NCJ Number
100252
Journal
Negotiation Journal Volume: 1 Issue: 4 Dated: (October 1985) Pages: 363-372
Date Published
1985
Length
10 pages
Annotation
This article compares the role of mediator bias in traditional and international mediation.
Abstract
Discussions of traditional mediation typically emphasize the importance of mediator impartiality, and this has also been noted in the mediation of international conflicts. However, mediators of international conflicts usually intervene because of international conflicts usually intervene because of their interest in the outcome of the conflict. Such biased mediation can still be effective as long as the mediator has some significant interests in the welfare of both parties and some power over each. Mediators of international conflicts must also clearly acknowledge their own vital interests in the resolution of the conflict and specify the implications of such interests for the parameters of an agreement. A mediator who claims impartiality while having an interest in the outcome may do more harm than good. Although analyses of traditional mediation emphasize mediator impartiality, mediator bias is also present, notably in attempting to facilitate the framing of an agreement that reflects community standards of justice. As in the international arena, any mediator biases must be clearly stated in traditional mediation if it is to be effective. The importance of stating mediator bias is illustrated in United States mediation in the Middle East and the 1982 Falkland Islands crisis. 10 references.