Article Summary of "Mediation as a World Role for the United States" by Amatai Etzioni
Citation: Amatai Etzioni, "Mediation as a World Role for the United States," in The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence, ed. Eugene Weiner, (New York: Continuum Publishing, 1998), pp. 249-262.
This Article Summary written by: Conflict Research Consortium Staff
Etzioni examines the United States' potential to mediate international
conflicts in the post-Cold war era. He begins by noting that the U.S. has
already served as mediator in a number of cases. Generally, in these cases the
conflicting parties were receptive to third party intervention, and voluntarily
complied with the terms of the mediated agreement. In some cases the U.S.
offered economic incentives to encourage agreement.
There are a number of advantages to the U.S. in adopting the role of
mediator. Mediation of conflicts generally reduces tensions and encourages
stability, which in turn encourages trade and ultimately peace. U.S. mediation
is usually requested when the conflicting parties are tired of their conflict,
and so ripe for a resolution. Successful mediation garners positive world
opinion, while failure has minimal costs. The U.S. generally gains some goodwill
for having made even a failed attempt to mediate a conflict.
Unfortunately, the U.S. has allowed its old-style foreign policy activities
to overshadow its mediation successes. Etzioni summarizes a number of successful
post Cold-War mediation attempts.
Although it entered late, the United States played a key role in mediating
the conflict between Israel and the PLO. The issues at hand included the status
of Jerusalem, the political status of Palestinians living in east Jerusalem, the
meaning of autonomy, and border security. American mediators help the parties
find ways to move forward while deferring decisions on sharply contended issues.
Etzioni concludes that the U.S. played a key role in keeping the talks
going.
Again, by postponing decisions on some issues the U.S. was able to keep the
talks between Israel and Jordan moving forward. In this case the U.S. also
established a trilateral economic committee, involving Israel, Jordan and the
U.S., which created a forum for more informal, flexible negotiations.
Israel and Syria both wanted peace and Syria in particular wanted better
relations with the U.S. Thus the U.S. was a natural choice to mediate the
Israeli-Syrian peace talks. The U.S. proposed to structure the negotiations in
terms of times and phases. Both parties could agree on the goals (troop
withdrawal, normalization, security assurances) and negotiations could proceed
over the schedule for implementing those goals.
The U.S. facilitated withdrawal of Russian troops from Estonia. Secretary
Christopher visited both sides, pressing the Russians to withdraw and the
Estonians to extend citizenship to resident ethnic Russians. President Clinton
hand delivered Estonia's request for a meeting with the Russian leadership. And
the U.S. Senate made further aid to Russia contingent upon full troop
withdrawal.
The U.S. also assisted in securing the transfer of nuclear missiles to Russia
from the former Soviet territory of Ukraine. Ukraine had concerns over security,
territorial integrity and compensation for giving up their nuclear arms. After a
series of annulled or broken agreements brokered by the U.S., Ukraine finally
ratified the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, signed on to the Lisbon protocol,
and began transferring their nuclear arms to Russia.
In Northern Ireland, Etzioni notes that "U.S. willingness to vouch for the
sincerity of the British offer provided the crucial weight that persuaded the
IRA to adopt a unilateral cease-fire."(p. 256) The U.S. also began a limited
disengagement from the U.K. to better position itself as a neutral mediator. The
U.S. was able to draw on its strong trust relationship with the U.K., such that
this distancing was not perceived as threatening by the U.K. (The U.S. had
pursued a similar tact with Israel, relying on a similarly strong trust.)
When Greece refused to recognize the newly independent Macedonia, the United
States stepped in to mediate the conflict. Greece was concerned that Macedonia
was looking to acquiring the Greek territory of the same name. The new
Macedonian flag incorporated Greek symbols, and the new constitution guaranteed
protections for Macedonians everywhere. The U.S. has backed Macedonian attempts
to reassure Greece, and has itself formally recognized Macedonia. Establishing
international recognition of Macedonia as an independent state may help limit
the spread of the Yugoslavian conflict, and so Etzioni notes that this is also a
case of preventative mediation.
In North Korea mediation was one element in the United States' foreign policy
activities. At issue was North Korea's failure to comply with inspections of its
nuclear facilities. The U.S. threatened to levy economic sanctions. At the same
time former President Carter's mediation reduced tensions, and the U.S.
disengaged itself somewhat from South Korea, leading to more openness and
allowing negotiations to proceed.
Etzioni identifies two challenges which must be faced if the U.S. is to
increase its mediation activities. First, it must consider the relationship
between mediation and other foreign policy tools. Mediation alone is not
sufficient to achieve American foreign policy objectives. However, as a tool
mediation should be given greater prominence, and other foreign policy
activities should be used to enhance mediation efforts. Second, The U.S. must
consider the relationship between mediation and basic justice. Mediated
agreements are usually less costly and painful, but may not be entirely just.
Etzioni suggests this trade-off may be acceptable when the costs are limited to
matters of face, or prestige.
U.S. practice of mediation was limited during the Cold War era. Most U.S.
mediation efforts were actually either negotiations with the USSR over client
nations, or secondary to the larger goal of containing communism. Mediation is
particularly appropriate o the post-Cold War era however. Mediation's low cost
and lower profile is less likely to distract the government from domestic
issues. There is little domestic support for an activist foreign policy. At the
same time the American public's compassion for the suffering of other nations
calls for some international involvement.
Etzioni concludes that effective U.S. foreign policy in the post-Cold War
world should emphasize mediation. The U.S. should participate in international
bodies, such as the UN, which strengthen international law. It must be willing
to use force in defense of U.S. citizens. And it must assist nations toward
democratization, but with much more sobriety and humility than it has shown in
the past.
|