Sir Harold Nicolson said that the function of diplomacy is “the management of international relations by negotiation.” This comment is relevant in terms of both ‘new’ and ‘old’ diplomacy. We cannot expect an establishment that has developed over the extensive period of time to either disappear or be replaced with another entirely. As with all systems concepts will change over time but some aspects- generally the core concept- will remain to uphold the idea.
If we take a look at what both encompass we could get a better idea of the development of diplomacy. ‘Old’ diplomacy tended to be secretive as well as forceful at times with regards to wars. It was also a form of high politics. ‘New’ diplomacy on the other hand has adopted public diplomacy, the inclusion of non-state actors, multilateral conferences and has embraced technological advancements.
Since the creation of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in Zimbabwe little else has been in the press with regards to this matter. It was only in the recent visit of South African president Jacob Zuma to London that this issue has been bought back to my attention. During his visit Gordon Brown and Jacob Zuma discussed the current sanctions as well as general situation of Zimbabwe, they came to no conclusion but did try and show a united front.
“We have agreed to put our heads together so Zimbabwe can move forward.”
Jacob Zuma, March 2010
This statement struck me a quite odd, as haven’t we been through this all before? Former South African president Thabo Mbeki stated a very similar thing while trying to negotiate a deal between the ZANU and PF. This colossal task of creating a democratic and united government was considered a success but it appears that even though the process was put into place little has really changed within the country. Public diplomacy has played an extensive role in this matter and continues to though the current sanctions. So we have to wonder, if we were still practicing the ‘old’ diplomacy would we have become involved with the issue of Zimbabwe? Probably not. Public diplomacy only becomes relevant with the development of globalization yet we cannot disregard ‘old’ diplomacy as secret meetings surely took place.
Zimbabwe is a long way from what it once was or could possibly be but what we can be certain of is that for there to be any development there will continue to be extensive negotiations, not only with South Africa but with the international community.
By highlighting the changes in diplomacy I have discovered that some concepts are unwavering and that the ‘new’ diplomacy could not exist without the continuation and support of the ‘old’ diplomacy. I would hope that one day the need for ‘old’ diplomacy will not exist but as the world stands today it is very significant.
http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88066
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8548916.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/07/zimbabwe.southafrica1
No comments:
Post a Comment