Face-to-face with a madman

Abstract

What is it like to negotiate with a ‘madman’? What are the behavioural traits typical of him? How might being ‘mad’ enable him to take advantage of his counterpart? Conversely, what harm can it do to him? How might such negotiation style impact international politics? I advance four arguments, derived primarily from insights in microsociology and from a close study of Hitler, Khrushchev, Saddam, Gaddafi and Milošević. First, face-to-face interactions are sui generis as a channel of communication because interlocutors are subject to the imperatives of time (to act and react swiftly), space (on the spot) and competence. Second, the ‘madman’ is ‘mad’ because he exploits these imperatives to dominate others. He manipulates and even disrupts the ‘rhythm’ of an interaction, through constant and unexpected swings in mood, pace and level of courteousness. Third, contrary to the image of him in popular perception, the ‘mad’ leader is for the most part rather composed and clear-headed, if not calculating, even when expressing anger. Finally, being ‘mad’ can backfire in the long run. Whether it is advisable to be ‘mad’ from a utilitarian perspective may depend on how long a leader expects his tenure to last.