Principles of Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Negotiation
B. Kim Barnes

Much can be learned about conflict management and resolution from the experience of people who have been involved in difficult and long-term international conflicts. About 20 years ago, I was privileged to hear a keynote speech by the Honorable Harland Cleveland, former Assistant Secretary of State and Ambassador to NATO and Director of the Hubert Humphrey Institute of Public Policy. He spelled out a number of principles for conflict management garnered from his experience in international diplomacy.

1. Agreements on next steps are only possible if parties are not forced to agree on the causes of the conflict.
2. No conflict is merely two-sided. Real conflicts are always multi-lateral. We need to recognize the limitation of two-sided procedures such as the courtroom.
3. Voting is an inferior means of conflict management, because it produces two-sidedness. People argue differently toward a conclusion than toward an action. A consensus is required for committed action.
4. Procedure can become a surrogate for substance.
5. Creep up carefully on the use of force. The purpose of force is to accomplish limited objectives with the least risk of escalation.
6. It helps to widen the community of concern—this should be considered early in a conflict.
7. Courage to tackle a problem is directly proportional to distance from the problem—this is why the regional approach to peacekeeping does not work.
8. Know the costs as well as the benefits of openness (to the press and the public). Openness produces posturing in meetings.
9. Private consultation is needed as part of the process. Everyone does not have to be involved in everything.
10. The third party is indispensable, though often lacking. He or she helps the parties articulate what they want.
11. Power is not just force. There is a Chinese saying, "Big noise on stairs, nobody coming down."
12. Our standards are not the world’s standards. As Clarence Darrow said, we need to watch our tendency to judge others by their actions and ourselves by our intentions.
13. We need to take an interdisciplinary approach rather than narrow our degrees of freedom for both reflection and action. The difficulty is not how to make the conflict simple enough to deal with, but to get our thinking to be complex enough to deal with it.
14. Some tensions are promising and should be allowed to run their course—we need not resolve everything.

Some advice from Gerald Johnston, Ph.D., who was part of the successful SALT 1 talks between the U.S. and the then Soviet Union:

• Have “quiet negotiations” if you can, with little publicity (to avoid posturing).
• Parity is essential to successful negotiations; asymmetry does not lead to resolution.
• Keep both formal and informal channels of communication open.
• Focus negotiations on verification of agreements, not simply on making agreements.
• Don’t assume that the other side won’t accept a proposal—test it.