Features of involving a third party in negotiations to resolve political conflicts

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru

Features of involving a third party in negotiations to resolve political conflicts

Herasymovych Vadym Anatoliyovych

Особливості залучення третьої сторони до переговорів щодо вирішення політичних конфліктів

Герасимович Вадим Анатолійович

кандидат політичних наук,

доцент кафедри соціології та політології Національного авіаційного університету Київ, Україна

Актуальність теми зумовлена тим, що події постбіполярного світу ще більше змусили світових лідерів звернутися до переговорів як способу врегулювання обох міжнародних конфліктів у різних частинах земної кулі. Події в Україні, Іраку, Сирії, на Корейському півострові та інших «гарячих точках» Землі неминуче пов'язані з тим, що переговори набувають особливої актуальності для вирішення конфліктів і миру. Завдання статті - розкрити багатоаспектність діяльності третьої сторони під час переговорів щодо вирішення політичних конфліктів (зокрема з урахуванням полі- тичного досвіду незалежної України). Методологія Для вирішення завдання даної статті були використані такі загальнонаукові методи, як аналіз, синтез, дедукція, індукція, абстракція, узагальнення. Основними методами та підходами були діалек- тичний, історико-логічний, міждисциплінарний, системний. Результати Встанов- лено, що для ефективного функціонування третьої сторони важливо використо- вувати в конфлікті не лише представників та інструменти офіційної дипломатії, а й представників та інструменти громадського сектору (представників інтеліген- ції, релігійних організацій, лідерів думок). дозвіл. Наголошується, що, сприяючи кон- структивній дискусії та вирішенню конфлікту, третя сторона переговорів визначає вибір остаточного рішення, яке є прерогативою конфліктуючих сторін. Важливість участі «третьої сторони» в переговорах зумовлена ще й тим, що медіатор повинен мати два головних моменти: бути достатньо обізнаним і компетентним, а отже, повинен ретельно аналізувати конфліктну ситуацію і володіти навичками медіації, т.к. а також неупередженість, яка полягає в тому, що він повинен займати ней- тральну позицію, не надаючи підтримки жодній із сторін конфлікту.

Ключові слова: третя сторона, фасилітатор, переговори, політичний конфлікт, політичний процес, стилі переговорів.

The relevance of the topic is due to the movement of Ukrainian society toward democratic values requires knowledge and the ability to coordinate interests between political forces and branches of government. Negotiations remain the only civilized method of reaching an agreement in the modern world. In addition, the multi-party system of Ukraine requires finding civilized means of resolving conflicts between the interests of various political forces, parties, and currents. The task of the article is to reveal the multifaceted nature of the activities of the third party during negotiations on the resolution of political conflicts (in particular, taking into account the political experience of independent Ukraine). Methodology To solve the task of this article, general scientific methods such as analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, abstraction, and generalization were used. The main methods and approaches were dialectical, historical-logical, interdisciplinary, and systemic. Results It was established that for the effective functioning of the third party, it is important to use not only representatives and tools of official diplomacy but also representatives and tools of the public sector (representatives of the intelligentsia, religious organizations, opinion leaders) in conflict resolution. It is emphasized that in helping constructive discussion and finding a conflict resolution, the third party in the negotiations determines the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. The importance of the participation of the «third party» in the negotiations is also due to the fact that the mediator must have two main points: to be sufficiently knowledgeable and competent, and therefore must thoroughly analyze the conflict situation and possess mediation skills, as well as impartiality, which consists in the fact that he should take a neutral position, not giving support to either side of the conflict. Key words: third party, facilitator, negotiation, political conflict, political process, negotiation styles.

negotiations agreement democratic

The relevance of the research topic is due to the fact that the events of the post- bipolar world even more forced world leaders to turn to negotiations as a way to settle both international conflicts in different parts of the globe. The events in Ukraine, Iraq, Syria, the Korean Peninsula, and other “hot spots” of the Earth are inevitably connected with the fact that negotiations become especially relevant for conflict resolution and peace. As a result, it becomes especially important to understand the specifics of the preparation, conduct, and consequences of negotiations in the settlement of conflicts between certain players of political, social, or military events.

The task of the article is to reveal the multifac- eted nature of the activities of the third-party during negotiations on the resolution of political conflicts (in particular, taking into account the political experience of independent Ukraine).

Мethodology. To solve the tasks of this article, such general scientific methods as analysis, synthesis, deduction, induction, abstraction, and generalization were used. The main methods and approaches were dialectical, historical-logical, interdisciplinary, and sys- temic. Dialectical method - revealed certain contradic- tions of negotiations in the context of modern political development of Ukraine, systemic approach - deter- mined the specifics of the ways of existence and inte- gration of the analyzed phenomena (negotiations) into logical integrity; interdisciplinary - allowed to involve not only political studies but also psychologi- cal and sociological ones, which contributed to a more

holistic study of the analyzed phenomenon; the his- torical-logical method - revealed not only the external aspect of the development of the negotiations but also the internal, that is, the causes and consequences of certain transformations of the negotiations. Such a set of methodological principles and approaches helped to carry out systematic research and solve the tasks of this dissertation.

Results. In general, the term “third party” is broad and collective. Three main forms of third-party partici- pation in conflict resolution can be distinguished.

1) Court. The difference from other forms of third- party participation in conflict resolution is that the court itself has a clearly developed, legally established pro- cedure for consideration of issues, as well as the obli- gation for participants in the conflict to implement the decisions made by the “third party”. In this case, the participation of the third party is maximal with a high degree of intervention in the conflict.

2) Arbitration. Arbitration is characterized by the absence of strict rules that regulate the process of discussion around the issue, as well as the right to choose a “third party” by the direct participants in the conflict.

3) Mediation is a special form of “third party” par- ticipation in conflict resolution. The goal is to contrib- ute not only to the process of negotiations between the participants in the conflict but also to a constructive discussion and search for a solution to the problem. In this case, the mediator does not have the appropri- ate authority to determine the choice of the final decision, which is the prerogative of the conflicting par- ties. The mediator is obliged to emphasize the fact that the responsibility for the fiasco at the negotiations and the possible escalation of the conflict are borne by the participants in the conflict, and not by the “third party” [6].

In general, if we define the term “third party”, it traditionally includes any person who does not have the status of a mediator or observer, but is engaged in the settlement of conflict relations between other parties. It is important to pay attention to the fact that among the above-mentioned forms of “third party” participation in conflict resolution, only the last one is oriented towards the use of a negotiation approach.

Accordingly, the “third party” at negotiations was most often represented by people who enjoyed undeniable authority and respect, and whose advice and recommendations they had to listen to. Mak- ing decisions at their own discretion, they could establish who is right and who is guilty. In medieval Europe even before the formation of national states, the role of the third party in the settlement of conflicts was played by the Pope [2, p. 80]. He acted more as a judge than a mediator, deciding how the conflict should end. Over time, the role of the Pope in conflict resolution has significantly decreased. States tried not to involve the church in internal affairs in order to prevent its interference.

From the moment of its formation until today, states continue to act as a “third party” in the settle- ment of conflicts. This is especially noticeable when there is an armed conflict that may affect the interests of those countries that are not directly involved in it.

The concept of “third party” is quite broad and can include such terms as “mediator”, “observer of the progress of negotiations”, and “the arbitrator”. A “third party” should be understood as a person with the status of an observer or mediator, who deals with issues of conflict resolution between the par- ties. The foreign researcher claims that the “third party” can intervene in the conflict both independently and at the request of the conflicting parties. The influ- ence of the “third party” on the participants of the con- flict is diverse. Among the means of influence, two groups are distinguished:

- persuasion and assistance for the purpose of peaceful settlement of the conflict;

- coercion, application of pressure, and limitation of conflict actions [3, p. 92].

The main means of the “third party” during nego- tiations are persuasion and assistance in resolving the conflict situation, although the use of political and economic pressure should not be excluded. The role of a third party in negotiations can be performed by a mediator, a consultant, an authorized person of the arbitration court, or a facilitator.

Let us now consider in detail mediation and facilita- tion as a form of third-party participation in negotiations.

Actually, diplomats define mediation as one of the effective means of peaceful settlement of inter- national disputes, the essence of which is that a third party, on its own initiative or on the initiative of the con- flicting parties, organizes negotiations between them with the aim of a peaceful resolution of the conflict and takes a direct part in them.

In general, mediation, as noted by the Western researcher R.J. Fisher has many different definitions that reflect a number of its main characteristics. They are usually seen as the intervention of skilled and dis- passionate mediators to help reach a solution that satisfies everyone on the issues underlying the con- flict between them. Mediation, the foreign scientist emphasizes, is a peaceful and non-binding approach to conflict resolution, in which the parties partici- pate only of their own free will, retaining control over the content of the agreement. Thus, mediation is, first of all, a method of purposeful solution to a problem between both parties and usually one that does not affect the nature of social relations between them [6].

Mediation is most often understood as one of the most common forms of “third-party” participa- tion. According to G. Raiffa, a mediator is “a dispas- sionate person who seeks to help the negotiators find a compromise solution. The mediator helps to conduct negotiations, but he has no right to dictate decisions” [8, p. 87]. The purpose of his activity is not so much to offer a ready-made solution as to help the parties to the negotiations to determine whether there are com- promises that would satisfy them.

At the same time, we can note that mediators are not endowed with official power, they perform their function voluntarily. They can settle disputes or impose their decision. The mediator's duties include the organization of constructive interaction between conflicting parties. A professional mediator must possess the qualities of a communicator, a listener, and a person who can use trust.

The American scientist J. Schellenberg singles out a number of features of mediation, namely:

1) The mediator's role is to provide assistance in conducting negotiations in the event of certain difficul- ties in the independent settlement of the conflict by the existing parties.

2) The intermediary is a “neutral third party”.

3) Mediation is a voluntary process.

4) The mediator can lead the negotiations, but the negotiators are always responsible for the deci- sions.

5) Mediation is a personal and confidential pro- cess.

6) If the parties do not reach an agreement, no sanctions are applied. In the case of voluntary agree- ments, the absence of consent is also considered acceptable and neither party is to blame.

7) The mediator is a trained professional. It should promote absolutely open communication between the parties and consider the problem as a goal to be mutually beneficially achieved. The mediator should help the parties to discuss the differences that exist, direct their discussion to the solution of the problem, and not to the discussion of who can win at the expense of the other [9, p. 35].

Therefore, it should be emphasized that, the medi- ation is most effective and necessary when the par- ties do not have experience in negotiating interaction and if the negotiations have reached a dead end. It is worth bearing in mind the fact that not one person, but a group of persons can act as a mediator. True, lead- ers may appear among a group of people and this will potentially lead to a decrease in efficiency in negotia- tions.

It is customary to single out the following types of mediation, some of which are listed below:

«- consultative mediation and mediation with ele- ments of arbitration, depending on the degree of par- ticipation of the mediator in the negotiations;

- state mediation;

- mediation of intergovernmental and non-govern- mental organizations;

- official and unofficial (depending on the degree of officiality);

- permanent and temporary (by duration);

- unilateral and multilateral (depending on the number of parties)» [4, p. 206].

Consultative mediation differs from other types in that the mediator gives the parties prior consent to the condition that, if the parties cannot find a solution to the problem, he will express himself in consultation. The opinion expressed by the mediator is not binding on the negotiators, and the parties consult the media- tor only if the negotiations have reached an impasse. In contrast to consultative mediation, mediation with elements of arbitration involves the parties agree- ing before direct mediation begins that, in the event that negotiations do not result in the desired resolu- tion of the problem, the mediator will make a binding decision on the disputed issue.

As V. Zymohliad notes, management media- tion can be used as a method of managing intra- organizational conflicts, and in this case, the role of the mediator is performed by one of the organiza- tion's managers. At the same time, the manager who chose the role of mediator may not be the head of one of the conflicting parties. If the head of one of them acts as a mediator, then in such a situation he is not a neutral person in the conflict, since he may have his own interests that must be taken into account when working out the final decision [3, p. 91].

Considering facilitation as a form of “third party” participation in negotiations, first of all, it should be noted that this phenomenon can be defined from the point of view of process and result. From a pro- cess point of view, it is the development and manage- ment of processes that facilitate the efficient execution of work, minimizing the common problems faced by the participants in the negotiation interaction together. Facilitation is a process that focuses on the following issues:

- what they want to achieve;

- who should be involved;

- development of the scheme of the process in which participants participate, and the sequence of performed tasks;

- communication;

- achieving the appropriate level of participation and use of resources;

- the driving forces and capabilities of the partici- pants. [2, p. 80].

The main goal of facilitation is to increase group efficiency. From the point of view of the result, it is about helping the group to become better, namely:

* improve the quality of decisions;

* increase responsibility for the decisions made;

* to significantly reduce the time of implementation of decisions;

* improve relations in the group;

* increase the personal satisfaction of group mem- bers;

* promote organizational learning [5, p. 12].

In turn, “facilitation, as noted by the Ukrainian researcher O. Blyzniukova, is a form of group work aimed at clarifying and achieving the set goal by the group, at making a decision regarding very dif- ficult or very important tasks. In general, facilitation is understood as an increase in the speed or productiv- ity of an individual's activity as a result of the actual- ization in his mind of the image (perception, represen- tation) of another person or a group of people who are rivals or observers of the actions of this individual” [1]. The purpose of facilitation is to resolve the conflict within the group and help it reach a solution accept- able to all parties if the negotiators cannot do it on their own. Facilitation is needed when it is necessary to agree on opinions in the middle of the group, to help outline ways to solve this or that problem, and to demonstrate various methods of decision-making in order to increase group efficiency.

H. Raiffa emphasizes that, the task of the facilita- tor is to provide the opportunity for the parties to sit down at the negotiating table. The practice of inter- national negotiations shows that a facilitator can provide an optimal place for negotiations and com- prehensively promote them while creating favorable conditions. The facilitator may not directly participate in the negotiations, but at the stage of implementation of legal details, he provides assistance [8, p. 34].

According to L. Shypylova, the facilitator performs a number of functions, namely:

1) settlement of intra-group conflict and helping the group work out a solution acceptable to the parties.

2) “increasing group efficiency”, coordinating “opin- ions in the middle of the group”, assisting in identifying options for “solving this or that problem”, demonstrat- ing existing methods of “decision-making”.

There are two types of facilitation:

- basic facilitation;

- developmental facilitation.

For both the first and second types of facilita- tion, the negotiators have the opportunity to “influ- ence the process” at any time. However, in the case of “basic” facilitation, “the process is managed by the facilitator, offering, in his opinion, the most effec- tive” “work techniques” to the group. In the case of “developing” facilitation, “the members of the group themselves lead the process of discussion and deci- sion-making, and the facilitator only corrects it, sug- gesting how to solve the problem faster or more con- structively” [7, p. 100].

The facilitation procedure has a number of advan- tages. Therefore K. Kliuiev writes: «this procedure is one of the most modern ways of solving any problems related to effective group work. In addition, researcher singles out the most successful form among the main advantages of facilitation, when management func- tions are distributed among several people, and those responsible for decision-making have the opportunity to pay primary attention to this aspect» [5, p. 8].

Actually, the mission of the “third party” in the nego- tiations is to facilitate the settlement of the conflict, and its presence during the negotiations is a fairly common practice today. It is worth remembering that the most effective conflict resolution process can be considered the one when the agreements reached by the parties are supported by a system of guaran- tees and control by a “third party”, and the resolution of the conflict situation occurs as a result of fulfilling the obligations.

Conclusions

Thus, the importance of the third party as mediation in negotiations is to help in con- structive discussion and finding a solution to settle the political conflict; the mediator in the negotiations determines the choice of the final solution, which is the prerogative of the conflicting parties. The main aspects of the participation of the “third party” in the negotiations are: expressing proposals regard- ing certain options for the meeting place of the par- ties; active participation in setting the agenda; pro- viding assistance in finding a solution; determination of deadlines for completion of negotiations; control over the execution of the agreement.

Bibliography

1. Близнюкова О.М. (2020). Фасилітація як ефективна технологія вирішення проблеми. Режим доступу: http://dspace.kspu.kr.ua/jspui/ bitstream/123456789/3107/1/Фасилітація як ефек- тивна техноло.pdf.

2. Бондар Г.Л. Переговорний процес у дер- жавному управлінні / Г. Л. Бондар // Наукові праці [Чорноморського дежавного універси- тету імені Петра Могили комплексу «Києво-Могилянська академія»]. Серія: Політологія. 2016. Т. 273, Вип. 261. С. 79-83. Режим доступу: http:// nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Npchdupol_2016_273_261_17

3. Зимогляд В.Я. Конфлікт та консенсус у про- цесах формування громадянського суспільства. Нау- кові праці Чорноморського державного університету імені Петра Могили. Випуск 16. С. 85-95. 2018р.

4. Кіндратець О. М. Деякі аспекти розв'язання політичних конфліктів в Україні. Вісник Національ- ного університету «Юридична академія України імені Ярослава Мудрого». Серія : Соціологія. 2016. № 3. С. 204-207. Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov. ua/UJRN/vnyuac_2016_3_23

5. Клюєв, К. Г. Сучасні технології розв'язання політичних конфліктів [Текст] : дис. ... канд. політ. наук : 23.00.02 / Костянтин Георгійович Клюєв; наук. кер. Л. М. Дунаєва; Одес. нац. ун-т ім. І. І. Мечникова. Одеса, 2016. 210 с.

6. Лященко О. О. Політична криза як чинник трансформації взаємовідносин громадянського суспільства і влади (на прикладі подій в Україні 2013-2014 р. р.). Теорія та практика держав- ного управління. 2015. Вип. 4. С. 42-49. Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Tpdu_2015_4_9

7. Шипілова Л. Прийняття політичних рішень: організаційно-управлінський аспект. Вісник Націо- нальної академії державного управління при Пре- зидентові України. 2012. № 3. С. 98-104. Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Vnadu_2012_3_15

References

1. Blyzniukova, O. M. (2020). Fasylitatsiia yak efektyvna tekhnolohiia vyrishennia problem [Facilitation as an effective problem-solving technology] Rezhym dostupu: http://dspace.kspu.kr.ua/jspui/ bitstream/123456789/3107/1/Фасилітація як ефективна техноло.pdf [in Ukrainian].

2. Bondar, H. L. (2016). Perehovornyi protses u derzhavnomu upravlinni [The negotiation process in public administration], Naukovi pratsi Chornomorskoho derzhavnoho universytetu imeni Petra Mohyly kompleksu «Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia». Seriia : Politolohiia, T. 273, Vyp. 261, s.79-83 [in Ukrainian]. [in Ukrainian].

3. Zymohliad, V. Ya. (2018). Konflikt i konsensus u protsesakh formuvannia hromadianskoho suspilstva v Ukraini [Conflict and consensus in the processes of civil society formation in Ukraine], Derzhavne budivnytstvo ta mistseve samovriaduvannia, Vypusk 16, s. 85-95. [in Ukrainian].

4. Kindratets O. M. (2016). Deiaki aspekty rozviazannia politychnykh konfliktiv v Ukraini [Some aspects of resolving political conflicts in Ukraine], Visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu «Iurydychna akademiia Ukrainy imeni Yaroslava Mudroho». Seriia: Sotsiolohiia,

№ 3, s.204-207. [in Ukrainian].

5. Kliuiev, K.H. (2016). Suchasni tekhnolohii rozviazannia politychnykh konfliktiv [Modern technologies for resolving political conflicts]: avtoref. dys… kandydata politychnykh nauk 23.00.02. - politychni instytuty ta protsesy. Odesa, 21 s. [in Ukrainian].

6. Liashchenko, O. O. (2015). Politychna kryza yak chynnyk transformatsii vzaiemovidnosyn hromadianskoho suspilstva i vlady (na prykladi podii v Ukraini

2013-2014rr.)[],Teoriiatapraktykaderzhavnohoupravlinnia, Vyp. 4 (51) Rezhym dostupu: http://www.kbuapa.kharkov. ua/e-book/tpdu/2015-4/doc/1/07.pdf [in Ukrainian].

7. Shypylova, L. (2012). Pryiniattia politychnykh rishen: orhanizatsiino-upravlinskyi aspekt [Political crisis as a factor in the transformation of civil society and government relations (on the example of events in Ukraine in 2013-2014)], Visnyk Natsionalnoi akademii derzhavnoho upravlinnia pry Prezydentovi Ukrainy,

№3, s. 98-104. [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru