Communication and Conflict Final - Essay Example

COMMUNICATION AND CONFLICT FINAL Communication and Conflict Final Consider moderating behaviors in conflict. Specifically, analyzehow changing your own communication and/or perceptions relates to taking responsibility for the direction of the conflict and relationship. In conflict resolution, it is of ultimate importance that a person mediating or nego- tiating have the right attitude. If people are fighting in the first place, most likely the mediator’s attitude could have an effect on the potential outcome of the entire situation. This is why mediators must take responsibility by being clear, focused, and helpful. First of all, a mediator must make plain what exactly the directive is for the outcome of the situation for a conflict to be resolved. In order to achieve the goals of conflict resolution, the mediator must have enough internal direction and good communication and interpersonal skills in order to come to an agreement with both parties (“Why Does Virginia Tech Have a Conflict Resolution Program?” 2009). Being able to speak eloquently and clearly as a mediator is a key role in how conflicts are negotiated. Both parties must feel like they understand what is going on within the conversation being had, not only with each other, but how the mediator is being understood by both parties. Conflict resolution also has the element of being an at-times confusing process. Thus, it is key that the conflict resolution mediator has a specific focus. If the meeting is supposed to be about one topic and the direction of the conversation being had steers in a tangential direction, it is the job of the negotiator to keep the parties on-task. Usually when one enters into conflict resolution, the ultimate goal of both parties is to come to an agreement of some sort (“What is Conflict Resolution?”, 2003). Good mediators are able to keep the subject at hand relevant to the discussion and can navigate difficult, at-times uncharted waters, so to speak. One approach to conflict is that “ ‘we do not have to stay the way we are’; we all have more choices in conflicts tha[n] we assume” (Hocker, et. al., 1985, p. xi). According to Gerzon (2006), “As our world grows smaller, opportunities for conflict multiply. Ethnic, religious, political, and personal differences drive people apart--with potentially disastrous consequences--and its the task of perceptive leaders to bring them together again” (pgh. 1). Finally, a negotiator or person in conflict mediation needs to be helpful, above all things. If a negotiator is not helpful, chances are that the conflict could escalate or become blown out of proportion. Negotiators must seek to navigate that fine line which divides people who are at odds with each other. Being helpful is one of the key traits negotiators need to have in order to be successful at their job. Changing one’s communications or perceptions with regard to the situation may help immensely. After all, the negotiator’s attitude is key to how the situation will turn out. Good negotiators are able to see any conflict from both sides and are able to navigate uncharted waters. The deft negotiator is one who nimbly and quickly thinks on one’s feet and can mediate in sticky situations. These are the main traits that a good negotiator has. Without these facets, negotiation and/or mediation can be a tedious and time-consuming process. 2. Examine negotiation in conflict. Specifically, discuss how the language of competition and collaboration contribute to successful negotiation. Language used in competition and collaboration are significant contributions to the fine art of negotiation, especially in world affairs. Collective security is a “system by which states have attempted to prevent or stop wars. Under a collective security arrangement, an aggressor against any one state is considered an aggressor against all other states, which act together to repel the aggressor (Britannica, 2008). One such example of collective security in international relations is the League of Nations. The League of Nations was created in 1948. According to Britannica (2008), “[The creation of the such a one body, the League of Nations, was an idea strongly favored by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson] as a means of preventing another destructive world conflict.” Additionally, this included “…league covenant, embodying the principles of collective security (joint action by League members against an aggressor), arbitration of international disputes, reduction of armaments, and open diplomacy, was formulated and subscribed to…” (Britannica, 2008). “The basic principle of the League was collective security, whereby its signatories were pledged both to seek peaceful solutions to disputes and to assist each other against aggression” (Britannica 2008). Further, “As such, it was novel and potentially far-reaching; it could have developed into a powerful instrument for peace. It did indeed settle a number of practical disputes [between a number of countries]” (Britannica 2008). The League of Nations is one example of collective security whereby wars were stopped, in places such as Finland, Sweden, and Albania, for example, solely due to the fact that there was an organization in place that prevented world conflicts. It is a credit to world leaders like Woodrow Wilson that such a collective security organization like the League of Nations was put into action. Otherwise, such countries may have sent the devastation that takes place when war occurs. The League of Nations is an example in international relations of an organization that was a body which dealt with collective security. It helped prevent wars before they started. Basically, under collective security, an aggressor against one state was seen as an aggressor against all other states which would act in unison against the aggressor. The type of language used in negotiating conflicts in the world is very tenuous. Competition can contribute significantly to the art of negotiation, as the idea that two parties are fighting against each other is a key concept. Collaboration is important in conflict negotiation because there is a high chance that if the problem persists, both parties will not be able to come to an agreement. This is highly problematic if the situation ensuing is not favorable to either party. Both sides must agree to some concession or compromise, and a good negotiator will be able to navigate nebulous situations in order to provide the two parties which are fighting to come to an agreement. These aspects are key to conflict resolution. 3. Consider third party intervention in conflict. Specifically, examine how mediation relates to the collaborative approach to conflict. The Cold War was the era that lasted between the mid-1940’s and the early 1990’s between the United States and the Soviet Union (USSR) and their respective allies. The Cold War period saw mainly the crises unfold of the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Cuban Missile Crisis—all of which ended up being mediated after the wars were over. The Korean War lasted between 1950 and 1953. There was a conflict between North and South Korea. Both Koreas were trying to unify under their respective governments. It did not work. Disputes arose regarding elections and the border at the 38th Parallel. The United States and the Soviet Union got involved. The Vietnam War was an entirely different story altogether. Due to an international incident at the Gulf of Tonkin, a resolution was passed in Congress (interestingly and aptly named “The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution”). This resolution gave the acting President Lyndon B. Johnson the carte blanche to go to war without express authorization from Congress. The Vietnam War lasted for 16 years, from 1959 to 1975. The United States intervened to keep the Communist North from taking over the South. The fall of Saigon in 1975 was seen as the end of the war, and the Americans finally left. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a showdown between the Soviet Union, Cuba, and the United States in 1962. This happened when the Soviet Union used Cuba as a site for building its missiles. The U.S. feared an attack from the USSR through Cuba, since it was close enough that an attack could be formed from Cuban soil. The Soviets and Cubans decided to remove its missiles; in return, U.S. would not invade Cuba. The Cold War saw three major crises. These crises included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the Cuban Missile Crisis—a part of international relations history. Third parties all had to intervene in some manner after these wars. The importance of a third party can never be underestimated. Third parties bring an outsider’s perspective to a conflict. This can be very valuable. Third parties can view a topic with an objective eye. This is needed in serious conflicts where both parties cannot come to an agreement. Hostage negotiators are very good at this. They can come in between law enforcement and the hostage-taker. The importance of a third party intervening cannot be underestimated. Especially in wars, there is a necessity for tribunals and bringing people to justice. Inevitably, third parties who negotiate deals are very valuable in and of themselves. They can bring closure to two parties who have a rift between them and cannot seem to come to a resolution. In closing, third parties can be very valuable in a situation which arises between two parties which cannot be mediated betwixt the two, whatever the conflict is. REFERENCES Britannica. (2008). Online Article. Available: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/125567/collective-security Gerzon, M. (2006). Leading through conflict: how successful leaders transform differences into opportunities. USA: Harvard Business. Hocker, J., et. al. (1985). Interpersonal conflict. USA: Wm. C. Brown. What is Conflict Resolution? (2009). Available: http://ow.ly/qTqi Why does Virginia Tech have a conflict resolution program? (2009). Available: http://ow.ly/qTfE Read More