Trade and environmental diplomacy: What are the key differences between security, trade and environmental diplomacy?

Diplomacy in general has arguably proved to be a successful tool in international relations in recent times although some short falls have been inevitable.

Security diplomacy clearly exhibits the features of the old diplomacy as its dealings, operations and negotiations remain purely among states and conducted in a very secretive manner. The permanent member states in the Security Council of the UN are a typical example of how issues of security are really conducted in an exclusive style.
In addition questions regarding why the US and UK pioneered the Iraq War have not been properly addressed to satisfy the people they serve and on whose vote they rule. In attempts to avoid this pressure from the public, terms like; ‘national security’, ‘national interest’ is used and in the case of the UK, issues deemed to threaten national security are not made public until thirty years.

Trade diplomacy, has been dominantly bilateral in nature for a very long time. Although there have been a good number of interventions through the efforts of intergovernmental organisations, non governmental organisations and the like, the results of these pressures have not been commensurate to their inputs. It is evident the politics involved in trade as links between national interests and economic growth or development remain an undying feature in this arena.

Environmental diplomacy among these three types being discussed has arguably enjoyed a good number NGOs who have made an incredible representation on the international scene covering issues ranging from deforestation, pollution (land, air and water), protection of both plant and animal species near extinction, land mines and climate change. This form of diplomacy bears the pointers of the new kind of diplomacy: subject to public scrutiny. Green peace has been and still is one of the major promoter of the ‘green revolution’

In the future, if most countries stress the need ‘to save our world’ by co operating to cut carbon emissions, allow the operation of fair trade instead of free trade and encourage the representation of more countries on the ‘global south’ on security issues, then would the concept of the new diplomacy be considered as mature.