Specialised writer.
SPAIN
María Amorós Gurriarán
Daniel Delmás
Specialised writer.
SPAIN
Jorge Prado
Specialised writer.
PERU
Kruti Shah
Specialised writer.
INDIA
Lure Sadiq
Co-Editor English language
PALESTINE
ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN CLIMATE DIPLOMACY
The European Union’s (EU) climate diplomacy has changed dramatically since the early 2010s. Previously relying on a ‘leadership-by-example’ approach primarily concerned with the external projection of its domestic policies, the EU profoundly adapted its climate diplomacy strategy between the 2009 Copenhagen COP 15 and the 2015 Paris COP 21. This reimagined strategy was further solidified in the aftermath of the Paris Climate Conference. The EU’s redesigned climate diplomacy focuses on stronger – cooperative and adversarial – bilateral relations with significant emitters and greater flexibility in its positions and actions. (“The European Union’s Strategic Turn in Climate Diplomacy …”)
It is a widely held and, at first glance, plausible belief that the European Union (EU) is the world leader in combating dangerous global climate change. Since the early 1990s, the EU has committed to unilateral and relatively high reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the EU has ensured the implementation of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the only legally binding international framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This aspires to demonstrate leadership in developing a new global agreement after 2012.
The European Union’s Influence on Copenhagen Policy
Europe is forming its post-Copenhagen policy, with a strong emphasis on engaging third countries and adopting a more “realistic” approach to climate diplomacy. However, fundamental differences exist between and within European countries on key issues such as the transition to a 30% EU emissions reduction target, the future of the Kyoto Protocol, the significance of a binding UN treaty, the appropriate mix of conditionality and incentives, and the role – if any – of border adjustment measures. (“European Climate Diplomacy after Copenhagen – E3G”). These policy differences stem from fundamental disagreements about strategic goals and perceptions of international politics. The EU will be unable to deploy the total weight of Community and Member State resources to support its collective interests unless new processes for closer strategic alignment are implemented. Closer alignment is built on three critical pillars: improved collective political intelligence, a clearer medium-term strategy for meeting the 2c goal, and stronger strategic conversations on climate change among senior European politicians and officials, including foreign ministries.
However, a few new perspectives emerged in the post-Copenhagen context, emphasising the EU’s alleged role as a ‘leadiator,’ a ‘leader-cum-mediator,’ and paying some attention to its bilateral relations with emerging economies. However, the multipolar dynamics of the Paris Agreement negotiations and implementation necessitate a thorough rethinking of scholarly analyses of the EU’s climate diplomacy. Importantly, these must include a Foreign Policy Analysis perspective beyond the alleged default multilateral preference.
Europe must handle four significant areas of Climate Diplomacy.
The EU appears to be as well prepared as other major powers to navigate these new waters. Still, it will need to be more adept at climate diplomacy than the “low ambition coalition” to achieve its ambitious, positive agenda.
The four primary areas of climate diplomacy which Europe must address include:
- Strategy: How Europe defines and integrates its overall climate change goals with its broader strategic interests.
- Political engagement with third countries: How Europe perceives and influences climate change discussions in other parts of the world.
- Policy towards the international climate regime: How Europe creates effective international climate change cooperation mechanisms within and outside the UNFCCC.
- Practical climate cooperation with third countries: How Europe organises itself to provide practical support for low-carbon, climate-resilient development worldwide.
European Green Deal Diplomacy
Rebuilding Europe’s climate diplomacy strategy must begin with an open discussion of European interests, which may necessitate internal realignment of those interests. Maintaining momentum will require the enthusiastic participation of new stakeholders in the internal European debate, including the national security community. Europe needs a more intelligent political strategy, backed up by new diplomatic machinery, to influence other countries and win their support for its policy positions. European countries should continue to share lessons learned on best practices in this area through the new European External Action Service, the Green Diplomacy Network, and other channels.
Green Deal Diplomacy
One of the novel aspects of the new European Commission’s proposal for a European Green Deal (EGD) is the establishment of a “Green Deal Diplomacy.” While this ambition has yet to be realised, the proposed new diplomacy does not emerge from a vacuum. The EU has been developing explicit climate and energy diplomacies since 2011 and 2015. As a result, it will be critical for EGD diplomacy to learn from previous attempts to formulate and implement EU external ambitions in policy areas related to the European Green Deal, both successes and failures. The purpose for the EU to be a “global leader” by paralleling internal ambitious transition efforts with a “stronger ‘green deal diplomacy’ focused on convincing and supporting others to take on their share of promoting more sustainable development has received comparatively less attention.
For climate diplomacy, regular and extensive conclusions on spreading ambitious climate action to various actors, emphasising instruments and policy synergies (e.g., energy, human rights, trade, security, development) have provided a relatively straightforward framework of external engagement. The goals of energy diplomacy are less clear, with actions primarily aimed at improving internal coordination among Member States and EU institutions and expanding on existing energy partnership/dialogue formats. As a result, transparent decisions on which concrete policy-area specific objectives and external instruments will be included in EGD diplomacy will be required to develop into a meaningful, comprehensive outreach strategy rather than a paper tiger of stated ambitions for various areas of external engagement.
Conclusion.
When the EU redesigned its external climate strategy, it changed how it chose its main interlocutors and interacted with them in practice. The Union has shifted away from a singular focus on the multilateral arena and leadership-by-example to what is known as ‘multiple bilateralisms’ (MB), which is defined as a foreign policy “strategy that entails the maintenance of several bilateral relationships in parallel as a subset of a multilateral negotiation setting.” With this shift, the EU abandoned its efforts to create a global climate regime that mirrored its regional and adopted a more pragmatic approach, acknowledging that it is part of a broader and malleable global context in which the – cooperative and confrontational – relations between major emitters shape multilateral climate policies decisively. The key features of the redesigned EU climate diplomacy are greater flexibility and more significant investment in the EU’s multiple bilateral relationships with other major emitters in parallel with the ongoing UN climate regime negotiations.
ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN THE MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student
13 April 2022, Kenya
Photo by Frederic Köberl
Category: Diplomacy
Reference: EM13042022D
“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”
CONFERENCE DIPLOMACY IN THE 21ST CENTURY
“Conference diplomacy has its antecedents in the Eastern Mediterranean in the 4th-century bc when the Greek city-states and Persia convened eight international political congresses, established a mutually guaranteed territorial status quo, and agreed on rules of conduct for regulating international affairs.”
What is Conference Diplomacy?
Conference diplomacy is the management of relations between governments and intergovernmental organisations that takes place at international conferences. This definition encompasses relations between governments and relationships between governments and the organisations to which they belong. This latter type of relationship has brought new elements to diplomacy. The term “conference” is used broadly, preventing the old distinction between a conference and a congress. The latter refers to gatherings attended by sovereigns or their principal ministers.
It is about resolving differences through an interconnected set of compromises and trade-offs in which no party gains everything, but all parties gain something and concede something.
Actors in Conference Diplomacy.
In most intergovernmental conferences, four main actors can be detected:
- the delegations, as representatives of their governments.
- the secretariat and its executive head.
- the presiding officer(s).
- various groups of governments, often acting through a single delegation appointed by the group.
Sometimes others become involved in conference diplomacy:
- non-governmental organisations.
- formal mediators, appointed by the parties in the dispute, by the UN Secretary-General, by the UN Security Council, or somehow.
- informal facilitators- a recent example is former US president Carter, with his interventions in North Korea, Haiti, and former Yugoslavia
Rise of Negotiations in Conference Diplomacy.
Westphalia, especially the Münster agreement, can be seen as a network of interconnected bilateral negotiations. It thus had a multilateral connotation, though not in the modern sense. As a result, this study proposes the term multi-bilateral negotiation because the meetings resembled a conference and resulted in numerous informal contacts between delegations that were not involved in formal negotiations. It is worth noting that this transverse or transliteral negotiation, along with regular longitudinal negotiation, is common in today’s conference diplomacy. In fact, the more participants there are and the more complicated and numerous the issues, the more transliteral negotiations are required inside and outside the conference rooms to keep the process moving. While the procedures and methods of the Westphalia negotiations favoured the larger countries, the smaller parties considered themselves fortunate to have been invited. Without the massive gathering, they would have been left much more out in the cold, which is why small countries prefer multilateral meetings. In contrast, their larger ‘brothers’ often prefer bilateral meetings currently. Westphalia can be seen as a bridge between old-fashioned bilateral interaction and twenty-first-century conference diplomacy in terms of procedure and process.
The United Nations and Conference Diplomacy
Diplomacy today faces the challenges of modern phenomena such as increased public attention and involvement, new modes of communication, and an increase in the number of international state and non-state actors, all of which are required to formulate foreign policy. From air traffic to the internet, modern communication technologies have allowed top diplomats, politicians, and heads of government and state to communicate personally and directly.
Conference Diplomacy (Kaufmann, 1996) by Johan Kaufmann assists practitioners in dealing with the procedures of institutionalised conferences, particularly in the context of the United Nations. Today’s United Nations has unrivalled convening and mobilising power, which has been used to organise many global conferences on various topics ranging from women to human rights, population to social development, and economic development to environmental conservation. Typically, the panels have included all global governance actors—states, civil society organisations, and, to a lesser extent, private sector firms. Whereas intergovernmental conferences are essential for the development of treaty law, global discussions are critical to the evolution of norms and ‘soft law,’ which begins to exert a binding effect in customary international law. According to two UN scholars, these conferences are “important for articulating new international norms, expanding international law, creating new structures, setting agendas… and promoting linkages among the UN, the specialised agencies, NGOs, and governments.” Any major global conference is accompanied by extensive diplomatic activity, which can last several years. Countries try to identify like-minded and thus likely coalition partners, harmonise strategies to advance their own and defeat competing interests and efforts, mobilise NGO support or blunt NGO dissent, etc.
Did you know?
A conference diplomat can jeopardise himself if he makes deliberate misrepresentations or avoidable errors, which are likely to be discovered sooner or later by his fellow delegates. Another delegate may confront him about his mistake in a speech, or he may be approached informally. In both cases, he will be questioned about the integrity of what he said. As a result, the conference diplomat will ensure that the facts he mentions in official sessions, informal speeches, or private conversations can be supported. On the other hand, the problem is that ‘truth’ is not always a singular entity. Truth can mean one thing to one person and something else to another when it comes to policy.
Conclusion
Modern conference diplomacy is one result that uses an ancient diplomatic strategy for avoiding conflict for as long as possible—ideally until a solution is found.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student
Category: Diplomacy
06 April 2022, Kenya
Reference: EM06042022D
Photo: jonathan-ansel
“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”
HANDLING CONFLICTS
Conflicts are inevitable. As long as humans walk the face of the earth, there will be confrontations. From issues as minor as scheduling two appointments simultaneously on your planner to disputes between family members and co-workers or political disagreements within the government, everyone will deal with conflicts on some level and in some manner.
For the most part, no one wants to enter into a personal conflict or disagreement intentionally. Conflicts can cause quite a stir of raw emotions and defences. If not handled correctly, it can cause many misunderstandings, severed relationships, financial hardships, unexpected reactions, or other issues and problems.
One of the best protocols for handling conflict is to avoid conflicting issues before they arise. However, that is not always an option.
When handling conflict, consider these guidelines:
Promptly – When an unavoidable issue arises, address it promptly or as quickly as possibly allowed to avoid the situation from escalating more. Don’t allow conflict to ferment. Many unpleasant problems can be resolved more civilly if just addressed promptly. Accidents, mistakes and slip-ups happen. Try to make corrections to mend the situation and move forward when they do.
Professional – Handle conflicts professionally. Something may have gone awry and not the way planned initially; however, don’t break the protocol of being professional. Think of reasonable, agreeable solutions to rectify the error.
Private – When a negative situation does occur (and once again, they will), if at all possible, try to resolve the problem in private with all the parties involved. Who does the conflict affect? If the matter only concerns one other person or a small group of people, keep the case with them only.
It is crucial to remember to handle the issue in private only if it can be done in a safe environment and without causing any further harm to someone else or something else.
Public – If your conflict was public, it might be necessary to handle the resolution publicly. This may even involve public apologies or corrections. If so, take it with no dramatics and as professionally as possible.
“Make wise choices. Every choice you make has a consequence.”
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Writer by Renita Jackson, Etiquette Specialist
06 April 2022, U.S.A
Category: Etiquette
Reference: RJ06042022BE
“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”
25 March SME INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS NETWORKING MEETING
25 March 2022
WE ARE YOUR GATEWAY TO THE WORLD!
The objective is to enable SME’s to do business with partners from all over the world.
We have had a very successful meeting in which some of the companies will continue to be in contact for mutual collaboration. Thank you for sharing your experiences and the challenges involved in doing business internationally.
Thank you!
See you on 29 April to Meet Match and Do Business!
Companies and countries:
SLP Interancional Ltd international, United Kigdom
Galve Internacional, The Netherlands
ReGen Villages Holding BV, The Netherlands
NKJ Strategic Solutions, South Africa
Leos Trumps, India
Auersmont School of Etiquette, Australia
ProtocolToday Consulting and Academy, The Netherlands
New Economy Strategies, The Netherlands.
See you on 29 April to Meet Match and Do Business!
SOFT POWER DIPLOMACY
Japan’s soft diplomacy phenomenon is portrayed through “Pop Culture Diplomacy.” The Japanese government’s program uses anime (animated cartoons) and manga (a comic style) to achieve a foreign policy goal. The use of pop culture as a diplomatic strategy stands in appealing, warm, and humane opposition to the threat of military power. While reliance on pop culture as a means of soft diplomacy and nation branding has significant potential for international relations, nations must be cautious in developing these practices. Recent initiatives in Japan, Britain, Turkey and the United States reveal the possible benefits and pitfalls of soft diplomacy and nation branding through popular culture.
Soft Power
Joseph Nye Jr, a political scientist during the 1980s, defined soft power as a country’s ability to influence others without resorting to coercive pressure. When put into practice, it entails a process where countries project their values, ideals, and culture across borders to foster goodwill and strengthen partnerships. The concept of soft power was first used in 1990 by the American Political Scientist Joseph Nye. In his article, Nye focuses on how America will rebuild the hegemonic power of the unipolar world after the Cold War. The debate has been shaped around ‘how power has changed in international relations. Countries must constantly renew themselves in the global competition.
Countries have developed tools and strategies to help them outperform their competitors in global competition. The country’s soft powers and brand are the most important tools. Positive images of the countries attract investment, tourism, and security. The country brand has evolved into an essential soft power tool in this context. The countries’ brand values and soft powers directly impact one another. Countries with a high brand value also have effective soft power. A country’s soft power is primarily based on three factors: its culture (in places where it is appealing to others), its political values (when they are upheld at home and abroad), and its foreign policies (when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority.)
Soft Power Diplomacy
Soft diplomacy is one of those words with a hazy definition that you recognise when you see it. Typically, it refers to attempts to engage directly with the public in indirect ways; it’s diplomacy’s soft power equivalent in that the goal isn’t so much to accomplish a specific substantive task as it is to try and change the fundamental basis on which a diplomatic relationship exists between countries. In and of itself, diplomacy evolves from the IR theory of Liberalism, which promotes cooperation among state actors for the peaceful resolution of conflicting issues in a win-win situation. As a big fan of Joseph Nye’s work on liberalism and soft power, I can say that soft diplomacy is based on the same idea.
Soft diplomacy is a process of mutual empowerment in which no direct goal-oriented action is taken, but efforts are channelled indirectly to achieve the goal. There is some debate about whether the affected state actors will directly participate. I believe that state actors are involved in some cases, and some indirect state actors engage in soft diplomacy.
European Union Soft Power Diplomacy
The EU is a leading intergovernmental organisation, and its success inspires non-member states to join the European integration project. The EU’s “soft power” stems from its willingness to offer a seat at the decision-making table, built on this promising foundation. This attractiveness ensures peace and security among European states, and the EU enlargement process strengthens the EU’s position on a global scale. As a result, the EU’s soft power benefits its member countries and the EU itself. This attractiveness ensures peace and security among European states, and the EU enlargement process strengthens the EU’s position on a global scale. Thus, the EU’s soft power benefits both its member countries and the EU itself. Soft power is being used by rising powers such as Russia, China, and India. Soft power and public diplomacy are lacking in developing countries.
Examples of Soft Power Diplomacy:
Korea
From the Gangnam style dance moves to the crazed fans of Korean pop groups like BTS, Twice, Black Pink, and the Oscar-winning film Parasite, as well as a large following of soft romance in Korean dramas. Korea is the new entertainment industry leader, in addition to establishing a foothold in the cosmetics and fashion industries, which have taken the world by storm.
India
India’s long history, culture, and civilisation is the most significant factor. These have drawn intellectuals and ordinary people from all over the world to India. So many brilliant minds from all over the world would not be working as Indologists if they were not attractive. Being in a strategic location and a global powerhouse of Asia, India also exercises soft power diplomacy through its vast diaspora, IT and pharmaceutical industries, and a foreign policy that values its neighbours.
China
China is one of the most powerful nations in terms of soft power diplomacy, from a global economic powerhouse to a centre of rich culture and traditions. China is a land that has it all, including our favourite Pandas, who are one of the key Chinese soft power diplomacy instruments.
Germany
Germany wields considerable influence and soft power in public policy, foreign relations, and international affairs. (Not afraid to criticise Russia or even support Iran for the JCPOA.) Germany is also a major contributor to global donations to international organisations and the most influential advocate for environmental protection, conservation, and sustainable development.
Conclusion
Soft Power is about winning people’s hearts and minds at its most basic. As a result, a people-centred approach is required. Governments cannot do much more than facilitating the process in this regard. Even if the concept of Soft Power is imprecise, Joseph Nye did well to highlight this important aspect of countries’ foreign policies. There is no country today that does not value this factor. Academics and intellectuals can be crucial in this endeavour.
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student.
21 March 2022, Kenya
Category: Diplomacy
Reference: EM210322D