Trade and environmental diplomacy: What are the key difference between security, trade, and environmental diplomacy?

The process of multilateralism is a common feature in negotiations on trade, security, and environmental issues. The process of these negotiations allow states to come together in a framework that allows all states to be to negotiate with one another on such matters, and that international institutions such as the UN provides the framework for all states to engage with one another, although it has come to apparent that there does seem to be tendency on how these negotiations are carried out. The process of security negotiations is one of two dimensions when it comes to states. States maintain a view that all negotiations must be in the view of the public, all negotiations are to be put on the public, and however in reality it’s not the case. Secrecy has always been and will continue to play a role on states security, that in the eyes of the government there are certain aspects of negotiations should not be published, it would contradict the process of security in that state. From government’s points of view, to release minutes or evidence of the meetings would be a security risk, as it would give others the whole discussions that were discussed. Trade negotiations is more open to security negotiations, states are now negotiating in so many ways, in summit meeting, or while having lunch with one another. Trade is a common goal for states, they are all competing with one another, and that compared to security negotiation, trade negotiations have come changes as the world evolved. In terms of environmental negotiations, the rise of non state actors have changed the way states conduct their dialogue, the ability for non- governmental organizations to have major impact in environmental negotiations was evident in the Kyoto agreement. Governments have the ability to take these non state actors to negotiations, showing the true importance of non –state actors ability to work with governments.

The new diplomacy: Following the discussions in seminars 5 to 7, in your opinion what is the most important aspect of the new diplomacy

In terms of the aspect of new diplomacy, there is still that sense of validity to what is new about the new diplomacy. The aspect to which diplomacy is conducted by states today is still the diplomacy process from previous times. States still conduct negotiation with one another, using communication tools which are at their deposal. Back channel negotiations, secret diplomacy, and indirect diplomacy still continues to be regarded as an important role, using measures to which states can communicate with one another without majority of time being on the spotlight, or without the citizens not knowing the negotiations process. Through seminar discussions, I have concluded that there are two important aspects of new diplomacy, first, the rise and influence of NGO’s, and also summit diplomacy. Both these aspects are not the invention of new diplomacy, but rather a phase of transaction which the world has come through. As the world changes so does the course to how one conducts its operations in terms of diplomacy , and that it is a transition to which how negotiations are viewed, and more importantly administered. The rise of Non Governmental Organizations has become phenomenon since its birth, and that in today’s world they have the ability to influence governments on all forms sections, from conflict prevention, to climate change. NGO’s have been able to capitalize on the rapid changes the world has come through, and that more importantly as globalization has made states interconnect more with one another, it has also led to the growth of NGOs’. Another factor was Summit diplomacy, where states have the ability to negotiate with each other rather the going through the beucratic process. Summit diplomacy outlines the importance of negotiations, as evident to lunch diplomacy. Lunch diplomacy can be very productive when applied right, as it gives the two parties in precise to negotiate with one another, and that process overall achieves more than state diplomacy. In Summary, the process of the new diplomacy is still questionable, it is questionable on the basis that both new and old diplomacy conducts are very much familiar, it is only through the rapid changes in the word, mainly globalization which has spurned to the creation of new diplomacy.