Abstract
The US and the Soviet Union have been involved in the mediation of numerous international conflicts since 1945. A comparison of their mediation activities reveals, however, important differences in the extent and the manner of their involvement. This chapter will examine their mediation records, and offer an explanation of the similarities and differences in their behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For a more detailed discussion of this view of mediation, see I.W. Zartman and S. Touval, ‘International Mediation: Conflict Resolution and Power Politics’, Journal of Social Issues, 41 (2) (1985), pp. 27–45.
For a recent systematic presentation of mediators’ motives see C.R. Mitchell, ‘The Motives for Mediation’, in C.R. Mitchell and K. Webb (eds), New Approaches to International Mediation (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1988), pp. 29–51.
On boundary and ethnic disputes in Eastern Europe and Soviet policies in the Stalin era, see Robert R. King, Minorities Under Communism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973).
Quoted in Richard Pipes, Survival is Not Enough (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1984), p. 69.
See, for example, F.C. Ikle, How Nations Negotiate (New York: Praeger, 1967)
Richard Pipes, ‘Operational Principles of Soviet Foreign Policy’, Survey, 19(2) (Spring 1973), pp. 41–61
Leon Sloss and M. Scott Davis (eds), A Game of High Stakes: Lessons Learned in Negotiating With the Soviet Union (Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1986)
and Joseph G. Whelan, Soviet Diplomacy and Negotiating Behavior (Boulder, Colorado: Westview, 1983).
On US mediation in the Arab-Israeli conflict see S. Touval, The Peace Brokers (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982).
A.A. Gromyko et. al. (eds), Diplomaticheskii Slovar [Diplomatic Dictionary] (Moscow: 1971) Vol. III, p. 453 under entry ‘Tashkent Conference 1966’.
For information about the Tashkent mediation I have relied mainly on Thomas Perry Thornton, ‘The Indo-Pakistani Conflict: Soviet Mediation at Tashkent, 1966’, in S. Touval and I.W. Zartman, International Mediation in Theory and Practice (Boulder, Colorado: Westview, 1985), pp. 141–71.
On this mediation see Marina Ottaway, Soviet and American Influence in the Horn Of Africa (New York: Praeger, 1982), pp. 111–14
Colin Legum and Bill Lee, Conflict in the Horn of Africa (New York and London: Africana Publishing Company, 1977), pp. 5, 13, 68, 92ff.
For similar arguments see I.W. Zartman, ‘The USSR in the Third World’, Problems of Communism, 31(5) (September-October 1982), pp. 76–8
Alvin Z. Rubinstein, Moscow’s Third World Strategy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988), p. 248.
See William B Quandt, Camp David (Washington: Brookings Institution, 1986).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1992 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Touval, S. (1992). The Superpowers as Mediators. In: Bercovitch, J., Rubin, J.Z. (eds) Mediation in International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230375864_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230375864_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-38859-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-37586-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)