Landmines on the Table: A Negotiations Analysis of the Global Campaign to Ban Landmines

Abstract

The global campaign to ban landmines is a dynamic case of the multilateral search for a negotiated solution to an international problem. It includes middle- and great-power states, governmental and non-governmental organizations, and coalitions, as well as, empowered individuals. The primary research question this study seeks to answer is "why did the United States and pro-ban advocates fail to reach an agreement in solving the global landmines problem?" I argue that the competitive, distributive negotiation strategies and tactics used by the United States and pro-ban advocates during the campaign ensured that a negotiated agreement was not reached between these participants--even though the participants in the campaign, for the most part, had similar interests and issues, especially in reference to the protection of the civilian, non-combatant, populations. With these common interests and issues evident, I suggest that employing more cooperative, integrative negotiation strategies and tactics would have ensured a negotiated agreement between these two groups of negotiators.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Dec 01, 2008
Accession Number
ADA494555

Entities

People

  • Eric M. Moody

Organizations

  • University of Florida

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Biomedical
  • Counter IED
  • Engineered Resilient Systems
  • Human Systems

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Force
  • Anti-Personnel Mines
  • Arms Control Treaties
  • Employment
  • Fire Control Systems
  • Interagency Coordination
  • Intergovernmental Organizations
  • International Law
  • International Organizations
  • International Relations
  • Military Science
  • Munitions Testing
  • National Security
  • Personnel Management
  • Ridges
  • Terrain
  • Treaties

Fields of Study

  • Political science

Readers

  • Strategic Security Studies