JOURNAL REVIEW 4

1. Tittle of the Article

Cross-Cultural Effects in Conflict Management: Examining the Nature and Relationship
between Culture and International Mediation
2. Writer’s Identity and Affiliation
Bercovitch, Jacob, Jon Foulkes
International Journal of
Cross Cultural Management
12(1) 25–47
ª The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1470595811413105
ccm.sagepub.com
3. Abstract
While the importance of culture in organizational behavior has long been accepted,
scholars of political science are still trying to come to terms with the concept and its
implications. Traditional approaches to conflict emphasize the supremacy of the state while
ignoring many of the unique internal features which differ between states.We argue that this
is a mistaken approach and that one feature in particular, namely culture, does indeed have a
profound effect on how states perceive the world, behave in it, and manage their conflicts.
Culture has become more important in the current environment, where much conflict takes
place not just between states, but mostly between groups, divided along cultural or religious
lines, within a state. In this paper we want to examine how culture affects the process and
effectiveness of international mediation. We develop a theoretical framework to examine
culture, its dimensions, and how these may impact on mediation. We use a largescale dataset
of international mediation events to assess the relevance of our notions, and find that cultural
variation does indeed have a significant impact on mediation and conflict resolution. We
conclude by suggesting that greater attention be paid to cross-cultural factors in international
conflict management.
4. Introduction
Since the end of the Cold War, scholars of international relations have been trying to
understand the emerging system – seeking a new paradigm, if indeed one has emerged, with
which to understand our new world (dis)order. In a world that had been characterized by what
many called the realist paradigm, in which well defined states within accepted territorial
boundaries were the main actors, questions are now being asked as to whether this
framework, which treated all states the same, is still relevant to explain the reality of
contemporary international relations. Increasingly, we are seeing a greater focus on all forms
of conflict, not just the interstate conflict which was so dominant in the bipolar system.
Although intra-state conflict has always been present, its effects were somewhat muted by the
Cold War, and it is only now that many of these conflicts are attracting more serious
attention. As a result of the renewed interest in these types of conflict, more attention is also
being paid to their management and resolution, and the factors that may affect these.
Mediation, as one method of dealing with conflict, has grown in popularity as it seems
to offer the promise of being the most suitable method for achieving positive transformations
in intra-state conflicts, which are often characterized by high levels of intractability, multiple
issues, and disputants who differ from each other politically and culturally. Mediation may
also play an important role in the management of other international conflicts which have a
pronounced cultural component. After a brief discussion of the mediation process, we will
discuss the term ‘culture’ and offer a new definition..
5. Objective of the article
We will discuss the effects of culture on several aspects of the mediation process in
order to generate a more complex, complete, and structured account of how culture and
cultural differences affect mediation and its outcomes.
6. State of art of the article
The concept of culture, as defined here, will then be applied to the mediation process
and conclusions will be drawn to help practitioners enhance their chances for successful
conflict resolution
7. Method of the Article
This study used a literature study to conceive an international mediation dataset to
assess the relevance of our notions, and find that cultural variation does indeed have a
significant impact on mediation and conflict resolution.
8. Result and Discussion
Cultural differences clearly exist at different dimensions of any social interaction.
These differences are even more pronounced in the case of a conflict situation. To manage a
conflict successfully, mediators have to accurately understand the nature of the dispute, the
way in which the disputing parties perceive the dispute (which may be quite different from
the way in which an uninvolved third party may perceive it), and the differences that may
exist in their respective perceptions both internally and vis-à-vis one another.
 Cultural similarity between one or more of the disputants and the mediator may
produce a form of leverage which can be utilized in an effort to move the disputants toward
agreement. Moreover, a mediator possesses both personal and representative attributes. Both
of these are based on the cultural background of the mediator or the organization to which
they belong. In this sense, the mediator can be considered to be bringing their own cultural
makeup into the conflict. As will be described in the nest section, a mediator’s cultural
makeup can also influence whether an offer to mediate will be accepted by the parties.The
initiation of mediation and the strategies used by the mediator are the two main factors of a
mediation process.
Culture and cultural differences affect both of these aspects of the process. The notion
advanced here is that in order to enhance the chances of mediation success, mediators need to
be knowledgeable not only about the potential for culture to affect the process, but also the
particularities of both the parties’ and their own cultures, so that appropriate strategies can be
tailored to meet the specific dynamics. A careful and considered application of this
knowledge would, it is argued here, increase the chances of mediation success.
9. Thesis Statement
Although intra-state conflict has always been present, its effects were somewhat muted
by the Cold War, and it is only now that many of these conflicts are attracting more serious
attention. As a result of the renewed interest in these types of conflict, more attention is also
being paid to their management and resolution, and the factors that may affect these.
10. Conclusion
Research on culture and conflict management has mostly been conducted at the
individual level. In this exploratory paper, we have looked at the national/international level
of analysis, and on balance found culture to be very resistant to globalization. Culture acts
like a lens through which all our thoughts and actions are refracted. Culture is therefore a
major determinant of party behavior because such behavior is based on culturally derived
interpretations of the self and other. The ‘lens of culture’ not only influences the parties’
behavior, but it also affects the way conflict and its resolution is perceived.
11. Reference
Aggestam K (2002) Quasi-informal mediation in the Oslo Channel: Larsen and Holst as
individual mediators. In: Bercovitch J (ed.) Studies in International Mediation: Essays
in Honor of Jeffrey Z. Rubin. London and New York: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Arnett J (2002) The psychology of globalization. American Psychologist. 57: 774–83.
Avruch K (1998) Culture and Conflict Resolution. Washington, DC: United States Institute
of Peace.
Bercovitch J and Rubin JZ (1992) Mediation in International Relations: Multiple Approaches
to Conflict Management. London: Macmillan.
Berger P and Luckmaan T (1967) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge. London: Penguin.
Carnevale PJ and Choi D-W (2000) Culture in the mediation of international disputes.
International Journal of Psychology 35(2): 105–10.
Claude I (1971) Swords into Ploughshares. New York: Random House.
Cohen, R., (1990) Culture and Conflict in Egyptian-Israeli Relations: A Dialogue of the Deaf.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Cohen R (1996) Cultural aspects of international mediation. In: Bercovitch J (ed.) Resolving
International Conflict: The Theory and Practice of International Mediation. Boulder,
CO: Lynne Rienner.
Crocker C, Hampson F and Aall P (2004) Taming Intractable Conflicts: Mediation in the
Hardest Cases. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Deutsch M (1973) The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destructive Processes. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Deutsch M (1991) Subjective features of conflict resolution: psychological, social and
cultural influences. In: Vayrynen R (ed.) New Directions in Conflict Theory: Conflict
Resolution and Conflict Transformation. London: SAGE.
Edmead F (1971) Analysis and Prediction in International Mediation. New York: UNITAR
Study.
Fisher G (1988) Mindsets: The Role of Culture and Perception in International Relations.
Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press.
Gannon H (2004) Understanding Global Cultures. London: SAGE.
Garb P and Nan S (2006) Negotiating in a coordination network of citizen peacebuilding
initiatives in the Georgian-Abkhaz Peace Process. International Negotiation 11(1): 7–
35.
Gerhart B (2008) Cross Cultural Management Research: Assumptions, Evidence and
Suggested Directions. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management 8(3): 259–
74.
Hicks T (2001) Another look at identity based conflict: the roots of conflict in the psychology
of consciousness. Negotiation Journal 17: 35–45.
Hofstede G (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Jahoda G (1993) Crossroads between Culture and Mind: Continuities and Change in Theories
of Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kelman H (2007) Israeli–Palestinian peace: inching toward and looking beyond negotiations.
Middle East Policy 14(3): 29–40.
Kriesberg L (1998) Constructive Conflicts: From Escalation to Resolution. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Kroeber AL and Kluckhohn C (1952) Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and
Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Peabody Museum of Archaeology
and Ethnology Papers, 47.
Leng R and Regan P (2003) Social and political cultural effects on the outcomes of mediation
in militarized interstate disputes. International Studies Quarterly 47(3): 431–52.
Littlejohn S (2006) Moral conflict. In Oetzel J, Ting-Toomey S (eds) The Sage Handbook of
Conflict Communication: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
MacGinty R (2006) No War, No Peace: The Rejuvenation of Stalled Peace Processes and
Peace Accords. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Meyer T (1997) Identity Mania: Fundamentalism and the Politicization of Cultural
Differences. London: Zed Books.
Miall H, Ramsbotham O, and Woodhouse T (1999) Contemporary Conflict Resolution: The
Prevention, Management and Transformation of Deadly Conflicts. Cambridge: Polity.
Mitchell C (1981) The Structure of International Conflict. London: Macmillan.
Moore CW (1996) The Mediation Process: Practical Strategies for Resolving Conflict. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Pruitt D (1981) Negotiation Behaviour. New York: Academic Press.
Quandt WB (2001) Peace Process: American Diplomacy and the Arab–Israeli Conflict since
1967 (rev. edn). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Raymond GA, and Kegley CW Jr (1985) Third party mediation and international norms: a
test of two models. Conflict Management and Peace Science 9: 33–51.
Sambanis N and DoyleM(2000) International peacebuilding: a theoretical and quantitative
analysis. American Political Science Review 94(4): 779–802.
Smith WP (1985) Effectiveness of the biased mediator. Negotiation Journal 1: 363–72.
Tome V (1992) Maintaining credibility as a partial mediator: United States mediation in
Southern Africa 1981–1988. Negotiation Journal 8: 273–89.
Touval S (1985) The Context of Mediation. Negotiation Journal 1: 373–88.
Touval S and Zartman W (1985) Mediation in theory. In: Touval S, Zartman IW (eds)
International Mediation in Theory and Practice. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Triandis H (1972) The Analysis of Subjective Culture. New York: Wiley.
United Nations (2006a) Alliance of Civilizations: Report of the High-Level Group. New
York: United Nations Alliance of Civilizations.
United Nations (2006b) Uniting Against Terrorism: Recommendations for a Global Counter-
Terrorism Strategy. Report of the Secretary-General (A/60/825). New York: United
Nations.
Wall JA, Stark JB, and Standifer RL (2001) Mediation: a current review and theory
development. Journal of Conflict Resolution 45(3): 370–91.
Zartman IW (1993) A skeptic’s view. In: Faure GO, Rubin JZ (eds) Culture and Negotiation:
The Resolution of Water Disputes. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.