Overcoming the Obstacles to Effective Mediation of International Disputes

Information, Bias, and Mediation Success

“…By informing the disputants about each other's reservation points, mediators may help the disputants locate the bargaining set and thus increase the chances that the proposed settlement will fall within the bargaining set. Susskind and Babbitt (1992) describe the goal of information provision strategies as providing a ''reality check'' for the disputants. If the disputants miscalculate their opponent's probability of victory or resolve, a mediator can provide an objective assessment of the balance of forces between the opponents.…”

Determinants of mediation success in post-conflict Bosnia: a focused comparison

“…In selecting the cases, we categorically omit the mediation attempts made before and during the Bosnian War, since Determinants of mediation outcomes in post-conflict Bosnia 419 these mediation attempts had a completely different scope and objective to those made after the war. The criteria for 'success' are retrieved from the literature, measured from the starting point until the end of the process, and defined as success if the parties formally commit through the conclusion of an agreement (Bercovitch, Anagnoson, and Wille 1991;Kriesberg 1991;Susskind and Babbitt 1992). As noted in the previous section, we group the factors that may affect the success of an outcome in four major categories: (1) the characteristics of the negotiating parties, which include the regime type of the disputants, their power status vis-à-vis each other, and the nature of the previous relations between them; (2) the nature of the dispute, which includes how intense the dispute is, the issues the parties disagree on, and the duration and timing of the intervention; (3) the characteristics of the mediator, which comprise its power, rank and identity, relations with the parties, and previous mediation experiences; and (4) mediation strategies that contrast relational strategy with structural intervention and pressing strategy.…”

Coordinating Intermediary Peace Efforts

“…A study of five Indo-Pakistani crises between 1947 and 1990, for example, found that three cases resulted in war and involved multiple intermediaries, and two crises which were settled involved single intermediaries (Pavri 1996). The multiplicity of intermediaries may interfere with effective assistance due to poorly coordinated interactions among the intermediaries and the impact that has on the adversaries (Susskind and Babbitt 1992;Zartman 1991). Therefore, we should consider the difficulties in coordinating intermediary peacemaking efforts and how poor coordination contributes to the efforts' ineffectiveness.…”