With nearly 30 years’ experience as a negotiation coach, I have what I call an excellent “negotiation radar.” I can spot a negotiation a mile away, even when it doesn’t call itself one. And these negotiations-in-disguise are what I’ve termed “stealth negotiations.”
These “stealth negotiations” are in contrast with how negotiations are typically conducted. When I coach my clients in my system, the purpose is for them to achieve their negotiation objectives in an open arrangement. The two parties’ calendars schedule a “negotiation,” the attendees are part of a “negotiation team,” and the meeting is held in a proper-sounding conference room. This is a highly identifiable and clearly labeled event.
But the stealth ones are, well, pretty hidden from the layperson’s eye. For negotiation professionals, pinning such a negotiation down is often a tremendous source of pleasure. That’s because these arrangements are supposed to be under the radar and appear as something else entirely, such as a discussion.
And if you think that it was only a “discussion” President Barack Obama had with Russian President Vladimir Putin on September 6, you’ve missed one of the greatest “stealth negotiations” ever conducted.
The September 6 discussion between Obama and Putin, reported to have lasted 20 minutes, happened during the G-20 summit, which addressed the use of poison gas by the regime of Syria’s Bashar-al-Assad on August 21, which was in violation of the 1997 international agreement prohibiting the use of chemical weapons.
At a press conference following G-20, Putin reiterated that his country opposed military intervention in Syria. Even more notably, he said he didn’t believe Assad would have used chemical weapons against his own people.
However, at the beginning of this week, something happened. Secretary of State John Kerry suggested, if Assad turned over his country’s chemical weapons to the international community, Syria could avoid military intervention by the U.S.
Shortly after, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said that, if Syria’s surrender of these weapons might avert potential U.S. strikes against that country, Russia would get on board to try to get Syria to get with that plan.
And then, in a strange but welcome twist, the Syrian government seemed interested in considering the Russian suggestion.
What I’ve laid out here is hardly as simple as the formal negotiations that go into avoiding military intervention and getting a country to dispose of its chemical weapons.
However, I can’t help but wonder what really went on in those 20 minutes when Obama spoke with Putin. I have my ideas, though.
The smart negotiator, in order to secure his objective, needs to make the other side envision what’s in it for him, if he gives the other side what it wants. Obama is keen on avoiding military intervention in the Middle East, and he also wants Syria to honor the international law against chemical weapons. The more international support Obama gets in favor of making Syria give up its chemical weapons of mass destruction to ward off military strikes, the better for everyone. And, as a nation with its own military might, Russia’s Putin is an important guy to be part of Obama’s support network.
Everyone wants to be the hero, and I’m pretty sure, in those 20 minutes, Obama planted the seeds and painted a vision in Putin’s mind that the Russian leader could be exactly that. You can’t deny the timing of Putin’s announcement, so soon after he conversed with Obama.
In his remarks to the nation about Syria last night, our President specifically noted: “over the last few days we’ve seen some encouraging signs in part because of the credible threat of U.S. military action as well as constructive talks that I had with President Putin. The Russian government has indicated a willingness to join with the international community in pushing Assad to give up his chemical weapons. The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons and even said they’d join the chemical weapons convention, which prohibits their use.”
Last night Obama also said that he will continue his discussions with Putin and that tomorrow Kerry will speak with his Russian counterpart. With Russia on board, a resolution will be presented to the U.N. Security Council which will require Assad to give up his chemical weapons.
If there’s one thing for negotiators can learn from the attempts at Syria-related diplomacy over the past few days – and Putin’s involvement in it – it’s this. Great negotiators never take credit. It’s always the other side’s idea. And I suspect there was quite a bit of that going on during those 20 minutes.
* * *
This article is by Jim Camp, a negotiation coach and the creator of Negotiator-Pro powered by
