Secret Diplomacy

INTRODUCTION In the peace process, international negotiations may involve several different routes. Negotiations between countries may be done at the forefront of the public or may be hidden to maintain the confidentiality of the negotiation process. This article looks at the latter to see if the beneficial effects of secret diplomacy can also have a negative impact. This article is divided into three parts. In the first part we define secret diplomacy called inverse diplomatic diplomacy (BCD) and outline some of its features.

The term secret diplomacy specifies secret negotiations and is used to establish secret agreements, decisions, alliances and treaty diplomatic practices. In secret diplomacy, there is no attempt to give confidence to people and provide information to the public with little information about diplomatic activities. Confidentiality obligation is considered essential for diplomatic success. Open diplomacy is the opposite of secret diplomacy. People believe in the era of democracy that you have the right and obligation to understand and participate in foreign policy decisions. Therefore, diplomacy must take into consideration public wishes and public opinion, which is very important. It is expected that the nature and progress of all diplomatic negotiations and the final agreements or differences arising from such negotiations will be communicated in general.

Secret diplomacy and opposition to public diplomacy are no longer relevant. Nicholson (1988 - 1939, 42) distinguishes possible open political orientation and negotiations which must be kept secret among books quoted frequently even though it is old. As the authors are not reluctant to call the so-called "fantasy", or because there is no other alternative of liberal democracy, they now express their views in relatively equivalent terms. Confidentiality and publicity are not absolute. All of these are proportional, measurement, and degree issues in order to balance transparency requirements and efficiency desire (Sofer 1988, 203; Ikle 1964, 131-6).