We will write a custom Research Paper on Presentation and Analysis Interview with Ambassador Patrick N. Theros specifically for you
807 certified writers online
Ambassador Patrick Nickolas Theros is presently considered one of the most influential people in America. He has overseen some major accomplishments during his career, and has made historical contributions that will inspire many future generations. Patrick Nickolas Theros was the U.S. ambassador to Qatar from 1995 to 1998. He received four State Department Honor Awards in 1967, 1983, 1986, and 1992. This paper discusses some of the former ambassador’s best negotiations during his tenure, in addition to highlights of his future undertakings.
Patrick Nickolas Theros has provided prime news material, and has been one of the most controversial people in the American press. He works wholeheartedly, and ensures that all his achievements continue to remain major discussion topics in the future. The art of negotiation proved to be key to his ongoing success. Negotiation is a method by which people settle differences. It can also be described as the process of discussing a problem face-to-face to achieve a goal. Negotiation involves dialogue between two or more people or parties, intending to reach an understanding, resolve a point of difference, or gain an advantage in the outcome (Harcup).
During the interview, it became clear that one of his most successful negotiations took place between 2005 and 2007, when he prevented the Israeli government from forcing the ejection of the newly-elected Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem—Theophilus II. Parties in a negotiation must approach the contention with a clear mind, and clear goals for it to be successful. In terms of purpose and wellbeing of another human being, the art of negotiation gets tricky. Consequently, this particular negotiation is considered one of his most successful ever. This particular negotiation involved a scandal, and the lives of the people involved were at risk. Patrick Nickolas Theros defended Theophilus II, when he was wrongfully accused by the Israeli government.
The Israeli press had revealed that high ranking Israeli officials had been involved in the bribing of the previous Patriarch, Irineos II, to sell four valuable properties in the Old City of Jerusalem to an undisclosed Israeli Organization. Irineos had just been previously deposed, and this had spurred great rumors. This is because the people of Israeli were seeking answers for the dismissal of a man of church. There were claims that the government had attempted to force Theophilus out, to prevent him from informing the press about these sensitive matters, as he was already privy to the scandals. False accusations were then made against Theophilus by the Israeli Government. Theophilus II was accused of Anti-Semitism, and many other acts of defacement were also levied against him (Verity).
Patrick Nickolas Theros wrote letters to the Israeli Government in Theophilus’ defense. He approached the matter with one target in mind—to make sure that the real problem in this situation was separated from Theophilus II. He argued that these false accusations and acts of defacement were not only unfair to Theophilus II, but also violated his human rights as an Israeli citizen. The situation had become so extreme that Theophilus could not peacefully reside in his home. He had been under great pressure from the government, and that violated hisprivacy. The press was constantly on his case, and search warrants were sometimes issued to the police to search his residence for any clues related to the matter. In 2007, when the scandal finally subsided, Theophilus became a free man. It was argued that it was a legal matter that should have been settled lawfully. Theophilus claimed to have been the victim of mistaken identity. He would not have wished to be involved in that scandal because the Israeli seemed to have had hidden motives. The Israeli press had also recorded that the city’s historic role was supposed to be a meeting place for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Jerusalem was supposed to be an example of co-existence, and of religious and cultural diversity. Theophilus II and Patrick Nickolas Theros had won a crucial battle, but many believe that the war had not yet been won.
Patrick Nickolas Theros is currently undergoing one of his unsuccessful negotiations. He has been involved in a situation that is not proving favorable to him. The United States of America government is trying to come up with policies that they believe will help enhance peace between them and the Middle East. They have come up with policies that could determine the relationship between them and the people of Turkey, but they are currently facing challenges since the Turkish government does not find it favorable on their side (Fisher, Ury and Patton).
Patrick Nickolas Theros recently expressed his concerns regarding the unfortunate reactions that their intended relationship with Turkey had attracted. Turkey seems to be reluctant and unwilling to follow and support the US preemptive interventionist policies. Patrick N. Theros believes that Turkey is unsupportive because of their belief that these policies will destabilize their region.
Turkey has holds immense power in the Middle East, and its influence among its neighbors is insurmountable. The reason that these attempts at negotiation have failed is because the Turkey government believes that it will harm their interests, in addition to the U.S. government’s policies towards Hezbollah and Hamas. Anti- Israeli sentiments have been expressed by the Turkish public. Their media is also believed to be responsible for fuelling the alleged unpopularity, and false beliefs among the citizens of Turkey.
U.S. policies are being geared towards giving new impetus to the cooperation between the U.S. and Turkey. Their policies are intended to secure Turkish assistance in the pursuit of foreign policy goals (Kovach and Rosenstiel). By using Turkey to persuade other neighboring countries about these policies, a lot will have been contributed to the success of their intentions with the Middle East. From Patrick Nickolas’ point of view, this relation is believed to be favorable since it seeks to resolve the growing schism between the West and the Islamic world. Turkey’s location and role as the western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country is very significant for the U.S. policy.
This policy is alleged to be able to offer few real cooperation agreements between the two allies, and that is why these negotiations do not seem to be making any progress. They intend to transform the Arab world too (Publishing). The transformation would probably entail the creation of a more peaceful environment for any American citizen residing, or wishing to reside in Turkey.
According to Shell, in Bargaining for Advantage, the main reason why these negotiations are failing is because of the lack of common interest between these two parties. One party seeks to make peace with the entire Middle East, yet the other party seems to have interest in maintaining their power in the Middle East. Negotiation involves focusing on common interest, and the invention of options for mutual gain (Fisher, Ury and Patton). The use of initial criteria by both governments might prove to be useful for both parties in order to achieve common ground for the greater good. The approaches of the U.S. government are also not considered subtle enough by the Turkey government, considering their ongoing feud with Iraq. Turkey finds great favor with Iraq. Consequently, they do not believe that it would prove to be fair to their neighbors if they should ever come into agreement with the U.S. government regarding these policies. This has provided the former ambassador with a learning experience, as he saw that it is crucial for both parties to be on level ground when trying to negotiate. He realized that it is not a matter of winning over the other party during a negotiation, but that it is important to make it a win-win scenario for both teams (Segell).
Not all of the negotiations that Theros undertook fell through. Most of Theros’ interventions were a sign of pure genius in those days and in the standards of any diplomat worth his salt. One of the most interesting negotiations in Patrick Nickolas Theros’ time must have been his timely heroic act in 1967. The former ambassador received an award for delivering 147 American citizens from a very unfortunate turn of events in 1967. Patrick Nickolas Theros was awarded a Superior Honor award owing to his heroic efforts to rescue people trapped in a bloody crossfire. This occurred in the Gran Hotel in Maragua during an uprising.
This specific type of negotiation may have proved so interesting because of the number of people who depended on Patrick’s negotiation skills for assistance. His ability to deliver them from such an untimely and unfortunate event was not only impressive, but also added to his list of amazing achievements.
His negotiating style and ability involved a great deal of psychology. He was able to study the kind of people he was getting involved with in order to come up with a common interest. Patrick Nickolas Theros was able to understand the present political situation taking place at that particular moment and time. This negotiation was between three parties. He acted as the third party in trying to create an understanding between the other two. One party wanted political freedom; the other party wanted to enduring peace, while Theros wanted to rescue the American citizens.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
The political position of Maragua at that moment in time was often characterized by uprising and gunfire. They were often unsuspected, and no one had foreseen the occurrence of this particular uprising. 147 American citizens had unexpectedly fallen in the middle of a carefully planned event and found it difficult to emerge alive. Patrick Nickolas Theros expressed his heroic abilities when he delivered them safely out of the political mess. He argued that the American Citizens had nothing to do with the political situation at hand, and should therefore, be released on account of their human rights. Violation of human rights has often been referenced in negotiation situations involving the welfare of human being, as it bears great significance in the execution of common interest. Denying of human rights is illegal in many countries worldwide.
It must have been difficult to be able to get through to people involved in the crossfire due to their emotional state at that time. Uprisings are often characterized by people who resort to using violent means in order to get what they want (Stephenson). These people often believe that the only way to express their point is to assert it using violent ways. Their negotiation styles are often more harmful than of benefit since it costs many citizens their lives. The former ambassador’s ability to be able to cease the uprising for a moment in order to deliver all the American citizens out of that situation proves that he is currently one of the best negotiators.
The former ambassador is currently in the middle of a negotiation involving the Michigan State and Qatar. As the U.S.-Qatar Business Council President, he is currently exercising his duties by presenting the pleas of the people of Qatar to the high-ranking officials of the Michigan State. He has been scheduled to be an honorary guest speaker at an event known as Meet Qatar, to be held in Detroit, Michigan state. The former ambassador’s role in Qatar could have influenced their decision to appoint him Business Council President. His negotiation skills proved to them that he is able to undertake major activities involving great risk. His amazing ability to come out of these situations unscathed and victorious undoubtedly earned him his current position.
The entire purpose of the meeting is to influence business expansions in Qatar. The event informs representatives from Michigan Corporations about more than 180 billion dollars worth of available business opportunities for Michigan-based firms in Qatar. The Qatar fast growing and gaining steady recognition in the business world. It is full of unexploited business opportunities that could prove to be advantageous to any state that will venture into it.
Theros says that he will acknowledge the importance of Qatar to American business interests. He will also highlight a wide range of business opportunities for the Michigan states in Qatar. By doing so, Patrick Nickolas Theros will ensure that he has expressed the need for the officials of the Michigan State to come up with a useful and informative conclusion. There will be a display of the environment intended for the use of allocation for these Michigan-based businesses. Qatar plans to invest approximately 200 billion dollars in this venture.
Their ventures are going to include infrastructure projects between now and 2022 for the World Cup functions. These will offer great opportunities for U.S. firms to invest in Qatar. By doing this, Qatar salvages both their economy and the U.S. economy as well since it offers them a chance for expansion. Part of their funds will also be channeled into roads, bridges, recycling of water, and related services falling under the review of the Qatar Public Works Authority (Solly).
This venture is one of Patrick’s negotiations and it proves to be very interesting and very carefully planned. He intends to lay down his intentions in such a manner that will prove useful for both the U.S. and Qatar as well. He makes it clear that the two states should have a common interest in mind to help them achieve their goals, and make their lives easier (Shell). Focusing entirely on common interest, this negotiation might prove to be another successful venture for the former ambassador Patrick Nickolas Theros.
The entire career outline of the former US ambassador for Qatar proves that certain steps must be followed to achieve success in negotiation expeditions. One must make sure that certain skills are utilized, such as the current emotional situation of both parties, common interest, any underlying feuds, and the achievement of the greater good (Stuart). The most important thing, however, is the ability to approach a situation with a clear mind. The negotiator should be in a position to make sure that they do not spark any unnecessary emotion that could lead to more conflict between the parties at stake.
Non-adversarial bargaining is necessary in negotiation. The following steps ought to be followed: first separate the individuals from the problem, pay keen attention to interests, and creation of options for mutual gain, and capitalizing on use of objective criteria (Stephenson). These are one of the four major steps applied by Patrick Nickolas Theros in decision making. They provide reference for any form and style of negotiation put to the test.
Patrick Nickolas Theros, having been a deputy coordinator for counter-terrorism and responsible for coordination of all U.S. government counter-terrorism activities outside the US shaped him for decision making and negotiation. His work made him well-equipped to be fully useful in matters involving deadlock. Being always concerned about the undertakings in the U.S. and the progress of other countries he may be concerned with, he is constantly aware of what angle would prove most effective in matters of negotiation. For example, he has been seen to express his concerns about the Hellenization of America and the Americanization of Greece. He shows concern in current policy undertakings, thereby making him equipped in cases of matters involving policymaking should ever arise in the U.S. or Greece. He shows concerns in modern undertakings, such as business ventures and ongoing feuds between different countries, and is able to establish any common ground that would appear between them.
In negotiation, it is prudent to be prepared. Both parties need to be sure of what they would like to achieve in the long-run. Any cases of former feuds or disagreements or dislikes should be discarded in order to establish a win-win scenario. From the perspective of a student, these types of negotiations could influence in having to make a decision involving two parties or more that require a common interest in a particular subject. The former ambassador has exemplified a person who is not only concerned about making a reputation for himself but also a negotiator who is truly concerned with making peace among groups of people. Any antagonism that one might face in the course of one’s duties should be taken in great stride to allow a positive outcome. The interview with the former ambassador Patrick Nickolas Theros makes him a perfect example to follow. Through the interview, one sees a selfless individual who has faced all kinds of adversities to achieve a certain goal. He might not be perfect as has been shown by the few objectives he has failed to achieve. Nevertheless, Theros has learned from his past failures and adapted his style to suit any kind of situation that arises.
Harcup, Tony. Journalism: Principles and Practice. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2009. Print.
Fisher, Roger, William Ury, and Bruce Patton. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (2rd ed.). Berkeley: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1991. Print.
Kovach, Bill and Tom Rosenstiel,. The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know And the Public Should Expect. London: Three Rivers Press, 2007. Print.
Publishing, Trotman. Journalism (2rd ed.). London: Crimson Publishing, 2001. Print.
Segell, Glen. Disarming Iraq. London: Glen Segell Publishers, 2004. Print.
Shell, Richard. Bargaining for Advantage: Negotiation Strategies for Reasonable People (2rd ed.). London: Penguin Books, 2006. Print.
Solly, Ross. Journalism. London: Career FAQs Publishers, 2007. Print.
Stephenson, David. How to Succeed in Newspaper Journalism. London: Kogan Page Publishers, 1998. Print.
Stuart. Allan, Journalism: Critical Issues. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill International, 2005. Print.
Verity, Judith. Succeeding at Interviews: Give Great Answers and Ask the Right Questions (3rd ed.). Oxford: How To Books Ltd, 2004. Print.