Final answer:
Negotiators can balance their constituency's demands and the opposing party's demands through trade-offs and compromises. Successful negotiation involves aligning strategic decisions with shared goals and may benefit from a third party to enforce cooperation. The outcome relies on mutual goals, rules, and the reality at the time of the negotiations.
Step-by-step explanation:
A negotiator can satisfy both the constituency's demands for firmness and the other party's demand for concessions through the complex process of political bargaining. In essence, the negotiator must find a balance between the interests of their constituency and the need for a mutually beneficial outcome. This often involves trade-offs, compromises, and strategic decisions that align with the broader goals of the negotiations. Knowing the rules, realities, and strategic choices is crucial to influence these outcomes.
Compromise is most likely to be reached when the conflicting parties share a common goal but differ on specific details. For example, if different countries want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but disagree on the extent, they may compromise by settling on a reduction percentage that is a middle ground between their positions. This satisfies both parties to some degree, allowing each to claim part of what they wanted.
However, if no agreement is possible and the status quo prevails, those who benefit from it will often attempt to prevent negotiations from succeeding. Tradeoffs are essential in choosing between conflicting interests, as seen in the U.S. Congress where legislators must often decide between the demands of their constituents and the directions of their political party.
Ultimately, the success of negotiations can be influenced by the presence of a third party to enforce cooperation or punish defection, facilitating future cooperation and trust-building, particularly in situations akin to a prisoner's dilemma.