What is Required for a Peaceful Negotiation to be Successful?

WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR A PEACEFUL NEGOTIATION TO BE SUCCESSFUL?
Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Institution
Due Date
What is Required for a Peaceful Negotiation to be Successful?
The world has been a witness to some of the most gruesome, violent, and heinous acts that have left memories of a past that is best left undisturbed. During the First World War, Mougel (2011, p. 1) notes that there were more than 20 million deaths, and more than 21 million people ended up wounded. Of the casualties, civilians accounted for about ten million, which showed how deadly conflict could be and the failure to hold successful peaceful negotiations. After the First World War, the world also witnessed another period of mindless killings that left even more death, billions in property damage, and millions of refugees during the Second World War. Eder (2014, p. 2) notes that the world lost more than 60 million people during the Second World War. This was a significant percentage of the world’s population at the time, with some countries reportedly losing close to 20% of their populations. The images were horrific, and the numbers were beyond comprehension. The Second World War set the world on a different path, and even though there were scares of a Third World War breaking out, the lessons were too many to ignore. Peace became the goal for most countries, and peaceful negotiations started to happen at a higher rate. The definition of the term peaceful negotiation is quite simple and direct. The term denotes the process where two warring parties agree to put down their tools and reach a compromise in the presence of a mediator. While the process itself may not be as easy as the definition, the world has been a witness to some successful peace negotiations. The lessons and the scars of the past wars are still fresh, and people are unwilling to entertain the prospect of going back to counting their losses after years of fighting. However, regardless of the statement above, some parts of the world have still been hit with violence, and most recently, countries like Kenya, Burundi, Rwanda, Israel-Palestine, Congo, among others, have been featured in international media. In some of the cases above, peaceful negotiations have been instrumental in helping to bring about a truce, cessation of hostilities, ceasefire, and armistice. However, in others, war has continued with lives still lost, millions displaced, and the economic effects felt for decades. Regardless of the above, however, this paper provides a discussion into the intricacies of peaceful negotiations while also revealing some suggestions on the requirements for successful peace negotiations.
Types of Peaceful Negotiations
Negotiations take different approaches depending on the issues at hand. The first approach to peace is known as transactional negotiations. Transactional negotiations are mainly based on the give and take module. Two warring parties meet, table their demands, reach a compromise, and agree to a few select issues that are deemed crucial by the mediator. Transactional negotiations mainly seek to attain a compromise between the parties involved. Here, as indicated by Abukhater (2019, p. 125), the process is “reflective of distributive bargaining, where one party’s gain, while viewed as winning, is considered a loss for the other party.” The process repeats for all the conditions stipulated, and the parties agree and sign on any condition they agree to. However, as Crocker and Hampson (1996, p. 54) indicated, one side often ends up gaining over the other, thus paving room for further misunderstanding and conflict. The aim of the transactional style of negotiating is to help the parties involved focus on trading points across themselves. While on the table, they are expected to comprehend the benefit of the process through their gains while also allowing the other party to gain. Abukhater (2019, p. 125) notes that the focus is on “trading across value points” and trying to ensure that the parties maintain their interest regarding the negotiation process. However, there are numerous disadvantages of this process. The first one is that every gain by one party is seen as a loss by the other, and therefore, this can lead to a breakdown of negotiations. Abukhater alludes to the dysfunctional nature of transactional negotiations, especially when parties are involved in an emotional exchange. While on the discussion table, the parties ought to understand the greater goal or quest of helping to bridge the warring sides. Aside from the above, there is also the disadvantage of delivering change that will not last. Often, when warring parties are on the discussion table, they will table their demands and expect that their demands are addressed. However, as is often the case, many are close-minded and mainly promote their interests. In the end, as their interests are being promoted and traded across a table, the real issues are left unaddressed and later spiral out of control again. An example of such negotiations that have been ineffective in bringing about lasting change entails the British v. Irish negotiations in Northern Ireland. For these two parties, Campos (2021, p. 15) notes that the lack of objectivity and the infatuation with identities continue to undermine the negotiations. Even though there have been a few trade-offs, the two parties have yet to down their tools.
The other type of negotiation is known as transformational negotiations. As the words indicate, transformational negotiations aim to help the warring parties move past their selfish interests to accept lasting change. Abukhater (2019, p. 125) puts it clearly, noting that “transformational negotiations provide a device for the parties to enable them to collaboratively identify and prioritize issues perceived high value to each of them, establish ground rules regarding engagement mechanisms, and jointly create value streams to consider, assess, and trade across.” The goal is not for each party to get what they bargained for but for each party to see the need for lasting change and align their interests accordingly. While on the discussion table, warring parties tend to drive hard at their own agendas and will likely seek to get as many of their conditions passed as possible. However, the flip side of the above approach is that the real issues that led to the conflict in the first place have a real chance of not being addressed. Therefore, there is a need to consider an approach that addresses issues while also seeking to attain lasting change. The negotiation approach depends on the mediator, who has to make sure that the warring parties perceive the bigger picture. According to Paffenholz (2009, p. 5), a transformational perspective or approach considers a shift from what is being propagated internationally to what is relevant to the locals. She continues to write that to that effect, the process of negotiating seeks to “put more emphasis on civil society and ordinary people.” Hence, the warring parties are forced to address issues that concern the people and not simply address personal and selfish interests. The transformational style is not give-and-take but seeks to drive at real issues that are continually plaguing or affecting ordinary people. For example, in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the transformational style assesses the effects of the conflict on the ordinary people while refuting the interests of Israel, Palestine, and their allies. However, it is crucial to note that the need for compromise in both approaches is quite crucial. The parties have to agree that the needs and future of, for example, a country is crucial and thus need to put their differences aside. Peaceful negotiations are quite difficult to run, and there is a need for the mediators to use a combination of both styles to help ensure that both parties are satisfied with the results.
What Drives Success? Requirements for Successful Peaceful Negotiations
In every aspect of life, success is relative. In peaceful negotiations, success is also relative and is dependent on what the parties and the mediators consider successful. However, there are crucial elements or requirements that aid in the success or failure of peaceful negotiations.
The first requirement is the commitment by the warring parties to put down their tools and reason together. There can never be any negotiations without the admission by both parties that there needs to be cessation and that peace is a realistic goal. In the peaceful Burundian negotiations, the country saw a cessation of violence mainly because the warring parties decided to commit to the negotiations. Burundi, a country made up of Hutus (85%), Tutsis (14%), and Twa (1%), has never had a peaceful run that lasts a decade (World Bank, 2018). The country has always had civil issues that lead to fighting, thus disrupting any meaningful, peaceful endeavors started. The ethnic divide and hatred in the country started mainly because of the Belgians’ approach while colonizing the country. The Belgians decided to empower the Tutsis at the expense of the Hutus and the Twa (Curtis, 2003, p. 1). The dominance of the Tutsis continued well after the c...