Cross-civilizational conflicts lack any mediator both sides can trust.

Evidence

Conflicts between countries or groups with a common culture can at times be resolved through mediation by a disinterested third party who shares that culture, has recognized legitimacy within that culture, and hence can be trusted by both parties to find a solution rooted in the values of that culture. The Pope could successfully mediate the Argentine-Chilean boundary dispute. In conflicts between groups from different civilizations, however, there are no disinterested parties. Finding an individual, institution, or state whom both parties think trustworthy is extremely difficult. Any potential mediator belongs to one of the conflicting civilizations or to a third civilization with still another culture and other interests which inspire trust in neither party to the conflict. The Pope will not be called in by Chechens and Russians or by Tamils and Sinhalese. International organizations also usually fail because they lack the ability to impose significant costs on or to offer significant benefits to the parties. — Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the…, 804

Categorization

• SEED: Essay angle: why third-party peacekeeping so often fails — the structural absence of a ‘shared-parent’ mediator in identity disputes, contrasted with papal mediation in the Argentine-Chile case.