{"title":"1980s","description":null,"products":[{"product_id":"a-question-of-sovereignty-bahrain-qatar-and-the-international-court-of-justice","title":"Case 301 - A Question of Sovereignty: Bahrain, Qatar, and the International Court of Justice","description":"\u003cp\u003eGerner, Deborah J. and Omur Yilmaz\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis two-part case study examines the development and eventual resolution of a long-standing territorial dispute between two small Arab states, Bahrain and Qatar. That dispute turned into a conflict in which traditional mediation did not succeed, but formal international adjudication did. The decision of those two small states to subject themselves voluntarily to a binding verdict, one not subject to appeal, is remarkable in its own right.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe story begins at The Hague, where the two countries’ foreign ministers are awaiting the verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). It then presents the background to the conflict, the key leaders involved, the issues at stake, and the initial ICJ ruling that it had jurisdiction to rule on the dispute. Next, it describes the functioning of the Court and looks at how the conflict evolved under new rulers in both countries. Part A ends with the formal presentation by Bahrain and Qatar of their cases to the ICJ. The eventual verdict is described in Part B.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe generational change represented by the Bahraini and Qatari leaders, both new, allows consideration of the importance of individual actors in such disputes. The case study also illustrates the fact that seemingly insignificant disputes can be complicated. It can be used in a variety of settings: specialized courses in conflict resolution or international law, an introductory international politics class, or a Middle East politics course. It is appropriate for all collegiate levels; however, students would be well served by having modest knowledge of either international law or the Middle East before tackling this case. Another case on a similar topic which could be usefully assigned is “Beagle Channel Negotiations” (Case Study 135).\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":1206603212,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/301_1.jpg?v=1437152474"},{"product_id":"a-helping-hand-eliminating-child-labor-in-bangladeshs-garment-industry","title":"Case 315 - A Helping Hand? Eliminating Child Labor in Bangladesh's Garment Industry","description":"\u003cp\u003eElms, Deborah\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis case study reviews what happens when an apparently “good” idea in one country comes with serious consequences for real-world participants on the other side of the globe. Few in the West would say that children, especially those as young as 8, should be working in factories for up to 20 hours per day. But the sudden imposition and enforcement of child labor laws prohibiting children from earning wages in Bangladesh’s garment industry cost more than 50,000 children their jobs. In response, a novel coalition, comprised of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA), International Labor Organization (ILO), and the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), formed to create an alternative education system for unemployed child garment workers. As this study explains, the results were critical in designing other programs to address the issue of child labor worldwide.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":1206603284,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_315_new_c945d40b-3b41-46d5-bdff-92c3afa1b053.jpg?v=1524245017"},{"product_id":"the-cartagena-summit-cooperative-international-counterdrug-policy","title":"Case 320 - The Cartagena Summit: Cooperative International Counterdrug Policy","description":"\u003cp\u003eFiddner, Dighton and Hunter F. Lutinski\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis case study explores the bilateral and multilateral diplomacy that made the 1990 Cartagena Drug Summit, attended by the heads of state of the United States, Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru, a success.  The United States publicly admitted for the first time that its domestic demand was a major driver of the drug problem, while the Latin American drug-producing states conceded, also for the first time, that they also had a domestic narcotics problem. In addition, the four participants signed a regional multilateral agreement to combat drug trafficking, and pursue new tactics in the “War on Drugs.” Their’ rapport at the summit paved the way for ratification of the 1991 Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPA).\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":1206603336,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_320_copy_09e135e0-2ab6-45f5-a4eb-3056d18df47f.jpg?v=1550871511"},{"product_id":"the-cartagena-summit-cooperative-international-counterdrug-policy-faculty-edition","title":"Case 320, Instructor Copy - The Cartagena Summit: Cooperative International Counterdrug Policy","description":"\u003cp\u003eFiddner, Dighton and Hunter F. Lutinski\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis case study explores the bilateral and multilateral diplomacy that made the 1990 Cartagena Drug Summit, attended by the heads of state of the United States, Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru, a success. The United States publicly admitted for the first time that its domestic demand was a major driver of the drug problem, while the Latin American drug-producing states conceded, also for the first time, that they also had a domestic narcotics problem. In addition, the four participants signed a regional multilateral agreement to combat drug trafficking, and pursue new tactics in the War on Drugs. Their rapport at the summit paved the way for ratification of the 1991 Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPA).\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":3860288069,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_320_copy.jpg?v=1550871409"},{"product_id":"a-helping-hand-eliminating-child-labor-in-bangladeshs-garment-industry-faculty-edition","title":"Case 315, Instructor Copy - A Helping Hand? Eliminating Child Labor in Bangladesh's Garment Industry","description":"\u003cp\u003eElms, Deborah\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis case study reviews what happens when an apparently good idea in one country comes with serious consequences for real-world participants on the other side of the globe. Few in the West would say that children, especially those as young as 8, should be working in factories for up to 20 hours per day. But the sudden imposition and enforcement of child labor laws prohibiting children from earning wages in Bangladesh's garment industry cost more than 50,000 children their jobs. In response, a novel coalition, comprised of the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA), International Labor Organization (ILO), and the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF), formed to create an alternative education system for unemployed child garment workers. As this study explains, the results were critical in designing other programs to address the issue of child labor worldwide.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":3860289861,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_315_new.jpg?v=1524244946"},{"product_id":"a-question-of-sovereignty-bahrain-qatar-and-the-international-court-of-justice-faculty-edition","title":"Case 301, Instructor Copy - A Question of Sovereignty: Bahrain, Qatar, and the International Court of Justice","description":"\u003cp\u003eGerner, Deborah J. and Omur Yilmaz\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis two-part case study examines the development and eventual resolution of a long-standing territorial dispute between two small Arab states, Bahrain and Qatar. That dispute turned into a conflict in which traditional mediation did not succeed, but formal international adjudication did. The decision of those two small states to subject themselves voluntarily to a binding verdict, one not subject to appeal, is remarkable in its own right.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe story begins at The Hague, where the two countries’ foreign ministers are awaiting the verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). It then presents the background to the conflict, the key leaders involved, the issues at stake, and the initial ICJ ruling that it had jurisdiction to rule on the dispute. Next, it describes the functioning of the Court and looks at how the conflict evolved under new rulers in both countries. Part A ends with the formal presentation by Bahrain and Qatar of their cases to the ICJ. The eventual verdict is described in Part B.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe generational change represented by the Bahraini and Qatari leaders, both new, allows consideration of the importance of individual actors in such disputes. The case study also illustrates the fact that seemingly insignificant disputes can be complicated. It can be used in a variety of settings: specialized courses in conflict resolution or international law, an introductory international politics class, or a Middle East politics course. It is appropriate for all collegiate levels; however, students would be well served by having modest knowledge of either international law or the Middle East before tackling this case. Another case on a similar topic which could be usefully assigned is “Beagle Channel Negotiations” (Case Study 135).\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNOTE: The student download for this case study includes all parts of the case study.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":3860294469,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/301_1.jpeg?v=1437596632"},{"product_id":"case-330-instructors-copy-from-miracle-to-crisis-brazilian-foreign-debt-and-the-limits-of-obligation","title":"Case 330, Instructor Copy - From Miracle to Crisis: Brazilian Foreign Debt and the Limits of Obligation","description":"\u003cdiv\u003eLandy, Thomas M.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n\u003cspan\u003eIn a September 1986 speech to the United Nations, Brazilian President Jose Sarney declared that his country's massive debt  imperiled its newly restored democracy, and warned that Brazil would not \"pay its foreign debt with recession, nor with unemployment, nor with hunger.\" Such crises illustrate the reality that some global financial obligations become so onerous that they must be restructured or forgiven--yet there is no single entity \u003c\/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003ein the international arena \u003c\/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003ewith the authority to make and enforce such a binding determination. This case study codifies and explores a set of questions whose answers can help resolve such challenges, which--as we have seen in Greece, among other countries--remain as relevant today as they were 30 years ago. It would be appropriate for courses in world politics, international political economy, development issues, and foreign policy analysis at the graduate and undergraduate levels.\u003c\/span\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":6839340677,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/ic_330_cover.jpg?v=1524165341"},{"product_id":"case-332-the-withdrawal-from-unesco-international-organizations-and-the-u-s-role","title":"Case 332 - The Withdrawal from UNESCO: International Organizations and the U.S. Role","description":"\u003cp\u003eJoel H. Rosenthal\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIn December 1983, U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz sent a letter to Amadou-Mahtar M'Bow, director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, notifying him of the United States' intention to leave UNESCO by the end of 1984 unless the organization adopted serious reforms. A year later, Sec. Shultz confirmed Washington's withdrawal, leaving it and London, which followed the American lead, outside an organization they had done so much to create nearly 40 years earlier. This case study analyzes how such a promising vision of the potential of multinational cooperation went sour, and assesses the roles ideology, domestic U.S. politics and policy disagreements within the Reagan administration played in the decision to withdraw.\u003c\/span\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":7611781765,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/332_new_cover.jpg?v=1540841975"},{"product_id":"case-332-instructor-copy-the-withdrawal-from-unesco-international-organizations-and-the-u-s-role","title":"Case 332, Instructor Copy - The Withdrawal from UNESCO: International Organizations and the U.S. Role","description":"\u003cp\u003eJoel H. Rosenthal\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIn December 1983, U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz sent a letter to Amadou-Mahtar M'Bow, director-general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization, notifying him of the United States' intention to leave UNESCO by the end of 1984 unless the organization adopted serious reforms. A year later, Sec. Shultz confirmed Washington's withdrawal, leaving it and London, which followed the American lead, outside an organization they had done so much to create nearly 40 years earlier. This case study analyzes how such a promising vision of the potential of multinational cooperation went sour, and assesses the roles ideology, domestic U.S. politics and policy disagreements within the Reagan administration played in the decision to withdraw.\u003c\/span\u003e\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":7617670853,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/ic332_new_cover.jpg?v=1540842029"},{"product_id":"case-335-peacemaking-in-southern-africa-the-namibia-angola-settlement-of-1988","title":"Case 335 - Peacemaking in Southern Africa: The Namibia-Angola Settlement of 1988","description":"\u003cp\u003eFew conflicts in the waning years of the Cold War involved more players than Southern Africa. Namibia, which had been under de facto rule by South Africa since 1915, by the 1970s was caught up in an independence movement as well as a greater regional struggle and a Cold War power play. The United States, Soviet Union, Cuba, and South Africa all became involved in Angola’s civil war, which threatened to spill over into both Namibia and South Africa.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWritten by US lead negotiator Ambassador Chester A. Crocker, this case study details the eight-year negotiations to bring about peace in the region – and secure Namibia’s independence from South Africa. The case includes a practical discussion of the concepts of \u003cspan\u003e“\u003c\/span\u003elinkage\u003cspan\u003e” \u003c\/span\u003eand “ripeness” – which help explain how the US team was able to push the negotiations to conclusion in 1988.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":27759478800,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/new_cover_335.jpg?v=1524162344"},{"product_id":"case-336-instructor-copy-the-us-and-soviet-proxy-war-in-afghanistan-1989-1992","title":"Case 336, Instructor Copy - The US and Soviet Proxy War in Afghanistan, 1989-1992","description":"This case study, drawn from an Institute for the Study of Diplomacy working group series on strategic surprise, focuses on events in Afghanistan during the late 1980s and early 1990s and the policy decisions and consequences of completely withdrawing from engagement in Afghanistan in 1992. The case looks at how policy decisions surrounding these events affected US national strategic objectives in the region at the time—and whether an earlier, and deeper, consideration of the possible implications of the rise of radical Islamic groups might have changed the way in which the United States provided assistance to the mujahideen during and after the Soviet occupation. A decade later, Afghanistan and the radical groups operating within the country would emerge as a major national security challenge for the United States.","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":31207191632,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_336_new.jpg?v=1524245363"},{"product_id":"case-336-the-us-and-soviet-proxy-war-in-afghanistan-1989-1992","title":"Case 336 - The US and Soviet Proxy War in Afghanistan, 1989-1992","description":"This case study, drawn from an Institute for the Study of Diplomacy working group series on strategic surprise, focuses on events in Afghanistan during the late 1980s and early 1990s and the policy decisions and consequences of completely withdrawing from engagement in Afghanistan in 1992. The case looks at how policy decisions surrounding these events affected US national strategic objectives in the region at the time—and whether an earlier, and deeper, consideration of the possible implications of the rise of radical Islamic groups might have changed the way in which the United States provided assistance to the mujahideen during and after the Soviet occupation. A decade later, Afghanistan and the radical groups operating within the country would emerge as a major national security challenge for the United States.","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":31209391568,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_336_new_b7dceece-f7ae-4ff7-ad82-14dfe4ba7952.jpg?v=1524245449"},{"product_id":"instructor-copy-case-335-peacemaking-in-southern-africa-the-namibia-angola-settlement-of-1988","title":"Case 335, Instructor Copy - Peacemaking in Southern Africa: The Namibia-Angola Settlement of 1988","description":"\u003cp\u003eFew conflicts in the waning years of the Cold War involved more players than Southern Africa. Namibia, which had been under de facto rule by South Africa since 1915, by the 1970s was caught up in an independence movement as well as a greater regional struggle and a Cold War power play. The United States, Soviet Union, Cuba, and South Africa all became involved in Angola’s civil war, which threatened to spill over into both Namibia and South Africa.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWritten by US lead negotiator Ambassador Chester A. Crocker, this case study details the eight-year negotiations to bring about peace in the region – and secure Namibia’s independence from South Africa. The case includes a practical discussion of the concepts of \u003cspan\u003e“\u003c\/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003elinkage\u003c\/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e”\u003c\/span\u003e and “ripeness” – which help explain how the US team was able to push the negotiations to conclusion in 1988.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"ISD - Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":31939936016,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/cover_335.jpg?v=1524162474"},{"product_id":"case-356-instructor-copy-the-kashmir-back-channel-india-pakistan-negotiations-on-kashmir-from-2004-to-2007","title":"Case 356, Instructor Copy - The Kashmir Back Channel: India-Pakistan Negotiations on Kashmir from 2004 to 2007","description":"\u003cp\u003eHappymon Jacob\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eIn early 2007, Indian and Pakistani back-channel interlocutors, appointed by the respective heads of government, were preparing to finalize a secret deal to resolve their dispute over Kashmir. Had the negotiators managed to finalize a deal, the two counties would have signed it in a public ceremony. Such a deal could have brought the decades-long Kashmir conflict to a peaceful end. However, the deal, which was confidentially negotiated in secret third country locations for a period of close to three years, was neither finalized nor signed due to domestic political upheaval in Pakistan. Successive governments in Pakistan tried to continue the negotiations with the Indian government to complete the agreement, but those attempts did not succeed. This was the first time India and Pakistan had engaged in a serious, sustained and structured back-channel negotiation to resolve the most severe conflict between them.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eThis case study provides deeper insights into the conflict dynamics between India and Pakistan and the progress of the negotiations themselves.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eThe case begins with an introduction to the back channel that began in 2004. The background highlights, among other issues, the spike in violence that preceded the negotiations and the pre-negotiations conducted by the two sides through 2003 and early 2004. In 2004, the Indian government leading the talks with Pakistan lost the national elections. However, the incoming government led by the opposition party was willing and able to continue the process with Pakistan. The post 9\/11 global context also created a conducive atmosphere for the two sides to find an amicable solution to the Kashmir conflict given the U.S. goal to enlist Pakistan’s support in its fight against terrorism—Washington did not want the India-Pakistan standoff on Kashmir to be a distraction in its War on Terror.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\n\u003cmeta charset=\"utf-8\"\u003e \u003cspan\u003eBased on original interviews with the participants in the negotiations, this case study seeks to highlight how the political context emerged for the Kashmir negotiations, how political leaders on both sides established the back-channel, how it worked, how negotiators arrived at the agreement, and the circumstances that stopped the final ratification and implementation of the agreement. It is unclear whether the deal would have been implemented had it been adopted, and whether it would have been sustainable had it been implemented over the long term, which provides the basis for fruitful student discussion. \u003c\/span\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003c\/span\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cmeta charset=\"utf-8\"\u003eListen to a conversation with Happymon Jacob and case study author Rick Moss on back-channel diplomacy: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=vYpXIKKAonQ\u003c\/span\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":39404977881153,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/ic356cover.png?v=1628775095"},{"product_id":"case-356-the-kashmir-back-channel-india-pakistan-negotiations-on-kashmir-from-2004-to-2007","title":"Case 356 - The Kashmir Back Channel: India-Pakistan Negotiations on Kashmir from 2004 to 2007","description":"\u003cmeta charset=\"utf-8\"\u003e\n\u003cp data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eHappymon Jacob\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eIn early 2007, Indian and Pakistani back-channel interlocutors, appointed by the respective heads of government, were preparing to finalize a secret deal to resolve their dispute over Kashmir. Had the negotiators managed to finalize a deal, the two counties would have signed it in a public ceremony. Such a deal could have brought the decades-long Kashmir conflict to a peaceful end. However, the deal, which was confidentially negotiated in secret third country locations for a period of close to three years, was neither finalized nor signed due to domestic political upheaval in Pakistan. Successive governments in Pakistan tried to continue the negotiations with the Indian government to complete the agreement, but those attempts did not succeed. This was the first time India and Pakistan had engaged in a serious, sustained and structured back-channel negotiation to resolve the most severe conflict between them.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThis case study provides deeper insights into the conflict dynamics between India and Pakistan and the progress of the negotiations themselves.\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThe case begins with an introduction to the back channel that began in 2004. The background highlights, among other issues, the spike in violence that preceded the negotiations and the pre-negotiations conducted by the two sides through 2003 and early 2004. In 2004, the Indian government leading the talks with Pakistan lost the national elections. However, the incoming government led by the opposition party was willing and able to continue the process with Pakistan. The post 9\/11 global context also created a conducive atmosphere for the two sides to find an amicable solution to the Kashmir conflict given the U.S. goal to enlist Pakistan’s support in its fight against terrorism—Washington did not want the India-Pakistan standoff on Kashmir to be a distraction in its War on Terror.\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003cbr data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThis case study seeks to highlight how the political context emerged for the Kashmir negotiations, how political leaders on both sides established the back-channel, how it worked, how negotiators arrived at the agreement, and the circumstances that stopped the final ratification and implementation of the agreement. It is unclear whether the deal would have been implemented had it been adopted, and whether it would have been sustainable had it been implemented over the long term.\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p2\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eListen to a conversation with Happymon Jacob and case study author Rick Moss on back-channel diplomacy: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=vYpXIKKAonQ\u003c\/div\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":39405037813825,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/356cover.png?v=1628775176"},{"product_id":"case-357-instructor-copy-cyprus-seeking-solutions-a-case-study-of-the-2015-2017-negotiations","title":"Case 357, Instructor Copy - Cyprus: Seeking Solutions - A Case Study of the 2015-2017 Negotiations","description":"\u003cp class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThis case study examines the twenty-six months of UN-facilitated, Cypriot-led negotiations to reunify the island of Cyprus from May 2015 to July 2017. Drawing upon the author’s experience as U.S. ambassador to Cyprus during this period, the case assesses the roles and negotiating positions of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot leaders, the United Nations, the European Union, the governments of the United Kingdom, Turkey, Greece, Russia, France, and the United States. Historically the United States has played the role of “honest broker” in negotiations over Cyprus; during this period, then Vice President Biden and later Vice President Pence took an active interest in the talks.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eDespite a promising start and being seen as the best chance for success in a decade, the negotiations failed in the early hours of July 6, 2017. “I’m very sorry to tell you that despite the very strong commitment and engagement of all the delegations and different parties ... the conference on Cyprus was closed without an agreement being reached,” stated United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThe study explores the issues involved and the positions of the various actors, and identifies factors that contributed to the negotiations’ failure. Since positions and explanations are not all in the public domain, the analysis is indicative, not comprehensive.\u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eStudents could debate the validity of the known negotiating positions and discuss whether options existed that could have been more acceptable to all the parties. The case highlights the structure and limitations of multilateral diplomacy. Cyprus’ continued division, often referred to as the “Cyprus problem”, poses a significant impediment to EU-NATO cooperation, is a source of tension within the EU and between Turkey and Greece, and complicates the energy picture of the Eastern Mediterranean region. Instructors could open additional discussions about these consequences.\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":39477839102017,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/ic357.png?v=1634936540"},{"product_id":"case-357-cyprus-seeking-solutions-a-case-study-of-the-2015-2017-negotiations","title":"Case 357 - Cyprus: Seeking Solutions - A Case Study of the 2015-2017 Negotiations","description":"\u003cscript id=\"th-iframe-script\" src=\"chrome-extension:\/\/ofdopmlmgifpfkijadehmhjccbefaeec\/assets\/comms\/commsiframe.js\"\u003e\u003c\/script\u003e\n\u003cmeta charset=\"utf-8\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eAmbassador (ret.) Kathleen Doherty\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003cbr data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eThis case study examines the twenty-six months of UN-facilitated, Cypriot-led negotiations to reunify the island of Cyprus from May 2015 to July 2017. Drawing upon the author’s experience as U.S. ambassador to Cyprus during this period, the case assesses the roles and negotiating positions of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot leaders, the United Nations, the European Union, the governments of the United Kingdom, Turkey, Greece, Russia, France, and the United States. Historically the United States has played the role of “honest broker” in negotiations over Cyprus; during this period, then Vice President Biden and later Vice President Pence took an active interest in the talks. Despite a promising start and being seen as the best chance for success in a decade, the negotiations failed in the early hours of July 6, 2017. “I’m very sorry to tell you that despite the very strong commitment and engagement of all the delegations and different parties ... the conference on Cyprus was closed without an agreement being reached,” stated United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres.\u003cbr\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003cbr data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eThe study explores the issues involved and the positions of the various actors, and identifies factors that contributed to the negotiations’ failure. Since positions and explanations are not all in the public domain, the analysis is indicative, not comprehensive.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" style=\"padding-left: 30px;\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003e\u003cbr data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003e\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"p1\" data-mce-fragment=\"1\" data-mce-style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"\u003eStudents could debate the validity of the known negotiating positions and discuss whether options existed that could have been more acceptable to all the parties. The case highlights the structure and limitations of multilateral diplomacy. Cyprus’ continued division, often referred to as the “Cyprus problem”, poses a significant impediment to EU-NATO cooperation, is a source of tension within the EU and between Turkey and Greece, and complicates the energy picture of the Eastern Mediterranean region. Instructors could open additional discussions about these consequences.\u003c\/div\u003e\n\u003c\/div\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":39480716656705,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/products\/357.png?v=1634936823"},{"product_id":"case-363-instructor-copy-negotiating-peace-and-justice-women-s-leadership-participation-and-representation-in-the-process-to-end-civil-war-in-guatemala","title":"Case 363, Instructor Copy - Negotiating Peace and Justice: Women’s Leadership, Participation, and Representation in the Process to End Civil War in Guatemala","description":"\u003cp\u003eThis case examines women's involvement in the peace process to end the Civil War in Guatemala. Mayesha Alam and Génesis Torres-Alcántara provide background on the civil war and how it specifically impacted women, and analyze how women's groups organized to achieve their goals in the peace process. \u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis case study is meant to be instructive and informative but it does not capture every detail about women’s participation in peacemaking in Guatemala. Rather, the case study serves as a comprehensive introduction that can and should be paired with additional resources about Guatemala in particular, and literature, more generally, on relevant topics. Crucial questions include: How were women affected by the civil war in Guatemala? Why did women mobilize to advance peace? What opportunities and challenges did the ASC present for civil society’s participation in the peace process? What difference did women make and where did their efforts fall short?\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":46489622642972,"sku":"","price":0.0,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/files\/ic363cover.jpg?v=1692891505"},{"product_id":"case-363-negotiating-peace-and-justice-women-s-leadership-participation-and-representation-in-the-process-to-end-civil-war-in-guatemala","title":"Case 363 - Negotiating Peace and Justice: Women’s Leadership, Participation, and Representation in the Process to End Civil War in Guatemala","description":"\u003cmeta charset=\"UTF-8\"\u003e\n\u003cp data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThis case examines women's involvement in the peace process to end the Civil War in Guatemala. Mayesha Alam and Génesis Torres-Alcántara provide background on the civil war and how it specifically impacted women, and analyze how women's groups organized to achieve their goals in the peace process. \u003c\/p\u003e\n\u003cp data-mce-fragment=\"1\"\u003eThis case study is meant to be instructive and informative but it does not capture every detail about women’s participation in peacemaking in Guatemala. Rather, the case study serves as a comprehensive introduction that can and should be paired with additional resources about Guatemala in particular, and literature, more generally, on relevant topics. Crucial questions include: How were women affected by the civil war in Guatemala? Why did women mobilize to advance peace? What opportunities and challenges did the ASC present for civil society’s participation in the peace process? What difference did women make and where did their efforts fall short?\u003c\/p\u003e","brand":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","offers":[{"title":"Default Title","offer_id":46512788209948,"sku":"","price":4.5,"currency_code":"USD","in_stock":true}],"thumbnail_url":"\/\/cdn.shopify.com\/s\/files\/1\/0785\/0759\/files\/363cover_1.jpg?v=1692984998"}],"url":"https:\/\/isd-georgetown-university.myshopify.com\/collections\/1980s\/1990s+2000s+asia.oembed","provider":"Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University","version":"1.0","type":"link"}