Médiation géopolitique : nouvelles puissances médiatrices vs les néo-prédatrices | ESSEC Webinar

Médiation géopolitique : nouvelles puissances médiatrices vs les néo-prédatrices | ESSEC Webinar

by ESSEC Business School

Humanities, Social Sciences & Thought Geopolitics & Defence JPSInternational relationsJPSLGeopolitics
🎙 ESSEC Business School 👥 90K 📅 February 22, 2026 ⏱ 90 min 👁 443 📄 expert opinion 🧭 2026-08-13
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

mediationgeopoliticspredationTrumpconflict resolution

Summary

The webinar, hosted by ESSEC’s Geopolitics & Business Institute and IRENE Center, brings together experts to discuss the evolving role of mediation in international conflicts. Aurélien Colson introduces a typology of mediator motivations, distinguishing between process-related benefits, success-related gains, and tangible advantages from the content of agreements. Joseph Maïla analyzes Trump’s mediation efforts, listing nine ongoing mediations and arguing that they often serve US economic interests, exemplified by the minerals deal with Ukraine and the Rwanda-DRC agreement. Philippe Le Corre adds perspectives on Asia, noting that some conflicts like Thailand-Cambodia were resolved with other actors’ involvement, and discusses the Board of Peace as a US initiative. Sonya Reines-Djivanides questions whether US actions under Trump can still be called mediation, given their coercive and self-interested nature. Linda Benraïs and Emma Soubrier provide additional insights on the role of new mediators like Qatar and Oman, and the challenges of distinguishing mediation from interference. The discussion highlights the blurring lines between mediation, deal-making, and predation in contemporary geopolitics.

165 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The webinar provides valuable insights into the transformation of mediation in international relations, particularly under the Trump administration. The speakers offer concrete examples (Ukraine, Rwanda-DRC, Iran) and articulate a clear argument that US mediation often serves economic and strategic interests, blurring the line between mediation and predation. The argumentation is solid, grounded in recent events and expert knowledge, though it remains largely opinion-based without systematic citation of sources.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The scientific rigor is moderate: the speakers are credible experts, but the discussion is more analytical than evidence-based, with few explicit references to academic literature or official documents. The title accurately reflects the content, focusing on the contrast between new mediating powers and predatory ones. The webinar’s structure with distinct interventions and Q&A enhances its clarity.

139 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content: the webinar addresses the role of new mediating powers versus predatory ones, with a focus on US mediation under Trump.

Quality & Reliability

8/10

Panel of recognized academics and practitioners in mediation and geopolitics, with institutional affiliations (ESSEC, IRENE, EPLO, etc.). The discussion is structured and grounded in recent examples, but remains an expert opinion webinar without systematic citation of sources.

Chapters

Cited Sources

  • ESSEC Geopolitics & Business Institute — Mentioned as the organizing institute.
  • IRENE Center on Negotiation and Mediation — Mentioned as co-organizer and source of expertise.

Concurring Sources

Dissenting Sources

Contribution & Novelties

The webinar offers a timely analysis of the shift in mediation practices, particularly the emergence of ’neo-predatory’ mediation by great powers. It provides a framework for understanding mediator motivations and applies it to contemporary cases. The discussion on the Board of Peace and its implications is particularly novel.

Pour aller plus loin :

  • Mediation in International Relations — Overview of mediation concepts.
  • Track II diplomacy — Relevant to non-official mediation efforts.
  • The Oslo Accords — Example of successful mediation mentioned in the webinar.

83 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows high scores in information quantity, quality, and reliability, with a slightly lower technical level, indicating a balanced and accessible expert discussion.

Reliability 8/10

💬 No comments were provided for analysis.