THE INTERNATIONAL HONORIS CAUSA FOUNDATION AWARDED THE IBERO-AMERICAN MEDAL TO PROTOCOLTODAY

THE INTERNATIONAL HONORIS CAUSA FOUNDATION AWARDED THE IBERO-AMERICAN MEDAL TO ADRIANA FLORES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PROTOCOLTODAY. 04 AUGUST 2022, MEXICO CITY, CLUB DE INDUSTRIALES.

Adriana Flores was awarded the Ibero-American Medal of the Honoris Causa Foundation, “United for a Better World,” a badge awarded to life experiences turned into success for her spirit of improvement to create what she now has with her protocol, and Protocol Today, diplomacy has achieved success.

Based on her illustrious career and professional success, the result of a long history of hard work and excellence.

ProtocolToday® The Hague, Kingdom of the Netherlands, is an international protocol, diplomacy, interpersonal skills, business etiquette, and global cultural intelligence expert organization. It provides customized training programs based on public and private sector solutions.

Adriana Flores is regarded as a change agent and an advocate for Mexican business abroad; she was named President of the FHC in the Netherlands and Iberomerica leader.

This ceremonial act took place at Mexico City’s Industrial Club. DHC Enrique Michel Velasco, President of the FHC Board of Directors, DHC Raquel Bessudo, Vice President of the Board of Directors, and DHC Marco Tardelli, International President of FHC, were present. There were also diplomats and business representatives from the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, and Mexico.

In this ceremony, the Foundation’s presenters agreed to express the winner’s vital contribution to promoting Mexican culture and business in Latin America, particularly in the Netherlands, in addition to entrusting the liberty bell “symbol of Mexicans living abroad.”

It will be a privilege to represent Mexico and Latin America in the promotion of national and international business “United for a Better World.”

My heartfelt thanks to the FHC for believing in me and awarding me this significant international recognition, as well as to the people who have been the driving force, Hector Pérez, president of the Enlazadot company, for the interview on Women’s Day, Dr Sosa Chavez, psychologist and reporter, for her article published in the Guadalajara newspaper and to the press media for their publications.

My family, friends, follower and the ProtocolToday team.

 Thank you very much!

Entevista por Enlazadot

Video entrevista por Enlazado

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

My deepest thanks to all the people who have made an impact on protocoltoday
 www.protocoltoday.nl

Official Website

THE IMPORTANCE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN DIPLOMACY IN AFRICA

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence is important not only for developed countries but also for developing countries, including Africa. While the African continent has seen several innovative applications of Artificial Intelligence, more can be done to ensure access to information and knowledge via AI. While AI development has a long history of excitement followed by long disappointment, we are currently in the midst of an unprecedented period of technological innovation across multiple sectors, which is driving the growth of AI. The increase in digitised data in the global economy is one of the two critical factors driving this growth. Africa is already playing a key role in developing AI systems, which necessitate the use and availability of natural resources, labour, and skills across the continent.

Artificial Intelligence advancements in technology in Africa’s Digital diplomacy era

African countries have spent the last decade negotiating better export trading conditions using traditional diplomatic tools. However, the new global trading system is changing the very nature of diplomacy. Traditional approaches based on the concept of sovereign equity are giving way to more sophisticated approaches influenced by countries’ scientific and technological competence levels. This manifests itself in two ways. First, African countries’ ability to wield greater influence in the global arena will be determined by their economic strength, which is linked to their ability to use technological innovation for global competitiveness effectively. South Africa is the continent’s leader in AI adoption, thanks to a robust ecosystem that includes numerous technology hubs, research groups, and forums such as the AI Summit, which is sponsored by multinational corporations such as Intel, Salesforce, Amazon, and IBM, and Singularity University’s South Africa Summit. South Africa has over a hundred companies integrating AI solutions into their operations or developing new solutions using AI.

At least three major areas of technological innovation are reshaping international relations. First, greater international technical cooperation will be required to meet Africa’s human needs, such as adequate nutrition and health care. Similarly, Africa will need to strengthen its capacity for innovation to participate more effectively in the global economy. Although better raw material trading arrangements can help in the short term, long-term strategic technology alliances will offer the continent a viable way out of the raw materials commodity trap. Finally, addressing ecological challenges, such as the projected effects of climate change, will necessitate long-term technological collaboration with other countries. The recent agreement between the United States and Brazil to share ethanol technology to reduce reliance on oil demonstrates how urgent global challenges are redefining diplomatic relations.

AI in Security and Defence

Throughout history, warfare has changed due to the introduction and innovative use of new military technology. In the military and defence realms, AI is frequently discussed regarding lethal autonomous weapons, or “killer robots.” However, AI can enable and support a wide range of military functions, from logistics to autonomous weapons, cyber warfare, and disinformation. It consists of offensive and defensive systems and frontline and support systems. If we are interested in using AI as a tool for diplomacy, we must first define what diplomats do. One method is to examine the functions of diplomacy. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations defines diplomacy as gathering information, communication, representation, negotiation, and promotion of friendly relations. Artificial intelligence in diplomacy will play several roles in state recognition, making it a powerful tool for promoting relations between newly formed and established states. Within the African continent, Eritrea and South Sudan are examples of once-aspiring states that have achieved international recognition and recognition after successfully seceding from their host states. The two countries are opposed: the former gained statehood and recognition when digital diplomacy was non-existent, while the latter did so when it was well-established. Leading officials in South Sudan are known to have widely mobilised diplomatic support from regional states and the international community through digital technologies to gain statehood and recognition. As a result of digital technologies, social media has earned a central role in the projection, dissemination, and replication of information in the diplomatic arena. Diplomats worldwide used social media following South Sudan’s referendum to spread their speeches, announce public appearances, and share messages of congratulations for South Sudan’s referendum and independence.

The impact of AI in diplomacy, particularly in Africa, will result in a new or newly confirmed status in the relations between the states involved, joint or unilateral concerted action, the failure of negotiations, or their transfer to another temporal, geographical, or institutional framework. Failure may result in the use of military or non-military means of coercion. As defined in Chapter VI of the UN Charter, diplomatic negotiations aim to resolve conflicts without resorting to coercive measures. African governments should prioritise adopting AI solutions that help achieve national development goals and contribute to prosperous and inclusive societies. Policy responses to AI are emerging across the African continent, with Egypt, Mauritius, and Rwanda being the first to publish national AI strategies.

Conclusion

Local African actors are becoming more active in AI innovation, capacity building, and knowledge creation. This is brought on by increased computational power and an increase in funding for AI as part of a more significant increase in funding for start-ups. Despite this growth, African businesses are finding it difficult to develop suitable and alluring use cases that investors will fund with a reasonable degree of certainty that they will make a profit. However, foreign technology and AI companies continue to dominate the African market, which may not always support the achievement of national development priorities (such as those outlined in the UN 2030 Sustainable Development Goals). Worse, they amplify exclusion and oppression of specific groups, particularly women. African policymakers must prioritise the development of local AI capabilities and capacities that can be used to propel inclusive economic growth and social transformation. This prioritisation necessitates AI policies that build on national digital agendas and emphasise equitable access to digital, data, and computing infrastructure.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN OUR MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY 

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric Muhia, Co-editor in English language, Author of VIP Special Edition and specialised writer 

13  September 2022, Kenya

Category: Diplomacy 

Reference: EM13092022D    

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

DIASPORA AS A NEW TOOL IN DIPLOMACY

For a long time, diplomacy has been changing and evolving. Diplomacy has become more visible, and new diplomacy and diplomatic tools have emerged. The number of actors has grown. The emergence of new technologies, such as social media has also changed how diplomacy is conducted. Diaspora, on the other hand, is a much less discussed diplomatic tool. A country’s Diaspora can also be used to conduct diplomacy. “Both ‘diaspora’ and ‘diplomacy’ are concepts that have grown in popularity in recent years, indicating a shift away from viewing Diaspora as a descriptive category and diplomacy as the practice of state officials, respectively.

Diaspora diplomacy is a relatively new term that has gained currency at a time when cultivating external relations is a multifaceted process with many participants. Diaspora diplomacy is influencing and negotiating between nations by utilizing a country’s Diaspora to advance the home country’s interests.

Importance of Diaspora Diplomacy.

It promotes cross-border trade by acting as a middleman, providing market information and consumer preferences in both the host and origin countries. Diasporas have contributed to the development of their home countries by sending remittances and managing businesses in the latter. The Diaspora contributes to poverty alleviation at the household level through remittances sent to relatives. Diasporas promote their homeland’s image and culture. As a result, they serve as a tool for displaying a country’s soft power. Soft power is the ability to influence others to achieve desired results through attraction rather than coercion or the use of force.

Limitations

Most of the Diaspora migrates to other countries in search of better opportunities. A country’s diasporic community may be too small to make a difference. Diaspora diplomacy stems from the fact that Diasporas may be unwilling to engage with their home country and its government due to their critical view of their home country and its government. As a result, Diasporas may express their dissatisfaction loudly, negatively impacting the country’s image.

Diaspora Diplomacy Approaches in Foreign Policy

Diasporas frequently agree with their country of origin’s policies on foreign policy issues confronting the homeland and mobilize to support such policies. The collaboration between Jewish Americans and the Israeli government regarding Israel’s security is an example of diaspora-country cooperation. Foreign policy disagreements between homelands and diasporas have previously occurred between the government of Ireland and Irish Americans regarding Northern Ireland or between the government of Armenia and Armenian Americans regarding Turkey’s recognition of the Armenian genocide as a condition for normalized relations between Turkey and Armenia.

Governments should take a facilitative rather than an implementing role. Knowledge sharing and network access are two of the most significant benefits a country can obtain through Diaspora Diplomacy. New diplomacy initiatives alone will not result in successful diaspora diplomacy if foreign ministries do not adopt a new diplomacy mindset. Governments should prioritize communication, cooperation, and fostering an open, flexible, and transparent culture.

Diaspora Diplomacy in Cultural Exchange

The Diaspora’s role in cultural exchange, international affairs, and economic development is now well established. What is new is the growing proliferation of national strategies for actively leveraging them for public diplomacy. Diaspora communities have long relied on networks to maintain cultural and economic ties, but networks are also essential to the Diaspora’s role in public diplomacy. The concept of diaspora networks as an extension of a country’s hard (economic) and soft (cultural) power is now widely accepted. For centuries, diasporas have served as an extension of national prestige (or decline). Much thought has gone into the economic productivity of migrants and the role of remittances in maintaining cultural ties and assisting development.

Ireland

When it comes to diaspora diplomacy and diaspora strategy, Ireland is a forerunner. Ireland has launched several unique and innovative initiatives. However, as stated in the DFA’s official Diaspora Policy communication, there is still much to learn from the Diaspora and other countries. As a result, they are willing to learn from others and share their knowledge and experiences. They acknowledge that the DFA and the Irish Abroad Unit (the DFA’s specialized unit for diaspora matters, hereafter IAU) do not have a monopoly on this knowledge but that it is shared by Irish universities, NGOs, and private individuals. As a result, they believe that all these players must communicate and collaborate to broaden their knowledge on the subject. Finally, the DFA states that they will “support efforts to use Ireland as a hub for research into the potential and reach of diasporas, as well as the practical application of such research.”

Greece

There has been almost no research on Greek diaspora diplomacy. Research on the Greek Diaspora is available, but not from an IR perspective. The only study on diaspora diplomacy found in the Ministry’s library dates to 1996 and focuses on the success of the Greek Diaspora in lobbying the American government. The fleeing of Greeks after the fall of Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul) to the Ottomans is one of the most notable historical moments for using the term Greek diaspora. Currently, the General Secretariat for Greeks Abroad seeks to support the Diaspora’s interests and expectations while strengthening ties between the Diaspora and the homeland. GSGA’s goals include assisting the Diaspora in preserving national and cultural identity, as well as history, culture, and religion; promoting Greek culture through time; strengthening Greek networks abroad that can bridge friendship and cooperation between Greece and the other diaspora host countries; supporting Greek national interests abroad; providing for Greek schools, youth welcoming programs at home, and the use of new technologies; and funding and sustaining the operation of GSGA.

Conclusion

Ph.D. scholars can understand the social consequences of the Diaspora’s split existence by situating Diaspora in global social fields that connect their places of origin and destination. Investigating the complex web of diplomatic, economic, social, political, and emotional transnational diaspora relations and ties can ultimately advance the study and policy making in diaspora diplomacy.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN OUR MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies, and Diplomacy Graduate Student and Young Diplomat

17 June 2022, Kenya 

Category: Diplomacy 

Reference: EM17052022D

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

THE HISTORY AND THE ART OF GIVING IN DIPLOMACY

Since late antiquity, diplomacy has been subject to various protocols governing ambassadors’ treatment and behavior. With the gradual spread of new ways of doing diplomacy and the increasing correlation of diplomacy with sovereignty during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, questions of diplomatic ceremony in Europe became paramount. Diplomatic ceremonial accordingly developed both as a mechanism for regulating diplomatic interactions and the focal point for intense inter-sovereign competition. It was not until the nineteenth century that diplomatic ceremony began to decline as a point of intense international controversy, though it remains an element of practice in contemporary diplomacy.

History

The exchange of gifts during state and diplomatic visits demonstrates the good diplomatic relations between the states. This also presents a sign of the generosity that is required as a strategy of political representation. Gifts distributed to heads of states and heads of monarchies would be expressed as traditional depending on the recipient’s rank. With gifts distributed to the Kings, they were associated with the ritual act of knighting, or they were given as grateful recognition of rendered services. “On July 23, 1574, the Collegio (the Venetian council of ministers) resolved to commission the ambassadors extraordinary to purchase a magnificently equipped carriage as a gift for the king. As it was to serve his onward journey, the horses were accustomed to carriage harnesses and handsome. To complete the order in a short time, the ambassadors were permitted to appropriate such horses regardless of the owner or social status. Subsequently, the owners were to be paid.”

American Diplomatic Gifting

American diplomatic etiquette during the early national period largely conformed to the dictates of republican simplicity, giving it a certain uniqueness that set it apart from the court etiquette of the Old World. One of the most evident manifestations of the attempt to divorce American diplomatic etiquette and protocol from the traditional and time-honored practices associated with European Court usage involved the giving and receiving of diplomatic gifts and emoluments. In places such as the United States, where diplomacy aims to promote “security, prosperity, democracy, and economic development,” gift exchanges may seem an unusual tactic. Yet, the tradition maintains a place in international relations today.

However, there existed many occasions upon which the governments of Europe gave presents to foreign ministers stationed at their respective courts; the two most common instances were upon the conclusion of treaties and international agreements, and the completion of the foreign ministers varied widely from court to court and from diplomat to diplomat. John Quincy Adams was an expert on such matters, explained that the usual present received by diplomats at the Court of St. James was “ a sum of money, graduated according to his rank, or a gold box, or another trinket of equal value” while at St. Petersburg “this present usually consists of gold snuffbox with the portrait of the Emperor enchased in diamonds, the value of which is proportionate to the rank of the minister and to the degree of satisfaction which the Emperor thinks proper to manifest with his conduct during the mission.”

Most diplomats and heads of the state rely on a specific department to help them choose their presents. In the US, the Office of Protocol’s Gift Unit selects presents with varying degrees of success. In 2014, for example, secretary of state John Kerry gave Russian foreign minister Sergej Lavrov two large potatoes from Idaho. It seemed an unnecessary humiliation for Lavrov, who had already received a questionable gift from Kerry’s predecessor. In 2009, Hillary Clinton, then secretary of state, handed him a replica of a red button supposed to symbolize an easing of tension between the two countries. Yet the word peregruzka that appeared under the button meant “overcharged” and not “reset,” as the Office of Protocol had intended.

European Diplomatic Gifting

European and Mughal rulers and their envoys shared a common ground of diplomatic gift-giving practices shaped by an understanding of what was worthy of giving and of the symbolic power of the given objects. Gift-giving between European monarchies was also unique as it was realpolitik: receiving objects became a manner of securing, or maintaining, a favorable position with a diplomatic counterpart or adversary based on the value of the gift. Gift exchange between monarchs and states of equal standing has a long European history. Gifts would be offered directly at monarchical encounters: more often, they were given as proxy for heads of State. Sixteenth-century diplomacy used all gifts—animals, plates, jewels—along with the new gift of portraits, which were a particularly intimate form of present, affirming identity. Ambassadors, who were now increasingly often residents in London, brought gifts and were rewarded by the Crown. Elizabeth, James, and Charles had to develop tariffs of reward, reflecting the status of an embassy and the honor due to the servants of a foreign prince. Such rewards were matters of political importance, closely scrutinized by domestic and foreign observers.

Why do Diplomats Give Gifts?

A state gift often captures a nation’s essence, chosen for its ability to exhibit pride in a unique culture and people. Gifts of state may showcase fine or folk arts, crafts, or craftsmanship traditions. They may display wealth in precious stones or metals, fine textiles, and apparel. Gifts may draw from a rich heritage of antiques and antiquities or an expressive storehouse of cultural icons. This way, the gift becomes more than a mere formality but a reminder of the special alliance between the gift giver and receiver. Diplomacy comes in many different forms, but one is often forgotten: the long-standing tradition of state officials exchanging gifts. These gifts, meant to “welcome, honor and cultivate beneficial diplomatic relationships,” come in many shapes and sizes but often emphasize the workmanship of local businesses, historical craftsmanship, or local luxuries and materials. Sometimes surpassing the ordinary and requiring stringent accountability, they make us question the role of diplomatic performance, the effectiveness of government oversight, and the impact of symbolism.

Diplomatic gifts can indeed offer a lasting, positive image of allyship. The practice of diplomatic gift-giving overall requires striking a balance; this tradition holds potential for showing off a country’s cultural and material richness and for being a performative, diplomatically sensitive action. Perhaps our affinity for gifts and gifting to others is at the root of this norm. Diplomatic gifts may not be, after all, much different in intent or expectation than birthday gift-giving or any other holiday present. However, given the complicated processes and interactions that they require and the wealth they represent, it may be worth exploring their place among countries attempting to promote democratic and meritocratic values, as well as re-evaluating best practices.

The giver is ultimately the person who will benefit most in the exchange if the present creates an expectation for a gift in return.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN OUR MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student and Young Diplomat.

10 June 2021, Kenya

Category: Diplomacy 

Reference: EM10062022D    

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

THE IMPACT OF CHINA ON AFRICAN HEALTH DIPLOMACY

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), Africa accounts for a quarter of global communicable and non-communicable disease mortality and morbidity burdens. Still, its share of global health expenditure is less than 1%, leaving more than half of its population without access to essential health services.

Defining Health Diplomacy

The practice of health diplomacy seeks to prioritize the healthcare aspects of humanitarian aid as a mechanism for political and economic negotiations between donor and recipient countries. Health diplomacy is defined as any healthcare activity with the underlying intention of improving political, economic, and cultural ties between donor and recipient countries by the donor state’s foreign policy.

Health crises are a significant focus of contests for global influence, especially in the global South, where such crises are most acute. This necessitates a focus on international health diplomacy arenas and the power struggles that emerge from them, including the often-overlooked agency of African actors within these arenas. The nineteenth-century economic and trade policies relating to maritime quarantines were some of the first examples of historical health diplomacy. The early international health relations were focused on “international collaboration to protect human and commercial interests against the spread of specific infectious diseases.”

China, Africa, and Health Diplomacy

The overarching concern in global health work that does engage with Africa is perceptions and reactions to Africa as a threat to global health and a site for diplomacy. Typically, the continent is seen as being ‘acted on’ by the West8 and, more recently, three other powerful global actors, including China.

China has a long, often unacknowledged history of providing foreign aid to Africa, building on a shared colonial experience to forge what China refers to as mutually beneficial partnerships. Current health sector assistance accounts for more than a quarter of China’s African foreign aid. Although all donor countries claim that their foreign policy and health diplomacy are motivated by mutual benefit for the donor and recipient, China’s intentions in Africa have drawn scrutiny, particularly from the West. China’s health diplomacy differs from that of the West.

China’s health diplomacy differs from that of the West in three ways: a) ideologically, b) technologically (specific interventions and technological transfers), and c) structurally (execution and implementation).

Ideologically
China’s health diplomacy is guided by a specific ideological understanding of aid’s function, structure, and role in diplomatic relations that emerged in the 1950s. The ideologies embedded in China’s foreign policy and health diplomacy stem from Beijing’s specific political agenda and a distinctively “Asian” perspective on foreign policy.

Technologically
Aside from ideological differences, the actual health care interventions and health diplomacy structure further distinguish Chinese and Western health diplomacy. China’s interventions and technology transfer to Africa have been markedly different from those transferred by the West. Professional human resources have always played an essential role in Sino-African health diplomacy.

Structurally
There are structural differences between Chinese and Western health diplomacy as well. Whereas Western health assistance is a mix of public, private, and multilateral sources, China’s health diplomacy is almost entirely public. It is frequently decentralized to the level of a Chinese province. A Chinese province is usually paired with one or more African countries.

The rise of China has presented opportunities to African states, and recent Chinese interest in the Malawian health sector – including the provision of medical expertise to Kamuzu Central Hospital and Mzuzu Central Hospital, as well as Malaria eradication initiatives – provides opportunities for actors in the Ministry of Health, despite the withdrawal of traditional donors’ support. The ‘Beijing Consensus’ of non-interference and respect for sovereignty appeals to African governments such as Malawi as a break from traditional donors’ ‘tied aid,’ which includes prerequisites such as political liberalization or economic reforms (except for the ‘one China policy’).

African governments have a role to play.

Typically, the prospective recipient government initiates the process of health diplomacy. In general, an African government will propose a health project based on assessing their population’s needs. As a result, if the receiving government is looking for CMTs (Chinese Medical Teams), they will specify what practitioners and specialists they need and where they want them to work. The Chinese government then evaluates whether it can meet the proposal’s human and material resource availability demands. For this structure, interventions are frequently recipient-led from the start. They are thus more context-appropriate than if China designed a healthcare intervention based on its assessment of local needs. The increased specificity of this process may help to inform Western health diplomacy.

Diplomatic Response in Health Diplomacy

There is widespread agreement that improved governance of health systems is required to respond to the increasing frequency of global health threats, both at the national and international levels. The increased spread of globalization has resulted in an intensification of cross-border health threats that exceed the ability of any single country or organization to address the health threats that they face. However, the new approach to promoting a universal agenda for inclusive, sustainable development that applies equally to all countries is as important as the individual Goals. In this regard, the new Goals are unique in that they call for action by all countries, rich and poor, to promote prosperity while protecting the environment, which was not the case with the MDGs. Whereas health diplomacy is central to China’s soft power, shadow diplomacy allows us to understand better how these newer global actors use global health diplomacy to consolidate their influence in Africa.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN OUR MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student

27 May 2022, Kenya 

Category: Diplomacy 

Reference: EM27052022D    

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN DIPLOMACY

Artificial intelligence has applications in defence, intelligence, homeland security, diplomacy, surveillance, cybersecurity, information, and economic statecraft. Diplomacy, long regarded as the primary tool of international relations, is impacted by AI on three levels: it has become a subject of the action; it conditions diplomacy itself, and it prepares the environment in which it is practised.

Evolution

“artificial intelligence” (AI) has received much attention ” artificial intelligence “. As exaggerated as the public hype can be, there is genuine technological progress behind it: computer processor performance increases year after year, as are advanced in-memory technology and research into AI algorithms. To summarise, it is now possible to process more data faster than ever before – with consequences that can already be seen in everyday life, such as facial and speech recognition.

Diplomacy has long been a part of the digital revolution. To meet the challenges and opportunities that come with it, it is adapting its cultural references, operational methods, practices, structures, and initiatives. With AI’s integration into all aspects of society, it will inevitably impact diplomacy. The more profound AI is integrated into society, the greater the impact on the context in which diplomats operate.

AI Implications on Diplomatic Practice

Artificial intelligence (AI) has evolved into a tool of power politics and a component of state diplomacy.

AI as a tool for diplomatic practice: AI examines how it can support diplomats’ diplomatic functions and day-to-day tasks. In times of crisis, AI systems could be of great assistance to diplomats by assisting them in making sense of what is going on (descriptive analytics) and identifying potential trends (predictive analytics)

AI as a topic for diplomatic negotiations: Today, AI is still prone to error and will not be able to replace the judgement of experienced diplomats in the foreseeable future. However, as a supplementary tool, AI has the potential to make an invaluable contribution to the preparation and conduct of diplomatic negotiations.

AI as a factor influencing the environment in which diplomacy is practised: As a factor influencing the environment in which diplomacy is practised, AI has the potential to be the defining technology of our time, with the potential to reshape the foundation of the international order.

As a diplomatic topic, AI is relevant to a broader policy plan that includes everything from the economy, business, and security to democracy, human rights, and ethics. In assisting diplomats and other foreign policy professionals with internal and external text document analysis, speech analysis, content and framing input, catching spam and unwanted messages, identifying hate speech, and combating the spread of terrorism content on social media platforms.

Threats of AI as a diplomatic tool.

Artificial intelligence threatens international security and social, economic, and military activities. This means that governments, as the primary actors in a global society, must reconsider their foreign policies, diplomacy, and international cooperation in light of the new challenges posed by the malicious use of AI in various domains, particularly global psychological security. This threat is a crucial feature of the new cold war, defined by the race toward AI. Given the rise of new technological and economic forces, which means the emergence of new players and new rules of international relations, a new international order is taking shape. However, the malicious use of AI poses new challenges for states as the primary actors in international relations, given the emergence of new concepts such as artificial diplomacy, data sovereignty, cybersecurity, and cyberwar. For example, AI can assist diplomats in data processing, but it cannot completely replace the human factor. AI is incapable of reaching a compromise, and it is deaf to perception, intuition, and risk-taking. Human diplomats can detect the undetectable, see the invisible, and notice the unnoticeable, which AI systems cannot, at least not shortly.

Revolutionising Diplomatic Dialogues through AI

A dialogue must be added and organised based on the cognitive and analytical elements made available to operators by the digital revolution, from Big Data to the algorithms used in Artificial Intelligence. A dialogue of this type allows a diplomat to understand better his interlocutors’ history, cultures, attitudes, mentality, aspirations, and interests—that is, the citizens of the area in which he conducts his activity in favour of his state. In this regard, it should not be forgotten that, according to the most recent statistics, more than three billion people worldwide use Facebook, Twitter, Qzone, Snapchat, and other social media platforms daily.

It is the evolution of a forward-thinking diplomatic system. Many governments have advocated for establishing structures suited to these new responsibilities within foreign ministries and embassies worldwide. For example, the US State Department launched a Task Force on eDiplomacy in 2002, later becoming the Office of eDiplomacy. A visit to the official State Department website demonstrates how important, and complex the mechanism of American digital diplomacy has become. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) in the United Kingdom also has a separate Office of Digital Diplomacy.

The role of artificial intelligence in improving consular and diplomatic relations

From an AI standpoint, consular services could be low-hanging fruit for AI integration in diplomacy. Decisions are amenable to digitisation, the analytical contribution is reasonably relevant, and the technology encourages user-machine collaboration. Consular services rely on highly structured decisions. They primarily involve recurring and routinised operations based on clear and stable procedures that do not need to be treated as new each time a decision is required. By lowering language barriers between countries, AI can help improve communication between governments and foreign publics, increase the security of diplomatic missions through image recognition and information sorting technologies, and support international humanitarian operations by monitoring elections, assisting in peacekeeping operations, and ensuring that financial aid disbursements are not misused through anomaly detection. AI-assisted consular services may incorporate declarative (know-what) and procedural knowledge (know-how) to automate routinised operations and scaffold human cognition by reducing cognitive effort. This can be accomplished by using data mining and data discovery techniques to organise the data and enable the identification of patterns and relationships that would otherwise be difficult to detect.

Can Artificial Intelligence (AI) open new doors for the practice of diplomacy? Throughout history, “diplomacy” has meant the efforts of human communities to peacefully reconcile their interests with one another before or after attempting to enforce them by force.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN THE MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric MUHIA, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student

10 May 2022, Kenya  

Category: Diplomacy  

Reference: EM10052022D

Photography: Rene Bohme

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

MODERN BUSINESS EVOLUTION

Millennials & Gen Z: The Game Changers

The digital age of accessible information brought ground-breaking changes to how we live our everyday lives, the way we communicate, and the dynamic pace of change we are expected to keep up with. Looking back at the history and the previous generations, from the cradle to the grave- not much would change.

If the Boomers and Gen X thought the 20th century was a rollercoaster of space flight, colour television and flip phone- the 21st century is a remarkable metamorphosis. The entire spectrum of subtitles and far-reaching changes proved to be axiomatically indispensable. From the perspective of conducting business in the global economy- standing still means moving backwards. Whilst tailored suits, shiny lease cars, office environments, business cards, and proper handshakes still matter, they are far removed from the primary expectations of a modern business and the very definition of success.

The Millennials (born 1981- 1996) and especially Gen Z (born 1997-2012) brought and will continue to bring immense disruption to business and job markets within the next decade. Corporations must adjust to their employees, consumers and influencers, who outright reject the old status symbols and genuinely want to make a positive difference in the world. Creativity, environment, cultural diversity, empathy, and work-life balance are amongst the most important aspects of Millennials and Gen Z life. Often branded as ‘snowflakes’, privileged and over-sensitive by the older generations, the derogatory undertone doesn’t seem to faze or startle them. Their heads might be in the clouds, but the gravity is firmly centred on moving away from the old world.

There is a lot to be learned and some things unlearned, to put this simply into a business etiquette term. Having chameleon-like skills, being well informed on social issues, and the ability to communicate on all levels are at the very top of my list. Traditional formalities are a small fraction of the overall picture when conducting and communicating in business, reserved for the highest level of governments and conventional corporate structures. However, social awareness, commitment to sustainability, diversity, equality, and inclusion are the driving force behind modern business etiquette on a large scale.

At times, the change, as it’s always been, maybe challenging and uncomfortable, but it’s very rarely unnecessary. Depending on where you are in the business spectrum of today’s modern society, the landscape has shifted for both employees and employers. The most evident proof of this is the global reaction to the current conflict in Europe. This is a prime example of a centuries-old, traditionally profit-orientated culture turning its backs on injustice, aggression and suffering of innocent people. An overwhelming proportion of corporations across the globe choose to do the right thing at a very high cost of profit. This unorthodox move is intensely welcomed, encouraged and supported by large populations worldwide, who refuse to ignore this deplorable abuse. Companies rapidly transform and gain lifelong loyal customers, consumers, business partners, and employees.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN THE MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Anastasia MARTEL, Etiquette and Protocol Specialist

08 May 2022, United Kingdom 

Category: Business Etiquette 

Reference: AM08052022BE   

Photography: Bryan-goff

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

THE FUTURE OF MULTILATERAL DIPLOMACY

“Diplomacy has expanded its remit, moving far beyond bilateral political relations between states into a multilateral, multifaceted enterprise encompassing almost every realm of human endeavour,” said former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Multilateral diplomacy takes various forms: some are more institutional, such as the United Nations, while others are less formal and less identifiable in terms of parameters and rules. These latter are extremely difficult for African states, even though these fora, such as the World Economic Forum or G20, are extremely influential. It is the practice of involving more than two nations or parties in pursuing diplomatic solutions to supranational problems. Since multilateral diplomacy is a rapidly evolving industry, new forms regularly emerge, making it difficult to describe all types comprehensively.

Actors: Sovereign states remain the primary actors in multilateral diplomacy, but non-state actors such as non-governmental organisations, civil society representatives, and the business community are increasingly involved. Despite the importance of adhering to the constitutive acts of various international organisations, including their rules of procedure, multilateral diplomacy embraces new forms of interaction regularly, reflecting the need for flexibility and rapid adaptability to a dynamic environment.

Methods: In today’s world, only a tiny portion of multilateral diplomatic activity occurs in formal and solemn settings. The interaction between various actors takes many forms, including informal contacts and spontaneous coalitions of the willing.

Diplomatic Hubs

Diplomatic hubs in New York, Geneva, and Vienna will remain important in the future. Diplomats on the ground are critical, especially during the lockdown and social distancing. While diplomatic hubs, like all diplomatic practices, face both continuity and change, we can say that they are now more important than ever. Acknowledging context and nuance in multilateral diplomacy and dealing with contentious issues and crises necessitates an on-the-ground presence. Diplomatic presence at multilateral hubs is critical due to significant time differences between multilateral hubs and some capitals and potential future travel restrictions. Diplomatic representation at key multilateral institutions is also symbolic, signalling a commitment to multilateralism for functional and normative reasons.

Multilateral diplomacy by video conference: practices, procedures, protocol, and platforms

At the heart of the diplomatic practice is the ability to overcome communication barriers and positional distances. As a result, mediating physical distance and video conferencing challenges is a new diplomatic task, one for which diplomats are already prepared as “mediators of estrangement.” Negotiating the modalities of in-person, hybrid, and online meetings have become a new challenge for multilateral institution and meeting chairs and presidents. As the Human Rights Council (HRC) demonstrates, committed leadership and ongoing dialogue with member states to build trust are critical ingredients in successfully navigating the changed circumstances.

The diplomatic protocol has adapted to social distancing measures, such as reorganising and framing photo opportunities at high-level meetings. While this complicates meeting organisation, it does not call into question established protocol rules. Since some diplomatic practice has shifted toward video conferencing, key challenges include addressing security concerns, adapting to changes in communication and negotiation dynamics, providing translation services, and maintaining a stable Internet connection. Concerns have been raised about creating an unequal playing field and the risk of exclusion due to bandwidth requirements and security constraints. Small and developing countries face a unique set of challenges in this regard.

State of Multilateral Diplomacy among African Countries.

Representatives from African countries are outnumbered by negotiating teams from other countries who arrive better prepared; African countries must maximise their resources and collaborate to combine their areas of expertise. Diplomats in Africa are also woefully undertrained, and organisations such as the African Union (AU) could do more to improve their members’ diplomatic skills.

African diplomats should not be naive about the world and emerging powers’ multilateral strategies. Other countries are also developing countries does not necessarily imply that they are looking out for Africa’s best interests. The rise of multistakeholder diplomacy adds to the complication. It is difficult for African countries to open to this type of international relations. Still, they must do so to have genuine grassroots representation defending their points of view and promoting their interests.

Multilateral Diplomacy and the United Nations Today

As the world faces new and ongoing challenges such as globalisation, international terrorism, and a slew of other global issues, the United Nations and its critical attribute-multilateral diplomacy-are more crucial than ever. With new and updated essays detailing the experiences of a diverse group of practitioners and scholars working in diplomacy, this emerging era covers the fundamental characteristics of multilateral diplomacy as it is conducted within the United Nations framework in even greater breadth and depth.

Today’s Multilateral Diplomacy and the United Nations offers valuable insights from various perspectives on how diplomacy is practised, making it required reading for aspiring diplomats, international business leaders, and students at all levels. This volume’s contributors bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to examine five areas of multilateral diplomacy: UN diplomacy, crisis diplomacy, international economic diplomacy, UN summits and “citizen diplomats,” and non-governmental diplomacy.

In conclusion, context is critical in multilateral diplomacy. Diplomats on the ground are far better positioned to detect and interpret nuances and signals. The incorporation and dissemination of digital tools into the practice of diplomacy has had a significant impact on multilateral diplomacy today.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION 

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN THE MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Writer by Eric Muhia, International Studies and Diplomacy Graduate Student

02 May 2022, Kenya 

Category: Diplomacy 

Reference: EM02052022D   

“Somos una empresa de desarrollo de capacidades que conecta valores, culturas, organizaciones, individuos y sociedades en todo el mundo”

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.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

ADVERTISE YOUR COMPANY INTERNATIONALLY IN THE MAGAZINE GLOBAL MINDSET

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
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.

VIP SPECIAL EDITION

PROTOCOLTODAY ACADEMY OF PROTOCOL & SOFT DIPLOMACY

Share this article
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”