Negotiation
Mediation
Conciliation
Arbitration
International Courts
Threat or Use of Force

Negotiation

The ultimate objective of formal negotiations is to create a mutually accepted outcome for the conflicting parties, thus ending the violence. Negotiation involves several integrated processes that can take place on different levels, between local institutions and international actors. Conflicting parties come to the table only when they perceive it to be in their own interests. Usually this is when the contending parties have reached a mutually hurting stalemate, where the costs of continued fighting are too high. A stalemate comes about because of the absence of change and negotiation becomes attractive as a way to pursue their aims through more peaceful, means. This window of opportunity, or ripe moment for resolution, must be recognized and acted upon. During negotiations, trust must develop between the conflicting parties through a functional working relationship that establishes good faith. Furthermore, negotiation is a creative process, adaptable to changing circumstances, and flexible to new alternatives.

Negotiations usually occur between first track diplomats. Second track diplomacy can be pursued by NGOs or intellectuals, for example, and often plays a vital role in preparing the negotiation. Getting the parties together, identifying key issues, distinguishing rational from emotional objectives, preparing the agenda and negotiating the peace agreement, are all key functions of peacemaking. Third parties are often necessary to facilitate and mediate the process. This third party can conduct direct to indirect negotiations, or can document and draft working plans and proposals. Mediators can also conduct shuttle diplomacy between two conflicting parties who will not or cannot negotiate face to face in order to advance the negotiation process.

Mediation

When the parties to a conflict are unable to come to a resolution by themselves, the intervention of a third party is a possible means of breaking the deadlock and producing and acceptable solution. Mediators can play different roles. They can serve as hosts, observers, facilitators, formulators, educators, manipulators, or advocates. Mediators might be chosen for their reputation, skills, knowledge or resources. Mediators have their own motivations for participating in the negotiation process and sometimes come with their own agenda. Despite their biases, it is generally believed that mediators should be neutral to any of the conflicting parties. Their participation as intermediaries is based on the trust of all the conflicting parties. A mediator's participation can be terminated at any point during the negotiation process.

Conciliation

Conciliation is a form of negotiation that aims to settle disputes before they become conflicts. When a government or organization anticipates that a decision or a proposed course of action may cause harm, discussions with the affected party can provide a way of avoiding a dispute by creating opportunities for adjustment and accommodation. Conciliation therefore requires the willingness of the parties to compromise in order to avoid violence.

Arbitration

Arbitration functions in similar ways to a court system, yet it is less formal and more flexible than court proceedings. This form of adjudication is more conciliatory, at the same time its decisions are also final and binding. The proceedings and its outcome can be kept confidential. An arbitration panel is made up of an uneven number of judges. Each party chooses an equal number of judges and the last is expected to be impartial. The arbitrators selected by the parties have specialized knowledge of the issues involved. Before parties submit themselves to arbitration they have to agree on what procedures to adopt. This can lead to disputes about the laws applied, the choices between ad hoc and institutional arbitration, and the location of the proceedings. Arbitration lacks the power to conduct third-party inquiry and to subpoena witnesses. Arbitration can also be relatively expensive because the disputing parties will have to carry the entire cost of the litigation. Enforcement mechanisms are usually weak or ineffective, increasing the probability that the losing party will choose continued conflict over undesirable terms of compliance.

International Courts

International judiciary and quasi-judiciary bodies apply international law between signatory states subject to the court's jurisdiction. Their decisions are final and legally binding. Enforcement is still problematic, as the concept of state sovereignty prevails over international law. The most important international courts are:

Threat or Use of Force

The threat or use of force can be a compelling method for advancing ones interests. International actors can also use force as a tool to pressure parties to the negotiating table. The importance of force is often overlooked as a tool for conflict management. Parties must use this technique cautiously as it can easily lead to the escalation of further violence.