Contents
- My recent Talk on YouTube.
- My next Book.
My recent Talk on YouTube
On Tuesday 11 November 2025 I presented a 70 minute Talk to members of the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates worldwide, which was entitled – ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes.’
Link to the Video Recording of the Talk on YouTube:
“The Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes”
My next Book
I am currently writing a book for commercial publication in 2026/7 entitled – ‘Mediation of Cultural Heritage Disputes’.
Upon completion of that writing project my next and final book will be entitled – ‘Mediation of International Disputes’.
In the book I will discuss Mediation and Mediation Advocacy Tools in relation to International Disputes involving state actors.
In writing the book, I will apply my knowledge of first principles of Mediation and Mediation Advocacy in the Mediation of International Cultural Heritage Disputes, to the wider context of multi-dimensional and inter-cultural disputes between state actors more generally. So this book will build upon the book that I am currently writing.
By way of background material, see also:
- The ‘Negotiating Political Order’ page at www.diplomaticlawguide.com.
- My Theory of Convergence in Mediation, see the ‘Geopolitical Mediation & Peace building’ page at www.diplomaticlawguide.com.
- The technique I innovated and discuss in my recent Talk, see above, of analysing ‘Parameters’ as being the ‘Dimensions’ of a dispute/conflict.
- The Bibliography on the ‘Negotiating Political Order’ page at www.diplomaticlawguide.com,
While I am a Political Science graduate of one of the UK’s leading schools of Political Science, and am a published authority on Diplomatic Law, as a professionally trained, fully accredited and CMC registered Mediator and unbiased author, I must be and am agnostic about any and all religious, political and geo-political issues. In other words professionally, and therefore also privately, I am not permitted to, and do not hold, any religious and political views on any subject whatsoever.
As a Political Science graduate and objective observer, I analyse Geopolitics through the prism of the ‘Realist Theory’ developed by Professor John Mearsheimer.
In the book I will also be writing about my own Mediation ‘Theory of Convergence’, i.e. ‘Geo-Political Mediation’, in what is now a ‘multi-polar’ world divided into shifting ‘spheres of influence.’
Since Mediators are trained to probe and expose cognitive errors in reasoning by asking ‘reality-testing’ questions, I am licensed to ask politically uncomfortable questions.
In Mediation, it is only by asking reality-testing questions, that a ‘paradigm shift’ can be facilitated. Whether anything is agreed, and what is agreed in Mediation, is for the participants to decide. The Mediator remains above the fray, which is why he/she is able to facilitate a dialogue based upon clear thinking, which results in rational and ‘interest-based’ behaviour.
Political actors do not always behave rationally. Some act contrary to the overriding interests of their own people, so in the book, I will also examine historical and contemporary examples, based upon legally irrefutable facts that are in the public domain, and supported by independently verified visual evidence, from which I will invite you to draw your own critical conclusions.
Mediators do not care about whether participants in the process agree with them or not. However, a mediator can help save the participants from themselves, by asking hard questions about uncomfortable political truths. So, as an author writing about Mediation, I am not attempting to speak any truth to power. I do not need to, because if any questions I ask resonate, then I will have fulfilled my professional duty, by doing all that I can, to enable you to decide for yourself, what is in your own best interests.
Mediators are not policy or decision-makers, and nobody, unless they are psychic, can actually know what is going on inside the head of another person, so there are always multiple dialogues taking place in parallel in Mediation – both internal and external. While this may sound anarchic, it is not. That is because, provided participants act in good faith, i.e. do not have a hidden agenda rendering the process a mere ruse, a Mediator can impose intellectual rigour and engage ethics in facilitating the discourse, which of course takes place behind closed doors and in strict confidence.