Abstract

At the beginning of the 21st century, world politics faced the fact that the old methods of dispute resolution were no longer working. Conflicts today arise not only between countries, but also within societies due to social polarization or ethnic contradictions. Traditional diplomacy and courts are often too slow to stop escalation at an early stage. That is why there is an increasing need for flexible tools that can adapt to new challenges. One of these solutions is political mediation. Unlike a court, where there is always a winner and a loser, mediation seeks a compromise through the participation of a neutral mediator. The point here is not just to "close" a dispute, but to restore dialogue and preserve relations between the parties. Today, these practices are actively moving from the private sphere into big politics, becoming an important part of modern international diplomacy. The experience of different countries shows that mediation cannot be a universal "pill". Its success directly depends on the political culture, the structure of government, and the degree to which civil society is developed in a particular state. Therefore, it is impossible to simply copy someone else's model; it is necessary to study how different countries adapt mediation to their internal conditions and which of these approaches can take root in a different environment. This allows us to consider mediation as an institutional mechanism that is formed depending on the specifics of the political system and the level of development of public institutions. As a multiethnic state and a key player in ensuring regional security, Kazakhstan needs reliable mechanisms for public dialogue. In the context of current social transformations, the development of institutional foundations of mediation is becoming a systemic necessity.