E4.

3 Group 8
Chapter summary

Negotiation

This summary particularly will be discuss in two main articles:

● Article 1: Dwarfs in international negotiations: how small states make their voices heard.
● Article 2: Small State in the UN Security Council: Means of Influence?

Objective:
● To understand the obstacle for small small in international negotiation.
● To see what are the negotiation strategies of small states.
● To understand the way small states can exert their influence in international organization
especially in the UN, as well as the recognition from the international community in
world politics through different strategies.
Article 1
I. Introduction
Small states normally have limited resources; thus, in international negotiation, small states
cannot cover all items on the agenda, so they have to prioritize their most important aspects and
focus on those throughout the negotiations to yield the maximum benefits for their national
interests. Although it might seem that small states do not have much room to maneuver in
international negotiations, there are some strategies and systems that allow small states to stay
relevant and influential in the outcomes of the negotiations, i.e, “one-state,one-vote” system.

II. The concepts of size

Size is not an objectively given fact but rather a social construction. States are measured as big or
small depending on the context. Economic power is used as a measurement when the
negotiations are concerned with direct or indirect distributive effects. Military capacities is more
suitable as a measurement during armed conflict or in the security field. Population is used to
distinguish between small and big units. The distribution of the number of votes in a particular
negotiation setting can also be a measurement for the size of states. To make it less complicated,
we can identify small states as those having less than average relevant capacities in a given
negotiation setting.

III. Obstacles for small states in international negotiations

Small states normally face size-related obstacles in international negotiations. Financial
capabilities are important in three aspects. First, it is important that the delegation knows full
well about their states’ positions at the early stage of negotiation. With the lack of resources,
understaffed small states ministries are likely to formulate their national interests later than the
bigger states. Second obstacle is the limited budgets of small states lead to slim delegations, i.e.,
fewer diplomats and experts, which could lead to the lower of their activity rate. Lastly, being
economically inferior, small states are at a disadvantage when it comes to bargaining and
persuasion strategies.

IV. Negotiation strategies of small states

In general, there are two types of small state strategy: capacity-building strategies and shaping
strategies.
• Firstly, small states can increase their cognitive capacities by contacting institutional
actors such as international secretariats or chairs in order to obtain additional background
information on the issue under negotiation.
• Secondly, small states can offset the limited number of experts in ministries through
contacts with non-governmental organizations (NGOs), epistemic communities or industry
lobbyists.
• Thirdly, the longer a small state is a member of a particular international organization or
regime, the more easily it can counterbalance size-related disadvantages.
In principle, small states can employ the very same negotiation strategies as big states to
influence negotiation processes and outcomes. They can set priorities and invest their limited
resources in issues of high importance, and not be active on issues deemed less crucial. On this
basis, small states can use the very same persuasion-based or bargaining-based strategies as big
states.
• Firstly, states can indirectly influence negotiation outcomes by manipulating negotiation
processes. One such strategy is the framing or re-framing of debates. For example, actors may
be more receptive to technical arguments than moral ones in negotiations on a specific issue.
• Secondly, especially if states have specialized in a particular policy field, they can use
their expertise to further their positions with causal arguments.
• Thirdly, next to causal arguments, moral and normative claims can also be important for
the outcome of multilateral negotiations beyond the nation-state.
• Fourthly, depending on the stage of negotiations or the framing of the issue, states can
influence outcomes on the basis of legal arguments.
• Fifthly, especially in settings in which the number of actors is very high or in which the
cleavages are stable, coalitions are common features of negotiations.
• Sixthly, big as well as small states can use bargaining-based strategies. Thus, they can
seek to further their own interests through voicing demands or red-lines whilst hinting at
implicit or explicit threats.
• Finally, if issues are distributive in nature, states can engage in value-claiming Strategies,
in which each state seeks to get as much from the good to be distributed as possible.

V. The contributions of this special interest section

The contributions of the special interest section examine the strategies applied by small states in
their selected negotiation setting. It analyzes the effects of the institutional design of the
negotiation arena as well as the effects of the nature of the issue on the success of small states in
multilateral negotiations.
 • The effectiveness of the different shaping strategies may be influenced by institutional
design features, such as the number and size of actors involved, equal versus weighted voting
systems, unanimity versus majority voting, or institutional windows of opportunities such as
being the chair of meetings or holding the office of the Presidency to increase the influence
via arguing, framing, bargaining or value-claiming positions.
• Issue-specific characteristics, such as the number and stability of cleavages, the extent to
which an issue is distributive rather than regulative, can also influence the effectiveness of
small states’ shaping strategies that rely on persuasion.
Since the contributions cover different negotiation settings with variation across international
institutions (UN, EU, WTO) and across policy areas (humanitarian law, climate change, trade
and agricultural policies), this special interest section has two types of added value:
(1) Empirically, it systematically assesses the influence of small states in a variety of
international negotiations and different policy areas.
(2) Theoretically, the special interest section enhances our knowledge about negotiation
dynamics from a small state perspective.

Article 2

● Introduction
In the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), the power are divided to serve special
favorable to the 5 permanent members in both the decision making and world political by using
the Veto power that they had received by being the founding members, and in the international
era, the power of state can be defined by the populations, the territory, gross domestic product
(GDP) as well as the military capability. Therefore, small states have lesser influences on world
political affairs.
However, small states oftentimes had been defined by the amount of their populations
and yet if we compare those to the other context such as European Union we can see the different
result of defining small or big states so in order to considered one is a small or big states it is
depend on the context of the situation. Moreover, there’s also some other attempts on defining
the small or large states by comparing the economic power as well and the result still depend on
the context as well, even economic power are one of the important factor to gain power since in
other Intergovernmental Organizations like World Trade Organization (WTO), International
Monetary Fund (IMF), states does not need to be elected based on their economic strength.
Thus, the definition of small states or large states can not be defined by how much power
they possess but how they exercise their power.

● Theoretical Considerations and Opportunities for Small States within the UN

Traditional IR theorists mentioned that a state's size is related to the concept of
capabilities, and according to the Neuann and Gstohl it is based on having them implies their
pending action. Thus, to the realist this concept of capabilities is about the military strength
which is in the example of the differentiated between the United States to the European Union.
However, for the neo-liberal they view it in a better position in the international system by
understanding more about the related definition as well as the respect on the right of other
member decisions based on mutual respect.
Therefore, this can be more beneficial for the International Organizations when the
attention is focusing the image, the perception, the administrative competence, as well as
favorable to the multilateral diplomatic arrangements, because as in the case of UNSC small
states try hard to gain the recognition of their dependency as well as sovereignty, as for the
reason of sometimes they are not welcomed on the UN platform on the same stage as the larger
states.
Not only this, but also by the time of discussing the allowance of small states to join as
the members of the United Nations during the late 1960s and early 1970s as well. Moreover, the
involvement of the Cold War also affected the discussion and led to the power relation as well
when it had been diminished in the prominent and UNSC has opened up to face the new era and
different types of conflicts.

● From a Beneficiary to a Contributor and an Active Member

In order to acknowledge that whether state contribute to the UN or benefit the UN we
have to take a look into its domestic and external competencies, as for an examples based on the
case illustrated by the Nordics Financial support for the UN organizations that shown the
positive result from the Oversea Development Aid (ODA) and receive a title of Good
International Practice, and this also led to the rise of expectation from the international
community to the states as well so this is the pressure that state need to take into account.
Moreover, the important of small state’s administrative competences and activities in the
UN work is based on the number of times they have been invited to be an outsider in the UNSC
meeting following the rule 37, and that can be explained by the case of Norway that have been
invite as the outsider meeting in the UNSC during the period of 2000 to 2007 and in the same
period of time compare to the Bangladesh.
Therefore, this example has shown the small state’s abilities to contribute to the UN
including all factors such as the economic and military sector, as a result of many Peacekeeping
Mission, Peace Support Operation, Peace Building Initiative.

● How Small States Can Influence the UNSC: Knowledge and Prioritizing, Diplomatic
Skills and Image/Perception, Initiatives and Leadership, Coalition-Building

In order for a country to be elected to the UN Security Council, it has to have the support
of a large part of the international community. Firstly, governments interested in taking on the
role of an elected member of the UNSC have to convince others that they can take on the duties
that are associated with membership. Moreover, to deal with the structural disadvantage and to
maximize influence, small states have to prioritize, delegate and decide upon which issues are
manageable, and which can be dealt with more effectively by others in the Security Council and
need to be able to prioritize their work within the UNSC in order to be able to influence the
Security Council’s decisions. Secondly, a small state needs to have the administrative capacity to
tackle a wide range of complex issues and duties. At the same time, the state’s image is
important in this respect, as it must be perceived as having the competence to carry out the
Security Council’s obligations. Thirdly, they must have the ability to take initiatives and the
necessary diplomatic skills to pursue their initiatives and fulfil their responsibilities. Last but not
least, leadership and coalition-building are of fundamental importance with regard to power
relations in the Security Council.

To conclude, the article has identified several factors that determine the activeness and
influence of small states. First, countries have to have political incentives and ambition to adopt
an active role in the UN and need to be prepared to spend time, effort and money on working
within the UN. Small states should maintain some significant criterias such as sufficient
knowledge, diplomatic, leadership and coalition-building skills in order to qualify to influence
Security Council’s decisions. On the other hand, this article also emphasized the failure of IR
theories to take these factors seriously undermines their ability to understand and explain the role
of small states in the UNSC. The IR theories need to consider the administrative competence and
perception of states, along with the traditional variables, in order to produce a fuller picture of
the power potential of states in the international system.