THE WONDERS OF TECHNOLOGY?

“Technology… is a queer thing. It brings you great gifts with one hand, and it stabs you in the back with the other.”

C. P. Snow

Having the task to consider the most significant changes in the nature of diplomacy I immediately set my mind in the aspect of technological development. From my childhood I can still clearly remember my great-grandfather telling me how in his youth it was rather impossible to get to school on time, as there was not a single clock in his home. When he passed away a few years ago, the world had gone through some amazing transitions. Considering the effect these transitions had in one man’s life, I could not but wonder the scope of transformation that the art of diplomacy must have gone through. That was only a few days ago, however, I now know that the truth is no way near as simple as my original thesis suggests.

Let me explain. From ancient times until the 19^th century diplomatic messages were carried by hand. Now different forms of telecommunication carry these messages. Electric telegraph was the first one to have a major impact on diplomacy, followed by radio telegraphy, telephones, fax machines, electronic mail, mobile phones and today we even have the possibility of multi-media video-conferencing, although the last one is still rarely used. (Berridge 2010:192-3, 201)

Now, telephone is the easiest and fastest way to reach some one miles away. Telephones are easy to use, misunderstandings can be corrected immediately and the tone and volume of one’s voice can help to send signals and add personal touch. Even President Barack Obama is known to wear a BlackBerry on his hip. Telephones can be very useful during times of major crisis. But this is mainly the case with allies, when there are no language barriers and no worries of misuse of possible slips of the tongue. (Ibid.195-202)

However, according to G. R. Berridge there are major problems with the use of telecommunication as a tool of diplomacy. For example the lack of non-verbal communication is apparent. There is no way to add nuance to an oral message by the use of body language, dress and venue or to ‘say one thing but mean another’. Also, with telecommunication there is no time for consultation, which might lead to either hasty decision, or no decision at all. In addition there is always the risk of eavesdropping. (Ibid.193-4)

The problems of telephone diplomacy mentioned above might be some of the reasons why the famous hot line between the White House and Kremlin, set up in 1963, is not a telephone connection but a telegraph link. Haraldur Pór Egilsson’s The origins, use and development of hot line diplomacy explains in depth the origins of the hot line and the reasons for never adding speech facilities even though other modifications have been made. Telephone has become an important channel for the conduct of diplomacy but there are major risks and limits involved.

Out of even more resent technology, email has achieved a firm position as the modern written mode of telecommunication but there are security risks because of highly talented hackers. (Ibid. 203)

Technological change is also responsible for the development of fast and easy international travel. Gone are the days of long ship journeys to distant countries. Instead it is possible to travel just about anywhere in this planet within 24 hours. This has affected the roles of ambassadors, as heads of states and ministers no longer have to rely purely on their services. Yet another feature of change technology has created, is the amount of information available through the electronic media. Today the practitioners of diplomacy have to face the general public (under the influence of the CNN effect) and the increasing possibility of public debate. (Riordan 2003: 58-62)

Even if all this new technology has not revolutionized diplomacy, it has been a helpful (though at times unreliable) tool in the conduct of negotiations and brought people separated by great distances a lot closer.

Lastly, Haraldur Pór Egilsson points out how popular culture shapes people’s conceptions of diplomacy and diplomatic instruments. He focuses on the Washington- Moscow hot line and how such films as Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove have created the false belief of it being a telephone line. Here is a clip of the delusive, yet absolutely fantastic film!

References:

Riordan, Shaun, 2003 The New Diplomacy

Berridge, G. R. 2010 Diplomacy Theory and Practice, 4th Ed

Egilson, Haraldur P. The origins, use and development of hot line diplomacy http://www.clingendael.nl/publications/2003/20030500_cli_paper_dip_issue85.pdf

Diplomacy – technology and increase role of NGO’s

“Over 20,000 transnational non-governmental organization (NGO) networks are already active on the world stage, of which 90 per cent were formed during the last thirty years.”

(Riordan, 2004, p. 12)

International Relations are in constant mutation and evolution. In parallel diplomacy evolved in many different ways. Plus, Globalization brought innovation, closeness and information together worldwide connecting people. Due to this phenomenon, one of the main changes in diplomacy was within the close circle of international players who saw the rise of non-state actors. Though, Non-Governmental Organisations have existed for two centuries their role in the world stage has increased drastically particularly caused by the development of technologies of information and communication which influence public opinion. Who has not yet seen heartbreaking images of starving children, around the world? Images which are shown through the media to touch our hearts and therefore make us react.

Diplomacy suffered in recent decades increased media attention which occurred due to the development of technologies in the past century. A good example of this is The United Nations Climate Change Conference. A major political event which had worldwide news coverage.

Another characteristic of modern diplomacy are multilateral negotiations between states which now include the presence of NGOs, which predominantly exist because of charity donations.

NGOs like to call themselves representatives of civil society and take advantage of the mass media to promote their organization, goals, and draw attention to actions of governments and multinationals. The controversy around Shell and the extraction of oil in Nigeria illustrates their power. The video below was used by Amnesty International to cause public awareness regarding the lack of human rights and the environmental devastation caused by this transnational.

Obviously 50 years ago people would never know about this issue or at least it would not cause so much impact. Due to the media attention the company was publicly embarrassed and for the same reason Shell changed its policies regarding human rights standards and the environment. As Riodan states “The impact of these campaigns is indisputable, as is the greater political power new technology has given NGOs” (Riordan, 2004, p.89).

The previous reasons demonstrate how technology increased media’s attention in diplomacy and also the power of NGO’s in politic affairs in recent years. NGOs use the media to influence the public’s opinion and consequently the government to change their policies or even transnational’s procedures as shown above. There are many campaigns in which NGOs use media to influence us: advertisements in TV, mailshots, networking via internet, printed press and mobile telephones. We are surrounded by their attempts to make us act and help their causes.

But can NGO’s make people and governments react?

They surely have been proving that in the last years...

References

Riordan, S. (2004) The New Diplomacy

Polity Press, Cambridge