The Art of Diplomacy - Essay Example

Diplomacy and International Relations Diplomacy and International Relations Diplomacy is an art that has been evolving with time, asstates tend to get better ways to have a rapport with other states. In the lessons learnt, diplomacy is the art and practice of making peaceful negotiations between states and other communities. This is a drill derived to ensure nations and states have a union and live with respect to the rights of the other states. For a plausible result, nations and states obligate to use intercessions, which are conducted by experts and diplomats (Kissinger, 2011). The diplomats are required to be versatile in various fields, to make a better approach and understanding to the concerned states. This includes economic issues, culture, the environments, politics and human rights. In this learning, I have encompassed vast knowledge on the history and evolution of diplomatic approach in the world. This is about the influence states use to make a positive impact on their diplomatic experience. In recent times, different states have seen diplomacy evolve to modern state systems, in comparison to systems that were in operation since the 1500. Diplomacy has been improving in different aspects, depending on the field of operation (Owens, 2007). This takes into account the politics, economics, religion and military exposure. For a clear view of the change in the diplomatic experience, different patterns have been engaged. The existing anomalies have been used to focus on the difference in the change of diplomatic experience, which can also be used to predict the future commitments of a state. The history of diplomacy has been explained succinctly by various authors, highlighting the vital points in the evolution. Many authors give a functional view of diplomacy, which is solidly expressed by the actions undertaken by states, in having diplomatic approach with other states. This is encompassed to international relations, where states have to negotiate and agree (Kissinger, 2011). This involves historical accounts of many states, focusing on the approach used in negotiating with other states. Whereas many states have been engaging in communication and negotiations, some states choose other methods, which only weaken international relations and diplomacy. This states the reason behind eruption of conflicts, which results into rages. In the end, some states engage war to resolve issues. However, this is considered the only approach, where diplomacy has failed. States that engage fighting to resolve issues show a weaker diplomatic approach, with failed negotiations to reach at an agreement (Berridge, 2002). In recent times, diplomacy has evolved with few states with an urge of engaging war. This shows that diplomacy and international relations have been developing positively, and can be considered to improve with time. Diplomats have their way of expressing their issues, and dealing with negotiations, which is an approach that bears historic grounds. Diplomats have to use historic bearings in negotiations, to ensure they have a better accrual at the end of the negotiations. For instance, diplomats are compelled to acceptance of peaceful resolution of disputes. When states are in a dispute, the ostensible reason for diplomats is to make a peaceful negotiation, which will solve the entire dispute. The disputes with specificity must be resolved amicably to improve in the relations of the states. However, there are attachments to the resolving such disputes, depending on the existing laws. Though the laws have been evolving with time, law still has a historic bearing, which is used in resolving issues and disputes. Factual negotiations are acceptable by the law, as they have a bearing. Secondly, legal views must be involved between the two states. Without legal views, the dispute could be deemed void, due to the absence of a substantial course. Thirdly, the methods used by diplomats have a bearing in the historic evolution of resolving disputes. Therefore, negotiations must take place in respectable offices with mediation and inquiry. This will be followed by reconciliation, which shows the ultimate solution of the dispute. In the past, such environs conducive to negotiations were not prevalent. In addition to these, a third party must be involved in the resolution of disputes. Though the third party is vital in the negotiations, they do not have the power to decide, or have a legal binding to the negotiations. Similarly, the United Nations is an organization with the historical evolution that has chartered strategies used in dealing with conflicts. This has made an easier approach towards dispute resolution, as most states in the world are in conjunctions with United Nations’ statutes. With this evolution, it is easy to make international relations, as most states have a mutual binding, which is the United Nations. The United Nations has been on the frontline in making historical changes to the diplomatic approach in the world. This has been a unifying factor as many nations have adhered to the United Nations’ regulations, which are aimed at making a better approach in the international relations. With the indulgence of the United Nations, there are historic changes that are endorsed in the charter, to enhance international relations and diplomatic approach to disputes (Berridge, 2002). The first arrangement in endorsed by the United Nations is the general assembly, which deals with fact finding missions and is obligated to make recommendations. Therefore, the involved parties will involve the United Nations, which will offer a recommendation at the end of the dispute hearing. Secondly, the United Nations provides a security council, which may offer recommendations. This is indulged to ensure the fact finding mission is not jeopardized, as states with a vested interest could influence the ultimate results. In addition to this, the Security Council reflects on the political influence that is involved in the dispute solving. However, the Security Council has initiated discretion where it has the right to deny its indulgence in settling a dispute. In accordance to international relations and diplomacy, Marxist initiated essential elements that dictate on the international performance of a state. The first element in his writings is the dialectical approach, where the states have knowledge of the societal nature and reality (Oakley, 2003). This will always be dynamic depending on the involved parties, while they will also be prone to conflicts. This is due to the involvement of different societies, with different interests. The second element highlighted by Marxist is the material approach to history. He retorts that different countries have different developments, depending on their productive forces and the endowment in the economic force. Therefore, they will reflect a change in their approach to international relations, depending on their investment and what they risk losing in case of a dispute. The third element is the general view of capitalist development. The economies of states are dictated by the capitalistic developments, which make different countries appreciate a mutual binding to other states. Therefore, countries will involve more dialogue, which is deemed to protect their capitalistic developments. This in the end makes a better approach to the modern market, as the states will have a historical development with an improvement. Lastly Marxist insisted that countries have to engage diplomacy due to the mutual commitment involved in socialism (Oakley, 2003). Countries have reliance to improve on their socialism, though it has been ousted by capitalism as a weakness. In conclusion, diplomacy has been evolving and changing with time. Different countries have been engaging different maneuvers to make a positive approach, with changing times. In addition to this, the United Nations has been on the frontline in ensuring positive change in diplomacy and international relations. However, there is a strong defense on the historical bearing and the law. These are factors that seem to have a lesser effect on the evolution of diplomacy and international relations. References Berridge G. (2002). Diplomacy, Second Edition: Theory and Practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kissinger H. (2011). Diplomacy. New York: Simon & Schuster. Oakley A. (2003). Marxs Critique of Political Economy: Intellectual Sources and Evolution, Volume 2. New York: Routledge. Owens Z. (2007). Diplomacy. London: Dreamspinner Press. Read More