When Diplomacy Works and Fails? Essay Example

3 pages
806 words
University of California, Santa Barbara
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

When defining diplomacy, Braston (2014) stated that it is the management of the worlds relations through negotiations. Furthermore, Frankel (1969) asserts that diplomacy is a certain result of the coexistence among the different nations or political divides with any degree of contact. From these two statements, it is clear that diplomacy is the basic means through which various nations and other divided parties can secure their interests through dialogues and negotiations rather than violence. As Winston Churchill perceived, the reason for having diplomatic relations is not to confer a compliment but to secure a convenience. (Linn, 2009). However, there are some instances and situation in which diplomacy can either work or fail. Therefore it is vital to comprehend why and when diplomacy expedites nonviolent settlements of disputes amongst the nations and also when it hinders the resolution of the international conflicts.

For diplomacy to work, there are some steps in which the parties in disputes should follow or are directed by. Diplomacy can work when there is a practical system through which parties can engage in dialogues. The foreign policies of the nations involved should not be rigid or aesthetic; dialogues entails persuading others to conform to new policies and actions based on the new and changing understanding of things. According to Copeland (YouTube), there should be skills in place that are required to deal with thorny, complex issues. For diplomacy to work, it should be more flexible and adaptable to the changing conformities of todays world.

One of the recent successful examples of diplomacy working in the modern world is the decision by Ronal Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev to end the cold war. This was after several years of severe diplomatic hiatus by the two nations, the United States and U.S.S.R. Diplomacy can only work when there is a shared understanding and by privileging dialogues by the warring parties. The actions of the two nations implied that there should be skill at the measure of war. Nations ought to set aside their militarism and resort to developing capacities that shape the events of broadening their advantage without an ineffective resort of engaging in wars. Diplomats must engage in dialogues, carefully listening to what the other parties say and find the points of agreements that may overcome the points of disagreements. Parties dialoguing should have a clear goal and strategies through which they can be exchanged as to settle on agreements. Timing and leverage matters when negotiating, the Reagan administration was deft on how it handled the Soviet Union. Right and seasoned negotiators should take the lead in the talks, they should control their expectation so as to see the probable better understanding of adversarys perception. The approach of successful diplomacy often requires rigorous planning. On reaching agreements on which they can settle on, the parties should have a formal communique or agreement binding TREATY that clearly spells and specifies the actions and accountabilities of both sides.

On the other hand, diplomacy has the possibility of failing. The recent demonstration of failed diplomacy was the failure of diplomatic efforts to prevent the violent break-up of Ukraine. The western government led by the United States pressed for international mediation because it was the only chance of achieving a bloodless solution to the crisis. This, however, failed after the Russian government intervened into the crisis by choosing to defend Crimea and in the end annexing it. The Russians denounced the attempts by the international community to engage in persuasive conversation. The petulant action by the Russian Federation and Crimea to break off dialogue resulted in the effect were are seeing with Russian in Ukraine. The conflict in Ukraine is a vivid proof of failed diplomacy in which the Russian Federation used it to strategize the ordinary means of proofing itself to be a military power. Diplomacy could have easily integrated the preventive dimensions to prevent the conflicts from starting in Ukraine.

Before rushing into settling disputes through violent means, we should consider President Kennedys remarks when deciding on which ways we ought to settle our conflicts; he stated that Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind. Diplomacy only fails when the parties involved fail to engage in dialogues so as to find a common resolution. It is imperative to comprehend that diplomacy has the capacity to adapt to changes. The contemporary change on the way diplomacy works runs as a motif through which the process of diplomacy and the structures in place should respond to the transforming environments.



Barston, R. P. (2014). Modern diplomacy. Routledge.

Copeland, Daryl. 20 Dec 2012. What is Diplomacy? Why does it fail? How can it be more effective? Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WqdVPk71r4Frankel, J. (1969). International relations. Lane, Allen.

Linn Jr, M. (2009). Being diplomatic. The Bottom Line, 22(4), 126-130. https://doi.org/10.1108/08880450911010942

Have the same topic and dont`t know what to write?
We can write a custom paper on any topic you need.

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the collegeessaywriter.net website, please click below to request its removal: