During intercultural disputes mediators make a point of being sensitive to cultural issues.

And there are several matters covered in the current U.S./Iran mediation that are potentially critical are:

Iran is a country of 93 million people, approximately half are of Persian ethnicity and a quarter of Azeri (Turkic ancestry). Persian and Turkic dialects predominant. Approximately 90% are Shia Muslim. (Shia Muslims also populate Iraq, Azerbaijan, and Bahrain). The country’s economy is based on state ownership of oil and other large enterprises.

Until 1935 Iran was known as Persia, one of the oldest world cultures often regarded as of the cradle of civilization and one of the most influential world cultures through art, literature, science and medicine. Modern day Iran does not affiliate with the Arab world, rather, its people have a distinctive Persian identity with a sense of pride and dignity. Individual social status comes from family heritage, education, and wealth.

Consistent with this history, Iranian negotiators are known for having a high risk tolerance, being methodical, and slow to maximize concessions and wear down opponents. Iranian negotiators are comfortable with bluffing and using deceptive tactics. Most importantly, compromise is seen as weakness and submission. It also brings shame, but forcing an opponent to compromise increases stature.

Western negotiators, particularly those with a transactional approach, are at a disadvantage if they expect Iranians to adhere to their rules.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Fred Jandt is the author of a well known intercultural communication textbook, as well as his latest book, “How to Survive a Mediation.”

From a mediator’s perspective the U.S.-Iran mediation was not exceptonal.

First, who led the sessions? After six weeks of war, Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan attempted to assume the role, but ultimately Pakistan emerged as the key mediator. Pakistan has long maintained a policy of neutrality with Iran. Russia, China, and the Gulf countries were not seen as neutral, as they were aligned with either the U.S. or Iran. Yet, while seen as neutral, Pakistan could gain as an important diplomatic actor by convening negotiation between the world’s largest economy and one of the Middle East’s most important countries.

Second, how did the sessions go? Pakistan acted as a “shuttle mediator” facilitating a two-week ceasefire and then hosting talks in Islamabad. The mediation was the first meeting between the two countries in over a decade. At the Serena Hotel delegates stayed in separate rooms while Pakistani officials shuttled proposals back and forth.

Third, what were the demands and interests? Going into the mediation, the U.S. demanded Iran’s nuclear stockpile be eliminated, navigation be secured, and their be regional de-escalation. Iran demanded withdrawal of U.S. bases in the region, all sanctions lifted, frozen assets released, compensation for war damages, and recognition of its nuclear enrichment program. Overall, the U.S. was seeking limitations while Iran sought status.

Fourth, why did the mediation fail? After 21 hours U.S. representatives said the mediation failed because Iran would not commit to abandoning its nuclear program, while Iranian negotiators blamed the U.S. for the breakdown.

A mediator might say both parties lacked the “readiness” to settle, that is, continuing the conflict was seen as preferable to a settlement.

———————————————————————————————————————————

Fred Jandt is the author of “How to Survive a Mediation,” available now at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and wherever books are sold.