ABSTRACT
A dog fight, a chess game, and a debate are examples of three modes of conflict. The modes differ essentially in the objectives pursued by the conflicting parties. Negotiations conducted by persons acting on their own or empowered to modify the policies of the organizations they represent are closely related to genuine debates. The impossibility of reconciling the warriors and the victims illustrates the limits of conflict resolution. The Quakers’ approach to conciliation is based on four types of activity: listening and asking questions, message carrying, understanding and assessment, and making proposals. Negotiators in the international arena often serve only as mouthpieces of their governments and the negotiation process only as a platform for rhetoric. The negotiators frequently are not authorized to effect any agreement. Arms control negotiations are often paralyzed by rigid positions taken by the negotiators. The conflict in Nigeria generated problems much more complex than those generated by divided Germany.
