Does Traditional Diplomacy have any contemporary relevance?

In today’s world, issues increasingly stretch beyond national borders. These issues include drug cartels, environmental degradation, the economy and terrorism. This global interconnectedness has therefore necessitated multilateral action. Furthermore, complex interdependence, blurring the distinction between domestic and international issues, has led to the traditional notion of diplomacy coming under challenge. Traditional diplomacy, characterized by bilateral negotiations, secrecy and a focus on high politics, hasproven inadequate to deal with the challenges of the 21^st century. Emphasis on multilateral negotiations, openness and low politics, termed New Diplomacy, has developed in response to globalization.

The diplomatic agenda has expanded, for example to include the promotion of trade and this has become one of the Embassy’s primary tasks. Furthermore, the technology and communication’s revolution has had an impact on the conduct of diplomacy. Technological advances in the field of aviation, the telephone, fax and internet have led to the capability for rapid information sharing and consultation between the embassy and the home government. As a consequence, the foreign office is able to assert itself to a higher degree than previously by providing diplomats with continuous detailed instructions. In addition, the technology revolution has also enabled various government departments to maintain direct relations with their counterparts in other states, thereby bypassing the diplomatic channel. One of its major changes, however, is that summitry has gained widespread practice. Since the early 1970’s heads of state/governments and senior officials have become increasingly involved in diplomacy.

When looking at the surface it appears that old diplomacy has little relevance in the 21^st century, however, one should be wary about drawing such a shallow conclusion. By scratching the surface it becomes apparent that while old diplomacy has adapted to the requirements of the 21^st century, it is by no means outmoded. Secrecy continues to be a key element of diplomacy. It is about not losing face, the attempt to avoid unnecessary conflicts, complications and influence. If certain negotiations were done publicly, they may never have taken place to begin with. A prime example of this is Henry Kissinger’s secret talks to China which ultimately led to US recognition of the government of Beijing and diplomatic relations to China.

Another example is the 30 years ongoing talks between King Hussein of Jordan and Prime Minister Rabin of Israel. These culminated in a signed peace agreement 1995. What is clear, while other factors must be addressed, is that in order to progress the Israeli Palestinian Issue secret negotiations will play a vital role as public distrust and other external forces have historically and currently impede negotiations. Once secret negotiations have addressed some key areas of disagreement, addressing the concerns of these minor factors will prove easier.

Moreover, while the diffusion of actors in diplomacy is undeniable, one ought to be cautious to equal that to direct influence. Non nation-state actors do play a greater role today than 40 years ago. It should be noted however, that their level of influence is based on the willingness of nation-states. Despite heavy emphasis on multilateral treaties, bilateral agreements are still an important part of diplomacy. This is exemplified by the US pursuing bilateral immunity agreements with ICC signatories to avoid any jurisdiction whatsoever by the Court. Furthermore, permanent embassies remain a vital part of the diplomatic landscape. Though some of its functions have been altered, the embassy is still the central manager of foreign relations. When compared to its traditional functions, it is apparent that while heads of states/government take greater part in negotiations, diplomats provide a supportive role from beginning to end. Additionally, rather than collecting information, the embassy analyses the information by placing it into context for its home government.

Moreover, traditional functions still prove highly relevant. The embassy serves to cultivate contacts and identify such contacts to be cultivated for the future. The embassy serves as an early notification system to the host country of the desires, positions and thoughts of the home government regarding actions and positions of the host country. Recently, the Swedish ambassador in Kampala warned the Ugandan government that if Bill 18 – the anti-homosexuality bill- was passed, Sweden would not only publicly denounce it, but also withdraw development aid.