by Jane Beddall on November 29, 2008
Last time, I wrote about a recent article in the online version of “afrol News” that was titled: “DRC rebel leader wants Norwegian mediation.” The article discussed the advances that Congolese rebel leader Laurent Nkunda has made towards the Norwegian government to help mediate the conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Although Dovetail Resolutions has a focus on business disputes, estate planning and settlement conflicts, and elder mediation, the comments made in the context of that violent conflict and humanitarian crisis have relevance for mediating any type of dispute.
Mr. Nkunda said that he wanted mediators he could trust and gave two reasons he felt that Norwegian mediators could be trusted to help in this conflict.
First, they have experience in peace mediation. Their experience would be vital to helping them to mediate this conflict.
Second, Norway has very little economic or political stake in the country. Neutrality is a fundamental trait in a mediator.
Experience and neutrality are important qualities in a mediator — whatever the type of dispute.
by Jane Beddall on November 28, 2008
A recent article in the online version of “afrol News” was titled: “DRC rebel leader wants Norwegian mediation.” The article discussed the advances that Congolese rebel leader Laurent Nkunda has made towards the Norwegian government to help mediate the conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Dovetail Resolutions has a focus on business disputes, estate planning and settlement conflicts, and elder mediation — issues that seem far removed from armed conflicts and humanitarian crises. Yet Mr. Nkunda’s comments struck some universal chords.
Most fundamentally, he wanted mediators he could trust. Without trust in a mediator, the parties aren’t likely to even agree to a mediation. If they do agree to try the mediation process, but are wary of the mediator, they will likely accomplish very little.
Next time, the reasons Mr. Nkunda gave for his belief that Norwegian mediators could be trusted to help in this conflict and how those qualities are important in mediating any type of conflict.
by Jane Beddall on November 27, 2008
A recent online newspaper article contained this line: “[T]he case has been ordered to be decided by a mediator.” It’s a basic point and central to the the mediation concept and process: mediators don’t decide cases. Still, it’s not always understood, as so clearly shown in the article.
I occasionally meet people who respond to hearing that I am a mediator with the comment: “Wow, it must be great to tell people what to do.” I explain that I will do many things to help parties reach a resolution of their dispute (or to prevent disputes or help them change their approach to conflict from destructive to constructive.) But a mediator does not decide a case — the parties do.
by Jane Beddall on November 26, 2008
We routinely talk about preventing conflict, reducing conflict, and resolving conflict. When we do, we sound as if we are characterizing conflict as always a bad thing. Without a doubt, conflict can cause significant and lasting damage, both economic and non-economic. Those negative effects, understandably, receive a lot of attention.
Yet conflict can be good. When conflict is constructive it can foster creative thinking, more carefully considered options, and a better final result. Stifling dissent can be as damaging as permitting destructive conflict to take hold and grow.
The challenge, then, may be not to end all conflict. Instead, the goal may be to channel conflict in a positive direction.