Time to Talk?

Kleiboer, Marieke; Hart, Paul ‘t

doi:10.1177/0010836795030004001

Cited by 33 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…46 Still, a similar ontology, if not epistemology to constructivism can easily be fleshed out from what KtH formally title 'Mediation as Re-aligning Perceptions'. 47 From our perspective, that 'made power' mediators should possess leverage but not be perceived as overtly partial for reasons of trust via psychological empathy and identification is not surprising. Pushing KtH's prototheory to be more in line with the (neo-)realist tendencies of Wendt while helping ground claims of mediation literature, we argue that mediators invoking 'made power', in addition to self help, are more concerned with what Thomas Princen terms 'private interests' such as enhancing prestige or extracting relative gains from one of the disputants, than 'public interests' such as peace, stability and order for the larger community 'for its own sake'.…”

Section: A Typology Of Power Mediationmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…48 The distinction is also conceptually important as public interests, or commencing mediation for its own sake, makes a normative statement on the importance of a 'more humane world society' and implies motivation of 'changing social relationships' in KtH's language. 49 Thus, in its third conceptual iteration, mediation (and conflict) is seen in a critical light, as an opportunity for social change, which should not be mitigated by traditional power structures. Smith's pure style of mediation is largely in line with this iteration of mediator who 'should be a skilful neutral actor with no stake in the conflict' other than more humane world society.…”

Section: A Typology Of Power Mediationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

New routes to power: towards a typology of power mediation

Heemsbergen¹,

Siniver²

2010

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is concerned with a particular debate in mediation literature, revolving around the merit and necessity of power as a strategy employed by third parties in their efforts to negotiate a successful resolution to conflict. We argue that by subscribing to a one-dimensional spectrum of pure-to-power mediation, students of mediation have neglected the development of how power is conceptualised and operates within the changing dynamics of conflict and its mediation.We therefore seek to redefine the concept of power mediation to project a closer fit between conflicting parties' understanding of their situation and the methods, aims and motivations of their mediators. Breaking away from the existing pure-power spectrum, we propose a heuristic framework that includes four distinct types of power mediation, defined here as real, made, critical and structural power. The contribution of our heuristic model is threefold. First, it assists us in asking the most basic question of social science research, 'of what is this a case', which in turn ought to lead to a more sophisticated observation of mediation instances. Concurrently, through the frame of 'power', it establishes common understanding of observable phenomena that makes the study of mediation more accessible to the wider audience beyond students of our modest literature. Finally, the synthesis of epistemological and ontological inquiry of conflict and power with the established International Relations (IR) approaches of realism(s), constructivism, critical discourse and structuralism, allows respective real, made, critical and structural types of mediation power to be tested.

show abstract

Section: A Typology Of Power Mediationmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: A Typology Of Power Mediationmentioning

confidence: 99%

New routes to power: towards a typology of power mediation

Heemsbergen¹,

Siniver²

2010

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Most importantly, international negotiations should take place when both sides have indicated a genuine willingness to settle: this is 'the time to talk'. 70 Mediation, like negotiation, also functions best when the dispute is of a low intensity, involves simple issue structures and is requested by both parties. Unlike negotiation, however, mediation is more likely to be successful if applied early in the conflict before the parties have committed to the course of forceful struggle, and if the parties have a history of conflict-free relations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current developments in international conflict management:Assessing the relevance of negotiation and mediation

Bercovitch

Jackson

2001

Cambridge Review of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The perception by a party to a conflict that a mediator has sufficient leverage to persuade the other party(-ies) to accept a compromise is crucial to effective mediation (Kleiboer and Hart, 1995). In this case, Türkiye’s leverage has been an important background resource, allowing it to pursue its self-interested motives through a manipulative mediation strategy.…”

Section: Opportunism Under Uncertainty? Turkish Mediation In Ukrainementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In pursuit of this question, this paper inductively analyzes Turkish mediation in the Ukraine war. Informed by the literature on mediation as “power brokerage” (Kleiboer and Hart, 1995) and the influence of contextual and processual variables on mediation (Butler, 2018; Druckman, 1997), this research explores the relationship between a contextual (ripeness) and actor-level (motivation) variable. Of particular interest is the decision-making and behavior of third parties (like Türkiye in Ukraine) who elect to mediate complex conflicts in which ripeness is indiscernible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ripeness obscured: inductive lessons from Türkiye’s (transactional) mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war

Butler

2023

IJCMA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Conventional wisdom tells us that mediation without ripeness is a fool’s errand (Zartman and Touval, 1985). What, then, is Türkiye’s motivation for mediating the war in Ukraine in lieu of ripeness – and what can its behavior as a mediator tell us about that motivation? In pursuit of this question, this paper inductively analyzes Turkish mediation in the Ukraine war to unpack the relationship between a contextual (ripeness) and actor-level (motivation) variable. Of particular interest is the decision-making and behavior of third parties (like Türkiye in Ukraine) who elect to mediate highly complex conflicts in which ripeness is indiscernible. The purpose of this research is not to propose or test a causal relationship between obscured ripeness and mediation, but rather to examine mediation behavior in situations where ripeness is obscured. Design/methodology/approach The impact of weaponized information on ripeness and third-party mediation is evaluated through an original, systematic and inductive case study analysis of Turkish mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war. As an intense theater of operations for information warfare for well over a decade, the war in Ukraine serves as an especially apt choice for an analysis of “obscured ripeness.” Likewise, Türkiye’s anomalous position as the only substantive source of mediation in the conflict lends significance to an empirical examination of its motivation and behavior as a mediator. Findings This research reveals that the pervasive use of weaponized information in the Russia–Ukraine war has distorted and disordered the information environment, thereby obscuring the ability of third parties to determine if the conflict is or could be ripe for mediation. However, the condition of obscured ripeness that prevails in the conflict has not proven a deterrent for mediation by Türkiye, which, as the only mediator in the conflict, has used a transactional approach to mediation motivated by self-regarding interests and animated by a manipulative mediation strategy. In sum, this inductive analysis of Turkish mediation in Ukraine reveals that the use of weaponized information in a conflict indirectly selects on transactional mediation (and mediators). The significance of this finding is magnified by the widespread use of weaponized information in contemporary conflicts as well as the declining frequency of third-party mediation. Originality/value There have been few, if any, systematic assessments in Turkish mediation of the Russia–Ukraine war, and none specifically concerned with the effects of weaponized information. Additionally, the paper proposes a typology of mediator motivation that is used to structure that assessment, while also introducing a new concept (“obscured ripeness”) and linking that concept both to the existing literature on ripeness and to the use of weaponized information in contemporary armed conflicts. As such, this manuscript represents an important contribution both to the empirical and theoretical landscape with respect to the study of mediation and international conflict management.

show abstract

Time to Talk?

Cited by 33 publications

References 20 publications

New routes to power: towards a typology of power mediation

New routes to power: towards a typology of power mediation

Current developments in international conflict management:Assessing the relevance of negotiation and mediation

Ripeness obscured: inductive lessons from Türkiye’s (transactional) mediation in the Russia–Ukraine war

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About