Diplomacy

1. Diplomacy evolves from state-centric to global, encompassing diverse actors

Diplomacy has become something very much more than the diplomacy of states and governments.

Traditional to modern. Diplomacy has transformed from a state-centric practice to a global phenomenon involving diverse actors. While the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations still formally recognizes only state diplomacy, the reality on the ground is far more complex.

New players emerge. The diplomatic landscape now includes:

• Transnational corporations (TNCs)
• Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs)
• Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
• Civil society organizations (CSOs)

These entities create their own diplomatic networks, operating both within and outside traditional diplomatic channels. The rise of public diplomacy, which aims to influence foreign publics, further blurs the lines between official and unofficial diplomacy.

2. Treaties shape international relations and define diplomatic landscape

The principle that treaties validly concluded are binding on the signatories, who must adhere to them in good faith, is a cardinal rule in international law.

Cornerstone of diplomacy. Treaties serve as the foundation of modern international relations, providing a formal framework for agreements between nations. They cover a wide range of issues, from peace and security to trade and environmental protection.

Key aspects of treaties:

• Require proper authorization and freedom of action by signatories
• Can be multilateral (involving multiple parties) or bilateral (between two parties)
• May include clauses like "most-favored-nation" status in trade agreements
• Can be terminated under specific conditions, such as material changes in circumstances

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) codified international law governing treaties, providing a standardized approach to their creation, interpretation, and termination.

3. World War I's origins rooted in alliance diplomacy and militarization

It was the entangling alliances that created the house of cards that when war broke out, or for that matter when the Russian Empire declared mobilization of its armies, collapsed, and the Great Powers – minus Italy, which held out for the highest bidder – went to war.

Alliance system backfires. The complex web of alliances in pre-WWI Europe, intended to maintain balance and prevent conflict, ultimately contributed to the war's rapid escalation. When crisis struck, these agreements pulled nations into a wider conflict.

Militarization fuels tensions:

• Germany's Schlieffen Plan, designed for a quick victory, required invading neutral Belgium
• Arms race between major powers increased military readiness and tensions
• Belief in the inevitability of war led to aggressive military planning

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo served as the spark that ignited these underlying tensions, leading to a global conflict that reshaped the international order.

4. Versailles Treaty's punitive measures sowed seeds for future conflict

Keynes had given them misgivings about taking territory from Germany, while demanding reparations for the cost of the war. Was it right to impose such hardships on a country already devastated by war?

Harsh peace terms. The Treaty of Versailles, ending World War I, imposed severe punishments on Germany:

• Territorial losses
• Military restrictions
• Massive reparations payments
• "War guilt" clause assigning sole responsibility for the conflict

Unintended consequences. These punitive measures, while satisfying Allied desires for revenge, created long-term problems:

• Economic hardship in Germany fueled resentment and political instability
• Loss of territory and national pride contributed to the rise of extremist ideologies
• Weakening of Germany disrupted the European balance of power

Critics like economist John Maynard Keynes argued that the treaty's harshness would lead to economic depression and future conflict. These predictions proved tragically accurate, as the treaty's legacy contributed to the conditions that led to World War II.

5. Churchill-Stalin percentage agreement shaped post-WWII Europe

'Let us settle about our affairs in the Balkans.' Specifically, he went on: 'We have interests, missions, and agents there. Don't let us get at cross‐purposes in small ways. So far as Britain and Russia are concerned, how would it do for you to have ninety per cent dominance in Rumania, for us to have ninety per cent of the say in Greece, and go fifty‐fifty about Yugoslavia?'

Backroom dealmaking. In October 1944, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin met secretly to discuss spheres of influence in post-war Eastern Europe. This informal "percentage agreement" sought to divide control over various countries between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union.

Implications of the agreement:

• Attempted to avoid conflicts between Allied powers in the region
• Recognized the reality of Soviet military dominance in much of Eastern Europe
• Excluded the United States from direct involvement in these decisions
• Foreshadowed the Cold War division of Europe into Western and Soviet spheres

While not a formal treaty, this agreement influenced post-war policies and contributed to the tensions that would define the Cold War era. It also demonstrated the pragmatic, power-based approach to diplomacy employed by leaders like Churchill and Stalin.

6. ANZUS Treaty exemplifies small powers' pursuit of security alliances

Put simply, Canberra wanted strategic reassurance that America would come to Australia's aid in its next time of troubles; Washington wanted cooperation, an opportunity to take advantage of Australia's unique geographical position in the western Pacific, as well as the overall political position in Southeast Asia.

Asymmetrical alliance. The ANZUS Treaty, signed in 1951 between Australia, New Zealand, and the United States, illustrates how smaller powers seek security guarantees from larger allies. Australia, in particular, pursued this alliance to ensure American protection against potential threats in the Asia-Pacific region.

Key aspects of ANZUS:

• Provided Australia with a formal security link to the United States
• Offered the US strategic benefits in the western Pacific
• Reflected Cold War concerns about communist expansion
• Demonstrated the challenges of balancing national interests in an alliance

The treaty's negotiation and implementation revealed the complexities of diplomacy between nations of vastly different sizes and capabilities. While Australia sought firm commitments, the US aimed for flexibility and broader regional influence.

7. Globalization transforms diplomacy, introducing new challenges and actors

A defining feature of 21st‐century globalization is the increasing complexity of global relations and the rapidity with which information ricochets around the world, opening up new avenues for the conduct of diplomacy, while helping new participants to become involved.

Interconnected world. Globalization has fundamentally altered the practice of diplomacy by creating a more complex, interconnected, and rapidly changing international environment. This new landscape presents both challenges and opportunities for diplomatic actors.

Key features of globalized diplomacy:

• Increased role of non-state actors (NGOs, corporations, civil society groups)
• Rise of "polymorphous" security threats (e.g., climate change, terrorism, pandemics)
• Growing importance of economic diplomacy and global governance institutions
• Need for rapid response to crises and information flows
• Emergence of regional organizations as diplomatic players

Diplomats must now navigate a multi-layered system of global, regional, and local interests, often addressing issues that transcend traditional state boundaries. This requires new skills, adaptability, and a broader understanding of diverse global challenges.

Last updated: August 20, 2024