Collective conflict management: A new formula for global peace and security cooperation?

This article surveys current security challenges and identifies obstacles to effective global and regional responses and cooperation in an era when security has become increasingly divisible. The new situation is partly explained by the complexity and variety of security challenges, both traditional and new, and by the linkages between them. It argues that a new pattern of improvised, ad hoc and often case-specific security mechanisms has developed, which it calls Collective Conflict Management (CCM). The argument is illustrated by reference to cases of CCM where a wide range of actors-multilateral institutions at the global and regional levels, individual states or ad hoc coalitions, professional and commercial bodies, and non-governmental organizations-collaborate in an effort to manage specific security threats and challenges, bringing together a variety of relationships, resources and skills. The urge for collective action, rather than unilateral or single actor-led, is motivated by a number of factors and 'drivers", not all of them necessarily positive or constructive. The article concludes that the success or failure of CCM will depend in part on the severity of the problems it faces and in part on the motives and incentives behind collective responses. This new pattern raises interesting and important questions for the future of international security. While CCM may be untidy and lack clear norms and standards, in many cases it may be the best available in an increasingly fractured world

The Shifting Sands of Peacemaking: Challenges of Multiparty Mediation

Multiparty mediation, which occurs when two or more third parties cooperate or compete in helping antagonists negotiate a conflict settlement, carries both risks and rewards as a conflict management strategy. Cooperating multiple third parties can increase the chances of crafting an agreement, band together to create greater pressure on the conflict parties to reach agreement, and supply outside resources to help implement the negotiated agreement. Competing multiple third parties can undercut each other, prolonging the conflict and allowing antagonists to resist necessary compromises and negotiated concessions. This article examines the changing environment for multiparty mediation and the impact of five changes that affect the practice of mediation. It derives some interim conclusions about where the field is heading and offers some recommendations for making multiparty engagements more effective

A crowded stage: Liabilities and benefits of multiparty mediation

In today's environment, the international response to conflict often entails multiple mediators as well as other third-party actors such as peacekeeping forces, development agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and lone operators. Such a profusion of actors has often made peacemaking efforts messy, difficult, and at times chaotic. The vicious nature of internal conflicts, however, and the high costs for the international community of failing to prevent or end war make it critical to understand these multiple third-party interventions. The principal question is: do these multiparty mediations help or hurt the cause of peace? If the answer to that question is that a multiplicity of third parties can hurt a peace process, does the solution lie in stopping multiple third-party attempts at peacemaking? On the other hand, if the answer is that multiparty mediation can help, are there ways of increasing the chances that it will?

International negotiation and mediation in violent conflicts: The changing context of peacemaking

This collection of essays situates the study and practice of international mediation and peaceful settlement of disputes within a changing global context. The book is organized around issues of concern to practitioners, including the broader regional, global, and institutional context of mediation and how this broader environment shapes the opportunities and prospects for successful mediation. A major theme is complexity, and how the complex contemporary context presents serious challenges to mediation. This environment describes a world where great-power rivalries and politics are coming back into play, and international and regional organizations are playing different roles and facing different kinds of constraints in the peaceful settlement of disputes. The first section discusses the changing international environment for conflict management and reflects on some of the challenges that this changing environment raises for addressing conflict. Part II focuses on the consequences of bringing new actors into third-party engagement and examines what may be harbingers for how we will attempt to resolve conflict in the future. The third section turns to the world of practice, and discusses mediation statecraft and how to employ it in this current international environment. The volume aims to situate the practice and study of mediation within this wider social and political context to better understand the opportunities and constraints of mediation in today’s world. The value of the book lies in its focus on complex and serious issues that challenge both mediators and scholars. This volume will be of much interest to students, practitioners, and policymakers in the area of international negotiation, mediation, conflict resolution and international relations

A Global Security Vacuum Half-filled: Regional Organizations, Hybrid Groups and Security Management

At a time when the United Nations and key powerful states are pulling back from robust engagement in conflict management, regional organizations and ad hoc groupings of diverse organizations - collective conflict management initiatives - are stepping into the vacuum. In order to understand these two approaches - and why and when they may be operating together - this article compares them as they affect three significant questions and challenges in contemporary conflict management: is an intervention legitimate, is it effective, and does it set precedents for the community of states and international organizations that might be inclined to act. It notes that these approaches bring different strengths to an intervention process. Regional organizations play an increasingly critical role in providing legitimacy for an intervention, while the fact that collective conflict management initiatives do not set a precedent for further engagement allows them to act with more flexibility. The article concludes that neither of these approaches is sufficient to create a successor security regime to the post-cold war international system. It suggests that global power diffusion will be constrained by the irreplaceable core security competencies of powerful states acting bilaterally or, when it suits them, through regional bodies or the UN Security Council

Ready for Prime Time: The When, Who, and Why of International Mediation

Most of the literature on international dispute resolution emphasizes timing and "ripeness" when considering whether or not a dispute is suitable for mediation. In addition to this focus, the authors believe analysts should consider whether a particular mediator is "ready for prime time" Their framework posits that one may gauge the appropriateness of a mediator for a particular dispute along three different types of considerations: operational and political; strategic and diplomatic; and relationship and cultural "fit" They provide numerous case examples illustrating how the choice of a mediator might apply in each dimension

Why is mediation so hard? The case of Syria

This chapter examines how changes in the types of conflicts, the variable availability of mediators, and the international environment affect current mediation. In so doing it looks at external forces that support or undermine a nascent peace process; the complications associated with such issues as legitimacy, state capacity, perception, and the internationalization of civil/regional conflicts, as well as the number, quality, and coherence of institutions willing to undertake a mediation effort. This chapter analyzes these three challenges in the context of the Syrian conflict and explores how they affected the attempts to bring parties to the Syrian conflict to the negotiating table from March 2012 through December 2013. The chapter concludes with the argument that addressing the supply challenge through the effective coordination of different mediating bodies delivers a key component but notes that a mediation’s external, geopolitical environment will have a critical—and possibly negative—impact on even the best resourced mediation effort