Serial summitry has become a regular part of the contemporary diplomatic global landscape. It is a measure of the significance that summit diplomacy has acquired in the early twenty-first century that, according to Gideon Rachman, “the formation of the G20 group of world leaders is likely to be the most lasting institutional consequence of the global financial meltdown of 2008” (2009). As a biannual forum for cooperation and consultation among the heads of state and finance ministers of nineteen nations plus the European Union on matters pertaining to economic global governance, the G20 best highlights the relevance of summit diplomacy in the twenty-first century.
Although the term summit diplomacy was originally coined by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in 1950, as he called for another cold war talk with the Soviet Union at the highest level, summits date back to the Middle Ages. Summits have historically been reserved for meetings between heads of state or governments. Although summitry declined from the Renaissance until the nineteenth century during the Age of Classical Diplomacy, conference diplomacy underwent a revival in the early twentieth century, most notably with the conclusion of World War I in 1919, when leaders of Germany agreed to a peace negotiation with leaders of France, United Kingdom, and the United States in Versailles, France.
There has been debate as to whether the Munich meetings between British Prime Minister Joseph Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler in 1938 or the 1945 Yalta meeting between the Big Three—Churchill, U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Soviet Union Premier Joseph Stalin—contributed or detracted from the standing of summits as a form of effective diplomacy. Because neither summit attained the intended goals, for a time these summits were criticized as poor examples of twentieth-century summit diplomacy. Yet, during the cold war, summits between the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union became important, especially to deflect international tensions during the nuclear age. As U.S. President John F. Kennedy put it in 1959, “it is far better to meet at the summit than at the brink.”
Throughout the twentieth century and into the twenty-first century, ease of international travel coupled with growth of multilateralism and an increasing role of public opinion in international affairs have all contributed to the popularity of summits as a regular foreign policy tool. U.S. President Richard Nixon from 1969 to 1974 participated in more summits than President Roosevelt did in his twelve years in the White House (1932–1945).
However, summits have been known to elicit controversy. Many professional diplomats are critical of them. Former U.S. Under Secretary of State George W. Ball summarized the case against summits, arguing heads of state or government are vain; do not know policy details; and are far too willing to accommodate the desires of their foreign counterparts, sometimes to the detriment of the national interest.
Despite the frustration of professional diplomats, there is a reason why summits have proliferated. This is not just due to the desire of political leaders to bask in the reflected glory of their counterparts; too much international travel can easily become a handicap with national electorates. Globalization and complex economic interdependence have led to increased levels of diplomatic activity. Few areas now escape international scrutiny, and global challenges like climate change, international financial stability, transnational terrorism, or the illegal drug trade demand collective action. As the December 2009 Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen showed, it is difficult enough to get countries to agree to commit to significant domestic policy changes for the sake of global public goods with the participation of heads of state government, let alone without them. The notion that routine diplomatic processes are good and swift enough to address many global public policy issues misses both the significance and urgency of these modern global challenges; traditional diplomacy may downplay or procrastinate on taking action on global challenges requiring the attention of heads of state. Most states understand the political message a government can deliver by opting not to participate in global or regional summits or by sending junior representatives.
One reason the 2008–2009 Great Recession did not become another Great Depression was due to the quick and concerted action formulated by the heads of state participating in the G20 summit in London in April 2009. Summits are flexible, versatile instruments that concentrate the minds of top policy makers and can get a lot of business done if well-prepared and well-managed. While summits alone do not necessarily produce immediate changes, they can defuse crises, establish global reforms, implement regulatory measures to eventually alleviate future problems, and fortify new or existing global alliances. Summits can lead states to adhere and respond to international standards. Thus, summits likely will remain a popular diplomatic tool.
Bibliography:
- Ball, George W. Diplomacy for a Crowded World: An American Foreign Policy. Boston: Little, Brown, 1976.
- Berridge, Geoff R. Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 3rd ed. Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave MacMillan, 2006.
- Dunn, David H., ed. Diplomacy at the Highest Level: The Evolution of International Summitry. Basingstoke, U.K.: Palgrave MacMillan, 1996.
- Heine, Jorge. “Will They Have Table Manners? The G20, Emerging Powers, and International Responsibility.” South African Journal of International Affairs 17, no. 1 (2010).
- Legeuy-Feilleux, Jean-Robert. The Dynamics of Diplomacy. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 2009.
- Rachman, Gideon. “A Modern Guide to G-ology,” The Economist, November 13, 2009.
- David. Summits; Six Meetings That Shaped the Twentieth Century. New York: Basic Books, 2007.
This example Summit Diplomacy Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.
See also:
- How to Write a Political Science Essay
- Political Science Essay Topics
- Political Science Essay Examples