Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Rumi Roy
Assistant Professor
Article 33(1) leaves it to the parties concerned, “to seek a solution by negotiation, mediation,
conciliation, arbitration judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other
peaceful means of their choice.
The methods and techniques of amicable settlement of disputes specified in the Charter are:
1. Negotiation: It is the most common and the simplest method of pacific settlement of
international disputes and differences. Henry Kissinger defined negotiation as, “a process
of combining conflicting positions into a common position, under a decision rule of
unanimity.” Negotiation is the process by which governments conduct their relations with
one another and discuss, adjust and settle their differences and conflicts. It is a process in
which explicit proposals are put forward fort the purpose of reaching agreements. Usually
the negotiations are carried through oral, face to face, or written communications by the
heads of the State or their accredited agents and ambassadors. It involves direct
discussion between the parties to the dispute with the objective of reaching an agreement.
No outside party is involved in the process. Sometime an international conference may be
called for this purpose where some agreement might be reached. Negotiation requires
willingness to compromise and both sides must make concessions. Two elements that
need to be present in order for a negotiation to happen: common interest, and conflict
over that interest. Negotiation is a process that can be approached in many ways. No
matter what strategy you choose, success lies in how well you prepared. The key to
negotiating a beneficial outcome is the negotiators’ ability to consider all the elements of
the situation carefully and to identify and think through the options. At the same time,
negotiators must be able to keep events in perspective and be as fair and honest as
circumstance allows. Because a common ground or interest has brought the parties to the
negotiating table, a negotiator can benefit by trying to capitalize on this common ground.
By looking at the other side as a partner rather than an opponent and by working together,
negotiators have an opportunity to craft a solution that will be beneficial to both sides.
Indo-Pak negotiation at Shimla 1972 is an outstanding example of this method. The most
successful mediation happened in the Indus water dispute between India and Pakistan.
The World Bank extended its good offices to reach a settlement in 1960. According to the
treaty signed by both the countries, Pakistan got three western rivers the Jhelum, the
Chenab, and the Indus-and India received three eastern rivers- the Ravi, the Beas and the
Sutlej. The equal sharing of rivers made the task of resolving the dispute very simple.
Importantly, the treaty set up a permanent Indus Commission with a Commissioner each
for India and Pakistan. The Commission meets regularly and exchange visits to both the
countries, even during the time of tension and difficulties in India-Pakistan relations.
2. Mediation: According to Hans von Mangoldt, “mediation can be seen as the assistance
provided by a state or international organization, which exercises its political authority a
third party to the dispute in proposing a solution. Mediation can be set in motion by one
of the Parties or even by the mediator him or herself. The latter case seems to be the most
frequent.” Under mediation the third party either at its own initiative or at the request of
the disputant parties assumes responsibility for the settlement of dispute. The mediator
assumes the role of a middleman and tries to reconcile the opposite claims of parties in
disputes. Mediation is a procedure involving the suggestion of terms of settlement by a
third party. Thus the mediator actively participates in the negotiations. However, the
suggestions made by the mediator are not binding on the parties. The mediation process
can be characterized as follows:
a) a non-compulsory procedure in which
b) an impartial or neutral party is invited or accepted by
c) parties to a dispute to help them
d) identify issues of mutual concern and
e) design solutions to these issues
f) which are acceptable to the parties
To maintain his neutrality an effective mediator may not impose his will upon the parties.
Mediators must play a much more active and intrusive role. They must attempt to identify the
Parties’ underlying interests as well as their positions. To do so, they may not only meet with the
Parties jointly but also separately at confidential meetings. This type of proactive mediator
involvement has contributed greatly to the success of some mediation. Mediators have all the
leeway they need to issue a report that may—on occasion—take the law into account. However,
mediators will most often propose a settlement that also takes into account other factors. Such
proposals are not binding: the Parties are not obliged to implement it. Which is why, as
mentioned above, the mediator’s intrinsic qualities are so important. In 1998 the US acted as a
mediator between Britain, Republic of Ireland, and North Ireland to resolve the ticklish Irish
problem.