Suchergebnisse

The discipline of crisis negotiation has been hailed as one of the most effective and successful tools used by law enforcement today. Despite its documented success, some law enforcement agencies remain ill prepared to adequately respond to a hostage/crisis situation. In most cases, this lack of preparedness can best be attributed to an agency's failure to implement a crisis negotiation component to respond in conjunction with a tactical intervention during a hostage/crisis situation. Complex factors such as the rising number of individuals effected by mental illness and the ease with which law enforcement agencies may obtain tactical equipment through government surplus programs have intensified the need for the development of crisis negotiation teams in agencies of all sizes. Although some agencies may be unable to budget for independent negotiation teams, or may not be staffed adequately enough to create a negotiations team, it is imperative that all agencies pre-plan in order to respond to such an incident. Low cost training and equipment grant options are available for agencies struggling with budgetary constraints, and task force or direct assistance options are available for agencies struggling with staffing shortages. Regardless of the issue, law enforcement agencies capable of employing any type of tactical response in a crisis situation should implement a crisis negotiation component in order to decrease liability and ensure the safest possible outcome for all parties involved.

I present in this paper the Punjab crisis until operation Blue Star as a case study of failed ne-gotiations and analyze it using the tools provided by negotiation theory. According to its main authors, (Fisher, Ury, Patton, Cohen and Pfetsch) everything is negotiable if negotiations are properly led. Why did the Central Government of Indira Gandhi fail to come to an agreement with the Akali Dal Party? The theoretical analysis of the negotiation process shows that negotiations were not conducted properly. If it had been the case however, would an agreement truly have been reached? I argue that all Akali demands could have been handled if the requirements of the model of "principled negotiations" had been fulfilled, and if the parties had followed Cohen's recommendations on cross-cultural negotiations to improve their mutual understanding. The negotiations failed be-cause they were polluted by electoral politics and by the consideration of party interests, resulting in the communalization of the Punjab-Sikh issue. Studying the Punjab case allows however to point out certain limitations of negotiation theory, mainly the static nature of its assumptions and its inability to deal with the problem of negotiating in a context of violence, which leads me to the conclusion that negotiation theory should be further developed in a more multidisciplinary perspective to overcome its defects. More generally, it appears that India provides western theories with interesting cases to test their hypotheses, and I suggest to explore this field.

I present in this paper the Punjab crisis until operation Blue Star as a case study of failed ne-gotiations and analyze it using the tools provided by negotiation theory. According to its main authors, (Fisher, Ury, Patton, Cohen and Pfetsch) everything is negotiable if negotiations are properly led. Why did the Central Government of Indira Gandhi fail to come to an agreement with the Akali Dal Party? The theoretical analysis of the negotiation process shows that negotiations were not conducted properly. If it had been the case however, would an agreement truly have been reached? I argue that all Akali demands could have been handled if the requirements of the model of "principled negotiations" had been fulfilled, and if the parties had followed Cohen's recommendations on cross-cultural negotiations to improve their mutual understanding. The negotiations failed be-cause they were polluted by electoral politics and by the consideration of party interests, resulting in the communalization of the Punjab-Sikh issue. Studying the Punjab case allows however to point out certain limitations of negotiation theory, mainly the static nature of its assumptions and its inability to deal with the problem of negotiating in a context of violence, which leads me to the conclusion that negotiation theory should be further developed in a more multidisciplinary perspective to overcome its defects. More generally, it appears that India provides western theories with interesting cases to test their hypotheses, and I suggest to explore this field.

How does forced migration feature in EU member states' foreign policy and how does it affect their bargaining strategies? While the literature highlights EU-level policies aiming to manage forced migration flows, we examine how Greece sought to leverage its response to the 2015–16 European migrant crisis. We propose a theoretical framework that explains why the SYRIZA–ANEL government sought to leverage Greece's position as a refugee-host state via an issue-linkage strategy tying the management of forced migration to economic aid over the Third Economic Adjustment Programme. Initially employing a 'blackmailing' strategy focused on threats, Greece shifted to a 'backscratching' strategy of co-operation after March 2016, once its geopolitical importance and numbers of asylum seekers within its territory were reduced. We provide the first detailed analysis of Greece's foreign policy response to the European migrant crisis, demonstrating the importance of forced displacement in the international politics of EU member states.

This paper seeks to address the question, "How do women negotiate international crisis and what are their outcomes?" To do this, I derive hypothesis from both the realist and feminist theories to test in three case studies of prominent women leaders in the 20th-21st centuries. I analyze qualitative case studies on Margaret Thatcher, Dilma Rousseff, and Angela Merkel, in which I test variation in negotiation style affecting outcomes. In addition to assessing their early influences and overall negotiating styles, I look at the specific cases of The Falkland Islands Crisis, the NSA Surveillance Crisis, and the Ukraine Crisis negotiations. I find that Merkel and Rousseff embraced collaborative approaches, while Thatcher consistently used a confrontational approach. I also find that collaborative approaches tend to result in better outcomes for all parties, while a confrontational approach creates winners and losers. Overall, this offers more support for feminist theory than realist theory.

There is a crisis in multilateralism. This paper examines multilateralism by looking at the two most important current efforts to devise new multilateral rules binding all nations; the negotiations in the World Trade Organization (WTO) of trade rules and the negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to devise rules restricting the annual emissions of greenhouse gases. Both negotiations have failed after several years of intensive effort. There are remarkable parallels in these negotiations. Both have used the same approach to negotiations; consensus decision-taking, a bottom-up approach and differential treatment of developing countries, and complex modalities. These features have made the negotiations tortuous. Major changes in international relations have made agreement impossible to date: large global market imbalances and changes in geopolitical balances have produced a general distrust among major parties and an absence of leadership. What is needed most of all is a common or shared vision of the gains from binding multilateral rules for the world economy.

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd This article investigates uses of accounting in labour-management negotiations during the automotive industry restructuring of 2008 and 2009 in Canada. Following a series of negotiations that occurred between a large North American automobile manufacturer, a major Canadian automotive union and the Canadian government, we document how different stakeholder groups framed the emerging crisis and drew upon accounting in order to further their interests. Drawing on research in industrial relations, we outline two key modes of accounting in labour-management negotiations: (1) fostering, where accounting is used in an integrative manner to secure mutual gains; and (2) forcing, where accounting is drawn upon primarily to secure concessions from other parties. The case study highlights the way that forcing modes of accounting displaced more fostering modes as the crisis intensified, focusing attention on labour cost per hour and ultimately resulting in worker acceptance of pay restraint, more flexible work practices and a change in the wage structure of the labour force. The paper contributes to understanding the role of accounting in labour-management negotiations and how this role can be implicated in shaping the construction and contestation of organizational crises.

This Christmas we commemorate the thirtieth anniversary of the Beagle Channel crisis. This contributíon reconstructs this piece of history, from its beginning in 1977 to the menace of war, the Vatican mediation and finally the ratification of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship by Argentina in 1984. Dismissing simplistic analogies with the Falklands war, the reduction of the crisis to a populist manoeuvre of the Argentine Military Junta is refuted and the hypothesis of a bluff called by Chile with the support of the Vatican is proposed. The treaty is approached intertwining the mediation's dynamics with the broader context of the Argentine transition and the economic conjuncture. This reconstruction is based on puhlished material as well as on hitherto unpublished interviews. ; En esta Navidad, se cumplen treinta años de la crisis del Canal de Beagle. La presente contribución reconstruye esta historia, desde sus comienzos en 1977 a la amenaza de guerra, la mediación vaticana y fundamentalmente la ratificación por Argentina del Tratado de Paz y Amistad, en 1984. Rechazando fáciles analogías con la guerra de las Malvinas, se refuta la reducción de la crisis a una maniobra populista de la Junta Militar argentina, proponiendo la hipótesis de un bluff llamado por Chile con el concurso del Vaticano. Llegamos al tratado enlazando las dinámicas propias de la mediación con el contexto más amplio de la transición argentina y de la coyuntura económica. Esta reconstrucción se funda tanto en material publicado como en entrevistas inéditas.

The so-called refugee crisis presents a field of discursive struggle over meanings in politics. In Austria, mediatized politics in 2015 and 2016 was dominated by metadiscursive negotiation of terminology related to building a border fence and setting a maximum limit on refugees. Both issues raised serious ideological and legal concerns and were thus largely euphemized; as responses to ever-increasing pressure from the political right, however, they were also intended as signals to voters. This article presents a discourse-historical study of the normalization of restrictive policies in the theoretical framework of border and body politics, otherness, and mediatization.

El objetivo del documento es analizar la crisis que enfrenta la Organización Mundial del Comercio (OMC) para ser un foro para las negociaciones entre sus miembros. La hipótesis es que, en el contexto de una "crisis de la globalización", se presenta un trilema en la función negociadora de la OMC. En este trilema, tres vértices, cada uno de los cuales designa una característica del proceso de negociación, no se pueden articular al mismo tiempo sino en pares, dando lugar a tres escenarios: bloqueo de las negociaciones, acuerdos light y acuerdos plurilaterales. El artículo sigue un diseño metodológico cualitativo. Se basa en una amplia revisión bibliográfica y en el análisis documental. La figura del trilema, como una forma de abordar la crisis de la OMC, permitecomprender que esta es un fenómeno intrínseco a la configuración actual del orden internacional. Además, las conclusiones apuntan al hecho de que las reformas institucionales pueden resultar un abordaje insuficiente del problema, ya que la superación de esta situación requiere de decisionespolíticas. ; The aim of the paper is to analyse the crisis that the World Trade Organization faces for being a forum for the negotiations among its members. The hypothesis is that in the context of a "globalization backlash", a trilemma is presented in the negotiating function of the WTO. In this trilemma, the three vertices, each of which designate a feature of the negotiation process, cannot be articulated at the same time, but in pairs, in three scenarios: blockade of the negotiations, light agreements, and plurilaterals. The paper follows a qualitative methodological design. It is based on a large literature review and documental analysis. The figure of the trilemma, as a way of to tackle the WTO's crisis helps to realize that it is a phenomenon that is intrinsic to the current configuration of the international order. In addition, conclusions point to the fact that institutional reforms may result in an incomplete approach to the problem, since the overcoming of this situation needs of politicaldecisions.

The aim of the paper is to analyse the crisis that the World Trade Organization faces for being a forum for the negotiations among its members. The hypothesis is that in the context of a "globalization backlash", a trilemma is presented in the negotiating function of the WTO. In this trilemma, the three vertices, each of which designate a feature of the negotiation process, cannot be articulated at the same time, but in pairs, in three scenarios: blockade of the negotiations, light agreements, and plurilaterals. The paper follows a qualitative methodological design. It is based on a large literature review and documental analysis. The figure of the trilemma, as a way of to tackle the WTO's crisis helps to realize that it is a phenomenon that is intrinsic to the current configuration of the international order. In addition, conclusions point to the fact that institutional reforms may result in an incomplete approach to the problem, since the overcoming of this situation needs of politicaldecisions. ; El objetivo del documento es analizar la crisis que enfrenta la Organización Mundial del Comercio (OMC) para ser un foro para las negociaciones entre sus miembros. La hipótesis es que, en el contexto de una "crisis de la globalización", se presenta un trilema en la función negociadora de la OMC. En este trilema, tres vértices, cada uno de los cuales designa una característica del proceso de negociación, no se pueden articular al mismo tiempo sino en pares, dando lugar a tres escenarios: bloqueo de las negociaciones, acuerdos light y acuerdos plurilaterales. El artículo sigue un diseño metodológico cualitativo. Se basa en una amplia revisión bibliográfica y en el análisis documental. La figura del trilema, como una forma de abordar la crisis de la OMC, permitecomprender que esta es un fenómeno intrínseco a la configuración actual del orden internacional. Además, las conclusiones apuntan al hecho de que las reformas institucionales pueden resultar un abordaje insuficiente del problema, ya que la superación de esta situación requiere de decisionespolíticas.

The aim of the paper is to analyse the crisis that the World Trade Organization faces for being a forum for the negotiations among its members. The hypothesis is that in the context of a "globalization backlash", a trilemma is presented in the negotiating function of the WTO. In this trilemma, the three vertices, each of which designate a feature of the negotiation process, cannot be articulated at the same time, but in pairs, in three scenarios: blockade of the negotiations, light agreements, and plurilaterals. The paper follows a qualitative methodological design. It is based on a large literature review and documental analysis. The figure of the trilemma, as a way of to tackle the WTO's crisis helps to realize that it is a phenomenon that is intrinsic to the current configuration of the international order. In addition, conclusions point to the fact that institutional reforms may result in an incomplete approach to the problem, since the overcoming of this situation needs of politicaldecisions. ; El objetivo del documento es analizar la crisis que enfrenta la Organización Mundial del Comercio (OMC) para ser un foro para las negociaciones entre sus miembros. La hipótesis es que, en el contexto de una "crisis de la globalización", se presenta un trilema en la función negociadora de la OMC. En este trilema, tres vértices, cada uno de los cuales designa una característica del proceso de negociación, no se pueden articular al mismo tiempo sino en pares, dando lugar a tres escenarios: bloqueo de las negociaciones, acuerdos light y acuerdos plurilaterales. El artículo sigue un diseño metodológico cualitativo. Se basa en una amplia revisión bibliográfica y en el análisis documental. La figura del trilema, como una forma de abordar la crisis de la OMC, permitecomprender que esta es un fenómeno intrínseco a la configuración actual del orden internacional. Además, las conclusiones apuntan al hecho de que las reformas institucionales pueden resultar un abordaje insuficiente del problema, ya que la superación de esta situación requiere de decisionespolíticas.

Questions of justice are often at the heart of international negotiations. While previous research has established a link between justice and the effectiveness of negotiations, the mechanisms behind justice behaviour in international negotiations remain understudied. Against this background, this paper will investigate the question: What factors determine which justice principle negotiators invoke or agree to in international environmental negotiations? In order to answer this question this study will apply a controlled comparison applying the congruence method to five pairs of cases, covering a broad range of environmental negotiations. Within each pair, one factor theorized to play an important role in shaping justice behaviour in environmental negotiations will be analysed. The factors are 1) setting of the negotiations, 2) power balance between the parties, 3) scientific (un)certainty, 4) domestic constituencies, and 5) common crisis experience. The findings are expected to discern factors determining which justice principles negotiators invoke and under what conditions agreement on justice notions is promoted. Better understanding of what motivates negotiators' choices of justice principles and their mutual acceptance can help to strengthen the link between justice and effectiveness of negotiations. In this way, the paper's findings will be of relevance from both a research and policy perspective.

The small nation-state of Singapore has increasingly been referred to in the popular media as the Intelligent Island of the future. With significant state investment in the promotion and dissemination of information-communications technology and attendant social ramifications, this has become an area that can no longer be ignored or taken for granted. This article intends to map the conditions of possibility on which Singapore can be conceived of as an Intelligent Island, in situating the role of information technology and Intelligent Island discourse within the discourses of postcoloniality, technocapitalism, late modernity, and globalization. In particular, this article attempts to show how, in Intelligent Island discourse, the processes of the construction of a Singaporean nation are intricately linked to the shift in political discourse from mobilizing a rhetoric of crisis to one of utopianism.

In response to the recent financial crisis, European policymakers put banking regulation in the Eurozone on top of the agenda. In 2016, as part of the newly created European banking union, a mechanism for resolving troubled banks, the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM), became fully operational for the 19 member states of the euro area. The SRM was established to avoid future involvement of tax payers' money in the resolution of banks. This paper focuses on the negotiations on one of its instruments, the Single Resolution Fund (SRF), a fund of ex-ante contributions of Eurozone banks set up to winding down unviable banks. The SRF proved to be a main conflict issue during the negotiations. Germany and France were pushing for diverging preferences although both countries' banking sectors suffered from the crisis and both governments generally favored a regulatory approach on the European level. I provide an institutionalist explanation for these opposing positions of the two most important Eurozone countries. By drawing on the "Varieties of Capitalism" literature, I explain how the distinct features of these countries' financial and banking systems accounted for their preferences. On the one side, German negotiators sought to preserve the dominant way of bank-based corporate finance by particularly protecting savings and cooperative banks. On the other, the French government was in favor of higher contributions by the banking sector because market-based corporate finance is more prevalent in France. Nevertheless, France aimed at keeping its 'national champions' out as far as possible. This paper has important implications for how to think about preference formation in European financial regulation.