Deadlocked International Institutions: Implications for Negotiated Conflict Management

Abstract This article argues that the international institutions in which negotiations have often taken place have been challenged by increased conflict among member states in the early 21 st century. Multilateral international institutions function best when common interests are viewed as paramount by the state parties, because they allow the state parties to negotiate structures and processes that serve their shared interests and values. The paper analyzes the difficulties in managing international conflicts in the UN, osce , nato , and EU since 2000 due in part to the inability to achieve consensus within fractured and stalemated institutions. These problems have increasingly limited the role of these institutions in managing some of the most dangerous global conflicts, including on arms control and disarmament and managing the Russian war in Ukraine.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Negotiation
Published
2024-10-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/15718069-bja10109
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.46
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deadlocked International Institutions: Implications for Negotiated Conflict Management

P. Terrence Hopmann
2 citations
International Negotiation
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
4.46
article

Deadlocked International Institutions: Implications for Negotiated Conflict Management

P. Terrence Hopmann
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract This article argues that the international institutions in which negotiations have often taken place have been challenged by increased conflict among member states in the early 21 st century. Multilateral international institutions function best when common interests are viewed as paramount by the state parties, because they allow the state parties to negotiate structures and processes that serve their shared interests and values. The paper analyzes the difficulties in managing international conflicts in the UN, osce , nato , and EU since 2000 due in part to the inability to achieve consensus within fractured and stalemated institutions. These problems have increasingly limited the role of these institutions in managing some of the most dangerous global conflicts, including on arms control and disarmament and managing the Russian war in Ukraine.

International NegotiationVol. 30(2)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
4.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.