Thesis Abstract

Thesis Overview

<p> </p><p>GENERAL INTRODUCTION<br>1.1.BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY<br>Diplomacy, a word derived from the Greek word “diploma” which is an official document emanating from princes; a diploma is understood to be a document by which a privilege is conferred. Some scholars have argued that the origin of diplomacy is hard to trace. According to them, the major subject of concern in the field of diplomacy has been its practice, rather than its origins (Der Deriam, 1987:2). Diplomacy as predicating the art of representation and representation is as old as human society itself. Nicolson (1969:6) argues that even in pre-history there must have come moments when one group of savages wished to negotiate with another group of savages, if only for the purpose of indicating, that they had had enough of the day‟s battle and would like a pause in which to collect their wounded, and to bury their dead. The fact that these savages did not spend all their time fighting, in Nicolson‟s view, is diplomacy. The nature and the nearness to one another of the numerous Greek city/states encouraged the development of inter-state relations. The political and commercial relations among the states gave rise to the cause of the states they represented in the popular assemblies of the other city-states. These intermediaries or „pourpaleurs‟ as they were called had to be orators and they enjoyed certain privileges and immunities such as the inviolability of their person.<br>Diplomacy in the era of the Greeks was far from perfect. Ambassadors were appointed on an ad-hoc basis and for specific purpose. This led to the appointment of many ambassadors from a state to another at the same time. The contributions of the Romans, to the development of diplomacy were more in theory, in the realm of international law, than in practice. Their determination to impose “Pax Romana” on the world meant the ascendancy of force over diplomacy. In spite of this, however, the idea of appointing people with very high status started with them. Renaissance diplomacy was introduced which increased the functions of ambassadors. They were no longer political emissaries but also commercial agents. They needed to gather general information relating to the political, social and economic activities of the state to which they were accredited. Renaissance diplomacy suffered serious shortcomings. There was no agreed order of precedence, either in presenting credentials or in signing treaties, and each of these activities often led to unseemly wrangles, sometimes resulting into physical combat. Besides, it was noted for its immorality. Ambassadors were not paid well, yet they had to cater for their staff. They often had to resort into bribery, pinching and converting funds into their own pockets.<br>After the congress of Vietnam in 1815 the array of the shortcomings of Renaissance diplomacy were removed. The Regalement of 19 March, 1815 and the subsequent regulation of the congress of Aix-la-Chapelle settled the issue of precedence and the hierarchy of diplomatic representation. Precedence was no longer based on the prestige and status of an ambassadors sovereign but on the priority of the ambassador‟s appointment.(Olusola Ojo, Amadu Sesay,1988:203). However, ancient Greece and Roman history and literature are replete with records and references to “diplomatic” activities. The growing interdependence of states as well as the two World Wars have shaped and continue to affect the development of diplomacy. The common features of diplomacy in the contemporary system includes; “open”, “parliamentary” and “multilateral diplomacy”. Open diplomacy means the negotiations and discussions carried out in handling affairs without arousing hostility. It is usually carried on with free access to interested observers and members of the press. It refers to the art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations.<br>Multilateral diplomacy can be defined as the practice of involving more than two nations or parties in achieving diplomatic situations to supranational problems (Kishore Mahbubani, 2013). Multilateral diplomacy also known as “conference diplomacy” involves relations,…</p><p><strong>1.3. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM</strong></p><p>The anarchical structure of the world, the struggle for power within the international system and most especially, the inherent evil within man is the basis of conflict. In this vein, the concept of diplomacy cannot be left un-emphasized. The world today is surrounded by various violent conflicts namely; The Russia-Ukraine crisis, the Syrian war, the Turkey conflict, Israeli-Palestinian war, Israeli-Gaza crisis, to mention but a few. Most conflicting parties result into violence means of conflict resolution which is the root cause of the disrupted international peace today. Most diplomats of a country are non career diplomats with little or no experience in the field of diplomacy; hence the result is failed diplomacy<br>Diplomacy as an important approach in conflict management and prevention has been employed by various conflicting individuals, communities as well as nations states/countries and have achieved maximum result. They include: late Norwegian minister of foreign affairs: “Johan Jorgen Holst”, Nelson Mandela, and Kofi Anan amongst many others. A lot of research has been carried out on diplomacy as an important tool for conflict management but most of these researches have not really described the importance of diplomacy and also they have failed to look at the various ways in which diplomacy is carried out. Therefore, this work considers it important to undertake howbeit compendiously, a historical excursion into the art and practice of diplomacy globally. This it is hoped will shed light into our understanding of diplomacy as practiced by states within the international system. This project will enlighten the reader on the efficacy of diplomats as well as diplomacy in conflict management and various ways in which diplomacy can be effected.<br><strong>1.4. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY</strong><br>Amongst the various means of conflict management tools in both contemporary and anachronous times, this project‟s main objective is to examine the roles of diplomacy in conflict management and prevention. The specific objectives of the study are;</p><p>i) To examine the historical relevance of diplomacy in conflict management and prevention;<br>ii) To identify the roles and significance of diplomats in the Russia-Ukraine crisis; and<br>iii) To assess the effects and impacts of diplomacy in the Russia-Ukraine crisis.<br><strong>1.5. RESEARCH QUESTIONS</strong><br>The following research questions are derived from the research objectives of this study.<br>i) To what extent has diplomacy served as an effective tool in conflict management and prevention?<br>ii) What specific roles did diplomats play in managing Russia-Ukraine crisis?<br>iii) How effective was diplomacy in managing the Russia-Ukraine crisis?<br><strong>1.6. RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS</strong><br>ï‚· Diplomacy is an effective means of preventing and managing conflict<br>ï‚· Diplomacy is necessary in redressing power conflict<br>ï‚· Diplomacy is an important tool in realizing peace and stability in the society<br>ï‚· The role of diplomacy is underrated and underestimated within the international system.<br>ï‚· No other firm basis for the settlement of conflict has so far been invented to replace diplomacy.<br><strong>1.7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY</strong><br>This work analyzes diplomacy as a mechanism for easing hostility, diffusing, preventing and managing conflict amongst states within the international system. This study majorly gives a compact assessment on the Russia and Ukraine crisis that unfolded in the aftermath of the Ukrainian Revolution on 21 February 2014.</p> <br><p></p>