While I agree with Bob that the 192.168.x.x IP space is overused and should be avoided when possible, I do not agree that it is the easiest thing to change. Even if you use another private IP space there is always a chance that you will find overlap with a network with which you need to setup a VPN. You should migrate to something else if possible, though.
Most of my IPSec VPNs are to vendors or associate organizations that I do not want to expose my internal IP scheme to. So, I use NAT on all of those IPSec VPN connections. All day every day. What I don' t do is NAT entire subnets in these cases. I only include NAT rules for " interesting traffic" (ie, traffic for individual nodes that need to communicate across the VPN). If that is an option for you then it might make the setup easier.
Since you have subnet overlap in your particular situation you will have to write translations for both directions. Use Virtual IPs for policies controlling traffic that is remotely sourced and inbound to your network. If needed, use IP Pools for policies controlling locally sourced and outbound traffic. Use the translated addresses in your Phase 2 definitions of your IPSec VPNs. If you' re using Interface Mode VPNs then make sure you setup routes for your translated addresses to point down the correct virtual VPN interfaces.
I hope that helps get you started.