One of the recurring pleasures of editing Negotiation Journal is seeing pieces in a particular issue fit together so well without design or intention on our part. This happens so regularly that I can't attribute it merely to luck. Rather, I think it confirms our founding belief that, notwithstanding the span of our disciplines and fields, underlying issues and themes continue to tie seemingly disparate pieces together. And that tendency is likely reinforced by our commitment to bridge negotiation theory and practice.
Take, for instance, two pieces that appear in different parts of this issue, although they really should be read together. One is Jeswald Salacuse's wise and generous review of Ambassador Bill Richardson's recent book, How to Sweet‐Talk a Shark. Salacuse loves Richardson's stories, especially an account of his being courted in 2008 for endorsement by Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama, then both competing for the Democratic Presidential nomination. In the book, Richardson candidly describes missteps by Clinton (and her husband) — as well as a bad mistake of his own. As instructive as the examples are, however, Salacuse wishes that Richardson were more explicit about strategic principles that might explain ultimate success or failure.
But luckily for us, such a framework is offered in these pages by Alisher Faizullaev in his “Diplomatic Interactions and Negotiations.” It surveys the same territory that Richardson navigated as a United Nations Ambassador, special envoy, and sometime freelance trouble shooter in North Korea, the Congo, and other hotspots. Faizullaev analyzes the intricate web of relationships among state actors, organizations, and individuals, operating interdependently.
It would be fascinating to eavesdrop on a conversation among Richardson, Faizullaev, and Salacuse to hear the insights each might spark from the other. For that matter, if I were hosting, I would invite another contributor to this issue, Achim Wennmann, to pull up a chair as well. His article, “Negotiated Exits from Organized Crime? Building Peace in Conflict and Crime‐affected Contexts,” addresses the diplomatic challenges of dealing with criminal groups that emerge in civil wars and collapsing societies from Central America to Afghanistan.
As I imagine this stimulating conclave, I hope that Susan Podziba could join us, too. Her article, entitled “Civic Fusion: Moving from Certainty through Not Knowing to Curiosity,” reflects on her experience bringing together parties with polarizing and passionately held values. She describes the mediator's need to “create a state of not knowing,” that is, the realization by the parties that, while their respective views are not necessarily wrong, they also are not all‐encompassing. Once that understanding is reached, practical solutions may reveal themselves.
The guest list would be complete if Han‐Ying Tng and Al K.C. Au could make the trip from Singapore. They are authors of “Strategic Display of Anger and Happiness in Negotiation.” While they report on studies from the psychology laboratory, rather than the field, the topic they investigate — the eruption of emotion in the course of negotiation and its impact on negotiators — would be familiar to all the other authors who appear here alongside them.
Alas, an in‐person gathering of all these writers seems unlikely any time soon. But their voices here are clear and enlightening. Now it's our readers' turn to bring their own thoughts and experiences to the exchange that our contributors have begun in these pages.
