Do you think the ‘old’ diplomacy has any contemporary relevance?

In the old days there was indeed great contemporary relevance. There is always a link between new diplomacy and old diplomacy. There are obvious diplomacy where all the people read it on newspapers watch it on televisions there are also secret diplomacy and it still exists. In my opinion this issue outlines once again that there is a link between old diplomacy and new diplomacy. Old model of diplomacy has its success and failures. In my opinion old model of diplomacy is reflecting views of conservatism. Basically diplomats were making negotiations on the basis of national interest and global interest. When it comes to policy formulation or decision making process ambassadors impacts on it are limited. The word secrecy refering to negotiations being done behind the curtains hidden basically. Secrecy is born with Diplomacy. Essential negotiations usually take place in EU and UN centers which mainly discuss and come to decision about global world and global problems and its solutions furthermore interests of both state actors. Bilateral negotiations and agreements are a key concepts in diplomatic sphere.

In nowadays old diplomacy still has its traditional views and impacts on new diplomacy. In my opinion old diplomacy does have contemporary relevance because every country has its own principals and culture and the way of understanding. A classical example year 2002 where George.W.Bush and T.Blair had hidden secrecy agreement diplomacy in U.S.A they had discussions about middle east and other aspects however afterwards no officials were present they had discussions and talks in private. Therefore important decisions were made about invasion of Iraq 2003.