Framing Strategic Conflicts: Redesign of the American Negotiating Style

Christopher R Stricklin,Christopher R. Stricklin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21236/ada590305
2013-03-01
Abstract:As Prussian military strategist Carl von Clausewitz stated, war is the continuation of politics by other means. The politics inherent in this thinking can be viewed as international relations, diplomacy, or, simply, negotiations. Along these lines, America is known for a forceful, results-oriented negotiating style utilizing war as a quick alternative to negotiated agreement. In this manner, conflicts from World War I and II to the Cold War were not correctly framed. The American negotiating style must be restructured to remain successful in the globalized world of this century. Because of the current predisposition, the United States is framing a Cold War situation with China. And the situation should be reframed to engage in a non-confrontational manner. Stability strengthened by partnership must be the ultimate goal of international relations. The superpower must relax the belief that every problem has a military solution and embrace the new world order in which economics are the primary driving force behind change.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?