CONCLUSION
Until ten or fifteen years ago, scholarly attempts to comprehend the nature and sources of human conflict in general, and the manner of its resolution in particular, were all too few in number and rather marginal in character.
This situation has changed considerably. International conflict and conflict management have become subjects for systematic analysis. Scholarly tracts and practitioners' reflections have helped to institutionalize the field and enhance the individual and collective capacity to manage conflicts. The risks, costs, and tragedies of conflicts in the later part of our century have finally forced us to search for better ways to resolve them. The traditional reliance on power or avoidance are as far from being optimal ways of dealing with conflict as they are outdated. Negotiation and mediation are at last beginning to emerge as the most appropriate responses to conflict in its myriad forms and to the challenge of building a more peaceful world. Negotiation and mediation do not just happen. They are social roles subject to many influences; and, like other roles, they can be learned and improved.The shared quest for learning the principles and practices of mediation can make sense only if it is conducted within some kind of an intellectual framework, one that can explain the logic and reasoning behind this method of conflict management, in which the mediator is neither directly part of a conflict nor totally removed from it. This chapter has sought to provide a way of thinking about mediation, its structure, its context and its consequences.
The approach taken here embodies my conviction that mediation is an aspect of the broader process of conflict management, in which all parties have interests and are prepared to expend resources to achieve these, and that mediation involves the intertwining of interests, resources, and positions in an attempt to influence outcomes. This relationship is critical for analyzing the dynamics of conflict and assessing the prospects of successful mediation.
I have tried to unravel many aspects of this relationship and point out their influence on mediation. I do not assume that my analysis is exhaustive, but I believe that the presentation here adequately integrates many findings that have a bearing on conflict resolution and provides answers to the basic question of mediation research, namely when one should mediate and how. To assume that all conflicts can be mediated really ignores the basic structure and logic of the supply and demand of mediation.The end of the Cold War and the emergence of an ever-increasing number of ethnic and internal conflicts provide many opportunities for a significant expansion in the use of mediation as an instrument of conflict resolution. The old techniques of power and deterrence seem increasingly less relevant to deal with the problems and conflicts confronting us until the end of the century and perhaps beyond. Mediation may well offer the most coherent and effective response to these issues. To ensure that it can also be successful, we need to develop a better understanding of the process and offer consistent guidelines to the many actors involved in mediation. This effort is still in its infancy, and many different fields and disciplines can contribute to its development. In this chapter, I have tried to take a few tentative steps in that direction. The challenge confronting us all is to recognize the diversity, strengths, and limitations of mediation, and then use its most effective range of tools where appropriate. Given the amount of destruction resulting from today's conflicts and tomorrow's potential crises, this is one challenge we cannot afford to ignore.