concept of peace.

我们经常谈论和平，好像这个概念是不言自明的。但是人们可以对“和平”有各种各样的理论。在这项研究中，我们研究了卷入长期民族冲突的公民的平庸理论。我们证明，和平的外在理论1）取决于一个人是属于大国还是小国，以及2）解释了公民解决冲突的基本方法。具体来说，我们在西岸和加沙地带的巴勒斯坦居民和以色列的犹太居民的大规模样本中，探索了权力不对称，平庸理论和对解决冲突策略的偏爱之间的联系。结果表明，大国集团的成员（在本例中为犹太人-以色列人）比将和平与和谐的关系（称为“积极和平”）联系起来的可能性更大，而与实现正义（称为“结构性和平”）联系起来的可能性更大，而成员低势集团（在这种情况下，是巴勒斯坦人）中的一员表现出相反的格局。然而，两个团体都坚定而平等地将和平解释为战争和流血的终结（称为“消极和平”）。重要的是，在整个社会中，将和平与消极和平相结合比与积极或结构和平相联系更多，这预示着人们希望解决方案需要进行土地分割（两国解决方案），而将和平与结构性或积极和平相结合比与消极和平相结合更多预测公民通过共享土地来解决冲突的愿望（一国解决方案）。