My understanding of diplomacy

My 'first imporession' of the subject of diplomacy was reduced to the negotiation process itself. My idea of diplomatic relation were concentrated on the talks between actors and agents, not necessarily state officials, but nevertheless between those who were present at the meetings. I also thought of diplomatic relations a something positive and democratic, like invisible bonds betsween countries, organizations and big businesses, focused on talk, consensus and agreements rather than violence, threath and coercion.

My knowledge have developed in terms of widening the concept of diplomacy. I now know about the importance of public diplomacy, and the influence of people and civil society movements. Together with NGOs and other non-state actors, public pressure can influence the outcomes, and processes of negotiations and turn the position of states, international organizations and the media. I know that the use of soft power is extensive when it comes to the new, modern conduct of diplomacy, and is not limited to any physical meetings or debates. Soft power is exercized on many levels and in different dimensions, simultaneously, many times unnoticed, but never without a source.

I know understand that diplomacy, as many almost all other relations between humans, objects, nature, animals and beings is about power. How we interpret the meaning and effects of diplomatic relations depends on how we understand the concept of power. Power is as abstract as the diplomatic process itself. I believe new diplomacy should be understood as the relationship between agents and actors rather than outcomes of negotiations. In my opinion, we can not evaluate how succesful negotiations have been by only consider particular outcomes. Talks are going on constantly, everywhere and on all levels of governance, and interconnects with other processes of political power, flows of information, advanced communcation technology, globalization, mass-consumption, ideological tendencies, grassroot movements and the creation of plural identities. In a post-modern cosmopolitan society, the processes of diplomacy becomes more complex and integrated. The concept of new diplomacy is marked out by less secrecy, and value is put on having open, transparent and accountable negotiations. The narratives and rhetoric about open diplomacy is that is is th building blocks for global democracy. Nevertheless, some critique should be pointed at the conduct of diplomacy. Not only are negotiations controlled, and agendas are set, by those in power, which is the rich countries in the west and big multinational cooperations. Poor nations, NGOs with few resources and people from the global south still have a weaker voice and are excluded from the global space of diplomacy. Therefore, the grassroot movements and NGOs located in the South are very important in increasing equal participation, representation and influence.

My idea of diplomacy is, after taking this module, more about integration of interests, influence, representation, relationships and ongoing process than about the actual talks and the formal participants. I now understand that multiple components are interacting in creating the diplomatic space and that the functions, procedures and outcomes are dependant upon power relations, not always visable for the public eye. And importantly, I understand that citizen participation is more relevant in understanding diplomatic processes than it is stated in the traditional literature about diplomacy.