by admin on January 31, 2009
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had recently worked to position himself as a mediator between Israel and the Arab world, with some success. Yet, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, a well-publicized outburst condeming Israel for its actions in Gaza undermined his credibility. A Time magazine article online, “Behind the Turkish Prime Minster’s Outburst at Davos”, by Pelin Turgut, contains a quote that concisely states the Prime Minister’s misstep. ” ‘The most important quality of a mediator is to be able to maintain an equal distance to all parties involved,’ says Cuneyt Ulsever, a columnist for Turkish newspaper Hurriyet.”
Ulsever sums up one of the most basic traits a mediator must have: neutrality between parties. In this instance, the Prime Minister may have had other priorities that outweighed his desire to be seen as an honest broker, or he may simply have spoken unwisely. Either way, he has lost some credibility, and only time will tell if he can regain it.
by admin on January 31, 2009
There has been some news coverage about George Mitchell’s new assignment as Middle East special envoy. In particular, his recent trip to the region has been described as a “listening tour”. Unlike efforts to force a solution on parties, efforts to mediate a solution are based on what the parties themselves view as their priorities, their nonnegotiable points, their timetables, etc. In short, the process is all about them — not about what the mediator’s point of view.
So, it’s not surprise that listening by the mediator is essential. How else would a mediator learn just what the conflict is all about — from the parties’ own perspectives?
by admin on January 28, 2009
The New York Times Metropolitan Diary on January 26, 2009 included a story about a parking dispute on a New York street. Two drivers vied for the same parking space, each part way in the space, one nose first and one backed in. Neither would give in and neither could convince the other to give up. A crowd gathered. Eventually an onlooker variously described as a “peacemaker” or a “mediator” inserted himself between the shouting drivers and spoke with them. Next he pulled a coin from his pocket, they made their calls, and the coin was tossed. The loser protested briefly, then drove away.
This simple story illustrates one of the basics in conflict resolution: neutrality. Although the dispute was not complicated or protracted, it needed resolution and the parties could not do it themselves. In this case, they needed little more than an impartial third-party and a fair process that favored no one. Fortunately, a level head and a coin were at hand.
by admin on January 27, 2009
Last week, former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell was named as Middle East special envoy to work on the intractable conflict(s) that have plagued that region. Mitchell is justifiably lauded for his good works in the process to bring peace to Northern Ireland.
Mitchell commented on his Northern Ireland experience when his latest appointment was announced. “From my experience there, I formed the conviction that there is no such thing as a conflict that can’t be ended,” Mitchell said. “Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings.”
Mitchell did not mean to suggest that ending a conflict is easy or quick — for either the parties or a mediator. Instead, if the commitment to end the dispute is strong, a route to resolution can eventually be found.