Negotiations Overview

Negotiations Overview

Negotiations

Hello and welcome to this module on conflict negotiation. My name is Nicole Carle and I'm a counsel at the Public International Law & Policy Group, or PILPG. Today. I'm so pleased to welcome both Professor Milena Sterio, managing director of PILPG, and Dr Gregory Noone, executive director of PILPG, and both who are international law professors. They're here today to help us give an overview of the two critical components of peace negotiations, negotiation preparation and negotiation techniques. It's great to be joined by both of you.

It's a pleasure to be here, Nicole.

Thank you for having us, Nicole.

We’re here today to talk about negotiation because it's a critical step in restoring peace after conflict. Facilitating dialogue between conflicting parties is hugely important for resolving key issues and for ensuring future stability. This process requires very careful planning and preparation.

Milena, can you kick us off today and provide an overview of the key elements of preparing for negotiations?

Core Elements

Preparing for negotiations is a complex and lengthy process, and it involves a number of activities, including, for example, the selection of a delegation, determining logistics, and training and honing negotiation skills.

It also entails building coalitions of individuals who can support and advise a delegation during the negotiation process, which can sometimes take a number of weeks, if not a number of months. So first, let's discuss how to prepare for a negotiation. There are a number of core elements of preparing and developing a negotiation strategy, which include, so first, forming the negotiation team and building internal consensus.

It's important to know who exactly is going to be a part of that team, and it's important that all team members feel the same about the key issues and that there is internal consensus among these internal negotiation team members.

Second, you need to have a negotiation strategy, and you need to be well prepared for the substance of negotiations.

So that means knowing what the key issues are and knowing what your strategy for each of those key issues might be.

Third, you need to plan logistics such as timing and location. Where are you going to hold the negotiation session?

How long is it going to take? Are you going to be in a major European city?

Are you going to be somewhere in Africa, Asia? And then are you going to be there for a few days, for a few weeks or longer than that? Longer than that? All of that is very important.

Fourth, it's important to determine the form of the negotiation, and the key rules of procedure that will govern the negotiations.

So for example, Who goes first? Is it that one team presents, their key issues and the other team responds? Is it that one team presents all of their issues and the other team responds? How much time does each team have to present their issues? All of those things need to be determined ahead of time.

Fifth, it's important to establish any possible preconditions and any confidence-building measures. This also ideally has to be done ahead of time

so that all participants in a negotiation know what those key preconditions might be and what some confidence-building measures might be as well.

And then last but certainly not least, it's important to develop outreach strategies both for the constituents as well as for the media so that everybody knows.

Who has to be informed of what might be going on, what are some public facing communications, and what are things that remain for the internal participants of the process.

Nicole, if I can add that developing the negotiation strategy is so important that the worst thing people can do is show up in a negotiation without first understanding what they want to achieve.

So whether you talk about red lines. or, best alternative to a negotiated agreement, BATNA, which is an old business related term. But this has to be a long discussion that takes place on this side of the negotiations, because the worst thing that can happen is being unprepared.

And truthfully, you hope that the other side has also undertaken a similar process because if the other side shows up unprepared, there is a feeling that maybe. It will have an advantage. But the reality of it is they can't agree to anything. And you'll continually get the, oh, well, we have to run that up the chain of command.

We don't have the authorization to agree to this or to agree to that. So the negotiations really isn't going to go anywhere if both teams aren't fully prepared to begin the negotiations.

So important, and I thank you both for giving us that overview. Greg, I do want to stay on this theme of preparation.

 And going back to the core elements that Milena mentioned, there are a number of considerations and decisions negotiators will have to make, many that you just mentioned. Can you let us know, though, what the first step that negotiators will have to take when planning for talks?

Yeah, the first thing it's very important is the formation of the negotiation team.

Building a Team

So once a party decides that it will engage in negotiations, the negotiation team are often referred to as a delegation, will be formed. This process is an important process and involves selecting the right team members and then assigning roles in order to determine who's Who will be in negotiation room and what the responsibilities will be.

So it requires a clear assessment of who is likely to be on the opposing negotiation team and what types of personalities, background and skill sets will be most useful. matching or countering or coming to an agreement with the opposing team.

So when selecting team members, a party may consider many factors including negotiations experience, knowledge of the parties, the issues, the interest involved, the means and desire to be involved in the process.

I've seen people on negotiation teams that didn't want to be there, and it really hurt the position of the team that they're on. It didn't help. The team in any way, shape or form. And frankly, it showed some weakness to the other side. You'll also be concerned about the internal political dynamics of the team and the individual representation of particular key constituencies, as well as the individual ability to compromise based on the team's overall needs.

Malena, I'm sure you have some more thoughts on this as well. Sure. Thanks,

Greg. , I can also mention that there are Various roles that are important in each delegation and that sometimes you might have different members of a negotiation delegation that might fulfill multiple of those roles at the same time.

Some of such roles include things like a chairperson, that's the person who is in charge of the entire process. A chief negotiator, that's the person that's taking the lead at the actual negotiation. Individuals who serve as technical or legal experts, drafters, red team strategists, and other back channel negotiators.

A delegation may choose to have all of these roles, or might just select a few of these roles, might have to, might want to have different individuals fulfill these roles, or as I mentioned, might have, might want to have the same person fulfill all of these roles, or multiple of these roles at the same time.

Support Team

Besides the negotiation delegation, it is also important to establish support teams, and sometimes these support teams might be just as important as the negotiation team. The support teams will include individuals who provide expertise on substantive negotiation issues, so technical and legal support, as well as individuals who provide support on things such as logistics, media, communications, and other outreach support.

In other words, for the negotiations to go well, it is. Key to have carefully selected the different individuals who are part of the delegation to know which roles those individuals are going to play, but then also to have a strong support team, which is supporting the actual negotiators by doing things such as providing logistical media communications and outreach support.

I couldn't agree more in that support team is also ready to provide, substantive support because there could be an issue that arises that we hadn't anticipated going into the negotiations and it's always great to be able to pick up the phone, call back to the office where you have a team, , waiting to do, quick research, and pull out any legal issues that may come out or any other issues that may pop up that we had not anticipated, but we have a team set, so we're not calling back and finding everybody's gone on holiday because, you know, this team's out at the negotiation.

So it's time for us. Our work is done. That work is never done. You need that backroom support continuous throughout the process. The work is

never done indeed and clearly there are a lot of roles that need to be filled when preparing for negotiations and presumably not every member of a delegation will have the requisite experience with negotiations themselves or even be familiar with the details of the conflict in question for that matter.

Delegation Preparation

How can a newly formed delegation as a team and as a unit prepare for the upcoming negotiations effectively?

Yeah, there are a lot of things to consider here. And I go back to Melania's comment about the chief negotiator. That is so critical that person has previous experience, not necessarily previous experience as a chief negotiator, but previous experience in negotiations.

The first time I sat at a negotiations table, I sat all the way down in the end chair at the end of the table, completely irrelevant for the most part. But the chief negotiator had been someone who had been to many negotiations and had built up, his skill set or her skill set to be able to sit at the center of the table and be able to, really accomplish what we needed to accomplish, but you're right. There's a number of key steps that the delegation needs to take in order to prepare for upcoming negotiations. So once the delegation has been determined, it's important to build that internal consensus among the delegation. So this will have to be done carefully discussing issues internally and by determining the delegation's key interests, what compromises we're willing to make.

And as I said earlier, what red lines cannot be crossed in reaching agreement, with the opposing team. And as I mentioned earlier, we need to develop the best alternative to a negotiated agreement, a BATNA, B A T N A, BATNA, in which may be temporarily withdrawing from the negotiating session, withdrawing from the negotiations entirely, or maybe even returning to the conflict.

But there has to be a “What's our best walk away position?” And we have to understand what our red lines are. So once the delegation has reached this internal consensus, then a negotiation strategy can be developed this will involve a number of steps, including, but not limited to developing a road map for the negotiations, which will include the major topics to be addressed and in what order having done this for the United States government.

And I can tell you that the process prior to the negotiations. Negotiation takes considerably longer than the negotiations itself because you have to make sure all the constituencies are in agreement and all the equities are considered before putting together this road map for negotiations and truly understanding what our interests are.

And then, of course, you go from there and you draft the agenda for the negotiations. You start developing some preliminary proposals. Based on the issues outlined in the road map, which prioritize the order and importance of the issues and draw upon the ultimate goals of the negotiations. In fact, oftentimes negotiations will start with an exchange of papers, not necessarily everybody flying somewhere and sitting around a table, but Seriously engaging in in a draft agreement where we start laying out some of the commonalities, some of the things that are as we refer to as low hanging fruit, easy to accomplish things, and then go from there.

But also we need to engage in red teaming. So we need to simulate the negotiation exercise. In which the team takes the perspectives and arguments of the opposing delegation. We were doing one simulation with a team and we had the chief negotiator be on the red team and he started picking apart.

his own negotiation positions. And we're like, yep, now you're getting it. He goes, Oh my goodness, I didn't realize how weak my positions were until I look at them from the lens of the opposing delegation and how easy they are to pick apart. So all of this helps the negotiators anticipate what arguments their opponents might make and understand the weaknesses in their own arguments.

Milena, I see you look like you're ready to jump in.

Sure. So in addition to everything you just said, the delegation and every delegation team member will also have to prepare for the substance of the negotiations. So this will include basically training for the negotiations, especially if you have never participated in a negotiation before, becoming familiar with the substantive issues at hand, and also determining those red lines that you mentioned.

team member needs to know what is our red line. What is the position beyond or below which we cannot go? The entire delegation should really thoroughly research and familiarize themselves with all of the key facts, the parties, and the issues involved in negotiations because sometimes you might have to react on the fly.

You might have to react as things are happening, and you can only do that if you're well prepared. This. Preparation should also help the delegation to agree upon these common and unified positions. So everybody on the team needs to have a unified position, the same position and key issue, as well as goals and strategies of the overall negotiation.

It's also valuable to have all members train on the same negotiating skills and techniques in order to have consistent approaches throughout the negotiation. And so if you have more experienced team members and less experienced team members, it might be a good idea for everybody to come together before the negotiation actually starts so that those more junior team members can First, learn from the more senior members, but then also agree on a common strategy and a common approach to the negotiation.

Preparing for the substance of negotiations can involve a number of activities. So for example, as Greg just mentioned, you can facilitate negotiation simulations, which can then allow members of the delegation to discover and work through the different issues that might arise during the real negotiation.

can help them feel more at ease with their roles and help them also discover the weaknesses, as Greg just mentioned, of their own positions. Such preparation can also involve technical experts who may help other delegation members prepare for negotiations during this pre-negotiation phase through substantive and skills training.

Technical teams can also prepare proposals on substantive issues, they can draft preliminary negotiation proposals and documents, and in advance of the formal negotiations. And as Greg mentioned, sometimes those documents might be exchanged among the different teams, but sometimes those documents are going to be just internal and are going to constitute preparatory materials for the actual negotiation team.

And then last, the preparation involves Conducting research into areas that are relevant to specific negotiation topics. This will ensure that all of the delegation members are really well-versed in the topics that are going to be discussed. So, for example, if you're going to be discussing security sector reform, are you going to be discussing decentralization or self-determination?

You might want to train your delegation members ahead of time on the basics of those issues, not just involving the actual negotiation, the actual conflict. But more generally speaking, so that all team members are really well versed in these topics. And then finally, a well-researched agenda should be prepared that has definite goals, which would include things like your team's red lines, as well as the various concessions that the team can reasonably expect to give, and also reasonably expect the other side to make.

Yeah.

And that's important. So we're talking about interest in positions. So what are our interests? Those are what we keep, secret, private, you know, confidential. And then the positions of what we're laying out, as our bargaining points. So our interests are what we know and where, and what we're trying to achieve and where our red lines are, where our positions might be something that we know we're not going to get, but it's a starting point and we're going to keep moving from position to position until we hit on our interest and achieve our goals.

Thanks both. Sticking with this theme, everything we've discussed so far around preparations has all been internal to one's delegation.

Communication With Opposing Parties

What elements will a delegation need to discuss with the opposing side before negotiations can begin? Greg, you've already mentioned this a little bit with the exchanging of papers, but I want to talk a little bit more about what should definitely be included in those communications. Whoever would like to start sure I can jump in on this and start and I'm sure Greg will have things to add

Logistics

The one of the first steps in the preparation and things that the teams, the opposing teams will need to decide is to make logistical decisions about the location timing and the duration, the time frame of the event.

Of the negotiations and also the budget that will then accompany all of these elements. These decisions will need to be discussed and agreed upon with the opposing side before the negotiations actually start. So for example, when you're discussing the location of the negotiation could be physical.

You can pick a city, you can pick a specific place, or we can talk about virtual negotiations or a hybrid model where part of it is in person. Part of it is. online, and this will depend on the delegation's preferences as well as their ability to travel to go to these different places. If we're talking about a specific physical location, that physical location really should be a neutral third-party state that will agree to grant all the delegates visas for the negotiation, which will be secure so that team members don't have to worry about, physical security, and we should have relatively easy logistics so the team members don't have to worry about things like Wi-Fi access, getting, you know, food or water that's safe to eat or drinks, and things of that sort, in determining timing, when we're talking about timing of the negotiations.

It's important to consider what the optimal, the most strategic time for the negotiations might be. When are all the parties ready to move forward towards a negotiated resolution? But also when are the different delegations going to be ready? When are they going to have adequate time to prepare for the negotiations?

These decisions regarding timing can also be taken once the negotiations have commenced. These things can be tweaked, so for example, you could begin a negotiation, but then after a week, after everybody has been physically and mentally drained, you might decide that it's in the best interest of all the parties to give everybody a one or two day break, and then you resume afterwards.

So there's definitely some flexibility on this. You're also going to need to make decisions regarding the time limits for The presentations of the various delegation members. So if a delegation has a team that has five members, you're going to have to decide, okay, each person will get 15 minutes or 20 minutes to speak.

Otherwise you can imagine how things could get. Out of hand very easily. And then last thing that I would mention is that you're going to have to consider mandating regular meetings among the different team members to ensure that the negotiation teams continue to communicate and work together towards a resolution to any stalemates.

So you might want to build into the schedule of the negotiations, regular meetings that maybe happen daily or every other day or twice a week or three times a week. Where the different team members can get together, communicate, and make sure that progress isn't stalled because of some impasse, some issue that people just cannot agree on.

But I know that Greg has other thoughts as well. Yeah, all incredibly important and often overlooked. So all those logistics you just mentioned, are really keys to success. But they're kind of boring, right? And so people will tend to not give them, enough time and consideration when sorting that out, but they're incredibly important.

Form of Negotiations

And then, of course, we have to take, any logistics plan, we need to consider what's the preferred form of the negotiations. So that'll be really the next step in the preparation of, of the delegation. So there are several options, right? So there's shuttle mediation, in which a mediator meets, With one party at a time regarding specific issues, and then goes to the other party and shuttles back and forth their bilateral discussions, which sees parties engage in face to face talks, there could be roundtable or plenary discussions, which involve large formal gatherings of delegations and mediators.

And then, of course, a lot of the work is done in subcommittees or working group discussions that focus on a specific issue attended only by the delegates negotiating that issue. I can tell you, I was in one negotiation where the whole thing had come to a complete stop for about three hours. And we were going back and forth over one word.

Finally, we took a break because we weren't going anywhere, and it was the two chief negotiators that essentially held their own little working group, and just the two of them worked it out, and then we were able to reconvene and proceed.

Now, of course, each chief negotiator wasn't going rogue. They were working off the interests that each side had already established. And then, of course, there are large-scale conferences, which, generally the form-taking for initiating negotiations and maybe presenting a final agreement, but the large conferences usually aren't as successful when we're trying to get into, the nuts and bolts. The large conferences, especially when we're getting towards the end, we can only have about 5 issues, 5 minor issues that remain, and we have to have most of it done at that point, if you're going to try to come to a large conference and try to resolve some of the issues, most of the work is going to have to be done in smaller groups. So these negotiations may involve a combination of these forms as well.

Frankly, the form of the negotiations will also take into account whether the parties wish to negotiate directly or indirectly. When the United States was negotiating with Iran for the release of the diplomatic hostages back in 1979, Iran refused to directly speak to the United States.

And so what was important was that we had to use a mediator or a mediation committee that could bring the two sides together and perform this shuttle diplomacy. And then ultimately in the final agreement, there were two different papers, one signed by Iran and the mediator and one signed by the U.S. and the mediator because Iran refused to sign the same document the United States had signed. So there are all different things we need to take into account. And not the least of which, some of the rules and procedures. So I know Milena has a lot to say on that. So I'll stop here and let, let her discuss that.

Sure.

Rules and Procedures

But before that, I would just say, Greg, I think you've just illustrated for us that when there's a will, there's a way. You know, there are different forms that negotiations can take. And if parties are committed to resolving the issues, usually there's a way, but to get back to, the rules of procedure that Greg just mentioned, it is important for the delegations, for the different team members to agree on specific rules and procedures that they're going to follow during the negotiations.

So these might include things like, for example, protocols that have to do with the speaking order. time limits for each side, confidentiality rules, procedures for calling breaks, and for reconvening. Also, things like, for example, what are the ground rules for engaging with other parties during the negotiation, including the procedures for any back channel communications.

Backchannel communications are unofficial channels of communication between delegates that take place outside of the negotiation room. These backchannel communications are very important and can allow both parties to speak more honestly, more candidly about certain issues, to figure out possible points of compromise without making any formal commitments that they would do otherwise.

Inside the negotiation room and to really continue to move forward within these negotiations, even if the formal discussions stall. And so you need to have all of these rules and procedures predetermined so that once the negotiation starts, everybody's in agreement as to what happens in the negotiating room.

And then what can happen outside of the room, what can happen during those back channel communications is incredibly important. We've seen negotiations break down because one side complained that the other side went a minute over and that the mediator was favoring the other side because they allowed them to go a minute over from the preset time limit.

So things as simple as that can really sidetrack negotiations.

Yeah, really. And so we've discussed all these ways that we can avoid negotiations going off the rails or backsliding, as you mentioned.

Starting Strong

Is there anything that parties can do from the beginning to make sure that negotiations begin on a positive foot?

Yeah. I'll take this. I think there are a lot of things that can be done. So setting preconditions, or confidence-building measures can have a real positive impact on the negotiations and delegations might wish to establish these before going into the talks themselves.

 That early exchange communique, we need to make sure we understand as we've been highlighting throughout this conversation, not everything starts when we show up and we sit across the table. There's so much work to be done on our side, but there's also so much work to be done to be communicated to the other side to make sure that when we actually show up.

We have a lot of things in place. So focusing on the negotiating and implementing these measures may really help build trust between opposing delegations before we get into the real substantive, difficult issues that we need to tackle. But it all should be kept in mind that these preconditions can also have a negative effect disincentivizing delegations.

So preconditions and confidence building measures may include things like guaranteeing humanitarian access or other opening of ports or borders, release of detainees, providing the location of missing persons, ceasing, the indiscriminate use of weapons, perhaps permitting the return of refugees and internally displaced persons, also facilitating information exchanges through joint military commissions or other means. These can be critically important because, believe it or not, it's actually the sharing of information that will help that trust being built. You know, the famous axiom, trust but verify. Well, these are some of the ways that you can do that. And oftentimes, the issue is really about natural resources.

So we have to start looking at this allocation of natural resources and in how we're going to share or draw lines in order to make sure that both sides feel like they're getting the proper share. We can also strengthen areas of local governance. And, and finally, the discussion of guaranteeing greater minority rights of representation is always the I shouldn't say always, but oftentimes an underlying, cause of the conflict that, that somebody's, not, having, their representation or their rights are being abused.

Okay.

External Communication

We've talked a lot about delegations and how they have discussions among themselves before beginning negotiations. We've discussed how parties communicate with one another, both before and during the negotiations. Are there any communications that go on with other interested parties or stakeholders beyond the opposing delegation, perhaps?

And if so, at what stage should the delegation start thinking about communicating with each other or with the wider world, whether they're constituencies at home or elsewhere?

That's a great question and also a very important one. And that essentially has to do with the outreach strategy, which we mentioned earlier is one of the key issues that the team has to agree on before the negotiations start.

Outreach can take place basically, vis a vis the media, so vis a vis the external world, and can also take place vis a vis the different constituents. Developing a robust, comprehensive plan for both constituent outreach, as well as media outreach, is key. So first on the constituent side, having a specific and robust plan for constituent outreach can help to build trust between the parties and the relevant constituents, which can then help to solidify the legitimacy of the negotiations.

Because for negotiations to be successful, one thing is to obviously come to a negotiated agreement. But another thing is that those negotiations, the agreements reached in those negotiations have to be perceived as legitimate. With the different constituents, and so it's really important to have a plan, according to which you are now reaching out to your constituents and informing them about the different stages of the negotiation.

And then second, when it comes to the media, it's important to have a media outreach plan that will then shape the public communications in a way that can support the party's key goals. Such a strategy, such a communication strategy vis a vis the media, can involve allowing the media open access to negotiations.

Maybe not to all of the negotiating sessions, but maybe to some of the key sessions. That can help to signal transparency and therefore increase the perceived legitimacy of the negotiations. And that can also build a sense of inclusivity with the public, with the media. But conversely, broad media access may make it more difficult for delegates to discuss issues and to reach unpopular compromise positions as candidly as possible.

And so that is why before the negotiation start, you need to be able to decide how to deal with the media, what kind of access to give to the media. And as I said, a compromised position could be to say, for example, you invite the media to some negotiation sessions, but not to all of them. Developing all these strategies will require very careful considerations and very careful deliberation of all the possible approaches that may be taken.

And this is also why, as Greg mentioned, the pre-negotiation stage can take such a long time and can involve the discussion of all of these very complex issues. But it is important to get to those before the negotiations start so that once you're in the negotiation, you know how you're reaching your constituents and you know how you're informing the media about the progress of the negotiations.

Yeah, this can make or break the whole deal. First, in the absence of fact, perception becomes reality. If the perception is out there that this is happening or that's happening, but you know that the facts are, you need to shape the space with the information that you have so that you can start getting that buy-in.

And then to Milena's last point about too much media, when the U.S. was involved in working through the end of the Yugoslav war and they had the Serbs, the Bosnians, and the Croats, they brought them to really a remote location in part, of the United States because they didn't want them walking outside of the negotiations in Washington, D.C. or New York City and immediately undoing everything they'd worked on all morning because of the statements they're making to the New York Times or to the Washington Post. So it really is that careful balance of getting your message out there letting the media, know what's going on without people trying to negotiate through the media, because then you're going to break down the trust that you're building at the table.

Thanks for adding the examples. And throughout this conversation, I'm sensing a theme that there's a lot of careful planning and consideration. So thank you both for going through all of these. And if I can have you for a little bit longer, I have one more question, but talking more about skills now.

Skills and Techniques

Going back to preparations, when negotiators or mediators are preparing for negotiations, what are some of the particular skills and techniques they may wish to develop and later implement over the course of the talks?

So, Nicole, there are many different skills and techniques that negotiators, mediators might implement, but here are just a very quick overview of some of these techniques that parties may wish to develop and implement.

So throughout any negotiation, delegates can resort to a variety of persuasion techniques. These might include things like Storytelling, you know, in the past, this is how it happened. This is what happened. This is why this was successful or this is why this wasn't successful. Delegates can also reference objective standards, such as international norms or information that you found out from external experts to say, for example, well, under international law.

X, Y, and Z is correct. Or according to this report developed by this group of experts, A, B, and C is the correct approach. Delegates can also use common themes to present different interests and positions and to establish. common grounds. And then finally, delegates can also use questions strategically to find out from the other side, what exactly is your interest, to find out additional information about proposals, to find out more about some of the objective facts and figures that the other side might be using that might actually be helpful to your side.

And so sometimes instead of starting with a position, it might be a good idea to start with a friendly question to the other side, which then might help you to evolve your own position. But I know that Greg has a few other things to add on this topic.

Yeah. And I was just mentioned really quickly on the storytelling.

 There's one particular negotiation we're involved in where we essentially had to give time to each side to go back and kind of retell their history so that they could feel like they're being heard. And that everybody truly understood their side of the story before we even got to the present day and got to the issues that were at hand.

So, so a lot of these are very important. And it just had a few other additional negotiation techniques. These can make concern personnel, such as use of experts or changing the. The players to ensure that the best-matched negotiators from each team or in dialogue with one another, delegates may also wish to consider the most advantageous timing in controlling the discussion.

So, including establishing time limits for discussions in our speakers as well as establishing a set of signals to alert fellow delegates that the approaching time limits, or they're, so they can manage it better and also being aware of, when they're picking up when you're hitting the, the opposing parties, red lines and red flags.

And lastly, delegates can also review the progress of the negotiations by thoroughly documenting what's been said and how parties have responded to various proposals. This is critical. The note-taking that goes on during the negotiations and kind of that annotation for our side so we understand, okay, This was a key point, this was a key point.

Because at the end of the day when the negotiations are done, this is the negotiating history. And if you're actually negotiating an international agreement, That's one of the ways that we use to interpret it. So we have the kind of the plain meaning of the words in the document.

We have the object and the purpose of the document itself. But then there's the negotiating history. So taking these notes and really having an understanding of what was meant. When we were talking about this particular thing, or we decided to use these words in this particular order and put them in that sentence before, after the comma or the colon and all of these things are critically important.

So a good note, take our repertoire as it were, can really be beneficial to both sides, but especially to our team.

 Well, I think we've now covered all of the basic elements that negotiators or mediators might need to consider while preparing for negotiations. So this will conclude our conversation for today. And thank you both so very much for your time and for the audience for watching this video.