ABSTRACT
Introduction As a social process, mediation can be used to enhance conflict management or it ‘can be an instrument of destruction if applied unwisely’ (Rubin, 1994: 33). To appreciate how mediation should best be used, or, more specifically, how mediators should behave in a conflict, we need to understand the nature of the disputants, and the dynamics of their conflict. Only by understanding the reciprocal relationship between mediation and the conflict can we appreciate why certain intervention strategies are employed. The raft of questions that can be examined when investigating mediation behaviour are endless. Some of these include: Are some strategies more successful than others? How precisely does the context of a conflict affect mediation behaviour? How do mediators relate to different parties? What kind of mediator should intervene in different conflicts? Is the conflict ripe for intervention? What are the ideal conflict and party characteristics for success? What type of intervention strategy should be utilized? Is mediation successful because certain preconditions were present or because the strategy relevant for these conditions has been employed? Which of these conditions is most influential in determining intervention strategy? Clearly, the answers to these questions are interlinked. A number of studies have attempted to answer these questions by examining mediation systematically, analysing both its occurrence and the conditions associated with successful outcomes (e.g. Bercovitch, 1986, 1989; Bercovitch and Houston, 1993; Bercovitch and Langley, 1993; Bercovitch et al., 1991; Brecher et al., 1988; Butterworth, 1976, 1978; Frei, 1976; Haass, 1983; Haass et al., 1972; Holsti, 1966, 1983; Kleiboer, 1996; Levine, 1971; Miall, 1992; Raymond and Kegley, 1985; Sherman, 1987, 1994; Wall, 1981). Few studies, however, examined the question of how best to mediate, or what factors affect the choice of mediator behaviour. These are the questions we wish to examine in this paper. Elangovan (1995, 1998), in his evaluation of managerial mediation, notes that many of the factors that affect mediation outcomes are also responsible for the choice of a mediation strategy. But is the same pattern observed in international mediation?
