New blogs on the New Diplomacy

The students posting their thoughts on this blog have now completed the module. I have set up a series of new blogs for the students who are about to start the module this week. Please follow and comment on their work at:

http://thenewdiplomacya.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacyb.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacyc.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacyd.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacye.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacyf.blogspot.com/
http://thenewdiplomacyg.blogspot.com/

My understanding of diplomacy today: How have your opinions about the role of diplomacy in world politics changed since the start of the module? Looki

Looking back on the first impressions I wrote in the first lecture do not believe that my opinion about the role of diplomacy in world politics has changed providing that I always saw diplomacy as being the key for international cooperation, because it values dialogue and debate. Additionally, diplomacy is not stagnant as is evolving from its traditional practice to adjust to the present world. On the other hand, I have to admit that this module taught me everything about the growing importance of non-state actor in diplomatic practice and particularly the way public diplomacy today encourages the processes of democracy, engaging the public and setting the stage for debate distinguishing itself from messages designed to control. In a world, where the public is not a passive recipient, transparency has to be the key to hold representatives accountable.

Diplomacy Today

In my opinion, the role of diplomacy in world politics had changed in relation to the impact of globalization. During the Cold War and the post-Cold War, the politics at that time was more based on the political ideologies such as Marxism and Realism. But nowadays, the politics was based on the political economy. Also, some powerful states were mot considered to be the only significant international actors. When the creation of bilateral states had expanded the supplement of multilateral forms of diplomacy. Another contributions for the change in the world politics was the creation of embassies during the World War 2. The embassies were created for countries to represent their own countries in another states as well as for a country own interest. For example, nowadays, people who wants to know something about their own embassies and want to know more about visas and issues of their own country. They could go to their embassies website where the information is there available for them to read.

Nevertheless, International Organizations and the NGOs, both were seeing to be diplomatic actors and they liked to demonstrate their interests and their resources to influence the overcome their negotiations.

In conclusion, sometimes when a country had problems and they could not solve. There is another country who does try to have a diplomatic talk to solve the problem. Also, the same happened to countries who tries to violent some other countries law.

Diplomacy: The New View

When I began this module, I must admit that my view of diplomacy was very narrow. At the beginning of this semester, I would have defined diplomacy as the means by which states develop relations with each other and seek to solve conflicts. Needless to say, this module has revealed diplomacy to be far less simplistic than I initially assumed.

Learning about the “Old” and “New” diplomacy and the differences between them was the first eye-opener for me on this course. This lecture was the first to reveal to me that there was much more to diplomacy than I thought. It showed me the way diplomacy had evolved from its origins to the present day.

I found it interesting that bilateral negotiations had almost completely been replaced by multilateral negations. This added an interesting new dimension to the module for me because this showed me how diplomatic negotiations (and diplomacy as a whole) became open to non-state actors. The inclusion of non-state actors in the process of diplomacy has truly changed the face of diplomacy because it has shaken more of the elitism and secrecy of the old diplomacy off, allowing for more openness and public transparency. NGO’s and celebrities are now able to illuminate issues that many governments may not have the resources to address.

The development of multilateralism in diplomacy was a defining moment in the evolution of diplomacy because it not only opened the door for non-state actors, but it allowed for the participation of developing states in international affairs. The United Nations and other INGO’s have created forums in which multilateral negotiations can take place as well as allowing developing states to participate in discussions on international issues which may or may not directly affect them.

The inclusion and use of modern technologies in the business of diplomacy was another interesting facet in the evolution of diplomacy for me. Our visit to the Ghana High Commission was an excellent illustration of how modern technology is being used to enhance the work of diplomats and to streamline the daily operations of embassies. Finally, I am very pleased to have learned so much and to have been allowed to gain a broader understanding of what diplomacy was and is, as well as the things that drive it.

How have your opinions about the role of diplomacy in world politics changed since the start the of the module?

Before I took the New Diplomacy module, I had an impression that diplomacy means negotiations between the state actors as well as making treaties and alliances. Globalization has changed the world politics, but I was not aware of significant changes from the old diplomacy to new diplomacy. To defining diplomacy and its origins is a complex topic, because various scholars have different opinions and view concepts of diplomacy differently. It surprised me that there is no strong consensus on many features of diplomacy, for instance arguments by Riordan versus Berridge. The role of diplomat has been always considered as the profession for representing the country. This module introduced the changes within the diplomatic profession, which is challenged, for instance by the non-governmental organizations which could be to some extent considered as a diplomats, but not professionally recognized ones. It was very interesting to find out about the role of public diplomacy and its significant impact on the world politics. „Diplomacy has remarkably adjusted to its changing global environment and promises to continue adapting. New ways of interacting will be tried, some of them radically different“(Leguey-Feilleux, 355, 2009). This view about the future of diplomacy means that it keeps evolving. It was very interesting to research how the EU has transformed the institution of diplomacy. To conclude, my knowledge about the diplomacy is not much more extended than it was before. The content of module made every topic stimulating. I am very pleased about the New Diplomacy module, because it helped me to deeply understand how the diplomacy have been changing and what challenges it has been facing.

My understanding of diplomacy today

According to what I wrote at the beginning of the module, it is clear that I had a rather traditional, narrow-minded view of diplomacy, that is to say it was principally the actions of ambassadors and embassies that constituted my understanding of diplomacy. My understanding was therefore one of limited scope; secrecy, bi-lateral practices, high politics, crisis management and old traditions were all aspects that I understood as diplomacy. At the end of the module, I feel that my understanding has broadened to incorporate many of the different aspects of diplomacy and the debates that surround it. I am now more aware of the history of diplomacy, and how much diplomatic practice has changed, for example, the impact that technology has had on the practice of diplomacy and how significant NGO’s have become in multilateral diplomacy. Also the issues that warrant diplomatic action are far beyond what I would have imagined at the start of the module, i.e. global trade and the environment. This module has huge relevance to current affairs, and has helped me to analyse and gain a greater understanding of contemporary events, such as the Copenhagen climate change conference.

Having said that, I think the most important outcome for me in studying the subject, is just how important definitions are when talking about diplomacy. One can go to either end of the spectrum, either taking an incredibly broad view that diplomacy constitutes actions undertaken by a range of actors that encompass notions of communications and negotiations (the view largely taken by Leguey-Feilluex); or limiting the scope of diplomacy to official state actors and diplomatic channels (largely the view taken by Berridge).

My understanding of diplomacy today

Information is not only important to teach or inform but it also changes people's opinion and increase their understanding. The same way technological, social and political change has combined to undermine the traditional assumption of diplomacy. Lectures, seminar, books, visit to embassies, debates, documentaries and the media combined to undermine my old understanding of diplomacy (S. Riodan, 2003). When I started this module my opinions about the role of diplomacy in the world of politics were very different from the ones I have now, I changed my opinion because I gained more understanding of the topic. In my first lecture I wrote about my impression of diplomacy, at that time my impression was that diplomacy was all about propaganda, it was made of tact and lies to resolve crises between states, for the benefit only of your own government. I dint know about the role of non states actors, or even if they could be involved in diplomacy. knowledge of diplomacy had a big development today, my knowledge of diplomacy started developing during the first lectures after realising that there is more in diplomacy them lies and propaganda , I started reading books, reaching on the web, participating in debate and participate on visit to embassies. From that point my understanding of diplomacy completely changed, today my opinion about diplomacy became more realistic, I now understand that diplomacy changed and is no more made only of lies and propaganda. I learned that diplomacy is very important to maintain global peace and solve crises not only security but other type of crises as well, and that there is many different type of diplomacy today, bilateral, multilateral, security crises, environmental and trade diplomacy. My understanding changed so much that I choice to write my essay arguing against the statement that “diplomacy is a polite expression for propaganda”. Diplomacy is not only important but is an essential need for today politics. I changed my opinion and I am proud of it “only those who don’t have the income of new understanding and ideas remain with same opinion forever”.