The New Diplomacy

The New Diplomacy: Following the discussions seminars 5 and 7,
in your opinion what is the most important aspect of the new diplomacy?

New diplomacy differs from the old system of the diplomatic practice in a number of respects. It refers to the diplomatic talk among more than two states, usually happening through conferences and different international forums.
It is described as a tool helping to discuss so called ‘low politics’ and also many other issues that would normally not be discussed by the states on bilateral basis because it is actually multilateral diplomacy that brings attention to international or better sais global issues such as environment, trade, health and many others.
The last aspect is that it is believed to be open to public scrutiny. It was Woodrow Wilson who came with the idea that diplomacy needs to be open and accessible to the public so that the agreements and treaties are available to anybody. He banned ‘secret diplomacy’ wherein it was nothing surprising if treaties included secret deals of states.
In my point of view the most important aspect of the whole notion is the fact that multilateral diplomacy puts a number of states together and creates a space for international discussion. In any conference it is a big opportunity for states to confront each other with their own opinions and see different interests and attitudes of the actors because seeing the situation clearly helps to reach a solution to some of the global problems. It is more practical to simply organize a forum for a large group of states rather than try to reach an agreement on some issues through several bilateral meetings.
Another advantage of the practice is, as already mentioned above, the tendency to look at global issues. Walker argues that if not by using conference diplomacy, states would never come to talk about broader controversies because it is the diplomacy that raises such issues and makes states consider them and reach agreements of them. If these are agreed on as standards then states usually apply them and implement the policies on the national level in their domestic policies which clearly helps to make difference from the bottom.
Thirdly, international organizations and institutions that give space for talks sometimes create international programs that focus on particular policy in some area. Because more states are involved in them it can increase the affectivity of these programs. It also catches the media attention as conferences are depicted as important for international political stage. Mass media coverage helps to keep the public informed and thanks to reports right from the spot shapes the public opinion.
My next point is that even though some analysts argue that multilateral diplomacy is ineffective and wasteful because it does not necessarily ends up with the result of agreement my point is that it is a good thing that multilateral talk does not have to bring a result of agreement or a disagreement as oppositely to bilateral diplomacy. More states are involved and certainly every one of them has its own interests and agenda and does not want to compromise on issues so logically it makes the whole process longer and harder to come to some resolution. The positive aspect of it is that it is not wasteful to exchange information and experience about the discussed policies although the decision is not reaches immediately. It lets states interact with each other which is essential in order to come to possible compromises.
Overall even when it might seem that multilateral diplomacy is not that quick in changing the policies and the behaviour of states it brings a lot of opportunities and indirect politics making possibilities.