Carmelo Marcén Albero
Eco-social researcher and collaborator of Fundación Alternativas
It is difficult for those of us who try to put an everyday image to diplomacy. It seems to be one of those great ideas/words that enrich the collective whole. It is an idea always under construction, multiform, variable, executable at different scales and in very diverse scenarios. It plays an implicit -sometimes unconscious- focus among citizens and in political relations, between the administration and the administered. So much so, that its non-explicit consideration makes us suspect that something is not working as it should.
But what is diplomacy? We have searched for famous phrases that could summarize it and there are hundreds. Which one to choose? Many allude to the meaning of the RAE: “Set of political procedures that frame international relations”. They also mention that it is used in colloquial language to designate an apparent and interested courtesy; or a skill, shrewdness or dissimulation. We have found one worthy of being exposed and considered for discussion: “Diplomacy is the art of getting others to do willingly what you want them to do”. If we use this as a basis for discussion, and nuance it, we could say that diplomacy would be the complex desire to get many people to agree to reach a common goal together. Whenever I think of this, I am reminded of that phrase of former Uruguayan President José Mújica: “Diplomacy is just a formal gesture”. Behind it, politics has ceased to fulfill its function. But it can be changed for the better.
That is why we should reflect on the features that would characterize environmental, green and committed, creative and participatory diplomacy. Here we are going to focus on creative diplomacy in the ecosocial, not only green. We will then avoid what some environmental groups have described as the EU’s chameleon diplomacy. To this end, we will be unpacking the features that would characterize it. The first condition will be to banish the lies of environmental diplomacy. Let us think about doing the opposite of what denialists, retardists or environmental passivists maintain. We cannot consent to diplomacy that denies the ultimate goal of its first essence: the search for ways to share for the good of all. This should be the motto of schools of diplomacy, of consensual political action, rather than that other objective of winning without convincing, which is so often practiced today. A reading of the SDG 2024 report prepared by SDSN (REDS in Spain) is proof of this. The resounding silence of Spanish and European politics in the face of certain eco-social deficits is striking.
Recalling Jacques Delors, one of Europe’s most admired diplomats, we point out the need to make Europe and strengthen its values – this civilization, this way of living together – in order to survive in an extremely complex era, now beset by useless wars. Otherwise, history will condemn us. This, which would be valid for the ruling classes, is also valid for diplomacy on a smaller scale (country, region and community). It would be something like eco-European geopolitics. Moreover, Delors realized as early as Rio92 that diplomacy should strive to convince people of the need to build a sustainable future. And here we point out one of the fundamental axes of this climate and green diplomacy: geopolitics must be creative, regenerative, justified in agreements, modulated according to starting scenarios but with a common goal, daring in the different phases, and not so subordinated to the economy.
That is why we saw the EU’s statement as correct: the need to include measures to protect the environment, the climate and biodiversity, together with those aimed at protecting social and territorial cohesion. We repeat ourselves again and again: How much will have to be deployed, including committed social pressure, so that the Nature Restoration Law, approved in extremis, becomes a pleasant reality! We do not want a chameleon-like democracy. We expect conviction and perseverance from the EU, its member countries and other administrations closer to us. It occurs to us, with respect, to set tasks for “ecodemocracy”.
A lot of high-level diplomacy will have to be deployed, as it seems that part of the future prospects of the EU do not understand that nature is all of us, especially those of us who burden it the most. However, there are suspicions that European diplomacy is delaying the application of its rules against deforestation for a year, and it is said that it has signed the de-protection of protected species, such as the wolf, which is also biodiversity. Such careless diplomacy needs the help of the European Environment Agency, which issues periodic technical reports on progress in achieving the collective objectives.
From the ecosocial platforms and collectives we maintain that “ecodiplomacy” is inextricably linked to democracy, climate justice and sustainability for the common future. Fortunately, justice is beginning to learn that its mission also includes environmental diplomacy based on legislated protections for nature, which, we insist, is all of us. Nature Restoration law is much more than a declaration of principles. The Nature Restoration law is key to an “ecodiplomacy” within the EU Biodiversity Strategy. It could be the logbook for agreements between countries and their respective administrations. This law establishes binding objectives for socio-natural policy. It obliges to restore degraded ecosystems, in particular those with the greatest potential to capture and store carbon and to prevent and reduce the impact of natural disasters. We insist on the need for a broad understanding of what was promoted by the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on “EU Climate Diplomacy”.
We do not want to finish without referring to the Environmental Democracy Index (EDI) of the World Resources Institute. It more or less states that “meaningful public participation is essential to ensure that decisions about land and natural resources adequately and equitably address the interests of citizens. In essence, environmental democracy, to which EU countries’ diplomacy should be aligned.” It rests on three fundamental and mutually reinforcing rights: free access to information on environmental quality and problems, meaningful participation in decision-making, and the demand for compliance with environmental laws or prompt compensation for damage.
In light of this, I would argue that if a democracy does not strive to deploy diplomacy, locally and globally, it loses part of its essence. Diplomacy and climate democracy must go hand in hand and mutually reinforce each other; in this way they broaden awareness and generate consciousness. To coordinate in concrete actions, they must look at their past, present and future. We cannot keep them long in the waiting room of real life.
© Fundación Alternativas / All rights reserved
