This book discusses the role of time in peace negotiations and peace processes in the post-Cold War period, making reference to real-world negotiations and using comparative data.
Deadlines are increasingly used by mediators to spur deadlocked negotiation processes, under the assumption that fixed time limits tend to favour pragmatism. Yet, little attention is typically paid to the durability of agreements concluded in these conditions, and research in experimental psychology suggests that time pressure can have a negative impact on individual and collective decision-making by reducing each side’s ability to deal with complex issues, complex inter-group dynamics and inter-cultural relations.
This volume explores this lacuna in current research through a comparative model that includes 68 episodes of negotiation and then, more in detail, in relation to four cases studies - the Bougainville and Casamance peace processes, and the Dayton and Camp David proximity talks. The case studies reveal that in certain conditions low time pressure can impact positively on the durability of agreements by making possible effective intra-rebel agreements before official negotiations, and that time pressure works in proximity talks only when applied to solving circumscribed deadlocks.
This book will be of much interest to students of peace processes, conflict resolution, negotiation, diplomacy and international relations in general.
Table of Contents
1.Introduction 2. Time Pressure and Deadlines in International Negotiation: A Review 3. The Comparative Model 4. Complexity and the Absence of Time Pressure: Bougainville and Casamance 5. Complexity and Negotiating Strategies: Assessing the ‘Camp David Model’ 6. Conclusions Bibliography Appendix 1 - Sources for the Comparative Model Appendix 2 - The Comparative Model
Marco Pinfari is an Assistant Professor of International Relations at the American University in Cairo, Egypt.