Diplomacy and me

When we started this module, I was not aware of a distinction between diplomacy and foreign policy. I used to think diplomacy is about always immaculately presented and well organised diplomats enjoying their "high-class" lifestyle while representing their state. Indeed, it seemed to be as an exclusive club. I had a classical state centric approach to diplomacy. I was not fully aware of the development of diplomacy. I hoped this module would help me to understand what does it require to be a diplomat and what is all that communication, negotiation and representation about. I found many definitions of diplomacy but I did not understand what they really mean.

First of all, we were discussing when diplomacy started. Some of us argued that it started with the emergence of a state. I would say that diplomacy started with the formation of the first proto-state systems. I have learned that it is rather difficult to draw a clear line between an 'old' and 'new' diplomacy. We were arguing when the new diplomacy started- was it after the Second World War when groundbreaking social changes occurred as the demise of the aristocracy or with the emergence of world summits and international organisations? We looked at bilateral diplomacy and the role of an embassy. It was interesting to watch how its role evolved especially with the emergence of the Internet. Thanks to this module, I had an opportunity to visit the Swedish embassy. It was a great chance to put my theoretical knowledge into practice. I can say that diplomats are fully aware of the way diplomacy is evolving and what implications it has on their job. I knew they had to be excellent communicators but I was surprised at the range of issues they have to deal with. They have to be experts at many things. Their role does not require only being fully aware of the situation in the country they are staying in and their national situation. They have to lobby for their national businesses, promote investments and tourism in their country and build a massive network of contacts. This had made me more aware of commercial and consuming diplomacy. Having assessed the importance of technological change, public diplomacy seems to me the most important aspect of the new diplomacy and also the topic I enjoyed the most. It is crucial for diplomatic actors to present a good public imagine of the state/organisation they represent as it serves their interest. They can achieve it through blogs, YouTube channels or official websites. Nation branding is very popular. Public diplomacy is also about listening to other actors in international relations and reacting to their criticism. It is about a dialogue. States even create public diplomacy strategies (you might like this video about the future of public diplomacy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PC1b8XZpy8c&feature=related). Another issue we discussed was the emergence of non-state actors in diplomacy. As mentioned before, I had state centric approach o diplomacy and I did not think non-state actors have a significant role in the conduct of diplomacy. I know that I have to consider that there are also many non-governmental organisations, international organisation, multinational corporations, interest groups and even terrorist groups that conduct their own form of diplomacy. For example, non-governmental organisations lobby state decision makers and try to influence how they develop their domestic policies. They also participate in international negotiations. Celebrities can also conduct some kind of diplomacy and they are good at attracting attention to global issues (The Live 8 concert tries to set up the global call action against poverty). I was also interested in environmental diplomacy as I had previously participated in environmental project in my home country. Lately, we discussed international negotiations on environmental issues. In my opinion, they are mostly ineffective because environmental policies are not among the main goals of states' foreign policies. The states obey "soft-law" that encompasses principles and guidelines and they seem reluctant to implement treaties into their policies. I also learned about the paradox of coercive diplomacy. This diplomacy is built on an assumption that an international actor/ state which represents a threat to an international society will behave rationally once confronted by a potential military intervention. However, this method has to be used rather sensibly as a state/ aggressor could also think it has nothing to lose and start waging a war. To sum up, I especially enjoyed themes public diplomacy, environmental diplomacy and diplomacy of the European Union.

Following the readings of scholars specialised in diplomacy, I would say that diplomacy has a dominant position in world politics.
Diplomacy is usually connected with a term "soft-power". As we all know, soft power is always contrasted with hard power- use of military force. Therefore, I hope that diplomacy will keep its position and it will be the first and hopefully the last solution when dealing not only with conflicts but a whole set of issues as it does nowadays.

I think that the success of this module reflects the fact that lot of us is taking another 'diplomatic' module next year: Public and Cultural diplomacy.

Thank you.

My Understanding of diplomacy today

Reflecting on my readings from the previous seminars and discussions my opinion of diplomacy has changed as my understanding has grown.At the start of the module i thought diplomacy was simply the way countries related with each other in terms of their foreign policies. I assumed it was relatively modern in international relations and not dating back to the earliest civilisations. Diplomacy has always been present and has simply evolved over time.The first evidence of diplomacy dates back to around 2500 BC letter inscribed on a cuneiform tablet, sent from the kingdom of Ebla to the kingdom of Hamazi (Malissen 1999:3).These findings about the ancient origins of diplomacy fascinated me quiet frankly.The aspects that i found most intriguing about diplomatic relations where those about cultural diplomacy, religion and the roles of non state actors.

The emergence of new actors in state affairs is one of the most significant aspects of the new diplomacy as negotiations bilateral or multilateral are heavily influenced by these actors.In cases likes environmental summits taking place most developing states are faced with bigger burdens and are not able to send representatives to these summits and the ability of NGO's, to take precedence on behalf of states demonstrates their importance in the new diplomacy.

Religion and culture are aspects of diplomacy that we have found to be very important in the new diplomacy especially in the periods after the Cold War when different ideologies have surfaced through globalisation and the interconnectedness of the international system and the advancement of technology.

Understanding of New Diplomacy

Since we started this module of new diplomacy, there has been a change of perceptions for some of us in regards to the concept of diplomacy - from what is being considered as the original concept of diplomacy that had to be conducted by professional diplomats, to the overly publicized new concept of modern diplomacy of various actors. Over the past few days, it has been intriguing to discover that religion can bee associated with diplomacy in different circumstances. You could say that the Roman Catholic Church has been engaging in what is perceived to be a disreputable public diplomacy in an attempt to deflect the undesirable attention that has been descending onto the Vatican, since the revelations of child sex scandals involving a number of catholic priests. And on the other hand Hezbollah, a religious fundamentalist group with no known diplomatic recognition any where in the world, pledging to aggressively pursue any diplomatic means to over turn a court’s ruling in Cairo, Egypt that convicted 26 members of its groups for the attempted terrorists activities in Egypt (BBC, 29th April 2010). But such a move by Hezbollah can create a dilemma of defining the rightful participants in the conduct of diplomacy – especially when there are some elements of moral question involved, but they also provide a platform for us to analyze diplomacy from a different perspective. The module has widen the channels of understanding the diplomatic conducts of different actors that are not answerable to a particular State, and it has also equipped us with some valuable knowledge of the skills of negotiation by professional diplomats and the importance of their work at local and international level as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8651095.stm

My understanding of diplomacy today

In the beginning of the module I was not really attracted to the module. However afterwards I found it very interesting. I thought that diplomacy is negotiations only however diplomacy itself is an art its not only based on the negotiations but its an art of conducting relationships for gain without conflict.
Its methods include secrecy where secret negotiations takes place one of the main goal of the diplomacy is to further the interests of the state as dictated by history, geography and economics. Preserving widest possible freedom of action for the state as well as integrity and security. Diplomacy basically seeks to to maximise national advantage without using coercion force. In the sphere of Diplomacy Embassies and NGO's play a significant role and has substantial impacts. Representation of NGO's and the way they influence important aspects in our everyday life. Embassies have huge impact basically their job and main goal is to have a good relationship with other countries and try to get full advantage for their country. I have also understood that it is very essential to have a good effective diplomacy. I also learned that new Diplomacy still has certain concepts from old Diplomacy.
Furthermore Non-governmental organisations are components of civil society. The are active in open societies and they cover a broad spectrum of human activity. NGO's affect the diplomatic process when they succeed in rallying public support.
Another significant aspect in diplomacy is propaganda especially in public diplomacy. Propoganda is the manipulation of public opinion through the mass media newspaper and radio also banners on the streets on buses. But bilateral diplomacy between two states is done via embassy. For example in French system embassy diplomacy secrecy means keeping either the fact or the content of the negotiations secret. Ambassadors have to have full representative character.

What is diplomacy today?

The module ‘The New Diplomacy’ has been a journey. Within a space of a few weeks I have acquired such a vast amount of knowledge. Personally, when the module began I believe I had a very limited approach as to what diplomacy or diplomatic practice was. However, since the module began, my understanding and perspective of diplomatic practice has changed considerably. Not only have I spent considerable amount of time looking and trying to understand diplomatic practice through text, but have also had the opportunity to take part in practical mock diplomatic work as well as embassy visits.

What I have learnt throughout this module experience is that diplomacy isn’t one confined between states which is what I thought diplomacy ought to be and that non state actors as well as multilateral forums were ineffective nuisance. But, in a world today that has developed technologically bringing the world closer and enabling a wider arena, the dimension of diplomatic practice has changed. However, the traditional bilateral diplomatic practice is still of great importance.

Tackling bigger issues such as climate change, nuclear proliferation and poverty are better to discuss on a multilateral platform as they are problems that affect people globally. However, national security, border control and immigration are not things that can be dealt with on a multilateral dimension, they are things that concern a nation state.

To summarise, over the last month or two, I have gathered that the change in technology and communication have affected diplomatic practice, but it cannot bring into question its existence. Diplomacy is just as important as it once was, what has had t change is the style of diplomacy.

The new dimension of diplomacy is an essential one in the globalised world today

The most important factor to consider when looking at new diplomacy is that the world we live in now is very different to the one there was especially prior to the end of the Cold War. There has been a rapid advance in technological development and communication enabling the world to come together as a global village. This development has had an impact on the conduct of diplomatic practices. What once used to be traditional diplomacy that was largely conducted bilaterally between two nation states has opened up to a wider arena of diplomatic practice. There are many different influential non state actors in the diplomatic field with considerable with considerable influence alongside the fact that nation states are increasing their participation in multilateral relationships.

An example of the change in diplomatic practice in the European Union; in the post cold war world this Union has enabled the smaller and weaker neighbouring countries to come together in order to form and establish a stronger role on the world stage in facing the challenges that a globalised world faces such as climate change. The union together has many other benefits, of which the biggest one is the economic benefit.

There are many NGOs and other non governmental institutions that have considerable power and impact. An example of an area whereby there have been non-governmental organisations have been effective alongside governments is the Marine Strategy Directive set up to save Europe’s seas and oceans. This directive has been established with the help of both governmental organisations working alongside non-governmental organisations that have expertise in this area.

Commercial Diplomacy.

Commercial diplomacy is diplomacy with commercial twist, designated to influence foreign government policy and regulatory decisions that affect global trade and investment. In the past Commercial Diplomacy concerned itself largely with negotiations over tariffs and quotes on imports but in today's more interdependent world, trade negotiations cover a much wider range of government regulations and actions that affect international commerce including standards in areas such as health, safety, environment, and consumer protection; regulations covering services such as banking, telecommunications and accounting; competition policy and laws concerning bribery and corruptions, agricultural support programs and industrial subsidies.
Commercial Diplomacy encompasses the whole analysis, advocacy, and negotiating chain that leads to international agreements on theses trade-related issues. In the highly interdependent world we live in today, the policy issues subject to trade negotiations are often very complex and touch on a myriad of domestic policy issues, legal provisions, institutional issues and political interests. It requires an in-depth analysis of all the factors that can have a bearing on the policy decision-making process at home and abroad and commercial interest at stake, the macro-economic impact of alternative policy options, the interest of all possible stakeholders and their political influence, the domestic policy issues entwined with the trade issue, the applicable domestic and international legal provisions, and the impact of media coverage on public opinion.
Diplomatic Diplomacy deals with political decision-making and exercising political influence, in fact, issues related to the access of foreigners to domestic markets, their rights to buy domestic assets such as land and businesses, and their qualification to provide a wide range of services are often even more political than purely domestic regulation by governments. Commercial Diplomacy usually requires a heavy dose of domestic policies, both at home and in the foreign country, including the active use of a wide range of advocacy and coalition-building tools.
At home, the Commercial Diplomat must utilize a full range of political advocacy tools and techniques to assure support of the home government for desired outcomes abroad, or to obtain favorable policy actions by the home government in areas such as taxation, export credits, and export controls in line with . To obtain governmental decisions favourable to the stakeholders, the commercial diplomat must be able to make effective use of advocacy tools such as letters, testimony, white papers, speeches, phone calls and personnel visits to key stakeholders and decision-makers. The Commercial Diplomat must also be successful in building coalitions within the government, industry or interest groups, or among stakeholders with political influence, thus increasing the political influence that is brought to bear in support of the desired outcome.
A good example of Commercial Diplomacy twist is that of China. Since late 1990s China has rapidly modified its diplomatic priority and turned more attention and resources to deepening its once lost connection with developing countries in many part of the world, particularly in Africa and Latin America. China has adopted a new trade strategy to penetrate the markets in underdeveloped countries in Africa and Latin America, while continuing trade with the west by carefully examining the Chinese trade partners and trade structure and the diplomatic activities related to trade. These changing trade behaviour is driven by domestic/global market needs or by economic power and importance in global trade, and applying trade penetration as a means to promote its foreign policy goal is a means of expanding trade ties with the developing world, China has to find a way of balancing between the two camps.

Turkey use public diplomacy to strengthen relations with the Arab World

Over the last few decades, there has been much public diplomacy has been described as another form of propaganda by many, but is it?

As we know, public diplomacy is a transparent method adopted by a sovereign country by which it communicates with other countries around the world that influences foreign audiences widely and promotes national interest. Public diplomacy includes activities such as exchange programs, visits, T.V broadcasting, radio and cultural events.

With the development in technology and communication, there is a need for more access and transparency in order to reach out and gain support as well as inform the wider public. This in no way a means of replacing traditional diplomatic practices but as it is mentioned above; it is a means of informing the wider public in order to gain their support on certain issues and matters.

A recent example of public diplomacy is the launch of the channel At Turkiyya by the Turkish government in Arabic in order to unite the Arab and Turkish world as well as break down barriers between them emphasising that this is not propaganda. The previous broadcast that was in Turkey was ‘lost in translation’ which therefore created a misunderstanding, therefore the establishment of At Turkiyyah will enable them to get rid of intermediaries and explain the culture, art and geography as it is in the Arab world. This is in no way replacing traditional diplomacy, but is a good example of what pubic diplomacy aims to achieve and that is to inform the wider foreign audience regarding the sovereign state.

Quantra. (2010) available at: http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_article.php/_c-476/_nr-1319/i.html (accessed on 23/04/2010)

most important aspect of the new diplomacy

The New Diplomacy itself means where citizens play a greater role and has a significant impact on international relations.

Post cold war era created new form diplomacy also known as new diplomacy. In my opinion most important aspect of the new diplomacy in interference emergence of the new actors. Governments keeping (Non Governmental Organisations)NGOs on their side avoids problems and public uprising so it is crucial and beneficial for governments.

There are lots of other ways to operate in diplomatic situations such as bilateral diplomacy, multilateral diplomacy. Another important aspect of the new diplomacy is the new ways they are now able to communicate between states, in delegations, conferences and meetings through propaganda. Nowadays multilateral and bilateral are the main means of resolving conflicts.

Public Diplomacy

Public Diplomacy is a conduct of foreign policy by engagement with foreign public. Music, film, sports diverse citizens to understand each other. In my opinion public diplomacy is one of the tools of the soft power. Main objective of the public diplomacy is to create a positive image view or thought about a particular actor or country. It is in every country's interest to attract foreigners with their cultures traditions and make their country popular among the others. During the cold war between the superpowers U.S.A and U.S.S.R public diplomacy was very popular. Both superpowers competing with each other and trying to attrach other state actors was also part of public diplomacy. When we look at American foreign policy we can see that public diplomacy played a significant role. New advanced technology is very important in exercising public diplomacy and achieving its primary goals. For example after a terrorist attack in september 11th US government tried its best to improve public diplomacy in middle east and in Islamic World.

Most significant change in the nature of diplomacy.

Diplomacy is a process of communication between political entities. One of the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy is the structure of diplomacy. Where states are not only actors involved in diplomacy there are also international organisations. There are two types of international organisations intergovernmental and non-governmental. Intergovernmental is with governments only as members and non-governmental means with groups as members or private individuals. According to Baylis and Smith the increasing number of non-state actors has changed the nature of the new diplomacy and the process of negotiations and decisions. For example establishment of international organisation as League of Nations after the end of Second World War it acted as peaceful settlement of disputes and international forum.

Another significant change in the nature of diplomacy is that it is more open to public scrutiny it is very unlike to traditional diplomacy where diplomacy is usually undertaken in secrecy.

New actors in the field of diplomacy

Government agencies around the globe view information as not only an asset but also a national priority particularly this time of information age where information is considered as a commodity. For those government agencies involved in diplomacy, they are under pressure to rapidly gather, process and disseminate information, they are transforming their relationship with NGOs and non-state actors for the purpose of expanding their information capabilities and resources.Generally speaking non-state actors such as non-governmental organisation(NGOs), International government organizations(IGOs), the media and corporations have a prosperity to effectively deploy and utilize communication technology for innovative information exchange from geographical dispersed sites around the world indicating national governments increasing information dependencies on non-state actors.The impact of new government information partnership afford non-state actors with a more influential role in diplomacy process.
This shows how governments is changing state and non-state communicative dynamics and influences in the new era of diplomacy.

The most important aspect of the new diplomacy: the emergence of new actors

Diplomacy as we have seen throughout this module, has been changing and evolving. The evolution has been made from the traditional diplomacy to the new diplomacy practiced presently. The most important aspect of the new diplomacy is the emergence of new actors in the international system. Actors such as international organisations, NGOs and MNCs. The number of NGOs has risen from 176 in 1909 to 21,026 in 2006. (Leguey-Feilleux, pp 105: 2009) The number of NGOs has had an increase of more than 80% in less than a century. And with that increase in number, came an increase in power and influence.

Leguey-Feilleux states a brilliant example; this being the success in achieving the banning of landmines in December 1997. This was the result of the influence of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the NGOs involved with them, which were more than 1200, on governments. (Ibid, pp 122-128: 2009) As stated by Leguey-Feilleux, ‘it was a remarkable achievement for civil society in the diplomatic process, an example of partnership with governmental institutions.’ (Ibid, pp 128: 2009) Governments have realised that it is in their interest and benefit to keep the NGOs on their side to avoid problems and public uprising. International organisations nowadays have a voice and a say, and help set the international agenda. Even if the issues raised are not dealt with immediately by the government, the international organisations at least manage to shed light on them. Depending on the support of the public and campaigning by the organisation, the issue in question might reach a point where the government will not be able to ignore it anymore and will address it.

Such an issue nowadays is that of climate change. NGOs have put it out in the open and spread the word. People are more and more involved in wanting governments to act in relation to it because it is something that affects everyone. Thus, climate change is on the agenda for quite a large number of countries nowadays. The 2009 Copenhagen Summit spurred a lot of manifestations and demonstrations across the world. In London alone, The Wave demonstration gathered around 20,000-40,000 people. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8396696.st

The role of new actors in the international system is one which is gaining greater strength. The government prefers to keep NGOs on their side as they can be of use to them when it comes to negotiations for example, as a country is more willing to talk to an NGO than to a government sometimes. Diplomacy has been evolving and will continue to do so, as globalisation has done until now.

Leguey-Feilleux (2009) ‘The Dynamics of Diplomacy’ London: Lynne RIenner Publishers

Most Important Aspect of the “New” Diplomacy

The most important aspect of the “new” diplomacy I consider the development in scale that diplomacy can be conducted, that is through multilateral or conference diplomacy.

The main difference between bilateral diplomacy and multilateral diplomacy is that bilateral diplomacy is conducted between two governments on a one-to-one basis, but multilateral diplomacy on the other hand is conducted on a more complex environment, where one government has to deal with several other governments and those other governments in their own turn have to deal with all the other governments, or more simply- “dealing with several governments simultaneously” (Walker, 2004, p-16) “within the organization, while seeking to fulfill the mission given to the organization by the states that created it.”(Leguey-Feilleux, 2009: 217). Though in purpose, both bilateral and multilateral diplomacy are similar in a sense that in both cases states mainly act in their own national interests- as in Multilateral diplomacy is seen as “Acting globally, to benefit locally”. (Walker, 2004, p21)

As for main characteristics of multilateral diplomacy are:

“Parliamentary” or “Diplomacy by parliamentary procedures” or “Open diplomacy”

(note the Press behind)

It is “Open” only on the surface though, because it is argued that genuine agreements and negotiations take place confidentially in a more complex environment, thereby this process is criticized as corruption of diplomacy.

Therefore, one of the most important aspects of multilateral diplomacy is the process through which decisions/agreements are reached, that is through “informal consultations”, that could take place outside of official meetings, during lunches and etc.

Also, during such multilateral or conference diplomacy, the formation of coalitions or blocs play an important role in decision making, where “intrabloc diplomacy” takes place.

As for the reasons why do I consider Multilateral Diplomacy as the main aspect of the “new” diplomacy, because even though similar to conference diplomacy took place during the Concert of Europe in the form of Congresses in 1815-1856, where delegates also met for discussions and negotiations, which constitutes that it is not so “new” after all, I still think that contemporary Multilateral Diplomacy is different, because it is more effective and multidimensional.

This is observable through some of the main purposes of Multilateral Diplomacy:

o Information gathering and pooling, as the process of “peer review”

o Joint projects, that are useful in achieving ones own objectives in the issues that need joint management.

o Management of the external environment, where for example agreements on opening the markets at the WTO (World Trade Organization) can benefit the trade environment in certain regions, or agreements reached on Chemical Weapons Convention can create a more secure environment.

o Influencing behavior, where “governments who wish to influence are within the sovereign control of other states”. (Walker,2004, p18)

o Entering into mutually beneficial contracts, where both states should end up with good deals.

o Domestic agenda salvation processes, where states “see the international scene primarily as an extension of the domestic” (Walker,2004, p19).

o Reactive character of states, where if one state brings up a topic, other state that is in concern has to follow suit (even if the state would rather to dismiss the topic) in order to ensure that its own interests are not damaged.

o Meetings take place in routine-annually or at regular intervals planned basis.

(Walker, 2004, pp:16-20)

Thus, as Walker argues: “Multilateral Diplomacy is not different in purpose from bilateral diplomacy; it is merely one of the implements in the toolkit available to governments for coping with issues as they arise” (Walker, 2004, p-21).

Bibliography:

Leguey-Feilleux, Jean-Robert, (2009), The Dynamics of Diplomacy , Lynne Rienner Publishers, London.

Walker, Ronald A.,(2004) Multilateral Conferences: Purposeful International Negotiation. Studies in Diplomacy and International Relations, Palgrave Macmillan.

Pictures available at:

http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/8KQfXW-Q3ov/IMF+WB+2008+Fall+Meetings+Washington+DC

Most important aspects of the new diplomacy

Mulitilateral diplomacy usually includes bilateral diplomacy somehow within its own framework in how negotiations are carried out,the forming of blocs within individual interests can be seen to happen and to a certain extent undermine the multilateral aspect of diplomacy.

States need to consult individual embassies that they may have set abroad before actually raising important suggestions at these multilateral diplomatic conferences and hence the inclusion of bilateral diplomacy within the framework of multilateral diplomacy.

It is also important to note that the emergence of multilateral diplomacy is not only beyond the twentieth century but dates back to earlier examples from the persian world fourth centuries BC (watson,p85-8).Within the European system of states,somewhat chaotic multilateral conferences devoted to peace settlements were a feature of the 17th century(Berridge,p151).

However with the evolving nature of the international system mutliateral diplomacy has certainly evolved in its forms of inclusion and openess,whether it can be seen to bypass bilateral diplomacy is arguable, i argree more with the aspect that the two go hand in hand and it is almost impossible to completely override bilateral diplomacy.

After the cold war and events leading further on into the September 9/11 attacks on the United states of America the most important changes to diplomacy can be seen as the inclusion and openess of multilateral conferences.It is important to note that this does not mean multilateral diplomacy has been overtly successful as most important descisions and negotiations do happen bilaterally as with example of the UN security council.

The inclusion of NGOs within multilateral negotiations is also an important aspect within the new diplomacy although they may not have the same weight as other state actors they raise important awareness to certain issues due to their levels of expertise within a particular subject as with, the environment that state actors may overlook.

Frank

Less glamour- multitasking

In a technologically advanced world, states and citizens are becoming more integrated. Therefore, it could be argued that diplomacy is also affected by this process and it has lost its privileged status due to this integration. Bolewski argues that changes in the character of diplomacy are due to several factors such as “accelerating globalization, new participants in globalized world and internationalization of domestic politics."(Bolewsi 2007: 16). I would argue that one of the most important aspect of the new diplomacy is the fact that “diplomat no longer has a controlling monopoly in carrying out diplomatic tasks” (Roberts 2009: 20). Indeed, diplomacy can be conducted not only by state institutions but also by non-governmental organizations, activists, businessmen, artists or academics. If diplomacy is as Satow states “conduct of business between states by peaceful means” (Roberts 2009: 1) then these actors definitely help to build peaceful bridges and promote a good image of their state. Diplomats have to be more prepared when addressing their communication skills than before because establishing good relations and contacts with media can be sometimes as difficult as dealing with the foreign government. New diplomacy has to be more flexible as is the environment which surrounds it- global network society. As Riordan points out,
“ Economy, trade, finance, human rights, the environment and organized crime are all issues that we now have to deal with at the international level... this represents a major intrusion into the diplomatic word of domestic politics and political agendas” (Riordan 2003:3). To sum up, new diplomacy addresses more issues, it is conducted by a broader range of actors and it is constantly “in the spotlight”.

Wilfried Bolewski, Diplomacy and International Law in Globalized Relations, (Berlin: Springer, 2007)
Sir Ivor Roberts (ed.), Satow’s Diplomatic Practice, 6th edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009)
Shaun Riordan, The New Diplomacy (Cambridge: Polity, 2003)

Aspects of New Diplomacy

The international political system, of the post cold war era created a process that breed a new form of diplomacy that challenges the conception of national sovereignty together with the structures of traditional diplomacy. Unlike traditional diplomacy, it needs to be emphasized that this new form of diplomacy emerged out, but not moulded from the development of a sovereign state, instead, it can be argued that the forces of globalisation induced new diplomatic structures that invaded the principles of a sovereign state to set the rules of its economical and political systems, to determine the behaviours of its own people, and the structures of its foreign policy. Although the old diplomatic structures are still withstanding in the new global political system – the strength of their role has been weakened by unconventional new diplomatic conduct of non-state actors to the point of the inquest of their relevancy in the modern international system.

New diplomacy of non-state actors (NGOs, Pressure groups, Multinational corporations) has bypassed the traditional state embassy and penetrated to the core areas of bilateral and multilateral negotiations between states on the range of international issues such as; cultural, environmental, trade, financial, security, humanitarian and human rights. Globalisation created a global nomadic lifestyle for international citizens in searching for; advanced knowledge, business opportunities, settlements, attractions and employment. The advancement in technology has allowed information to be transmitted faster to the international public making it insignificant for citizen to contact their embassies for information of a foreign country. Embassies are no longer the sole distributors of foreign information. For example, Google map technology - allows potential visitors to view the geographical location of the destination in another country. Diplomats of new diplomacy utilises this technology to create global network for interacting, campaigning, lobbying and negotiating about a range of international issues.

Diplomacy within the public eye

The international system is an essential part in looking at the extent to which globalisation anarchy and interdependence have lead sovereign states to communicate and relate with each other through public diplomacy.

Challenges that have faced the United States and mainly the west such as the Cold war and the September 9/11 attacks can be viewed as bringing a greater importance and transforming public diplomacy.

The war on terror that was lead by President George Bush during his time in office saw the invasions of Iraq and subsequently Afghanistan.The extents and consequences of these wars have seen questions arise not only in the eyes of the world but very importantly in the minds of people duelling in the countries involved.

Clarification is required through diplomacy towards these countries in order to bring about an understanding and bridge the negativity that may tarnish the images of these countries invading their territories.

The recent unexpected visit of Prince Charles to Iraq to enlighten the troops fighting in Basra was deemed as not welcome by the lay people of Basra due the occupation of British troops in their motherland.

Whether the visit was superficial and mainly for his own benefits as said by some of the locals,an important form of public diplomacy can be seen as he managed to meet with senior members of the community such as Basra's governor Abdull Latif and the Archbishop Gabriel Kassab of the Christian community.

The risk of Prince Charles being in Iraq was imminent hence the secrecy prior to his visit meeting with local community bridges some misunderstandings and may clear critics about his visit within the local community and uplift the general view of the local people to the troops in this area of Basra.

http://www.turks.us/article.php?story=20040210074636257

Frank