Introduction to International Relations
- The branch of political science that is concerned with the foreign affairs of and relations among countries. - Foreign affairs; relations among countries. - The discipline that studies interactions between and among states, and more broadly, the workings of the international system as a whole. It can be conceived of either as a multidisciplinary field, gathering together the international aspects of politics, economics, history, law, and sociology, or as a meta- discipline, focusing on the systemic structures and patterns of interaction of the human species taken as a whole. The discipline acquired its own identity after the First World War. Its principal branches additional to theory include international political economy, international organization, foreign policy- making, strategic (or security) studies, and, more arguably, peace research. If area studies are added to these, the label international studies becomes more appropriate. When spelled wholly in lower case, the term refers to the totality of interactions within the international system. The emphasis is often on relations between states, though other collective actors such as multinational corporations, transnational interest groups, and international organizations also play an important role.
- Study of the relations of states with each other and with international organizations and certain subnational entities (e.g., bureaucracies and political parties). It is related to a number of other academic disciplines, including political science, geography, history, economics, law, sociology, psychology, and philosophy. The field emerged at the beginning of the 20th century largely in the West and particularly in the U.S. as that country grew in power and influence. The study of international relations has always been heavily influenced by normative considerations, such as the goal of reducing armed conflict and increasing international cooperation. At the beginning of the 21st century, research focused on issues such as terrorism, religious and ethnic conflict, the emergence of substate and nonstate entities, the spread of weapons of mass destruction and efforts to counter nuclear proliferation, and the development of international institutions.
- Study of the relations among states and other political and economic units in the international system. Particular areas of study within the field of international relations include diplomacy and diplomatic history, international law, international organizations, international finance and economics, and communications, among others. In addition, increased attention has been paid in recent years to developing a more scientific understanding of the international system as a whole. Aspects of international relations have been studied as early as the time of the ancient Greek historian Thucydides. As a separate and definable discipline, however, it dates from the early 20th cent., when the first organized efforts were made to find alternatives to wars in nation-state international behavior. Two schools of thought quickly developed. One looks to strengthened international law and international organizations to preserve peace; the other emphasizes that nations will always use their power to achieve goals and sees the key to peace in a balance of power among competing states. With increased importance attached to a theoretical understanding of the whole international system, there has been a growing use of concepts and modes of analysis developed in the natural sciences in an attempt to improve the verifiability and applicability of theories. In many of the leading U.S. universities there are both research institutes and schools of international relations. See diplomatic service; United Nations; European Union.
International Relations
International relations is mainly the study of nation-state-their political and non-political relations, their foreign affairs and policies, their interaction with each other and with various other political and non political groups- alliances, regional and international organizations, sub-national, trans-national and
1 [email protected] supra-national agencies. It also includes, to some extent, the study of international history, international law, international society and other psychological, cultural and strategical factors that influence the interactions and relations among states and groups.
International Politics: Political aspects of international relations are called international politics.
Difference between International Politics and International Relations
Both the terms are used loosely and interchangeably by scholar. But of late a distinction is made between the two. The differences among them can be enumerated as follows:
International Politics Differences International Relations - politics of the international Subject matter - Totality of the relations among community-focusing on people and groups in the world diplomacy, and the relations society. among states and other political units Only political Relations Description All types of relations between countries and peoples-political or non-political, peaceful or warlike, legal or cultural, economic or geographic, official or non-official, formal or informal -On official relations between Emphasis -Also includes non-official, he states and their informal and private relations governments and officials among groups and peoples. State to state relations Interest People to people relations Narrower- it includes only Scope Wider-when states cooperate those aspects of international with one another to maintain relations in which some postal or transport services, or to conflict of purpose or interest prevent the spread of epidemics is involved. As soon as an or suppress the traffic in drugs, issue arises which involves, or these activities are describes as is thought to involve, the non-political. power of one state in relation to another, the matter at once becomes political. It was mainly studied with Methodology to study The study of international historical, descriptive and relations is being enriched by the analytical methods. wider and mere versatile and scientific approaches and methods Oppositions relations Adi H. Doctor’s view Cooperative relations
Thus the current nomenclature-International Relations- covers a wider form of relationship between states, groups, institutions and individuals across the respective national boundaries. Yet it has to be admitted that political relations still over-ride in this field of study.
2 [email protected] Scope and Subject-matter of International Relations
Sometime back scholars of international relations thought that its scope was not yet delimited. One cannot settle once and for all the subject matter of a discipline, as it tends to vary with the passing of time and with the emergence of new conditions and factors. But there must be a separate core of the discipline to qualify itself as and autonomous discipline. To this extent is scope has been settled. Moreover, in the previous chapter its development as and autonomous discipline has been traced. Since World War I and especially after Second World War different scholars, universities, academic organizations and institutions endeavored to carve out a specific area of study for international relations. Some of them have put for ward a limited list and others exhaustive list of contents. It gave rise to wide controversy among scholars. Rather than discussing their viewpoints individually and in detail, an attempt is being made in the following paragraphs to enlist commonly agreed points. It cannot be maintained conclusively that scope is fully decided because the international situations as well as this discipline is in a state of flux. But it can be safely said that by and large its scope and main areas of study have been distinctly demarcated. At the same time prospects of its enlargement in future are there along with changes in world conditions. 1. State system: the study of international relations begins with the state system. One can see a great impact of the state system on international scene since last three centuries. The individuals organize themselves in sovereign states and through them strive to fulfill their interests. The incompatible interests of these sovereign states cause conflict, and international politics, thus, the natural outcome of the conflict of sovereign states. Not all states assume similar importance to every other national state. Some are significant because of their neighborhood, some owing to their military or economic power, whereas some others due to the racial or cultural links. In brief, interstate relations are the result of sovereign state and international relations studies these relations. 2. Relations in Conflict and Cooperation: international relations studies relations between two or more states, which are very often complex and influenced by a variety of geopolitical, historical, social religious, ideological, strategic and leadership factors. Broadly speaking, these relationship have taken the form of cooperation and conflict. Cooperation and conflict are two sides of the same coin. In spite of the fact that there were more conflict in international history than cooperation. Both co- existed throughout the various periods of history. International relations are primarily a study of both conflictual and cooperative inter-state relations. 3. General and Diplomatic History: In the initial years of ht beginning of the discipline, its studies were mainly historical. International relation was considered identical with international or diplomatic history for quite a long time. Under this tradition, certain major events were taken up for analysis against a historical perspective. After some time, historical approach was replaced by many new and better approaches yet historical facts and events have not lost their relevance for international relations. For example, to study the present Indo-Pak relations one has to go bch into the past to know their historical background. The study of general and specially the diplomatic history cannot be separated from international relations. 4. Power: In the post Second World War period power became the central theme in the study of international relations. According to Mrgenthau, interna5ional politics is nothing else but power politics’ and can be realistically understood only if viewed as “ the concept of interest defined in terms of power” of a national state. Power has practical as well as theoretical relevance. It is a major determinant of the policies of the leading states of the world and of international relations generally. In international relations one studies the nature, elements and measurement of national power; balance of power; power equations and limitations on national power. Major limitations on power which are being studied are: international law. International morality, world public opinion, balances of power, collective security and international organizations. 5. International Law: As mentioned above, international law acts as restrictions on national power and state action. Thus it is accepted as a very important aspect of the study of international relations.
3 [email protected] International law contains a set of rules; which regulates and determines the inter-state behavior pattern both in time of peace and war. Therefore. A sound knowledge of international law is must for understanding international relations. 6. International Organizations: The United Nations, the most comprehensive of all international organizations, regional arrangements such as NATO, OAS, EU, and SAARC, and other organizations of international or regional character have assumed significant role in the present world. These international institutions provide forums for cooperation and conflict-resolution and are governed by their own rules. These organizations came into existence to enhance economic, military, technological or cultural cooperation among member states. Since all these organizations and institutions have bearings on inter-state relations. They become a subject-matter of international relations to that extent. 7. International System: The study of international relations has also been undertaken in terms of international systems. It involves the application of system theories to a wide variety of international phenomena, as well as the development of typology of systems in the international community. International systems have been studied historically or from the point of view of present world. Ancient China, classical Greece, imperial Rome, Renaissance Italy, Mughal India, or nineteenth- century Europe are the example of old international systems. Contemporary international systems have been built on the basis of uni-polarity, bipolarity and multipolarity, or on regions such as continents or geographic areas of greater or lesser extent. Various regions are studied as international subsystems or as subordinate state systems. 8. Integration and Community Approach: A working international system requires a high degree of integration, and is most effective if it is supported by a community structure. Integration is one of the focus points in the interdisciplinary approach to international relations. Studies of past and present tendencies towards integration as well as towards conflict in the internationals community may suggest factors that have an important bearing on contemporary diplomacy and political behavior. Certainly the question of integration in the international community deserves thorough study and analysis. 9. Geopolitics: According to Hessler, “Geopolitics….is the science of the relationship between space and politics which attempts to put geographical knowledge at he service of political leaders. 10. Conflict Management and Conflict Resolution: 11. War and Peace: 12. Ideologies: 13. Nationalism, Colonialism and Imperialism: 14. Foreign Policy: 15. National Interest: 16. Policy Making: 17. National Character: 18. Psychological Factors: 19. Military-Strategic Factors: 20. Alliances and Groupings: 21. Arms Control and Disarmament: 22. Demographic Factors: 23. Economic Factors: 24. Area and Regional Studies:
Purpose and Importance of International Relation
Like any other discipline, international relation has its own importance, purpose and value. It has both theoretical as well as practical utility. It provides valuable assistance to general, leadership, professional and research education. This discipline is useful for the college teacher, professional-school teacher,
4 [email protected] graduate-school teacher; the journalist and commentator; the statesman, diplomat and international official; the lawyer, economist, civil servant, statesman and politician; the scholar and research worker in the field. Its utility “in general education, in practical action and in scholarly research” is well explained by Quincy Wright a follows: 1. General Education 2. Practical Importance 3. Research Purpose According to Palmers and Perkins: 1. Human Survival and Progress 2. Understanding and Controlling Problems 3. Objectivity, Balance and Perspective According to Adi H. Doctor: 1. Understanding the role of Subjectivity 2. Internationalism along with Nationalism 3. A better World Quincy Wright Palmers and Perkins Adi H. Doctor 1. General Education 1. Human Survival and 1. Understanding the role of Progress Subjectivity
2. Practical Importance 2. Understanding and 2. Internationalism along with Controlling Problems Nationalism
3. Research Purpose 3. Objectivity, Balance and 3. A better World Perspective
Foreign Policy: Its Definitions and Determinants Foreign Policy is a set of goals that seeks to outline how the particular State will interact with other States of the world and, to a lesser extent, non-State actors. Foreign policies generally are designed to help protect a State's national-interests, national-security, ideological goals and economic prosperity. This can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with other nations, or through aggression, war and exploitation. The development of foreign policy is influenced by domestic considerations, the policies or behavior of other States or plans to advance specific geopolitical designs. In other words, foreign policies are the general objectives that guide the activities and relationships of one State in its interactions with other States.
Foreign policy connotes a greater degree of rational procedure, and a type of planning involved in a step by step progress to a known and defined goal. Through foreign policy, every States decides "what course it will pursue in world affairs within the limits of its strength and the realities of the external environment". It, therefore, gives a sense of direction to a State. It suggests adequate means for the easy journey to this direction. It creates a sense of purpose as well as a confidence to achieve that purpose.
Broad definition of foreign policy contains three elements-goals pr objectives, policy plans and actual actions undertaken by a State to regulate its external relations.
In sum, every State decides its course of action in international relations in the light of its means and ends. Then it conducts its foreign relations and behaves at international level and regulates the behaviour and action of other States according to that action plan. This is what a foreign policy means.
Importance of Foreign Policy: It is known fact that the formation of government is essential to run a State and no-State can live without maintaining interstate relations which have become so essential in these days. A successful foreign policy enhances a nation's power and prestige in the comity of nations. Foreign policy gains also increase a government's credibility in the eyes of public internally as well as externally. Because of the influence of foreign policy of a State, most of the existing nations long for establishing diplomatic relations with such countries and the entire world is under the network that makes international relations. No State can avoid the involvement in the international affairs, and this involvement must be legal, systematic and based on certain principles. Within a systematic frame States are obliged to behave in international field. This mandate is possible only if a State has formulated its own foreign policy. A state without foreign policy is like a ship without radar which may drift aimlessly until it sinks into violent storm or current or events.
Components of Foreign Policy
According to Lerche and Said Mahendra Kumar Jangam 1. Formulation of the objective in 1. Policy Makers; 1. Principles underlying foreign the most precise terms 2. Interest and Objectives policy; possible; 3. Principle of Foreign 2. Problems faced by the nation; 2. The nature of the action to be policy; and 3. The particular way of making undertaken, stated with 4. Means of foreign policy. policy including the role of sufficient clarity to guide and foreign policy makers; and direct the State's other officials; 4. The products or results of and foreign policy. 3. The forms and perhaps the
6 [email protected] amounts of national power to be applied in pursuit of the objective.
Objectives of foreign policy: • Interest can be explained as the aims passed on to the policy makers by the community. • Foreign Policy is inconceivable without national interest. At the same time it mist be clarified that national interest does not exclude the significance of international obligation, especially in the present-day world. • Objectives are the product of national interest. They are interests spelled out and made more precise in the light of the present-day complexity of international relations. • Objectives are of a more specific nature than interests. Common objectives are as follows which can be supplemented by specific objectives according to the peculiar problems, needs and conditions of the particular country: 1. Maintaining the integrity of the State. 2. Promoting economic interest; 3. Providing for national security; 4. Protecting national prestige and developing national power; and 5. Maintaining world order.
Pre-requisites of Foreign Policy: Study of foreign policy necessitates that the following factors must be borne in mind: 1. Foreign policy has many constituents , most important of which are defense, diplomatic and economic interests. These constituents though singly salient, are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They often coexist and strongly influence each other. 2. Foreign policy is made in the name of a state, but it is the government which really formulates and executes it. 3. Foreign policy never operates in vacuum rather it is conditioned by an environment, both domestic and external. - Domestic environment consists of political parties, pressure groups, rival bureaucratic organizations, public opinion, political culture etc. - The External environment comprises among other sub-systemic actors-neighboring states and others belonging to the region, super powers and international organizations. 4. In government it is some individuals around whom foreign policy making revolves (plays the prominent role in this regard) : President or Prime Minister or the King 5. Foreign Policy always involves both decision and action , with decision perhaps the more important element. Action of behalf of an objective can result from policy only if the decision itself indicates clearly what the policy maker had in mind both as to objective and procedure. 6. Foreign policy embraces both important and less important matters (routine matters). 7. Cost-risk factor in foreign policy has also its significance. A policy decision requires the commitment of resources, the assumption of a risk or both. 8. Foreign policy has to be examined from actual behaviour pattern of states rather than exclusively from declared objectives or policy plans.
Instruments of Foreign Policy: The instruments of Foreign Policy may be said to be those institutions or devices through which the national power or resources are used for the accomplishment of the interests and objectives. These are as follows: 7 [email protected] 1. Diplomacy: Good diplomats and through the art of diplomacy can put country's viewpoint effectively before the world and fulfill foreign policy objectives by means of mutual negotiations and thus spare their country from resorting to coercive methods.* Diplomacy reduces the area of disagreement and misunderstanding with other states. 2. Publicity and Propaganda: these can be used steadily to combat and break down the undesirable attitudes and opinions and to create the desired attitudes and opinions. Propaganda can be used for the systematic falsification of true propositions or positions and the establishment of suitable ones. Thus these three factors-diplomacy, publicity and propaganda-are employed by a nation for building up its public relations, for removing undesirable or discreditable factors like embarrassment, misunderstanding, suspicion, fear, etc. between itself and other nations, and for projecting a favourable and acceptable image to other nations. These also help in increasing the power and prestige of a nation. 3. Balance of power; 4. Collective Security; the principle of collective security is adopted to secure collective defense-as threateningly posed or actually mobilized-against a powerful nation or nations. 5. International Law and Organizations; 6. Economic and non-political methods; and 7. War and peace.
Determinants of Foreign Policy Foreign policy of states is determined by a number of factors. These important determinants can be broadly classified into three categories:
1. General or Objective: The general and objective factors determine the framework in which policy choices are to be made and operated. These are the factors which are common to all the countries in determining their foreign policy.
+ Sovereignty and Integrity of the State: safeguarding of its sovereignty and territorial integrity; safeguard the property of citizens and to protect their interests; security of national boundaries + Interdependence of States: + Promotion of National Interest: Common interests of States are self-preservation, security and wellbeing of its citizen. +Internal and External Conditions:
2. Specific or subjective or internal Specific and subjective factors vary from country to country in accordance with their internal conditions and needs. These specific factors determine the specific response of leadership to a particular situation, and therefore indicate the direction of foreign policy. A state may be facing certain problems and difficulties and therefore, has to take several internal factors into consideration while formulating its foreign policy. These factors may differ from state to state. +Geography: size, climate, topography, shape and location. +History: the past experience, failures and successes guide policy makers to deal with present problems. +Population: Manpower determines the standard of living, values, the way of life and even expectation of a nation. Besides the quantity, the quality of population as revealed in its educational level, skilled labour, technical know-how, health and strong national character, is a determinant of foreign policy. + Natural resources: + Economic Factors: mutual interdependence of the economies; economic activity: tariffs, import quotas, trade agreements and other financial arrangements. +Development: developed-independent policy, backward-dependent policy +National and Military Capacity: it includes the military preparedness of a state, its technological advancement and modern means of communication; economic development and enlightened political institutions.
8 [email protected] +Ideology: Democracy, Communism +Public Opinion + Decision Makers +Domestic Instability
3. External Factors: Certain external factors and situations also influence and shape a nation's foreign policy: • International Organizations: international law, UNO, and its activities etc. The nations cannot completely ignore international law, treaties and contracts so that their violations may not put in danger the policies. • World Public Opinion: it provides dynamism to external environment. Only if domestic public opinion of many countries combines it becomes an effective world public opinion. • Reaction of Other state: Others External Factors: general world conditions, whether tense or relaxed, cold war like or detente like, war prone or peace oriented.
9 [email protected] Definition of Diplomacy and its Changing Nature
Diplomacy: The art or practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties and agreement. “Diplomacy is the application of intelligence and tact to the conduct of official relations between the governments of independent States.” - Sir Ernest Satow, Guide to Diplomatic Practice. Diplomacy is an art of influencing, by pursuing foreign policy, in favour of the representing state through conduction of negotiation, conclusion of treaties and agreements. It also indicates to a set of rules, institutional practices and discoursed held or executed by those officials who have the right to use the folded document issued by the government, international organizations or agencies as an identity document in international affairs.
“Diplomacy is a political process under which political entities-states usually-are interconnected with official relations in the framework of the international environment” – E. Plischke. Defined more simply diplomacy is the art and practice of conducting negotiations between states, is the skill in handling affairs without arising hostility. More formally, it could be defined as the managing of the foreign affairs of states at the governmental level.
Diplomacy is the chief instrument of executing foreign policy. Its methods include secret negotiation by accredited envoys (though political leaders also negotiate) and international agreements and laws. Its use predates recorded history. The goal of diplomacy is to further the State's interests as dictated by geography history and economics. Safeguarding the State's independence, security and integrity is of prime importance; preserving the widest possible freedom of action for the State is nearly as important. Beyond that, diplomacy seeks maximum national advantage without using force and preferably without causing resentment.
Diplomacy is defined as the mechanism of representation, communication and negotiation through which States and other international actors conduct their business-national interest. In other words, it is understood as an art of promoting national interest through bilateral, regional and multilateral interaction and relation. Thus, it is concerned with the management of relations between States and other actors of international arena. Diplomacy is central both to an understanding of a global system of world politics and to the foreign policies of States and other actors on the international stage.
Macro and Micro Perspective of Diplomacy From the 'macro' perspective of world politics, diplomacy refers to a process of communications that is central to the workings of the global system. If conflict and cooperation are placed at two ends of a spectrum of world politics, diplomacy can be located at the cooperation and representing forms of interaction that focus on the resolution of conflict by dialogue and negotiation. Diplomacy therefore is fundamentally related to attempts to manage and to create order within a global system, the object being to prevent conflict spilling over into war. Diplomacy in world politics refers to a communication process between international actors that seeks through negotiation to resolve conflict short of war. This process has been refined, institutionalized and professionalized over many centuries.
World Politics
Conflict Co -operation
War Diplomacy
From the Micro Perspective of International actors like States, an understanding of diplomacy provides revealing insights into the behavior of the actors themselves in the global system. From this perspective, however, diplomacy can be identified as a policy instrument rather than a global process. All actors have goals or ends towards which their foreign policy behaviour is directed. In order to achieve ends, actors clearly need means-often called policy instruments. Diplomacy provides one instrument that international actors use to implement their foreign policy. Diplomacy is one of a set of instruments through which decisions are implemented, policy activated, and policy objectives- also established by the political leadership-achieved.
Nature and Characteristics of Diplomacy From the above definitions it may be deduced that the nature of diplomacy consists of following: a. It is a technique of implementing foreign f. Bargaining game aiming at achieving maximum policy; and giving minimum; b. Channel of communicating between g. Requires tact, intelligence, shrewdness and wit; governments; h. implies both compromise and threat, persuasion and c. method of adjusting and managing inter-state penalty, reward and punishment, carrot and stick relations; and so on; d. Art of forwarding national interests; i. is workable and useful both in peace and war; e. Quality or skill of international negotiations; j. For successful and effective working it requires trained and professional diplomat
Evolution of Diplomacy The world "diplomacy" has been taken from Greek word "diploma" i.e. folded document. It was first introduced into the English language by Edmund Burke in 1796, based on the French word "diploma tie". 1. The Rise of Diplomacy; 6. From Peaceful to Coercive Diplomacy; 2. Old and Modern Diplomacy; 7. Diplomatic Good Offices; 3. Bilateral Diplomacy; 8. Para Diplomacy; 4. Multilateral Diplomacy; 9. Summit Diplomacy; 5. Diplomatic Negotiations; 10. Preventive Diplomacy.
Types of Diplomacy The diplomacy may be categorized into different forms on the basis of time, techniques, practices, personnel (diplomats), and diplomatic dealings. 1. Old Diplomacy: 16 th Century to 1918/19 Concerned mainly with the building up of allies; Friendly, humane and polite art, carried on with much finesse and a great deal of mutual toleration;
11 [email protected] Mainly European-Europe was the centre of old diplomacy; Big Power Affairs-greater importance and responsibility of the great European powers. Aristocratic Affairs:- Aristocratic and nobles diplomats; Secrecy:- It was based on the assumption that negotiation must be always a process rather than an episode, and that at every stage it must remain confidential. Secrecy was considered essential for resolving differences; Flexible:- freedom of ambassadors and the flexibility in the matters of negotiation and the conduct of entire diplomatic relations possible; Lack of fast ICT means; Foul means:- for serving national interest, diplomat often resorted to foul means and practice such as bribery and murder.
2. New Diplomacy: the period after first world war where international conditions changed considerably and democratic governments replaced monarchies: New diplomacy was more professional and non-political; International- worldwide, not the Europecentric; Specialization-experts in their respective fields are sent to negotiate; Summit and personal: important issues anre directly discussed by summit level (top). Political leaders of concerned countries directly rather than by their diplomats; Open: It insists on open covenants of peace openly arrived at and not on private international understanding; Decomratic: the broad framework of diplomacy containing the vital objectives and not the process of negotiation are democratically determined and subjected to democratic scrutiny and control.
Differences between Old and New Diplomacy Old Diplomacy New Diplomacy Mainly confined to Europe; All pervasive, world wide and truly Dominated by Europe; international in nature; Aristocratic and Monarchic; Open and democratic; Diplomats from noble and Aristocratic family; Diplomats from public and Merit base; More Secrete; Conducted through Summit; Run By the Generalist; Run by specialists and Experts;
Secret Diplomacy: Secerecy means undercover and shady dealings; Sub-category of old diplomacy in 19 th century; The Congress of Berlin of 1878 was a fine example. Open Diplomacy: Came with the growth of democracy; There should be open covenants of peace openly arrived at, after which there shall be no private international understandings of any kid but diplomacy shall proceed always frankly and in public view; The principle of open diplomacy was adopted by the covenant of League of Nations and lately UN Charter; In reality, open diplomacy can not be practiced in to to. Personal and Summit Diplomacy: When foreign Minister, Prime-minister and even Head of States directly and personally participate in diplomatic parleys, it is called personal diplomacy. When vital national interests and major political considerations are involved in any issue, the negotiations are usually conducted by top level political leaders;
12 [email protected] Extensive and frequent foreign visits by Head of States have become important means of personal diplomacy; Personal diplomacy is vague through personal agents and direct contacts; Sometimes, Head of States directly contact each other by telephone. They also correspond directly, or send messages to each other by personal emissaries and confidents; Summit meetings are conferences of top political figures- Head of States/Governments-who are able to make important political decisions and conclude agreements, possibility without normal diplomatic channels. Multilateral and Institutional Diplomacy: Conference diplomacy was a precursor of institutional diplomacy and parliamentary diplomacy is a by- product of institutional diplomacy; Conference Diplomacy:- A large part of international dealings is conducted through the medium of international conferences and the periodic meetings of regional and international organizations. This is known as conference diplomacy. Diplomacy by conference is a multilateral method of diplomatic negotiations in which leaders or representatives of more than two countries participate and is characterized by numerous and complicated rules of procedure; It was the world war First that gave a boost to the idea of Conference Diplomacy under the pressure of common danger; Usually nations resort to this diplomacy to discuss and solve common problems, to achieve special objectives, to tackle common danger and to make international treaties. Institutional Diplomacy: With the rise of international and regional institutions like the UN and its specialized agencies, IMF, WTO, NATO, EU etc, a new type of diplomacy has come into existence namely institutional diplomacy; Negotiations are usually conducted by international institutions with a view to solving international conflicts and problems. The foremost example of this respect is the diplomatic efforts undertaken by the United Nations from time to time in regard to various international conflicts and crisis. The UN is a world body in which almost all the nations of the World are members. That’s why diplomacy conducted in the UN has acquired extra significance. Diplomacy in the UN is known by several names such as public, conference, multinational, multilateral and parliamentary diplomacy. It has been also dubbed as block diplomacy, diplomacy by groups and even diplomacy by majorities. Parliamentary Diplomacy: Sub-type of a multilateral diplomacy and especially a child of institutional diplomacy. The parliamentary form of multilateral diplomacy usually follows those procedures and techniques which are generally used by legislative bodies of democratic nations such as public debate, voting, decision by majority vote, reporting out of committees etc. Rusk describes the following Components of Parliamentary Diplomacy: 1. a continuing organization; 2. regular public debate exposed to mass-media; 3. a set of rules governing the procedures; 4. formal conclusions expressed in resolutions passed by majority; 5. Existence of committees.
Bilateral Diplomacy: Bilateral issues and matters between two countries and neighbors were and are continued to be tackled through bilateral diplomacy. Along with multilateral diplomacy, bilateral diplomacy is still relevant owing to the following factors: Bilateral missions normally carry out consular and commercial information and other functions which only the most severe critics would argue could be dispensed with entirely;
13 [email protected] As domestic economies everywhere came increasingly under the control of governments, international traders need more help from their own governments and its missions in foreign countries in their bilateral commercial negotiations with other countries; Bilateral missions are also used for aid development tasks; Nation often set up special bilateral consultative study and core groups to enhance cooperation in a particular field of or to sort out a specific issues;
Hi-tech Diplomacy: The impact of the growth of transport, communication and technology on diplomacy is very significant. Information technology has revolutionalized politics, commerce, defense and diplomacy; The magic of IT revolution is going to metamorphose every aspect of life in 21 st century; Mainstream culture, virtual office, teleconferencing; Change in technology have vastly improved the security and the speed of communication between Missions abroad and their governments and governments react much more quickly towards events and they maintain a closer and more constant dialogue with their representatives abroad and thus with other governments.
Informal Diplomacy: Informal diplomacy has been used for centuries to communicate between powers. Most diplomats work to recruit figures in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country’s leadership. This occurs in situations where governments wish to express intentions or to suggest methods of resolving a diplomatic situation, but do not wish to express a formal position.
Track II Diplomacy: It is a specific kind of informal diplomacy, in which non-officials (academic scholars, retired civil and military officials, public figures and social activities) engage in dialogue, with the aim of conflict resolution, or confidence building. This sort of diplomacy is especially useful after events which can be interpreted in a number of different ways, both parties recognize this fact, and neither side wants to escalate or involve third parties for fear of the situation spiraling out of control. Although Track II Diplomacy may seem less important than Track I (the work of actual diplomats at their embassies), it is many times for more important. In deed, its informal nature often reflects the fact that the issues in question are of deadly seriousness.
Cultural Diplomacy: Cultural diplomacy is the use and transfer of cultural ideas between different groups to achieve rapport and understanding. It alludes to a new way of making diplomacy by involving new non-governmental and non- professional actors in the making of diplomacy. In the frame of globalization, culture plays a major role in the definition of identity and in the relations between people. When classical diplomacy fails, a better knowledge can help bridging the gap between different cultures.
Prescriptions of Cultural Diplomacy: Recognition: the initial prescription of cultural diplomacy requires each party to recognize the distinct cultural dynamics of the other, this recognition affords equal human rights on equal terms; Understanding: Parties are also prescribed the study of the foreign cultural dynamics in order to gain an understanding of the traditions, history, languages and general way of life, pertinent to the engaging party. During this process parties may discover aspects of a foreign culture which they fundamentally disagree with or find abhorrent. These perceptions do not require agreement with all aspects of a foreign culture, only for recognition and understanding; Dialogue; Purpose:
Cowboy Diplomacy: Cowboy diplomacy is a term used by critics to describe the resolution of international conflicts through brash-risk-taking, intimidation, military deployment, or combination of such tactics.
Gunboat Diplomacy: Gunboat diplomacy refers to the pursuit of foreign policy objectives with the aid of conspicuous displays of military power-implying or constituting a direct threat of warfare, should terms not be agreeable to the superior force. The British diplomat and naval thinker James Cable spelled out the nature of Gunboat diplomacy in a series of works published between 1981 and 1994. in these, he defined the phenomenon as “the use or threat of limited naval force, otherwise than as an act of war, in order to secure advantage or to avert loss, either in the furtherance of an international dispute or else against foreign national with in the territory or the jurisdiction of their own State. He further broke down the concept into four key areas: Definitive force: the use of gunboat diplomacy to crate or remove a fait accompli; Purposeful Force: to change the policy or charter of the target groups or governments; Catalytic Force: to buy a breathing space or present policy makers with an increased range or options; Expressive Force: to send a political message-interestingly this aspect of Gunboat diplomacy is undervalued and almost diminished by cable.
Preventive Diplomacy: Preventive diplomacy is an action to prevent disputes from arising between parties, to prevent existing disputes from escalating into conflicts and to limit the spread of the latter when they occur. “Action taken in vulnerable places and times to avoid the threat or use of armed force and related forms of coercion by States or groups to settle the political disputes that can arise from the destabilizing effects of economic, social, political and international change”. Michael S. Lund. As a general rule, preventive diplomacy is consensual diplomatic and political actions with the aim of : Preventing severe disputes and conflicts from arising between States which pose a serious threat to regional peace and stability; Preventing such disputes and conflicts from escalating into armed confrontation; and Limiting the intensity of violence and humanitarian problems resulting from such conflicts and preventing them from spreading geographically.
Characteristics of Preventive Diplomacy: It is about diplomacy: It relies upon diplomatic and peaceful methods such as persuasion, negotiation, enquiry, mediation and conciliation; It is voluntary: preventive diplomacy practices are to be employed only at the request of the parties or with their consent; It is non-coercive activity: Acts that require military action or the use of force, or other coercive practices, such as sanctions, are outside the scope of preventive diplomacy; It requires trust and confidence: the facilitator or mediator in the dispute must be seen as trust worthy and as an impartial honest broker by all involved parties; It rests upon international law: Any action should be in accordance with the basic principle of international law; It is based on sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of a State. This includes the principles of sovereign equality and territorial integrity; It requires timeliness: action is to be preventive rather than curative. Preventive diplomacy methods are most effectively employed at an early stage of a dispute or crisis. It is a low profile diplomacy: low profile in the sense that it is formulated by actual politicians, diplomats and experts involved in an conflict and then outcomes or solutions are passed on to the level of decision-makers and heads of States and Government. 15 [email protected]
Since the end of cold war, the international community through international institutions has been focusing on preventive diplomacy. As the UN and regional Organizations as well as global and regional powers discovered the high costs of managing conflict, there is a strong common perception of benevolence of preventive diplomacy. Preventive diplomacy action can be implemented by the UN, regional Organizations, NGO Networks and Individual States, e.g. UN peace keeping mission in Macedonia (UNPREDEP) in 1995- 1999. It was the First UN Preventive Action. Preventive measures include: early warning, fact-finding, early deployment, demilitarized zone, confidence building measures, etc.
Public Diplomacy: Public Diplomacy defines government to people relations. This kind of diplomacy is built on information exchange between a government, its citizens and peoples of other nations and States. A diplomacy that seeks to promote the national interest of a country through understanding, informing and influencing foreign audiences, a diplomacy whose pillar is official government efforts to shape the communications environment overseas in which a country’s foreign policy is played out, in order to reduce the degree to which misperceptions and misunderstandings complicate relations between the country and other States.
Three Main Pillars of Public Diplomacy are: Information, Education and Culture: 1st refers to the general information disseminated by a government to the international community in all fields and sectors: culture, history, religion, life, etc 2nd : educational exchanges-Scholarships:…………….. 3rd : Cultural presentations, exhibitions etc.
Elements of Public Diplomacy: Press and Public Affairs activities of governmental officials (President, ministries, diplomats, officials…); Information and cultural activities organized by diplomatic missions abroad; Educational and cultural exchanges; International exchange of persons programs; International television and radio; and Government-sponsored activities of NGOs.
Public Diplomacy differs from traditional diplomacy in that public diplomacy deals not only with governments but primarily with non-governmental individuals and organizations. Furthermore, public diplomacy activities often present many differing views as represented by private individual and organizations in addition to official government views.
Difference between Public and Official/traditional Diplomacy Public diplomacy is transparent, open and widely disseminated, whereas official diplomacy; apart from occasional leaks, is opaque/secret. Public diplomacy is transmitted by government to other government; Official diplomacy is concerned with issues related to the behaviors and policy of governments, whereas public diplomacy is concerned with issues related to the attitudes and behaviors of publics. In summary, while traditional official diplomacy focuses on relationships between the representatives of States or international actors, public diplomacy is directed at foreign public in foreign societies as a principal target, in order to influence their attitudes. In general, public diplomacy remains a key instrument of official foreign policy, to support its objectives, or at least, to reduce hostility to country. Perhaps, the best example in this context is the great efforts made by US government to improve and refurbish its image in the world, especially in Islamic societies.
16 [email protected] Virtual Diplomacy: In the broad definition, virtual diplomacy signifies the integration of new ICTs, especially the internet, in diplomacy practices at all levels in order to facilitate the achievement of diplomacy goals. Whereas, in its narrow definition, virtual diplomacy means the use of new ICTs, especially the internet, to perform the functions of diplomacy, i.e. presentation, information, negotiation, and communication….
Key elements of virtual diplomacy based on the use of the internet in the following fields: Information gathering; Communication and negotiation; Virtual embassies and conferences; and Rising of new diplomatic actors.
Diplomacy After September 11 Attacks: International Diplomacy has set five priority objectives after September 11 attacks which have to be simultaneously pursued and these are: Strengthening internal security; Bringing the perpetrators to justice; Building front-line defenses against future attacks; Addressing the conflicts and policy issues that generate grievances; Addressing the underlying social, economic and cultural issues that generate grievance.
Functions of Diplomacy: 1. Representation: a. Symbolic: attending a number of ceremonies: Republic Day; b. Legal: casts his vote at international conferences on behalf of his government; c. Political: he is to sell the foreign policy and project a favourable image; 2. Negotiation: Diplomats are mainly negotiators. 3. Obtaining Information: Precise information must be made available to those who formulate foreign policy if there is to be a minimum discrepancy between the objective environment and the image of the environment held by policy makers. Only a resident diplomat can have the real feel of the political, economic and social and other conditions prevailing in the host foreign policy. 4. Reporting: Obtained information to the home country. 5. Protection of Nationals and national interest: 6. Making Policies: A principal contribution of diplomats in the policy making process comes from their skill of interpretation and judgment about conditions in the country to which they are accredited. 7. The substantive functions: a) conflict management, b) problem solving, c) cross-cultural interaction, d) negotiation and bargaining. 8. Procedural Activities: refinement of protocols; diplomatic drafting; press release; etc.
Instruments and Technique of Diplomacy: Are used to achieve the goals of foreign policy; Many modern writers are of the opinion that states usually adopt three basic mode of behaviour to achieve diplomatic objectives: cooperation, accommodation and opposition; Techniques: 1. Coercion: In many cases, rupture of diplomatic relations has coercive elements, as does exclusion of the target state from international conferences or organizations. Coercion may also be3 applied in negotiation by an ultimate, by establishment of a rigid time limit for the conclusion of an arrangement, or by the registration of a formal or informal protest or complaint.
17 [email protected] 2. Persuasion: There are two persuasive devices: the advancement of arguments and the proffering of quid pro quo. While actual line between coercion and persuasion is very thin, and the two techniques often mix with each other, there is a real difference in both motivation and atmosphere, and most diplomatic initiatives are at least initially cast in persuasive form. 3. Adjustment: Diplomacy is an art of give and take. Adjustment is admirably suited to the task of enabling two States to modify their positions on an issue in order to reach a stable relationship. Its direction of communication, its potentially coercive nature, and its subtlety and flexibility all contribute to its usefulness. However, the adjustment function of diplomacy is effective only if both parties are amenable to negotiation and give and take, nothing in the diplomatic instrument can overcome a State’s rigidness or unwillingness to change a policy. 4. Agreement: Agreement may involve coercion, persuasion, or adjustment and that no agreement is possible unless both parties wish it. Formal written agreements are the most binding strictures on international commitment offered by international politics, and can be reached only by diplomatic means.
Good Diplomacy and Ideal Diplomats: Skills needed to Diplomats: Specialist knowledge; knowledge and understanding of his own country; Knowledge of the mechanism and procedure of international intercourse.
Professional Knowledge: Skill in negotiating and in day to day diplomacy; Skill in observing, analyzing and reporting; Skill in representation; Skill in the management of a Mission; Skill in communication and public diplomacy; Cross-cultural skill.
Personal Qualities: Political awareness; Personal warmth and acceptability; Intellectual curiosity and the drive to go on learning; Intellectual versatility; Leadership; Common Sense.
Other Qualities: Truthfulness, precision, calm, good temper, patience, modesty, intelligence, charm, tact; Loyalty, posed to a good memory, eloquent; Moral authority, personal credibility, genial personality, compromising ability, lack of hotheadedness.
“The good British ‘diplomatist’ is: Tolerant and fair; He acquires a fine balance between imagination and reason, between idealism and realism; He is reliable and scrupulously precise; He possesses dignity without self-importance, demeanour without mannerisms, poise without stolidity; He can display resolution as well as flexibility, and can combine gentleness with courage; He never boasts; He knows that impatience is as dangerous as ill-temper and that intellectual brilliance is not a diplomatic quality; 18 [email protected] He knows above all that it is his duty to interpret the policy of his government with loyalty and common sense and that the foundation of good diplomacy is the same as the foundation of good business-namely credit, confidence, consideration and compromise.”, Diplomacy, Harold Nicolson.
Classification of Diplomats: In a technical and professional sense, diplomacy includes two types of personnel: Diplomatic and Consular. 1. Diplomatic Personnel: The VCDR, 1961 divided the heads of diplomatic missions into three general categories. The first category comprises Ambassadors and High Commissioners; the second comprises Envoy-Extra-Ordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary and the third category is made of Charges d affairs. The diplomats of first two category are accredited (officially presented) to the head of the host State where as Charges d affairs are accredited to the Foreign Minister or Secretary of the State of the host Country.
A good number of diplomatic officials who work under the above in Mission or Embassy are: a. Counselors of Embassy of legation who rank highest among diplomatic staff; b. Secretaries of an embassy or legation, usually ranked as First, Second and Third Secretaries; and c. Attaches who may be junior career officers or non-career persons serving on a temporary basis.
2. Consular Personnel: related to the diplomatic function is the consular function and services. Consular functions, codified in VCCR, 1963 include: processing and issuing entry and exit visas, facilitating commercial and other activities related to investment, processing ship’s papers and providing information about the home State to all interested parties. Consuls are divided into five classes: a. Consul General; b. Consuls; c. Vice-Consuls of Career; d. Vice-Consuls not of Career; and e. Consular Agents. Consular personnel enjoy less diplomatic privileges and immunities than diplomatic personnel in the host country.
The Future of Diplomacy 1
Four Tasks of Diplomacy: Diplomacy is an element of national power. The importance of diplomacy for the preservation of international peace is but a particular aspect of that general function. For a diplomacy that ends in war has failed in its primary objective: the promotion of the national interest by peaceful means. This has always been so and is particularly so in view of the destructive potentialities of total war. Taken in its widest meaning, comprising the whole range of foreign policy, tha task of diplomacy is fourfold: 1. Diplomacy must determine its objectives in the light of the power actually and potentially available for the pursuit of these objectices; 2. Diplomacy must assess the objectives of other nations and the power actually and potentially available for the pursuit of these objectives; 3. Diplomacy must determine to what extent these different objectives are compatible with each other; and 4. Diplomacy must employ the means suited to the pursuit of its objectives. Failure in any one of these tasks may jeopardize the success of foreign policy and with it the peace of the world.
The Promise of Diplomacy: Its Nine Rules: Four Fundamentals + Five Prerequisites of Compromise
1 Hans J. Morgenthau 19 [email protected]
Four fundamental Rules 1. Diplomacy must be divested of the crusading spirit: 2. The objectives of foreign policy must be defined in terms of the national interest and must be supported with adequate power: 3. Diplomacy must look at the political scene from the point of view of other Nations: 4. Nations must be willing to compromise on all issues that are not vital to them:
Five Prerequisites of Compromise: 1. Give up the shadow of worthless rights for the substance of real advantage: 2. Never put yourself in a position from which you cannot retreat without losing face and from which you cannot advance without grave risks: 3. Never allow a weak ally to make decisions for you: 4. The armed forces are the instrument of foreign policy, not its master; 5. The government is the leader of public opinion, not its slave.
21 st Century Diplomacy: Diplomacy today is vastly different form what it was in the 19 th century; it will continue to evolve and change. Tomorrow’s diplomacy will be even further removed from the famous pictures of the dancing Congress of Vienna, where the foundations for the structure of diplomacy for many decades, indeed for two centuries, were laid. At the height of the rigged elections in Zimbabwe earlier this year, the International Herald Tribune carried a picture that contrasts perfectly with the images the Congress of Vienna has left on our minds
What has changed, what will continue to change in diplomacy as a profession and it the environment in which it operates? Changed interest structures: 192 members of UN-this multiplies the instances of possible interactions between states, still the primary, but no more the sole subjects of international relations. At the same time some traditional categorizations have lost their meaning (East versus West) or tend to forego significance (North versus South). Others are becoming essential: rich versus poor, inclusion or exclusion form the process of globalization; good governance versus undemocratic, dictatorial regimes. New international actors: Active participation of NGOs: States have lost their monopoly as subjects of international law. Today, international organizations and other entities are recognized as agents under international law. Many important areas of today’s international relations (human rights, development cooperation, environmental politics, sustainable development and others” would be unthinkable without the active contribution of the NGO community. Post modern diplomacy might become a profession, which also includes agents not engaged in the service of a state but of international organizations, NGOs, business, sport federations and other entities operating on the international level.
Foreign Policy goes national: Foreign policy is open to day-to-day public scrutiny and criticism. For the diplomat this means that she or he is also becoming more or less directly answerable to the public. The public expects explanations, journalists need to be given background interviews, Parliaments ask for information. Many foreign policy issues have fully entered into the domain of national and even regional and local politics. Foreign policy today has to do with many issues in our daily lives. What used to be “low politics” (as against “high politics”) has become normal work for the foreign policy agent: regulations for trade and investment, addressing environmental issues, regulating entry into the country and dealing with problems of migration, finding solutions to questions of road transit often endangering the living conditions of many people. At the same time, for all these issues there are domestic ministries, experts in other government offices who increasingly are also establishing foreign contacts. They are directly interacting with their homologues in other countries and are regularly traveling to international conferences. This situation is bound to clash with the traditional “gatekeeper” function of foreign ministries, which hinges on the 20 [email protected] (false) assumption that domestic and international affairs are conducted in two very different political arenas. In the age of globalization foreign ministries would be ill advised if they tried to maintain this claim as justification for their existence. Managers of globalization: The globalization of international relations, the internationalization of national policy areas and the growing awareness, that global problems require global solutions signify new important functions for diplomacy. Diplomats have become managers of globalization; they are tasked to manage the “global Village” in which we live. Disarmament, arms regulations, the fight against international terrorism crime and drug abuse, the protection of human rights, the prevention of climate change and desertification, the promotion of sustainable development, conflict prevention, development cooperation, peace keeping, peacemaking, and peace enforcement….. Diplomats need to follow developments in these field proactively, to shape them, to involve public discourse and to give advice to decision-makers on the political levels. They need to be aware of global trends and interests and what they mean for home country. These tasks are carried out though a combination of bilateral, multilateral and polylateral (including in some structural way-NGOs, advocacy groups and other non-official entities) diplomacy. The development again calls for efforts to bridge the traditional divide between domestic and foreign affairs with foreign affairs moving beyond “gate keeping” to “coordinating” cross border relations. In the context of multilateral diplomacy the current stage of transatlantic relations is a cause of concern for many intellectuals on both sides of the ocean. There is a real difference in the approach to international law, international organization and multilateral diplomacy. This divergence of views can be exemplified by a number of examples. Among them: reduction of environmentally harmful CO2- emissions (Kyoto Protocol); the establishment of an International Criminal Court; the right of diplomatic protection for citizens of one state, living in an other country, unlawful trade restriction (WTO-rulings against the Unite4d States”; and last but by no mean least: the issue of international legality in dealing with Iraq’s program of weapons of mass destruction. On all these fronts we witness an increasing continental drift. Modern means of communications: the modern means of electronic communication constitute the most obvious structural change to the environment in which diplomats operate.
The effects of Information Technology (IT) on the operation of the Diplomatic Service: At first glance it might look as if diplomacy has not changed all that much due to the advent of IT, as if diplomacy were to resist change. To some extent this is true, since there is no doubt retarding factors, such as a slower generational change in comparison to the business sector but also the particular relevance of the temporal factor in diplomatic procedure. In diplomacy, probably more than in other professions, a fast decision is not necessarily the best decision. Most importantly, however, we should keep in mind that-again in diplomacy more than in other professions-human input; the human factor has considerable importance. Thus personal contacts, human expertise and experience, in-built controls ad feedback mechanisms, characteristic for diplomatic procedures and not necessarily fast or highly efficient, will continue to exert influence over diplomacy making the re-engineering of diplomatic procedures a more subtle and complex exercise.
Internet as information tool for the diplomat: While information gathering has become so much easier, information management has and will continue to become much more important. The introduction of internet- systems has brought about most important changes for the diplomatic service. Among them: Direct contacts between all officers, without the need for prior authorization, to get message, an inquiry, and an information note out or to get it received. The welcome results are higher motivation, no loss of time and greater sense of responsibility among younger colleagues; Development of an informal reporting style; Teamwork: officers can-independently from their geographic location-work together on a report to the minister, a draft statement, a position paper. The strict delineation between central authority and missions abroad is slowly vanishing;
21 [email protected] Ministerial structures and lines of command at mission are being redefined, flatter authority, more delegation of responsibility are necessary by-products; Introduction of task-oriented structures independent of the physical location of the diplomats involved: limited and geographically dispersed experience or academic background in particular areas (e.g. international law) can more easily be pooled together electronically, thus also creating incentives for the continuous upkeep of specialization (particularly important for smaller services); The introduction of Internet systems leads to fatter lines of authority and increased possibilities for team working. Task-oriented organization will change the relationship between the ministry and Missions abroad; Missions ought to be better integrated into the overall structure of the ministry, including decision making; Integrated resource management needs to preserve the standard functions of missions abroad in relation to their geographic location and combine these functions with new tasks relating to the available expertise in individual mission, which can be employed for specific projects.
Hyperlinks: With the further advance of IT the technique of using hyperlinks in reports and information notes will provide additional opportunities. Hyperlinks can lead the reader towards specific paragraphs of a document, background material or other related reports. This technique, once accepted has the potential of reforming substantially the format of reporting and information sharing.
Websites: As matter of course most Foreign Ministries and more and more individual missions nowadays maintain their own web sites. They assume important information function: presentation of leading personalities, photographs and CVs, lists of embassies and opening hours, what to do if you are about to become a “consular case” in a far away country. In addition web sites can be used as policy oriented tools to: Provide important statements and position papers with some background note (hyperlink); Put more information within easy reach of visitors: statistics, archival sources; Publicize position-papers; Guide visitors through indication of useful links; Create interactive programmes to generate interest in foreign policy issues or to sound out public opinion, web-chats with the minister, letterbox, etc. Websites assume an important function in the “representation” of a country, one of the traditional functions of diplomacy. Web-sites need to be professionally developed and maintained. There has to be close co-ordination of the ministry’s central web-site and those of missions abroad to prevent contradictions and in order to demonstrate corporate identity.
Negotiating per Internet: Advantages: Concentration on content and substance, no “emotional noise”; Clarity, lucidity of formulation, less misunderstandings; Facilitates comparison of texts proposed; Transparency, easy to maintain record of proposals made and revisions added; Time factor: each delegation can work according to its rhythm, time difference can be turned into advantage; Easy and reliable method of establishing the final text; More than two parties can participate; Cost efficient.
Preconditions: Partners must share a common view on the purpose of the negotiations and the timeframe; Ground-rules need to be established (who are the active negotiating partners? With whom can you share the text? Who establishes the final text?) 22 [email protected] It helps to have a central facilitator who maintains control over the process and convenes meeting in person, when needed; Basic trust among negotiating partners must have been established in prior face-to-face meetings and further personal meetings at regular intervals will be needed to advance the process; Within delegations there has to be a clear understanding about delegation of authority (once a proposal has been made electronically it cannot be easily withdrawn); as head of delegation you must be comfortable with a fairly flat structure of hierarchy within your team;
Knowledge Management: The Public Diplomat:
What qualifications does the 21 st century diplomat need? Many of the structural changes that we can discern in international relations today and which will be even more relevant for the future will require important changes in some of the traditional ideas associated with the “art of diplomacy”: Openness instead of secrecy; while this does not mean “open covenants openly arrived at”, it does mean a sincere willingness to communicate with the interested public and explain positions and results achieved; In the age of general mobility of the citizen, diplomacy must also be seen as a “service industry”, helping citizens in need for assistance and advice; To a very large extent networking and teamwork are replacing hierarchy; delegation of authority, and streamlining of administrative procedures and decision-making becomes essential; Not the quantity or sheer speed but the quality of information counts; Diplomacy needs gender equality and must promote equal career possibilities.
What then constitutes the ideal “new age” diplomat? Through mixture of traditional and not so traditional characteristics: A pluri-disciplinary education; A high level of tolerance; Linguistic skills; Neither a “Softie” nor the “elbow type”; Patience to listen and observe; Readiness for life-long learning, mid career Proficiency in intercultural communication; training; Sensitivity to socio-cultural differences; Stress resistance, coolness in crises; Feeling comfortable with the latest Management skills; communications technologies; Ability to work in teams; Ability to perform at ease in public; collaborator instead of competitor; Free of elitism; a keen interest in global issues. Service orientation;
Transcending these requirements is the often-posed question: should the diplomat be a generalist or specialist? The great George Kennan once confirmed the need for both the generalist and the specialist, adding that of the two the generalist will take the more essential and central position: without his leadership and the coordination over the activities of the experts, they would only produce chaos.
Let us look into this issue a bit more in detail: the modern diplomat must in the first instance be a coordination expert. He or she must be able to meet the demands posed by globalization and be able to draw the right conclusions and policy recommendations form international developments, which are more often than not interwoven and mutually supportive. The diplomat must be able, also in small teams, to motivate and show leadership. She or he must be a public relations expert and must have a sound knowledge in foreign policy issues in general as well as in global issues. This “generalist” will also need a sound background in economics
23 [email protected] and should be a seasoned negotiator in theory and practice. In short, our “generalist” is a “specialist” in the art of diplomacy.
However, in particular in the case of smaller foreign services this will not suffice: if we want ot recognize the dire reality of scarce resources of available personnel and funding, we must have our diplomacy specialist, also trained to be a true specialist in one particular domain: e.g. multilateral diplomacy, international law, economic integration, environmental issues or development cooperation. And he or she would expect over the course of the career to be able, more than once, to have a posting where this special knowledge can also be put to use.
Training of diplomats needs to correspond to these new requirements and challenges. It should be able to count on a pluri-disciplinary university education as its base. The training, in addition to the obvious need of language training should include both a thorough and academically founded program acquainting future diplomats with various instruments in the fields of economics, international relations, conflict and crisis management. Regardless of the age-old question whether human beings will ever be able to learn, form history, diplomats need to be well versed in Diplomatic history and have a sound knowledge of law including Human rights law and international trade regulations.
Multi-Track Diplomacy in the 21 st Century
A Look at the World of the 21 st Century: To understand how multi-track diplomacy might play a role in the world of the 21 st century, it is necessary to examine some of the trends in world affairs that are looming on humanity’s horizon as potential threats to global security in the coming era. Let us examine eight of these trends: 1. The Globalization of violence; 2. The Breakdown of Systematic Integrity; 3. The rise of rogues; 4. The depletion of natural resources; 5. The institutionalization of polarization; 6. Challenges to the Nation State; 7. Changing power blocks; 8. The trauma-tization of the Human family;