Competing Narratives about Ukraine and the Possibility of Dialogue and De-Escalation

What are the prevailing narratives about the war in Ukraine and how could these narratives be reframed to support conflict de-escalation and peace efforts? Contrastive stories in conflicts tend to be excessively selective, biased, and simplistic, framed for example in terms of victimhood or the Manichean struggle between good and evil. Such frames are not only deeply anchored in social practices and structures but also construct them, provide them with moral justification, and are therefore difficult to change. However, such a negative spiral of antagonistic narratives will not continue forever. Sometimes, a turnaround only occurs after a massive crisis or disaster, but actors can also learn and change. Learning and change require reflexivity from the parties involved. Reflexivity is an ability to critically distance oneself from all narratives, including stories one believes in oneself. Reflexivity should not be confused with judgmental relativism. While reflexivity makes actors aware that their narratives are not absolute but socially and historically contingent, it involves the possibility of rational comparison and assessment of stories and their problems and merits. Through this awareness, actors may become more willing to adapt, negotiate, or integrate elements of other narratives. Alternative framings can also bring in new elements, including impartial facilitators and international or global institutions such as the UN.