Tuesday, 23 February 2010

The evolution of diplomacy:Write about what you consider to be the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy

Multilateral diplomacy has been the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy. Diplomacy as we all know was first conducted in secrecy by Kings, Princes and Elites in the medieval era. This form of practice was justified in the sense that the contents of negotiation must be kept a secret to prevent radical supporters of governments who might try to sabotage talks if they are made aware of what were at stake. And also, a successful negotiation means each party has to settle for less than its requirements.

However multilateral diplomacy has become essential today in contemporary world due to the large number of states in the international system. Multilateral diplomacy hinges on conferences, where a specific or urgent matter could be discussed by staging a conference rather than working through normal diplomatic channels. Multilateral conferences bring all interested parties and warring factions whose agreement may needed together and having a chair person helps the participants to reach a decision.

Conference diplomacy also enables states to engage in bilateral diplomacy as participants could discuss other matters outside the formal agenda at the multilateral conference. States such as Iran and the United States of America who might not enjoy a good relations could use such conferences to improve their relations.

In conclusion, multinational diplomacy has been the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy.

Yaw

6 comments:

  1. The multilateral diplomacy existed long time ago, however it was recognized in Europe in the 15th century, for instance when the Treaty of Westphalia was signed. I agree with Yaw multilateral diplomacy is essential today because of the number of state and non-state actors. However, from my point of view, multilateral diplomacy would not exist if there was not bilateral diplomacy. One of the main disadvantages of multilateral diplomacy is the ability to reach final consensus. The number of actors in multi-lateral diplomacy can be very high, and so on some actors might disagree and some might ask for different options or ask more questions. To reach consensus in multilateral diplomacy is difficult and it can be long procedure. On the contrary, bilateral diplomacy does not have this issue, because there are only two actors. Bilateral diplomacy is important when two nation-states need to keep their bilateral relations, for instance within the free market. The reason is that strong bilateral relations can be served as basis for the cooperation in the world market. Even though bilateral diplomacy has been criticized for failing to prevent First World War, it is the way to go, mainly in terms of „high politics“, when two nation-states decide to work out their interests together, without other unnecessary nation-states or international organizations.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is for Barbora

    If multilateral diplomacy existed long time ago but not recognized why would it be the significant change? So if it existed before, the type of secrecy or the use of power to gain something was not so high then? I do not agree with Barbora when she says that multilateral diplomacy existed before. I also agree with what you said that multilateral diplomacy will not exist today without bilateral diplomacy as everything has its base, the more you grow, the more changes occurs, so I think you made an interesting point there.

    And for Yaw, referring to what you said, it can be argued that since Multilateral diplomacy brought all these changes it is therefore the significant change because it has be renamed due to the growing numbers of NGOs and Globalization as well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is for Barbora,
    I do appreciate that bilateral dipolmacy has been the basis of diplomacy. However due to the interconnectedness of the world, conference dipolmacy enables hostlie states who would not have engagaed with each other to engage at conferences they would be invited to attend. We all saw President Obama urging Raul Castro of Cuba to respect human rights and release political prisoners at the last summit for America's leaders.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To me i do agree with babora that multilateral diplomacy emerged long time ago, example when passing through the history of organisations.. Then probably you will find the first and the oldest organisation that is central comission for navigation on the rhine, in 1815 by the cogress of vienna.it was convened by 4 states of European which had defeted napoleon. Its aim was to establish ballance of power in europe. Another vivid example is that of city states that they signed the formal organisation know as amphiety legue in the 16th century. All these shows that multilateral diplomacy emerged or started long time ago. Although there are some reforms between old diplomacy and new diplomacy.. The current diplomacy we have now.. Example of the reforms is like open diplomacy, summit diplomacy, parliamentarism diplomacy, public diplomacy etc.. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The comment above is for Barbora.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The comment above is for Barbora.

    ReplyDelete