AN EXAMINATION OF THE CONCEPT OF ECONOMIC DIPLOMACY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW


I.         Introduction

            Globalization has transformed the organization of international economic relationships around the world, affecting the economic, social and political sphere of societies and citizens. It is characterized by a complex set of interconnectivities and interdependence with an increasing number of actors vying to influence the outcome of these relationships. They lay competing claims to resources, markets and legitimacy and are engaged in activities traditionally defined as belonging to the domain of diplomacy. Sovereign states remain the traditional subjects of international law, but in practice remain interdependent in the pursuit of their economic interest.

            Owing to this fact of interdependence of sovereign nations in the conduct of their international economic and commercial activities, sovereign states and other actors in the international system who are guided by the international laws, fashion out ways on how they further their individual and sometimes group interests. This usually leads to diplomatic activities. In this paper we shall examine the concept of economic diplomacy in international law. By concept, we mean, a though, opinion, and general notion, idea especially formed by generalization from particular examples.[1] Having realized from the dictionary definition that a concept is not yet a law but a general notion, we shall in this paper discuss; the various terms and definitions, the concept of economic diplomacy; the nature and practice of economic diplomacy, an appraisal of the concept of economic diplomacy and the future of economic diplomacy. This discussion is predicated on the presumption that economic diplomacy is being conducted under the known principles of International law which sources[2] remain, international conventions, general principle of law recognized by civilized nations, teachings and writings of highly qualified publicists.

II.        The Concept of Economic Diplomacy in International Law


            It may be convenient at this point to define the various terms of this subject before we offer the conceptual definitions of the subject. When we talk of ‘economic’ we mean relating to or concerned with economics, financially sound, reasonably profitable; useful in the production of wealth or promotion of commercial prosperity.[3]
            Also the term ‘diplomacy’ is variously defined. In fact many of the definitions given by renowned writers of the subject often show wide divergences in their conception of the word ‘diplomacy’. Sir Ernest Satow in his celebrated “Guide to diplomatic practice’ sees diplomacy as:
The application of intelligence and tact to the conduct of official relations between governments of independent states, extending sometimes also to their business with vassal states or more briefly still, the conduct of business between states by peaceful.[4]

            Horton Kaplan confuses diplomacy with formulation of policy. He defines diplomacy for instance, as:

The formulation of a strategy aiming at achieving national interests in the international field and carrying out of this strategy by diplomats.[5]


Professors O. Ojo and Sesay[6] state that:

The word diplomacy may be defined as the means and methods through which a nation state conducts its business with other actors in the international system.


            It should be noted that this particular definition has taken cognisance of the fact that diplomatic activities have gone beyond the traditional view of state to state relations to recognize the increasing importance of the economic diplomatic activities of other ‘actors’ in the international systems.
            In the light of this proliferation of actors involved in international relations and diplomatic activities, Mellissen offers the most succinct definition of contemporary diplomacy by stating:

Diplomacy is defined as the mechanism of representation, communication and negotiation through which states and other international actors conduct their business.[7]

            Diplomacy evolved over time and so did its definition and the professional identity of diplomats. The recorded history of Diplomacy dates back to ancient Greece and has evolved over time. Important contributions to the diplomatic method have been made at different times in recorded history particularly during the periods of the Italian city-states, in France before and after the French revolution, and in England starting with industrialization and expansion of its empire.
            Diplomacy functions through a labyrinth of foreign offices, embassies, legations, consulates and special missions all over the world. It is commonly bilateral in character but as a result of the growing importance of international conferences, international organizations, regional arrangements and collective security measures, its multilateral aspects have become increasingly significant.
            Diplomacy has been seen as the method or process by which the policies of states especially foreign policies are carried out. This in fact, underscores the importance of Diplomacy in statecraft or state operations.
            Without proper implementation or realization of state policies through the medium of Diplomacy, the policies remain redundant and aborted notwithstanding how lofty or beneficial they may be to the propounding states. One cannot but agree that Diplomacy requires tact and intelligence.
            Diplomacy generally is conducted on the basis of intricate code that has evolved over many centuries. There are both written and unwritten rules of the game. It has been said that the unwritten rules of the game are as important as the written regulations.
            Some of the known written regulations relating to the conduct of Diplomacy include: The famous Regalement of 1815, the Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Officers adopted by the American Nations at Havana in 1928, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963.
            The foregoing background concerning Diplomacy generally in international law may be necessary for a good appreciation of the concept of Economic Diplomacy in International Law, which is the subject of this paper.
            The dynamics of modern international law and state relations especially in the modern trend of globalization, competition for foreign direct investment as well as growing influence of international economic standard setting organizations such as WTO, ITU, ILO, etc, has brought economic Diplomacy to prominence in international law. As a result of modernity, the interplay of relationships between states has become characterized by a complex set of interconnectivities and interdependencies with an increasing numbers of actors vying to influence the outcome of these relationships. The realm international law is now witnessing an increase and competing claims to resources, markets and legitimacy.
            Private firms and companies from states are now vigorously engaged in rapid expansions through merger and acquisition and other forms of co-operative joint venturing across boarders, while at the same time intensifying efforts to influence domestic and international policies in heir favour.
            The economy has become the focal point of most independent states and actors in international law. Nation states are now engaged in fierce competition for economic gains and at the same time seek co-operation with other states in order to shape regulatory institutions in their favour. Countries now more than ever before compete with each other to attract foreign direct investment, push other countries to gain market access for their national companies and attempt to protect their domestic markets by covert or overt trade barriers. At the same time, countries now see the need to deepen their co-operation at standard and rule setting intergovernmental institutions such as the World Trade Organization, International Telecommunications Union, etc, so as to realize the policies of their states.
            Proceeding from the foregoing, the concept of Economic Diplomacy will be better appreciated not by a definition of the concept but by looking at its functions. Thus, it has been stated that,

Economic Diplomacy is concerned with economic policy issues, including the modus/work of delegations/operations at standard setting organizations. Economic Diplomacy involves monitoring and reporting on economic policies of foreign countries and give the home governments advice on how to best influence them. Economic Diplomacy employs economic resources, either as rewards or sanctions in pursuit of a particular foreign policy objective. This is sometimes called economic statecraft.[8]

            Further elucidation of this issue will be appreciated by a look at the goal of the Economic Diplomat, thus, it has been stated that,

The goal of economic diplomats is to competently influence multilateral economic policy by coordinating specialized ministries, by shaping the negotiation process at economic standard setting organizations, and by constructively including non-state actors when useful and appropriate.”[9]

            The above description of the scope of activities of Economic Diplomacy/Economic Diplomat shall provide the necessary guide to this paper. Proceeding from the above position, Economic Diplomacy can therefore be said to be very relevant in various spheres of international law and will involve a look at economic and trade policies/issues, the activities of institutions and organizations concerned with economic and trade matters, interest in the economic affairs of other states, the application of resources of a state to further the economic interest of a nation.

III.      Nature and Practice of Economic Diplomacy


            An x-ray of the economic diplomatic activities in International Law will also involve an examination of the institutions and organizations from where most of these policies originate. Economic diplomatic activities of a state are carried on through the foreign policies of the state. These foreign policies are shapened by what states consider as their best economic interests and advantages. These policies are either aimed at protecting the local economy or taking advantage of a week system or opponent. A ready example of conflicting state policies that shapen economic diplomacy is the on-going trade dispute between USA and China. While China has found in US a ready market for its cheap textile products, the US is bent on adopting the policy of trade restrictions to protect its local textile industry from an unfair competition from Chinese textile products. Another example can be readily seen in our Nigeria policy of the closure of its borders with Benin Republic sometime more than one year ago. Nigeria, which is a signatory to the ECOWAS free trade movement among the member states, but intent of protecting its economy from loss of tariffs and unfair competition through smuggling activities through Benin Republic announced the closure of its borders with Benin Republic whose economy is totally dependent on its trading activities with Nigerians engaged rather on diplomatic missions which eventually led to the re-opening of the border. In fact economic diplomacy looks at how decisions are made domestically and the processes of negotiating them internationally.
            It is to be noted that the economic diplomatic activities are conducted within the confines of International Law and through, bilateral treaties, multilateral treaties, through the UN and its various agencies, some regulatory or standard setting institutions and other convenient international fora.
            In its activities and deliberations, the United Nations dwells into economic issues concerning member states. The concept of Economic Diplomacy in International law can be better assessed based on some important economic projects canvassed within the United Nations.
            In 1955, the third committee of the General Assembly adopted a draft article as part of the covenants on the right of sell-determination, the second paragraph of which stated,

The peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic cooperation based upon the principle of mutual benefit and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.”


            The concept of economic self-determination stemmed from a General Assembly Resolution of 21st December 1952.[10]
            Much later, work in the United Nations’ Commission on Permanent Sovereignty Over Natural Resource and the Economic and Social Council culminated in the adoption of Resolution 1803 (xviii) by the General Assembly on 14th December 1962. The resolution was in the form of a declaration on permanent sovereignty over natural resources, it referred to the inalienable right of all states freely to dispose of their natural wealth and resources in accordance with their nation’s interest and to have respect for the economic independence of states.
            Further economic ramifications of this resolution can be discerned from the following incidence of the resolution:

(a)              It gave control of the wealth and resources of a nation to the people of that nation and for the development and well being of its people.
(b)              The exploration and disposition of a nation’s resources and the import of foreign capital required in the state must be in conformity with the rules and conditions which the people of a nation considers to be necessary or desirable.
(c)              In cases where the people desire capital importation, the earnings on that capital shall be governed by the national legislation in force as well as international law.
(d)              The economic development of developing countries whether in the form of public or private capital investments, exchange of goods and services, technical assistance or exchange of scientific information shall be such as to further their independent national development and shall be based upon respect for the nation’s sovereignty over their national wealth and resources.
            Still on the economic activities of the United Nations, since 1972, the less developed countries pressed for the establishment of a “new deal” in their relations with the industrialized nations. This pressure was reflected in particular, in the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3201 of May 1 1974, containing a declaration on the establishment of a new International Economic Order.
            On the 12th December 1974, the General Assembly adopted the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, Resolution 3281 (xxix).
            These resolutions had far reaching economic contents guiding/regulating the economic activities of the member states.
            The Consideration of these resolutions in this paper is germane and significant for certain reasons, it shows how far major institutions in international politics and international law like the United Nations can affect the economic policies/fortunes of member states, it also shows how concerned such institutions is about the economic realities of member states, it further brings into prominence the role of Economic Diplomacy (piloted by economic diplomats) on international law. The undercurrents of Diplomacy employed in the emergence of these resolutions is quite enormous and intriguing, for example, in passing resolution 1803, more than 12 nations abstained from voting though present, 2 nations clearly voted against the resolution and 87 nations voted in favour. In Resolution 3231 (Charter of Economic Right and Duties of State), 10 nations abstained in voting, a total of 6 nations strongly opposed the resolution, while 120 nations voted in favour. The main countries that were against the resolutions and voted against them includes, the United States, the United Kingdom, German Federal Republic, Denmark, Belgium, Luxemburg. It is imagined that throughout the period and event leading to the passage of these economic resolutions, Economic Diplomacy by the contending states was at its best.
            It is salient to point out that the United States and its allies came out frayed in the interplay of Economic Diplomacy that followed the passage of these resolutions, so much so that till date the United States and its allies have remained persistent Objectors to these resolutions.[11]
            Another aspect of economic diplomacy can be gleaned from the activities of International Monetary Fund (IMF), Established in 1945, under the terms of the Articles of Agreement which emerged after the Bretton Wood Conference. The organization now comprises of over 182 states. The principal purpose of the IMF is to facilitate the expansion and balanced growth of International Trade and to contribute thereby to the promotion and maintenance of high levels of employment and this is to be secured by stable exchange rates, financial discipline and the avoidance of balance of payments disequilibria.
            IMF operates through a board of Governors, an Interim Committee, an Executive Board and a Managing Director. In addition, there is a Development Committee, which advises the IMF and the Governors of the World Bank on matters concerning developing countries.
            All decisions of the IMF is by consensus of members in a system of weighted voting whereby members that has stronger economic strength is allotted more voting power.
            Furthermore, by Article 1(iv) of the Agreement, one of the purposes of the fund is to assist in the establishment of a multilateral system of payments in respect of current transactions between members and in the elimination of foreign exchange restrictions, which hamper the growth of world trade.
            In addition to its duties in relation to monitoring exchange rate and its role in promoting currency convertibility, the IMF is also charged with providing international liquidity. By the 1969 amendment of the Articles of IMF Agreement, Special Drawing Rights (SDRS) was created to promote international liquidity to assist member states confront their balance of payment problems.
            It is submitted that from the foregoing, the formation, structure, operations and management of IMF falls under purview of Economic Diplomacy. The art of Economic Diplomacy is brought into play especially in the decision making, as exemplified in the weighted voting system.
            Another veritable example of economic diplomacy is the emergency of General Agreement on Tariff and Trade (GATT), which is a standard setting organization. USA took the bold step of drafting the ambitious multilateral agreements, which later metamorphosed to the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). GATT is a product of enormous economic diplomatic debates held in Geneva 1947 that lasted from April to September. It proceeded from this multilateral convention incorporating the results of more than 120 sets of bilateral negotiations among twenty nations embracing more than 43,000 separate terms. The resulting agreements affected more than three-fourths of the import trade of the participating nations and about three-fourth of the total world imports. The general provisions of GATT established for the first time a generally accepted international code of treatment in commercial relations.[12]
            What is fundamental in this presentation concerning the passage of GATT is to appreciate the level of Economic Diplomacy/Negotiations that transpired to give birth to this international economic regulation. It further underscores the monumental contributions of Economic Diplomacy in the regime of laws/regulations of International Law.
            As a treaty, the objective of GATT is to establish a common code in respect of international trade by providing mechanisms both for consultation and for reducing and stabilizing tariffs. The fundamental principles of GATT agreement include:

(i)                The principle of most favoured nation state.
(ii)             The reduction of tariff barriers.
(iii)           Non-discrimination between imported and domestic goods.
(iv)           Elimination of import and export quotes.
(v)              Restriction of exports subsidies.

            The dynamics of diplomacy with economic content was amply demonstrated in the formation of UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development). UNCTAD is a product of the resentment by the developing countries against the operations of GATT. The under-developed countries through their various diplomats mounted enormous pressure on the UN, which led to the UNCTAD Conference in Geneva 1964. Attended by representatives of 120 countries and regional organizations, UN Agencies. UNCTAD is reputed to be the largest international conference ever held, it was dominated by representatives of developing countries with the delegates of the industrialized nations on the defensive. The conference witnessed the emergence of the world largest pressure group consisting of the developing countries. At the end of UNCTAD, the developing countries were able to wrest some concessions from the industrialized states. The conference approved a new charter of international economic relations. At its nineteenth session held later in the year, the UN General Assembly adopted resolution 1995(xix) providing for the establishment of UNCTAD as a permanent body.
            Further dynamics of economic diplomacy led to the emergence of World Trade Organization (WTO). The Uruguay round of negotiations and Diplomacy, which lasted for a period of seven years gave birth to World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995 under the Marakesh agreement. The World Trade Organization is to provide a common institutional framework for free trade realization in the world. It has the objective of reduction of tariffs and ending discriminately treatment in trade relations.
            Economic consideration and efforts in Economic Diplomacy has led to the formation of several other organisations and institutions regulating conduct, relations in the international and regional sphere, some of these include:
(1)              International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) 1946
(2)              International Finance Corporation (IFC) 1956
(3)              International Development Association (IDA) 1960
(4)              International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) 1966
(5)              Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) 1988
(6)              World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO)
(7)              Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
(8)              European Economic Community (EEC)
(9)              European Free Trade Association (EFTA)
(10)         Benelus Union
(11)         North Atlantic Free Trade Association (NAFTA)
(12)         Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
(13)         African Economic Community (AEC)
(14)         Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (CMESA) 1993
(15)         African Union (AU)

            Another area in which Economic Diplomacy has held sway is in the area of foreign investment and its protection. Foreign investment has turned out to be a major source of economic and industrial growth of many states.
            The basis of foreign investment generally is purely economic, both for the capital exporting and capital importing country. The obstacle of foreign investment, which includes political climate, fear of government control, exchange restrictions, makes Economic Diplomacy more needful in these areas of international law. The capital exporting counties need to be assured that their investment will be protected and worthwhile and the capital importing country must be impressed with the economic gains of the foreign investment. In practice, foreign investment involves various negotiations between nations and national agencies sometimes for several years before it can be realized.[13]
            The protection of foreign investment has become one of the pre-occupation in international law in recent times. The fall of colonialism and imperial states has elicited the need for the protection of foreign investments. Here again, all the steps taken or adopted to protect foreign investments have been grounded on Economic Diplomacy. Some of the standards accepted generally for the protection of foreign investments have been products of continuous usage by states in their Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITS), which were later to become customary usage of International Law. These include, the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) standards, the standard of national treatment, the international minimum standards, etc.
            Furthermore, it must be underscored that it is the level of negotiations/Diplomacy between nations that will determine the use of any of the standards of protection for foreign investment.
            It is to be noted also that it was the resultant diplomatic moves persistently put forward by the Western countries especially by the United States that ensured that the United Nations included payment of compensation in case of Nationalization and expropriation in Article 2 2(c) of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, Resolution 3281.
            It has been stated[14] that presently, there is no multilateral provisions on the protection of foreign investment. However, in 1995, Organization for Economic Corporation and Development (OECD) made up of 29 developed countries started negotiations towards the establishment of a Multilateral Investment Treaty (MAI), once again, this is a concerted effort to advance the economic influence of their member states.
            All the proposals in the said proposed treaty are geared to protect the economic policies of the governments of the member states. The drafters of the said treaty are very hopeful that it will form the basis for a WTO, UN or World Bank sponsored universal multilateral treaty on foreign investment.[15] If this is done, Economic Diplomacy would have reckoned another major stride in international law this time by member states of OECD.
            Another aspect of Economic Diplomacy, borders on the conduct of states in the economic affairs of other states. Modern Diplomacy now involves detailed study and analysis of the policies of states by the embassies and consular offices of other states. This is with the intendment of proffering necessary advice to their respective countries and for the purpose of evaluating whether or not such policies affects the economic interest of home countries.
            The situation is even stretched to seeking to influence certain legislations in the foreign countries and even or organizations/institutions. Thus, it has been noted that there are more staff and activities going on the Geneva office of Industrialized Countries Embassy to WTO than is the case at their bilateral Embassies in Switzerland.[16] Countries have sponsored the opening of special offices in Brussels in order to influence decision making at the EU Commission and EU related institutions.

IV.      An Appraisal of Economic Diplomacy in International Law


            The use of economic resources as rewards or punishment in the pursuit of national goals and policies has come to be seen as a veritable operation of Economic Diplomacy. History and current events have demonstrated how some nations especially the rich ones employ their economic resources to foster or frustrate certain policies in the world, which may be economic, political, military or otherwise. The NICARAGUA CASE (MERITS) between Nicaragua vs United States. In this case, the government of United States terminated economic aids to Nicaragua on the ground that it had aided guerrillas fighting against the El Salvador government, which enjoyed good relations with US by allowing USSR arms to pass through its ports. Nicaragua brought this case claiming that the US had acted in breach of the bilateral 1956 US-Nicaragua treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation. The court declined jurisdiction on the ground that the US had reservation on article 2(4) of UN Charter.
            This conduct has the benefit of a chequered history of practice, for example, in 1945, the United States granted most favoured nations treatment to more than thirty countries of the world and also granted them 50% reduction of American tariffs, this gesture was conditioned on the concession by those countries that benefited from the treatment to allow free flow of goods to their countries with minimal restrictions. It is to be noted that USA took this step to foster their pursuit of free trade policy in the world.
            It has been recorded that the Soviet Union was able to hold the Soviet block of Eastern Europe together politically for several years because of her several aids to these countries and threats of boycott of purchase of goods from those countries.
            Since the end of the Second World War, USA has consistently adopted the policy of granting aids and soft loans to many countries for reconstruction and development purposes. However, this is conditioned and targeted at ensuring that these countries in turn buy all necessary material goods and even personnel from the people and government of America.
            This approach of threat to boycott of economic and marketing patronage has frequently been employed in international energy and oil business by countries to ensure adherence to certain policies preferred by the threatening nations.
            It has been noted that the importance of Economic Diplomacy in International Law has engendered the emergence of non-state actors seeking to shape economic and business policies of their countries and of the world. E.g. transnational companies in the United States have been engaged in Diplomatic offensive lobbying the government and the congress to grant permanent normal trade relations status to China. This step is purely for economic survival of these transnational companies. Even NGOs are adding their voice to the economic policy debates by lobbying across national boundaries on issues such as poverty alleviation, safe environmental practices, human right protection and unfettered capitalism.[17]
            An appraisal of economic diplomacy cannot be completed without considering its effects on both the developed and developing nations particularly with regard to the nations sovereignty. It is submitted that economic diplomacy has become a veritable tool in the hands of developed nations in pursuing its economic agenda in international law. With the level of technology, human and material resources available to the developed nations, they tend to conduct economic diplomatic activities that tend to undermine the principle of sovereign equality of states particularly when considered in relation to the developing nations. Conversely, the developing nations, without any measure of economic and political strength seem to be at the receiving end of the economic diplomatic activities of the developed nations.
            With respect to the developing nations this makes the principle of sovereignty, according to George Schwarzenberger “a mere dejure sovereignty”.[18] Furthermore, with the increasing influence of non-state actors like multinational and transnational corporations, in the conduct of economic diplomacy, particularly considering the enormous financial and economic resources available to them, developing nations are further pushed to surrender some aspects of their sovereignty in order to attract direct foreign investment. It is submitted that the fact that economic diplomacy is a nascent phenomenon, there are bound to develop new ethos and standards, outside the known principles of international law, in the conduct of economic diplomacy in international law.

V.        The Future of Economic Diplomacy


            Traditionally, diplomacy has been the prerogative of envoys representing central government offices and their mandate confined to the affairs of the state, today, management of international economic relations is no longer confined to the state but rather extended to civil and commercial affairs. Protagonists of these new interest groups will certainly be business executives’ members of civil societies and representatives of NGOs.
            Globalization and technological revolution has increased the speed of change within different spheres of daily life and international relations. Wider availability of information and knowledge and easier access has spurred higher aspirations among different peoples. Internet based technology makes it possible for people and businesses to establish supra-territorial relationships, which were n the past the realm of a privileged few. One of the unintended developments of globalization is the participation of non-state actors in diplomacy.
            Seen from this perspective, it will become imperative that different actors in the enlarged sphere of post-modern diplomacy acquire the additional competencies to engage constructively in policy dialogue. This will naturally continue to reshapen the confines of international economic laws, as the post-modern economic diplomats both state and non-state actors set to achieve the following basic objectives and tasks:

(1)              To influence political, economic and social policies to create the right conditions for economic development taking into account the needs and aspirations of other stakeholders.
(2)              To work with rule-making international bodies whose decisions affect international trade and financial regulations.
(3)              To forestall potential conflicts with foreign governments, NGOs, and various economic actors thereby aiming to minimize political and economic risks.
(4)              To use multiple international for and media channels to safeguard the image and reputation of their own country, enterprise and NGO.
(5)              To create social capital through dialogue with all stakeholders whom the process of economic development and globalization might impact.
(6)              To sustain credibility and legitimacy of their representative bodies in the eyes of the public and their own communities.

VI.      Conclusion and Suggestion


            The focus of this paper has been an attempt to consider the various forays, contributions and impact made by the Economic Diplomacy to the body of International Law. This examination has revealed that economic and trade issues has come to dominate the ideologies and policies of both the states and international institutions constituting the operators of international law and relations. The reason for this disposition is very obvious, being that economic stability has come to be sine qua non to political stability.
            Furthermore, Economic Diplomacy has come to occupy a centre stage in International Law in modern times owing to the fact that after the cold war era, boundaries between business and diplomacy have gradually become blurred. States now more than ever before appear to be championing economic development and trade relations in today’s global economy, which has become increasingly interconnected and interdependent.
            One other issue that has necessitated the emergence of Economic Diplomacy is the north-south dialogue referring to the economic gap and disequilibrium existing between the developed and developing countries. So long as the developing countries continue the contention of reducing this gap, Economic Diplomacy must continue to feature prominently in International Law.
            It is posited that with the predominance of economic and trade in world affairs, Economic Diplomacy will inevitably take the centre stage in International Law, and would continue to shapen the existing norms and practices until such a time when there shall be written codes on the conduct of economic diplomacy in international law for both state and non-state actors.


[1] The New Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary of English Language, 1994 Edition
[2] Article 38 of the Statute of International Court of Justice
[3] The New Lexicon Dictionary
[4] Ernest Satow, A Guide to Diplomatic Practice (London: Longman 1975) Page. 1
[5] Morton Kaplan, Introduction to Diplomatic Strategy in World Politics, July 1952 page 548
[6] Olusola Ojo and Amadu Sesay, Concepts in International Relations (JAD Lagos, 1988) page 141
[7] Mellissen, Jan (1999) ed. “Innovation in Diplomatic Practice” Macmillan, London, pp XVI-XVII
[8] See G.R. Berridge Alan James “A Dictionary of Diplomacy”  Palgrave Publication, Hampshire, UK 2001 at page 81
[9] Raymond Saner, Lichia Yiu: International Economic Diplomacy Mutations in Post-Modern Timed, Netherlands Institute of International Relations Clingerdael, page 20
[10] Resol, 626 (vii)  see also Resol, 1314 (xiii)
[11] See IAN BROWNLIE, Principles of Public International Law, 3rd Edition, Page 543
[12] Palmer and Perkins – International Relations, 3rd Edition – Page 538
[13] Under the Treaty of Rome 1947
[14] SAM KARGBO – International Protection of Foreign Investment at page 94
[15] IBIB
[16] Raymond Saner, Lichia yiu, International Economic Diplomacy, Mutations in Post Modern Times pages 12-13
[17] Raymond Saner, International Economic Diplomacy – Mutations in Post Modern Times pages 2, 7 and 27
[18] George Schwarzenberger, Principles and Standards of International Economic Law, page 31
Share on Google Plus

Declaimer - MARTINS LIBRARY

NB: Join our Social Media Network on Google Plus | Facebook | Twitter | Linkedin