A more rational and relaxed tone

Great news out from the Bankok Post.  William Roth reports that Cambodian and Thai foreign ministers reached a decision to reduce troop levels near Preah Vihear temple.  The dispute of ownership of the temple was resolved in 1962 by the International Court of Justice, which issued a ruling that the temple belonged to Cambodia.  So the dispute between Cambodia and Thailand over troop levels, among other issues, has been going on for over forty years.

Mr. Roth's report indicates that these two countries have not agreed to a neutral to help them resolve these issues, but at the same time, Mr. Roth advocates for the use of a neutral.  The strengths that a neutral brings to international negotiations include:

• Propose ideas that the parties couldn't put forward on their own.
• Disaggregate issues to find a solution.
• Find solutions that respect the interests of the parties.  
• Changing reality from a zero-sum game to one that satisfies the interests of the parties.

It is amazing that the benefits of a neutral in international disputes are the same as in the inter-personal disputes so many conflict resolution specialists face daily.  Whether it is a set of fresh eyes or simply the ability to help the parties understand and develop creative solutions to reach each of their interests, the involvement of a neutral can be greatly beneficial to helping parties reach resolution.  Even after forty years.