ORGANIZATIONAL EVOLUTION WITHIN 21ST CENTURY: A WIN FOR DIPLOMACY

ORGANIZATIONAL EVOLUTION WITHIN 21^ST CENTURY: A WIN FOR DIPLOMACY

 Organizational evolution is of dynamic imperative as we journey through the 21^st century and beyond-time changes so too are its people and organization they belong to so as to avoid it dying a natural death of stagnancy. Close diplomacy of the past is nothing compared to today’s judging from yesterdays outcome which is busted by modern means of communication devoid of speculation. The show of unity by the duo –USA and RUSSIA, is a thing to celebrate.

Who says this two can’t tango on a time like these? Evaluating the mode right after the press conference of a 3 day hard diplomatic engagement between Washington Kerry and Russian Lavrov in Geneva I am optimistic that days ahead in the UN Security Council mode would be somber as everyone think back to events proceeding. It is a diplomatic win for the world. This is a success for the USA and RUSSIA as both sacrificed a lot to get to the point of general agreement expressing satisfaction to their final outcome.

Non lost in my view as both should receive an equal pat on the back, the Obama administration hard stance should be appreciated with great love-for lack of a better word-for pressing the Russian to act on their good friend Assad.

The title organizational evolution within the UN is of great importance.UN has to succeed and can only do so when and while it adapt to meeting the challenges that comes along in its existence. The Syrian crisis unlike any is a challenge of unprecedented magnitude. Was anyone anticipating the polarization it presented as an aftermath? Of course not, the resultant agreement is the best known in recent time between the two great powers. I hope would continue on many issues like nuclear non proliferation and Palestine/Israeli issue.

This friendly relation that emerged from the 3 day hard diplomatic negotiation is only possible when there is an understanding that a stable world is only possible by accepting to work together. Who wants war anyway?  This question should be anchored along with the popular slogan ‘yes we can” attitude in a winning formula.

Against the backdrop of ‘two elephant fighting the glass feels the impact’ should make these two-USA and RUSSIA, understand the hope placed on them to agree to disagree while maintaining world peace. Regardless of the skepticism still left on, solution within the mother organization is essential to maintain the functionality irrespective of who proposes such solution, in effect accommodating of differences of opinion to meet the greater demand of world crisis. Antagonism on issues should be less important and possible outcome like the 14^th day of September presented cherished.

Bravo to diplomacy, we hope the government of Syria appreciate the length walked to achieve what was and such reciprocate by being transparent in all their disclosures. Opposition we hope shall walk the political way as a possible solution to the two and more years of civil war consume lives.

Permit me to add here, may we never lose sight of the vital significance of British parliaments vote which indirectly by virtue of omission or commission helped delay the process of the war or bombing as the case may have been, which if they had voted otherwise would have seen an entirely different scenario.

Celestine Chidi (Student of International Relation and Diplomacy)