Open ended is that whose end /results are not betermined beforehand. Thus any type of negotiations in which possibilities and solutions are explored rather than trying to reach a predetermined end. The current term is out of box.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 hrs (2007-11-14 08:28:00 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

The term can be reduced to mere' azadana muzakrat' too.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 12 hrs (2007-11-14 17:22:48 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Well every opinion should be respected. But I still opine that open ended is which 'points' to neither end.

There are two types of negotiations i.e open ended and close ended. This is basically about setting out the limitations of the agenda of the negotiatiations and it has nothing to do with the results or natija.Obiviously, its not possible to set out the results of negotiations in advance. If you are able to set the result than there is no need to negotiate. So, using the word "natija" obiviously makes no sense.

Moreover, in close - ended negotiations the parties are supposed to negotiate on the particular or limited terms/topics. Whereas in case of open - ended negotiations the participants can explore unlimited prospects/possibilities/solutions without setting out about the particular things in the agenda.

Open-ended means there are no conditions or pre-conditions as far the outcome of the negotiations is concerned.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 11 hrs (2007-11-14 16:18:14 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

غیر فیصلہ کن مذاکرات can be translated into English as "Undecisive Negotiations" and بلانتیجہ خیز مذاکرات
can be translated as "Resultless Negotiations". None of the two is appropriate in the strict sense of the word.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 days7 hrs (2007-11-17 13:04:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Muhammad Irshad has explained it well that غیر فیصلہ کن مذاکرات or بلانتیجہ خیز مذاکرات
cannot be appropriate. He has clarified well that, "in close-ended negotiations the parties are supposed to negotiate on the particular or limited terms/topics. Whereas in case of open-ended negotiations the participants can explore unlimited prospects/possibilities/solutions without setting out about the particular things in the agenda."

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 days8 hrs (2007-11-17 13:16:19 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

However, کھلے مزاکرات too is embedded in difficulties. It can be translated into English as "Open Negotiations", which means the negotiations are held openly, in front of the public or media eyes. Open-ended has to do with the result or aim of the negotiations, open here signifies that there is no restriction to whether you make any progress in the matter or you simply waste your time as far the result is concerned. It matters not; nobody is going to hold you responsible for not making any progress.
In مذاکرات غیرفیصلہ کن دکھائی دے رہے ہیں or غیر فیصلہ کن مذاکرات or بلانتیجہ خیز or 'بلا نتیجہ مذاکرات'. we have the result specified, i.e. the negotiations failed [specific result] to produce any result or make any progress on the agenda--which is not right for open-ended.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 days (2007-11-18 05:38:09 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

I think you, the asker, might be looking for:Bila Sharat-ai-Nateeja Andoozi kay Muzakirat ' بلا شرطﹺ نتیجہ اندوزی کےمذاکرات'