Situation 1: Reason vs Problem 1) What is the problem? Kuwait stealing Iraqs oil 2) Resources The major reason that led to the conflict and thus negotiation was Oil. 3) Time Available Short time, as Saddam being an autocratic personality, will not hesitate to take any further actions. 4) Ideal vs Pragmatic Solution Ideal: The ideal situation would be Saddam leaving Kuwait and Kuwait stops stealing Iraqs oil Pragmatic: The pragmatic situation would be Saddam accepting Arab leagues proposal and withdraws his army
Situation 2: Relationship vs Problem
1) How do you relate to the problem? Personal Stakes: Here, we can divide the personal stakes into two parts: (a) Saddam Hussain: Here, the personal stake is Saddams personal ego at stake (b) Kuwait: Here, the stake is the safety of people of Kuwait Organizational Stakes: Here, if we look at the big picture, with Saddams invasion of Kuwait, there is an underlying threat to other Arab nations as well
Situation 3: Result vs Problem
1) What results you expect? Short-term result of a valid negotiation between Saddam and Kuwait would be Saddam leaving Kuwait and getting the desired land and wealth as proposed by Kuwait, but its implication would be long term, i.e. peace and prosperity to the Arab nations. However, in any case, it would be a win-lose situation in this case.
Situation 4: Reason vs People
1) Who all are involved? Saddam Hussain and his army, Kuwait, and the Arab League 2) Parties nature/behavior? Kuwait: Open to negotiate, priority is the safety of its citizens, passive and practical in approach Saddam: Dictator, aggressive and non-compliant to change 3) Their expectations: Open vs Concealed? Kuwait: Open Saddam: Concealed
Situation 5: Relationship vs People
1) Behavioral logistics? Yourself vs Other Party Saddam: Aggressive and Audacive. Kuwait: Defensive 2) Commitment Uncertain commitment by both the parties 3) Rationality and Emotionality Rationality dominated by Kuwait, whereas Saddam emotional part, i.e. his ego dominated
Situation 6: Result vs People
1) How much dependent on your efforts? In this scenario, the result is entirely dependent upon the discretion of Saddam, as Arab league and Kuwait have already shown all their negotiation cards, so it depends upon Saddam as to how he perceives the negotiation.
Situation 7: Reason vs Process
1) Rational vs Emotional Saddam: Emotional Kuwait/Arab League: Rational 2) Deductive This would involve a series of fruitful talks 3) Inductive This would involve assuming that the suggestions are taken. 4) Time frame: One time solution/long-drawn It is a long drawn process, as its implications would have imperative and long lasting influence not only on Kuwait, but also on its neighboring nations as well.
Situation 8: Relationship vs Process
1) One time process/ long drawn/enduring process Its a long drawn and an enduring process, as a series of negotiating talks would definitely happen between the two parties In addition, it has implications on both the parties would definitely be long drawn. 2) Extent Reason based vs Extent Emotional Based Between the two options, the only Reason based process must be followed. However, since, the relationship between the two parties is not cordial; we cannot simply go on with a reason-based process. Emotional based approach should be clubbed with reason-based approach to get the best result.
Situation 9: Result vs Process
1) Costs involved in terms of money, time and relationships. Money: A huge amount of money is involved in this case. In any case, there is win-lose situation, where Saddam/Iraq wins and Kuwait loses. Money in terms of cost of land, and the benefits that Saddam would be deriving out of that land; wiping put or renegotiating the $14 billion debt; Iraq taking control over Ramilla oilfields. Time: This process would take ample time, as the implications are far too urgent. Therefore, in order to have better results, the process could take a lot of time. Relationships: Kuwait is trying to follow a process wherein the relationships are intact, whereas, Saddam is going for do-or-die approach and he hardly cares about the implication of process followed on relationships.