OR
???
The evolution of diplomacy: Write about what you consider to be the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy. Give your reasons and provide illustrations
The Emergence of Development Diplomacy
As diplomacy, defined as being a process of communication which is central to the workings of the global system, fundamentally is applied to world politics in order to secure global order, peace and stability, it may be interesting to look at the ways in which diplomacy has evolved continuously as the perception and definition of human security has changed, particularly throughout the past century (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 388.)
In traditional diplomacy, governments were to a great extent mainly concerned with the physical security of their citizens. With the emergence of the new diplomacy after the First World War however, governments, highly influenced by the Inter-Governmental and Non-Governmental Organisations which continuously increased their role in diplomacy and international decision-making, broadened their views on the importance of the different aspects of human security and soon looked to the social and economic well-being of people, in addition to the very safety of their lives, as crucial features of diplomacy (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 389-392.)
Throughout the Cold War, the main agenda of diplomacy was to avoid a global nuclear catastrophe and one may argue that human development and progress was only of little concern to the international community. The fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989 however, marked the emergence of Development Diplomacy, as the world witnessed a significant humanitarian consciousness arise. Now the agenda of issues was wider than ever before, and with both bilateral and multilateral actors at work, concerns of poverty and development played a central part in diplomacy (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 392-394.)
Development Diplomacy has now developed into an essential component of foreign policies, so much that the government of the United States of America recognises the importance of international development and diplomacy in securing a peaceful and stable world on equal grounds with military force. In this way, they have shown a commitment to cooperating with both Non-Governmental and International Organisations in the name of Development Diplomacy, effectively dismissing the ways of the traditional diplomacy with its solely bilateral approach, exclusiveness and secrecy (www.state.gov, www.usaid.gov and geneva.usmission.gov.)
In fact, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has stated, while speaking at “The first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review” (QDDR) in 2009 that the current American administration sees development to be
“...one of the most powerful tools we have for advancing global progress, peace, and prosperity.”
(http://www.usaid.gov/press/frontlines/fl_aug09/p1_clinton080902.html)
Keeping in mind that global progress, peace and prosperity are the very goals of diplomacy, Clinton stresses the upmost importance of Development Diplomacy today. - An opinion I most certainly share as I believe that an open and inclusive diplomacy, which caters to all people, must be considered of paramount significance in a globalised world.
American "Smart Power": Diplomacy and Development Are the Vanguard, U.S. Department of State, 2009
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/scp/fs/2009/122579.htm
Clinton Announces Development Diplomacy Strategic Review, US Aid, 2009
http://www.usaid.gov/press/frontlines/fl_aug09/p1_clinton080902.html
Secretary Clinton: Development And Diplomacy Core Elements of Foreign Policy, Alongside Defense, United States Mission, 2010
http://geneva.usmission.gov/2010/05/09/clinton-foreign-affairs-day-2010/
The Emergence of Development Diplomacy
As diplomacy, defined as being a process of communication which is central to the workings of the global system, fundamentally is applied to world politics in order to secure global order, peace and stability, it may be interesting to look at the ways in which diplomacy has evolved continuously as the perception and definition of human security has changed, particularly throughout the past century (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 388.)
In traditional diplomacy, governments were to a great extent mainly concerned with the physical security of their citizens. With the emergence of the new diplomacy after the First World War however, governments, highly influenced by the Inter-Governmental and Non-Governmental Organisations which continuously increased their role in diplomacy and international decision-making, broadened their views on the importance of the different aspects of human security and soon looked to the social and economic well-being of people, in addition to the very safety of their lives, as crucial features of diplomacy (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 389-392.)
Throughout the Cold War, the main agenda of diplomacy was to avoid a global nuclear catastrophe and one may argue that human development and progress was only of little concern to the international community. The fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989 however, marked the emergence of Development Diplomacy, as the world witnessed a significant humanitarian consciousness arise. Now the agenda of issues was wider than ever before, and with both bilateral and multilateral actors at work, concerns of poverty and development played a central part in diplomacy (Baylis and Smith, 2005, 392-394.)
Development Diplomacy has now developed into an essential component of foreign policies, so much that the government of the United States of America recognises the importance of international development and diplomacy in securing a peaceful and stable world on equal grounds with military force. In this way, they have shown a commitment to cooperating with both Non-Governmental and International Organisations in the name of Development Diplomacy, effectively dismissing the ways of the traditional diplomacy with its solely bilateral approach, exclusiveness and secrecy (www.state.gov, www.usaid.gov and geneva.usmission.gov.)
In fact, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has stated, while speaking at “The first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review” (QDDR) in 2009 that the current American administration sees development to be
“...one of the most powerful tools we have for advancing global progress, peace, and prosperity.”
(http://www.usaid.gov/press/frontlines/fl_aug09/p1_clinton080902.html)
Keeping in mind that global progress, peace and prosperity are the very goals of diplomacy, Clinton stresses the upmost importance of Development Diplomacy today. - An opinion I most certainly share as I believe that an open and inclusive diplomacy, which caters to all people, must be considered of paramount significance in a globalised world.
American "Smart Power": Diplomacy and Development Are the Vanguard, U.S. Department of State, 2009
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/scp/fs/2009/122579.htm
Clinton Announces Development Diplomacy Strategic Review, US Aid, 2009
http://www.usaid.gov/press/frontlines/fl_aug09/p1_clinton080902.html
Secretary Clinton: Development And Diplomacy Core Elements of Foreign Policy, Alongside Defense, United States Mission, 2010
http://geneva.usmission.gov/2010/05/09/clinton-foreign-affairs-day-2010/
So nicely written! I agree with this view too, Minna. Diplomacy isn't just about avoiding to be killed in a war!
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point of view that development is one of the main goals of diplomacy as we have now many international organisations created to promote the global development.
ReplyDelete