Tuesday 19 October 2010

What A Dream…My First Date With Diplomacy





As one who is a novice in the art of diplomacy, it has taken some time to get my head around the brunt of it all. The constant bellows of old diplomacy, new diplomacy…OLD DIPLOMACY…NO NEW DIPLOMACY required that I use a part of my brain that salaciously would otherwise be engaged in America’s Next Top Model…no need to comment, thank you.

After banging my head against the corner of the table and to MUCH deliberation, it turns out that diplomacy has been here all along, it’s an embryonic journey of states and its governments coming together to chant along to “All We Need Is Love”, well that’s the goal at least. As the world has become smaller with globalisation, it has become apparent that we actually need each other even if it is out of self-interest. It’s this dependency that shows the ever-changing face of diplomacy.

Discovering that the world is round was no match to one of the first accounts of a diplomatic conference being held in 432 BC. As the Spartans were laid back with beautiful maidens depositing grapes in their mouths a serious discussion transpired. A decision was to be made if they were to go to war with Athens only for some Athenian delegate to surface, who then came to address the Spartan assembly. This led to a vote allowing the delegate to reside in Sparta although they had made the decision to go to war with Athens. Ladies and gentlemen, may I present to you, early diplomacy, although there are other accounts that pre-date this such as the cuneiform tablet dating from 2500 BC hailing from the Kingdom of Ebla.

However all things in this world do come to an end when reform is required, the First World War was a total knock out and devastated the world. In addition there was an outcry for transparency in future diplomatic agreements being made. So, one world war later followed by a global slice of humble pie we were presented with, the all loving, all caring, all war (stopping?) League Of Nations. Ok, I know the League’s shelf life was as short as George. W. Bush’s attention span, however, it was the beginning of new diplomacy with attempts to strengthen international relationships.

After several dates with diplomacy, I think we are beginning to understand each other a little better. Old diplomacy focused most specifically on overcoming conflict to preserve peace, new diplomacy still focuses on this aspect but the world is one that always changes and diplomacy is tailored to this change.

Living in a globalised world means that more is required of diplomats, conflict is not the same as yesteryear as the race to build WMD is growing, a world war in the 21st century would be catastrophic beyond our wildest dreams. For this we can look at the crisis over North Korea’s’ nuclear weapons, which rubbed most actors up in the wrong way. Moreover, China has presented itself as a key player in international relations and takes a well calculated approach to its global affairs.

I could not imagine a world without diplomacy; we need it to assist the sustainability of peace and development. Diplomacy has enabled the world to move forward, in an economic, cultural and political sense; it is a key factor in the way in which the world works. Transparency has been crucial in moving forwards in international relations and the use of the media has been a fantastic platform for this, but one should not fall to all of its allures...as I believe secrecy still plays a big part in the diplomatic underground.

2 comments:

  1. This is a nicely constructed piece. I like your blogging style, which is very engaging - you are clearly developing your own voice on this subject. I like the idea of you going on "dates" with diplomacy in an effort to better understand it. But you should insert some references to the academic literature when you revise this entry for your log.

    You tend to present diplomacy as a peaceful endeavour, or at least one aiming toward world peace. But there is another view, neatly captured in the title of Christopher Meyer's BBC TV series and book, Getting Our Way, i.e., diplomacy is about pursuing the national interest, and doing so often leads to conflict rather than peaceful accommodation and agreement. Do you think the latter view has any purchase?

    I guess these two approaches to diplomacy largely correspond to Brian White's argument that diplomacy can be viewed from the perspective of the international system as a whole, in which it is a network of communication for the management of international affairs, or from the perspective of individual states, from which it appears as a tool or instrument for the implementation and achievement of foreign policy goals.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I feel it's not just about letting the public know who their enemy is. It's about giving feedback to the government of the sending state. Globalization has made this easier and this is what makes it new diplomacy. This is my view as a student of IR.

    ReplyDelete