Key differences between trade, security and environmental diplomacy.

The areas of security, trade and environmental all appear to be quite different they do however having overlapping areas, particularly in regard to the environment and security, which are increasing all the time. The major difference between security and the other two areas has to be the fact that security diplomacy is often and quite rightly carried out in a secretive manner, along more traditional lines. Security is an area which is and should continue to be managed by trained persons with expertise in this area. Tied to the secretive nature of diplomacy, is the use of back channels between higher level statespersons. This provides a way for states (more specifically heads of states) to conduct diplomacy on a personal and one to basis and not in the gaze of the public or media and can have very positive and rapid results. A good example of this is the use of back channels by Robert Kennedy and Ambassador Dobrynin during the Cuban missile crisis. As well as using the more traditional methods of diplomacy when it comes to security the world has also taken on a more unified and multilateral approach through the use of organisations like the UN, NATO and the AU. These provide a centralised manner for security issues to be resolved. I feel this shows security to be quite unique in the field of diplomacy.

Trade Diplomacy is an area which is changing, with more and more people and groups becoming involved in it. It also seems to evoke strong emotions with mass protests taking place when groups such as the G20 meet. Trade is an area which is beginning to have a greater focus on the environment with concern for issues such as the degradation of land through over farming and clearing of rainforests. Both trade and security have similarities in that they are issues which no state can afford to ignore and constantly seek to have a greater influence or involvement in.

In contrast to trade and security diplomacy, the environment is something that affects everyone regardless. It is incredibly complicated area for diplomacy and attempts at a unified global response (The Kyoto protocol) seem to constantly fail with states such as the US refusing to sign up to it. This demonstrates one of the major differences between trade and security, where states have a vested interest in being involved whereas the environment in some eyes is seen as a far lesser issue. It is however becoming more prevalent with the environment itself is becoming a security concern as earths natural resources become scarcer the threat of conflict over what remains becomes greater.