"Negotiation and the Art of Forgiveness"
By Brad McRae

Negotiators need the wisdom to know if, when, and how to forgive the other party for acts that are both real and imagined if progress is to be made in a particular negotiation. The issue of forgiveness arises when one party is, or believes that he or she has been hurt, wronged, or betrayed by another party. Some of the time there is no need for forgiveness because just by being able to communicate and listen to each other, it becomes clear that the problem developed through a misunderstanding or a mistaken assumption or assumptions. There are other cases where there has been hurt, and the other party has been wronged and/or betrayed. In this case, in order for forgiveness to take place there are at least four primary conditions that have to be met: 1) an acknowledgement of the other party's perceptions and feelings; 2) an admission of guilt and a repudiation of what took place in the past; 3) a resolve that the situation not repeat itself, and 4) an agreement on developing a future that will be different from the past.

In an article entitled, "The ethics of forgiveness," Trudy Govier spoke eloquently on the art of forgiveness:

Many mediators and proponents of conflict resolution are loathe to make moral judgments about causes, a reticence which is commendable in many contexts. In understanding forgiveness, however, an attempt to avoid moral judgments can be misleading. Forgiveness emerges from a background of moral agreement about what constitutes an offense. The whole idea of forgiveness presupposes that one party has wronged another, and that the one who had done wrong admits it and repents, whereupon the other may forgive him. Forgiveness thus requires a victim, an offender or wrongdoer, and a common understanding that the offender has done something wrong. -- Interaction Fall/Automne 1994.

An example from a BBC documentary film illustrates the liberating and transformational effects of forgiveness. In the documentary, a BBC journalist interviews a British Army Officer who had been savagely beaten as a POW by a Japanese Officer while being held captive during the building of the bridge on the River Kwai. At the time the documentary was made, the British Army Officer was in his late seventies and continued to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress related to his captivity and brutal treatment. When asked what he would do if he ever met the Japanese Officer who beat him, he said he would, "Kill him."

The BBC managed to find the Japanese soldier and arranged for the two men to meet. The two men were placed at opposite ends of the bridge over the River Kwai, (which is a railway bridge). As the film progresses, the two old men slowly start to walk towards each other. There is a great deal of suspense because no one knows what either one will do when they meet. They stop two feet in front of each other. The Japanese soldier, who had become a Buddhist monk, respectfully bows to the British Officer. The British Officer slowly moves his right hand up and shakes hands with his ex-tormentor. The Japanese soldier says that God had brought them together, looks the British Officer directly in the eye and asks for his forgiveness. In that moment, the two men were set free from the past.

Astute negotiators, mediators and peacemakers often ignore the power of forgiveness and the power of an apology at their peril. In just a minute, you will be asked to think of an example, from your own experience, that best illustrates the power of forgiveness and then determine how you can effectively apply those principles from your personal life and professional practice. The following example from my experience illustrates the power of this technique.

The most dramatic instance of forgiveness that I have witnessed occurred during the time when I was working as an EAP (Employee Assistance Program) counselor. My client had a daughter who was being treated for leukemia at the local children's hospital. The child had completed her course of chemotherapy. The treatment was considered successful and the child was leukemia free. However, the treatment protocol calls for the injection of one more shot of chemotherapy as an extra precautionary measure to make sure that all of the cancerous cells had been destroyed.

Tragically, there were a series of mistakes which occurred during this particular treatment and the chemotherapy shot was mistakenly injected into the child's spinal cord instead of into her blood stream. By the time the mistake hade been discovered, it was too late. The child would die, piece by piece, as the chemotherapy, which is a neural toxic, preceded up her spinal cord into her brain. As I witnessed these tragic events, I tried to support the parents, to the best of my ability, as they watched their child die. This was an incredibly heartbreaking experience for everyone involved including the doctors, nurses and hospital administrators who could do nothing to help her. After she died, I continued to work with, and support, the parents.

One year after the child died, the mother asked if I would arrange a meeting between herself and the physician who had made the fatal mistake. Nothing in my clinical training or professional experience had prepared me for such a role. I did not know whether I could do it, whether I should do it, or even how to prepare myself for the meeting.

In actuality, all I did was provide a meeting place and a supportive environment for two people who needed to say some very important and very painful things to each other. The result of that meeting was that there was at least a partial forgiveness and each of the participants had the ability to get on with their lives in a better way than they would have if the meeting had not taken place.

I have the utmost respect for the mother who asked for the meeting. The lesson I learned was to have the courage to ask for painful meetings that we would mostly rather not attend and to attend them anyway. Secondly, to be courageous enough and to be assertive enough to say what needs to be said, and give the other party the opportunity to hear what the situation looks like from our point of view and to hear what the situation looks like from his or her point of view.