Balance of Power Between the

¶ … balance of power between the parties? What were their sources of power? Was power used by your team / the other team? How? What effect did this have on the negotiation? As the Teotihuacan Murals are the national artifacts of the Mexican government so they had a chance to get them back. But as these artifacts were bought by Wagner in 1960 the Treaty of Cooperation did not apply as it was introduced in 1970s and it would create retrospectivity if followed.

As the national laws were being a conflict in the matter San Francisco had more authority over the matter as they had the artifacts. Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco (FAMSF) had the possession of Teotihuacan Murals. As the Teotihuacan Murals were of Mexican heritage so the Mexican community had expert opinions and knowledge about preserving and restoring the artifacts. But as compared to Mexico the U.S.A. had more technology and resources to enhance the preserving and restoring process.

The negotiation was affected by both of these points as FAMSF used the power of possession to formulate the clauses. But the clauses also considered the expertise of the Mexican people to restore the artifacts. As for three years the FAMSF would keep the Teotihuacan Murals and restore them to its original form with the help of the Mexican people. Keeping all the points in view the San Francisco Museum had an edge of power over the Mexican government as the Teotihuacan Murals were bought into the U.S.A.

through legal means and they decided voluntarily to return the artifacts back to them. And this resulted in a successful negotiation and agreement through which FAMSF still benefits. b. Using the "circle chart describe the three most important factors that affected the negotiation between the parties in Teotihuacan and explain what effect these factors had.

HINT in answering Teotihuacan question, part b, factors from the circle chart...clearly, one of the factors that heavily influenced the negotiation here was "legal pluralism." Hence as part of your answer to part b, you should discuss the effect of multiple laws / evolving international norms / and rules and practices of the profession on the negotiation in the case. Ans.When the Mexican government came to know that the Teotihuacan Murals were in U.S.A, they asked the U.S.

government to handover the Teotihuacan Murals to them according to the Treaty of Cooperation. The treaty had the clause which stated that all stolen archeological historical and cultural properties would be returned from wherever they are stolen. An action was taken by an attorney on behalf of the Mexican government to return the artifacts.

But the Treaty of Cooperation did not apply to the case as it was signed in the 1970s while Wagner legally bought the Teotihuacan Murals in the 1960s and thus the treaty did not apply to the past. This caused the Mexican government to go for an out of court settlement. Thus causing a situation of Legal pluralism as the laws did not apply to the case and it greatly affected the negotiations by giving a lead to the museum in terms of legal authority.

Cultural differences were another factor which affected the negotiations. The Mexican Government did not give up here as Teotihuacan Murals were a part of their cultural heritage and had great importance. The Teotihuacan Murals greatly increased the revenue of San Francisco museum as California comprises a great population of Mexican-Americans and as the artifacts were a linkage to their heritage and birth line they were deeply interested in them. Another strong factor which affected the negotiations was the External Stakeholders.

As the artifacts were of deep interest for the Mexican community, the Mexican government wanted the artifacts back. But due to the increasing revenue of the San Francisco Museum (because a lot of Mexicans live in the U.S.A.) they had to consider the negotiations as they did not want to cut out their revenues.

The San Francisco Museum did not want to set up an example for other museums in the world to follow as they had many artifacts from different countries and would not like to return them c.

How were the INTERESTS of BOTH SIDES served by the agreement you reached? Ans.The agreement allowed the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco (FAMSF) to keep the Teotihuacan Murals for three more years so they could preserve the pieces of Art and restore it to its perfect condition so they do not get damaged when transporting them to Mexico. And in preserving the pieces of art Institute of National de Antropologia e Historia (INAH) was helping FAMSF.

This would help the FAMSF to display the pieces of art when they are not getting restored and would help increasing their revenue and the revenue which will be generated by the displays of the art would be divided between the FAMSF and the Government of Mexico. Thus generating a source of income for the Government of Mexico too..While on the other side the Mexicans would be getting 26% of the pieces every year starting from the second year.

And in return the Mexican museum would provide FAMSF with 100 artifacts to display on a yearly basis, which would be returned too every year. The FAMSF would pay for the preservation and restoration of the pieces of art and so the Government of Mexico would not have to bear the costs. When the pieces of art are returned to Mexico, they would donate 20% of the pieces to the FAMSF and thus this would help the FAMSF to possess a collection of Mexican artifacts.

This would be a great source of revenue for the FAMSF as many Mexicans live in the U.S.A. The Mexican Government also gave a year to the FAMSF for to retain the Teoithucuan Murals to display after they are restored. The agreement's terms clearly said that FAMSF was formulating this agreement for the sake of improving the relations and friendship with the United States of Mexico, thus giving a clear view that it did not support returning of artifacts back to the country they originate from.

The FAMSF will invest in the excavations of pieces of arts and in return for that they will get the rights to display the newly discovered artifacts in their museum. The revenue generated by the artifacts would be taken by the FAMSF to fulfill their.