ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the arguments of those who dismiss mediator impartiality as a requirement for successful mediation. Defenders of impartiality have an entirely different view of mediation. The debate about whether impartiality is required for effective mediation is a non-debate. Those who say that it is not a requirement are entirely correct, for they perceive mediation as a process of punishment and reward in which mediators become a third bargaining force, arguing for one side or the other depending on where they believe settlement should fall. As in international mediation generally, if there is a single belligerent requirement for a mediator interested in stopping the fighting, it is that the mediator be objective in the dispute. One of the main attempts at mediation during the Nigerian Civil War came from the Organization for African Unity. A pure mediator who is perceived as biased is an obstacle to cease-fire.
