I attended a Mediation in London yesterday as an observer, part of the final process of my qualifying as a professional Mediator.

 

Most Mediations settle the dispute, often saving the parties vast sums of money. Plus unresolved Mediations at least clear the air and can enable the parties quietly to find a settlement a few days or weeks later. In this case the Mediator was terrific: patient, firm, steady and resourceful. And unsuccessful. The parties argued long and hard over a commercial dispute and narrowed the gaps between them, but ultimately even the prospect of avoiding awesome professional fees and the uncertain hassle of an eventual arbitration did not bring them to clinch a settlement. Maybe next week?

 

Why is diplomatic mediation for significant international disputes relatively rare?

 

In private mediations (family, commercial, employment and so on) the parties typically have plenty of pride, bluster and stubbornness to deploy. But their own money/interests are at stake. Blunt cost/benefit arguments cut ice.

 

At the state level leaders have the Responsibility of Office which in fact may be the Irresponsibility of Office, especially where there is little democracy. They park themselves on insane positions of ‘principle’ which cause incalculable damage to their own country and people, yet risk little if any personal downside for them – maybe even cheap populist upside if they rig the media and vaunt their intransigence as the only possible response to the scandalous behaviour of the other side.

 

My favourite example of how people can always wallow in grotesque disagreements when they want to came in Bosnia in 1997. High Representative Carl Bildt and a swarm of diplomats, myself included, tried to set up the first meetings of the new Bosnian post-Dayton collective Presidency: Carl describes all this and more in his book. A grisly story. BH Presidency members Izetbegovic (Bosniac) and Krajisnik (Serb) were at loggerheads over the symbolism of different venues in and around Sarajevo; Zubak, the Croat member, was happy to appear quite reasonable on this occasion.

 

Eventually it was agreed that they hold a meeting in the Museum. The three leaders appeared. And started arguing about the seating arrangements for the three of them at a small round table.

 

Back to primary school geometry. Should the chairs be in the shape of an equilateral triangle (showing they each had equal status), an isosceles triangle with Izetbegovic looking a tad more important at the head, or a scalene triangle (equal but irregular status)?

 

Or should they just to get on with it and start the post-war nation-building processes their exhausted respective communities needed?

 

Several hours later they got on with it. Such self-indulgent nonsense already had cost hundreds of thousands of European lives. And short of picking them up, tying them to their chairs and telling them to be nice – and then praying they would be –  there was nothing we could do about it.