Diplomacy, Law and Global Change - Coursework Example

Diplomacy, Law and Global Change: The Effectiveness of the Security Council in the Twentieth Century and the Role of Embassies in a Globalized World Introduction Globalization has made interstate relations more complicated. It has changed the processes applied by the United Nations (UN) Security Council to maintain peace and security within the international community (Taylor, 2005). However, the use of veto power by the permanent members in the Security Council to protect their national interest has remain. This has greatly affected the effectiveness of the world body’s principal organ to achieve its responsibility as stated in Article 24 of the United Nations Charter. In another case, global change has contributed to the utilization of diplomacy as the primary means of channeling information rather than just a mere statecraft (Berridge, 2002). Along with the evolving nature of diplomacy, embassies’ role is also changing (Bayne & Woolcock, 2007). In a globalized world, embassies are major diplomatic structures used by states to broaden political and economic connection. The exchange of communication has been made quite practical by the establishment of these foreign ministries. In this essay, three literary works shall be reviewed to support the aforementioned hypotheses. The book written by N. D. White states that the United Nations Security Council is the international community’s second attempt to create a viable mechanism to achieve collective security. It says that the League of Nations, the forefather of UN, was the first attempt. The idea of making the League was allegedly introduced right after the end of the First World War. Basically, the countries which favored the plan aimed for international cooperation in the areas of peace and security so that no more war could happen. They wanted to devise a system which could prevent and preserve peace within the international arena. Most importantly, they envisioned an organization which could afford them protection in case of aggression from other state. Unluckily, the League failed. As a result, the Second World War took place. It was stated in the book that the failure of the League was attributed to the fact that the aim for collective security was weaker than the individual desires of states to safeguard their national interests (White, 1990). For instance, despite the fact that President Woodrow Wilson was the one who took the lead in making the League a reality, the US congress refused to approve the proposal. This means that at that period, America was not able to realize the importance of collective security. In other words, it considered the League as not promoting its interests as one of the Great Powers. In the following chapters of the book, the works and geopolitical limitations of UN was discussed. It was asserted that collective security was subservient to the Great Powers’ national interests (White, 1990). The superpowers protected their interests through the veto power. The UN Security Council was then controlled by competing blocs. In this sense, it can be stated that the Security Council’s composition was tainted with selfish motives. Its own structure (the geopolitical division) has triggered the occurrence of two competing major blocs which effectively limited the areas in which it can properly operate (White, 1990). Nevertheless, the author enumerates some international issues which were successfully settled by the Security Council such as the 1962 missile crisis in Cuba and the 1948 Berlin Blockade. In these events, the superpowers have settled their differences for peace to continue. In other words, there was a period when the five permanent members (US, Soviet Union, France, UK and China) were centered on one aim-- that is, sacrificing their own personal interest to achieve world peace and cooperation. In another case, the P-5 (five permanent members of UN) has collaborated in the 1987 war between Iran and Iraq. According to the book, Chapter VII resolution was proven effective when UN considered the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq as an action of aggression. This decision influenced the Security Council to employ an economic embargo against Iraq. For the years ahead, the veto power has still been used by superpowers to advance their interests. This has brought limitations which are greatly influenced by strategic and political considerations. In disputes within the respective blocs of the superpowers, the Security Council would be prevented from intervening by the application of veto power (White, 1990). The journalistic work of Olara Otunnu talks about the decision-making process in the Security Council and the reasons why it needs to be modified. It was the author’s contention that the Security Council should not be functioning alone (Otunnu, 1995). The spirit of unity in decision-making should reign in the Council. It is not right that the ultimate power of UN Security Council is lodged upon the five permanent members. He further says that decision-making in the world body should be democratic. It should truly represent the voice of the members as a whole. The veto power should not be controlling. This call is legitimate as proven by him. He cited that Article 24(1) of the UN Charter conferred ultimate responsibility on its members whether permanent or not (Otunnu, 1995). The current set-up of the UN Security Council reflects the 1945 situation -- when the Allies and China were accorded permanent position in the Council (Otunnu, 1995). The veto power attached to the permanent seat served as their power to object to every resolution which does not represent their interests. Moreover, his article suggests that the Security Council needs an immediate change. This assertion could mean that the Security Council has not been effective in pursuing its goal. This could be attributed to its decision-making process and composition. In the later part of the journal, Otunnu (1995, p.1) contended that the UN organ should learn to adjust in the world’s evolving situation in order for it to remain significant. Such is another way of stating that some countries consider SC as disabled -- it is not functioning anymore. It could happen that some states have not experienced being assisted by the SC in their dispute resolution. Another possible reason could be that the Security Council has always been controlled by its permanent members. The most awakening statement of the article says that the council’s present type of membership implores less participation and transparency. Thus, it should modify its membership composition (Otunnu, 1995). The Council should not be strict and personal in accepting and classifying new members. The permanent members should not be limited into five countries. The change of membership composition should be done as soon as possible for UN Security Council to regain respect and loyalty from the international community. In the last part of the journal, Otunnu (1995, p.1) has seen it practicable and efficient for the Council to have a four-tier structure of membership. The first tier shall be composed of the present five permanent members of the UN Security Council. All of them will still have veto power but they can only used it as a defense mechanism in extremis -- to be applied when the core issue is of vital national interest. The second tier will consist of new permanent members with no veto power. The third tier shall be a newly created seat in the Security Council. Its members shall serve for more than two years but less than seven years. The last tier will consist of non-permanent members (Otunnu, 1995). In his book, Siracusa (2010, p.1) cited that diplomacy has evolved. It is not just about state and government diplomacy. The emergence of globalized participants such as transnational corporations (TNCs) and intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) could not be ignored (Siracusa, 2010). These economic networks have instituted diplomatic processes to achieve their goal. It was emphasized in the book that they have diplomatic webs which function alongside with the traditional system of diplomacy (Siracusa, 2010). Significantly, many international corporations depend on embassies’ economic analysis. This means that extending the scope of diplomacy to economic networks makes diplomacy a public affair rather than just an official venue. As opined by Siracusa, in the later chapters of his book, diplomacy was basically an intergovernmental relationship before the Second World War. It was then referred to as an official mission. This is due to the fact that diplomats in embassies were prohibited to participate in the domestic affairs of the recipient state. Stated in another sense, they were to avoid influencing the policy-making process of the receiving state. They can only propose policies. However, after the war, it was stated by Siracusa (2010. p.4) that diplomatic operations have been broadened. It has included a government-to-people relation (Siracusa, 2010). This has been elaborated in few pages of the book. The main point of which is about public diplomacy. It says that public diplomacy specifically pertains to the diplomatic act aimed at affecting public attitude on the formulation and implementation of foreign policies (Siracusa, 2010). Needless to state, in the midst of globalization, diplomatic agents have been thinking locally and globally. They have been accorded the right to interfere with the internal and external affairs of the recipient country as long as it is of diplomatic reason. One of the important findings found in the book was that embassies have been used as strategic structures. They have been established for political and economic reasons such as treaty-making. Siracusa (2010, p.8) asserted that commercial treaties provide economic advantage between the contracting parties like reduced tariff on imported products. He then explained basic information about treaties and its relevance in international law. The book expressed the idea that treaties are usually contracted by diplomats in embassies. Ambassadors serve as the negotiator for its represented state. In this context, establishing an embassy seems to be the direct way of concluding a treaty. It can therefore be deducted that embassies are created for treaty-making. The most known multilateral treaty of all times is GATT, the General Agreement on Tariff and Trades (Siracusa, 2010). In international law, treaties are considered binding (pacta sunt servanda) (Siracusa, 2010). Accordingly, due to the most favoured-nation clause, each of the signatories shall have reciprocal obligation to extend to their nationals whatever benefits a treaty offers (Siracusa, 2010).This system actually results to a good economic and political relation. Relevantly, the book wanted to point out to the readers that embassies are ought to adapt to the changes that the globalized world has offered. This goes to say that embassies should be making advantage of the transformations and use it to advance the interests of their corresponding states. It is to be contended that if embassies would resist the change then, they would be suffering from a structure breakdown. This breakdown could eventually lead to the eradication of embassies which will complicate state-to-state relations. Corollarily, diplomats would be having hard time formulating significant policies that would be negotiated with the host country. They could not solve recent issues. Interstate relations would be harder to regulate. In order for them to have the necessary capacity to solve contemporary problems which are within the scope of their responsibility, they should not resist change. As stated in the book’s conclusion, the role of embassies should not be stagnant. It should not mirror a structure that adopts the same processes as time evolves. After all, this kind of change is not about adopting another ideology. It is regarding the adjustment of diplomatic instruments to the emerging trend of the society. This is to say that embassies are not just buildings. They are not mere physical representations. Allegedly, if one is to talk about embassies, he or she should see it in accordance with its internal role as a diplomatic tool. Conclusion Diplomatic agents such as embassies and the UN Security Council will always remain relevant in the international setting as long as they are adaptive to change. In a globalized world, embassies are ought to reform its negotiating tactics and policy formulation. With regard to the Security Council, it should modify its type of membership to be a truly effective international peacekeeper. Globalization can be advantageous if the world body could find a way to isolate its evil effects in international relations. References Bayne, N. & Woolcock, S., 2007. The new economic diplomacy: decision-making and negotiation in international economic relations. 2nd ed. England: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Berridge, G., 2002. Diplomacy: theory and practice. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Fink, A., 2009. Conducting research literature reviews: from the internet to paper. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. Hart, C., 1998. Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE Publications. Otunnu, O., 1995. The security council: a need for change. The Ecumenical Review, 47(3), p.302. Ridley, D., 2008. The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students. London: SAGE Publications. Siracusa, J., 2010. Diplomacy: a very short introduction. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Taylor, P., 2005. International organization in the age of globalization. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Wallace, M. & Wray, A., 2006. Critical reading and writing for post-graduates. London: SAGE Publications. White, N. D., 1990. The united nations and the maintenance of international peace and security. New York: Manchester University Press. Read More