Ted Feifer and Mike Lekson of the Education and Training Center/ International conducted the Institute's sixth workshop on negotiation skills in multilateral diplomacy for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna, May 14-16, 2008.

Ted Feifer and Mike Lekson of the Education and Training Center/ International conducted the Institute's sixth workshop on negotiation skills in multilateral diplomacy for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna, May 14-16, 2008. There were 25 participants. Half came from national delegations to the OSCE (Russia, Turkey, Montenegro, Slovenia, Ireland, Armenia, Germany, Norway, the U.S., and Belarus), and half were OSCE Secretariat staff members. These included 4 Kazakhstan Foreign Ministry officers posted to Vienna to gear up for their country's chairmanship of the OSCE in 2010.

Workshop objectives were to explore the similarities and differences between multilateral and bilateral negotiations; strengthen participants' analytical, problem solving, and negotiating skills; and increase their understanding of and ability to use the multilateral process to achieve their objectives.

The workshop focused on strengthening core negotiation skills in bilateral and multilateral situations. Participants engaged in a two-person negotiation exercise, utilized a problem solving framework to work through a typical OSCE mission challenge, did a self-assessment on their conflict management style and were briefed on using style as an analytic tool, and assessed the use of negotiation skills in emotional situations. They applied their skills and lessons learned in multiparty negotiations with an OSCE Permanent Council scenario, and in a complex simulation based on the management of the 1999 Horn of Africa conflict by the Organization of African Unity.

The workshop gave OSCE Secretariat staff and diplomats assigned to the OSCE the opportunity to work with and better understand each other's priorities and work. As one participant noted, the training was "most useful for professionals who have been involved in real-life negotiations." Another, "greener" participant, felt the workshop was very useful precisely because he had very little experience in negotiation skills. One participant seemed to sum of the view of many by noting the special value of the workshop in helping her to evaluate her regular work in light of the experience of the workshop.

Related Publications

As Russia Bars Democracy in Belarus, Risks Will Rise

As Russia Bars Democracy in Belarus, Risks Will Rise

Thursday, October 8, 2020

By: Dr. Donald N. Jensen

As people in Belarus continue massive protests against an autocratic ruler and a rigged election, risks are rising that Russia’s military could take a direct role, less visible than an overt invasion, projecting power westward toward NATO and threatening Ukraine from the north. The dramatic images of this prodemocracy movement resemble those from neighboring Ukraine, yet one difference is critical. The Belarus uprising seeks no sharp break from Russia or turn toward the European Union or NATO. So effective policies to advance Belarusians’ democratic hopes should work for the long term.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Democracy & Governance

Don Jensen on Protests in Belarus and Russia’s Response

Don Jensen on Protests in Belarus and Russia’s Response

Wednesday, September 9, 2020

By: Dr. Donald N. Jensen

After an “obviously crooked election” in Belarus sparked massive protests, USIP’s Don Jensen says Russia is quietly using the situation to assert influence. If Moscow’s military presence in Belarus increases, “I think you’re going to see a much more forward projection of Russian power against NATO,” he said.

Type: Podcast

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Democracy & Governance

Understanding Russia’s Interest in Conflict Zones

Understanding Russia’s Interest in Conflict Zones

Tuesday, July 7, 2020

By: Paul M. Carter Jr., Ph.D.

Under Vladimir Putin, Russia’s global ambitions have steadily increased, including in unstable areas of the Middle East, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere. For the most part, Moscow’s activities in these and other areas run counter to Western interests and undermine efforts to mitigate conflict through broad-based, transparent processes. This report outlines the factors that appear to be motivating the Kremlin’s conflict-zone interventions and places them within the larger context of Russian foreign policy interests.

Type: Special Report

Conflict Analysis & Prevention

Amid the Central African Republic’s search for peace, Russia steps in. Is China next?

Amid the Central African Republic’s search for peace, Russia steps in. Is China next?

Thursday, December 19, 2019

By: Leslie Minney; Rachel Sullivan; Rachel Vandenbrink

The 2017 National Security Strategy refocused U.S. foreign and defense policy to address resurgent major power competition with Russia and China. In U.S. foreign policy, Africa has emerged as a frontline for this competition, as in recent years both Moscow and Beijing have sought to expand their influence and promote their interests on the continent. Nowhere is the role of major powers more apparent than in the Central African Republic (CAR), where Russia has emerged as a key power broker amid a civil war that has simmered since 2012. Despite concerns about the need to counter other major powers, the best course for U.S. policy in CAR is to not allow competition with Russia and China to distract from the fundamental priority of supporting a democratic, inclusive path to peace.

Type: Analysis and Commentary

Conflict Analysis & Prevention; Global Policy

View All Publications