Second World War fought in 20th century taught the powers of Europe and world in general that settlement of interstate problems through war causes tremendous economic costs, catastrophic humanitarian consequences and complete destruction of the all parties included in the war. With the experience gained from these systemic wars, the new world order was established to
promote more diplomacy and put more decisive restrictions on use of force in world politics. Especially the horror of the Second World War has been quite influential in the construction of this new world order. As a result,  diplomacy has gained a greater significance in the post-Second World War world order.

Negotiation can be defined as an attempt to explore and reconcile conflicting positions in order to reach an acceptable outcome. Whatever the nature of the outcome, which may actually favour one party more than another, the purpose
of negotiation is the identification of areas of common interest and conflict.

Win-set is a term coined by Robert Putnam in his famous article that he developed a framework for foreign policy decision-making (Putnam, 1988). According to Putnam’s framework, win-set of an actor can be defined as any desirable outcome from an international bargaining process. In other words, any outcome within the range of its win-set would be considered as gain by the actor. The formation of this win-set, according to Putnam, is directly related with the domestic political dynamics. Therefore, win-sets that determine the foreign policy agenda of a country is directly connected with the domestic politics of that country, according to Putnam’s framework.

The natural answer emphasizes state actors. Yet, not all negotiations run between states. Obviously, state to state negotiations constitute the vast majority of all diplomatic negotiations. Interstate negotiations may be conducted on various issues. Land and sea borders, water issues, settlement of violent conflicts, trade and customs issues and other specific problems between states can be subjects of interstate diplomatic negotiations. It should also be noted that sometimes states negotiate with political entities that they do not recognize as a sovereign state.

DDR stands for disarmament, demobilization and reintegration. DDR is considered as an essential part of contemporary peace agreements. Especially several African states such as Liberia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast and Uganda experienced severe civil wars in post-colonial period. Inevitably, the efforts for settlement of these conflicts had to focus on the status of the former combatants. In fact, many peace efforts which aimed an immediate ceasefire and neglected the status of former combatants failed or violence recurred in spite of signature of a peace accord. Thus, peace negotiations today include detailed discussions about how to disarm, demobilize the ex-combatants. Reintegration of former warriors to the society is also of utmost importance in order to prevent them to engage in crime in the post-conflict period.

States are usually represented by the diplomats of their respective ministries of foreign affairs in international diplomatic negotiations. Sometimes, elected ministers of foreign affairs directly take part in the negotiation committee. In a few cases, governments appoint a responsible person, such as an envoy, as the head of negotiating committee.

The motivation behind this is to have someone in charge who has a public attractiveness so that bargaining leverage could be broaden accordingly.

The success of negotiations is directly dependent upon the attitudes of the negotiating parties.

This approach emphasizes that the mediator, as a third part which has no conflict of interest with any party included in the conflict, intervenes in the conflict with an aim to bring the overall conflict to a manageable point.

A mediator’s main objective is to facilitate the dialogue between the parties of the negotiation. In other words, foremost function of the mediator is to facilitate the contact.

The main difference between formal and informal mediation processes is that in informal mediation process, the mediator lacks the economic and political backing enjoyed by the mediators in formal processes. Therefore, informal mediation is considered mainly as a dialogue facilitation initiative rather than providing decisive and binding consequences.

Once a successful mediated negotiation is finalized, the next step is to officialize the agreed conditions through a diplomatic agreement of which clauses would be binding for all signatory parties.

Signing of a diplomatic agreement does not always guarantee the full compliance of the parties. In quite a few cases, disputes that are contained through diplomatic agreements recur since one party or multiple parties violate the clauses of the agreement.

Lomé Peace Accord is the peace agreement signed by Sierra Leonean government and Revolutionary United Front (RUF) and its leader Foday Sankoh in 1999, which ended the civil war in Sierra Leone (Abraham 2001).

After long standing conflicts which left tremendous casualties on each party included, sharpened identities and resentments of the respective parties make detrimental effects on their motivation to sign a peace and lead them to seek revenge. Therefore, peace accords after long standing conflicts inevitably have to address sensitive issues such as powersharing in the post-conflict term, transitional justice, war crimes and rehabilitation and reintegration of former combatants. The diplomatic agreements that end conflicts have to be supported peacebuilding efforts in the post-conflict period to obviate the recurrence of the violence.

Ratification is a final step for an international diplomatic agreement to be put in practice. In most cases, international diplomatic agreements are presented to parliaments for ratification. Copying this general practice, 87th article of the constitution of Turkey authorizes the Turkish Grand National Assembly for the ratification of international agreements

When a diplomatic agreement is signed, the final step for it to be put into practice is the ratification process. Ratification is simply the approval of an agreement by the domestic agents of a country.

In absolute monarchies of the medieval world, ratification was not needed because the committee signing a diplomatic agreement was directly authorized by the monarch. Yet, contemporary global democratic principles rendered parliaments as the representatives of the people. Therefore, almost in all liberal democracies, the natural ratification organ is the parliament. Depending on the constitution of the country, parliaments ratify international agreements either with simple or qualified majority.

Ratification is an essential procedure for the activation and realization of a diplomatic agreement. In fact, many diplomatic agreement remained ineffective or annulled because they did not succeed to be ratified.

Because neither country brought these protocols to their respective parliaments and ratified them. Recently in early 2018, Armenia declared that they cancelled the protocol unilaterally for it became obvious that both countries are not ratifying them.