Humanitarian Negotiations with Armed Groups

4 Working Towards More Effective Negotiations

4.5 What to do if Negotiations Fail to Converge or if They Break Down

Clearly not all negotiations lead to an agreed outcome. Humanitarian negotiations may fail to converge on a shared perspective or agreed outcome, or may break down completely. This section provides guidance for humanitarian negotiators in such situations.

Review Strategy, Confirm Issues and Develop More Options

When the negotiations fail to converge, humanitarian negotiators should re-assess the strategy being used. Perhaps a different line of argument or a more forceful expression of the legal obligations of the armed group is required. Humanitarian negotiators should also confirm with the armed group that the issues have not changed during the negotiations. Development of more options for both parties to consider may also provide new space for agreement.

Case Study: Persistence by Operation Lifeline Sudan (OLS) in humanitarian negotiations pays off.

“In September 1997, for the first time in the history of OLS, both the Government of Sudan and the SPLA agreed, in principle, to allow OLS to access rebel-controlled areas of the Nuba Mountains. However, negotiations on access modalities halted in November. Despite this setback, OLS continued to push both sides to reach agreement on a means for OLS to assess the needs of the populations in the area. The UN was finally able to send an inter-agency assessment team in the Nuba mountains mid-2000.”

(Source: WFP.)

Keep Open Alternatives on Substance

Even before entering into negotiations, humanitarian actors should consider what alternatives are available to their organization in the event that the negotiations are unsuccessful in fulfilling the desired objectives, or collapse completely. These may not be good alternatives, but they must be considered.

Try Building on the Process

If the negotiations reach an impasse on the substantive issues being discussed, humanitarian negotiators can suggest changes in the negotiation process that may provide some space for additional consideration of the substance by the armed group. Continuing with the process provides additional opportunities for dialogue during which the substantive issues might be resolved.

Explore Alternative Approaches to Negotiations and Engagement

In the event that negotiations with the armed groups collapse, humanitarian negotiators should consider alternative approaches to achieve the desired humanitarian outcome, or to bring about an environment more conducive to successful humanitarian negotiations. These process alternatives include:

Working indirectly through UN political representatives to gather political support — in the country, and externally — for the humanitarian negotiations;
Indirect negotiation through an intermediary with previous or ongoing contacts with the armed group; Humanitarian Negotiations with Armed Groups 56
Making renewed approaches to more senior leaders in the armed group;
Gathering broader support for humanitarian negotiations within the humanitarian community in the country/region, and conducting negotiations through a coalition of humanitarian organizations; and
Engaging in public and/or private advocacy efforts to influence the armed group and its supporters.
Don't Burn Bridges

When negotiations fail to converge or if they break down completely, it is important that humanitarian negotiators do not make any statements or take actions that could preclude future negotiations or interactions with the armed group.

Reinforce Lines of Communication

Even if negotiations threaten to break down completely, humanitarian negotiators should keep open and indeed reinforce lines of communication between the parties. It is precisely when negotiations are not going well, that lines of communication need to be maintained.