Автор работы: Пользователь скрыл имя, 13 Февраля 2013 в 18:37, магистерская работа
All rights reserved; no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the
Publishers or a licence permitting restricted copying in the United Kingdom issued by
The functions of the presiding officer fall into two categories: procedural and substantive.
1. Procedural functions
(a) Opening, closing and adjourning meetings.
(b) Calling on representatives to speak.
(c) Limiting the length of speeches if necessary, or if the rules so require.
(d) Giving rulings on points of order and points of procedure.
(e) Clarifying points where necessary.
(f) Calling for the termination of irrelevant remarks.
(g) Ensuring that the business of the meeting is carried out.
2. Substantive functions
(a) Carrying out ad hoc functions which the meeting entrusts to the Presiding Officer's discretion (e.g. the appointment of countries/ members to new committees).
· permitting time for informal discussions;
· promoting informal discussions in which he does not participate;
· promoting informal discussions and participating in them;
· holding discussions with individual representatives to see if he can find sufficient common ground to overcome an impasse.
The increasing impact of multilateral organisations on international relations has resulted in the need - and opportunity - for the Presiding Officer to play a much more active role than previously. Delegates gather not so much to play an adversarial role as to seek solutions - not all of which will meet the objectives of their individual countries, but which provide the most satisfactory result for the members of the organisation as a whole. They undertake an exercise in Positive Diplomacy, and the Presiding Officer, aware of this sense of purpose, is, to an increasing extent, able to submit a draft resolutions for initial consideration and - with the blessed invention of the wordprocessor - to proceed virtually without interruption to sponsor a whole series of amended drafts until a final version is produced of which nobody may really approve wholeheartedly but one to which nobody is prepared to object: a process of consensus-building and eventually of nemine contradicente.
THE SECRETARIAT
The secretariat provides the administrative backing to a conference; not only to the presiding officer and representatives during the conference, but in preparation for the conference and on its conclusion. If the secretariat is a permanent one it also continues its administrative functions between meetings, when it may assume a largely executive role, acting on the general or specific guidance of its governing body.
Before a conference, and assuming that the place of meeting has been determined, the secretariat will be mainly concerned with invitations, protocol, reception and hospitality, transport, liaison with local authorities, and the arrangement of the conference hall down to the last microphone, pencil and cup of coffee; but above all it will be concerned with the preparation and distribution of the agenda (or draft agenda) and the agenda papers, together with the rules of procedure for the conference where applicable.
While the conference is in progress the secretariat will be responsible for its entire administration, including the provision of translators and the keeping of such records of the proceedings as may be specified by the rules of procedure or required by the presiding officer. A considerable number of documents is invariably required for circulation at all stages of the proceedings - draft resolutions in particular - and typists are normally available at all reasonable hours. After the close of the conference there are two major tasks apart from the general clearing-up operations: the circulation of the Report of the Proceedings (the minutes or procès-verbale): these are often circulated in draft in the first instance (and nearly always so in the case of verbatim reports) so that participants may correct minor errors of punctuation, spelling or grammar (but not change the substance of their intervention); and putting into effect the various decisions that have been reached at the conference.
The head of the secretariat in many instances has certain specific functions that he is required to perform and these are usually set out in the rules of procedure. These may relate to the submission of periodic reports, the presentation of accounts, and matters relating to the staff.
CONFERENCE DIPLOMACY
The object of conferences is to discuss problems and find solutions that are so far as possible acceptable to all participants, and this process is carried on by the traditional methods of diplomacy. However, the flourishing of multilateral diplomacy since the foundation of the United Nations has resulted in a proliferation of international organisations, conferences and committees, and has brought with it an additional dimension to traditional diplomacy: the phenomenon of group voting. Group interest does not normally override national interest, but where the national interest is not strong the group policy will be followed, mainly on the reasoning that strength lies in numbers and in unity, but also because many states with the right to vote do not have the staff to research every issue that comes before them. It is also a particularly useful system for prearranging the election of officers and generally exchanging information on matters of mutual concern.
The fundamental types of group are:
Political and cultural,
Economic development,
Regional,
Economic treaty-linked states.
Among the major groups at the present time are:
There are in addition ad hoc groups which form to protect their common interests in specific matters. For example in the law of the sea conferences members of the same political or regional group opposed each other in the Continental Shelf group, the group of territorialists (200 mile territorial sea), the fishing states group and the various other ad hoc groups that came together on this particular issue.
For a comprehensive study of conference practice and proceudre, conference management and conference diplomacy see Conference Diplomacy by Johan Kaufmann (Leyden, Sijthoff).
Chapter 11
THE DIPLOMAT AND
THE MEDIA
'We began the 19th century with the choice: whether or not to spread our nation from coast to coast. We began the 20th century with a choice: to harness the Industrial Revolution to our values. At the dawn of the 21st century we must now choose how to shape the forces of the Information Age and the Global Society.'
These are the words of President Clinton on the occasion of his inauguration as President of the United States for a second term of office: a historical survey of the two major issues that faced his country in the 19th and 20th centuries, and his view of the major challenge that will face his country in the coming century - namely the advent of the Information Age and the Global Society. And what may be deduced from his observation is that the relationships between the existing units of the Global Society - the sovereign independent states - will require management with ever-increasing skills and perception, as well as constant adaptation and an awareness of how the by-products of the Information Age - in particular the television - can be employed in the service of diplomacy.
The basis of diplomacy throughout the ages has been person-to-person communication through the medium of envoys or ambassadors. But the term 'diplomacy' relates to the study of documents; and when considering the evolution of the various media of communication throughout history, it is evident that the written word - through the medium of the Press in particular - has had a significant influence on the formulation of foreign policy and on the processes of diplomacy; and a wary but mutually advantageous relationship has developed between diplomats and journalists and their counterparts in radio broadcasting. Now, in the age of the satellite dish and digitalisation, it is the impact of the audio-visual image that demands the diplomat's attention.
The television revolution, which has burst upon the world with unexpected speed and as yet unpredictable effect, is a revolution affecting men's minds. The increased availability of television has created a global awareness, motivating the mass of the world's population to new visions and new ideas. The hundreds of millions who hitherto have concerned themselves essentially with the survival of the family and the local community, now see themselves as part of a social and political unit with a voice in their country's domestic and foreign policies. Moreover, the impact of the television revolution on policy formulation is both national and international.
Nationally, the television can influence the government's foreign policy agenda by the selection and intensity of its news coverage. Every country has three elements to its foreign policy formulation: the rational, which is what the Minister for Foreign Affairs, on the advice of his or her diplomats considers to be in the best interests of the country; the political, which is what the government considers to be possible and appropriate; and the emotional, which is what the public expects, based to a very large extent on what they have seen on the television. Until recently, the formulation of foreign policy was primarily the concern of a literate, politically conscious élite: now, the principal medium of information - the television - being ubiquitous and no longer elitist, or requiring literacy, has the power to arouse emotions and create uninformed opinion throughout all strata of society.
Internationally - and it is a little more than a decade since the first TV satellite was launched and six years since coverage became effectively international - television has brought about a structural revolution: the creation of President Clinton's 'Global Society'. It has:
(c) created for diplomats a new dimension to traditional Public Diplomacy which has two major components: it enables a country to influence another country's foreign policy by appealing directly to that country's public opinion over the head of the government; and it provides scope for Media Diplomacy which may be described as a process of negotiation whereby governments utilise the medium of television in order to make public statements of policy relating to other countries, with a view to influencing the outcome of a dispute.
The situation has now been reached where international television companies not only seek interviews with diplomats to help fill their daily 'news hole' - a joint venture to the advantage of both parties; they also welcome, to an increasing extent, the Video News Release. This is a professionally produced video cassette which has three characteristics: it is suitable and attractive for television presentation; it can be produced and put into storage and brought out when its timing would produce the greatest impact; and it carries a message that the instigator wishes to put across to as wide an audience as possible. There are more than a hundred firms engaged in the production of Video News Releases in the UK alone. Customers are mainly governments and Non-governmental Organisations, and the VNRs often provide a sporting event or touristic attraction as a foreground to the real message that they wish to put across. Major NGO users of VNRs are environmental organisations, charities and Aid Organisations, and they rely for their success on the profound observation that 'Man has a natural craving to be distracted and entertained'. The Video News Release which is the successor to the Press Release, is essentially entertainment but with a hidden message.
These developments are all relatively innocent, and reflect the ability of governments and others to adapt their processes of diplomacy and persuasion to the changing possibilities of the times; but this advance of technology can bring dangers as well as benefits, in the form of disinformation and misinformation. Disinformation is a form of deliberate deceit - a practice which is by no means new to diplomacy, and can normally be detected (provided that it is not subliminal) and countered. Misinformation is also the provision of a false image, but in this case without evil or deliberate intent, and often without the producer's awareness of his or her own deception. It is, however, a real danger on account of the impact that it has on the emotional input into the formulation of foreign policy. The major components of Misinformation are:
Technical Limitations. Camera crews cost money, and are only sent where there is likely to be the most action and excitement. Hence the saying 'News is where the camera is'.
Selective perception and subjectivity. However objective producers may be they inevitably have a personal perception of what is important and what is not; what is right and what is wrong. Moreover, they do not just want to be reporters of events: they want to make an impact on society.
Cultural limitations. These are an important factor because people of different regions and cultures become accustomed to judging certain countries or situations from a fixed viewpoint: and what is more they are not readily receptive to a change. When President Bush, standing on the steps of the White House, put his arm around the then President de Klerk of South Africa soon after the end of Apartheid and said 'who would have thought, a year ago, that we two would be standing here' he exemplified the fact that reports from South Africa were expected to accord with the American perception of the time. But apartheid did not end suddenly - it had been disappearing gradually for several years - but no journalist and very few diplomats dared to say so because it was contrary to conventional wisdom - to what people at home had wanted to believe and had grown accustomed to believing.
Personal political commitment is something that all producers will have; and perhaps without realising it and certainly not intending it, they will allow it to influence their work.
Dramatised reporting marks a stage in the evolution of the theatre and the concept of 'Art for Art's sake', and is a major distorting factor. All television producers aim to create good viewing, good theatre. They want the praise of their fellow producers for being good at their job; and if that involves a little exaggeration or the manipulation of facts in order to produce an exciting and stimulating effect it can be justified on the grounds that all television - the 'docudrama' as an example - is an extension of the theatre, an emotional experience and thus a legitimate contribution to the entertainment industry.
Post-fabricated reporting. Camera crews can rarely be on the spot when an event occurs, just as the fire brigade can rarely be there when the fire breaks out - but they can be there soon after. The consequence is that many of the events seen on television are replays of what took place earlier on: faithful replays - but post-fabricated nevertheless.
The Media Law of Demand and Supply is based on the fact that the demand for news is constant and relentless, and producers may sometimes be forced to broadcast whatever they can find: which is where the Video News Release comes into its own. It is no good announcing 'This is the 9 o'clock news - oh sorry we haven't got any news today: here is a Western instead'. News creation is at times inevitable.
The Magnifier Effect comes into play when minor incidents are magnified out of all significance. Crowd scenes can be manufactured on the basis of a small gathering, and impressions are created by general- ising from the particular.
The need to personalise and demonise. An audience can often more easily identify with an individual politician than with a country; and if there is a conflict situation they need to be able to identify the Good Guy from the Bad Guy. It was no problem in the Gulf, but Somalia was difficult. Luckily a particular General appeared on the scene as the Bad Guy; and indeed he would have had to have been invented had he not done so.
A further by-product of the television revolution is what may be termed 'Media Management', and here one need look no further than an election that took place in 1997 in a European country with a longstanding history of democratic institutions. For the first time in its history one party made a conscious decision to adopt a strategy for contesting the election through the medium of the television. For two years they conducted a strictly professional and highly disciplined campaign; and the result was that they won by an overwhelming majority.
As the Spanish newspaper El Pais according to the London Times, observed 'he (the party leader) is a new product, sold no more or less than like a new washing machine'. The election will surely find its way into the history books of Media Management, and perhaps of the decline of democratic institutions in Europe.
This new situation has imposed an obligation on diplomats to become proficient in the skill of Media Presentation, both nationally and internationally: nationally because a country's foreign policy, in order to be effective, requires a high degree of popular support - or at least understanding - and a diplomat should be prepared to explain and justify his government's policy to his own people in the most effective manner which is the wide-reaching, audio-visual medium of the television; and internationally because every opportunity should be taken of improving the country's image abroad to as wide an audience as possible, and to explain and justify its actions. Apart from their function as passive analysts, diplomats serving abroad must be trained to appear on television. They may or may not seek it, but it will catch up with them one day. Appearing on television is a grave responsibility, with serious consequences if it is handled badly, a benefit for their country if handled well; and since television is in many ways a modern method of 'Diplomatic Representation' supplementing influence with the political élite by influencing the public, they must react positively and professionally to the opportunities that are offered to them.
THE TELEVISION INTERVIEW
A television interview requires careful preparation and analysis, and the diplomat must consider ('him' being 'him/her' throughout):
The interviewers' objective: why should they go to the trouble of interviewing him: what are they trying to achieve? The answer is a story to help fill the daily 'news hole': that is their job.
The diplomat's objective: why should he agree to be interviewed: what is he trying to achieve? On the negative side, if an interviewer says that a diplomat has 'declined to be interviewed' on a particular subject, it can be made to appear that there must be some sinister reason behind the refusal; whilst on the positive side an interview provides the opportunity to reach out to millions of viewers and to provide a televisual 'representation' of his country and so enhance its image. An interview should be seen as a joint venture between interviewer and diplomat: both have something to gain from it.
The circumstances of the interview: in order to work out a strategy it is essential to know whether the interview will be live or recorded; whether or not it will be one-on-one or if others will take part and if so who they are; will it form part of the news, a documentary, a chat-show or be in front of an audience? At what time will it be shown and will the audience be popular or serious? Most important of all, will it be shown as a whole, or will a sentence or two be extracted and used as a contribution to a 'docudrama' which the producer is putting together in accordance with his script, but where the diplomat will be unaware of the denouement. Whether arrangements are being prepared for the diplomat himself or for one of his visiting Ministers, it is important to ensure that the seating and lighting are satisfactory, and that the camera is at eye-level; and ideally that the interview takes place at a specified time and on 'home' ground. Impromptu interviews, for example at airports or receptions, should be avoided if at all possible.
The strategy of the interviewer may be to obtain information and explanation; it may be sensation-seeking, or it may be to create a theatre-piece or docudrama. The diplomat's strategy must be adapted accordingly.
The strategy of the diplomat is to leave the audience with a good impression of himself and of his country - bearing in mind that there are over 180 countries in the world, some with confusing names, and that the interview may be the only way that the audience has of gaining an impression of a country, which it does by associating the diplomat with the country. What does the public expect of a diplomat? He should be composed, confident, reliable, credible, honest, reasonable, trustworthy and warm: he should not appear to be ill-at-ease, hesitant, confused, dogmatic or superior. To sum up, a diplomat's strategy will be influenced by the occasion, the audience, the culture of the country and the interviewer's choice of strategy - gentle treatment or rough. To some extent, it is a matter of playing out time without conceding a goal, whilst taking every opportunity of proving that his country plays attractively and according to the rules.
The tactics of the interviewer vary according to the individual: each one normally has a particular style, objective and modus operandi, and the diplomat should know the host country well enough to be familiar with its television personalities. Those who want to provide an exciting, provocative piece of entertainment may seek to:
· destabilise the diplomat, unsettle him
· provoke an indiscretion
· lead him towards subjects he wishes to avoid
· get him talking man-to-man, from his heart rather than from his head
· get him on the defensive
· use any trick within reason (such as pretending that the interview is over when in fact the camera is still running) in order to produce good theatre
The tactics and techniques of the diplomat: these are limited by the fact that the producer of the programme controls the cameras, and that the viewing audience identifies with the interviewer; but the diplomat has an advantage in that the interviewer must maintain his audience's interest and produce 'good theatre', and has only a strictly limited time for his act. The diplomat's tactics are - inevitably - mainly reactive, but if a question put to him is one that he wishes to avoid he can take advantage of the fact that the interviewer does not normally ask a question without first putting it in its context by providing some background information: his audience wants to feel involved and to identify with the questioner, and it is perfectly legitimate to pick on one of the background assumptions for an answer, and ideally to provide a key phrase for the interviewer to continue his questioning on another tack rather than reverting to his main question. What the interviewer is seeking to achieve is a harmonious flow of question and answer, and he will not wish to break the sequence.