Conflict theory has an abstract appearance, but it is basically a field of applied social research, in which theo ries and their policy implications are profoundly affected by the underlying objectives and value premises of the conflict theorist. On the whole, conflict theory today operates from value premises favoring the reduction, moderation, or stabiliza tion of conflict rather than its intensification; in practice, if not in theory, this tends to align it with status quo interests. The initial impact of this value orientation was to discourage study of war termination, but in recent years conflict theorists have begun to turn their attention to this problem. Some who have done so have seen wars as "fightlike," some as "gamelike." In both cases, the studies have been heavily influenced by assumptions congenial to the prevailing value premises. In particular, conflict theorists have sought to view abstractly the conflicts they study, to fit them into sym metrical models, and to focus upon conflict behavior—mili— tary action and strategic options—rather than upon the an tagonistic interests or political issues in conflict. In certain recent studies applying conflict theory to current problems of war termination, these values and assumptions have led to conceptual schemes and policy conclusions strikingly similar to Defense Department strategies of pacification and to stand ing policy positions of the United States government, in particular with respect to the war in Vietnam.