National and international actors seek to protect human rights and resolve conflict to improve conditions for civilians in internal conflict.  Practical efforts to protect human rights can be good for resolving conflict by advancing long term stability, identifying causes of conflict, identifying potential mechanisms for its resolution, protecting bridge builders in a divided society, providing a neutral standpoint for addressing contentious issues, and generating international support for a peace process.  Practical efforts to protect human rights can sometimes be bad for resolving conflict because raising human rights violations with belligerents can distance them from a mediator, there is an asymmetry of violations between a state and an armed group, belligerents can see human rights as reducing their control over populations, human rights are perceived as inflexible, human rights are viewed as western, and those who have committed war crimes may seek to avoid punishment.  When there is a tension between the two in a situation of conflict, human rights activists may give priority to protecting rights, while mediators may give priority to resolving conflicts.  Nevertheless, tensions between resolving conflict and protecting human rights are not inevitable. They can be reduced, though not eliminated, through institutional design or political acumen.