Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Debunking the Myths of International Mediation: Conceptualizing Bias, Power and Success

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Changing Global Order

Part of the book series: United Nations University Series on Regionalism ((UNSR,volume 17))

Abstract

Reflecting on four of the most significant peacemaking processes in the twentieth century – the 1978 Camp David Accords, the 1993 Oslo Accords, the 1995 Dayton Agreement, and 1988 Tripartite Accord on Namibia – the present chapter aims to explore the reasons that explain why and how specific outcomes have been achieved. As these cases shows, peacemaking processes are often characterized by a decision to leave out from discussion a major item of contention. While the decision might have been out of fear that discussing these issues might derail the other items on which agreement was in sight, it is still not clear how this decision is actually made. Reflecting back at these examples, a common puzzle comes to light: was the exclusion of a major issue the price of eventual success in reaching an agreement? Since the presence of mediators was crucial in shaping outcomes in all four cases, in order to answer what prompted the decision to leave some of the major issues out and move to agreement on other points, the present study will focus on the role of third parties on three tactical dimensions: strategic issue sequencing (i.e. decision which issue should be addressed first), party arithmetic (i.e. who should they engage with in the peace talks and which spoilers should be excluded), and the feasibility assessment of a potential solution (i.e. what kind of a deal is sustainable and achievable at the same time). All three dimensions will be further scrutinized as the building blocks of a specific type of bias that third-parties bring to the peacemaking process: bias of outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Further Readings

  • Beardsley, K. (2011). The mediation dilemma. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J. (1996). Resolving international conflicts: The theory and practice of mediation. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, M. J. (2009). International conflict management. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, J. G., & Lowe, V. (1999). The settlement of disputes in international law: Institutions and procedures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greig, J. M., & Diehl, P. F. (2012). International mediation. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleiboer, M. (1998). The multiple realities of international mediation. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

References

  • Akpınar, P. (2015). Mediation as a foreign policy tool in the Arab Spring: Turkey, Qatar and Iran. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, 17(3), 252–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aljazeera. (2013). The price of Oslo. Documentary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley, K. (2011). The mediation dilemma. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beardsley, K. C., Quinn, D. M., Biswas, B., & Wilkenfeld, J. (2006). Mediation style and crisis outcomes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 50(1), 58–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beber, B. (2012). International mediation, selection effects, and the question of bias. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 29(4), 397–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J. (1986). A case study of mediation as a method of international conflict resolution: The Camp David experience. Review of International Studies, 12(1), 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J. (2005). Mediation in the most resistant cases. In C. Chester, H. Fen, & A. Pamela (Eds.), Grasping the nettle: Analyzing cases of intractable conflict (pp. 99–122). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J. (2009). Mediation and conflict resolution. In J. Bercovitch, V. Kremenyuk, & I. W. Zartman (Eds.), The Sage handbook of conflict resolution (pp. 340–357). London: SAGE.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J., & Jackson, R. (2009). Conflict resolution in the twenty first century: Principles, methods and approaches. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitch, J., Anagnoson, J. T., & Wille, D. L. (1991). Some conceptual issues and empirical trends in the study of successful mediation in international relations. Journal of Peace Research, 28, 7–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J. (1986). Strategic choice in mediation. Negotiation Journal, 2(1), 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J. (2002). Mediating from strength. In J. Bercovitch (Ed.), Studies in international mediation (pp. 25–40). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnevale, P. J., & Arad, S. (1996). Bias and impartiality in international mediation. In J. Bercovitch (Ed.), Resolving international conflicts: The theory and practice of mediation (pp. 39–53). London: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P. T. (2000). Intractable conflict. In M. Deutsch & P. T. S. F. Coleman (Eds.), The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 428–450). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, C. A. (1980). South Africa: Strategy for change. Foreign Affairs, 59(2), 323–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, C. A. (1992). High noon in Southern Africa: Making peace in a rough neighborhood. London: WW Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, C. A., Hampson, F. O., & Aall, P. R. (2004). Taming intractable conflicts: Mediation in the hardest cases. Washington, DC: US Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daalder, I. H. (2000). Getting to Dayton: The making of America’s Bosnia policy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, D. (1997). Negotiating in the international context. In I. W. Zartman & J. L. Rasmussen (Eds.), Peacemaking in international conflict: Methods and techniques (pp. 81–124). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egeland. (1999, January). The Oslo accord: Multiparty facilitation through the Norwegian channel. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. Aall (Eds.), Herding cats: Multiparty mediation in a complex world (pp. 527–546). Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Favretto, K. (2009). Should peacemakers take sides? Major power mediation, coercion, and Bias. American Political Science Review, 103(2), 248–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fretter, J. (2002). International organizations and conflict management: The United Nations and the mediation of international conflicts. In J. Bercovitch (Ed.), Studies in international mediation. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gent, S. M., & Shannon, M. (2011). Bias and the effectiveness of third-party conflict management mechanisms. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 28(2), 124–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greig, J. M., & Diehl, P. F. (2012). International mediation. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrooke, R. (1999). To end a war. New York: Modern Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, P. T. (1996). The negotiation process and the resolution of international conflicts. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, P. T. (2001). Bargaining and problem solving: Two perspectives on international negotiation. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. Aall (Eds.), Turbulent peace: The challenge of managing international conflict (pp. 445–468). Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iji, T. (2017). The UN as an international mediator: From the post–cold war era to the twenty-first century. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 23(1), 83–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • John, A. W. S. (2011). Back channel negotiation: Secrecy in the Middle East peace process. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamrava, M. (2011). Mediation and Qatari foreign policy. The Middle East Journal, 65(4), 539–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamrava, M. (2013). Mediation and Saudi foreign policy. Orbis, 57(1), 152–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kriesberg, L. (1993). Intractable conflicts. Peace Review, 5(4), 417–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kydd, A. (2003). Which side are you on? Bias, credibility and mediation. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 579–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lax, D. A., & Sebenius, J. K. (1991). Thinking Coalitionally: Party arithmetic, process opportunism, and strategic sequencing. In H. P. Young (Ed.), Negotiation analysis (pp. 153–193). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lax, A. D., & Sebenius, J. K. (2006). 3-D negotiation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, R., & Carnevale, P. J. (1990). Contingencies in the mediation of disputes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 259–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohlson, T. (2008). Understanding causes of war and peace. European Journal of International Relations, 14(1), 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruitt, D. G., & Olczak, P. V. (1995). Beyond hope: Approaches to resolving seemingly intractable conflict. In B. B. Bunker & J. Z. S. F. Rubin (Eds.), Conflict, cooperation, and justice: Essays inspired by the work of Morton Deutsch (pp. 59–92). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieger, R. (2016). Saudi Arabian foreign relations: Diplomacy and mediation in conflict resolution. Milton Park: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Quandt, W. B. (2010). Peace process: American diplomacy and the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1967. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. (1982). The art and science of negotiation. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, H. (1985). We need a larger theory of negotiation: The importance of pre-negotiation phases. Negotiation Journal, 1(3), 249–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, H. (1996). Prenegotiation and Circum-negotiation: Arenas of the peace process. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. R. Aall (Eds.), Managing global Chaos: Sources of and responses to international conflict (pp. 419–432). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savun, B. (2008). Information, Bias, and mediation success. International Studies Quarterly, 52(1), 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silber, L., & Little, A. (1996). The death of Yugoslavia. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sisk, T. (2009). International mediation in civil wars: Bargaining with bullets. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stedman, S. J. (1997). Spoiler problems in peace processes. International Security, 22(2), 5–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, D., & Zoubir, Y. (2018). China’s participation in conflict resolution in the Middle East and North Africa: A case of quasi-mediation diplomacy? Journal of Contemporary China, 27(110), 224–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, I. (2007). Mediation with muscles or minds? Exploring power mediators and pure mediators in civil wars. International Negotiation, 12(2), 229–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svensson, I. (2009). Who brings which peace? Neutral versus biased mediation and institutional peace arrangements in civil wars. Journal of Conflict Resolution., 53(3), 446–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terris, L. G. (2016). Mediation of international conflicts: A rational model. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S. (1989). Multilateral negotiation: An analytic approach. Negotiation Journal, 5(2), 159–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S. (1992). The superpowers as mediators. In J. Bercovitch & J. Z. Rubin (Eds.), Mediation in international relations. New York: St Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S. (1996). Coercive mediation on the road to Dayton. International Negotiation, 1(3), 547–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S. (2002). Mediation in the Yugoslav wars: The critical years, 1990–95. New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S. (2003). Mediation and foreign policy. International Studies Review, 5(4), 91–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S., & Zartman, I. W. (1985). International mediation in theory and practice. Boulder: Westview.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touval, S., & Zartman, I. W. (2006). International mediation in the post-cold war era. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. R. Aall (Eds.), Turbulent peace: The challenges of managing international conflicts (pp. 427–443). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuković, S. (2011). Strategies and Bias in international mediation. Cooperation and Conflict, 46(1), 113–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vuković, S. (2015). International multiparty mediation and conflict management: Challenges of cooperation and coordination. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vuković, S. (2019). Mediating closure: Mediator as a driver. In I. W. Zartman (Ed.), How negotiations end: Negotiating behavior in the endgame. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vuković, S., & Hopmann, P. T. (2019). Satisficing in international mediation: Framing, justifying and creating outcomes in peacemaking. In J. Wilkenfeld, K. Beardsley, & D. Quinn (Eds.), Research handbook on mediating international crises. London: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wetlaufer, G. B. (1996). Limits of integrative bargaining. Georgetown Law Journal, 85, 369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkenfeld, J., Beardsley, K., & Quinn, D. (2019). Research handbook on mediating international crises. London: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Young, O. R. (1972). Intermediaries: Additional thoughts on third parties. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 16, 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W. (1989a). Prenegotiation: Phases and function. International Journal, 44, 237–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W. (1989b). Ripe for resolution: Conflict and intervention in Africa. New York: Oxford University Press on Demand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W. (2001). The timing of peace initiatives: Hurting stalemates and ripe moments. The Global Review of Ethnopolitics, 1(1), 8–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W. (2005). Analyzing intractability. Grasping the nettle: Analyzing cases of intractable conflict (p. 47).

    Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W. (2008). Introduction: Bias, Prenegotiation and leverage in mediation. International Negotiation, 13(3), 305–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W., & De Soto, Á. (2010). Timing mediation initiatives. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zartman, I. W., & Touval, S. (1996). International mediation in the post-cold war era. In C. A. Crocker, F. O. Hampson, & P. Aall (Eds.), Managing global Chaos: Sources of and responses to international conflict (pp. 445–461). Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Johns Hopkins University, SAIS, Washington, DC, USA

    Siniša Vuković

  2. Leiden University, FGGA, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Siniša Vuković

Authors
  1. Siniša Vuković
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siniša Vuković .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Security and Global Affairs, Leiden University, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Madeleine O. Hosli

  2. Faculty of Governance and Global Affairs, Leiden University, The Hague, The Netherlands

    Joren Selleslaghs

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vuković, S. (2020). Debunking the Myths of International Mediation: Conceptualizing Bias, Power and Success. In: Hosli, M.O., Selleslaghs, J. (eds) The Changing Global Order. United Nations University Series on Regionalism, vol 17. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21603-0_21

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation