Breakthrough International Negotiation: How Great Negotiators Transformed the World's Toughest Post‐Cold War Conflicts

Abstract

Much of the negotiation literature involves two parties that are each assumed to behave in a unitary manner, although a growing body of knowledge considers more complex negotiations. Examples of the latter include two parties where one or both parties do not behave in a unitary manner, multiple parties on one or both sides, parties on multiple sides and parties engaged in separate but linked negotiations. Greater degrees of complexity distinguish these negotiations from negotiations with two unitary parties.

Deconstructing Henry: Negotiation Lessons from Kissinger's Career

“…Kissinger was able to muster support from beyond presumably two‐party negotiations by “helping” parties gain some economic advantage to produce diplomatic alliances, or by reordering diplomatic alliances as he did with China and the Soviet Union and their respective interests in Vietnam. Although the term was coined later, Kissinger was a “muscle mediator” (Watkins and Rosegrant ), who used both promises and threats of American aid or economic sanctions to move pieces on his chessboard of desired longer terms goals . In their detailed discussions of his Southern African negotiations, the authors use graphics to illustrate how Kissinger used alignment strategies and applied negotiation “pressure points” on various parties (see pages 21, 22, 33, 40, 43, 46, 54) as part of a multifront negotiation campaign.…”

Diplomatic Interactions and Negotiations

“…Holbrooke, “America's diplomat extraordinary” (Elliot ), “a brilliant, sometimes abrasive infighter” (McFadden ), was seen as the “toughest” member of this diplomatic actor–agency–agent triad at the time. Holbrooke “successfully argued that the [NATO] bombing [of the Bosnian Serb army] was necessary for a successful negotiation because it demonstrated the West's political will” (Seldowitz : 54), and he “brought Serbs, Croats, and Muslims to the table in Dayton using military force” (Watkins and Rosegrant : 266).…”

Towards a Paradigm of Multiparty Negotiation

“…Permanent negotiations in international institutions such as the UN or NATO, periodic but regular negotia tions in forums (e.g., regional groupings of nations such as APEC) and single but complex and lengthy negotiations, such as multilateral conferences, are prominent within this domain. Less complex phenomena, such as international joint venture negotiations between two corporations or bilateral multiparty negotiations invol ving governmental entities, are also within this domain (Aurisch 1989;Boyer and Cremieux 1999;Kremenyuk 1991Kremenyuk , 2002Landau 2000;Tinsley and Weiss 1999;Watkins and Rosegrant 2001;Zartman 1994). …”