Negotiating the Path of Abraham, 2015 Progress and Challenges

James K. Sebenius

Case | HBS Case Collection | December 2015

Negotiating the Path of Abraham, 2015 Progress and Challenges

Abstract

The Abraham Path board reviews the last five years and seeks to frame and act on its major strategic, negotiating, and operational challenges going forward. The Abraham Path Initiative seeks to revitalize a route of Middle East cultural tourism following Abraham's path 4000 years ago. It begins in the ancient ruins of Harran, in modern-day Turkey, where Abraham first heard the call to "go forth." It passes through some of the world's most revered cultural, historical, and holy sites, ending in the city of Hebron/Al-Khalil at the tomb of Abraham. With Abraham as a venerated patriarchal figure for Islam, Judaism, and Christianity—monotheistic religions whose adherents have so often clashed—the potential unifying power of this conception has attracted a remarkable range of supporters from around the world as well as considerable media interest. Having lengthened the walkable part of the Path from 300km five years ago to over 2000km today, with thousands of people having walked parts of the Path, and having been awarded a major World Bank grant, several challenges nonetheless remain including regional war and turmoil, sustainable funding, tensions over the Path's activities in Israel, and possible next steps for the initiative.

Language: English

Format: Print

13 pages

Educators Purchase

Citation:

Sebenius, James K. "Negotiating the Path of Abraham, 2015 Progress and Challenges." Harvard Business School Case 916-027, December 2015.

In 1976, a growing crisis in Southern Africa drew the attention of United States Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger. White Rhodesian leader Ian Smith's refusal to accede to black majority rule threatened to widen into a regional conflict involving apartheid South Africa and newly independent leftist African states. Kissinger and others feared that the region was on the brink of becoming a new battleground in the Cold War. In light of these developments Kissinger decided to intervene, seeking a negotiated solution that might bring about a peaceful end to minority rule. The account in this case carefully describes—but does not analyze nor draw lessons from—these challenging circumstances.

In 1976, United States Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger conducted a series of intricate, multiparty negotiations in Southern Africa to persuade white Rhodesian leader Ian Smith to accede to black majority rule. Conducted near the end of President Gerald Ford’s term in office and against substantial U.S. domestic opposition, Kissinger’s efforts culminated in Smith’s public announcement that he would accept majority rule within two years. This set the stage for the later Lancaster House negotiations that resulted in the actual transition to black majority rule. The account in this case carefully describes—but does not analyze nor draw lessons from—these challenging negotiations.

Rightly known as the “father of negotiation analysis,” Howard Raiffa was my thesis advisor, colleague, and friend for over 30 years. The bulk of this article develops an account of his intellectual trajectory from game theory to statistical decision theory to decision analysis and to negotiation analysis. It suggests how these superficially separate fields relate to each other and inform the theory and practice of negotiation. I intersperse this account with nuggets of insight that I picked up from Howard for dealing with people, analyzing problems, doing research, teaching effectively, and building a legacy.

Faculty & Research

Negotiating the Path of Abraham, 2015 Progress and Challenges

Abstract

Citation:

About the Author

More from the Author