Abstract

The conflict resolution and negotiation is sparingly used in political dialogue or in foreign relations parlance and the usual term we hear is peace. It can be argued that conflict resolution and negotiation is the process that leads to peace. Politicians who slogan the terms, “peace talks” project the assumed outcome from the discussion which is fine when you are dealing with social issues but what about the situations where one side or other doesn’t want peace or are not willing to push toward the goal of peace in the conflict? In those cases conflict resolution and negotiation might be the two best all-encompassing phrases to use to explain the process of communication between the parties involved. It is clear that, unless both sides are focusing on the same goal, whether it is peace, a ceasefire, drawing borders, armed conflict, release of prisoners, unfair justice, a division of resources, etc., they must both be on the same page or at least move away from the deal feeling they got something out of it. If one or both parties feel they got a raw deal then it is almost inevitable that both parties may end up back at the bargaining table discussing that same issue as the conflict was not resolved to each party’s satisfaction.

Key words: Conflict, negotiation, resolution