"The challenge and art of diplomacy"
Finally finished a book on Japan's foreign policy since the end of the 2nd World War, written by a former Japanese diplomat, Togo Kazuhiko. His closing message, imparted from his grandfather through his late mother, is a fantastic one.
The most important thing in diplomacy is, when you come to a critical point in negotiations, be prepared to give 51(%) to your counterpart and be satisfied with 49(%) on your side.
Professor Togo's mother went on to explain, as he relates:
Usually we say in the foreign service that winning too much is not good for one's own country. (...) If you win too much, then the other side will become frustrated and this will sow the seeds of future contention. So the best outcome of a negotiation is a result of 50 to 50. It is a no winner and no loser situation.
This being logical, though quite possibly not what negotiators around the world are taught. Everyone wants what's best for their own side, after all.
But what your grandfather said was a little more. He said that a mutually satisfactory result would emerge if a negotiator ultimately thinks deeply about the position of the other side, even to the extent of contemplating giving 51% to the other side, i.e., a little more than the position of one's own country. This is the most difficult part. There are so many forces pressuring you to think about the immediate interest of your own country. Someone has to think about the position of the other side. And that is the way to secure ultimately the best interest of your country. That is the challenge and art of diplomacy.
It's obvious how this would be a struggle, right? If one doesn't even know - or is not willing to acknowledge - the other side's point of view, then how can negotiation even happen?
And it goes both ways.
The most important thing in diplomacy is, when you come to a critical point in negotiations, be prepared to give 51(%) to your counterpart and be satisfied with 49(%) on your side.
Professor Togo's mother went on to explain, as he relates:
Usually we say in the foreign service that winning too much is not good for one's own country. (...) If you win too much, then the other side will become frustrated and this will sow the seeds of future contention. So the best outcome of a negotiation is a result of 50 to 50. It is a no winner and no loser situation.
This being logical, though quite possibly not what negotiators around the world are taught. Everyone wants what's best for their own side, after all.
But what your grandfather said was a little more. He said that a mutually satisfactory result would emerge if a negotiator ultimately thinks deeply about the position of the other side, even to the extent of contemplating giving 51% to the other side, i.e., a little more than the position of one's own country. This is the most difficult part. There are so many forces pressuring you to think about the immediate interest of your own country. Someone has to think about the position of the other side. And that is the way to secure ultimately the best interest of your country. That is the challenge and art of diplomacy.
It's obvious how this would be a struggle, right? If one doesn't even know - or is not willing to acknowledge - the other side's point of view, then how can negotiation even happen?
And it goes both ways.