Traditional Diplomacy

Traditional diplomacy had been under attack for the number of reasons in different period of time. And it is clear indication of the declining of traditional diplomacy this is due to number of factors including the rapid advances in transport and communication and also traditional diplomats insufficient knowledge of 'low politics'. However the importance of Bilateral institutions still evident. For example there was a period of success such as the Veinna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961[VCDR]. VCDR was only dealing with bilateral deplomacy. International organization was not involved.

For certain extent the rise of modern communication reduced the importance of for professional diplomats to be in foreign lands in which with high development of speedy communication tools such as Internet, telephone, satellite make it easier for foreign ministry office or state department to make direct contact with foreign government. And the negotiation can be conducted by foreign office high-ranking official. As Morgenthau stated '' the modern technology of communication has made the shuttle diplomacy possible''. And the rapid development of communication has made Multilateral or Conference Diplomacy unavoidable.

In addition summitry diplomacy has undermined the traditional diplomacy this can be said that the heads of government can make direct contributions to international negotiations though this could be pitfalls of summitry in which heads of states would probably have not essential details of the negotiation undertaken. Moreover traditional diplomacy has been attacked for the style in which it has been conducted the claim is that traditional diplomats are only concerned with 'high politics'

Although the above mentioned factors undermined the importance of Bilateral institutions. but the professionalism and the institutions are still making invaluable contribution. Bilateral as multilateral is necessary in international politics. therefore traditional diplomacy is not outmoded