Editing Conflict resolution (section)

=== Conflict resolution curve ===
There are many examples of conflict resolution in history, and there has been a debate about the ways to conflict resolution: whether it should be forced or peaceful. Conflict resolution by peaceful means is generally perceived to be a better option. The conflict resolution curve derived from an analytical model that offers a peaceful solution by motivating conflicting entities.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Das |first1=Tuhin K. |title=Regret Analysis Towards Conflict Resolution |date=2018 |journal=SSRN |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3173490 |ssrn=3173490 |s2cid=216920077 }}</ref> Forced resolution of conflict might invoke another conflict in the future.

Conflict resolution curve (CRC) separates conflict styles into two separate domains: domain of competing entities and domain of accommodating entities. There is a sort of agreement between targets and aggressors on this curve. Their judgements of badness compared to goodness of each other are analogous on CRC. So, arrival of conflicting entities to some negotiable points on CRC is important before peace building. CRC does not exist (i.e., singular) in reality if the aggression of the aggressor is certain. Under such circumstances it might lead to apocalypse with mutual destruction.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Das |first1=Tuhin K. |title=Conflict Resolution Curve: Concept and Reality |journal=SSRN |date=2018 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3196791 |ssrn=3196791 |s2cid=219337801 }}</ref>
 
The curve explains why nonviolent struggles ultimately toppled repressive regimes and sometimes forced leaders to change the nature of governance. Also, this methodology has been applied to capture conflict styles on the Korean Peninsula and dynamics of negotiation processes.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Das |first1=Tuhin K. |last2=Datta Ray |journal=SSRN |first2=Ishita |title=North Korea's Peace Building in the Light of Conflict Resolution Curve |date=2018 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3193759 |ssrn=3193759}}</ref>