Abstract
AbstractNeutral states have traditionally been seen as particularly well suited to function as international mediators. This assessment was based on the fact that both concepts – neutrality and mediation – have their roots in attempts to contain violent conflicts and thereby combine realist and idealistic dimensions of international relations. While due to these normative commonalities, the increased influence of norms in mediation might be deemed to favour the role of neutral states as mediators, a more nuanced analysis reveals a mixed impact: The new norms made mediation enter into policy fields to which neutrality does not apply. But they also increased the complexities of mediation processes which in turn could open up new opportunities for neutral states.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
