The impact of mediation on international conflict resolution

How to cite this journal: Author, Date of the post, WMO Conflict Insight, Title of the post, ISSN: 2628 6998, https://worldmediation.org/journal/

ABSTRACT *

This article surveys the effects of mediation in contemporary international conflicts, taking as its point of departure the range of active disputes from Venezuela, Palestine, Indonesia, Syria, Sudan and Iran to the trade confrontation between China and the United States. The author sets out five mediation strategies, procedural, communicative, directive, preventative and apolitical, and illustrates each with cases including the facilitation between the Venezuelan government and opposition between 2002 and 2004, the Kenyan post election mediation of 2007 and 2008, the Tokyo Conference on the reconstruction of Sri Lanka, preventive diplomacy in the trade and security disputes among major powers, and research based engagement by non governmental organisations on resource competition in the Middle East. The article then examines how the success of mediation is measured, distinguishing acceptance of the mediator, the signing of a peace agreement, partial outcomes such as power sharing arrangements or de-escalation zones, and the long term criterion of non recurrence, noting that by the stricter measures a majority of mediation efforts fail. Finally the author identifies the principal obstacles facing mediation today: the multiplication of conflicts since the end of the Cold War and the resulting displacement of more than sixty five million people, state fragility and the blurring of political, criminal and ideological motives, economic complexity, the proliferation of armed groups with unclear objectives, the regionalisation and internationalisation of disputes, the escalatory role of unverified information in the media, agreements concluded under strain that relapse into conflict, and insufficient support from the Security Council. The article concludes that mediators and peace advocates must combine work on active disputes with broader efforts to build a culture of peace.

KEYWORDS *

International mediation, mediation strategies, procedural strategy, communicative strategy, directive strategy, preventive diplomacy, measuring success, peace agreements, conflict recurrence, displacement, United Nations, Security Council

INTRODUCTION

The international environment is currently facing several conflicts started and stimulated by different parties for various reasons. The conflicts have endangered lives and distorted economies in such places. For example, currently, countries like Venezuela, Palestine, Indonesia, Syria, Sudan, Iran, and China vs. the United States are facing conflicts today. In most of these countries apart from the China-US (which is a trade war), many people have lost their lives while others seek refuge in neighboring areas due to the hostile conditions that are inhabitable. For that matter, the international communities led by the United Nations (UN) are focused on ensuring peaceful coexistence and interaction in such areas through mediation. The thesis, therefore, seeks to determine the effects of mediation in international conflicts today.

MAIN CORPUS

Strategies in Mediation

The underlying challenge in conflict resolution is defining the most suitable and sufficient mediation process. However, the identification of the best mediation stands as a nightmare since conflicts take varying contexts and directions. The strategies that include procedural, communicative, directive, preventative, and apolitical have been applied in attempting to solve the conflicts in the world. In regards to procedural strategy, the peacemaker regulates the timing, agenda, and venues, dispatch of information, and formality of the meetings (Moore, 2014). The main aim is to minimize stress and disruption between the disputants who never have a history of peacemaking.

For instance, between 2002 and 2004, the Organization of the United States in conjunction with the United Nations Development Program facilitated negotiation between the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, and the opposition to prevent conflict occurrence. Up to 2014, there has been calmness till when the opposition began opposing the leadership of Nicholas Maduro with the situation escalating in 2019 when he was being sworn in for a second term.

On the other hand, the communicative technique requires the mediator to advance and focus on fostering communication and cooperation passively. The Truth Commission takes part in establishing the violence and its major causes and helps the party mediate on their grievances (Moore, 2014). For instance, when the Post-Election Violence broke out in Kenya in the 2007-08 elections, the body was commissioned with major players coming from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) with the late former UN Secretary-General Koffi Annan being the chairperson. In this case, the critical approach was power mediation that led to the parties agreeing on a coalition government hence peace.

In a directive approach of mediation, the peacemaker strives to influence the content and final decision of the negotiation. The mediator may threaten to employ practices like diplomatic sanctions or incentives and aids to the country (Ruggeri, Dorussen & Gizelis, 2017). A better example is the Tokyo Conference that sought the reconstruction and development of Sri Lanka. The parties that attended like the US, EU, Norway, and Japan offered financial support of USD 4.5 billion towards restoration and improvement of Sri Lanka, thus enhancing peaceful coexistence.

Moreover, preventative diplomacy helps the mediators to prevent disputes from arising or escalating into a conflict between disputants and limit the spread of fights should they occur. The strategy has been crucial in conflicts like the US-China trade war, the Russia-US disputes, and the North Korea-US conflict. Finally, there is the apolitical strategy where the non-profit and private organizations like the International Crisis Group participate in the resolution of international conflicts through researching, analyzing, and advocating for conflict resolution (Moore, 2014). A good illustration is the case of research conducted by the International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD) in 2009 in the warzones areas of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Palestine, and Israel to prevent any conflict that would have risen due to competition for scarce resources like water resources due to climate change.

Mediation and Outcomes

The success of a mediation process is viewed from different perspectives by different persons. Some individuals consider the negotiation process as a success when both parties in a conflict formally or informally accept the mediator to allow talks. The perception was mainly during the times of a few numbers of mediation with high expectations. On the other hand, a successful mediation occurs when there are a solution and termination of the hostilities. In this case, it focuses on a situation where the eventual result is the signing of a peace agreement (Wallensteen & Svensson, 2014). In most cases, studies reveal that 55% of these mediation fails as they usually do not reach these extents. For instance, mediation of conflicts in countries like Israel, Lebanon, Palestine, and Venezuela has failed on this scale.

However, some scholars argue that the latter measure is broad, thus examine both the short term and long term results. In this case, they suggest that the outcomes of the process should be into two. One is coming into an agreement on political, power-sharing in a territory, third-party security guarantees, or justice enforcement (Wallensteen & Svensson, 2014). Majorly, it focuses on any outcome from the mediation process to minimize the hostility in the war region. For instance, under such measure, mediation in Syria may be considered a success due to establishing some war-free zones such as the Idlib region, Eastern Ghouta, the Rastan Pocket, Southern Syria through the appealing of Turkey, Russia, and Iran.

Conversely, long-term success considers the reoccurrence of conflict where a low chance of a repetition of the war and hostilities signifies the accomplishment of the mediation. In most negotiations that lead to a de-escalation or end of the war, the reoccurrence of war takes a longer time (Wallensteen & Svensson, 2014). Situations of disputes such as Venezuela took over ten years before re-emergence. In all of the above cases, there is no explicit determinant of mediation due to the unpredictable nature and behavior of conflict. For that matter, the outcome of the mediation process in regards to success is always relative depending on the scope of mediation.

SUMMARY

Challenges to Mediation

Currently, the number of conflicts has tripled since the end of the cold war thus increase the fatalities and victims of disputes and wars in the world. Over 65 million people have been displaced due to conflicts in their region with Syria displacing more than half of its population, around 6.5 million people (Bijlani, 2017). Therefore, the need and urgency of mediation have increased which has prompted the UN to focus on various measures of preventing future wars in other regions as they attempt to solve the existing ones.

The nature of the conflict also poses a challenge in the mediation process in regards to issues like state fragility, confusing lines among political, criminal, and ideological interests like in Syria where the ISIS against the government and the government humiliates its citizens (United Nation, 2017). Furthermore, the complexities in the economies of conflict and position of the countries like the US-China trade war, and unclear objectives of the increased armed groups are challenges in mediation. Besides, the regionalization and internalization of disputes complicate the situation, thus hindering mediation.

Fourth, the contribution of media in escalating the spread of information, some of which are uncertified leads to reactions and escalation of conflict in the affected area. Moreover, peace agreements under a strained environment lead to the relapse into conflict like were the case of South Sudan hence distorting the full mediation process (United Nation, 2017). Finally, inadequate support from the Security Council has limited the mediation efforts of the UN.

CONCLUSION

The rate of the ongoing war in the current world is increasing so fast that the UN, the Security Council, and private organizations must make a swift move to minimize, and prevent future emergence of any conflict through the strategies discussed above. Until now, the impact of mediation has been quite low due to the rising number of wars and their intensification in such areas. Therefore, the mediators and peace ambassadors must put more effort in not only focusing on the ongoing disputes but also significant on the creation of awareness about the importance of peace, love, and harmony and support one another in the society. Consequently, the mediation challenges will be eradicated hence a highly effective mediation process for a peaceful and humane world.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION *

The figure the author cites, that a majority of mediation efforts fail when measured by the signing of a peace agreement, is less discouraging than it first appears, and understanding why points toward what the field most needs.

The measure itself is part of the problem. Judging mediation by signatures alone counts as failure every effort that opened a humanitarian corridor, secured a prisoner exchange, prevented a war from spreading, or built the relationships on which a later settlement was founded. Kenya was mediated successfully in forty one days only because earlier interventions, which are recorded as failures, had established contacts and mapped the terrain. A field that measures itself by its rarest outcome will systematically undervalue its most common contribution, and will also attract the resources appropriate to a rare achievement rather than to a continuous practice. A more honest evaluation framework, one that records de escalation, humanitarian access, relationships maintained and violence prevented alongside agreements concluded, would give both mediators and their funders a truer picture of what the work achieves.

That reframing has a practical consequence for where effort is placed. The strategies the author describes are almost all deployed once violence has begun, when positions have hardened and constituencies have accumulated losses that must be justified. Preventive engagement is comparatively cheap, and its successes are invisible precisely because nothing happens; funding structures reward the visible, which is why prevention is chronically under resourced. Standing regional early warning and dialogue capacity, staffed by mediators already known and trusted in their regions, addresses the article’s observation that conflicts increasingly regionalise before international attention arrives.

Two further points follow from the obstacles the author lists. First, the fragmentation of parties, the proliferation of armed groups with unclear objectives, makes the classic model of two identifiable sides at one table increasingly rare. Mediation practice needs to develop for this reality: local and sequential processes that build settlements from the ground upward, coordination among simultaneous tracks so that parties cannot forum shop, and inclusion of civil society, women’s organisations and displaced populations whose stake in durability exceeds that of the armed actors. The article’s own observation that agreements concluded under strain relapse points to the same conclusion, since agreements owned by more people break less easily.

Second, the mention of unverified information as an escalatory force identifies something newer than most mediation doctrine accounts for. Where rumour can mobilise a community faster than any mediator can reach it, conflict parties should be encouraged to agree communication protocols alongside ceasefires, and mediation teams need capacity to counter false reports quickly and credibly.

Finally, the constraint the author names last is the decisive one. Mediation cannot substitute for political will among those who supply the parties with weapons, money and protection. Where the Security Council is divided, mediators can still preserve channels, protect civilians and prepare frameworks, but they cannot manufacture the consent of great powers. Recognising that limit honestly is not defeatism; it is what allows mediation to be judged by what it can actually deliver, and to be ready with an agreement when the political moment finally arrives.

* Added by the WMO Editorial Team

REFERENCES

References

Bijlani, R. (2017). 15 Facts About The Syrian War. The Borgen Project. Retrieve from https://borgenproject.org/facts-about-the-syrian-civil-war/

Hossain, F. A., & Ali, M. K. (2014). The relation between individual and society. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 2(08), 130.

Mcloughlin, C., (2016). State-Society Relations and Citizenship. GSDRC Applied Knowledge Services. Retrieve from https://gsdrc.org/topic-guides/state-society-relations-and-citizenship/state-society-relations-overview/

Moore, C. W., (2014). The mediation process: Practical strategies for resolving conflict. John Wiley & Sons.

Queiroz, R., (2018). Individual liberty and the importance of the concept of the people. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 99.

Ruggeri, A., Dorussen, H., & Gizelis, T. I. (2017). Winning the peace locally: UN peacekeeping and local conflict. International organization, 71(1), 163-185.

Spirkin, A., (2011). Dialectical Materialism: Man and Society. In Themes in Soviet Marxist Philosophy. Retrieve from https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/spirkin/works/dialectical-materialism/ch05-s04.html

United Nation, (2017). Report of the Secretary-General: United Nations Activities in Support of Mediation Activities. United Nations. Retrieved from https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/DPA%20Report%20REV9%20ENG%20WEB.PDF

Wallensteen, P., & Svensson, I. (2014). Talking peace: International mediation in armed conflicts. Journal of Peace Research, 51(2), 315-327.