Prenegotiations

Pre-negotiation is not merely “talks about talks” to buy out time in its literal meaning or it does not address the design of an outcome but it facilitates and focuses on the process of the intended negotiation. The objective of pre-negotiation is to identify and seek mutual agreement over the problems but it does not tackle beyond definition. Moreover it concerns procedures, structures, roles, and agendas in order to assist negotiations. Many scholars are agreed on the importance of the pre-negotiation but have provided with different ingredients of the subject matter that includes Zartman, Harris and Reilly, Berridge, Ball et al and Corbacho. The essay will begin with the key concepts of pre-negotiations and include the details that how the agendas and procedures are agreed upon for negotiations in these concepts respectively. Moreover the potential advantages and risks will be considered and discussed throughout the essay. Analysis o Berridge (2005): essential to pre-negotiations is to reach agreements on three subject matters between all the parties involved. o To agree that there is a need to negotiate: this helps to establish a system to achieve agreement. o To agree on the agenda: this mean to filter out the issues to be resolved, and the not resolvable issues in the conflict; thus giving a focus on the subject matter o To agree on the procedure of negotiations i.e. format, venue, delegations and timing: firstly, the said input in the procedure ensures responsibility of the parties to participate, secondly, as once the decisions are made and details are agreed to negotiate it is very difficult to step back from the negotiations without negative implications. o Preliminary contacts between the entire involved parties can not only help to establish the negotiation progress that may make it more feasible at some future stage but also can bring the progressing towards the direct talks closer. o As a result during the pre-negotiation stage, the involved parties are able to reduce the risks of escalation of the conflict rather they participate to define and narrow down the boundaries of conflicts and structured the agenda of formal negotiations. o Consequently, the possibility of successful negotiation increases especially when all the involved parties make a consensus during pre-negotiation on what will be discussed later in negotiations. o Ball et al (1999): “The pre-negotiation step involves two major activities. These activities are assessment and preparation”. o The key question needs to be addressed in this assessment step is: "Should we proceed or not'" positive may lead to decide how to proceed with the collaborative process. o Whereas preparation step involves organizing and acquiring skills, knowledge and resources to all the parties involved on an equal footing with each other. This would filter out unclear situations and facilitate clarity before deciding to negotiate. o Different interest of parties involved may lead to conflicts instead of better alternatives. o No doubt the assessment and preparation are the key concepts of pre-negotiation but the limitation of this study is lack of in-depth account of the preparation. Resources, skills and knowledge are not the only factors that can contribute to lead to a successful negotiation set up. Certain elements in the pre-negotiation process that signify the nature of the changes in the parties' political positions (tactical or strategic) were not considered in this approach. o Harris and Reilly (1998): “Developing a “common mental map”, and then devising the means to travel is the business of pre-negotiation.” the approach is much more sophisticated and detailed as compared to previous. o Pre-negotiation agenda includes participants, preconditions and barriers to negotiations, (i.e. disarmament and ceasefire), levelling the playing field; (mutual acceptance not power balance), resourcing equally for all involved, deciding the location and form of negotiation, venue location, setting the agenda, managing the proceedings, timeframe and decision making consensus. o Important elements in negotiations that contributes to the success of the process i.e. the credibility of deadlines, the appropriateness of the formula, the necessity of ownership, inclusivity/exclusivity of the talks, are based and shaped up in the pre-negotiation and diagnosis phases. Conclusion o Pre-negotiation is a problem solving process. Though the scope and scale of all the approaches discussed in the essay plan, is different but it clearly come up to the saying “a stitch in time saves nine”. As Harris and Reilly (1998) considers “If a process is designed that is not appropriate to the context, then it is defeated before it begins.” The framework discussed above by them is the most detailed and convincing one that minimizes the risks of bad design as it encompasses all the essential elements needed in pre phase of negotiations. The process of pre-negotiation is undeniably important and needs to be designed well so that it will help to create a functional working relationship between parties. It helps to change perceptions, helps parties show their commitment to the process towards negotiation.