Have you ever wondered why the strongest country in the world has such a problem dealing with less powerful nations? Why we always seem to give up more than we gain in international negotiations? Why are our politicians so dazzled with size, complexity and abstruseness in treaties and trade agreements? Is there any way to get better at negotiating so we don't constantly embarrass ourselves?
I'm afraid not. The ability to bargain is not necessarily instinctual, it can be learned and honed with practice but we have cultural problems that will forever doom us to hoping and flailing, wishing and blustering when we deal in the international arena.
We are uncomfortable in negotiations because the outcome is never guaranteed. We find ourselves placing our comfortable fixed price existence at risk and we are suddenly dependent on a skill we have never had to develop. It's so easy to walk into a commercial establishment and only have to decide whether or not we are willing to pay the posted price for an item.
We (and I include most of Europe in this) have evolved into this fixed price society. The only time we bargain is when we purchase a home or an automobile and then we hate every minute of it. In nearly every other case the cost of goods and services are set by the seller and our only decision is whether or not we will accept the price. Not so the rest of the world.
In many smaller, less structured and less advanced societies everything is negotiable. The price of every item is a matter of competition between a seller who wants value for his product and a buyer who is willing to give up assets in order to make the purchase. These folks grow up from childhood practicing the art of hondling and it should be no surprise when they clean our clock in international negotiations.
We enter international negotiations with discomfort and apprehension because of our lack of proficiency. Our adversaries are well aware of our shortcomings and take advantage. We are so afraid of losing major points in a negotiation that we paint ourselves into corners by allowing our adversaries to score point after point on smaller issues. This has the dual effect of stimulating our opponents while discouraging us. While our adversaries are seeking advantage, we give up what we have in order to keep talks going. Other nations enter negotiations with clear goals in mind and an understanding of risk and reward, we go in with a laundry list of points we are willing to concede. Clearly our result will be less positive than our opponents.
At the end of the Korean conflict, during the Panmunjom "peace" talks, the North Koreans infuriated the U. S. representatives by placing everything from the seating arrangements to the color of the tablecloth to the size of the place cards into the negotiations. Then they sat back and smirked while our side fumed and blustered over these minor details and were psyched into an inferior position. A half century later we are still doing the same thing.
Our lack of negotiating skill delayed our exit from the Viet Nam quagmire as we got bogged down in minutiae while the NVA scored hit after hit. Our Vietnamese allies who stayed behind paid the price and died in their thousands because of our lack of bargaining skill.
We always enter negotiations in good faith, believe in the rectitude of our position and miss opportunity because of ingrained inflexibility. Unfortunately, we think our adversaries are doing the same. Our first mistake.
We are more interested in being liked than in being successful. We have given away huge amounts of treasure and political power because we always believe we have to get along with everybody. The most powerful nation in the world hasn't the guts to work for its own best interest.
Our aim in negotiations is to minimize losses rather than maximize gains. Our opponents do just the opposite, largely because we are so predictable.
Our goals are short term and rigid. We gave and gave to Russia after the Second World War because we were unable to negotiate from the position of our overwhelming strength and we were more interested in reaching an accommodation than in preventing Russia from consolidating its power.
We have just witnessed free elections in Iraq and there are those who are concerned that they will not come up with a government that is like ours or at least similar enough to be acceptable. Iraq will evolve into its own form of government regardless of our best efforts because, for better or worse, they understand the art of bargaining, we do not.
It's far too late for us to learn to negotiate properly. We should learn to use our strength to gain advantage, not wimp out every time we are challenged. Bet it won't happen.
?2005 Charles Stone, Jr.
Born: Buffalo, NY 8/7/42 Graduated: Williamsville Central HS 1960Military Service USAF 1/27/61 - 1/4/65 Missile mechanic, 3 years in Germany. Computer School, Buffalo, NY 1967.Worked as a computer programmer, programmer/analyst, systems analyst, DP manager and consultant from 1968 - 1990Became disabled in 1991 Currently living in Kissimmee, FLInterests: politics, motor sports, history (mainly military), Web surfing, talk radio junkie.Member of the NRA. Favorite TV shows: CSI, Whose Line Is It, Anyway?, Nova. Favorite radio program: Neal BoortzPolitical leaning: libertarian, Constitutionalist, individualist. Supported and campaigned for Harry Browne in 1996 and 2000. Not sure I'd do it again. Published in: Bureaucrash, Sierra Times, The Libertarian Enterprise, Free Market Net, We Hold These Truths, The Informed Volusian