NEGOTIATIONSAND VISITS
Meetings between heads of government or state, as well as between ministers for foreign affairs, to discuss policies or problems of mutual interest to their countries have become common practice in intergovernmental relations. The results of such meetings are usually, for lack of time, not set out in formal treaties or agreements signed in the traditional manner. Very often, the participants confine themselves to the drawing up of a joint statement, declaration or communiqué, handed out during a press conference and usually published in newspapers. Such instruments, however important or binding upon the participating governments, have none of the classic character of international agreements.
The final documents of intergovernmental negotiations or visits -joint statements, communiqués or declarations (whether signed or unsigned) come to life only if there is prior agreement between the participants on each paragraph, phrase or word in the text.
A communiqué is an official report on the course of international negotiations, and on the agreement achieved. It may be brief and contain an announcement of some fact or facts in general terms. Sometimes, however, it may be long and elaborate, and then it will include a detailed description of the course of negotiations, declaration of the decisions adopted by the participants and the terms of the agreement achieved.
Prior to World War II a shorter variety was predominant.
Today the idea has undergone substantial change. Final documents of negotiations or visits now embrace a wide range of important international issues and are becoming more meaningful. Communiqués as well as joint statements and declarations have become increasingly widespread, playing a far more important role in international relations than they used to play in the past.
The nature, content and tone of a final document are determined primarily by the nature of the states adopting the document -states with similar or different social systems, allied states or states members of the opposing military groupings, and so forth.
The first task a communiqué (joint statement or declaration) is called upon to fulfill is faithfully to reflect the outcome of the negotiations or exchange of views. In most cases the participants are interested in positive results - otherwise why enter into talks at all?
Although communiqués, joint statements and declarations (either bilateral or multilateral) are similar in their purpose, there are certain differences between them. A communiqué is a more general kind of document. Its prime objective is to inform thepress and the public at large of the results of the talks and of the atmosphere in which they were held. A joint statement is a document that is more binding on the sides. It presumes that something substantial has come out of the negotiations - either in the field of general international problems or in the field of bilateral relations - and in view of that the participants decided to issue a joint statement. Finally, a declaration is a still more weighty and binding document. Declarations proclaim identical views and joint intentions. All three forms of documents - communiqués, joint statements and declarations - record the decisions which have been adopted during the talks (for instance, it is announced that a consular convention has been signed during the talks, or that an-invitation to make an official visit has been extended or accepted, and so forth). The language of communiqués is business-like and dryish. Elevation of style is characteristic of joint statements, and particularly declarations.
|
|
|
In terms of its subject matter, a final document (unless devoted specifically to one question or event) breaks down into two groups of questions - international and bilateral relations.
Each side tries to reflect in the communiqué (joint statement or declaration) its attitude to the burning issues of the day (both global and regional ones). If such questions or events have been avoided in the final document, the omission invites the assumption that the sides have no common viewpoint on the topic.
The chief merit of communiqués (joint statements or declarations) lies in a precise, realistic and faithful reflection of the results achieved and of the positions of the sides expounded during the talks. The final document does not reflect the ups and downs of negotiations but their end results, and it is in setting down those results on paper that each phrase, word or punctuation mark should be thoroughly weighed.
In most cases communiqués, joint statements and declarations; have their own protocol part. When, besides negotiations, there; has been a tour of the country, mention is usually made of the, cities or important industrial, scientific or cultural centers or projects that were visited and of the reception accorded by the population. In listing the participants in the negotiations, it is important to be very precise in stating their surnames and initials in conformity with the rules of the language concerned, and in observing the precedence dictated by the protocol.
The usual pattern of a communiqué (joint statement, or declaration) is as follows: mention is first made of the negotiations (or a visit) that have taken place and their duration; then follows a reference to the meetings that have taken place and a list of their participants; then comes a general appraisal of the atmosphere of the talks and a range of issues considered; the part setting forth the results of the talks on international problems usually precedes the one relating to questions of bilateral relations. If an invitation to pay a visit has been extended, agreement on that is generally recorded in the final part of a document. It has been customary to note, at the very end of a final document, the significance of the negotiations for the development of relationship p between the two countries, as well as for international security.
Final instruments of intergovernmental negotiations are sometimes drawn up in the form of a memorandum of understanding, which has become common practice of late. (From "Modern Diplomacy" by K.Anatoliev).
