International Negotiation in the Twenty-First Century

Alain Plantey

• Publisher: Routledge-Cavendish
• Year: 2007
• eBook ISBN: 9781135393342
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: International Law
• Index: Law

Never have international relations between nations been so complex as in the current political climate. In this contemporary world international negotiation has become a combination of traditional diplomacy and the modern framework of conferences, multi-party institutions and organizations such as the European Union. While this diplomacy has, in the past, existed to prevent national and international conflict, its scope has expanded to deal with other problems facing us on a global scale. As negotiation is the primary tool to resolve international conflict, an understanding of the methods and principles of international negotiation remains essential. Only this form of diplomacy can hope to answer the global challenges we will face in the twenty-first century.

International Negotiation in the Twenty-First Century is an accessible examination of negotiation and diplomacy on an international scale and is the first publication to analyze this fundamental concept in a single volume.

Part I:
Diplomatic Negotiation

59 – In the great encounters of history, it is difficult to know how much was due to art and how much to chance. Certainly, many victories can be put down to luck, but the essence of skill must surely be the ability to seize each opportunity and turn events to one’s advantage. In a social order where any balance is relatively unstable, no one system can determine policy in the long term.

60 – In the course of any nation’s existence, and of the coexistence of nations with each other, every day brings its share of events, and international life refashions itself into new and different configurations on an almost daily basis. In relations between nations, nothing is settled, no position can be taken for granted and no judgement is set in stone. It is unsafe to rely on any declaration that is not supported, or to treat any long-held claim as justified, or any undefended space as secure, or any non-combatant authority as legitimate. The art of politics and negotiation requires those who practise it to adapt constantly to changing circumstances. (see 219, 2248)

The negotiator must be both willing and able. He must seek to explore fresh possibilities, renew the methods he uses and project strategies into the future. Diplomacy is all about new beginnings and the unending business of adapting to new realities: it is a never-ending struggle. (see 2398)

The unpredictability of the international environment means that many negotiations produce precarious results. Gains are only made by behaving with moderation. Exaggerated demands are not consonant with good faith. (see 81)

61 – Negotiation will obviously not have the same value or importance each time and everywhere. Defence and diplomacy will not mean the same for a country protected by its geographical situation as they will for one that is not so favoured. Insularity encourages isolationism and often xenophobia.

There is no diplomatic innovation without calculation and risk. Nor can there be any meaningful negotiation with a partner that lacks the means to put it into effect.

62 – As a form of relations between sovereign States, negotiation can encompass issues of the greatest magnitude as well as matters of detail. It ranges over war, business and science as well as diplomatic representation and consular protection. It implements the strategies of political leaders and can also be used to defend private interests. (see 1674)

63 – For the historian, the great peace conferences are as important as the great battles. These conferences have a great impact, not only because they decide the fate of nations, sometimes against their will, but also because they are almost invariably followed by more bloodshed. Within modern times, the Peace of Westphalia, the Congress of Vienna, the Treaty of Versailles and its ancillary agreements, and also the Yalta and Potsdam Conferences successively reassembled the pieces of the map of central Europe that had been torn apart by the adventures of leaders and the clash of nations, and, each time a new order was set up, it degenerated into fresh conflict. The quality of the negotiations on such occasions may quite simply be measured by the length of the truce that followed. (see 999)

64 – Competition and rivalry do not exclude compromise and entente, which is itself only one of the factors at play in political manoeuvre. This is amply demonstrated by the nature of the relations between the two great powers for over forty years: the antagonists came together as partners as soon as the need arose to stabilise a world threatened by risks without precedent in history. (see 1761)

In the early days, diplomacy was often only a matter of accommodating the pretensions and the sometimes sordid interests of a few sovereigns. Things are undoubtedly very different now.

Chapter I:
Diplomatic Negotiation and the Themes of War

65 – Trials are part of life, for States as well as people. Birth is the first trauma. After that, every change causes apprehension, and every encounter carries an implied risk of opposition, competition or sometimes violence, even gratuitous violence. For Darwin, Nietzsche, Marx and even Freud, the tao of nature, history and mankind is struggle.¹

66 – Competition between individuals and groups is the driving force behind the advance of humanity. It is neither possible nor desirable to reduce this diversity to uniformity. Experience has taught that groups wishing to be seen as unique or unitary, as is the case with certain dominant political parties, are not in fact homogeneous, and that the sorts of conflict they prevent in the outside world surface within their own internal workings. Conflict permits society to remain in a state of constant evolution.² (see 1879)

67 – Peoples have been in confrontation from the beginning of time in their pursuit of incompatible goals,³ whether over the search for the means of survival, the acquisition of territory or out of a need for political, religious or economic domination. They all, however, share the desire to steer clear of any venture which might endanger their own security.

68 – Some have viewed the age-old use of force for the resolution of disputes not just as an expression of human ambition but as a fundamental biological reality. Far from being a means for man to pursue his aims, they say, war in fact makes an instrument of him, because it plays a major role in regulating society and moving it forward. It does so, allegedly, by eliminating surplus populations and excesses of wealth, reinforcing group cohesion, satisfying the need to indulge in quarrels and the impulse to self-sacrifice, and acting as a spur to creation and to man’s need to excel himself in all fields of human endeavour.⁴

69 – The truth of these observations can be seen more clearly at the international level than within State structures themselves. Throughout its entire existence,⁵ the society of nations has been made up of the juxtaposition of entities whose mutual relations have been lively, changing and sometimes marked by conflict or anarchy. The delicate features of this environment, which is not subject to any higher normative power, have evolved considerably in recent times, but at bottom they remain the same as they were when Machiavelli devised his first formula for contemporary diplomacy.

The more ancient the antagonisms, and the deeper and wider they extend, the more difficult it is to prevent and resolve disputes.

70 – In an unregulated environment, the mere existence of others can constitute a danger if concern for security is ignored. Wars arise out of exactly the same difficult environment in which normal relations are formed and normal exchanges take place between countries. Unless regulated by negotiation, it takes very little for it to be shaken by conflict.

Since the post-war illusion of the 1920s, security has reasserted itself over peace as the overriding concern.⁶

71 – King Frederick II of Prussia took the view that war was so profound a source of misery and so uncertain in outcome that no amount of reflection was too much before committing one’s forces.⁷ This did not prevent him, any more than other princes, from straying beyond the paths of peace in seeking solutions to his problems. Harmony between nations will not be achieved overnight, however much the survivors of each conflict hope that it will prove to be the last.

72 – The diplomat lives in hope that evolution will follow its inevitable course without overt violence between nations. He offers his contribution without excessive illusions, in the knowledge that peace is more the result of the balance of power than of treaties and that this balance must constantly be readjusted.

But he knows, too, that there will never be a finer opportunity to practise his art, nor a greater reason to succeed, than in times of confrontation.

Section 1: The confrontation of forces

73 – The place each nation occupies in relation to others, starting with its neighbours, is the product of a combination of strengths and weaknesses.⁸ Surrounded as it is by rivals, each State will seek to impose its will and its glorious superiority and to avoid having to bow to the choices and interests of its adversaries. Competition favours change, while fears for security make the status quo seem preferable. The will to survive, whether by combat or negotiation, is influenced as much by national temperament as it is by circumstances.

74 – Serious disputes between human groupings have been decided by force, most often physical force, from time immemorial. Everyone’s inclination is to take the law into his own hands, if he can. Kant said that the natural state was a state of war, always threatened if not actually declared.⁹

Today more than ever, money and trade are factors of strength, often in the hands of private sector companies more active than many States.

Even now, wealth and power are the subject of sometimes fierce rivalries between nations.

75 – Social peace does not come about by itself; man instinctively desires it, but he also harbours the instinct to fight. It is not without significance that no one has yet succeeded in defining peace, except as a lasting period of absence of war, and that, bound up as it is with considerations both of reason and passion, the very concept generates huge controversy. Some have sought to justify violence and war on grounds of religion, the quest for freedom and justice or as the instruments of law or humanitarian aid.¹⁰ (see 218, 1677)

76 – A nation’s freedom depends on the relationships of power it establishes with others. But at the same time, its identity and autonomy of will, and its ability to minimise the constraints imposed by others will also be factors in assessing these relationships.

The delimitation of a Sovereign State’s territory and jurisdiction shows what it aspires to achieve by defence and negotiation, while at the same time leaving scope for others to exercise initiative. (see 609)

Following the European Stability Pact (OSCE, Paris, 1995) and the measures adopted to give it effect, and also with a view to their subsequent adhesion to the European Union, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic entered into agreements in 1995, 1996 and 1997 on the respective limits of their territories.¹¹ (see 1330, 1417, 1692, 1833, 1884)

Maritime and air boundaries have also been negotiated, in the Montego Bay Convention of 1982 and the Paris and Chicago Conventions of 1919 and 1944 respectively.

77 – It is because they have power, and exercise it, that States are the principal actors in international life. They unite when faced with a threat to this monopoly, such as nuclear terrorism. (see 372, 618)

But with more and more actors on the world stage, the balance of power becomes more complex and changeable, as the play of antagonisms comes to depend on the internal affairs of a growing number of countries. (see 1676)

The early part of the twenty-first century has been characterised by the simultaneous appearance of various competing power relationships. (see 1677, 1686, 1807)

78 – All possible means have been used, down to plotting and revolution, to weaken a foreign government feared because of its weight or effectiveness. (see 637, 2250, 2312)

If power is accepted as the prime mover in relations between nations, the first aim of diplomatic negotiation is to discipline its use and mitigate its effects: society cannot exist if the different forces at play within it cann...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Foreword
• Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Part I: Diplomatic Negotiation
• Part II: Institutional Negotiation
• Part III: Prospective Negotiation
• Part IV: Negotiation: A Political Art
• Conclusions