XX century brought a significant change into the system of diplomacy. The transition from traditional system to the so called "new diplomacy" did not take place without a reason though and according to many theorists, the main reason was the First World War (White, 2001). However, I believe there are some elements or habits which survived and are still of some (good) use in the globalized nagotiations network.
Journalist Kenneth Weisbrode highlights the fact that not only is the traditional diplomacy still haunting the new system but it is going to be of even higher importance soon, as there are already talks for instance between the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the British Tories leader David Cameron about the reinvention of diplomatic system for the 21st century with a remarkable accordance to "the old diplomacy" (Weisbrode, 2010).
What is it that modern diplomacy derives from the classic system? From various dimensions on which diplomacy operates, each diplomat or State usually picks some of the "traditional" methods which he/it can efficiently use in a particular situation. For instance, even the global network's strong supporter and the new, open diplomacy follower- the U.S. and its foreign ministry, due to its difficult relations with China is actually very likely to use some of the old fashioned "ways of doing business" (Weisbrode, 2010). Is it going to be treaties, ambassadors? It's an interesting issue to observe judging by how Kenneth Weisbrode describes it.
Speaking of negotiations, even though Internet and technology have immensely developed in the times of globalization and are some of the most popular, yet efficient communication tools, a slight reluctancy to adopt them can be observed among diplomats (Riordan). When it comes to the most important communications, many diplomats still prefer the "traditional" handshake and face to face contact, not to mention the elegant receptions and gastronomically sophisticated dinners instead of video conferences.
One of the most visible links with the "old sytem" is probably also the presence of the resident ambassy and everlasting attention given its main residence's "brick and mortar" appearance (Berridge).
Another example of the "old dog's" presence can be the the fact that states are still forming bilateral groups or even blocks of interest as they used to (example can be the Copenhagen summit on climate change in 2009) just to create a balance of power. Especially the poorer and smaller states which have practically no influence on the global issues try to seek security this way. That's not really what Woodrow Wilson was hoping for in his 1918 pro-international-networking speech proclaiming the rise of the "New Diplomacy". Judging by this example states do behave according to the realism's theory. Sometimes they do not only seek security but also power (as for instance Venezuela) and it's also reflected by their diplomacy, which happens to resemble what once upon a time was calles "machtpolitik".
Among other persisting elements journalists also mention: "the alignment of foreign policies with national and regional interest, the preference for the possible over the merely desirable, and the cultivation of what are today called "confidence building measures"." (Weisbrode, 2010).
Change of the diplomatic system is obvious, it is just progress. Still, the "new diplomacy" sticks to some of the good, old and known methods, but are we by any chance going to face the future "back to the past" in diplomacy?
It is unlikely that the US and the UK can dictate terms on the rest of the world as they used to so I disagree with Weisbrode's emphasis unless the 5 permanent members stitch up the system to favour themselves in legal terms. The growing power of China is evident, their financial stock of currency dollars and buying power in economic terms continues to rise and their influence in spheres of interest that have resources that they need continues apace. In the news yesterday it was announced that the Chinese government now has the most powerful computer on the planet it is called the Tianhe-1A supercomputer in China at the National Supercomputing Center in Tianjin. A powerful weapon to have in any countries arsenal.
ReplyDelete