@article{oai:unii.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000942,
 author = {中束, 友幸 and Nakatsuka, Tomoyuki},
 journal = {国際地域研究論集, JISRD : Journal of International Studies and Regional Development},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {application/pdf, Recent years have witnessed a reinvigoration of research on mediation and bias. Counterintuitively, some of these studies assert the effectiveness of biased mediators in armed conflicts. These previous studies have identified two types of bias: 1 ）bias stemming from a particular relationship between a mediator and a conflicting party, and 2 ）bias associated with a mediator’s preference over the conflict resolution outcome. However, few researches have examined the latter type of bias in a qualitative manner. Focusing on the mediator who has a preference for a compromising solution located between the initial preferred solutions of the two conflicting parties, I argue that this type of biased mediation is effective in providing information to the conflicting parties and preventing future exploitation of a negotiated settlement. Here, this type of mediator is called a mediator who is not neutral but impartial. In order to demonstrate the above argumentation, I employ a case study of Henry Kissinger, mediating the first disengagement agreement between Egypt and Israel in 1974. By doing so, I believe this paper contributes to elucidating a nuanced picture of the problems of mediation and bias.},
 pages = {135--147},
 title = {中立ではないが公平な調停者 : ヘンリー・キッシンジャーの第一次エジプト・イスラエル兵力引き離し協定における調停},
 volume = {9},
 year = {2018},
 yomi = {ナカツカ, トミユキ}
}