The term new diplomacy has been coined to describe the diplomacy nowadays but there is no clear cut which divides the structure of the old one from the new one. It has been a gradual progress so for a better illustration, everything that we can see in the conduction of diplomacy nowadays, but was not common in the past, is new diplomacy. There is an ongoing discussion on how much the new diplomacy is new. One of the features of the new diplomacy is a use of modern technologies where people around the world can see news at the same time that those events are going on or heads of states can call each other. However, new technologies cannot replace personal contacts, if any important negotiation is supposed to take place so still negotiators must meet personally. In the modern diplomacy, often heads of states take active part in the negotiation and the number of visits is very high (1). Nothing can replace the old personal contact. It is a similar case with embassies where countries still keep ambassadors in foreign countries because they can keep in touch with people in that foreign country and can have a better understanding than just those who read news. Despite the fact that the new diplomacy can seem to be highly transparent, there are still secrets and as the former British foreign minister Robin Cook among others said the most of the negotiations are done during breaks and behind closed doors. This fact can be further supported for instance when Tony Blair visited George Bush’s ranch before the invasion of Iraq and then he became suddenly a staunch supporter of the invasion or the dubious arguments behind the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan.
(1) http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/trvl/pres/c7383.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment