Introduction:
Afghanistan’s situation in the eve of Taliban’s control has influenced Russia’s diplomacy in the region. The global proxy war in the region has turned towards a new era of diplomatic Sciences. The situation in Central Asian states, Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict i-e Nagorno Karabagh and now in Afghanistan has expanded Russian Diplomatic frontiers to new heights. The diplomatic statements of Russian Foreign Affairs clearly reflect post-modern foreign policy trends. Russia’s Ambassador to Afghanistan has praised the conduct of the Taliban in the days since its takeover, saying there was no alternative to the hardline group and resistance to it would fail. Vladimir Putin has made anti-terrorism a cornerstone of his foreign policy, comparing it to the fight against Nazism. In Syria and Libya, Russia justified its backing of authoritarian leaders by saying they provided a bulwark against the rise of radicalism and chaos. President Vladimir Putin rejected the idea of sending people evacuation from Afghanistan to countries near Russia, saying he did not want “militants showing up here under cover of refugees”, Russian news agencies reported. Russian diplomacy in uncertain situation of Afghanistan and the region is impressive to President Putin Patronage to Young Diplomats and Youth in the country. These young diplomats are actively participating in global affairs for maintaining peace and sustainable development in the region.
Russian Diplomatic Theory and Sustainable Development
The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international diplomacy and peaceful co-existence is a major challenge of the modern world. The challenges and opportunities; it presents for the future of multilateralism is yet an un-resolved question and there is a need to think deeply on crises springing out from this pandemic. If crisis is the disruption of the routine operation of a system, if it is a turning point that transforms relationships, then different actors have an interest in initiating or sustaining the disruption of a system, which they rightly or wrongly perceive as exploiting and marginalizing them.
Global cooperation and solidarity are central to responding and mitigating to the health and socio-economic effects of the COVID19 pandemic, yet, to many, this was slow to mobilize and lacking in political leadership. Global pandemic is affecting multiple areas of global diplomacy, covering a range of tools of global cooperation: multilateral diplomacy, the rule of law, sustainable development, economics and financing, digital governance, and peace and security. COVID-19 has brought the world to its knees. With almost every country and territory reporting cases of the coronavirus, the world has to adapt to a new kind of normal. The spread of the new coronavirus is testing our globalized world. The world of diplomacy is particularly affected by these developments, as meetings, conferences, and other major events are cancelled. During times of crisis, international cooperation is more than essential. The accelerated transition towards online meetings and diplomacy requires thoughtful changes including the security of online tools and revisiting old rules and protocols.
Now coming to the role of OIC;
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest inter-governmental organisation after the United Nations, with the membership of 57 states, covering four continents. The OIC is the collective voice of the Muslim world to ensure and safeguard their interest on economic socio and political areas. The OIC and its member countries are effectively contributing in international peace and development.
The Charter of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) commits its Member States to promoting international peace and security, understanding and dialogue among civilizations, cultures and religions and fostering noble Islamic values concerning moderation, tolerance and respect for diversity. The objectives and principles of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) aspire for an inter-state relationship based on justice, mutual respect and good neighborliness to ensure global peace, security and harmony.
The contemporary challenges faced by the international community are enormous as well as diverse and transnational. These challenges range from issues of national security, violent extremism, radicalization, terrorism to poverty alleviation, combating disease, environmental degradation, water, food security and alike.
Finally, I would like to say that OIC has a huge potential to play a more active role in international peace and sustainable development. During COVID19 it has also established a comprehensive database to monitor COVID19 situation in its member states so that they can formulate well informed strategies against Corona Virus. In the post COVID-19 situation, almost all diplomatic activities turned towards online platforms but there is a need to make them more effective by some physical interactions. The most effective diplomacy doesn’t take place in the formal meeting itself. It’s what’s happening on the margins. It’s what happens in the corridors.
Regional Security Challenges and Russian Diplomacy
One of Russia’s most significant instruments in its strategic toolbox has been its capacity to use diplomacy to pursue its geopolitical opportunities in regional conflicts. From Nagorno-Karabakh to Libya, from Syria to Afghanistan, Russia’s diplomats are at the top table at peace negotiations. Russia is increasingly the key pivot power in any conflict resolution process in the Middle East. Russia’s approach to conflict management is a form of coercive diplomacy: a strategic mixing of hard power and diplomatic know-how. It has often been highly effective in managing conflicts in ways that respect and promote Russia’s national interests.
Russia’s emerging role as a diplomatic broker and mediator in international conflicts supports several of Russia’s strategic goals. First, it addresses Russia’s search for international status, providing ways for Russian diplomats to be in the room when major international security issues are discussed.
Second, it corresponds to Russia’s self-conception of how a Great Power and UN Security Council member should act; in Moscow’s realist worldview, Great Powers have additional rights, but also take on additional responsibilities for peace and security, particularly in their sphere of influence.
Of more immediate significance is the way in which Russia’s conflict diplomacy is designed to directly benefit Russia’s foreign policy goals. It has so far proved an effective and low-cost mechanism to consolidate or extend Russian geopolitical influence as in Syria or in Eastern Libya, where it acts as a multiplier for the deployment of military force and helps to legitimize a Russian military presence. Furthermore, it provides Russia with leverage in its relations with other regional powers; for example, Russia’s diplomatic and military engagement in regional conflicts offers a mechanism for Russia to maintain an edge in bilateral relations with Turkey.
Finally, acting as a mediator and peacemaker in conflicts offers a relatively low-risk way to compete with the West; Russia’s actions have reduced Western influence in Syria, the Southern Caucasus, Libya, and central Africa. At the same time, because Russia has positioned itself as an indispensable actor in many of these conflicts, the U.S. and its European Allies are forced to maintain effective channels of communication with Russia to help manage regional conflicts.
Conclusion
Russia has ambitions to be a major security actor globally. Alongside its ability to project military power outside its immediate region, Russia also has extensive experience and capacity in conflict-related diplomacy. Russia has good intelligence and analysis capabilities and an effective diplomatic service that enables it to take on complex negotiations. The Russian model is effective at linking military, diplomatic and economic instruments into a relatively successful policy mix.
Some aspects of Russia’s approach are a useful corrective to liberal peacebuilding. Russia rightly points out that peace negotiations also need to consider power politics, including the interests of regional powers. At times, however, a focus on great power rivalries oversimplifies conflicts and overlooks complex local dynamics that can derail international initiatives. In addition, a highly exclusionary political process that ignores the interests of minorities and other social groups’ risks creating new conflict fault lines. But the biggest problem in Russian approaches to conflict is the outcome: an illiberal peace or an authoritarian strongman may be better than all-out civil war, but a failure to address issues of injustice and human rights risks creating fertile ground for further conflicts and instability in the future.
About Author:
Qaiser Nawab is Pakistani global youth activist working as Director Business Development for Middle East at M&C Consulting Inc. (a Canadian based Communication and Crowdsourcing Company). He is also Founder CEO of a global youth led organization “THE” Society – Together for Health and Education having strong collaborations with various Russian organizations including Academy of Youth Diplomacy, Tatarstan. He is the receipt of “New Generation Program” by the Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States Affairs, Compatriots Living Abroad, and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo) and Council of Young Diplomats, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia.
Introduction:
