What does it mean that Pope Francis can mediate Venezuela?

We will see what can be done. But the initial condition is that both parties want it. Thus, the Vatican Head of State offered himself as a future mediator, facilitator or observer in the crisis, particularly political, which crosses the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

From now on, it will be necessary to know the position that will finally take the parties involved in the conflict. That is to say the country's president Nicolás Maduro and the president of the National Assembly, Juan Guaidó.

In the case of Maduro, one might think that the offer will be well received. A few days ago, the president said: "I sent a letter to Pope Francis, hoping that it happens or that it is already in Rome, at the Vatican, saying that I am at the service of the cause of Christ, and with that spirit, I have asked for help in a process of facilitation and strengthening of dialogue. "

In the case of Juan Guaidó, no previous statement or consideration has led us to reflect on the decision that might be made.

Now, indiscriminately from the final resolution, what does it mean to "mediate a conflict?" Is it the same as being an umpire? Why could the pope be a good alternative even in a negative context?

Mediator or arbitrator?

The essential difference between the two is that in the case of arbitration, the third party is asked to judge and decide on the solution of the dispute. In the case of mediation, the third part helps both parties, at best, to reach an agreement.

Arbitration can be voluntary or mandatory. If this is mandatory, they agree in advance to submit to the final decision of the referee, even if it goes against their preferences.

So, what is a mediator?

Traditionally, it was a neutral third party accepted by the people concerned. In this way, we try to make sure that the stakeholders "trust" their impartiality.

A mediator must in turn have a sufficiently recognized reputation for both parties to take it seriously. In the case of the pope, this reputation can be based on a moral authority (he intervened in the case of the Beagle channel between Argentina and Chile).

In the end, you should try to encourage the parties to change their references, considering the problem in an innovative way and not necessarily with a change of position in the same dimension.

Is this the right time for a mediator to enter?

The reality is that the opportunities for negotiation or mediation of a conflict and the degree of management or resolution achieved depend on how mature you are.

In this sense, timing It does not seem right. Suppose Maduro gives in and calls for elections, will he allow the presence of the same international observers who are demanding until now his exit from the government? If the results do not favor Guaidó, he will accept the result of the elections and will support an opposition that denounces impracticable?

The complexity of the Venezuelan case and the appearance of Guaidó reinforce an outcome to the conflict where the figure of Pope Francis will certainly be exceeded by this scenario and the possibility of obtaining a resolution accepted by all.