The Global Security Challenge to Negotiation

Abstract

This article assesses the mismatch between conventional notions of negotiation and the types of approaches likely to help reduce global security threats. A serious way in which global security problems challenge traditional negotiation analysis concerns questions of justice and fairness, which underlie the major issues discussed in other contributions to this volume. Confronting these questions is imperative for both practical and ethical reasons. I argue that analyses of justice and fairness in terms of outcomes only are flawed both intellectually and practically. This is especially the case of global security problems which involve heterogeneous and asymmetrical parties, unpredictability, and a long time frame. The future research agenda must begin by examining the structure of negotiations, including the identity and representation of parties. The structure has hitherto been taken to be an objective reference on basis of which the nature of just and fair procedures, concessions, and solutions can be judged. The l992 Rio Summit and the UNCED process are among many cases which highlight the particular importance of developing external criteria to determine the standing of non-state actors and to guide reforms in existing negotiation forums and practices. This would be a significant way forward to enhance the effectiveness and perceived legitimacy of global security negotiations.