The Art of Negotiation

This article provides a step by step illustration of diplomatic negotiations.It is an essential guiding tool for students in the field of international relations with a particular remit to Diplomacy.The document is delivered in simple English and in an easy to understand format to facilitate convenient readership. The author is a postgraduate student at the Institute of Diplomacy and International Studies in Nairobi.

International Studies Quarterly, 2010

This paper analyzes the conditions that encourage (or hinder) conflicting states in coming to the negotiating table. It also explores the factors that influence the successfulness of such negotiation attempts. A main argument of the paper is that it is important to look at what brings states to the table, because this may have a direct or indirect impact on the outcome of such negotiations. While confirming some of the findings within the conflict management literature, this paper demonstrates that contextual factors seem to have different effects or a different impact on each stage, implying that while certain factors may bring states to the table, they may not be the same factors that make agreements possible.

SSRN Electronic Journal, 2012

A long analytic tradition explores the challenge of productively synchronizing "internal" with "external" negotiations, especially focusing on how each side can best manage internal opposition to agreements negotiated "at the table." Implicit in much of this work is the view that each side's leadership is best positioned to manage its own internal conflicts, often 1) by pressing for deal terms that will meet internal objections, and 2) by effectively "selling" the agreement to key constituencies. Far less familiar territory involves how each side can help the other side with the other's "behind-the-table" barriers to successful agreement. Following Robert Putnam's (1988) two-level games schema, I characterize such "behind the table," or "Level II," barriers more broadly, offer several innovative examples of how each side can help the other overcome them, and develop more general advice on doing so most effectively. As a fuller illustration of a Level II negotiator helping the other side with its formidable behind-the-table challenges, I pay special attention to the end-of-Cold-War negotiations over German reunification in which former U.S. Secretary of State, James Baker, played a key role.

The art of negotiation, conceived in narrow terms, is a sophisticated instrument in the armoury of genuine diplomats enabling thanks to enlightened persuasion and commonsensical reasoning, to mitigate and civilize differences between states by transmuting material power into a bargaining weight used throughout the negotiating process. This reduces a direct appeal to use force by actors and creates a dialogical context for reciprocal interaction under conditions of which states are capable of reaching a convergence point, thereby instantiating a new, more just international environment. Negotiation results in the transformation of the anarchical structure attributable to a collective effort through which actors, by means of elaborate negotiation and cautious communication, are allowed to appreciate each other counter fears, define and redefine their interests, establish common ground and reconstitute their identities. However protracted and intense negotiating has become, negotiators should not become frustrated as the success is reserved only for ones who are the most persevering and patient negotiators. Negotiation is a craft that could be learned and people who are consensual at the end succeed. There is no single blueprint for success, but negotiation remains the main tool in the armoury of a genuine diplomat whether it is multilateral or mini-lateral, global-centric or polycentric, conducted at the formal summit level or informal at the club level, high-table great power negotiation or negotiation at lobbying level. BATNA is often the best source of bargaining power in negotiations. Power can come from a strong role, title, or a position of authority. Negotiators can bring a sense of psychological leverage to the table. Simply thinking about a time in our lives when we had power or achieved something remarkable and substantial can bolster our confidence and improve negotiating outcomes. Simply thinking that negotiation process although difficult can be managed and that we can do it, can immensely boost our self-esteem leading to a consensual decision in the end. Negotiation has been the prime function of diplomacy and it remains so at present. The goal of global diplomacy should be to keep the world in balance. Diplomacy can do it and it still does matter, but skilled diplomats must not permit countries to become fundamentally stronger when they are ready to use their power while other countries become qualitatively weaker to react because this is why great wars and human tragedies occur. In the absence of dialogue, countries form alliances and start to chronically compete with each other. It is true that unchecked nationalism, militarism and populism can lead to wars. If our societies were more equal in terms of North-South divide many global challenges would be resolved more promptly. Whereas the division into rich and poor countries means there is a role for negotiators. One paradox is the variety of various approaches to solving climate change. Against climate change, all nations from North, South East and West suffer equally and yet it is an issue which generates debates and bickering. It is one of the most significant threats facing the world today and it is solvable. Success will depend on how much determination we all can show. According to the American Meteorological Society, there is a 90% probability that global temperatures will rise by 3.5 to 7.4 degrees Celsius in less than one hundred years, with even greater increases over land and the poles (Council on Foreign Relations, 2013). These seemingly minor shifts in temperature could trigger widespread disasters in the form of rising sea levels, violent and volatile weather patterns, desertification, famine, water shortages, and other secondary effects including conflict. In this sense, climate change stands against negotiation. The world may be fast approaching a tipping point concerning climate change. Those who currently hold power would like to see a possible solution not interfering with their established status quo. They are in favour of extending the existing institutions to continue to negatively modifying climate change causing diseases such as furuncles on the face of a virgin Gaia as those in the form of hurricanes. These are created as the winds of punishment that in their anger can dislodge mountains - a sign that God does not approve the way humans conduct themselves. It has been suggested that runaway global warming might cause the climate on Earth to become like Venus, which would make it uninhabitable. In less extreme scenarios, it could cause the end of civilisation. Climate activists who opt for a revolutionary change would like to abolish the existing status quo. Scientists warn that ''If we keep on with business as usual, the Earth will be warmed more every year; drought and floods will be endemic; many more cities, provinces, and whole nations will be submerged beneath the waves. In the longer run, still, more dire consequences may follow, including the collapse of the West Antarctic ice sheet, and the inundation of almost all the coastal cities on the planet." (Sagan, 1997). "Those who are sceptical about carbon dioxide greenhouse warming might profitably note the massive greenhouse effect on Venus. No one proposes that Venus's greenhouse effect derives from imprudent Venusians who burned too much coal, drove fuel-inefficient autos, and cut down their forests.'' (Ibid). Sagan's point is different, ''The climatological history of our planetary neighbour, an otherwise Earth-like planet on which the surface became hot enough to melt tin or lead, is worth considering — especially by those who say that the increasing greenhouse effect on Earth will be self-correcting that we do not have to worry about it, or that the greenhouse effect is a "hoax". The truth is that the greenhouse effect generated a critical level of greenhouse gases in Venus's atmosphere. Evidence published in the early 1980s showed that the composition of clouds consists mainly of sulphur dioxide and sulphuric acid droplets. The Pioneer Venus project launched in 1978 confirmed that. Like Venus, our stratosphere even now has a substantial mist of tiny sulfuric acid droplets so we know our limits. Life was given to the human species a billion years ago. We know that previous civilisations were given a chance, but did not manage to survive. We know what happened to other Earthlike planets. Followed by a climate revolution of consciousness, generating a friendly climate would require a different level of thinking, not the same one that created this problem. A holistic climate solution is possible. A supernatural mode has been known in history, Mark (4:39) wrote about Jesus: 'He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.' Only God has the power over the weather, ''He makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind. He makes winds his messengers, flames of fire his servants.'' (Psalm 104). God is so powerful that he set the Earth on its foundations so that it can never be moved. Unless it could be moved by a global climate sensitivity. Gaia (2019) stated, “Current technologies that will mature over the next 30 years will offer anyone who has the necessary resources the ability to modify weather patterns and their corresponding effects, at least on the local scale.'' Only God could have covered the Earth with ''the watery depths as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains.'' At His rebuke the waters fled, at the sound of His thunder they took to flight.'' Humans have to use all the powers of our brains to do something extraordinary. But impossible is not a fact, it is an opinion. When we meditate our minds we can achieve even the impossible. Recently, humans wanted to have rather than 'be'. There are more connections in the human body than there are stars in the galaxy, we form a gigantic network of information, and yet, no many know how to transform information into knowledge and knowledge into wisdom. But it is an achievement that inspires dreams, if mankind could change climate negatively, equally, we can influence it for the better. Each generation takes the Earth as trustees. However, the current generation has used it for exploitation and this has to be reversed and changed into holistic healing of the planet. Earth deserves to be honoured even by global leaders, She needs a respite from time to time. Humans treat politics as winning popularity contests rather than a source of wise guidance based on bridging divides through negotiation. Listening to the youth by political elites could offer a constructive start out of the conflict since young people are ready to offer new ideas and pragmatic solutions. The youth of today can help us all find the way, and together we can engineer the civilisation we want so negotiation still proves to be a vital tool in solving global challenges.

The concept of ‘ripe moment’ is an important principle in diplomacy practiced by states in the international community. Diplomats and politicians like Machiavelli, Richelieu and Gucciardini advised on and practised this concept religiously. Although not exactly so called, it was, according to Guicciardini’s ricordi para 78, expressed as the ‘proper moment’ (Berridge 2000 pp. 87). Logically, not many people will contest the saying ‘doing the right thing at the right time’, thus the concept of ripe moment in life event seem universally accepted. The diplomats aforementioned held the principle that diplomatic negotiations were only worthwhile when and if there are indications that the negotiations will end in a desired outcome. Thus, identifying the moment for successful negotiation remains very significant in diplomacy. This paper aims at a critical analysis of ‘ripe moment’. It presents a case study where the concept has worked effectively as anticipated, as well as present instances where the concept has not been absolutely productive. This paper examines the possibility to engineer or rather catalyse ‘ripe moment’ as well as recognising and seizing the ‘ripe moment’ in diplomatic negotiation towards achieving the expected outcome. Furthermore, it contests the conventional conceptualisation of ripe moment to include only state actors by having a view into the future of diplomacy. Keywords: International relations, Diplomacy

Global Health Diplomacy, 2012

Negotiation Journal, 2013

A long analytic tradition explores the challenge of productively synchronizing "internal" with "external" negotiations, especially focusing on how each side can best manage internal opposition to agreements negotiated "at the table." Implicit in much of this work is the view that each side's leadership is best positioned to manage its own internal conflicts, often 1) by pressing for deal terms that will meet internal objections, and 2) by effectively "selling" the agreement to key constituencies. Far less familiar territory involves how each side can help the other side with the other's "behind-the-table" barriers to successful agreement. Following Robert Putnam's (1988) two-level games schema, I characterize such "behind the table," or "Level II," barriers more broadly, offer several innovative examples of how each side can help the other overcome them, and develop more general advice on doing so most effectively. As a fuller illustration of a Level II negotiator helping the other side with its formidable behind-the-table challenges, I pay special attention to the end-of-Cold-War negotiations over German reunification in which former U.S. Secretary of State, James Baker, played a key role.

Handbook of International Negotiation: Interpersonal, Intercultural and Diplomatic Perspectives

International political negotiations that include sacred values often fall apart, or, when concluded, prove unsustainable. Why? What can be done to make these settlements more sustainable? This chapter reviews the literature on sacred values and sacred rhetoric, focusing on why sacred values cannot be mixed with material tradeoffs, how regular values become sacred, what we know about defusing them, and their immutability. It then applies new research to previous proposals for managing sacred values within international negotiations. Though sacred values are immutable, once acknowledged, they can be flexibly managed via tactics such as reframing, repositioning, and reprioritizing. Acknowledging and/or recognizing the other’s sacred values, however, is often a challenge. Thus, we suggest a practical need for SV negotiatior training, and propose a dual (in-group and intergroup), process-based platform that negotiators can use to prepare parties for negotiations involving SVs. Lastly, we identify critical areas for future research.

International Negotiation

Much can change over 25 years. When International Negotiation was established in 1996, it was just a few years after the breakup of the Soviet Union, the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc, and the founding of the European Union. Within a few years after publication began, international terrorist incidents grew rapidly, populist citizen-led protests resulted in the downfall of many governments, the use of information technology and social media mushroomed yielding countless new channels to communicate and organize, many new multinational regimes were formulated, and the rise of the Global South resulted in an upsurge of cooperation among developing countries, to name a few momentous events and trends. Many more critical changes in the global arena can be listed, all having important impacts on the processes and outcomes of international negotiation and mediation. There are always new political, economic and social factors that can affect international negotiations. So, it is important for researchers and diplomats to stay attuned to changing situations and anticipate what they might mean for the detailed give-and-take of particular upcoming negotiations. Through its special thematic issues, as well as its unsolicited articles, the journal has sought to publish research that is evidence-based, forward-looking and practical, while pushing the boundaries of theory. At the same time, the journal has been proactive in looking back and reanalyzing several key areas in the international negotiation literature, to assess their continued relevance and add to our understanding. This includes articles on justice and fairness, postagreement negotiation, preventive diplomacy, negotiation styles and culture, and training and research methods, for example. Change reveals itself in the what (different sectors and policy areas), the where (involving new countries and coalitions), the who (with greater inclusion of different stakeholders), and the why (for example, new threats or problem areas) of negotiation and how that impacts on ways the negotiation process unfolds. We have seen in recent years how the use of new social media technologies (Twitter and Facebook, for example) can influence elections, spur trade wars, and undo existing agreements, with little regard for country borders. We have seen how the emergence of populist leaders sometimes leads