The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
The summary
After the Cold War, the world politics would be multi-polar and multi-civilizational while nation states remain the most pivotal actors in world affairs. Although there are other alternative paradigms for the future of world politics, such as “one harmonious world”, “two worlds”, “184 states, more or less” and “sheer chaos”, the civilizational approach can solve the others’ deficiencies and incompatibility. Seeing the world affairs from the fault lines of civilizations can maintain the simplicity of the paradigm because there are only 7 or 8 major civilizations. Moreover, this approach can predict the emerging conflicts.
There are 7 or 8 civilizations: Sinic used for the common culture of China and the Chinese communities, Japanese, Hindu, Islamic, Orthodox, West, Latin American and perhaps African civilizations. Civilizations, since ancient times, have encountered, competed against one another, and interacted with one another. After the Cold War, the West is overwhelmingly dominant. Nonetheless, the gradual change will occur. The power of western civilization is going to decline relatively to the other civilizations, especially to Asian civilizations, i.e. China. The decline of West would be slow, not linear and simultaneous with the indigenization of the other cultures. Soft power is power only when it is backed up by the hard power. The process of indigenization is manifest in the revival of religion, especially in Asian and Islamic countries. Because the political identity and the authority are disrupted by the social-economic modernization, people come to the religion to seek for a sense of identity and a sense of community.
Cultural identity has become the central factor of a country’s association and antagonism after the 1990s. The states are concerned about their own cultural identity meanwhile people are also seeking identity and security. There are five reasons for the conflicts among different cultures and the cooperation among same civilizations. First, people have multiple identities. People differentiate themselves according to their cultures, which infers to the fact that the conflicts between the cultures are getting more serious. Second, the social-economic modernization contributes to the importance of cultural identity. Third, the affiliation to one group makes the differentiation between this group and others necessary, which is all relational. Fourth, although the conflicts between civilizations originated still from the traditional sources of conflicts: the territory, resources and relative power, the conflicts between the civilizations involve also cultural issues. Five, it’s natural to hate for people need enemies. Hence, the conflicts are everywhere.
Inter-civilization relations tend to have conflicts. The dangerous clashes in the future would stem from the interaction between Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance and Sinic assertiveness. Both Asian and Islamic civilizations are emphasizing their superiority to the Western culture. They manifest most their cultural differences among the other civilizations. Asian assertiveness comes from the economic growth, which enhances the government. Asian values or Asian affirmation includes four elements. First, Asian superior economic performance would eventually enable Asian countries to surpass the West in world affairs. Second, the economic success comes from Asian cultures, not from the Western cultures. Third, East Asians have many things in common in their civilizations despite the acknowledgement of the differences. Four, Asian values are the model for non-Western countries. The population growth in Muslim world has in turn provided the recruits for fundamentalism and for insurgency. The Muslim countries want to modernize but not Westernize. Although the Islamic insurgency shares many commonalities with the Protestant Reformation, the Islamic insurgency touches almost every Muslim society, which is much bigger in scope. The insurgency came from the economic growth during the oil crises and is propelled by the demographic growth after the control of petroleum waned. Governments use the Islamic Resurgence as a tool but are also conditioned by the Resurgence.
There are three issues that the West differs from the non-Westerners increasingly. First, the West wants to maintain military superiority with aid of non-proliferation measures. Second, the West promotes the human rights and tries to impose the political values and other moral standards such as human rights and democracy on other countries. Third, the West tries to maintain its cultural integrity by restricting the number pf non-Western immigrants or refugees. The ability of the West to pursue these goals depends on the conflicts that will reshape the global politics. The conflicts would come by two forms: fault line conflicts at micro level and core state conflicts at macro level. The Muslim-non Muslim clash would be prevalent in fault line conflicts.
The Gulf War was the first post-Cold War resource war between civilizations. Fault line wars have several characteristics. Fault line wars are lengthy and bloody. They are communal conflicts betweens different cultural states or groups. Fault line conflicts are about the struggle of territory or control over people. They are protracted wars. The Muslims are the central actors in fault line conflicts because of historical hatred, rapid demographic growth and recent democratization.
The West needs to renew itself in order to counter the relative decline vis-à-vis the other civilizations. Western universalism is dangerous because this idea would confront the assertiveness of other cultures. The West should maintain its military and technological superior capacities and recognize that the interventions done by the West are the most perilous source of conflicts in a post-Cold War world. In the future, to avoid the civilizational conflicts, no civilization should intervene in the affairs of others. The United Nations would also need to go under institutional reforms to embody the relative decline and rise.
The critic
Huntington wrote this book, The Clash of Civilizations, to counter the arguments proposed by Francis Fukuyama in The End of History . I think it’s interesting to see what is coming next after the Cold War because there are so many uncertainties. On one hand, he succeeded in arguing that the history does not end at democracy’s victory over communism or other regimes. On the other hand, I think there is a misinterpretation of other cultures in Huntington’s argument. I don’t think that the differences among the major civilizations are actually the future sources for conflicts. Huntington, in my eye, has had a skeptic perception towards the other civilizations. Why can the other civilizations not be the peace breaker? Why can these emerging economies and civilizations not just enjoy the confidence of their success? The non-West can enjoy the success and stand up to voice their point of view without wanting to invade the world. The label of “anti-American” does not mean an eventual war between the West and non-West.
In page 127, Huntington talked about the convergence of similar cultures. He said, ‘In East Asia, home to people of six different civilizations, arms buildups gain momentum and territorial dispute come to the fore.’ He mentioned that Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore are increasingly oriented toward China. Moreover, Koreas are moving towards the unification. I don’t agree this part. He simplifies the world into seven or eight civilizations in order to portray the world in another way. I think this is also a way to observe the relations among and within states, but the over-simplification is dangerous. Even within the same civilization, conflicts are not extinct. Even between the broader Chinese culture, Taiwan, Singapore and China have often frictions and possibility of use of force. Sharing the same culture does not lead to a common goal.
I like the idea of the return to religion. La Revanche de Dieu, as Huntington mentioned, comes from the French scholar, Gilles Kepel. Kepel first published this book in 1991. He thinks that after 1975 the movement back to the religion has gained enormous force because of the collapse of political ideologies, crumbling of the economic prosperity and laxity of “social glue ”. The return is not toward a general religion but to a strict and pure religion, which emphasizes the text, such as Koran and Bible. Any kind of religious movement, joined by the young, educated and modern “army”, can right now seize the power from the top and mobilize the crowd from the bottom. All these movements also provoke new conflicts on the old controversy: the denominational cleavages.
At the same time, I came to understand the reasons why the West is tightening their policies regarding the immigrants. The demographic growth differs from the West and the non-West. The Muslims, the Africans, the Latino Americans and the Asians (Indians for example) will outnumber the Western population in a few years. The United Kingdom will be a Muslim country in a few years. Such a fact or trend is shocking for the West. The West is tightening the control of immigrants because the Western countries are afraid that they would lose control over the resources and the wealth.
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
A Multiparty Conflict and Negotiations
The background of the conflicts
Roommate problems have been a nightmare for most college students. Good roommates would become a person’s best friends for life, but the discord between roommates could cause a lot for students who aim at studies.
International Student House (ISH) is a private dormitory founded by Quaker Foundation, accommodating up to 100 people. Paulina, Li-Ting and Jackie share a triple room in ISH. Three girls sleep in a big room; there is a bathroom and a walking closet in the room.
Three girls are from different continents: Li-Ting is Taiwanese, Paulina is from Finland and Jackie comes from South Africa. They are getting along well because they can talk about many things and enhance the global understanding. However, some problems have emerged.
First of all, Li-Ting found out that three people’s schedules are very different and sometimes their schedules clash. Paulina and Jackie need to go to work early in the morning while Li-Ting is still in bed. Paulina and Jackie would talk although Li-Ting is still sleeping. Paulina would slam the drawers and talk on the cell phone, which disturbs Li-Ting’s sleep. Li-Ting, on the other hand, usually stays up late for studying while the other two need to go to bed early. The lamp at Li-Ting’s desk would cause Paulina and Jackie to get a good sleep. The noises cause three parties’ bad quality of sleep and make the quality of life worse. Second, three people are supposed to share the responsibility of cleaning up the bathroom since it’s a private bathroom and the maid would not come into the room to clean it up frequently. Paulina does not try to help the cleaning and she has never emptied the common trash cans. Li-Ting feels that she is the only one who cleans up the bathroom and uses the vacuum cleaner to maintain the tidiness. Third, Jackie moved in after Li-Ting and Paulina so she has a bad spot in the walking closet. She thinks that the others have the advantage over her although they are paying the same rent. Fourth, Jackie does not clean the bathtub after taking a bath or shaving, which generates a lot of negative feelings in Li-Ting’s and Paulina’s mind. These troubles are making their life more and more difficult and the atmosphere of this room is getting gloom.
Are these issues possible to be dealt with among them? How are they going to solve these problems? Is it necessary for any party to change to another room eventually?
Know yourself and understand the others first
The multiparty conflicts are more complicated for several reasons. There are more people involves, which infers to more issues. At the same time, the involvement of each party is not the same in every issue. It means that the interests are more difficult to identify. Their nationalities also make the conversation more difficult because every party is subject to his or her own culture. How to engage the conversation becomes a tough issue to deal with prior to the real negotiations.
Before engaging the conflicts, it’s pivotal to understand the cultural differences among the parties. It would be especially important in a multilateral negotiation to avoid some taboos. Paulina is from Finland; a European culture applies to her. She is more individualistic than Li-Ting is. Jackie is also from the Western community in South Africa so she also shares some common habits as Paulina. Paulina and Jackie should know that Li-Ting hesitates to reveal her true feelings because of many reasons and that one of the reasons is that people from East Asia don’t like to stir up a disharmony. Li-Ting needs to understand that she won’t improve the situation by saying nothing to her roommates.
It would be very beneficial for all parties if the participants do some assessment about themselves before going into the negotiation room, such as Thomas and Kilmann conflict assessment or life-trap test. Thomas and Kilmann assessment can help the tester to understand his conflict engagement mode. Li-Ting knows that she has an accommodating and somehow withdrawing personality while facing the conflicts. This is due to her education and the way that her family deals with emotions. Therefore, she normally puts up with all the things that bother her if it is not really disagreeable to bear. However, the roommate problems are actually affecting her sleep and this would in turn have a negative effect on her studies. A good negotiator should know his or her natural impulses very well but the negotiator will use these modes of engagement as a strategy. Being accommodating at some occasions can make the negotiator be assertive in other issues or facilitate the person to make a trade-off. Hence, Li-Ting should be problem-solving but not withdrawing if she wants to reach a common solution with her roommates.
What’s an objective criterion?
In formal multiparty negotiations, the first thing to negotiate even prior the negotiations is to talk about the process and the decision making. All parties should agree on a framework of how the negotiation will proceed. If one party feels the process is at his or her disadvantage, he or she may be reluctant to participate in the talk. Hence, objective criteria during the negotiations are extremely pivotal.
In a multiparty negotiation, a facilitator is sometimes needed. The facilitator does not have a direct interest in the conflict, and the facilitator does not have rights to change the agreement. In this case, Li-Ting, Paulina and Jackie can ask a friend to join the conversation. The friend would be neutral. This friend should not decide for three parties but only try to make the conversation flow.
One more principle is that only one party speaks at a time. The negotiations should proceed in a rational basis. When a party is speaking, the others listen attentively and actively. Only after one finished his argument can others start to talk.
Application of the difficult conversation tactics
According to Difficult Conversations, there is an underlying structure within every conversation. Whatever the people converse falls into three simultaneous conversations: the “what happened” conversation, the feelings conversation and the identity conversation. A successful negotiator should be very circumspect and try to deal with these three conversations at the same time.
First of all, the negotiating parties are recommended to deal with their respective feelings. In the interest based negotiations the negotiator should know his or her emotions and tried to understand it, the negotiator should prevent himself from being controlled by the emotions. The ARIA process, in my eye, would be a very good start because this process realizes conflicts produce strong feelings. The ARIA process, in contrast to the interest-based negotiations, emphasizes the importance of emotional exchange and at the same time the ARIA method still analyzes the conflicts objectively and rationally. ARIA process consists of 4 steps: antagonism, resonance, invention of more options and actions. Hence, Li-Ting and her roommates should tell one another their own feelings and what they think of one another. Li-Ting should reveal her emotions to her two roommates and justify her emotions with some evidence to prevent the expression of emotion from becoming a personal attack. After every party says what they feel, Li-Ting and her roommates should try to be in one another’s shoes and try to see why the other parties feel a certain way for her. This process can help the negotiators to cope with the feelings conversation.
Secondly, all parties should avoid three mistakes in the “what happened” conversation: arguing about right or wrong, assuming the others know each other’s intention and blaming the other parties.
l All parties should stop argue what is true. They should talk about what’s important.
2 The negotiator should stop assuming he or she knows the intentions of others. Don’t start to think that somebody is malevolent while one is not sure.
3 A good negotiator should not blame others and let his emotions override the conversation. It is suggested that the parties use the contribution system.
For any kind of negotiation, multiparty or not, the negotiator always need to prepare himself to the conversation. For a multiparty negotiation, it’s essential to draw a map of entangling interests. Knowing each dialogist’s interests can enable the negotiator to link the issues and do some trade-offs during the negotiations.
In order to figure out what’s important to Li-Ting and her roommates, it is appropriate to use the 9 element analysis to identify the issues lying under this complicated surface. According to three parties’ analysis, there are some common grounds and interests. Li-Ting, Jackie and Paulina, the three main parties in these conflicts, all want a good living environment. Based on this desire, the three parties would have a deeper motivation to sit down and talk it through. For the kind of conversation, the difficult parts lie in how to start the conversation and how to prevent the conversation from accusation and blame.
According to Difficult Conversations, the three parties should sit down and talk, but talk is not enough. People sometimes converse but do not communicate. Moreover, people tend to unconsciously avoid the sensitive parts, which are actually something that they hold on to. Meanwhile, they also need to realize that every person perceive the reality from different angles, which is also called “cone-in-the-box”. Li-Ting should listen to the others and accumulate the information that she has got from the conversation in order to have a holistic view of the truth. Paulina does not mean to slam the drawers in the morning. She is the only child in her family; therefore, she has never lived with somebody in the same room. Li-Ting lived in a quadruple room while she was an undergraduate so she is used to living in an environment where people enjoy less privacy. Jackie needs to be informed that her hygienic habits are disturbing the other two parties. After this, they can talk about their own contribution into the current discord. Instead of blaming one another, to think in terms of contribution involves self-consciousness and a shared responsibility. For example, Jackie admits that she does not pay attention to the dirt and hair in the bathtub after the bath. This does not require an apology but this would make the other parties feel better and facilitate the conversation. If no side is ready to say what they contribute the conflicts, it’s possible to ask an observer to point it out.
Thirdly, every negotiator should pay attention to identity conversations, which might actually be the most difficult problems in some occasion. There are mainly three identity issues that a person need to deal with in a difficult conversation. The first issue is about being competent or not. The second issue is about whether the dialogist is a good person. If the person thinks that making another party uncomfortable makes him a bad person, this person would often back in at the end. The third issue is about whether a person feels love-worthy. For example, Jackie is a PHD student and researcher in cancer studies but her research is not going well recently. She might feel incompetent and doubt herself if Li-Ting raises the question about the ability of taking care of everyone’s own space and cleaning it up. This would trigger a huge rebound from Jackie, which is unconscious but has a significant impact on the conversation.
Invent more options!
After all the parties in the multiparty negotiation explore the true story of what happened, they can have an image of every party’ interests and know where the common ground is. All parties would need to work toward a problem solving solution. The final agreement would be more difficult to reach in a multiparty negotiation; however, it’s not impossible. A feasible and satisfactory solution should be an option that all parties can accept and don’t feel harmed and forced. Thus, the question is not about forcing the other negotiators to agree with one party’s proposal. The participants would need to seek for more viable options outside of the original ones. If the negotiators think their respective proposal is the best answer, it would be very difficult for them to break the ideology jail and the negotiators might ignore a potentially better solution which will satisfy all participants. For instance, Paulina won’t accept Li-Ting’s proposal about the noise if Li-Ting just wants to impose her will on Paulina. Moreover, Jackie won’t accept to clean the bathtub if Paulina does not do something about the trash bins. The roommates would soon realize that they need to find an altogether solution to cover all the issues.
When issues are complicated, the complexity would slow down the negotiations and probably make the final agreement unsatisfactory because the negotiators would sometimes neglect some underlying issues and forget to deal with them in the final agreement. Hence, the negotiator would think the final agreement does not encompass what he or she desires to deal with and then renounce the agreement. That’s one of the reasons why a successful negotiation might not be implemented at the end.
Circle Chart: 4 basic steps for inventing options
Therefore, during the process of finding a viable solution, the Circle Chart Analysis[5] is a very useful tool. The circle chart includes four steps: the problem, diagnoses, the general prescriptions and specific action ideas. These four steps infer to the logical steps to solve a problem, but people often make intuitive thinking and jump to the conclusion too fast. The chart enables negotiators to see the situation with lucidity and averts them from ignoring certain topics that they need to handle. It’s recommended that negotiators use this analysis repeatedly during the negotiations because the ongoing situation changes as the negotiations go on.
Actions!
The implementation of the outcome document is frequently a problem in international relations. The congress might not rectify the treaty or the agreement. A good negotiator would make sure that his counterparts communicate the progress back to the governments and the congress and that his counterparts are working on the domestic support. Therefore, the final document won’t be a surprise for the congress and thus the agreement is backed up by the congress.
Another problem of implementation is that there are free riders. Some parties would escape from their duty to perform the agreement because they can still benefit from the deeds of others, which is the idea of “externality”. Hence, an enforcement mechanism is in need.
Even in this case, the roommates agree upon a feasible solution. However, Paulina is actually not used to cleaning up the bathroom because her mother is the one who does the house chores in her family in Finland. She also thinks that she does not need to perform the tasks because she pays the rent here and the maid should come and clean the room. Because of these thoughts, the implementation of the solution would be hard. Jackie also finds that she still feels disturbed at night when Li-Ting finishes her work in the library and comes back to the room at two o’clock in the morning. Hence, the commitment that every party has made is falling apart.
In this case, they need to ask Paulina to perform her duty. If Paulina does not
want to do it, Li-Ting and Jackie can use the last resort: asking for help from the dormitory manager. The manager can either persuade Paulina to clean up the room or switch her to another room where there is no private bathroom.
For Jackie and Li-Ting, they can renegotiate on the arrangement of time. Jackie needs to ask whether Li-Ting is willing to try to go to bed earlier. If nothing can be done, Li-Ting might choose another alternative instead of accommodating the others’ habits and schedules. A person’s lifestyle is not easy to be altered. Li-Ting has been used to working during the night since little because she is more efficient at the moment of the day. It’s really difficult for her to change from a night howl to a day person. Then, she can give up the negotiations and exert her BATNA. She can tell the manager that they cannot solve the problems although the roommates try. The manager can arrange a single room or another double room for her if there is some rooms available. Li-Ting would need to report this to her mother and ask for financial help, which would be another negotiation.
Conclusion
Negotiations can be vital or trivial, and negotiations for new negotiations ensue from original ones, which would be a continual process. After such an analysis of the roommates’ conflicts, the roommates should by now understand that they all want a good living environment and that they all need to work for it. The communications among the roommates need to be enhanced although it is tough to start the conversations.
Three significant tasks during the difficult conversations are that all parties need to deal with the true story, their feelings and their identities. Talking and understanding provide a solid basis for potential solutions. The roommates need to do some brainstorming to come up with creative solutions. The dialogists would choose a solution that everyone accepts and implement it. If the situation does not improve, they may restart the process of negotiations again to seek for a better means to satisfy all their needs.
Roommate problems have been a nightmare for most college students. Good roommates would become a person’s best friends for life, but the discord between roommates could cause a lot for students who aim at studies.
International Student House (ISH) is a private dormitory founded by Quaker Foundation, accommodating up to 100 people. Paulina, Li-Ting and Jackie share a triple room in ISH. Three girls sleep in a big room; there is a bathroom and a walking closet in the room.
Three girls are from different continents: Li-Ting is Taiwanese, Paulina is from Finland and Jackie comes from South Africa. They are getting along well because they can talk about many things and enhance the global understanding. However, some problems have emerged.
First of all, Li-Ting found out that three people’s schedules are very different and sometimes their schedules clash. Paulina and Jackie need to go to work early in the morning while Li-Ting is still in bed. Paulina and Jackie would talk although Li-Ting is still sleeping. Paulina would slam the drawers and talk on the cell phone, which disturbs Li-Ting’s sleep. Li-Ting, on the other hand, usually stays up late for studying while the other two need to go to bed early. The lamp at Li-Ting’s desk would cause Paulina and Jackie to get a good sleep. The noises cause three parties’ bad quality of sleep and make the quality of life worse. Second, three people are supposed to share the responsibility of cleaning up the bathroom since it’s a private bathroom and the maid would not come into the room to clean it up frequently. Paulina does not try to help the cleaning and she has never emptied the common trash cans. Li-Ting feels that she is the only one who cleans up the bathroom and uses the vacuum cleaner to maintain the tidiness. Third, Jackie moved in after Li-Ting and Paulina so she has a bad spot in the walking closet. She thinks that the others have the advantage over her although they are paying the same rent. Fourth, Jackie does not clean the bathtub after taking a bath or shaving, which generates a lot of negative feelings in Li-Ting’s and Paulina’s mind. These troubles are making their life more and more difficult and the atmosphere of this room is getting gloom.
Are these issues possible to be dealt with among them? How are they going to solve these problems? Is it necessary for any party to change to another room eventually?
Know yourself and understand the others first
The multiparty conflicts are more complicated for several reasons. There are more people involves, which infers to more issues. At the same time, the involvement of each party is not the same in every issue. It means that the interests are more difficult to identify. Their nationalities also make the conversation more difficult because every party is subject to his or her own culture. How to engage the conversation becomes a tough issue to deal with prior to the real negotiations.
Before engaging the conflicts, it’s pivotal to understand the cultural differences among the parties. It would be especially important in a multilateral negotiation to avoid some taboos. Paulina is from Finland; a European culture applies to her. She is more individualistic than Li-Ting is. Jackie is also from the Western community in South Africa so she also shares some common habits as Paulina. Paulina and Jackie should know that Li-Ting hesitates to reveal her true feelings because of many reasons and that one of the reasons is that people from East Asia don’t like to stir up a disharmony. Li-Ting needs to understand that she won’t improve the situation by saying nothing to her roommates.
It would be very beneficial for all parties if the participants do some assessment about themselves before going into the negotiation room, such as Thomas and Kilmann conflict assessment or life-trap test. Thomas and Kilmann assessment can help the tester to understand his conflict engagement mode. Li-Ting knows that she has an accommodating and somehow withdrawing personality while facing the conflicts. This is due to her education and the way that her family deals with emotions. Therefore, she normally puts up with all the things that bother her if it is not really disagreeable to bear. However, the roommate problems are actually affecting her sleep and this would in turn have a negative effect on her studies. A good negotiator should know his or her natural impulses very well but the negotiator will use these modes of engagement as a strategy. Being accommodating at some occasions can make the negotiator be assertive in other issues or facilitate the person to make a trade-off. Hence, Li-Ting should be problem-solving but not withdrawing if she wants to reach a common solution with her roommates.
What’s an objective criterion?
In formal multiparty negotiations, the first thing to negotiate even prior the negotiations is to talk about the process and the decision making. All parties should agree on a framework of how the negotiation will proceed. If one party feels the process is at his or her disadvantage, he or she may be reluctant to participate in the talk. Hence, objective criteria during the negotiations are extremely pivotal.
In a multiparty negotiation, a facilitator is sometimes needed. The facilitator does not have a direct interest in the conflict, and the facilitator does not have rights to change the agreement. In this case, Li-Ting, Paulina and Jackie can ask a friend to join the conversation. The friend would be neutral. This friend should not decide for three parties but only try to make the conversation flow.
One more principle is that only one party speaks at a time. The negotiations should proceed in a rational basis. When a party is speaking, the others listen attentively and actively. Only after one finished his argument can others start to talk.
Application of the difficult conversation tactics
According to Difficult Conversations, there is an underlying structure within every conversation. Whatever the people converse falls into three simultaneous conversations: the “what happened” conversation, the feelings conversation and the identity conversation. A successful negotiator should be very circumspect and try to deal with these three conversations at the same time.
First of all, the negotiating parties are recommended to deal with their respective feelings. In the interest based negotiations the negotiator should know his or her emotions and tried to understand it, the negotiator should prevent himself from being controlled by the emotions. The ARIA process, in my eye, would be a very good start because this process realizes conflicts produce strong feelings. The ARIA process, in contrast to the interest-based negotiations, emphasizes the importance of emotional exchange and at the same time the ARIA method still analyzes the conflicts objectively and rationally. ARIA process consists of 4 steps: antagonism, resonance, invention of more options and actions. Hence, Li-Ting and her roommates should tell one another their own feelings and what they think of one another. Li-Ting should reveal her emotions to her two roommates and justify her emotions with some evidence to prevent the expression of emotion from becoming a personal attack. After every party says what they feel, Li-Ting and her roommates should try to be in one another’s shoes and try to see why the other parties feel a certain way for her. This process can help the negotiators to cope with the feelings conversation.
Secondly, all parties should avoid three mistakes in the “what happened” conversation: arguing about right or wrong, assuming the others know each other’s intention and blaming the other parties.
l All parties should stop argue what is true. They should talk about what’s important.
2 The negotiator should stop assuming he or she knows the intentions of others. Don’t start to think that somebody is malevolent while one is not sure.
3 A good negotiator should not blame others and let his emotions override the conversation. It is suggested that the parties use the contribution system.
For any kind of negotiation, multiparty or not, the negotiator always need to prepare himself to the conversation. For a multiparty negotiation, it’s essential to draw a map of entangling interests. Knowing each dialogist’s interests can enable the negotiator to link the issues and do some trade-offs during the negotiations.
In order to figure out what’s important to Li-Ting and her roommates, it is appropriate to use the 9 element analysis to identify the issues lying under this complicated surface. According to three parties’ analysis, there are some common grounds and interests. Li-Ting, Jackie and Paulina, the three main parties in these conflicts, all want a good living environment. Based on this desire, the three parties would have a deeper motivation to sit down and talk it through. For the kind of conversation, the difficult parts lie in how to start the conversation and how to prevent the conversation from accusation and blame.
According to Difficult Conversations, the three parties should sit down and talk, but talk is not enough. People sometimes converse but do not communicate. Moreover, people tend to unconsciously avoid the sensitive parts, which are actually something that they hold on to. Meanwhile, they also need to realize that every person perceive the reality from different angles, which is also called “cone-in-the-box”. Li-Ting should listen to the others and accumulate the information that she has got from the conversation in order to have a holistic view of the truth. Paulina does not mean to slam the drawers in the morning. She is the only child in her family; therefore, she has never lived with somebody in the same room. Li-Ting lived in a quadruple room while she was an undergraduate so she is used to living in an environment where people enjoy less privacy. Jackie needs to be informed that her hygienic habits are disturbing the other two parties. After this, they can talk about their own contribution into the current discord. Instead of blaming one another, to think in terms of contribution involves self-consciousness and a shared responsibility. For example, Jackie admits that she does not pay attention to the dirt and hair in the bathtub after the bath. This does not require an apology but this would make the other parties feel better and facilitate the conversation. If no side is ready to say what they contribute the conflicts, it’s possible to ask an observer to point it out.
Thirdly, every negotiator should pay attention to identity conversations, which might actually be the most difficult problems in some occasion. There are mainly three identity issues that a person need to deal with in a difficult conversation. The first issue is about being competent or not. The second issue is about whether the dialogist is a good person. If the person thinks that making another party uncomfortable makes him a bad person, this person would often back in at the end. The third issue is about whether a person feels love-worthy. For example, Jackie is a PHD student and researcher in cancer studies but her research is not going well recently. She might feel incompetent and doubt herself if Li-Ting raises the question about the ability of taking care of everyone’s own space and cleaning it up. This would trigger a huge rebound from Jackie, which is unconscious but has a significant impact on the conversation.
Invent more options!
After all the parties in the multiparty negotiation explore the true story of what happened, they can have an image of every party’ interests and know where the common ground is. All parties would need to work toward a problem solving solution. The final agreement would be more difficult to reach in a multiparty negotiation; however, it’s not impossible. A feasible and satisfactory solution should be an option that all parties can accept and don’t feel harmed and forced. Thus, the question is not about forcing the other negotiators to agree with one party’s proposal. The participants would need to seek for more viable options outside of the original ones. If the negotiators think their respective proposal is the best answer, it would be very difficult for them to break the ideology jail and the negotiators might ignore a potentially better solution which will satisfy all participants. For instance, Paulina won’t accept Li-Ting’s proposal about the noise if Li-Ting just wants to impose her will on Paulina. Moreover, Jackie won’t accept to clean the bathtub if Paulina does not do something about the trash bins. The roommates would soon realize that they need to find an altogether solution to cover all the issues.
When issues are complicated, the complexity would slow down the negotiations and probably make the final agreement unsatisfactory because the negotiators would sometimes neglect some underlying issues and forget to deal with them in the final agreement. Hence, the negotiator would think the final agreement does not encompass what he or she desires to deal with and then renounce the agreement. That’s one of the reasons why a successful negotiation might not be implemented at the end.
Circle Chart: 4 basic steps for inventing options
Therefore, during the process of finding a viable solution, the Circle Chart Analysis[5] is a very useful tool. The circle chart includes four steps: the problem, diagnoses, the general prescriptions and specific action ideas. These four steps infer to the logical steps to solve a problem, but people often make intuitive thinking and jump to the conclusion too fast. The chart enables negotiators to see the situation with lucidity and averts them from ignoring certain topics that they need to handle. It’s recommended that negotiators use this analysis repeatedly during the negotiations because the ongoing situation changes as the negotiations go on.
Actions!
The implementation of the outcome document is frequently a problem in international relations. The congress might not rectify the treaty or the agreement. A good negotiator would make sure that his counterparts communicate the progress back to the governments and the congress and that his counterparts are working on the domestic support. Therefore, the final document won’t be a surprise for the congress and thus the agreement is backed up by the congress.
Another problem of implementation is that there are free riders. Some parties would escape from their duty to perform the agreement because they can still benefit from the deeds of others, which is the idea of “externality”. Hence, an enforcement mechanism is in need.
Even in this case, the roommates agree upon a feasible solution. However, Paulina is actually not used to cleaning up the bathroom because her mother is the one who does the house chores in her family in Finland. She also thinks that she does not need to perform the tasks because she pays the rent here and the maid should come and clean the room. Because of these thoughts, the implementation of the solution would be hard. Jackie also finds that she still feels disturbed at night when Li-Ting finishes her work in the library and comes back to the room at two o’clock in the morning. Hence, the commitment that every party has made is falling apart.
In this case, they need to ask Paulina to perform her duty. If Paulina does not
want to do it, Li-Ting and Jackie can use the last resort: asking for help from the dormitory manager. The manager can either persuade Paulina to clean up the room or switch her to another room where there is no private bathroom.
For Jackie and Li-Ting, they can renegotiate on the arrangement of time. Jackie needs to ask whether Li-Ting is willing to try to go to bed earlier. If nothing can be done, Li-Ting might choose another alternative instead of accommodating the others’ habits and schedules. A person’s lifestyle is not easy to be altered. Li-Ting has been used to working during the night since little because she is more efficient at the moment of the day. It’s really difficult for her to change from a night howl to a day person. Then, she can give up the negotiations and exert her BATNA. She can tell the manager that they cannot solve the problems although the roommates try. The manager can arrange a single room or another double room for her if there is some rooms available. Li-Ting would need to report this to her mother and ask for financial help, which would be another negotiation.
Conclusion
Negotiations can be vital or trivial, and negotiations for new negotiations ensue from original ones, which would be a continual process. After such an analysis of the roommates’ conflicts, the roommates should by now understand that they all want a good living environment and that they all need to work for it. The communications among the roommates need to be enhanced although it is tough to start the conversations.
Three significant tasks during the difficult conversations are that all parties need to deal with the true story, their feelings and their identities. Talking and understanding provide a solid basis for potential solutions. The roommates need to do some brainstorming to come up with creative solutions. The dialogists would choose a solution that everyone accepts and implement it. If the situation does not improve, they may restart the process of negotiations again to seek for a better means to satisfy all their needs.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Mass Democracy and Strong Man Leadership
Recently I feel my life can also fit into the international politics theory. Such theories are after all empirical. It’s proper to say that the strong man has the legitimacy to exist. I think sometimes it’s even better for the public good.
Mass democracy=Mass stupidity
Mass democracy means that the mass/ people decide where the whole group is going. People aggregate their view and then they formed the final decision. However, if this mass is an organized one, the group would be easily misled. If a person said something, other people think that they also think the same thing. This is a sort of decision that would easily go wrong because the process of forming the consensus without the deliberation is dangerous. At the same time, it’s also perilous if the people have all sorts of opinions. The opinions can be so divided that the mass cannot go anywhere. Because everyone is equal in the system, everyone could just doubt one another’s opinion and propose an alternative. In this sense, the mass need to put up with the chaos before actually reaching somewhere.
For example, several people and I went to see the fireworks on a Saturday night. That was the beginning of chaos. One would say let’s take this road to the Water Front. One got his guidebook and pointed the wrong direction. One said, “No, my friends said that we should take the 9th street.” One said that he wanted to meet his friends so we had better take another street. Suddenly, we passed by the 9th Street and I told that person that it’s already 9th Street. I know I was right but the mass just did not listen. That person said that he did not think it’s the 9th Street. I felt the depressing frustration. I think at the perfect moment, I realized why Plato said that he want to participate in the political forum. He said he did not want to be ruled by the stupid people. I think it’s the same frustration that Plato and I share when the people who know the truth are not listened to. Finally that person took us to the 12th Street and he could not find the way to the Water Front. The mass started to blame each other, but luckily 15 minutes later we happened to find the Water Street. Although we did not get a very good view at first, I motioned to move forward and the crowd followed. We finally got a better view near between the 7th and the 9th Street.
I knew from the beginning that I was right. However, I don’t understand the reason why I did not insist. Perhaps I am still the minority in the mass. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave was a perfect illustration for this. When there is only one person having insights, he is often oppressed. Hence, I say “Mass democracy is actually the mass stupidity.”
Strong Man
There is another way to make decision in the International Student House. Sometimes there would be a strong man in the group and everyone just accept his decision. Everyone accept because the mass don’t care about the outcome of some issues or because everyone respects the authority of the strong man. The decision making process would not be fussy. However, the single man leading could go wrong if the man is heading to the wrong direction. If the mass thinks that he did not do a good job this time, the strong man’s authority would be challenged. In international politics, the strong man would use a more suppressive ruling style to strengthen the regime lest his authority would be threatened.
Take my life in ISH for example, I don’t think I am the strong man, but I am often asked to lead the crowd, to show the direction and to make a decision. Nonetheless, this leadership is not solid because everyone can contradict me. I have no means to control the crowd or I have not that authority to make the mass to obey. This is the gap between the daily life and the international politics.
It’s interesting how we can reflect on Plato’s wisdom and democracy theory in our daily life. It shows the students of international relations that there is only a subtle difference between the theory and the practice.
Mass democracy=Mass stupidity
Mass democracy means that the mass/ people decide where the whole group is going. People aggregate their view and then they formed the final decision. However, if this mass is an organized one, the group would be easily misled. If a person said something, other people think that they also think the same thing. This is a sort of decision that would easily go wrong because the process of forming the consensus without the deliberation is dangerous. At the same time, it’s also perilous if the people have all sorts of opinions. The opinions can be so divided that the mass cannot go anywhere. Because everyone is equal in the system, everyone could just doubt one another’s opinion and propose an alternative. In this sense, the mass need to put up with the chaos before actually reaching somewhere.
For example, several people and I went to see the fireworks on a Saturday night. That was the beginning of chaos. One would say let’s take this road to the Water Front. One got his guidebook and pointed the wrong direction. One said, “No, my friends said that we should take the 9th street.” One said that he wanted to meet his friends so we had better take another street. Suddenly, we passed by the 9th Street and I told that person that it’s already 9th Street. I know I was right but the mass just did not listen. That person said that he did not think it’s the 9th Street. I felt the depressing frustration. I think at the perfect moment, I realized why Plato said that he want to participate in the political forum. He said he did not want to be ruled by the stupid people. I think it’s the same frustration that Plato and I share when the people who know the truth are not listened to. Finally that person took us to the 12th Street and he could not find the way to the Water Front. The mass started to blame each other, but luckily 15 minutes later we happened to find the Water Street. Although we did not get a very good view at first, I motioned to move forward and the crowd followed. We finally got a better view near between the 7th and the 9th Street.
I knew from the beginning that I was right. However, I don’t understand the reason why I did not insist. Perhaps I am still the minority in the mass. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave was a perfect illustration for this. When there is only one person having insights, he is often oppressed. Hence, I say “Mass democracy is actually the mass stupidity.”
Strong Man
There is another way to make decision in the International Student House. Sometimes there would be a strong man in the group and everyone just accept his decision. Everyone accept because the mass don’t care about the outcome of some issues or because everyone respects the authority of the strong man. The decision making process would not be fussy. However, the single man leading could go wrong if the man is heading to the wrong direction. If the mass thinks that he did not do a good job this time, the strong man’s authority would be challenged. In international politics, the strong man would use a more suppressive ruling style to strengthen the regime lest his authority would be threatened.
Take my life in ISH for example, I don’t think I am the strong man, but I am often asked to lead the crowd, to show the direction and to make a decision. Nonetheless, this leadership is not solid because everyone can contradict me. I have no means to control the crowd or I have not that authority to make the mass to obey. This is the gap between the daily life and the international politics.
It’s interesting how we can reflect on Plato’s wisdom and democracy theory in our daily life. It shows the students of international relations that there is only a subtle difference between the theory and the practice.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
Reflections on Casino
I represented Vice President Jamie Jackson in the Casino case and the environmentalist group in Harborco. The Casino conversation is a more simple negotiation in terms of numbers of people involved because there were only two people whereas the Harborco involves the whole class. Harborco was more complicated since it’s a multiparty negotiation. However, the Casino is really very difficult, personally speaking. Despite the difficulties that I have intrinsically, I think I still managed to reach a successful result.
One of the reasons why I felt a greater difficulty during the Casino talk is that the two parties were supposed to talk about not only their professional performance but also their relationship. I am not very good at handling the relational problem but it happened to be the most important part of this difficult conversation. In my childhood, my parents rarely had intimate talks with me or with my brother and then the children are not encouraged to share the deep most emotions towards the parents or siblings. Showing the intimacy is an embarrassing thing in my family and in most Chinese families. For example, boys are not supposed to cry. Hence, I have been very clumsy in this aspect. While growing up, I was not at ease to show my true feelings to my friends; I could be humorous and funny but I was not ready to say what I really thought. Right now, even with my boyfriend, I have similar problems. I need to think about what to say for a very long time beforehand. I need to prepare myself and summon the courage to initiate the conversation. In most situations, I will try not to touch on the sensitive parts and make the conversation flow. Hence, I was not comfortable for a deep conversation between Jamie Jackson and Allison although we had done the brainstorming. I think that my personality might prevent myself from being communicative because I am not good at expressing what I feel. This might make people think that I am always discontent or the inverse.
Only after doing Thomas-Kilmann assessment, did I know that I have a propensity to avoid or withdraw from the problems during the negotiations. I assume that this is a common problem among East Asians. In the Taiwanese culture, people avoid to say “No” directly to one another because they want to maintain the harmony within the group. It’s very difficult for me to come to someone and then to make a complaint to the person directly. Blaming somebody or asking a person to assuming the responsibility is not in the traditional culture because the decisions are based on the consensus. Nowadays, the American culture permeates the Taiwanese traditional culture: people are more and more straightforward. However, it’s very hard for me to suggest the other party that he has made a mistake and he has not met the expectations. Normally, I would prefer to escape from the conversation like this kind. I would just avoid seeing that person and postpone the conversation from taking place. However, I had an American partner who represented Allison. He was more direct than me. I felt some pressure from his questions. For instance, when he asked me “Are you avoiding me?” I felt a sudden guilt and I stuttered a little bit because I felt as if I was truly avoiding Allison. During the negotiations, my partner came up most of the key questions, which actually saved me from not getting my key issues. Nonetheless, I think I need to be more active in this kind conversation next time because I won’t have the partners of same character all the times. If I keep behaving in this way, the others would judge that I am not engaging in the conversation and they would probably give up talking the problems through.
Notwithstanding, I realized that I have a suppleness that would be actually helpful in future negotiations. When we debriefed the situation, other classmates mentioned that admitting their own responsibility in the event facilitated the conversation. It’s not difficult for me to assume the responsibility and to identify my contribution to the problems. During my education, I am always asked to seek for the reason inside myself first before going to seek faults in others. With aid of introspection, I avoid being stubborn and blaming the others, which does not redound to the mutual trust and to the ongoing negotiations. Therefore, I think this quality is a useful factor.
Furthermore, active listening is a good quality in understanding the other party’s concern. One can listen to the counterpart but at the same time is not paying attention to the counterpart. If a person is rush to react, he would think about how to fight back along the entire conversation. Actually I think this is an American propensity because not responding immediately means that somehow this person is slow in USA. On the contrary, I am a very good listener. My friends like to talk to me about their problems because I am very patient and good at listening without being careless. I suppose this is mainly because I am from Taiwan. Under the influence of Confucian philosophy, people are taught to be more patient. “Silence is gold,” says a Chinese proverb. I think it’s appropriate to be not hasty to respond because in the case of Casino the hasty behavior is not useful in lowering the counterpart’s defense. Luckily, my partner is not oppressive and he did not start with harsh accusation. Therefore, I did not have to arm myself either. My counterpart and I were both calm and not hurried to say who is at fault. At the end, I think we had reached a better understanding. Hence, I assume that this negotiation was successful in terms of building a positive professional relationship for the future.
Conflcts and I
The first connection that I have with conflict resolution is that I was born in Taiwan, an island in constant tensions and conflicts with Mainland China.
I have been an independent person since high school. After the age of 15, I lived by myself in Taipei, 400 kilometers away from home. I travel a lot; I don’t travel with a group, and I travel many times alone, which allows me to see the world the way it is and allows me to go to places where there are not many tourists. I have a global orientation, traveling to more than 17 countries and living in France, England, USA and Taiwan. I have lived in France for more two years. When I was in high school, I spent one year in the province of France. I spent my senior year in Paris, studying International Law and Organizations. As a result of traveling intensively, it’s easier for me to get used to a new culture.
I also took a class in Cross-cultural communications at GWU, in which I learned to communicate with the people from different nationalities. Cross-cultural communications deepened my interests in being an international negotiator.
I was Chief of the dormitory committee while I was a sophomore, and I needed to handle various incidents and conflicts everyday. There are 1100 girls in five dorms. Some girls caused troubles for the neighboring girls. I received the complaints, sometimes anonymous ones, and then I needed to go to the girls who were placed a complaint and talk to them. I acted as a mediator and a facilitator of intra-dormitory conflicts. I also served as the liaison between the residents and the administrative level, the university. In many events, I needed to represent the interests and concerns of the student body and demanded the school to improve the provided facilities and services. I think that this precious experience gives me a very good start in conflict resolution and negotiations.
I have been an independent person since high school. After the age of 15, I lived by myself in Taipei, 400 kilometers away from home. I travel a lot; I don’t travel with a group, and I travel many times alone, which allows me to see the world the way it is and allows me to go to places where there are not many tourists. I have a global orientation, traveling to more than 17 countries and living in France, England, USA and Taiwan. I have lived in France for more two years. When I was in high school, I spent one year in the province of France. I spent my senior year in Paris, studying International Law and Organizations. As a result of traveling intensively, it’s easier for me to get used to a new culture.
I also took a class in Cross-cultural communications at GWU, in which I learned to communicate with the people from different nationalities. Cross-cultural communications deepened my interests in being an international negotiator.
I was Chief of the dormitory committee while I was a sophomore, and I needed to handle various incidents and conflicts everyday. There are 1100 girls in five dorms. Some girls caused troubles for the neighboring girls. I received the complaints, sometimes anonymous ones, and then I needed to go to the girls who were placed a complaint and talk to them. I acted as a mediator and a facilitator of intra-dormitory conflicts. I also served as the liaison between the residents and the administrative level, the university. In many events, I needed to represent the interests and concerns of the student body and demanded the school to improve the provided facilities and services. I think that this precious experience gives me a very good start in conflict resolution and negotiations.
Summer Studies in Oxford
暑假也可以去牛津晃晃，學學人權法，還有溫習高中在牛津的日子，看著圖片，突然很想去，所以今天一定要快快申請，下星期一截止，加油加油～～
The GW/Oxford Program in International Human Rights Law has been developed by the University of Oxford Department for Continuing Education and The George Washington University Law School. It is intended to prepare students to contribute to the improvement of human rights conditions in their homelands and around the world.
For the 2006 session, the program has assembled an internationally recognized faculty offering courses on the philosophy, history, doctrine and practice of international human rights law. The program emphasizes advocacy and dissemination skills, as well as formal knowledge of human rights law, the means of its enforcement and its status in a contentious world.
In addition to an introductory course on the fundamentals of international human rights law, the program offers an advanced seminar on human rights lawyering and afternoon electives that address important contemporary issues in the field. These include seminars on human rights and peacekeeping, the predicament of populations at heightened risk of human rights violations (including women and refugees) and human rights and the marketplace.
Most instruction is conducted in small groups relying on case-based materials and simulations, allowing ample opportunity for exchange with instructors and the development of professional skills.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND?
The program welcomes law students, graduate students, lawyers, legal practitioners, staff of international and non-governmental organizations, researchers and other human rights professionals with a demonstrated interest in the field. Applicants should bear in mind that this is an intensive program of university-level study, and should be confident that they are academically and linguistically prepared for such a program. The program is conducted in English, and participants whose first language is not English are required to demonstrate English reading and writing ability by submitting proof of a TOEFL score of 600.
NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD
Students will be accommodated and take their meals in New College, Oxford. Founded by William of Wykham in 1379, it is one of the largest and best known of the Oxford colleges, and one of the most beautiful. The college is located in the center of Oxford, close to the St. Cross Law Faculty Building, where the program's classes are held and in which the Bodleian Law Library is located. Computer facilities are available at New College, and ethernet connections are provided in all rooms for students who want to bring their own laptops.
LECTURE SERIES AND OTHER SPECIAL EVENTS
In 2006, the program again will include a lecture series by some of the leading authorities and actors in the field of international human rights law. The guest speakers for 2005 included Mr. Geoffrey Nice, Principal Trial Attorney in the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic at the ICTY. The program also offers a human rights film series, a careers panel and a series of meetings with faculty members on their own work.
COURSE CREDIT
The program is accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) for 5 semester credits.The program also qualifies for Continuing Legal Education with the Law Society in the United Kingdom. For non-law students, credit can generally be arranged with graduate programs at the student's request. Applicants should confirm this with their home universities before applying. Acceptance of any credit or grade for any course taken in the program, including clinical courses, is subject to determination by the applicant's home university.
The GW/Oxford Program in International Human Rights Law has been developed by the University of Oxford Department for Continuing Education and The George Washington University Law School. It is intended to prepare students to contribute to the improvement of human rights conditions in their homelands and around the world.
For the 2006 session, the program has assembled an internationally recognized faculty offering courses on the philosophy, history, doctrine and practice of international human rights law. The program emphasizes advocacy and dissemination skills, as well as formal knowledge of human rights law, the means of its enforcement and its status in a contentious world.
In addition to an introductory course on the fundamentals of international human rights law, the program offers an advanced seminar on human rights lawyering and afternoon electives that address important contemporary issues in the field. These include seminars on human rights and peacekeeping, the predicament of populations at heightened risk of human rights violations (including women and refugees) and human rights and the marketplace.
Most instruction is conducted in small groups relying on case-based materials and simulations, allowing ample opportunity for exchange with instructors and the development of professional skills.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND?
The program welcomes law students, graduate students, lawyers, legal practitioners, staff of international and non-governmental organizations, researchers and other human rights professionals with a demonstrated interest in the field. Applicants should bear in mind that this is an intensive program of university-level study, and should be confident that they are academically and linguistically prepared for such a program. The program is conducted in English, and participants whose first language is not English are required to demonstrate English reading and writing ability by submitting proof of a TOEFL score of 600.
NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD
Students will be accommodated and take their meals in New College, Oxford. Founded by William of Wykham in 1379, it is one of the largest and best known of the Oxford colleges, and one of the most beautiful. The college is located in the center of Oxford, close to the St. Cross Law Faculty Building, where the program's classes are held and in which the Bodleian Law Library is located. Computer facilities are available at New College, and ethernet connections are provided in all rooms for students who want to bring their own laptops.
LECTURE SERIES AND OTHER SPECIAL EVENTS
In 2006, the program again will include a lecture series by some of the leading authorities and actors in the field of international human rights law. The guest speakers for 2005 included Mr. Geoffrey Nice, Principal Trial Attorney in the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic at the ICTY. The program also offers a human rights film series, a careers panel and a series of meetings with faculty members on their own work.
COURSE CREDIT
The program is accredited by the American Bar Association (ABA) for 5 semester credits.The program also qualifies for Continuing Legal Education with the Law Society in the United Kingdom. For non-law students, credit can generally be arranged with graduate programs at the student's request. Applicants should confirm this with their home universities before applying. Acceptance of any credit or grade for any course taken in the program, including clinical courses, is subject to determination by the applicant's home university.
Thursday, March 02, 2006
I love Psalm 23
The Lord is my Shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures:
He leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul:
He leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for His name' sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil: For thou art with me;
Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies;
Thou annointest my head with oil; My cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the House of the Lord forever.
The French Way
Introduction
When the rioters burned the buses in suburban Paris, the Frenchmen and the world were shocked. When French President Mitterrand was reported to have a mistress, the world was amazed by the indifference shown by the French public. Famous photographer Robert Doisneau captured romantic couples in Paris. What kind of people is this? There are some clichés about the French people and the life in France. Are they really arrogant? Are they really bad at learning English? Do they dislike the USA and the fast food? Are they romantic? How can we explain their reaction?
In this essay, I want to show an image of France without bias and stereotype by giving the French way of communications first. French way of communication is not a “French exception”. It comes from somewhere deep in the culture. While analyzing the specific way how French people communicate with one another, I will also use some culture factors to explain the communication characteristics. I will also seek for a little comparison through the culture shock that I have been through in France to illustrate the cross cultural communication.
How do the French people communicate?
According to Edith Wharton, there are two ways of judging a foreign people: at first sight, impressionistically, in the manner of the passing traveler; or after living among the foreign people, soberly and advisedly, and with all the vain precautions enjoined in another grave contingency. She refers to the French culture as “poetry of life”. However, instead of seeing French culture through a subtle object, one can see the French way of giving the message to one another by a more objective analysis: Geert Hofstede Analysis . We can also re-examine the French communication through nine lenses at the same time: family, religion, language, education, history, politics, economics, national resources (geography) and class structure. The culture factors can actually tell us why the French act in a certain way.
French people and uncertainty avoidance
The Geert Hofstede analysis for France illustrates their emphasis on uncertainty avoidance. France gets 7, Taiwan gets 20 and USA gets 32; a low score means the country does not like uncertainty. The high uncertainty avoidance ranking indicates France’s concerns for rules, regulations, and issues with career security. I think one of the reasons why French people behave in this way is the French language.
Modern French used to be one of many dialects spoken in the territory. It was spoken primarily in the region of the River La Loire. Now French is spoken by almost 100% of population although there are some minor dialects. The language belongs to Romance family. The grammar of the language is very refined and complicated compared to English, having the conjugations and accords of feminine and masculine terms. As many languages of Romance language, verbs are very precise in expressing time and meaning. This feature of French leads to the tendency that French people prefer the rules and the precision. French is a low context culture.
In real life communication, the uncertainty avoidance is embodied by the clear-cut conclusion in the negotiation setting. Everything should be more or less concrete and written down in order to be effective. As Taiwanese, I was very frustrated with the uncertainty avoidance because I felt like being forced to decide and speak out the decision. At the same time, because of this high uncertainty avoidance tendency, French people tend to take the process of cooperation more slowly and they prefer to have more time to be well prepared. They prefer to have a meeting during which everyone has already something concrete to provide and contribute. In this way, they are not comfortable with Taiwanese “loose” behavior. For instance, I always need to have almost everything done before the group meeting when I studied in France. The French classmates arrive at the meeting and they would put everybody’s efforts together and get a consensus about how to present the subject.
Although there is an increasing usage of argot and suburban way of speaking, French is a formal language. While doing business or joining the conversation with a bunch of French people, it’s important to demonstrate a good command on formal French although most of French people have learned English. With aid of a good mastery of French, people can gain a very quick access to the core of social events and win more respect, which would facilitate the affairs.
Some Tips
Most individuals in business speak English. If you do not speak French, it is very important that you apologize for your lack of knowledge.
The French have a great appreciation for the art of conversation.
Punctuality is treated very casually in France.
Business can be conducted during any meal, but lunch is best.
French people and individualism
In addition to uncertainty avoidance, France gets 11th position in individualism and collectivism scale in the Geert Hofstede analysis meanwhile USA is the 1st individualistic culture. The individualism comes from the religion: Christianity. Roman Catholicism is the most popular religion in France, which represents from 83 to 88% of the population; at the same time, the Muslim population is growing with an amazing speed and it is estimated to be around 5 to 10%. Judaism is also popular in France; it’s about 1% of the population.
Individualism in French means that personal goals override the allegiance to groups like the family or the employer. Competition and the “I” sayings are encouraged. Hence, French people also stress the individual achievement. For example, French people like people to show their competitiveness, which I was very shocked and uncomfortable because people in Taiwan are not encouraged to show off. Because of this, I had a quarrel with my high school classmates because I said that the French people are so arrogant and they don’t care about the others. Right now, I understand that the French culture stress the individual’s performance. Next time if I have also to show my own capacity, I will be at a better position to deal with this aspect. At the same time, it’s also a culture which demands a lot of privacy because they think the personal life has nothing to do with the person’s achievement. This explains why people don’t care about the fact of President Francois Mitterrand had a mistress; in the eye of Taiwanese society, it’s not conceivable to be a great and achieved person with disrupting the collective order and values.
However, I need to counter this “individualism” argument by emphasizing the importance of family in French culture which makes the French people sometimes behave more like Taiwanese than like Americans. As most European cultures, family is the priority for French people. The French people cherish their family and defend the traditional values which originate from the family although many French couples don’t get married despite the children. The rights of the homosexual couples and unmarried couples are guaranteed by PACS (Pacte civil de solidarite), and PACS is a contract which allows two individuals to organize their united life. Although people are very tolerant towards the homosexual, the marriage between same sexe couple is still illegal.
Like other Southern European cultures, French young people have a stronger attachment to their family than the American young people. The young people generally stay with the parents till they are early thirties in some cases. Parents pay for the rent if the children want to live outside of the family, but basically the children can still rely on the parents’ financial support. The phenomenon is getting more and more attention because the younger generation sometimes refuses to leave their nest and earn their own living. In this way, French people are more similar to Asian; young people leave the nest in a very late stage of their life.
Some Tips
The French have a great respect for privacy. Knock and wait before entering into a room. Additionally, do not "drop in" unannounced. Always give notice before your arrival.
France is a highly stratified society, with strong definition and competition between classes.
French people and power distance
Power distance refers to the extent to which a society accepts that power in relationships, institutions, and organizations is distributed unequally. The Geert Hofstede analysis ranks France with quite a low score, and a low score means that France is a country which prefers a large power distance. (Taiwan gets 19 in the ranking and USA gets 26.)
I think the reason why French people are more tolerant of an unequally distributed power structure can be traced back to the history and to the education system. In the interim it is exemplified and reinforced by education and politics. Although France is a republic right now, France used to be governed by the dynasties. The emperors and the aristocrats formed an elite class: they’ve got knowledge and resources. Notwithstanding French people are not under the reign of aristocrats anymore, the elite class is embodied by another way of ruling and superiority.
The elitism permeates in the French culture due to the education system and the government officer selection. When graduating from junior high school, the students need to pass the examination called Brevet; only those who succeed in the exam can go on to senior high school. At the end of “premiere” (second year of senior high school), all students need to pass the French Bacalaureat to test students’ ability in French literature. Those who fail the exam need to repeat the second year in senior high school. In order to go to university, students are required to succeed in Bacalaureat at the end of the third year. With the Bacalaureat, students can apply for universities as they wish and they don’t need to pay for the tuition. However, students can also choose another route: go to “preparatory school”, which prepares students to pass a series of selective examinations at the end of two more years’ studies. The students who succeed in the entrance exam of “grande ecole” can go to the elite school such as National Administrative School and National Normal School. These students will be next public servants and teachers. People without the degree from National Administrative School can still work in government but if a person wants to work in a higher position, the person had better have the master degree from the very best schools which aim to shape the next generation bureaucrats. This process of forming future officers, professors and engineers helps the people to accept some social phenomena with protesting.
While building connection with the professors or dealing with the authority in France, Taiwanese and Americans often find that it’s hard to be familiar with them. For example, professors don’t have office hours and they don’t need to be familiar with the students. “They are neither accessible nor helpful!” is a usual complaint. However, the distance between the professor and the French students is large and tolerated because they represent the authority. French students just accept this as a fact. In Taiwan, I respect the professors. However, students can still approach teachers and have a conversation more easily because Taiwan has been influenced by the USA.
Some Tips
Dress conservative and invest in well-tailored clothing.
Patterned fabrics and dark colors are most acceptable, but avoid bright colors.
French businessmen do not loosen their ties or take off their jackets in the office.
Women should also dress conservatively. Avoiding bright or gaudy colors is recommended.
Women should also avoid any glitzy or overpowering objects, such as flashy jewelry.
French people and femininity
French culture is more of feminine traits than Taiwanese one, but they are similar in the scale. A feminine society thinks that sexual equality is important and thus gender roles are more flexible in French society than in a masculine society, such as Japan. The society has a more feminine culture, but all in all it’s still a traditional society: man has the final say on most of the family decision although man is supposed to be more caring and nurturing.
French society is also a society in which a person should show his sense of beauty and taste, which goes back to France which Edith Wharton has described. The French enjoy life and have a strong sympathy toward the weak. In this sense, French people are indeed romantic.
In communication, the style is less aggressive and more reflective. Speaking softly is a common code in France; although interrupting is not forbidden, one still need to listen to another person’s talk with attention. In the meantime, the French enjoy having intellectual debates with others.
Some Tips
The French are very conscientious of their appearance.
The French frequently interrupt each other, as the argument is a form of entertainment, but the French often complain that North Americans lecture rather than converse.
Be sensitive to the volume of your voice. Speaking with loud voice and laughing hard might offend or embarrass everyone in a restaurant, meeting, or on the street.
Eye contact is frequent and intense, and can often be intimidating to North Americans. French handshakes are not as firm as in the United States or in Taiwan.
Avoid drinking hard liquor before meals or smoking cigars between courses. The French believe this permeates the taste buds, compromising the taste of the meal.
Good gifts to present include books or music, as they demonstrate interest in intellectual pursuits.
Conclusion
It’s never easy to understand one culture by a mere analysis, but through the analysis people can have a more accurate and objective view of French communication characteristics in a nutshell. One should now know the French culture is a low context language culture; the French don’t like the ambiguity. French culture is also an individualistic one: competition is encouraged and personal goals are important. Although individualism is popular, the French still consider themselves as part of society. The French also tend to accept a larger degree of uneven power distribution. In communication, it’s easy to observe the difference of power and hierarchy. It’s also a more feminine society, in which the tone and the voice of conversations would be softer. The role of women is well regarded, but still it’s still a male chauvinist society.
References
Flanner, Janet. Paris Was Yesterday, 1925-1939. Harcourt, 1988.
Marquardt, M., Berger, N., and Loan, P. HRD in the Age of Globalization. Basic Books, 2004.
Ministry of culture website: http://www.culture.fr/
Samovar, Larry and Porter, Richard. Communication between Cultures, 2nd edition. Wadsworth, 1995.
Wharton, Edith. French Ways and Their Meaning. Berkshire House Books, 1997.
Civil Society and Its Impact
Introduction
I attended a small seminar held by a grass root organization called One Voice a few days ago. This organization is funded by several Californian Jews, aiming at building the Israelis’ and Palestinians’ capacity. This organization held several peaceful manifestations to urge the Palestinians to vote. The long term goal is to provide the public a better understanding about the other side and induce the peace resolution of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is merely one of countless examples which show us how the NGOs permeate our daily life and forge our agenda. In the 1990s, the terms of “third sector” and “civil society” are gaining the worldwide focus. Many people think the civil society is an elixir to every problem that the nation states cannot manage. However, the importance of the civil society is still debatable. To what exactly do we refer when using this term “civil society”? Do we overestimate its magnitude? Does this force undermine the exercise of sovereignty?
To answer these questions, I will seek to define civil society first with a theoretical perspective and an insider’s viewpoint. I agree with all the definitions provided by the book, Civil Society . However, I do prefer to use the term to define a non-political and non-capitalism sector. Second, I will argue that civil society does not replace the states in the strict sense although it’s doubtless overwhelming. NGOs and other non-state actors can achieve many tasks that normal sovereign cannot do today. In this way, I agree that the civil society is complementary to the first and second sectors, but they cannot replace the nation states because they are not created to govern the people.
What is civil society?
While reading Civil Society, it’s striking to me when the author, Michael Edwards, mentions that the term of civil society is regarded to be indistinguishable in ancient times: both refer to a type of political association governing social conflict through the imposition of rules that prevent citizens from hurting one another. I have always thought the civil society is a recent phenomenon, which has only been in existence for two or three decade. Thus, I think it’s essential to understand what civil society we are talking about.
There are many definition and viewpoints regarding this term. According to Michael Edwards, there are mainly three kinds of definition to understand civil society: we can regard civil society as associational life, as the good society or as the public sphere. The first definition comes from Alexis de Tocqueville. This “neo-Tocqueville view” also corresponds to how most people view civil society. Civil society is a part of society distinct form states and markets. It is shaped for the objectives of advancing common interests and facilitating collective action, containing all associations and networks between the family and the state, exclusive of firms. I prefer to use civil society as associational life and as Third Sector because there are some unique features that non-profit organizations (NPO) have and that states and private sectors don’t have.
However, I also believe that NGOs have a more important goal other than providing the community link and services. They are forging public opinions and empowering the people. The existence of civil society allows the society to have different voices and helps to build the channel through which the minority can be heard. As Michael Edwards put it, “civil society is people power writ large.”
The shift of power?
Does the emergence of civil society undermine the nation-states’ effectiveness of control? Do we exaggerate the significance of civil society?
The acceptance of human rights and minority rights, the increasing role of international financial institutions (World Bank and IMF), and globalization have led many people to question the capability of the sovereign state. According to Jessica T. Mathews’ article Power Shift in Foreign Affairs, the absolutes of the Westphalian system are all dissolving. The economic activities and the threats are no longer bounded by the boundaries; the resources and the crimes are right now transnational. The diseases such as SARS and Bird Flu are not stopped by the borders. Although the task of providing security still falls upon the shoulders of the nation states, political entities are sharing powers, inclusive of political, social and even security roles, with corporations, international organizations such as UN and NATO and a lot of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) . Because of the Internet and the lowering telecommunication costs, the world is experiencing dramatic changes and NGOs reach an unprecedented level of influence. Jessica Mathews indicates, “Today NGOs deliver more official development assistance than the entire system.” NGOs such as Oxfam, Greenpeace, Care, WWF and Amnesty International have a bigger annual budget than some agencies of UN system.
I have worked in a research platform, Centre for the Third Sector in National Chengchi University (Taiwan), as a volunteer. While I worked there, I observed many instances which NGOs lobby in the congress and then manage to push forward some changes in the political or legal environment. Working for the NGOs or others voluntary service groups at least for a period of three months becomes a popular choice for young people. In my opinion, another reason why the civil society is so full of vitality is that civil society makes up the disappointment that people face in the political reality. Some people think that civil society does provide services in many areas that the conventional sovereignties cannot supply anymore. In this kind of situation, civil society does fulfill the vacuum where sovereign states don’t enjoy their influence. For example, Oxfam worked with ENDA Tiers Monde, a Senegal-based NGO , to provide legal advice and substantial assistance to seven African countries in negotiating new terms and having more legal standings in Cancun 2003. Why can these countries not underpin their argument on their own? Because the states are not capable of achieving this goal and because there were not enough financial resources or legal experts to solve the case on their own, it’s then the time for NGOs to come in. In this sense, the emergence of civil society is truly eroding the sovereignty.
Nonetheless, Stephen D. Krasner contends that states have never enjoyed as much sovereignty as some have supposed. I also think that civil society is not damaging the states to exert their power and control their people because the civil society is not the formal entities which can conduct international treaties and wars despite its vigor. States are still the only entities which can declare wars, establish formal diplomatic relations and use the force. Heller and Sofaer in Problematic Sovereignty assert that the voluntary actions of limiting states’ power or conceding the power to international organizations are actually not a surrender of the sovereignty but an embodiment of sovereign power.
Michael Edwards mentions that states allow the civil society to develop and moreover states induce the civil society to take a bigger voice because it’s considered to be one important indicator in good governance nowadays. For example, China right now cultivates and subsidizes many NGOs and these kinds of associations have an independent appearance but as a matter of fact they are state-sponsored. I do agree with what Jessica said about China’s oppression of the development of civil society as NGOs are somehow a means for China to defer the criticism. The latest issue of The Economist conducted a survey on philanthropy . More and more millionaires are getting into the business of giving but they use the whole new concept to decide who to be given money. The new donors are becoming much more businesslike about the way their money is used. Although the aurthor of the survey, Matthew Bishop, argues that the new trend might encourage civil society and make a better world to come, I am still suspicious of the idea “social entrepreneurship” promoted by civil society itself. Are NGOs unconsciously becoming the tools of corporations and states? Everyone participates in civil society not only because it’s good for humankind but also because the amplification of civil society is good for his own reputation. Civil society is a phenomenon because people want it to be.
Conclusion
Civil society itself is a debatable term. The neo-Tocquevillian view of civil society is the most popular one, but I also think that civil society is capable of empowering the public and allows the society to be more diverse. Some scholars think that civil society is weakening the basis of “states as single actors” system. It’s true that civil society is emerging and the NGOs can play important roles in international events. However, at the same time, other scholars claim that the sovereignty is not harmed by the dynamism of civil society. People overestimate the significance of civil society and it would perhaps fall into the hands of political and business manipulations.
I attended a small seminar held by a grass root organization called One Voice a few days ago. This organization is funded by several Californian Jews, aiming at building the Israelis’ and Palestinians’ capacity. This organization held several peaceful manifestations to urge the Palestinians to vote. The long term goal is to provide the public a better understanding about the other side and induce the peace resolution of Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is merely one of countless examples which show us how the NGOs permeate our daily life and forge our agenda. In the 1990s, the terms of “third sector” and “civil society” are gaining the worldwide focus. Many people think the civil society is an elixir to every problem that the nation states cannot manage. However, the importance of the civil society is still debatable. To what exactly do we refer when using this term “civil society”? Do we overestimate its magnitude? Does this force undermine the exercise of sovereignty?
To answer these questions, I will seek to define civil society first with a theoretical perspective and an insider’s viewpoint. I agree with all the definitions provided by the book, Civil Society . However, I do prefer to use the term to define a non-political and non-capitalism sector. Second, I will argue that civil society does not replace the states in the strict sense although it’s doubtless overwhelming. NGOs and other non-state actors can achieve many tasks that normal sovereign cannot do today. In this way, I agree that the civil society is complementary to the first and second sectors, but they cannot replace the nation states because they are not created to govern the people.
What is civil society?
While reading Civil Society, it’s striking to me when the author, Michael Edwards, mentions that the term of civil society is regarded to be indistinguishable in ancient times: both refer to a type of political association governing social conflict through the imposition of rules that prevent citizens from hurting one another. I have always thought the civil society is a recent phenomenon, which has only been in existence for two or three decade. Thus, I think it’s essential to understand what civil society we are talking about.
There are many definition and viewpoints regarding this term. According to Michael Edwards, there are mainly three kinds of definition to understand civil society: we can regard civil society as associational life, as the good society or as the public sphere. The first definition comes from Alexis de Tocqueville. This “neo-Tocqueville view” also corresponds to how most people view civil society. Civil society is a part of society distinct form states and markets. It is shaped for the objectives of advancing common interests and facilitating collective action, containing all associations and networks between the family and the state, exclusive of firms. I prefer to use civil society as associational life and as Third Sector because there are some unique features that non-profit organizations (NPO) have and that states and private sectors don’t have.
However, I also believe that NGOs have a more important goal other than providing the community link and services. They are forging public opinions and empowering the people. The existence of civil society allows the society to have different voices and helps to build the channel through which the minority can be heard. As Michael Edwards put it, “civil society is people power writ large.”
The shift of power?
Does the emergence of civil society undermine the nation-states’ effectiveness of control? Do we exaggerate the significance of civil society?
The acceptance of human rights and minority rights, the increasing role of international financial institutions (World Bank and IMF), and globalization have led many people to question the capability of the sovereign state. According to Jessica T. Mathews’ article Power Shift in Foreign Affairs, the absolutes of the Westphalian system are all dissolving. The economic activities and the threats are no longer bounded by the boundaries; the resources and the crimes are right now transnational. The diseases such as SARS and Bird Flu are not stopped by the borders. Although the task of providing security still falls upon the shoulders of the nation states, political entities are sharing powers, inclusive of political, social and even security roles, with corporations, international organizations such as UN and NATO and a lot of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) . Because of the Internet and the lowering telecommunication costs, the world is experiencing dramatic changes and NGOs reach an unprecedented level of influence. Jessica Mathews indicates, “Today NGOs deliver more official development assistance than the entire system.” NGOs such as Oxfam, Greenpeace, Care, WWF and Amnesty International have a bigger annual budget than some agencies of UN system.
I have worked in a research platform, Centre for the Third Sector in National Chengchi University (Taiwan), as a volunteer. While I worked there, I observed many instances which NGOs lobby in the congress and then manage to push forward some changes in the political or legal environment. Working for the NGOs or others voluntary service groups at least for a period of three months becomes a popular choice for young people. In my opinion, another reason why the civil society is so full of vitality is that civil society makes up the disappointment that people face in the political reality. Some people think that civil society does provide services in many areas that the conventional sovereignties cannot supply anymore. In this kind of situation, civil society does fulfill the vacuum where sovereign states don’t enjoy their influence. For example, Oxfam worked with ENDA Tiers Monde, a Senegal-based NGO , to provide legal advice and substantial assistance to seven African countries in negotiating new terms and having more legal standings in Cancun 2003. Why can these countries not underpin their argument on their own? Because the states are not capable of achieving this goal and because there were not enough financial resources or legal experts to solve the case on their own, it’s then the time for NGOs to come in. In this sense, the emergence of civil society is truly eroding the sovereignty.
Nonetheless, Stephen D. Krasner contends that states have never enjoyed as much sovereignty as some have supposed. I also think that civil society is not damaging the states to exert their power and control their people because the civil society is not the formal entities which can conduct international treaties and wars despite its vigor. States are still the only entities which can declare wars, establish formal diplomatic relations and use the force. Heller and Sofaer in Problematic Sovereignty assert that the voluntary actions of limiting states’ power or conceding the power to international organizations are actually not a surrender of the sovereignty but an embodiment of sovereign power.
Michael Edwards mentions that states allow the civil society to develop and moreover states induce the civil society to take a bigger voice because it’s considered to be one important indicator in good governance nowadays. For example, China right now cultivates and subsidizes many NGOs and these kinds of associations have an independent appearance but as a matter of fact they are state-sponsored. I do agree with what Jessica said about China’s oppression of the development of civil society as NGOs are somehow a means for China to defer the criticism. The latest issue of The Economist conducted a survey on philanthropy . More and more millionaires are getting into the business of giving but they use the whole new concept to decide who to be given money. The new donors are becoming much more businesslike about the way their money is used. Although the aurthor of the survey, Matthew Bishop, argues that the new trend might encourage civil society and make a better world to come, I am still suspicious of the idea “social entrepreneurship” promoted by civil society itself. Are NGOs unconsciously becoming the tools of corporations and states? Everyone participates in civil society not only because it’s good for humankind but also because the amplification of civil society is good for his own reputation. Civil society is a phenomenon because people want it to be.
Conclusion
Civil society itself is a debatable term. The neo-Tocquevillian view of civil society is the most popular one, but I also think that civil society is capable of empowering the public and allows the society to be more diverse. Some scholars think that civil society is weakening the basis of “states as single actors” system. It’s true that civil society is emerging and the NGOs can play important roles in international events. However, at the same time, other scholars claim that the sovereignty is not harmed by the dynamism of civil society. People overestimate the significance of civil society and it would perhaps fall into the hands of political and business manipulations.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Principled Negotiations Paper
The Background and the conflictLi-Ting is a student in DC, and her boyfriend, Jason, is working in his father’s firm. Li-Ting and her boyfriend originally planned to travel somewhere this summer. They talked about where to go. They were thinking about going to either South America or Siberia. During the discussion, Jason asked Li-Ting about when the semester would end. However, when the final decision was revealed, Li-Ting found out that her boyfriend made a travel plan without taking her condition into consideration. Jason decided to go to Moscow through the Siberian railway and he thought they need to arrive at Moscow on the 5th June 2006 so he decided to take the Siberian railway while Li-Ting would still in the middle of her exams. They had a serious discussion about this trip. Jason insists on setting off from Beijing no later than early May but Li-Ting wishes for a later departure or a change of the plan proposed by Jason. Who is going to back down? Howare they going to deal with this issue? How can they achieve a better outcome?
Application of the principled negotiation to the two-party conflictFirst of all, the negotiators need to know themselves very well. A Chinese proverb says, “Knowing yourself and understanding your enemies are the open sesames of winning a war.” I think this proverb full of wisdom applies not only in wartime but also in daily life. Both sides should understand what personality they have before engaging in the negotiation. For that reason, it’s a good idea for both sides to do the Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode assessment before resuming the negotiation. Li-Ting has a more accommodating propensity but she also got high score in problem solving and in withdrawing. Jason, on the contrary, is not afraid of confrontation but at the same time he also has a tendency to withdraw.
According to Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in , being hard or soft is not always good in a positional bargaining. Negotiations are actually in two folds. The first facet is that negotiations deal with the substance. The second one is that a negotiation emphasizes the procedure regarding the dealing with the substance. The authors proposed four methods to obtain a mutually satisfactory and tenable result.
According to the first advice in Getting to Yes, every negotiator has two kinds of relationship: the substantial interest and the relationship with the other side. As we know, the couple would like to maintain a long term relationship; hence, it’s very important to separate the person from the problem. Li-Ting should write down her fears and emotions in order to give these feelings a second thought. She should ask her boyfriend to do the same. They must not blame each other for the divergence of the plan; on the contrary, they should sit down side by side to solve the problem together. In this negotiation, the two parties need to bear in mind that they need to pay attention to what the other says and try to understand each other by asking questions but not questioning each other emotionally.
The second step to achieve a good negotiation is to deal with their respective interests. Hence, it’s pivotal to identify their interests first in order to facilitate the dialogue. One of the most basic needs for Li-Ting in this relationship is the sense of security. This can be identified through her anxiety that her boyfriend will travel alone and leave her behind. Jason’s interests lie in the facts that their friends are in Russia right now and that he could not travel safely without the Russian-speaking friends. Another concern that Jason has is that he does not like to make decisions which depend on others’ will. Both people have different interests, which caused the problem. Therefore, the date of departure is not the biggest issue. The fears of losing her boyfriend and not seeing him for the summer are Li-Ting’s underlying motives; the safe voyage and the control over his own schedule are the basic interests in Jason’s eye.
However, during the discussion, the divergence of interests did not emerge. She blamed him for his not waiting for her to take the train to Moscow and she started to look at the past and to search for the evidence to prove that he does not love her enough. What she did is to reveal her fear, which is good, but the problem is that she did not let him know her fears. She only posted her article in her personal journal in a website. It might be better for her to share these thoughts with the other side. If they both recognized each other’s interests, the negotiation might have been smoother.
In order to better identify Li-Ting’s position and limits, a detailed analysis of 9 elements for interest-based negotiations might help.
With aid of 9 element analysis
The 9 elements of an interest-based negotiation Li-Ting’s analysis
Context setting Parties Li-Ting
Jason (her boyfriend)
Jason’s father (for he is the boss of the company where Jason works): Does he agree to let the employee off for several months?
Li-Ting’s mother (for she provides the financial support): Is she going to pay for Li-Ting’s travel?
Li-Ting’s school advisor: She advises Li-Ting about the curriculum and she is the person who can approve Li-Ting’s study plan.
Issues When are they setting for Siberia? How is the travel going to be? Which route do they take after Russia?
Core elements Interests Does not want to quarrel with Jason
Wants to maintain a good relationship
Does not wish that her boyfriend travel alone without her
Also likes to travel
Options She can join her boyfriend later on after her final exams
She can go directly from DC to Beijing or Moscow
Jason could postpone the departure date
Standards Is it fair? Is the process of deciding the travel plan fair for both parties?
Exit elements Alternatives Li-Ting’s mother would probably offer her a chance to study in Prague in summer. →This is a BATNA.
Li-Ting can choose to do internship in Washington, DC.
Commitment If they reach a final plan for summer trip, is this plan feasible?
Influencing elements Communications Should Li-Ting disclose her anxiety and her fear? Does Jason really listen to her? Is the Internet instantaneous communication effective in solving the problem?
Relationship They are working to have a long term relationship. They want to build a deeper and more solid trust,
The third advice is to be creative and to invent a win-win option. In this case, the two parties need to explore more possibilities about the future travel. A more essential thing is that they should not insist on their original start point because this would preclude them from being creative. If both negotiators think their respective proposal is the best answer, it would be very difficult for them to break the ideology jail and the negotiators might ignore a better solution which will satisfy both sides. For example, the couple needs to brainstorm separately first for other possible actions and during the brainstorming, they had better use the circle chart analysis to come up with lots of options. This circle chart can really help Li-Ting to encompass as many possibilities as possible because this chart can prevent people from neglecting certain issues unconsciously. Both sides should make a repetitive use of this chart during the conflict resolution.
Diagnosis General Prescriptions/ Objectives
The reason why: Li-Ting chose to study in DC. She lives on her mother’s support. Jason works for more than one year and he has an independent fund. They both love travel but they don’t have the same occupation right now.
The gap: If Jason travels alone, he might date somebody else. The more she worries about it, the tenser the relationship will be. She still has 2 more semesters before getting her master degree. She does not have her economic independence. After the travel, Jason and Li-Ting will still be together despite the distance
They need to have a mutual trust in the relationship
Make Jason think more about the future and consider more Li-Ting’s condition
Gain the living and be economically independent
The Problem Specific Actions
What it is: Li-Ting studies in DC, and she is very far away from her boyfriend, Jason. He planned a travel, which Li-Ting did not feel comfortable about.
What’s the vision: Li-Ting wants to see her boyfriend in summer. Li-Ting and Jason would like to travel together once a while. They would live together after Li-Ting finishes her studies in DC. Ask her mother to pay for trip to Siberia→Then she can be with her boyfriend
Finish her studies earlier by taking courses in summer→she can go back to Taiwan earlier and start to earn her own living
Go to Prague for 6 credit class during the summer vacation
Build up a more solid trust and a better communication between the two parties
Choose to trust Jason and let him go to travel alone
The forth step is using objective criteria. As we know, Li-Ting has an accommodating tendency. She might think that backing down would be the best way to solve the conflict. Letting Jason take the train alone and then joining him in Moscow are successful at avoiding a fiercer confrontation. However, backing down on the subject of travel plan does not solve her real concern and does not help to develop a robust relationship. They would avoid dealing with their real problems if one party decides to bend his or her rules. They should talk about what she wants to accept and he does not want. They should establish objective criteria of determining the results. I propose hence that they can look at how a healthy boyfriend-girlfriend relationship should be and develop a framework acceptable for both as a criterion while dealing with each other’s concern. Two parties should also allow the other side to reason and to form the argument.
Conclusion
From the analysis, I came to a conclusion that this conflict is not due to the date of departure. The fundamental friction under the surface of this quarrel is that each party has different perception about the future. They should not regard each other as an enemy but a partner; thus, they will be able to stop picking the other side’s faults. They should discuss how they can do to improve the trust between them and be open to a deep, perhaps dolorous, conversation. If they are able to construct a better understanding about their couple life, the next negotiations could better address their concerns.
Application of the principled negotiation to the two-party conflictFirst of all, the negotiators need to know themselves very well. A Chinese proverb says, “Knowing yourself and understanding your enemies are the open sesames of winning a war.” I think this proverb full of wisdom applies not only in wartime but also in daily life. Both sides should understand what personality they have before engaging in the negotiation. For that reason, it’s a good idea for both sides to do the Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode assessment before resuming the negotiation. Li-Ting has a more accommodating propensity but she also got high score in problem solving and in withdrawing. Jason, on the contrary, is not afraid of confrontation but at the same time he also has a tendency to withdraw.
According to Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in , being hard or soft is not always good in a positional bargaining. Negotiations are actually in two folds. The first facet is that negotiations deal with the substance. The second one is that a negotiation emphasizes the procedure regarding the dealing with the substance. The authors proposed four methods to obtain a mutually satisfactory and tenable result.
According to the first advice in Getting to Yes, every negotiator has two kinds of relationship: the substantial interest and the relationship with the other side. As we know, the couple would like to maintain a long term relationship; hence, it’s very important to separate the person from the problem. Li-Ting should write down her fears and emotions in order to give these feelings a second thought. She should ask her boyfriend to do the same. They must not blame each other for the divergence of the plan; on the contrary, they should sit down side by side to solve the problem together. In this negotiation, the two parties need to bear in mind that they need to pay attention to what the other says and try to understand each other by asking questions but not questioning each other emotionally.
The second step to achieve a good negotiation is to deal with their respective interests. Hence, it’s pivotal to identify their interests first in order to facilitate the dialogue. One of the most basic needs for Li-Ting in this relationship is the sense of security. This can be identified through her anxiety that her boyfriend will travel alone and leave her behind. Jason’s interests lie in the facts that their friends are in Russia right now and that he could not travel safely without the Russian-speaking friends. Another concern that Jason has is that he does not like to make decisions which depend on others’ will. Both people have different interests, which caused the problem. Therefore, the date of departure is not the biggest issue. The fears of losing her boyfriend and not seeing him for the summer are Li-Ting’s underlying motives; the safe voyage and the control over his own schedule are the basic interests in Jason’s eye.
However, during the discussion, the divergence of interests did not emerge. She blamed him for his not waiting for her to take the train to Moscow and she started to look at the past and to search for the evidence to prove that he does not love her enough. What she did is to reveal her fear, which is good, but the problem is that she did not let him know her fears. She only posted her article in her personal journal in a website. It might be better for her to share these thoughts with the other side. If they both recognized each other’s interests, the negotiation might have been smoother.
In order to better identify Li-Ting’s position and limits, a detailed analysis of 9 elements for interest-based negotiations might help.
With aid of 9 element analysis
The 9 elements of an interest-based negotiation Li-Ting’s analysis
Context setting Parties Li-Ting
Jason (her boyfriend)
Jason’s father (for he is the boss of the company where Jason works): Does he agree to let the employee off for several months?
Li-Ting’s mother (for she provides the financial support): Is she going to pay for Li-Ting’s travel?
Li-Ting’s school advisor: She advises Li-Ting about the curriculum and she is the person who can approve Li-Ting’s study plan.
Issues When are they setting for Siberia? How is the travel going to be? Which route do they take after Russia?
Core elements Interests Does not want to quarrel with Jason
Wants to maintain a good relationship
Does not wish that her boyfriend travel alone without her
Also likes to travel
Options She can join her boyfriend later on after her final exams
She can go directly from DC to Beijing or Moscow
Jason could postpone the departure date
Standards Is it fair? Is the process of deciding the travel plan fair for both parties?
Exit elements Alternatives Li-Ting’s mother would probably offer her a chance to study in Prague in summer. →This is a BATNA.
Li-Ting can choose to do internship in Washington, DC.
Commitment If they reach a final plan for summer trip, is this plan feasible?
Influencing elements Communications Should Li-Ting disclose her anxiety and her fear? Does Jason really listen to her? Is the Internet instantaneous communication effective in solving the problem?
Relationship They are working to have a long term relationship. They want to build a deeper and more solid trust,
The third advice is to be creative and to invent a win-win option. In this case, the two parties need to explore more possibilities about the future travel. A more essential thing is that they should not insist on their original start point because this would preclude them from being creative. If both negotiators think their respective proposal is the best answer, it would be very difficult for them to break the ideology jail and the negotiators might ignore a better solution which will satisfy both sides. For example, the couple needs to brainstorm separately first for other possible actions and during the brainstorming, they had better use the circle chart analysis to come up with lots of options. This circle chart can really help Li-Ting to encompass as many possibilities as possible because this chart can prevent people from neglecting certain issues unconsciously. Both sides should make a repetitive use of this chart during the conflict resolution.
Diagnosis General Prescriptions/ Objectives
The reason why: Li-Ting chose to study in DC. She lives on her mother’s support. Jason works for more than one year and he has an independent fund. They both love travel but they don’t have the same occupation right now.
The gap: If Jason travels alone, he might date somebody else. The more she worries about it, the tenser the relationship will be. She still has 2 more semesters before getting her master degree. She does not have her economic independence. After the travel, Jason and Li-Ting will still be together despite the distance
They need to have a mutual trust in the relationship
Make Jason think more about the future and consider more Li-Ting’s condition
Gain the living and be economically independent
The Problem Specific Actions
What it is: Li-Ting studies in DC, and she is very far away from her boyfriend, Jason. He planned a travel, which Li-Ting did not feel comfortable about.
What’s the vision: Li-Ting wants to see her boyfriend in summer. Li-Ting and Jason would like to travel together once a while. They would live together after Li-Ting finishes her studies in DC. Ask her mother to pay for trip to Siberia→Then she can be with her boyfriend
Finish her studies earlier by taking courses in summer→she can go back to Taiwan earlier and start to earn her own living
Go to Prague for 6 credit class during the summer vacation
Build up a more solid trust and a better communication between the two parties
Choose to trust Jason and let him go to travel alone
The forth step is using objective criteria. As we know, Li-Ting has an accommodating tendency. She might think that backing down would be the best way to solve the conflict. Letting Jason take the train alone and then joining him in Moscow are successful at avoiding a fiercer confrontation. However, backing down on the subject of travel plan does not solve her real concern and does not help to develop a robust relationship. They would avoid dealing with their real problems if one party decides to bend his or her rules. They should talk about what she wants to accept and he does not want. They should establish objective criteria of determining the results. I propose hence that they can look at how a healthy boyfriend-girlfriend relationship should be and develop a framework acceptable for both as a criterion while dealing with each other’s concern. Two parties should also allow the other side to reason and to form the argument.
Conclusion
From the analysis, I came to a conclusion that this conflict is not due to the date of departure. The fundamental friction under the surface of this quarrel is that each party has different perception about the future. They should not regard each other as an enemy but a partner; thus, they will be able to stop picking the other side’s faults. They should discuss how they can do to improve the trust between them and be open to a deep, perhaps dolorous, conversation. If they are able to construct a better understanding about their couple life, the next negotiations could better address their concerns.
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Love is
13/02/2006
While chatting with friends, they have had some issues with love recently. Everyone is somehow puzzled by love. I held a different point from a friend, saying that in love gives and takes are not necessarily equal. However, she does not agree. I don’t think that there is an absolute right or wrong; this acquaintance and I view the relationship in different ways.
Suddenly, I thought a about the verses from the Bible. The verses also talk about love. It would be a very good idea to write it down. “Love suffers long. Love is kind; it’s not jealous. Love does not brag and is not puffed up. It does not behave unbecomingly and does not seek its own things; it is not provoked and does not take account of evil. It does not rejoice because of unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. It covers all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things.” These verses come from Corinthians 13: 4-7 and in the Bible this section is called the definition of love.
I think this might be one of the definitions. Love can be defined by individuals. However, it’s important to be tolerant and to understand. Do I not wish he loves me? Do I not hope his affection endures? Don’t take account of evil: I should never think about what he has not done. I have never wanted to set a barrier for him. For me, I am thankful for all the marvelous things that I have had with my baby for he is always my 100%.
Well, I don’t mean that I don’t have any problem. I still have a lot to conquer because of the reality. I suffered from the distance which separates Jason and I. He has his own schedule. He has his own plan. I am sometimes uncontrollably upset. However, I will try to believe all things and hope all things.
Happy Valentine’s Day.
Friday, February 10, 2006
What Shakespeare thinks about love
SONNET 116
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
http://www.japantimes.com/shukan-st/special/poem/po20030117main.htm
Let me not to the marriage of true minds
Admit impediments. Love is not love
Which alters when it alteration finds,
Or bends with the remover to remove:
O no! it is an ever-fixed mark
That looks on tempests and is never shaken;
It is the star to every wandering bark,
Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken.
Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
Within his bending sickle's compass come:
Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
If this be error and upon me proved,
I never writ, nor no man ever loved.
http://www.japantimes.com/shukan-st/special/poem/po20030117main.htm
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
The survival kit for East Asia
Languages
In Japanese, people have a hesitation to say something clearly. People have tended to avoid saying anything directly; a listener needs to read between the lines. Recently, in lectures and speeches, Japanese people use more and more direct speech but still politicians would use a vague language.
“I’d love to” means no in Japan. They expect others to be very sensitive to their facial expressions and changes in tone. Once a person fails to meet their expectations and misses the signal, this person is recognized as “unsocial.” Hereafter, he will not be expected to understand the proper Japanese conversation.
“You” exists in 5 forms in Japanese. To the elder, people used another “you” to show the respect. The number 8 is lucky because the Chinese character of 8 signifies a broader future.
In Korean, as well as in China, 4 is also a number to avoid because its pronunciation resembles to the death. 7 is the good number. “You” exists in 4 or 5 forms in Korea.
However, Chinese has only 2 forms of “you” because the most important thing is to show the respect towards the elder. People of the same age are mainly called by the same manner.
In order to maintain the harmony, the business meetings are normally
Education
In East Asia, the education tends to be more hierarchical. Confucius and the traditional value taught the Asians that the education is a pivotal element of good governance. Teacher is a highly respected profession. Students are not encouraged to challenge teachers’ authority or speech.
Beyond the respect for the educators, the students need to compete with each other in order to get into a good university. Normally, students have to pass an entrance exam or several ones to get the admission. Hence, the students of good universities are proud of their academic background but at the same time they should be humble despite their achievement.
Geography
The isolation of the four islands of Japan means a lot. It’s not easy to let another culture come in. 1350 years ago, Chinese culture came into Japanese culture and Japan tried to integrate the Chinese culture into its own culture. After Edo period, Japan isolated themselves for 250 years. Japan was forced to open its borders to the American, and the Japanese average perception, even till now, is that the American or the foreigners in a broader sense is a threat.
On the contrary, China has many subjacent countries, and there are many minority peoples with China’s territory. This creates an open attitude towards the foreigner and to other cultures.
Korea is the bridge between China and Japan. Therefore, Korea has always been either China’s or Japan’s colony before the Republic of Korea was established. The culture is a mix of continental and oceanic culture.
Real life practices: How do you fit into the East-Asian life?
Dos and taboos…
A wedding
If you are invited to a friend’s wedding in Japan, you have to be careful. There are many customs to follow. The bride will dress in pearly white, and the groom will dress in dark-colored clothes. To congratulate the couple, people will give money with a white and red envelope with the gold and red strings, which is only used for the funeral in China.
In China, red is a good color, so wearing a red dress is one of the traditions for the bride. Guest who attended the banquet would give a red envelope with money inside to congratulate the newly-weds. The wedding is for two people so everything should be in pair. You should avoid the singular number like 1100 or the number 4.
In Korea, the wedding dress is the traditional dress. The bride wears a green and red skirt. The traditional wedding ceremonies surrounding the events have deep Confucian roots, symbolizing the importance of the families involved. To give your blessings to the couple, you can either prepare a gift or the money, but the money should be put in a white envelope.
The New Year celebration
As we know, this year is the dog year. New Year’s Day is on 29th January this year. How do the Chinese celebrate the Chinese New Year?
Chinese and Korean both celebrate the New Year according to the lunar calendar. In Taiwan the celebration lasts for 15 days. The Chinese New Year’s Eve is marked by the hot pot and the red envelopes. Parents and the elder in the family would give money to the younger ones as long as the young people are not married. For the first day, people would go to a temple, wishing for good luck for this year. The people who have the first prayer done would be very lucky.
In Korea, people will thank their ancestors in the morning of the New Year. Ddeu-kkuk, a rice-cake soup, will be prepared for the New Year’ Day.
In Japan, people only celebrate the New Year. They will eat with the family members. They would go to a shrine and make a wish after ringing the bell and then clapping hands.
Sadou, the tea ceremony
The purpose of the tea ceremony is to provide a good time. They share the atmosphere together; for example, you can go to have a tea and . It’s a special way to treat an important guest. When you are served a tea, you should take the tea with your two hands with respect, say thank you, and turn the tea bowl three times before you have a sip. After having the tea, you should return it to the host and say some praise for the good tea.
In Taiwan, the tea ceremony is completely different although they both demand the respect. When a Chinese treat a guest a tea, he is showing the hospitality and a guest should accept the tea. In Taiwan and China, it’s also the host that makes the tea. However, people use two cup to taste the tea. The first cup is taller and is only for the smell; the guest will drink in the second cup.
The colors
The yellow and purple used to be the colors for the royal family. The white is a color for funeral in China and in Korean. On the contrary, for a Japanese funeral, people will dress in pure black. The envelopes would be white for all occasions in Korea.
In Japanese, people have a hesitation to say something clearly. People have tended to avoid saying anything directly; a listener needs to read between the lines. Recently, in lectures and speeches, Japanese people use more and more direct speech but still politicians would use a vague language.
“I’d love to” means no in Japan. They expect others to be very sensitive to their facial expressions and changes in tone. Once a person fails to meet their expectations and misses the signal, this person is recognized as “unsocial.” Hereafter, he will not be expected to understand the proper Japanese conversation.
“You” exists in 5 forms in Japanese. To the elder, people used another “you” to show the respect. The number 8 is lucky because the Chinese character of 8 signifies a broader future.
In Korean, as well as in China, 4 is also a number to avoid because its pronunciation resembles to the death. 7 is the good number. “You” exists in 4 or 5 forms in Korea.
However, Chinese has only 2 forms of “you” because the most important thing is to show the respect towards the elder. People of the same age are mainly called by the same manner.
In order to maintain the harmony, the business meetings are normally
Education
In East Asia, the education tends to be more hierarchical. Confucius and the traditional value taught the Asians that the education is a pivotal element of good governance. Teacher is a highly respected profession. Students are not encouraged to challenge teachers’ authority or speech.
Beyond the respect for the educators, the students need to compete with each other in order to get into a good university. Normally, students have to pass an entrance exam or several ones to get the admission. Hence, the students of good universities are proud of their academic background but at the same time they should be humble despite their achievement.
Geography
The isolation of the four islands of Japan means a lot. It’s not easy to let another culture come in. 1350 years ago, Chinese culture came into Japanese culture and Japan tried to integrate the Chinese culture into its own culture. After Edo period, Japan isolated themselves for 250 years. Japan was forced to open its borders to the American, and the Japanese average perception, even till now, is that the American or the foreigners in a broader sense is a threat.
On the contrary, China has many subjacent countries, and there are many minority peoples with China’s territory. This creates an open attitude towards the foreigner and to other cultures.
Korea is the bridge between China and Japan. Therefore, Korea has always been either China’s or Japan’s colony before the Republic of Korea was established. The culture is a mix of continental and oceanic culture.
Real life practices: How do you fit into the East-Asian life?
Dos and taboos…
A wedding
If you are invited to a friend’s wedding in Japan, you have to be careful. There are many customs to follow. The bride will dress in pearly white, and the groom will dress in dark-colored clothes. To congratulate the couple, people will give money with a white and red envelope with the gold and red strings, which is only used for the funeral in China.
In China, red is a good color, so wearing a red dress is one of the traditions for the bride. Guest who attended the banquet would give a red envelope with money inside to congratulate the newly-weds. The wedding is for two people so everything should be in pair. You should avoid the singular number like 1100 or the number 4.
In Korea, the wedding dress is the traditional dress. The bride wears a green and red skirt. The traditional wedding ceremonies surrounding the events have deep Confucian roots, symbolizing the importance of the families involved. To give your blessings to the couple, you can either prepare a gift or the money, but the money should be put in a white envelope.
The New Year celebration
As we know, this year is the dog year. New Year’s Day is on 29th January this year. How do the Chinese celebrate the Chinese New Year?
Chinese and Korean both celebrate the New Year according to the lunar calendar. In Taiwan the celebration lasts for 15 days. The Chinese New Year’s Eve is marked by the hot pot and the red envelopes. Parents and the elder in the family would give money to the younger ones as long as the young people are not married. For the first day, people would go to a temple, wishing for good luck for this year. The people who have the first prayer done would be very lucky.
In Korea, people will thank their ancestors in the morning of the New Year. Ddeu-kkuk, a rice-cake soup, will be prepared for the New Year’ Day.
In Japan, people only celebrate the New Year. They will eat with the family members. They would go to a shrine and make a wish after ringing the bell and then clapping hands.
Sadou, the tea ceremony
The purpose of the tea ceremony is to provide a good time. They share the atmosphere together; for example, you can go to have a tea and . It’s a special way to treat an important guest. When you are served a tea, you should take the tea with your two hands with respect, say thank you, and turn the tea bowl three times before you have a sip. After having the tea, you should return it to the host and say some praise for the good tea.
In Taiwan, the tea ceremony is completely different although they both demand the respect. When a Chinese treat a guest a tea, he is showing the hospitality and a guest should accept the tea. In Taiwan and China, it’s also the host that makes the tea. However, people use two cup to taste the tea. The first cup is taller and is only for the smell; the guest will drink in the second cup.
The colors
The yellow and purple used to be the colors for the royal family. The white is a color for funeral in China and in Korean. On the contrary, for a Japanese funeral, people will dress in pure black. The envelopes would be white for all occasions in Korea.
Reflection on Sally Soprano Case
During this positional negotiation, I am not so at ease at first. I think it has to do with my lack of professional experience. I have rarely faced this kind of bargaining in real life practice so I don’t know how to cope with this situation. As an agent for Sally Soprano, I knew that I should act to meet Sally’s Interests. However, I didn’t know to which extent I should be aggressive or pushy.
According to the Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode instrument, I get 0 in competing, 7 in collaborating, 7 in compromising, 7 in avoiding and 9 in accommodating. I don’t like to get into discord with others. It does mean that I have a perfectly good temperament; I still have temper. Nonetheless, I have always tried to avoid the quarrel even though I feel the discontent because I am taught in this way and Taiwanese culture stresses a lot on the maintain of harmony. I am the eldest sister in my family, having a five-year younger brother. My mother had always told me to give in while my brother and I were fighting for the toys. It’s a big sister’s duty to fulfill the siblings’ wishes because the eldest should be more mature. Meanwhile, it’s very important to keep the harmony within the group and the society in East Asia. It’s a general phenomenon that a Japanese or a Chinese avoids to say “No” directly. To say “No” means a disturbance and an impoliteness in East-Asian society. Prior consultation is the technique used everywhere, which enables the negotiators to reach a tacit consensus. However, this kind of education and culture might get a negative effect when I need to deal with people whose standpoint is different from mine.
My partner, however, is not an aggressive person at the first sight. Neither he nor I wanted to touch the sensitive subjects. Hence, I figured out that one of us needs to mention them. I mentioned that the audition is not necessary, saying this would undermine my client’s reputation. He is mild but still insisted to have a chance to evaluate her voice despite my promise. I recognized that my counterpart is mild in appearance but he is tougher than I thought. Since he is stronger than I, I don’t want to confront him. I gave in at the end: we agreed on a charity solo concert, upon which the decision would be made. If I could have insisted more on the inutility of any kind of audition, I would have a better bargaining ground. Because I gave in, I was frustrated. Being mild is one thing; being imposed by others is another. Due to my background, I assess that I might be a little too mild during the negotiations. In the following week, I learned that we should act competitively, accommodatingly, or compromisingly based on strategies instead of our own nature. Therefore, for the next negotiation, I need to learn how to insist in my position. I need to learn how to say “No” without creating any discontent.
Another thing that I felt frustrated is that I did not explore the best option. I think that I was conservative about the gains although the salary was not my priority. I learned that the counterpart was actually able to offer much more than I finally got, which means that I could have done better. More is not necessary better in this case because I know the long term relations need a time to grow and also because getting the job is the most pivotal task that I had during this negotiation. I was not satisfied with the results but they were acceptable in terms of salary and audition; hence, I did not try to push further. However, I think it would be better for me to halt this propensity. I tend to reconcile when one of my objectives are met and I stop seeking for the best solution. Once I am content with what I have, I stop looking for the better outcome. Perhaps, I learned this from the international politics. If the other party is not oppressing me and if the offer does not damage my fundamental interests, I should accept it because getting to the agreement is the most important thing. I think that instead of being offered a price I should be the one who say the price first next time.
When the other party asked me about my client’s future engagement in other operas or occasions, I did not tell him that my client would like to join a TV opera show. I did not know why I hesitated to tell the truth to him and at that time I had a bad time at deciding to tell him or not. Being honest is a very important quality but in this case I was afraid that my honesty would damage my negotiation. I did not want to look vulnerable especially when the other party did not show its intention while asking. If the other party knows everything and the bottom line, I think I will lose the upper hand. Hence, I chose to say only part of the truth. If I had chosen to tell him, maybe we could work for a better result; even so, I did not know how much I should have told him. It comes back to the reason why I am suspicious to the other’s intention. Growing up in a happy family, I have had no trauma or any tragic event in my life. I don’t think human beings are evil or bad. I think it’s mainly because of my education. I was taught in school that the enemy and the rivals are not trustworthy. From the historical lessons, trusting your enemy would sometimes hurt you because they can really stab you to the core. In Chinese culture, we promote the notion that we can look at the bright side in every event but we need to be cautious too. I think being cautious is not a terrible attitude; being over-suspicious is. This could hinder my negotiation if I really doubt this person’s credibility and then I might miss the signal and misjudge his intention.
Finally, I assess that my negotiation is not really successful because nothing is certain in the end. I did not get the final decision from the other party. Following decisions all depend on the temporary agreement that I had. However, this solo concert does not guarantee my client’s job in the opera. I accept the uncertainty because there is surely a need for proving my party’s ability. On the other hand, I think it’s my intrinsic problem that I don’t like to push people to say the last word. Being a classmate or friend, this might be a good quality. However, being a negotiator, I think that this also means that at the end I would probably get nothing at all. For the next round of negotiation, I will try to get a more concrete promise.
According to the Thomas-Kilmann conflict mode instrument, I get 0 in competing, 7 in collaborating, 7 in compromising, 7 in avoiding and 9 in accommodating. I don’t like to get into discord with others. It does mean that I have a perfectly good temperament; I still have temper. Nonetheless, I have always tried to avoid the quarrel even though I feel the discontent because I am taught in this way and Taiwanese culture stresses a lot on the maintain of harmony. I am the eldest sister in my family, having a five-year younger brother. My mother had always told me to give in while my brother and I were fighting for the toys. It’s a big sister’s duty to fulfill the siblings’ wishes because the eldest should be more mature. Meanwhile, it’s very important to keep the harmony within the group and the society in East Asia. It’s a general phenomenon that a Japanese or a Chinese avoids to say “No” directly. To say “No” means a disturbance and an impoliteness in East-Asian society. Prior consultation is the technique used everywhere, which enables the negotiators to reach a tacit consensus. However, this kind of education and culture might get a negative effect when I need to deal with people whose standpoint is different from mine.
My partner, however, is not an aggressive person at the first sight. Neither he nor I wanted to touch the sensitive subjects. Hence, I figured out that one of us needs to mention them. I mentioned that the audition is not necessary, saying this would undermine my client’s reputation. He is mild but still insisted to have a chance to evaluate her voice despite my promise. I recognized that my counterpart is mild in appearance but he is tougher than I thought. Since he is stronger than I, I don’t want to confront him. I gave in at the end: we agreed on a charity solo concert, upon which the decision would be made. If I could have insisted more on the inutility of any kind of audition, I would have a better bargaining ground. Because I gave in, I was frustrated. Being mild is one thing; being imposed by others is another. Due to my background, I assess that I might be a little too mild during the negotiations. In the following week, I learned that we should act competitively, accommodatingly, or compromisingly based on strategies instead of our own nature. Therefore, for the next negotiation, I need to learn how to insist in my position. I need to learn how to say “No” without creating any discontent.
Another thing that I felt frustrated is that I did not explore the best option. I think that I was conservative about the gains although the salary was not my priority. I learned that the counterpart was actually able to offer much more than I finally got, which means that I could have done better. More is not necessary better in this case because I know the long term relations need a time to grow and also because getting the job is the most pivotal task that I had during this negotiation. I was not satisfied with the results but they were acceptable in terms of salary and audition; hence, I did not try to push further. However, I think it would be better for me to halt this propensity. I tend to reconcile when one of my objectives are met and I stop seeking for the best solution. Once I am content with what I have, I stop looking for the better outcome. Perhaps, I learned this from the international politics. If the other party is not oppressing me and if the offer does not damage my fundamental interests, I should accept it because getting to the agreement is the most important thing. I think that instead of being offered a price I should be the one who say the price first next time.
When the other party asked me about my client’s future engagement in other operas or occasions, I did not tell him that my client would like to join a TV opera show. I did not know why I hesitated to tell the truth to him and at that time I had a bad time at deciding to tell him or not. Being honest is a very important quality but in this case I was afraid that my honesty would damage my negotiation. I did not want to look vulnerable especially when the other party did not show its intention while asking. If the other party knows everything and the bottom line, I think I will lose the upper hand. Hence, I chose to say only part of the truth. If I had chosen to tell him, maybe we could work for a better result; even so, I did not know how much I should have told him. It comes back to the reason why I am suspicious to the other’s intention. Growing up in a happy family, I have had no trauma or any tragic event in my life. I don’t think human beings are evil or bad. I think it’s mainly because of my education. I was taught in school that the enemy and the rivals are not trustworthy. From the historical lessons, trusting your enemy would sometimes hurt you because they can really stab you to the core. In Chinese culture, we promote the notion that we can look at the bright side in every event but we need to be cautious too. I think being cautious is not a terrible attitude; being over-suspicious is. This could hinder my negotiation if I really doubt this person’s credibility and then I might miss the signal and misjudge his intention.
Finally, I assess that my negotiation is not really successful because nothing is certain in the end. I did not get the final decision from the other party. Following decisions all depend on the temporary agreement that I had. However, this solo concert does not guarantee my client’s job in the opera. I accept the uncertainty because there is surely a need for proving my party’s ability. On the other hand, I think it’s my intrinsic problem that I don’t like to push people to say the last word. Being a classmate or friend, this might be a good quality. However, being a negotiator, I think that this also means that at the end I would probably get nothing at all. For the next round of negotiation, I will try to get a more concrete promise.
A thought on Giddens and his ideas
The ideas proposed by Anthony Giddens
In the book Conversations with Anthony Giddens-Making Sense of Modernity, I got to have some ideas proposed by Giddens throughout his academic endeavors. This book consists of 7 major themes, including his famous theory of structuration, modernity and his point view about the world politics. In this essay, I will try to look at some view points of Giddens’ and then I will try to address these problems myself with aid of his assertions.
How about the modernity?
The book is about making sense of modernity as it indicates from the title. Modernity is associated with a certain set of attitudes towards the world, a complex of economic institutions and a certain range of political institutions. These characteristics make modernity more dynamic as a social order. I think that modernity is actually at the center of gravity in his thoughts. His theory about the structure is generated because of the idea too. When he talks about the world politics, he also infers to the modernity.
What kind of social order are we facing in the 21st century? Although Giddens thinks that Marx is wrong about the mutation of capitalism to socialism, he does prefer Marx treatment of modernity. Marx’s approach is more suitable for the modern society where we are living. For Marx, the economic structure determines the upper building: the political choice. In this way, Marxism is better at deciphering the contemporary society: economic influences have a more distinguishable and profound effect in the modern society than in the previous forms. (Page 95) This is a particular characteristic of capitalism. Take Taiwan for instance Taiwan is tightly linked to the economy of USA and Japan because of the massive consumption of Japanese products and American movies. People are prone to accept Japanese values and USA’s thinking. This is reconstituting the Taiwanese society everyday. This economic interdependence translates into the changes in governance.
Giddens then talked about the risk society and the post-modernism. To him, post-modernism sees politics as an end and political power fades away with the passing of modernity. The modernity takes on new meanings and subtleties. (Page 217) This leads to his important theory.
How to capture the complex and non-linear nature of international affairs?Anthony Giddens proposed the Theory of Structuration in The Constitution of Society (1984). This theory aims at reconciling theoretical dichotomies of social systems such as agency/structure, subjective/objective, and micro/macro perspectives, which consider individuals as either acted upon (as elements within a structural context) or as autonomous agents. The approach does not focus on the individual actor or societal totality "but social practices ordered across space and time" (p. 2). Its proponents adopt this balanced position, attempting to treat influences of structure (which inherently includes culture) and agency equally.
In the article Courage Versus Caution: A Dialogue on Entering and Prospering in IR , Ersel Aydinli said that Professor James N. Rosenau is a scholar of change. The article also mentioned that Professor Rosenau labeled himself as a pro-post modernist whereas he said that it’s a parody. In his point of view, the solution lies in agent-based modeling through computer simulations. This is also what I found out through the reading of Complexity . This agent-based thing has a link to Anthony Giddens’ theory.
In the analysis of IR, I think that normally we see things through a deductive lens. What Giddens suggested is that the micro level of analysis is equally important. People thought that the individual was and quite often the same was true of society. However, Giddens thinks that the society is not a status quo but a series ongoing activities and practices that people carry on and that these practices at the same time reproduce larger institutions. Why are structural changes possible? The international system is a complex for many reasons. First, the structure itself has become a multi-facet one. Societies are driven by many different forces. Second, the structure intersects. Hence, the structure is changing as the social life is flowing actively. In this way, I assimilated the international structure to the social life. We should put emphasis on the agencies which continue the activities under the structure. The forces of non-profit organizations are not negligible. The way that individuals behave has changed too. We need thus new methodology to rethink the bigger structure. Probably we need to understand the international relations by an inductive way to complete our understanding of IR.
How to deal with the globalization?
Globalization poses a challenge for the studies of IR. We need to track down the character of future trajectory of political authority as it is being reconstituted at the global level. Giddens think that the nature and structure of governments might need to change. However, he does not agree on the idea that governments should be shrunken to a minimal size. Liberalists think that the governments should be shrunken to their smallest essentials and that market will take control over the society. Giddens thinks that it’s ridiculous to think about minimizing the government to a local level in a global age. On the contrary, “social solidarity depends upon good government at all levels”. (Page 172) We need to invent a new form of government which will be different to the classical nation-state.
He also mentioned that European Union has to be seen now as both an expression of and a response to globalization. (Page 178) The increase of the transnational exchanges has led to a need for a bigger economic bloc. The economy of scale is the best way to help the industries to deal with the international trade. If a country is not big enough, the market is not big enough to absorb its own production The European Union creates an economy of scale and at the same time the goods and labor can flow more freely. Hence, I agree with Giddens on the European Union as a pioneering response to the globalization. This book is published in 1998 and since then the EU has had many new developments. The euro is now circulating in the world, which fits into Balassa’s model. Balassa thinks that the highest level of economic integration is becoming one economic entity after issuing the unique currency. Whether the EU is going to be one political and economic entity remains a question. However, many people blame the European slow economic growth to the asymmetry within the EU. The economic policy is concerted but not harmonized. Every country is different. The shock strikes the continent as a whole but every country’s reaction differs from the others. Yes, the response should be tailor-made, but if the European Central Bank can take decision for the member countries, it can allocate the resources more efficiently. The top-down vision might be a better way to have a really fully integrated economy. Giddens thinks that Europe won’t and can’t look like a super nation-state, with a common culture. It seems to me that Giddens does not want to see a unified Europe. He thinks that EU is a cosmopolitan society. In my eyes, the EU needs to a common identity to improve its economic growth. The mere monetary union is not enough. To consolidate what the Europeans have already built, we need also a down-top method.
Conclusion
In short, Conversations with Anthony Giddens: Making Sense of Modernity opened my eye. It gave me an entry to Anthony Giddens’ thinking and facilitated my understanding about his theories. Among all the forces, modernity is a force that we cannot neglect. We have to review the structure of society because the society is under a perpetual transformation. The government also needs to reinvent itself in the modern society.
In the book Conversations with Anthony Giddens-Making Sense of Modernity, I got to have some ideas proposed by Giddens throughout his academic endeavors. This book consists of 7 major themes, including his famous theory of structuration, modernity and his point view about the world politics. In this essay, I will try to look at some view points of Giddens’ and then I will try to address these problems myself with aid of his assertions.
How about the modernity?
The book is about making sense of modernity as it indicates from the title. Modernity is associated with a certain set of attitudes towards the world, a complex of economic institutions and a certain range of political institutions. These characteristics make modernity more dynamic as a social order. I think that modernity is actually at the center of gravity in his thoughts. His theory about the structure is generated because of the idea too. When he talks about the world politics, he also infers to the modernity.
What kind of social order are we facing in the 21st century? Although Giddens thinks that Marx is wrong about the mutation of capitalism to socialism, he does prefer Marx treatment of modernity. Marx’s approach is more suitable for the modern society where we are living. For Marx, the economic structure determines the upper building: the political choice. In this way, Marxism is better at deciphering the contemporary society: economic influences have a more distinguishable and profound effect in the modern society than in the previous forms. (Page 95) This is a particular characteristic of capitalism. Take Taiwan for instance Taiwan is tightly linked to the economy of USA and Japan because of the massive consumption of Japanese products and American movies. People are prone to accept Japanese values and USA’s thinking. This is reconstituting the Taiwanese society everyday. This economic interdependence translates into the changes in governance.
Giddens then talked about the risk society and the post-modernism. To him, post-modernism sees politics as an end and political power fades away with the passing of modernity. The modernity takes on new meanings and subtleties. (Page 217) This leads to his important theory.
How to capture the complex and non-linear nature of international affairs?Anthony Giddens proposed the Theory of Structuration in The Constitution of Society (1984). This theory aims at reconciling theoretical dichotomies of social systems such as agency/structure, subjective/objective, and micro/macro perspectives, which consider individuals as either acted upon (as elements within a structural context) or as autonomous agents. The approach does not focus on the individual actor or societal totality "but social practices ordered across space and time" (p. 2). Its proponents adopt this balanced position, attempting to treat influences of structure (which inherently includes culture) and agency equally.
In the article Courage Versus Caution: A Dialogue on Entering and Prospering in IR , Ersel Aydinli said that Professor James N. Rosenau is a scholar of change. The article also mentioned that Professor Rosenau labeled himself as a pro-post modernist whereas he said that it’s a parody. In his point of view, the solution lies in agent-based modeling through computer simulations. This is also what I found out through the reading of Complexity . This agent-based thing has a link to Anthony Giddens’ theory.
In the analysis of IR, I think that normally we see things through a deductive lens. What Giddens suggested is that the micro level of analysis is equally important. People thought that the individual was and quite often the same was true of society. However, Giddens thinks that the society is not a status quo but a series ongoing activities and practices that people carry on and that these practices at the same time reproduce larger institutions. Why are structural changes possible? The international system is a complex for many reasons. First, the structure itself has become a multi-facet one. Societies are driven by many different forces. Second, the structure intersects. Hence, the structure is changing as the social life is flowing actively. In this way, I assimilated the international structure to the social life. We should put emphasis on the agencies which continue the activities under the structure. The forces of non-profit organizations are not negligible. The way that individuals behave has changed too. We need thus new methodology to rethink the bigger structure. Probably we need to understand the international relations by an inductive way to complete our understanding of IR.
How to deal with the globalization?
Globalization poses a challenge for the studies of IR. We need to track down the character of future trajectory of political authority as it is being reconstituted at the global level. Giddens think that the nature and structure of governments might need to change. However, he does not agree on the idea that governments should be shrunken to a minimal size. Liberalists think that the governments should be shrunken to their smallest essentials and that market will take control over the society. Giddens thinks that it’s ridiculous to think about minimizing the government to a local level in a global age. On the contrary, “social solidarity depends upon good government at all levels”. (Page 172) We need to invent a new form of government which will be different to the classical nation-state.
He also mentioned that European Union has to be seen now as both an expression of and a response to globalization. (Page 178) The increase of the transnational exchanges has led to a need for a bigger economic bloc. The economy of scale is the best way to help the industries to deal with the international trade. If a country is not big enough, the market is not big enough to absorb its own production The European Union creates an economy of scale and at the same time the goods and labor can flow more freely. Hence, I agree with Giddens on the European Union as a pioneering response to the globalization. This book is published in 1998 and since then the EU has had many new developments. The euro is now circulating in the world, which fits into Balassa’s model. Balassa thinks that the highest level of economic integration is becoming one economic entity after issuing the unique currency. Whether the EU is going to be one political and economic entity remains a question. However, many people blame the European slow economic growth to the asymmetry within the EU. The economic policy is concerted but not harmonized. Every country is different. The shock strikes the continent as a whole but every country’s reaction differs from the others. Yes, the response should be tailor-made, but if the European Central Bank can take decision for the member countries, it can allocate the resources more efficiently. The top-down vision might be a better way to have a really fully integrated economy. Giddens thinks that Europe won’t and can’t look like a super nation-state, with a common culture. It seems to me that Giddens does not want to see a unified Europe. He thinks that EU is a cosmopolitan society. In my eyes, the EU needs to a common identity to improve its economic growth. The mere monetary union is not enough. To consolidate what the Europeans have already built, we need also a down-top method.
Conclusion
In short, Conversations with Anthony Giddens: Making Sense of Modernity opened my eye. It gave me an entry to Anthony Giddens’ thinking and facilitated my understanding about his theories. Among all the forces, modernity is a force that we cannot neglect. We have to review the structure of society because the society is under a perpetual transformation. The government also needs to reinvent itself in the modern society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)