This blog constitutes my first attempt at using a group blog on a class-taught module. While it had a number of clear benefits in terms of developing students' writing and enabling them to comment on each other's work, there were some problems. Not least was the fact that on a blog with 50 students all posting their entries at similar times on similar themes, the blog became repetitive and overloaded. To address this problem, I have set up seven groups blogs of ten or so students each for the current semester. Please follow and comment on their work on the following blogs:
http://newdiplomacy2010a.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010b.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010c.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010d.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010e.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010f.blogspot.com/
http://newdiplomacy2010g.blogspot.com/
Thursday, 18 February 2010
Sunday, 31 January 2010
How can means used in 'public diplomacy' facilitate this incident?
Although it has been a while since we completed the 'New Diplomacy' module with Steven, I just wanted to share something which has been in the news for quite some time now.
Back in October (23rd) last year, a British couple Rachel and Paul Chandler were kidnapped by Somali pirates whilst sailing along the Indian Ocean on their yacht. Three months on, and the British couple remain in pirate's hand. David Miliband, Foreign Secretary, has made clear that the British government will not get involved in any 'ransom payment' in order to secure the release of Mr and Mrs Chandler. Miliband further deliberates that the British government has never been attracted to the idea of making 'concessions' to 'hostage-takers', rendering such incident plus the request to 'oblige' (by paying the demanded 'random') is not in Britain's interests.
This kind of response reminds me of Peter R. Neumann's claim when he said that 'democracies must never give in to violence, and terrorists must never be rewarded for using it. Negotiations give legitimacy to terrorists and their methods and undermine actors who have pursued political change through peaceful means. Talks can destabilize the negotiating governments' political systems, and undercut international efforts to outlaw terrorism' (Neumann, R. P (2007), 'Negotiating With Terrorists', Foreign Affairs on-line).
Returning to the Somali pirates case, would Britain's reaction in a way be representing its 'commitment' and 'compliance' with internationally accepted measurements in countering piracy?
British High Commissioner, Rob Macaire, based in Kenya, informed the BBC (in the early aftermath of the incident) that: '...our main concern is to make them understand that what they are doing is entirely unjustified and that they should release the Chandlers immediately and unconditionally'.
From a 'new diplomacy' point of view, British government response to the £4.3 million random demanded by the pirates resembles a form of 'hard power'. 'Hard power' in this context involves the British government and its foreign affairs officials to engage in (via 'media' channels) 'disciplining' the 'wrong-doers (pirates), and reaffirm the international protocol against such unjust activities. Despite the application of 'hard power', Whitehall officials and the government have an expert 'hostage negotiator' on stand-by as the event unravel.
Could the Somali pirate's reluctance to release the Chandlers be due to the fact that a similar hijacking (on the 29th November, 2009) of a Greek supertanker 'Marcan Centaurus' (carrying a $156 million worth of oil/or equivalent to two million barrels of oil) by another pirate gang off the coast of Somalia...successfully received a $7 million ransom as they freed the Greek ship..
Similar outcomes also apply for the Saudi-owned 'Sirius Star' supertanker, it was hijacked in November 2008, and freed in January 2009, as the hijackers received a concession of $3 million in ransom.
Back in October (23rd) last year, a British couple Rachel and Paul Chandler were kidnapped by Somali pirates whilst sailing along the Indian Ocean on their yacht. Three months on, and the British couple remain in pirate's hand. David Miliband, Foreign Secretary, has made clear that the British government will not get involved in any 'ransom payment' in order to secure the release of Mr and Mrs Chandler. Miliband further deliberates that the British government has never been attracted to the idea of making 'concessions' to 'hostage-takers', rendering such incident plus the request to 'oblige' (by paying the demanded 'random') is not in Britain's interests.
This kind of response reminds me of Peter R. Neumann's claim when he said that 'democracies must never give in to violence, and terrorists must never be rewarded for using it. Negotiations give legitimacy to terrorists and their methods and undermine actors who have pursued political change through peaceful means. Talks can destabilize the negotiating governments' political systems, and undercut international efforts to outlaw terrorism' (Neumann, R. P (2007), 'Negotiating With Terrorists', Foreign Affairs on-line).
Returning to the Somali pirates case, would Britain's reaction in a way be representing its 'commitment' and 'compliance' with internationally accepted measurements in countering piracy?
British High Commissioner, Rob Macaire, based in Kenya, informed the BBC (in the early aftermath of the incident) that: '...our main concern is to make them understand that what they are doing is entirely unjustified and that they should release the Chandlers immediately and unconditionally'.
From a 'new diplomacy' point of view, British government response to the £4.3 million random demanded by the pirates resembles a form of 'hard power'. 'Hard power' in this context involves the British government and its foreign affairs officials to engage in (via 'media' channels) 'disciplining' the 'wrong-doers (pirates), and reaffirm the international protocol against such unjust activities. Despite the application of 'hard power', Whitehall officials and the government have an expert 'hostage negotiator' on stand-by as the event unravel.
Could the Somali pirate's reluctance to release the Chandlers be due to the fact that a similar hijacking (on the 29th November, 2009) of a Greek supertanker 'Marcan Centaurus' (carrying a $156 million worth of oil/or equivalent to two million barrels of oil) by another pirate gang off the coast of Somalia...successfully received a $7 million ransom as they freed the Greek ship..
Similar outcomes also apply for the Saudi-owned 'Sirius Star' supertanker, it was hijacked in November 2008, and freed in January 2009, as the hijackers received a concession of $3 million in ransom.
Sunday, 29 November 2009
"A very diplomatic blog: British ambassadors worldwide tell (nearly) all on the web"
It seems only appropriate - if a little self-referential - that I should use this blog to highlight a very interesting piece in The Guardian on the growing use of Web 2.0 by British diplomats and ambassadors. For the full article click on the title above. It includes the reflections of Ambassador John Duncan, who has generously commented on some of the students' work on this blog.
Friday, 29 May 2009
International issues and controversies
Hello everyone,
Hope your exams went well and you are all enjoying your holidays. Apart from that, I would like to introduce you to the blog I have created called 'international issues and controversies' available at http://worlddilemmas.blogspot.com.
Take look at it and if interested, you are more than welcome to join.
Best wishes,
Hope your exams went well and you are all enjoying your holidays. Apart from that, I would like to introduce you to the blog I have created called 'international issues and controversies' available at http://worlddilemmas.blogspot.com.
Take look at it and if interested, you are more than welcome to join.
Best wishes,
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Visit to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
On 24th April some of the New Diplomacy students and I attended a wonderful morning of activity at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. We heard from a variety of speakers, including the desk officer for Burma and officials dealing with export licences and arms control issues. Before lunch we were treated to a tour of the buildings by the FCO's historian Kate Crowe. A very informative and entertaining morning. Many thanks to Martin Garrett for inviting us and for being such a welcoming host.
Wednesday, 13 May 2009
Just a thought, and in reference to February's blog on 'the alleged torture of British resident and detainee in Guantanamo Bay'
At the start of the semester one of our classmate posted a blog regarding the alleged torture of a British resident and detainee in Guantanamo Bay.
Recently, and thanks to the perseverance of Mr Binyam Mohamed (the former detainee) lawyers along with several media organizations such as the The Times newspaper, NY Times, The Guardian News & Media and the BBC has led the High Court to take rather unusual measures in reopening the case of the former British Guantanamo detainee.
At the start of the year, the UK agreed to US's request not to disclose details on manners in which US officials handled the detainee; however recent pressures from the media and human rights organisations have manged to trigger a re-inquiry into the matter.
Last week the director of human rights organisation 'Reprieve', said:
'It is long past time that this evidence was made public...... How can it be that two governments that purport to uphold the rule of law be working together to cover up crimes committed against Binyam Mohamed?'
The reasons behind me posting this blog is to ask whether the current scenario may turn into (what Hirut earlier in February suggestsd) 'a diplomatic crisis'. Can this incident, providing the High Court continues the process of re-opening the case.....to some extent harm the UK-US so called 'special relationship'?
Or does this news event illustrate the power and influence of international organisations (in this case a 'human rights oriented' group) along with media firms divert or re-direct government's courses of actions/behaviour?
Recently, and thanks to the perseverance of Mr Binyam Mohamed (the former detainee) lawyers along with several media organizations such as the The Times newspaper, NY Times, The Guardian News & Media and the BBC has led the High Court to take rather unusual measures in reopening the case of the former British Guantanamo detainee.
At the start of the year, the UK agreed to US's request not to disclose details on manners in which US officials handled the detainee; however recent pressures from the media and human rights organisations have manged to trigger a re-inquiry into the matter.
Last week the director of human rights organisation 'Reprieve', said:
'It is long past time that this evidence was made public...... How can it be that two governments that purport to uphold the rule of law be working together to cover up crimes committed against Binyam Mohamed?'
The reasons behind me posting this blog is to ask whether the current scenario may turn into (what Hirut earlier in February suggestsd) 'a diplomatic crisis'. Can this incident, providing the High Court continues the process of re-opening the case.....to some extent harm the UK-US so called 'special relationship'?
Or does this news event illustrate the power and influence of international organisations (in this case a 'human rights oriented' group) along with media firms divert or re-direct government's courses of actions/behaviour?
Friday, 1 May 2009
My understanding of diplomacy today
My first opinions about diplomacy were that diplomacy is similar to a pyramid in which you have the base, the foundations in the old diplomacy and then you continue to add layers to it and it becomes more diverse and complex similar to the international system that we live in now. This view has not changed drastically, I still see diplomacy as a feature deeply rooted in international politics, and the methods of the old diplomacy still exsist and will continue to exsist so long as we live through a Realists assumption of the world. However, my opinions about the role of diplomacy have altered slightly. I wasnt aware of the extent that diplomacy is needed throughout all arenas of international politics from the environment, to trade, finance, and security, and international policy making and treaties. My awareness of diplomacy was restricted to foreign policy and foreign relations. I am now much more aware of the significance of diplomacy in international politics and the role that individuals have in creating that. It has made me think a lot about the voting system, individual parties and non governmental organization that have a stronger impact than I believed, especially in Western countries. It has also made me think about the diplomatic process and systems used in Europe and North America versus the rest of the world and how much more progress we need.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
