Abstract:
Why civil war negotiations fail and conflicts recur, is the central question in conflict
negotiation literature. However, the role played by ideological factors, in particular
Domestic Public Opinion (DPO) is under-theorized in the civil war negotiation
literature. Thus, this study, attempts to address the gap by seeking to answer the
following question: why do warring parties display more conciliatory negotiation
behavior in certain negotiations and not in other negotiations in the context of civil war?
The aim of this research is to explain the relationship between DPO and the negotiation
behavior of the government. By doing so, the study aims to offer an insider's view on
negotiation and to address a methodological lacuna by providing non-institutionalized
indicators derived from its empirical analysis. The study employs a comparative case
study approach with structured focused comparison methods to examine negotiations
in the Sri Lankan conflict. The two negotiation efforts are namely, Wickremasinghe-
LTTE negotiations in 2002-2003 and Rajapakse-LTTE negotiation in 2006. Public
opinion surveys, government positions and conduct have been used to operationalize
the DPO and negotiation behavior of the government.
