The 'Old' and 'New' Diplomacy

In my opinion, the most significant difference between the ‘Old’ and the ‘New’ diplomacy is, the concept of diplomacy has changed. Although there has been changes between the ‘Old’ and the ‘New’ diplomacy, I believe that the basis of the diplomacy has not been changed dramatically.
The ‘Old’ diplomacy was more concerned about; war, peace, rights of foreign citizens, trade rules between and among nations but after the World War 2 with the changing conditions and the issues arised and the concernes of diplomacy has changed and became more about; human rights, labour rights, environmental issues.. etc. In other words; the new diplomacy, in relation to the old diplomacy, is more concerned with the global issues rather than the national ones.
In addition to that the emphasis has changed from bilateral to multilateral. The ‘New’ diplomacy which also known as public and inclusive diplomacy has shaped more open than the ‘Old’ diplomacy. Also with the globalisation of the world and with being easy to travel, government ministers did not have to depend on their ambassadors to be represented. The international conferences and meetings made it easier to communicate between nations. Therefore the actors of the diplomacy has changed from government ministiries, diplomats and ambassadors to NGO’s and Non-state actors. Before the ‘New’ diplomacy; diplomacy was taken as an issue which specialists; such as diplomats supposed to deal with.
In conclusion; the concerns of the diplomacy has changed and became more global while the actors changed into NGO’s from ambassadors and diplomacy has become more open and public. In spite of the fact that there has been differences the main basis of the diplomacy has remained the same.