Hello, I am looking for someone to write an article on Diplomacy, Law and Global Change. It needs to be at least 2000 words. Along with the evolving nature of diplomacy, embassies’ role is also changing (Bayne & Woolcock, 2007). In a globalized world, embassies are major diplomatic structures used by states to broaden political and economic connections. The exchange of communication has been made quite practical by the establishment of these foreign ministries. In this essay, three literary works shall be reviewed to support the aforementioned hypotheses.
The book written by N. D. White states that the United Nations Security Council is the international community’s second attempt to create a viable mechanism to achieve collective security. It says that the League of Nations, the forefather of the UN, was the first attempt. The idea of making the League was allegedly introduced right after the end of the First World War. Basically, the countries which favored the plan aimed for international cooperation in the areas of peace and security so that no more war could happen. They wanted to devise a system that could prevent and preserve peace within the international arena. Most importantly, they envisioned an organization that could afford them protection in case of aggression from another state. Unluckily, the League failed. As a result, the Second World War took place. It was stated in the book that the failure of the League was attributed to the fact that the aim for collective security was weaker than the individual desires of states to safeguard their national interests (White, 1990). For instance, despite the fact that President Woodrow Wilson was the one who took the lead in making the League a reality, the US Congress refused to approve the proposal. This means that at that period, America was not able to realize the importance of collective security. In other words, it considered the League as not promoting its interests .as one of the Great Powers. In the following chapters of the book, the works and geopolitical limitations of the UN were discussed. It was asserted that collective security was subservient to the Great Powers’ national interests (White, 1990). The superpowers protected their interests through veto power. The UN Security Council was then controlled by competing blocs. In this sense, it can be stated that the Security Council’s composition was tainted with selfish motives. Its own structure (the geopolitical division) has triggered the occurrence of two competing major blocs which effectively limited the areas in which it can properly operate (White, 1990). .