Search

Conflict entails material bases of social life as well as psychological. Conflict resolution is ingrained in the analysis of inter-group dynamics as well as the process and outcome of negotiating different values and incompatible interests. Resolution of serious social conflicts means more than finding solutions to contentious issues. Self-esteem and identity as well as physical well-being are key elements to be considered in conflict resolution and peace building. In rebuilding communal relations, long-term hostile relationships have to be overcome to prevent future occurrences of iolent conflict. According to realpolitik, conflict can be effectively controlled and managed by the use of force or the threat of punishment or retaliation. Conflict resolution is considered a movement toward creating cooperative relationships. Psychological and social dimensions of conflict behaviour were investigated in generating an interdisciplinary theory. Research on conflict resolution ought to be promoted by a holistic approach to examining human conflict.

NEGOTIATION is involved, either at personal, group or international levels, in managing almost every arena of human affairs. In particular, joint solutions are required in many public spheres, both domestic and international, sometimes with grave consequences to the welfare of larger collective communities. Many international actors argue over the terms of settling territorial boundaries, arms control, termination of long-term hostilities, reduced pollution, protection of endangered species, free trade, monetary systems or other shared problems. When more than one solution exists, actors may have different preferences for types of mutually desirable agreements. This produces dilemmas for negotiation. Negotiation is a unique set of social interactions in which negotiators differ but have complementary needs or desires. Facing one of the largest threats to the future of humanity, for instance, every reasonable person would accept the necessity for collective action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions responsible for the irrevocable damage to the global atmosphere, but it has proven difficult for governments to agree to measures to be taken to obtain the objective. Though it has now become part of history (from the 1950s to the early 1990s), the United States and the Soviet Union kept increasing their stockpiles of nuclear weapons the use of which would have left neither side with any chance of survival. Although both sides realized the need to control the arms race through negotiation, they still competed to gain military superiority. It took more than two decades and cost approximately one million lives to end the civil war between the Sudanese government and the south's ‘liberation forces’ prior to the conclusion of a peaceful settlement in 2005. In all these incidents, any one actor's security and welfare cannot be achieved alone, requiring mutually agreed actions. In entering negotiation, each party has certain expectations, but one's objectives cannot be realized without joint solutions to the shared problems. In negotiation settings, a mutually acceptable solution is sought by two or more parties, who have differing preferences over feasible outcomes. Even if the attainment of one party's goals is in fundamental conflict with those of the other parties, negotiation still takes place due to converging interests as well as opposing ones. Incompatible preferences can be resolved through the recognition of the interdependence in which cooperation becomes an inevitable part.

Unless both sides win, no agreement can be permanent. Jimmy Carter, 2002 AS PROGRESS may not necessarily be linear, the potential for negotiations evolves along vastly different trajectories. Nonetheless, the participants should have an overall, even if vague, notion of how the process is likely to proceed. The whole sequence of negotiations can be envisaged as a developmental process of testing the ground, agenda formulation, proposal making, bargaining and closure. In illuminating the main characteristics of different negotiation stages, this chapter looks at specific negotiating activities that encompass proposal exchange, issue redefinition and conceptualization, exploration of an overall structure of the deal, and a search for implementing details. The nature of the dispute is initially defined through issue clarification at the agenda phase. Once having voiced a commitment to key issues, each side has to turn their attention to narrowing the differences before any prospect for settlement emerges. This transition serves as a preliminary to final bargaining. More specifically, these preliminaries constitute a search for a viable range of alternative settlements through a serious study of trading possibilities, and honing a bargaining formula. Jostling for position may precede the eventual ironing out of differences. The points of difference may be narrowed by concession-making. Thus a shared sense of the approximate range of possible terms is essential to deal structuring and detailed bargaining. As vividly illustrated, for instance, in Greek debt talks with Eurozone countries and the US–Iranian nuclear deal-making attempt in 2015, the whole process does not stop at the conclusion of an agreement, spilling over into implementation, demanding either associated negotiation or renegotiation for new or improved terms. Prenegotiation stage As part of prenegotiation dynamics, each side measures the other's capabilities and desires. Then the first step is a decision as to whether or not to negotiate at all. In general, each party should feel compelled to see the need for negotiation; it can be created by various events and other circumstances. The example of Panama's negotiation with the United States below demonstrates how a weaker party can take advantage of a catalytic event to force a much stronger party to see the need to redress their grievances.

If you must be selfish, then be wise and not narrow-minded in your selfishness. Dalai Lama, 2002 NEGOTIATION is often characterized as interdependent actions involving a set of two or more decision-making units which have different preferences over the possible outcomes. By considering a negotiation process as a strategic interaction, we can shed light on interactive decision-making among actors who have a set of actions to choose from. In an interactive process, the actual or likely decisions by one agent have an impact on the other's choice of actions. Viewing this decision-making process within the structure of a game helps us explore different possibilities for solutions to conflicting preferences. In fact, game-theoretic analysis assists in uncovering order in seemingly chaotic interactions among negotiators. This chapter introduces a game-theoretic perspective in building a foundation for understanding structural conditions embedded in many conflict settings. It starts with theoretical assumptions about interactive decision-making and moves on to basic concepts involving the Prisoner's Dilemma and minimax. By introducing these and other concepts such as a dominant strategy and an equilibrium, the chapter lays the groundwork for further discussion about the dynamics of cooperation and conflict that will come later. Strategic interaction in negotiation In strategic situations where the outcome for each participant relies on mutual decisions, an individual's success depends on the choices of others. For instance, when one country concedes part of a disputed territory, they would want to have measures taken to ensure the territory is prevented from being used to attack. Not only one's own choices but also those of other actors drive the allocation of values. In other words, an ability to realize one's own desires hinges on what the other does (Schelling 1960). Thus the outcome derives from mutual influence of each other's actions and strategies, reflecting the decisions of all the concerned parties who have different interests. In general, negotiation has long been defined such that “choices of the actors will determine the allocation of some values,” and “the outcome for each participant is a function of the behavior of the other” (O. Young 1975, 5). More specifically, bargaining takes place because each actor's welfare is affected by the other's decisions.

The purpose of this article is to examine how to manage and resolve conflict that arises from dissatisfied needs and incompatible interests. The way we respond to conflict has broad implications for human well-being and social change. After discussing conceptual issues, the article examines three different models of interpreting conflict. Then it explains diverse ways of dealing with a broad range of problems. These include negotiation, adjudication, mediation, arbitration, problem solving workshops, and consensus building. The final section looks at issues relevant to the application of these methods.

Preface Notes on the Contributors PART I: INTRODUCTION Peacebuilding: Conceptual and Policy Issues H.W.Jeong Does Peacebuilding Build Peace? C.P.David PART II: PEACEKEEPING AND CAPACITY BUILDING Peacekeeping Strategies for Peacebuilding Multi-Functional Roles H.W.Jeong Negotiation Readiness in the Development Context: Adding Capacity to Ripeness B.I.Spector PART III: RECONCILIATION AND SOCIAL REHABILITATION Reconciliation: Contexts and Consequences C.Lerche & H.W.Jeong Gender in Post-Conflict Reconstruction S.McKay PART IV: POLICY DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL ISSUES Peacebuilding Design: A Synergetic Approach H.W.Jeong Operational Issues for Peacebuilding: Organizational Imperatives H.W.Jeong & D.Last Index

Difficult peace negotiations can create the conditions necessary for the settlement of intrastate violence and war in many divided societies. This book focuses on diverse processes and strategies for the transition from violent conflict to post-conflict reconstruction. In order to obtain a peace settlement that is durable, ‘institutions and support structures must be put in place so that the parties are discouraged from taking up arms again’ (Hampson, 1996, pp. 9–10). In investigating a post-settlement situation, thus, it is important to identify actions and support structures that will prevent a relapse into violent conflict. The volume explores the ways dynamics of postconflict situations can be transformed for the achievement of sustainable peace.

Multilateral negotiations are designed to establish a set of goals and formal mechanisms for implementing policy options. The content, types and nature of agreements reflect interactive processes of combining diverse interests and values. International environmental negotiation constitutes a multi-faceted process: parties should agree on a set of facts associated with problems, recognise different perceptions of issues and decide common policy actions overcoming conflicting positions. More specifically, treaty making involves agenda setting, collection of information, a forum for interest articulation, a bargaining process, and development of normative statements and rules.