There are four main sources of writing on

diplomacy and negotiation in the traditional

literature
• Historians: Thucydides, The Peloponnesian Wars,
Edward Gibbon, The Rise and Fall of the Roman
Empire, A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Europe,
1848-1919.
• Practitioners: De Cailleres, On the Manner of
Negotiating with Princes, Sir Harold Nicholson,
Diplomacy 1919, Kissinger, Diplomacy (1994), and
a host of memoirs by diplomats of all creed and
period.
• International Relations Theoreticians: Students of
diplomacy and negotiation in the academia (and
to a lesser extent in foreign ministries’ schools of
diplomacy), e.g., Ikle, How Nations Negotiate,
Arthur Lall, Diplomacy,
• Students of Negotiation in other Disciplines (e.g.,
economists such as Thomas Schelling, labor
relations specialists, lawyers, etc.)
 Negotiations refer to a joint decision making
process wherein two or more parties try to reach
an agreement through concessions and
argumentation, while each is trying to maximize
its own payoffs.
For negotiations to take place two conditions
must be met:
• There must be a conflict of interest between or
among the parties
• All parties must believe that there exist some
possible agreements that make each of them
better off than no agreement
 Buyer’s Seller’s
utility utility

$
Zone of agreement Seller
Buyer
Seller’s
reservation price Buyer’s
reservation price
 Buyer’s Seller’s
utility utility

No zone of
agreement
$
Seller
Buyer

Buyer’s reservation Seller’s

price reservation price
•• ExtensionAgreement.
Extension Agreement.Ratification
Ratificationand
andcontinuation
continuationof of
existingagreements.
existing agreements.

•• NormalizationAgreement.
Normalization Agreement.Restores
Restoresor
ortransforms
transforms
relations,typically
relations, typicallyfrom
fromaastate
stateof
ofconflict
conflictto
toaastate
stateof
of
normal,peaceful,
normal, peaceful,relations.
relations.

•• RedistributionAgreement.
Redistribution Agreement.Typically
Typicallyredivision
redivisionofof
propertyor
property orvalues.
values.These
Thesemay
maybebeone-sided,
one-sided,benefiting
benefiting
oneside
one sideat
atthe
theexpense
expenseofofthe
theother,
other,or
orthey
theymay
mayentail
entail
exchangeof
exchange ofgoods
goodsororvalues
valuesover
overparties.
parties.

•• InnovationAgreement.
Innovation Agreement.Agreements
Agreementsthat
thatform
formnew
new
arrangements,institutions,
arrangements, institutions,or
orpatterns
patternsofofbehavior.
behavior.
1.
1. Decision
Decisionto
toNegotiate.
Negotiate.
2.
2. Prenegotiations
Prenegotiations
3.
3. Substantive
SubstantiveNegotiations
Negotiations
4.
4. Clarification
Clarificationof
ofAgreements
Agreements
5.
5. Implementation
Implementation
6.
6. Extension/termination
Extension/termination
The typical assumption is that states enter
negotiations because they wish to reach an
agreement. This is implied in the definition of
negotiations.
In many cases, however, states may negotiate
for additional reasons. Worse, states may
negotiate because they do not wish to reach an
agreement.
Traditional theorists identified several
alternative objectives of negotiations. These
include:
• Brinkmanship
• Bargaining for domestic audiences
• Bargaining for third parties
• Pause in fighting and regrouping
• Uncovering the true intentions of the
enemy.
• Bargaining to get others involved
Prenegotiation refers to the process whereby the
parties to negotiation determine the logistical aspects
of the negotiation process (e.g., location,
participants, content of negotiation, and the agenda).
This is a seemingly technical aspect of the negotiation
process and should attract little substantive
attention. In fact, it turns out to be an important part
of the negotiation process, one that takes up a lot of
time and effort in most cases
Several factors render prenegotiations an important
part of the negotiation process as a whole:

1. Beliefs about the effects of logistical and physical

factors on the process and outcome of
substantive negotiations.
2. Prenegotiations serve as an important learning
experience about the adversary.
3. Symbolic elements of negotiation (issues of
representation, positioning, and so forth).
4. Playing for time.
5. Agenda setting is believed to be an important
tactical weapon in negotiation processes.
6. Tradition.
•• Evidence
Evidenceand
andbeliefs
beliefsabout
aboutrelationship
relationshipbetween
between
settingand
setting andoutcomes.
outcomes.

•• Location—Home
Location—Homecourt
courtadvantage
advantage

•• Timing—Relationship
Timing—Relationshipto
tohistorical
historicaldates
dates

•• Form
Formofofcontact
contact(direct,
(direct,indirect,
indirect,sustained,
sustained,
paused)
paused)
•• Learning
Learningwithout
withoutconceding
conceding
Many physical and technical issues have
symbolic significance. For example.
• Representation—rank of negotiators
• Who participates—implication of recognition
• Order of seating—symbols of relative
importance
• Location
• Nature of contact: direct, indirect
• Mandate of mediator
• Significance of time in negotiations
• Preparing positions
• Mobilizing constituencies and third
parties
• Regrouping
• Putting pressure on the other side
† Each side wants to be able to outguess the adversary.
Specifically, each side wants to identify the adversary’s
reservation price, learn about the structure of decision
making, and about concession patterns.
† But each side wants to do the learning without sacrificing
substantive assets as tuition.
† Prenegotiation affords posturing on technicalities as a
learning mechanism.