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: 20
09) 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
I would disagree with you on the issue of climate change. I agree that NGOs are doing a great job in terms of spreading information and "awakening" public and as non-state actors they are changing the way diplomacy is conducted nowadays. However, could you elaborate what do you mean by the following: "climate change is on the agenda for quite a large number of countries nowadays"; do you also mean that they are effectively dealing with the issues of climate change? I personally do not think it is enough to put something on the agenda but to implement policies and follow the environmental law. States have not produced a general agreement. Steven Curtis' comment about Venezuela's representative Claudia Salerno waving her bleeding hand in order to grab the attention has made me look at the whole negotiation and as far as my opinion is concerned, The Copenhagen summit was a debacle. If anyone is interested in this topic, I would suggest to read the following article: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/LLN2010001ClimateChange.pdf.
ReplyDeleteI can only agree that states "only want to be answerable to themselves".
Hi Berta,
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I was unable to access the link to the article you posted. I understand that you think not much action has been put into combating climate change, but I would not expect changes to happen overnight. The fact that states put environmental issues on their agendas is already a big step. The environmental issue is one on which states cannot come to a consensus. This is because it clashes with the states' self-interest most of the time. not to say all the time. The Copenhagen Summit did not come up with a solid agreement as many expected, but I believe that the fact that they gathered in one place and decided to discuss climate change is already an achievement to a certain extent, even if not successful, and worth some praise. We still have to wait and see what will come out of the UNFCCC Bonn Summit in June and the one in Cancún in November 2010.