МИРНЫЕ СРЕДСТВА РАЗРЕШЕНИЯ МЕЖДУНАРОДНЫХ СПОРОВ

Мирные средства разрешения международных споров - средства, применяемые субъектами международного права в целях урегулирования международных споров в соответствии с принципом мир­ного решения международных споров. В ст. 33 Устава ООН в качестве таких средств названы переговоры, обследование, посредничество, примирение, арбитраж, судебное разбирательство, обращение к региональным органам или соглашениям. Этот перечень не является исчерпывающим: международному праву известны и др. средства - добрые услуги, консультации, комиссии по разрешению споров. Кроме того, в соответствии с Уставом ООН разрешением международных разногласий могут заниматься Генеральная Ассамблея ООН и Совет Безопасности ООН

Указанная система средств сложилась в ходе длительной международной практики и продолжает развиваться. Переговоры, арбитраж относятся к наиболее ранним средствам, тогда как судебное разбирательство, использование международных организаций стали применяться сравнительно недавно - с XIX - XX вв. В последние десятилетия широкое признание получили консультации, представляющие собой одно из эффективных средств разрешения споров.

В соответствии с принципом мирного разрешения споров, относящимся в современном международном праве к основополагающим, спорящие стороны обязаны урегулировать свои разногласия; исключительно мирным путем с помощью перечисленных выше или каких-либо иных средств по их собственному выбору. Принцип свободы выбора этих средств закреплен в ст. 33 Устава ООН и означает, что использование: того или иного средства должно происходить по взаимному согласию и на основе свободного волеизъявления сторон. Такое согласие на обращение к какому-либо определенному средству, как правило, фиксируется в договорном порядке. Имеющийся в международном праве большой арсенал средств мирного раз­решения споров обеспечивает выбор наиболее приемлемого из них для каждого конкретного спора в зависимости от его условий и затронутых в нем вопросов.

ф 22. Sum up the information from the unit. Pick out a problem you consider important. Make a 5-8 minute report on your problem for public speaking. Be ready to discuss the problems of peaceful means for resolving international disputes with your group-mates.

 

NEGOTIATIONS

Starting-Up

Negotiation is a dialogue intended to resolve disputes, to produce an agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective advantage, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is the primary method of alternative dispute resolution.

Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit organisations, government branches, legal proceedings, among nations and in personal situations such as marriage, divorce, parenting, and everyday life.

 

Vocabulary Focus

The study of the subject is called negotiation theory.

Those who work in negotiation professionally are called

negotiators.

Professional negotiators are often specialized, such as union negotiators, leverage buyout negotiators, peace negotiators, hostage negotiators, or may work under other titles, such as diplomats, legislators or brokers.

Negotiation typically manifests itself with a trained negotiator acting on behalf of a particular organisation or position.

It can be compared to mediation where a disinterested third party listens to each side's arguments and attempts to help craft an agreement between the parties.

It is also related to arbitration which, as with a legal proceeding, both sides make an argument as to the merits of their " case" and then the arbitrator decides the outcome for both parties.

Cherry picking is used primarily in purchasing negotiations, although the principles are applicable to many other situations. In essence, the purchaser pursuing a cherry picking strategy examines the proposals of several potential vendors, picks out the best components from each proposal, and then tries to negotiate based upon their " ideal" proposal.

Salami sausages are big things (often spicy) that are eaten a slice at a time, they would be indigestible if taken in a single large piece. This aspect has led negotiators to use the name salamy tactics for a negotiating technique that tries to do just that: to win concessions in small doses (slices) when the other party would probably reject them if they were put on the table all at once. It is often used on a party that is mainly concerned with damage limitation.

Study the terms given above and explain their meanings in Russian.

 

1 APPROACHES TO NEGOTIATION

Pre-reading

A Before reading the text make sure you know the meanings of the following words:

mutual gains approach win-lose approach win-win approach zero-sum game

precondition substance bargain context

benefit agenda option

B Complete the following sentences with the appropriate word from the list above:

There are certain issues on the    of negotiations.

If one person's gain results in another person's loss, such a negotiation is called    approach.

A trade or is possible that is beneficial to both

parties.

When both parties benefit, such a negotiation is therefore not  game.

If a decision is reached that benefits both parties, it is     approach.

Skilled negotiators set to deceptive approaches.

Reading

Read the text and remember the basic elements of negotiation.

Approaches to Negotiation

Negotiation involves three basic elements: process, behavior and substance. The process refers to how the parties negotiate: the context of the negotiations, the parties to the negotiations, the tactics used by the parties, and the sequence and stages in which all of these play out. Behavior refers to the relationships among these parties, the communication between them and the styles they adopt. The substance refers to what the parties negotiate over: the agenda, the issues (positions and interests), the options, and the agreement(s) reached at the end.

Skilled negotiators may use a variety of tactics ranging from negotiation hypnosis, to a straightforward presentation of demands or setting of preconditions to more deceptive approaches such as cherry picking. Intimidation and salami tactics may also play a part in swaying the outcome of negotiations.

In the advocacy approach, a skilled negotiator usually serves as advocate for one party to the negotiation and attempts to obtain the most favorable outcomes possible for that party. In this process the negotiator attempts to determine the minimum outcome(s) the other party is (or parties are) willing to accept, then adjusts their demands accordingly. A " successful" negotiation in the advocacy

approach is when the negotiator is able to obtain all or most of the outcomes their party desires, but without driving the other party to permanently break off negotiations, unless the best alternative to a negotiated agreement (BATNA) is acceptable.

Traditional negotiating is sometimes called win-lose because of the assumption of a fixed " pie", that one person's gain results in another person's loss. This is only true, however, if only a single issue needs to be resolved, such as a price in a simple sales negotiation. If multiple issues are discussed, differences in the parties' preferences make win-win negotiation possible. For example, in a labor negotiation, the union might prefer job security over wage gains. If the employers have opposite preferences, a trade is possible that is beneficial to both parties. Such a negotiation is therefore not a zero-sum game.

During the early part of the twentieth century, academics such as Mary Parker Follett developed ideas suggesting that agreement often can be reached if parties look not at their stated positions but rather at their underlying interests and requirements to reach a decision that benefits both parties. In the 1970s, practitioners and researchers began to develop win-win approaches to negotiation. Win-win is taken from Economic Game Theory, and has been adopted by North American academics to loosely mean Principled Negotiation. " Getting to YES" was published by Roger Fisher and William Ury as part of the Harvard negotiation project, sometimes called mutual gains bargaining. The mutual gains approach has been applied in environmental situations.

 

Post-Reading

A Give the Russian equivalents for the following word-combinations:

the context of the negotiations; the parties to the negotiations; the tactics used; the adopted styles; to negotiate over the agenda; the options reached at the end.

B Read the first paragraph of the text again and explain what the following concepts of negotiation mean:

1) process; 2) behaviour; 3) substance.

C Translate the text into Russian in the written form.

D Answer the following questions:

Which tactics do skilled negotiators use to reach the best outcome?

What are the tactics the negotiators use in the advocacy approach?

Why can traditional negotiating tactics be called win-lose?

In which cases is traditional negotiating tactics applied?

Does mutual gains bargaining mean the same as win-win negotiating practice?

E Make a resume of the text.

 

2 DIPLOMATIC STRATEGY

Pre-reading

A Before reading the text make sure you know the meanings of

the following words:

withdraw a diplomat on the merit of prosecute

a breach of honour   act reasonably persecute

split the difference    force to agree  immunity

persona non grata    the gain from  incentive

reach agreements compromise    appeal to

recall a diplomat make a deal hostility

commit a crime hard power sanctity

make a demand soft power violate

B Answer the following questions:

Has real world diplomacy traditionally been influenced by hard or soft power?

Why is it difficult to reach agreements?

Can anything be gained from splitting the difference and compromising?

Can a diplomat violate rules of the host country if he is granted immunity?

What does the government do if their diplomat is declared persona non grata?

Reading

Read the text and then do the tasks that follow.

Real world diplomatic negotiations are very different from intellectual debates in a university where an issue is decided on the merit of the arguments and negotiators make a deal by splitting the difference. Though diplomatic agreements can sometimes be reached among liberal democratic nations by appealing to higher principles, most real world diplomacy has traditionally been heavily influenced by hard power.

The interaction of strength and diplomacy can be illustrated by a comparison to labour negotiations. If a labor union is not willing to strike, then the union is not going anywhere because management has absolutely no incentive to agree to union demands. On the other hand, if management is not willing to take a strike, then the company will be walked all over by the labour union, and management will be forced to agree to any demand the union makes. The same concept applies to diplomatic negotiations.

There are also incentives in diplomacy to act reasonably, especially if the support of other actors is needed. The gain from winning one negotiation can be much less than the increased hostility from other parts. This is also called soft power.

Many situations in modern diplomacy are also rules based. When for instance two WTO countries have trade dispute, it is in the interest of both to limit the spread of damage to other areas by following some agreed-upon rules.

The sanctity of diplomats has long been observed. This sanctity has come to be known as diplomatic immunity. While there have been a number of cases where diplomats have been killed, this is normally viewed as a great breach of honour. Genghis Khan and the Mongols were well known for strongly insisting on the rights of diplomats, and they would often punish any state that violated these rights.

Diplomatic rights were established in the mid-seventeenth century in Europe and have spread throughout the world. These rights were formalized by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which protects diplomats from being

persecuted or prosecuted while on a diplomatic mission. If a diplomat does commit a serious crime while in a host country he may be declared as persona non grata (unwanted person). Such diplomats are then often tried for the crime in their homeland.

In times of hostility, diplomats are often withdrawn for reasons of personal safety, as well as in some cases when the host country is friendly but there is a perceived threat from internal dissidents. Ambassadors and other diplomats are sometimes recalled temporarily by their home countries as a way to express displeasure with the host country. In both cases, lower-level employees still remain to actually do the business of diplomacy.

Post-Reading

A   Say if the statements below are true or false. Correct the ones which are false.

Real world diplomatic negotiations are the same as intellectual debates in a university.

There are incentives in diplomacy to act reasonably, especially if the support of other actors is needed.

The gain from winning a negotiation can be much more than any other matter.

If two WTO countries have trade dispute, it is in the interest of both to win it.

When diplomats have been killed, this is normally viewed as a great breach of honour.

Diplomatic rights were formalized by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

Diplomatic rights do not protect diplomats from being persecuted or prosecuted while on a diplomatic mission.

If a diplomat does commit a serious crime while in a host country he may be declared as persona non grata (unwanted person).

Diplomats are never withdrawn for reasons of personal safety.

Ambassadors and other diplomats are sometimes recalled temporarily by their home countries as a way to express gratitude to the host country.

 

⇐ Предыдущая12345

Поделиться: