Wednesday, 25 March 2009

What is the most important aspect of the new diplomacy?

The main difference we can appreciate from the ‘old diplomacy’ transformation to a ‘new diplomacy’ is the way of how politics are based now, firstly no more politics behind ‘close-doors’, an open dialogue between countries, giving place to a new and dynamic ‘public diplomacy’ where politics are now more transparent and where the citizens have a greater role. Secondly the ‘Para-diplomacy’ of non state actors and the rise of the media as a soft power. Thirdly a Multilateral-diplomacy, have completely changed the way diplomacy is conducted. In my opinion these three factors are crucial in today’s diplomacy, and it is difficult to look at it without one. Nevertheless for me, NGOs are the most important aspect in new diplomacy, they have affected not only the way diplomacy is conducted, it also has imposed new rules to the game, and most of the time have been the political decisions-makers for most of the countries. In some cases NGOs such as multinationals corporations had gain equal status and rights as countries have, and used it against countries who opposed them, eroding their sovereignty in an incredible way. They have been playing the role of diplomats so well, that today their impact is crucial in first and third world countries. As an example we just have to look at Shell Oil in Nigeria, ‘Maquiladoras’ in Guatemala, the Roman Catholic Church, Al-Qaeda in USA or what sub Americans-state units had done to controlled and ruled the Canal Zone in Panama. NGOs have immense influence in the international system, participating in the majority of global diplomacy, and even to challenge global rules. However the roles non state actors play and the influence they exert, depend on political, economic, and social context.

5 comments:

  1. Jose
    Some really good points here and The recent Cluster Munitions Treaty is a testament to what can be done when States and NGO's work together.

    But that work had to be done outside the main institutional architecture and although few will admit it there were really risks of creating a new norm with few countries who had any real equity in upholding it. Also it demonstrates that many states within the existing architecture still has to really buy-into the New Diplomacy.

    A final point is that NGOs sometimes have a problem bringing such exercises to a conclusion since so many of them are lobbying organisations. I don't suggest that his is un-important but it can lead to a tendancy to constantly "up the ante" and see any compromise as a sell-out.
    For more thoughts on the new Diplomacy in practice see my own blog.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is true that NGOs has been playing an increasing important role on the development of public diplomacy mainly because is seen as a credible insitution in the eyes of the public that are also engaging more actively in diplomatic relation. Nevertheless, i would not go so far as to assert that NGOs have equal right to state concerning decision making, or that multinational coorporation have the same role than NGOS. Howerver you made a very interesting point about the role of those MNTc have in the process of desicion making in developing countries, well done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would agree with Suely regarding the limit to NGOs as diplomatic actors - increasingly we are seeing non state actors participating in diplomacy, but by no means are they as involved in the decision making process as traditional players. I think the way in which they are limited is arguably quite intentional on the state's behalf - by inviting NGOs to join in conferences etc, they are able to limit their say in the process. Having said that - the contributions of NGOs is still valuable, and their co-operations with states has proven to be successful in some cases that you have pointed out.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Jose,

    I like your bringing into question the different and new aspects of the new diplomacy. Certainly and without doubt I support the idea that the influence of NGOs today grows with a rapid speed therefore it takes an important place in decision-making process. I also support your point about the place of multinational corporations in the diplomatic sphere- they do have an immense power, sometimes leaving no choice for the state government to act on its own. Those are powerful corporations, who could offer employment, flows of FDI and much more to the state in terms of economy, which makes the latter vulnerable and weak.
    However, coming back to your point that politicians are transparent today- I personally would not say so. I do not believe that politicians will ever be trasparent and more open, neither do I believe that honesty is their strong feature. The view of Joseph Nye about soft power, being able to make others want what you want without force is a very useful skill and tool,which I think the good politicians today are able to use very efficiently.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear Jose
    The debate takes a different slant if one looks at The Nuclear Disarmament debate. CND a shadow of it's former self. The role of the former Cold War politicians in pushing forward the debate is fascinating, echoing what we have seen in Climate Change.
    Most of you are probably thinking about exams, but for those who want to follow the NPT meeting in New York, I will be posting on Twitter for the next 2 weeks jduncanMACD
    Regards John

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.