There have been quite a number of changes in the nature of diplomacy over the past few centuries. However, there are two that I believe to be more significant than the others.
The first significant change was a product of World War I. WWI, the subsequent formation and collapse of the League of Nations as well as WWII, forced world leaders to re-evaluate their diplomatic practices. The world experienced a shift from the “old” to the “new” diplomacy. The old diplomacy was marked by elitism and secrecy while the new diplomacy favoured a greater degree of openness and also professionalised the business of diplomacy. The decline of empire necessitated the abolition of the practice of appointing diplomats based on their bloodlines and opened the way for skilled and suitably educated individuals to assume these responsibilities.
The other significant change is that of technology. Since WWII, there have been many advances in technology - specifically communications technology. Communications technology as we know it today is changing the face of diplomacy. Many argue that with the ready availability of the internet, video and tele-conferencing and the likes, diplomats are becoming obsolete. After all, why bother having an entire embassy in another state when CNN or BBC World can tell you exactly what is going on in real time halfway across the globe. While diplomats and embassies have by no means been made obsolete, the development of communications technology has had and will continue to have an effect on the way diplomacy is practised.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I do support your point about advances in technology - specifically communications technology being major contributor to the change in diplomacy. Communications technology is really changing the face of diplomacy.The the best way of communication for diplomacy is face to face communication, and diplomats know that very well. telecommunication will only reduce but not totally stop face to face communication. take this practical example, you have misunderstanding that is coursing problem with with a friend, will you call her to say sorry or meet her to say it face to face so she can see your body language and the expression in your face , me my self i will prefer face to face.
ReplyDeletedon't take me wrong but I just don't think we should undermine the role of an embassies. embassies don't only identifies relations between two states it also have many other useful functions.
ReplyDeleteI never said that I think embassies were a relic of a bygone era. I said that there are those who argue that with the emergence of certain technologies, the embassies are becoming less relevant. I do not subscribe to that school of thought at all. It is ridiculous for a state to even consider relying on BBC or CNN as their primary source of information on another state. Far from that, I believe that technology should be used to enhance the business of diplomacy and the functioning of embassies.
ReplyDelete