A Comparative Analysis of the Elements of Success & Failure in Global Diplomacy (original) (raw)
This paper is a comparative analysis of the elements of successful diplomacy and the elements of diplomatic failure. It examines and uses three cases as examples, the Helsinki Accord of 1975, the Six Party Talks ending in 2009 and the Iran Nuclear Treaty of 2016. Further, is expounds on how these successes and failures were achieved with respect to the modern nation-state in today's form of diplomacy and international relations. Diplomacy as a function of human interaction has existed since the beginning of humankind. Indeed, diplomacy has existed for millennia and since the time that two people or two polities first conducted negotiations. Diplomacy as we think of it today is the concept of the interaction of diplomats acting as interlocutors between international polities for preservation of peace. If it were not for diplomacy international organizations of today such as NATO and the United Nations would not exist. No doubt the world would most likely be in a constant state of war. We tend to think of the beginning and evolution of diplomacy in a Eurocentric sense. Certainly, the Greeks and Romans made their contribution millennia ago but almost every country in Europe has made some conceptual contribution to the corpus of material and the discipline that makes up modern diplomacy. The concept of the balance of power theory that we hold today in our global geo-strategic policies was part of the political doctrine of many well-known political realists such as Machiavelli, Guiciardini and Francsesco Sforza (Machiavelli, n.d.).
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.