Creating from Chaos

D. Prins
{"title":"Creating from Chaos","authors":"D. Prins","doi":"10.1093/law/9780190947842.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In practice, negotiations leading to a United Nations treaty are often untidy and anarchic. The ambition to adopt a strong treaty covering the whole UN membership is habitually at odds with the overriding significance of national sovereignty. Unwilling countries, knowing that proponents aspire consensus, can block progress where they deem fit. And that same sovereignty principle plays out in the limited options a chairperson of a conference has for firm process management. The disarray has other origins as well. At treaty conferences, delegates need to develop pockets of informality in which they can build the trust needed for recognition of their most pressing priorities. The abundance of informal exchanges outside the meeting room adds to making process management a challenge. Also, a lack of national resources, and patronage in recruitment, often negatively impact on consistent, knowledgeable engagement by delegations. Last, unavoidable time restrictions prevent the process from playing out in a well-planned, methodical way. Bringing order to this process is only limitedly possible. Multilateral treaty-making seems inherently messy and deeply improvisational. Such a setting tends to reward those countries that can field skilled, creative, resourceful diplomats who can be trusted to make the most from only generic instructions.","PeriodicalId":254022,"journal":{"name":"The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Treaties","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Oxford Handbook of United Nations Treaties","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780190947842.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In practice, negotiations leading to a United Nations treaty are often untidy and anarchic. The ambition to adopt a strong treaty covering the whole UN membership is habitually at odds with the overriding significance of national sovereignty. Unwilling countries, knowing that proponents aspire consensus, can block progress where they deem fit. And that same sovereignty principle plays out in the limited options a chairperson of a conference has for firm process management. The disarray has other origins as well. At treaty conferences, delegates need to develop pockets of informality in which they can build the trust needed for recognition of their most pressing priorities. The abundance of informal exchanges outside the meeting room adds to making process management a challenge. Also, a lack of national resources, and patronage in recruitment, often negatively impact on consistent, knowledgeable engagement by delegations. Last, unavoidable time restrictions prevent the process from playing out in a well-planned, methodical way. Bringing order to this process is only limitedly possible. Multilateral treaty-making seems inherently messy and deeply improvisational. Such a setting tends to reward those countries that can field skilled, creative, resourceful diplomats who can be trusted to make the most from only generic instructions.
从混乱中创造
在实践中,导致联合国条约的谈判往往是不整洁和无政府状态的。通过一项涵盖联合国全体成员国的强有力条约的雄心,通常与国家主权的压倒一切的重要性相冲突。不情愿的国家知道支持者渴望达成共识,可以在他们认为合适的地方阻碍进展。同样的主权原则在会议主席对公司流程管理的有限选择中发挥了作用。这种混乱还有其他原因。在条约会议上,代表们需要发展一些非正式活动,在这些活动中,他们可以建立必要的信任,从而使他们最紧迫的优先事项得到认可。会议室外大量的非正式交流增加了流程管理的挑战。此外,缺乏国家资源和在征聘方面的赞助往往对代表团一贯的、有知识的参与产生不利影响。最后,不可避免的时间限制阻碍了这个过程以一种精心计划的、有条理的方式进行。给这一过程带来秩序是有限的。多边条约的制定似乎天生就很混乱,而且非常即兴。这样的环境往往有利于那些能够派出熟练的、有创造力的、足智多谋的外交官的国家,这些外交官可以被信任,只从一般性的指示中发挥最大作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信