International Relations: Israel-Arab Conflict Mechanisms (Essay Sample)

GLOBAL CONFLICTS
Name:
Subject:
Date:
Conflict Resolution Mechanisms
One of the main differences between mediation and arbitration is that in mediation, the mediator is a neutral party and does not have any interest in the conflict. Therefore, he listens to the views of the two parties and tries to bring them together to a negotiation table. This is through convincing them on the need to sit together and work out a solution that will please the parties involved in the conflict. The mediator does not make any decision. On the contrary, he only provides a platform for the two parties to meet and guide the negotiation process. Also, he waits for the parties to agree and come to an agreement with each other. His main role is to plead with the two parties to stop maintaining hard positions and instead agree to talk to each other to get an amicable solution. Therefore, their role is not to issue orders, find faults in the arguments, or determine the case. Instead, their role is to enhance communication between the conflicting parties and develop viable options. In many cases, the parties involved in a conflict meet at the presence of the mediator and explain their views regarding the conflict. The mediator then meets each party separately and discusses the dispute with them and explores any available avenues that might result in a solution. In some cases, the mediator goes go back and forth after meeting the parties in an attempt to communicate with each party regarding the position of the other. The focus in this process is on reaching a solution that will be of benefit to both parties. Once the two parties agree, they enter into a written agreement. This is to ensure that they honor their position and avoid any other similar confrontation.
On the other hand, arbitration is a bit formal. It is mainly conducted by a professional, e.g., a retired judge or a senior lawyer who is well conversant with the law and dispute matters. During the process, each party is given an equal opportunity to present their case to the arbitrator. Similar to what happens in the courts, the arbitrator requests each party to present their witnesses. An arbitrator discourages any other negotiations outside this process. This is to ensure that they do not water down what the process will have achieved. The arbitrator dictates the rules of engagement and ensures that both parties adhere to them. Once the arbitrator listens to all parties, he then makes the final decision. One of the main differences between the arbitration and mediation process is that the decision made by the arbitrator can be enforced in a court of law in different countries across the world. Therefore, unlike the mediator who has no powers to make legally binding decisions, an arbitrator decisions must be honored, and failure to observe the decision can attract some penalties. Therefore, the mediator depends heavily on the willingness of the parties to find a solution. This is unlike in the arbitration process whereby, a decision might fail to please some of the members involved in the process. Nevertheless, in this case, all members involved in the arbitration process have to abide by the decision made. Therefore, before they enter into the process, they must be willing to accept the position that will be taken by the arbitrator.
Part 2
Global Unresolvable Wars
The Israel-Arab conflict has continuously made headlines for decades. Various mediation processes have failed to achieve any remarkable success. The reason is that the parties involved are not willing to sit down without demands and discuss the issue with open hearts. Furthermore, global politics has played a significant role in preventing an amicable solution to be reached. The fact that the two factions support different ideologies has complicated the matter. As a result, developed countries have been avoiding the issue to avoid any fallout with the two parties. Therefore, they have opted to play safe and wait for the problem to be resolved by the international bodies. However, over the years, the international bodies have been accused of turning their back to the issue despite their mandate being to maintain peace and stability. International arbitrators have also been trending carefully due to the inclusion of religion in the conflict. The Jews have been trying to establish in the country after years of wandering in different parts of the world. The creation of Israel and the current attempts by its leaders to expand the territory has been the major source of the problem. However, the other parties argue that Israel is non-existent and it has no ground to discuss boundaries in the first place. Therefore, lack of good faith in the discussion and the attempts by the two parties to prove that their position is more important ha complicated the issue. Therefore, there is a need for the two parties to drop their hard position and accept to look for a long-term solution that will stop any more bloodshed.[Liebes, Tamar. Reporting the Israeli-Arab Conflict. London: Routledge, 2014.] [Caplan, Neil. The Israel-Palestine Conflict: Contested Histories. Wiley, 2011.]
Lack of consensus regarding the best interv...