The invention of new technological devices, mostly in the field of transportation and telecommunications, has significantly affected the process of diplomacy (Melissen: 1999, p.171). Technological developments have started to mold the old conception of space and time, the invention of the printer and the railways have constituted a paramount symbol of cultural expansion and decentralization of information. Traditionally information was limited to a priviledged group that belonged to the central power and the people without economic capacity lacked of access to information of the government activities, consequently the interference of public opinion was null.
Although the new rising power of the media has interfered the process of communication that is the main pillar of diplomacy, it does not affect the very nature of diplomacy. Diplomacy does not maintain intact but conserve its essence as an indispensable institution that manages with responsibility the public interest. Traditional diplomacy continuos valid regarding the importance of diplomats' direct presence for a most effective communication, precision of concepts, responsibility, representation and interest of real information such as language, tradition and custom.
International representation must coexist with modern technology's challenges and maintain the essential characteristics of traditional diplomacy in which individuals must be chosen to represent the state, collect relevant information, take advantage of communications and IT resources and negotiate on behalf of the state that they are representing. However, as this important development has encouraged groth to access to information, careful must be taken with spying networks, hackers and the leaking of a report that can filter contradictory information on web-sites of ministers and diplomats, "a clear result of the growing use of the web in diplomatic practice is that it throws into question the validity of paragraph 2, Article 41 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations which specifies that 'all official business...shall be conducted with, or through, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' (Melissen: 1999, p.180-181).
Hi Clau, I really like what you wrote! Maybe (just my humble suggestion) you could make the conclusion clearer? Nice choice of picture, by the way :)
ReplyDeleteHello Irene, thank you so much for your suggestion; regarding to my conclusion I think IT innovations are a doubled edge sword that favor the diplomats' constant need of a flow, quick and comprehensive communication but there is a potential risk with this instant information that you can get with a few fingertips no matter where you are and this is not the way an embassy works traditionally, an embassy works with instructions in telegrams from the secretary of state in order to make sure that everyone understand where the instructions come from (protocols as a form of communication). And what about traditional diplomacy (bilateral) that functioned in a state to state basis encouraging negotiations, in comparison with the actual trend of diplomacy 'Multilateral' that is a complex and prolong process for negotiation, contrary with the objectives of our era of innovation and development, the best example is the failure to achieve an agreement on some trade negotiations or Copenhagen.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the era of communication is a tremendous step forward for global invention and democracy, flow of information is a remarkable achievement of mankind' political change.
Clxx
Hi!
ReplyDeleteI like your blog entry, too, however, I think it is more Melissen who elaborated the above than you, personally.
Of course we are allowed, and encouraged, to quote and you do provide the correct references, but I think a blog should include more original thought.
For such a short pice of writing, i think your quotations are too long. It would be more intersting to find out more about what you think, yourself!
:)