this is good question. undoubtedly, ethnocentrism in most of region led to extremism and it is problematic situation and condition to create region cooperation framework. we see the problem in south west Asia for example in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

removing this problem can be led to situation in which we can see new conditions to create framework for better cooperation

Maybe I have come into this conversation rather later, but what conflict are we talking about? Generally speaking an exclusive stance on ethnocentrism is a characteristic of a certain kind of nationalism and in itself shows an illiberal and essentially undemocratic political attitude. This kind of exclusivism often leads to conflict and there are several examples of this in the last 100 years especially where two nationalisms clash, as in the case of the last phase of Greco-Turkish Wars (1919-1922), and populations are exchanged. Population exchange was experimented with when India and Pakistan gained independence in the late 1940s, but rather than accept that a community might retain some groups amounting to mixed ethnicity and certain amount of cosmopolitanism, a kind of madness gripped the affected groups and they turned on each other, in some cases where there had been peaceful co-existence for years. The work of Muller, Sternberger and Habermas suggests an alternative to an ethnocentric form of 'patriotism', i.e. constitutional patriotism. Similarly in the history curriculum debate in 2010-2013 in England (yes England not the UK, as England has its own history curriculum, as does Wales and Northern Ireland; whereas Scotland has an entirely independent education system) Lord Bew in the House of Lords (October, 2011) said that it was possible to have a patriotism of the (political) left and centre as well as of the right. Michael Ignatieff wrote about this in Blood and Belonging (1993 I think) and contrast ethnic nationalism with democratic nationalism. This theme was taken up by historian James Belich in his Dominion Day address in Wellington New Zealnad in September 2007. There are psychological aspects of the association of ethnocentrism with conflict, such as 'otherizing' but also deeper effects linked to trauma and memory. I could write much, much more. See the work of Gail Weldon (her South Africa PhD) on Rwanda and South Africa. She refers to the work of Lederach (the moral imagination) and Volkan (e.g. on large-group identity and chosen trauma). This is all also associated with the managing of collective identity, and the tensions between official versions of narratives that contribute to identity and individual, unofficial versions. This in a bizarre connection I have found links to the Russian writer Bakhtin's notion of the carnivalesque as a challenge to official narratives. Will that do? 

it is one of the central and most discussed issues in CR domain. it relates to all social conflicts but naily ethno-national conflicts known as PSC - Protracted Social Conflicts or Intractable Conflicts.

i recommend to begin reading Edward Azar, Nadim Rouhana, Daniel Bar-Tal who wrote a lot about this bias. 

Thank you Mr. Kobi

it is good area to discuss more with to gather on this issue because this has important role to reshaping some geographical aspects in the near future specially in geopolitic situations 

The ethnocultural aspects of nationhood and conflict is often underestimated. One very recent example is what is happening in Afghanistan with the introduction of a parliament. There was much discussion regarding how he parliament should be structured. The US won out and established a parliament that reflected their own. The structure of Afghan society was one based on tribes that often were at war with each other. This has caused many problems and much conflict. The UK and Canada argued strongly for a Federation that recognised the various cultures with Afghanistan. This would have meant that all the tribe would have a say and may have minimised the internal conflict that is rife in Afghanistan

I think that ethnocentrism like in Afghanistan have had negative consequences of nation building and caused critical situation so we can see drug cultivation, production and trafficking. this trends has been serious problem  for development process in that country and  seriously  damaged Afghanistan economy.

Yes it has had very negative impacts on the country but also on the region. These impacts can rests in conflict, human rights violations, poverty and development. These impacts are always considerations in social or economic terms yet they stifle development and prosperity.