TRABAJO FIN DE GRADO

GRADO EN PROTOCOL, ORGANIZATION OF EVENTS AND

CORPORATE COMMUNICATION
CURSO ACADÉMICO 4º
CONVOCATORIA JUNIO

CULTURAL DIPLOMACY IN THE FIELD OF DIPLOMATIC PROTOCOL

AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

AUTORA: Sabau Leyva, Laura Ivette

DNI: 50573441Y

TUTOR(A): Trapaga, Koldo

En Madrid, a 2 de junio de 2022

 INDEX
1. Aim of the study....................................................................................................................4
2. Basic Concepts.......................................................................................................................4
2.1 International Relations..........................................................................................5
2.2 Globalisation.........................................................................................................5
3. Protocol and Diplomacy.......................................................................................................6
3.1 Diplomacy.............................................................................................................6
3.1.1 Concept and practice......................................................................................6
3.1.2 History of Diplomacy.....................................................................................7
3.1.3 Characteristics................................................................................................9
3.1.4 Strategy........................................................................................................10
3.1.5 Functions......................................................................................................10
3.2 International Protocol..........................................................................................11
3.2.1 Introduction..................................................................................................11
3.2.2 Concept........................................................................................................12
3.2.3 History of Protocol.......................................................................................12
3.2.4 Method.........................................................................................................13
3.3 Ceremonial protocol in diplomatic relations.......................................................14
3.3.1 History and Evolution of ceremonial...........................................................15
3.3.2 Characteristics..............................................................................................15
3.3.3 Classification of Ceremonial Protocol.........................................................15
3.4 Etiquette..............................................................................................................16
3.4.1 Concept........................................................................................................16
3.4.2 History of etiquette.......................................................................................16
4. International Organizations...............................................................................................17
4.1 Concept...............................................................................................................17
4.2 Treaties................................................................................................................18
Treaty of Versailles...........................................................................................19
Treaty of Lisbon................................................................................................19
Vienna Convention...........................................................................................19
Human Rights Treaties......................................................................................20
5. United Nations.....................................................................................................................20
5.1 Concept...............................................................................................................20
5.2 Aims and Principles............................................................................................21
5.2.1 Aims of the United Nations.........................................................................21
5.2.1 Principles of the United Nations..................................................................21
5.3 History.................................................................................................................22

2
 5.4 Organs of the UN................................................................................................23
5.5 Protocol at the United Nations............................................................................24
6. Case Study; how diplomacy and protocol have failed in the conflict of Russia and
Ukraine.....................................................................................................................................24
6.1 International Conflict and its relation to diplomacy protocol.............................24
6.2 Historical Framework.........................................................................................25
6.2.1 Official EU and US positions on the conflict in Ukraine............................27
6.2.2 US and EU economic and trade sanctions against Moscow........................28
6.2.3 Analysis of the measures..............................................................................29
6.3 UN and Ukraine..................................................................................................30
7. Conclusion...........................................................................................................................31
8. Bibliography........................................................................................................................32

3
 1. Aim of the study
The aim of this study will be to analyse the use of protocol and diplomacy in the field
of international relations, and more specifically to analyse these concepts, and how they have
functioned as a tool that has facilitated international relations.
A central aspect of the work will be to analyse the complementarity of the different
concepts which, although they can be understood as isolated elements of study, display a
coherent line of work with great potential when considered together.
The structure of this development begins with the study of the main concepts, their
evolution, their characteristics... This serves as a guiding thread, to, finally, understand the
failure of diplomacy and protocol in the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine.
Diplomacy is one of the oldest arts in the world, which has played an essential role in
the smooth development of international relations throughout history. Today, international
protocol and diplomacy remain essential for any country, as they mark its image in the world.
Both protocol and diplomacy are institutionally regulated procedures between nations
to resolve international conflicts through dialogue. In short, they are the basic instrument that
a country uses with other countries to strengthen its own position, on the one hand, but also to
contribute to reinforcing international harmony, on the other.
Both disciplines are made available to states for conflict resolution; however,
ignorance of diplomacy or protocol can also be and has been the cause of international
disputes (Arias Llamas & Celada Rodríguez, 2010: 10).
On the other hand, we live in a global world, in the information and knowledge
society, which allows us to interact with people from all over the world, with all kinds of
cultures, beliefs and religions, something that entails an inhospitable updating and adaptation
in our environment, and which obviously affects the management of diplomacy and protocol.

2. Basic Concepts
Throughout the history of society, trade and immigration have brought people from
different cultures and backgrounds into contact with each other, making communication
between people from different cultures inevitable.
This multicultural coexistence has been very important as it has favoured
interculturality by helping the understanding of other cultures based on respect, tolerance and
freedom. Without multiculturalism and intercultural dialogue, societies would only know the
dominant cultures and other cultural forms would be marginalised.
According to Montiel, culture is a strategic element due to its versatility and plasticity
because it acts in the field of consciousness and behaviour; but above all in a context of
complex multilateralism and interdependence (Montiel, 2010).
Culture is therefore a resource for social cohesion, dialogue between peoples, social
peace and shared development. Intercultural communication focuses on the mutual exchange
of ideas and cultural norms and the development of deep relationships.
That is, when one society or group interacts with another, we are in the presence of
cultural contact. With these intercultural relations, through dialogue, we seek to understand

4
the differences in the way people from different cultures act, communicate and perceive the
world around them.
This intercultural dialogue allows us to avoid ethnic, religious, linguistic and cultural
divisions. It allows us to evolve, to deal with different identities in a constructive and
democratic way thanks to shared universal values.
Over the years Intercultural Relations has developed greater intercultural competences,
such as strengthening participatory democratic citizenship and participation; learning
intercultural skills; creating and expanding spaces for intercultural dialogue... which helps to
communicate with other cultures and contributes to harmonious coexistence between nations.
The concept of cultural diplomacy is used interchangeably as a synonym for
international cultural relations. For the historian Robert Frank, these encompass "exchanges,
equal or unequal, of world representations and models, as well as the production of symbolic
objects between spaces separated by borders" (Frank, 2003: 325).

2.1 International Relations

Broadly speaking, the beginning of International Relations can be traced back to the
Treaties of Westphalia in 1648. These treaties encouraged the building of independent nation
states through the institutionalisation of diplomacy and armies.
Modern international relations attempt to explain the relations between different types
of states. International relations is a way of looking at the international system and includes:
an individual level; the state; an international level; that of transnational and
intergovernmental affairs; and a global world level.
We could define international relations as Q. Wright: "it is the relations between
groups of major importance in the life of the world at any period of history, and especially the
relations between territorially organised nation-states.
It is, therefore, a discipline with specific objectives
 The establishment of forecasts on the evolution of international events and
their consequences.
 Objective knowledge of current international affairs;
 The expression of value judgements on foreign decisions and policies.
 An essential contribution to the intellectual and professional training of the
followers of this dynamic.
 Arriving at a conception of the dispersed facts in order to deduce the main
variables and dominant characteristics.

2.2 Globalization
Intercultural sensitivity within groups paves the way for acceptance and tolerance of
other cultures and enables their members to open up to universal values among all groups,
such as law and justice, which the globalised society must build together. This creates a third
culture.
Globalization has led to the development of common lifestyles and consumption
habits. It can be seen in the customs that have adapted to the characteristics of others,
redefined, and this is observable through artistic expressions, fashion, gastronomy, music,
among others, in any country.

5
 On the one hand, the greatest advantage of globalisation is to get to know different
worldviews and ideologies throughout the world, as a result of which there is greater respect
for diversity.
On the other hand, the cultures of regions or peoples with smaller populations have
been influenced by the cultures of larger and more influential regions or countries, leaving
their own culture aside.
The emergence of an increasingly interdependent international society as a result of
globalisation calls into question the hierarchical model of society, just as it does in national
societies.
It should be added that today's societies are also knowledge societies, in which public
opinion has greater access to information in all areas, including international relations, and it
is not just that there is knowledge, but that its opinion counts.

3. Protocol and Diplomacy

The importance of showing respect for the culture of others cannot be overstated. Lack
of knowledge inhibits proper communication, which is essential when dealing with other
cultures, both within our own society and beyond.
Diplomacy applies to relations between states and protocol is the art of knowing how
to apply it. Although the two concepts are totally linked and one cannot function without the
other, there are differences when it comes to determining the role of each in society, their true
raison d'être.

3.1 Diplomacy

3.1.1 Concept and practice

Diplomacy helps to be skilled in intercultural communication. It is about reaching an
agreement, a solution, a negotiation, a compromise that everyone can live with. Its main
function is to achieve peace agreements through negotiations whose objectives are in the
interest of both states. -bennet
It is the science and management of international relations between sovereign states
whose objective is the search for the peaceful resolution of conflicts through dialogue and
which leads to negotiation.
Cultural diplomacy links two polyvalent and difficult to define concepts: culture and
diplomacy.
One of them defines culture as "a complex whole that includes knowledge, beliefs, art,
customs, law, traditions, as well as all that acquired disposition or use (norms, values and
models of behaviour) for man living in society" (Saint-Pierre, 2003).
The most widely cited definition is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organisation's (UNESCO) Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, which
defines culture as "the set of distinctive spiritual, material, intellectual and emotional features
of society or a social group, encompassing, in addition to art and literature, ways of life, ways
of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs" (Rodriguez, 2008c: 863).
Diplomacy has been defined since the beginning of the 20th century as "the science of
the social and political constitution of states and the art of reconciling duties, rights and

6
interests. Its aim is to maintain, affirm and develop peaceful relations between states' (Funck-
Brentano, 1900: 74).
Another classic definition is that of British diplomat Sir Harold George Nicolson, who
refers to relations between states through negotiation, as well as highlighting the diplomatic
virtues: truthfulness, precision, good character, patience, modesty, loyalty, imagination, tact
and intelligence (Nicolson, 2000).
In this understanding, both concepts link a way of doing (diplomacy) with a content
(culture), which, framed in the field of foreign policy, have given rise to a practice known as
cultural diplomacy.
Others use the term cultural diplomacy to refer to the diplomatic practice of
governments in the service of foreign policy objectives through various cultural and
educational manifestations supported in principle by governments (Rodríguez, 2008b).
In this sense, J. M. Mitchell points to two different forms of government intervention:
"first-order diplomacy" and "second-order diplomacy".
The first is exercised directly by governmental authorities responsible for foreign
policy in terms of their objectives, while the second is exercised in terms of sectoral
objectives pursued by private or decentralised bodies dedicated to cultural development
(Mitchell, 1986).
On the international scene, we find a multiplicity of modes of cultural diplomacy,
because the countries that practice it develop it on the basis of their traditions, values, forms
of cultural diplomacy, and the ways in which they are pursued.
The actual practice of diplomacy dates back to the 17th century, when a royal code
establishing diplomatic procedures was created, ratified and accepted by the UN in the Vienna
Convention in 1961.
Due to changes in international society after the First World War, the taboo of
approaching foreign audiences in peacetime disappears. Public opinion began to take shape
and demanded participation in diplomacy.
This concept eventually evolved into a contemporary form of diplomacy in which the
subject of diplomacy took on new dimensions, as did the use of information. And with the
great technological, technical, economic, commercial, military and social development, the
democratisation and specialisation of the diplomatic profession.
Arguably the best definition of the concept and meaning of the term Diplomatic
Practice is the one in Satow's Guide: "Diplomatic Practice is the employment of intelligence
and tact in the conduct of official relations between the governments of independent states; or
more briefly, the conduct of business between states by peaceful means."

3.1.2 History of Diplomacy

The origins of diplomatic relations are as old as the history of human societies
themselves. As political units were configured into states, the need to communicate arose,
which generated diplomatic practices in the construction of relations between countries
capable of building international relations within the framework of public diplomacy.
Evidently, today's diplomacy differs substantially from the practices of yesteryear;
however, diplomatic relations form, along with war, trade and communication, the essential
substratum of an international society, whose web of relations and actors has experienced a
constant and growing complexity throughout history.

7
 The existence of diplomacy dates back to ancient times, with China, India and Egypt
recording the earliest antecedents.
If we go back to ancient times. In general, in most times, some forms of diplomatic
relations were maintained, even when societies or civilisations were at war. People needed
things like parliament, the ability to talk to each other, the ability to send representatives and
the ability to make representations.
This is how it has always been in human affairs, assuming that the starting point is
some form of dialogue. From dialogue, they could build some form of mutual understanding
of each other's positions, and then enter into negotiations.
From antiquity to the 15th century and from the 15th century to the end of the 20th
century, giving rise to a third vision referring to Digital Diplomacy.
From antiquity until the 15th century, diplomacy was itinerant in nature and was
carried out by means of exceptionally appointed representations, to carry out their activity in a
foreign country and generally before a monarch, for a limited period of time and in
accordance with the nature of the steps to be taken.
These actions revolved around the negotiation of peace treaties or alliances, the
establishment of trade agreements to control the traffic of goods as well as the delimitation of
borders.
Initially, diplomatic activities lacked organisation and basic rules governing their
functioning. These formalities arose from the imposition of customs such as the exchange of
gifts, which is still in force today, as can be seen in state visits to the Vatican.
To this should be added the limitations imposed by the means of transport and
communications of the time and the linguistic, religious and cultural difficulties, all of which
prevented the establishment of stable and regular diplomatic missions.
It was not until the Middle Ages that the Holy See, the religious and political power of
Christendom, adopted the custom of sending temporary diplomatic missions to sovereigns in
order to settle their spiritual differences, so to speak, and to mark out territories of power.
From the First World War to the emergence of the Internet, permanent diplomacy
experienced a relative decline in favour of new forms of shuttle diplomacy, powerfully
stimulated by modern technologies, transport (railways, steam navigation, aviation) and
communications (telegraphy, telephony, radio, television, wave and satellite, etc.) with a
global reach.
The expansion of mass media led to greater control of foreign policy by public
opinion. Naturally, diplomacy also became the subject of growing concern among broad
political and social sectors.
Diplomacy thus ceased to be the exclusive concern of governments and diplomatic
officials. Political mechanisms such as referendums were established to channel popular
control over foreign policy.
Despite all this, permanent diplomatic missions continue to play irreplaceable roles as
privileged channels of communication, information and negotiation between states, while
continuing to act as institutions protecting their nationals and the interests of their respective
governments.
More recently, with globalisation, public diplomacy has evolved into what is now
known as digital diplomacy. It is from the 1990s onwards that a new form of diplomacy
begins, reshaping new global, governmental and societal interests and needs in the digital

8
ecosystem. Phil Seib says that - "The era of diplomats talking only to other diplomats and
scheduling their conversations to suit themselves is over.
We are facing a new time, new diplomatic practices are performing to succeed in the
era of real time" (2012). This shows that the transformation of diplomacy and its activity
influences the media environment.
These changes in international society have led to the emergence of new forms of
diplomatic relations or the proliferation of existing but infrequent forms.
This classification is partly based on the one adopted by Cahier, which distinguishes
between diplomacy through heads of state and diplomacy through foreign ministers.
In general, we can classify them into three categories:
 Diplomacy at the summit.
This is diplomacy carried out directly by the highest state organs of foreign policy:
heads of state, heads of government and foreign ministers.
This form of diplomacy was practised as early as the 19th century through the system
of periodic congresses held by the highest representatives of the European powers.
Later, during the Second World War, the conferences in Tehran, Moscow, Yalta and
Potsdam proved to be important in the search for agreements on Allied military cooperation
or the articulation of the post-war world political system.
Since then, it has gained increasing frequency and weight in international politics to
the extent that it is now difficult to imagine negotiating on any major global or regional issue
without the direct involvement of a state's top political leadership.
Given its eminently political nature and the maximum level of power and
representativeness held by the agents of this type of diplomacy, its results are highly effective.
Summit diplomacy conditions the diplomatic activity of the permanent representations
by turning them into mere executors of the decisions adopted.
 Ad hoc" diplomacy.
Ad hoc" diplomacy, a term first used by the United Nations International Law
Commission, is a form of diplomacy characterised by its temporary and exceptional nature.
In effect, it is diplomatic relations established with the aim of resolving international
problems or issues that, due to their specificity and/or short duration, are not dealt with by
permanent missions.
 Parliamentary diplomacy.
This is the diplomacy that takes place between the member states of IGOs and the
organisations themselves. In effect, the member states of an intergovernmental organisation
establish permanent diplomatic missions accredited to it in order to channel the activities that
correspond to them as members.
A substantial part of this diplomacy is that which takes place within the framework of
the United Nations system. Its legal regulation is contained in the Vienna Convention on the
Representation of States in their Relations with Organisations of a Universal Character,
adopted in 1975.
This category also includes permanent observer missions that may be sent by states
that are not members of the organisation but wish to establish stable cooperation links with it.

9
3.1.3 Characteristics
Diplomacy is a concept defined by the following features
an activity that uses intelligence and tact in the conduct of a State's foreign relations;
 conduct conducted in a peaceful manner; and
 that is conducted by specialised organs
 which follows defined procedures;
 which has as an essential element the figure of the diplomat; f) which seeks to
protect the interests of the State.
 which seeks to protect the interests of the State and its citizens; and
 which requires a genuine knowledge and solid information of international life;
Diplomacy and diplomatic protocol are continuously intertwined by pure logic and
necessity.

3.1.4 Strategy
International cultural cooperation is a fundamental strategy of cultural diplomacy.
According to UNESCO’s Declaration of the Principles of International Cultural Cooperation
adopted on 4 November 1966, international cultural cooperation aims at enabling
governments, authorities, organisations, associations and institutions responsible for cultural
activities to achieve "through the cooperation of the nations of the world in the fields of
education, science and culture, the objectives of peace and welfare set forth in the Charter of
the United Nations".
Article v of the Declaration states that "cultural cooperation is a right and a duty of all
peoples and all nations to share their knowledge and know-how".
Likewise, article xi (1) states that "(States) shall, in their efforts to achieve
international cooperation, respect the sovereign equality of States and refrain from intervening
in matters which are essentially within the sphere of national competence". Within this
framework, most countries maintain and promote a wide range of cultural, educational and
scientific agreements and exchanges.
Foreign policy is conducted by the state, and cultural diplomacy actions therefore
respond to countries' objectives and diplomatic agendas. In this last aspect, cultural diplomacy
is generally carried out by three ministries: Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Ministries of
Culture and Ministries of Education.

3.1.5 Functions
The 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations synthesises the functions of
diplomacy into five: representation, protection and advice, negotiation, communication and
information, and liaison.
Today, as mentioned above, this function is exercised on behalf of a subject of
international law, the State, by specific individuals or specialised organs.
Negotiation, being a fundamental function of diplomacy, as expressed in Article 3(c)
of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, is also an inherent characteristic of
diplomacy, since diplomacy, in essence, "conducts relations between States"; diplomacy is the
"negotiation between political entities which mutually recognise their independence".

10
 In the development of this task, compromise must also prevail, since "the purpose of
any negotiation is to secure agreement, not victory, through persuasion and compromise", and
it is vital to avoid improvisation, as there must be a foresighted and calculated study of the
agreement to be reached.
Diplomacy, in its character of negotiation, involves "the defence of the interests of the
state not through the trampling of the other party, i.e., tending to achieve a meeting point
between the demands of the state itself and the opposing demands of the foreign state"
(Vilariño Pintos, 2011: 75).
Diplomatic communication must be characterised by precision, in that the facts must
be narrated as accurately but synthetically as possible; by clarity, resorting to simplicity but
with correctness; elegance and the appropriate use of diplomatic expressions to convey a
certain message without being violent; and finally, the correct use of the language,
considering who is the transmitter and the receiver of the message (Jara Roncati, 1983: 184-
186).

3.2 International Protocol

3.2.1 Introduction
Protocol is no longer just the general term for the written and unwritten rules of
diplomatic and social discourse between heads of state, heads of government and authorities
as laid down in the Vienna Treaties (1814-1815 and 1961-1963). Today, international
protocol is also concerned with the conduct between industrial partners and the cultural and
sports sector.
The conduct is not only based on existing international practices and rules of respect,
but also with the aim of accurately profiling countries, organisations and companies, securing
important business contracts and knowing the right people. Therefore, it can be said that
etiquette is a tool for maintaining good relations.
The application of international protocol focuses on three aspects. Firstly, it is
intended to minimise tedious discussions about who should sit where, in what order and in
what manner flags are displayed, or in what order people should walk, stand or greet guests.
Secondly, it is a means of avoiding unnecessarily disruptive diplomatic relations, and
thirdly, it is intended to cultivate a climate in which everyone feels comfortable and which
lends itself well to positive decision-making.
When discussing international protocol in government relations, it is important to
consider the precedence that exists between heads of state, ambassadors, authorities and
countries, but it is also relevant to describe the nuances of arrival and departure ceremonies on
official visits.
These include gun salutes at official welcoming ceremonies, styles of greeting, the
order in which flags are displayed, exchange of gifts and honours/decorations, order of
procession, laying of wreaths and presentation of credentials.
In a world where the global economy is ingrained in all aspects of life, international
protocol also has an extremely important place in the industry as a tool for managing
relationships based on respect, good communication, cooperation, hospitality and maintaining
and understanding of the correct way to conduct oneself in international business with foreign
cultures.

11
 In an uncertain global economic situation, strong international networks of
communication and cooperation have become increasingly important, increasing the need for
good diplomatic relations.
These remarkable changes have meant that the form of protocol has had to change to
adapt to the needs of our time, which are increasingly focused on ensuring that business is
conducted in an environment that depends on a correct knowledge of how to deal with
cultural differences.

3.2.2 Concept
Protocol, as a legal framework for organising an official act, has become an
indispensable element for maintaining harmony in international relations, as it enables
communication between states and their highest representatives to be organised and
channelled.
If diplomacy pays attention to the relations that States maintain, protocol is the "art of
knowing how to apply it", making these two concepts necessarily interdependent and
inseparable (Borau Boira & García García, 2014: 2).
Protocol has evolved from its origins to the present day in both its definition and its
nature. This evolution is reflected by Fuente (2008: 51) in his proposed definition: "In
contrast to the protocol of yesterday, which sought to reflect the power of the authorities
through pompous ceremonial and rigid etiquette, a new protocol is emerging today that seeks
to achieve, harmoniously, good organisation and transmit communication when the event is
designed to reach beyond the mere forum of guests present".
This, therefore, translates into an "expression of reciprocal respect between people, as
a means of social communication between them, is as old as the human race". Indeed, "when
a group of individuals organised in a communal and hierarchical manner come into contact
with other similar groupings, the need to establish a relationship framework based on mutual
respect is born" (Chávarri, 2004: 37).
Martínez Cazalla (2017: 99-108) considers protocol as "the most powerful weapon of
international relations and diplomacy".
Recovering the idea of the dynamism of this institution, we cannot forget the
importance of the media and the 'spectator' to whom protocol is exhibited in the global
context.
Along with communication, culture is also a determining aspect of protocol and
diplomacy, as it is according to a country's culture that it will develop its links with other
states. What is polite and a sign of good manners in one state may be offensive and
disrespectful in another (Borau Boira & García García, 2014: 6).
Castillo Esparcia and Fernández Torres quote Urbina to define protocol (2015: 14-15):
''Protocol is that discipline that with realism, technique and art (as it has all three) determines
the structures or forms under which an important human activity is carried out (Urbina).
Official protocol is defined as the set of techniques, based on legal regulations and on
uses and customs, for the organisation of official acts, such as acts organised by the Crown, as
the head of State, by the Government and its ministries, by the autonomous communities and
by the local Administration''.

12
3.2.3 History of Protocol
Before the word protocol arose, there were in fact everyday forms of hierarchy, which
can be seen in ancient frescoes or wall paintings in Ancient Egypt, Asia and Ancient Rome,
where entire processions often took off.
Here, a focus on hierarchy is clearly visible, as is a keen attention to detail in
determining who stood where and in what order. Ancient tribes had rules of respect for
status, such as those relating to the leader of the tribe.
The definition of protocol originates from the Greek word protókollon, an acronym of
the Greek words protos, meaning first, and kolla, meaning glue.
The term was used in late Greek to indicate a sheet or label attached to a rolled
papyrus manuscript and containing notes on the contents (later it indicated the first page that
was glued to the top of a notarial document), and also to describe the seal on a document.
Throughout history, protocol had many definitions. These include:
 An original outline or report by which a treaty is prepared.
 An agreement between states.
 Minutes of an international agreement, which acquires the powers of a
treaty from the signatures of the participants. For example, the 9
London protocols, the first of which was in 1814 and the last in 2000.
 The first copy of an agreement or similar document before ratification.
 A set of standard procedures for the regulation of data transmission in
computer science.
 The plan for the process of a medical treatment or scientific
experiment.
 A code for appropriate behaviour, such as security protocol and
academic protocol.
 An aspect of diplomatic etiquette in the form of official correspondence
between ministries responsible for foreign affairs.
 Forms of ceremonies and etiquette as practised by heads of state and
diplomats.
We need to situate protocol in a historical context, to know its origins. To do so, we
turn to Sánchez González (2017: 17- 18), who states the following: ''Protocol, as an image of
power, was born -differentiating itself from ceremonial- from the hand of Napoleon I in
Europe and from the Cortes de Cádiz in Spain, for different reasons, but with the same
foundation: the need to lend legitimacy to the new political power established before the
governed.
The word protocol began to be used in Spain with the meaning it has today at the end
of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century. Before, the word etiquette was used, and
referred to the way of proceeding of the staff in charge of attending the kings or the behaviour
required of any person in the presence of people of royal blood''. Nowadays, this meaning has
gone further and is not limited only to royal treatment.
Therefore, protocol was born in the institutional sphere, but nowadays its role in all
spheres is fundamental for a better understanding and to achieve greater efficiency in each of
the situations: institutional, social...
The current protocol has adapted to the new times being more flexible and reasonable,
as a modern and globalised society demands.

13
 According to Chávarri's definition (2004:37) it is the expression of reciprocal respect
between people, as a means of social communication between them, it is as old as humanity.

3.2.4 Method
When a group of individuals organised in a communal and hierarchical manner meets
other similar groups, the need arises to establish a framework of relations based on mutual
respect.
It might be thought that in situations of great pre-war tension or even war or direct
confrontation between one or several countries, the protocol could be ignored and not applied
given the urgency and drama of the situation in the face of the need to use all available
political-diplomatic means to bring peace to the conflict.
However, and in accordance with what Ramos (2010:197) points out, it does not
exclude compliance with the rules of protocol accepted by international law and custom.
On the contrary, protocol should emphasise its importance as a factor of
communication and harmonisation of relations between sovereign nations.
The protocol may comprise the following types of instruments:
 A protocol of signature is a subsidiary instrument to a treaty drawn up by the
parties to the treaty. This type of protocol covers ancillary matters, such as the
interpretation of certain clauses of the treaty, formal clauses not included in the
treaty or the regulation of technical aspects. Normally, ratification of the treaty
ipso facto implies ratification of this type of protocol.
 b) An optional protocol to a treaty is an instrument that establishes additional
rights and obligations with respect to a treaty. These protocols allow certain
parties to the treaty to establish between themselves a framework of
obligations that go beyond the general treaty and that not all parties to the
general treaty accept, thus creating a "two-tier system".
 A protocol based on a framework treaty is an instrument that sets out specific
substantive obligations to achieve the general objectives of an earlier
framework or comprehensive convention. Such protocols simplify and
streamline the treaty-making process and have been used, in particular, in the
field of international environmental law.
 A protocol of amendment is an instrument with provisions modifying one or
more previous treaties, which amends the agreements, conventions and
protocols on narcotic drugs.
 A protocol supplementary to a treaty is an instrument with provisions
supplementing a previous treaty.
 An oral protocol is an instrument recording certain agreements reached by the
contracting parties.

3.3 Ceremonial protocol in diplomatic relations

In relation to protocol we find the term ''ceremonial''. According to Pulido, ceremonial
''is defined as that set or series of rules and formalities that, explicitly or implicitly, are
necessary to organise a public act to which a certain degree of solemnity is intended'' (2016:
63).
It could be argued that Protocol consists of a set of principles of rules, while
Ceremonial is the application of the same for certain public acts and ceremonies of the State.

14
 In this sense, in contrast to Ceremonial, it is the treatment given any public or private
act that is subject to a series of rigidly pre-established formalities, either by law, culture or
custom, whose ultimate aim is to generate a solemn atmosphere around the issuer and his
public, through which to give notoriety, legitimise or show respect to certain persons or
events in the cultural, political, religious or civil sphere'' (2016: 61).
Di Génova (2018: 17) talks about the aforementioned relationship between ceremonial
and protocol: ''The concept of Ceremonial is closely linked to that of Protocol, they are
concepts that require reciprocity, two sides of the same coin.
While Protocol deals with strategic issues, Ceremonial offers the tactical or procedural
variants in which these required or preferential conducts should be put into practice''.

3.3.1 History and Evolution of ceremonial

From the middle of the 15th century until the Congress of Vienna in 1815, a
fundamental milestone for Ceremonial and Protocol is the declaration of the Legal Equality of
States, which allows us to determine precedence, which is useful for the organisation of
meetings between heads of state and representatives of countries in diplomatic meetings and
in public ceremonial in general, due to the universality of criteria when determining
precedence.
Diplomacy became a permanent feature of this period, during the first half of the 15th
century, in the intricate context of the political relations that prevailed between the Italian
kingdoms and republics.
Venice can be cited as the initiator of modern diplomacy of a permanent nature, with
the establishment of missions in Rome and Constantinople (now Istanbul).
In those times, the ambassadors, called orators, maintained an intense and regular
official correspondence. In this official correspondence, they gathered all the information they
could obtain, whether political, economic or social, from the states and courts to which they
were accredited.
These reports were extraordinarily useful both for Venetian foreign policy and for the
development of a new science, Diplomatic History, one of the first and most important
documentary sources of the period.
Among the first known permanent diplomatic missions were those established
between 1425 and 1432 by the Duchy of Milan (known as Milaneseate) and Sigismund of
Luxembourg (Holy Roman and Hungarian Holy Roman Emperor, King of Bohemia and King
of Romans).

3.3.2 Characteristics
The ceremonial has some specific characteristics that Otero (2011: 43) tells us about:
 Systemic character: it is made up of a series of interrelated elements in which the
part affects the whole.
 Spatio-temporal development: it is usually developed through a specific space,
with a script, agenda, and a specific timing or chronogram.
Domínguez Adame, a great connoisseur of protocol at the local level, comments the
following in this regard: ''Local Corporations must try not to lose their ceremonial traditions,
so popularly accepted, which on many occasions are a practical lesson in history and on

15
others, a school of civility, exalting with dignity and decorum the eternal values of
citizenship'' (2013: 50).
When an organisation applies ceremonial correctly, it achieves very satisfactory
results. Of the advantages of its good use, Sansone tells us: ''Ceremonial is the greatest
civiliser of humanity, given that its permanent aims and objectives are to establish order and
harmony.
Therefore, when we take care of the rules of behaviour, ethics and ceremonial, so
identified with the life of relationship, the reward for our harvest will be the sweet joy of a
harmonious, balanced and peaceful life'' (2016: 25).

3.3.3 Classification of Ceremonial Protocol

Official Ceremonial comprises two main areas: State Ceremonial and Diplomatic
Ceremonial or Protocol.
State Ceremonial State Ceremonial regulates the acts and ceremonies that take place in
the national territory or in the diplomatic missions of the State abroad and in which authorities
of the Republic participate.
According to Padief Oredev, State Ceremonial refers to royal honours, titles, dignities
among Heads of State and Government. Likewise, State Ceremonial, also called "Public
Ceremonial", is understood as: "... the set of rules and formulas, imposed by customary and
conventional law, aimed at regulating ceremonies and official acts, in accordance with the
principle of the legal equality of States".
Diplomatic Ceremonial or Protocol Diplomatic Ceremonial or Protocol: "...is mainly
concerned with establishing the rules to be observed on the occasion of the ceremony of the
delivery of credentials, order and placement of diplomatic agents among themselves, in
official ceremonies, precedence between them and the authorities of the country, visits,
audiences of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, honorary distinctions and everything that refers
to honors and courtesies to which diplomatic agents are entitled".
In this regard, Ambassador Javier Pérez de Cuellar also defines it as: "...the practices
and rules relating to the treatment of foreign dignitaries visiting the country, including Heads
of State, and the diplomatic agents accredited therein, who constitute the Diplomatic Corps".
In this sense, Diplomatic Ceremonial or Protocol regulates the official activities of
Foreign Diplomatic Missions. Therefore, it is oriented towards the rules, honours and
precedence of the members of the Diplomatic Corps, regulating the rules in force.

3.4 Etiquette

3.4.1 Concept
We can say that protocol is the general term for establishing proper conduct in order to
avoid conflicts and arguments. However, maintaining functionality always prevails over
carrying out the correct etiquette.
Protocol is often confused with etiquette, and it is necessary to delineate the
differences between the two.
Etiquette, which encompasses the rules of politeness and good manners, is as old as
mankind itself, and changes with the times. As such, these rules are influenced by the
prevailing culture of a country.

16
3.4.2 History of etiquette
When people live together in large concentrations, unwritten rules and social
conventions emerge naturally. Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy (1419-1467), was the first
monarch to write codes of conduct for his royal household, on cards, in order to keep his staff
clear.
In 1529, the Dutch scholar, theologian and philosopher Desiderius Eras-mus (1469-
1536) wrote a manual on the behaviour of children.
This was, in fact, the first book containing rules on politeness and courtesy specifically
for children. This book proved so popular that it was translated into several languages. Rules
of etiquette, of course, change with the times and are constantly subject to change.
During the Dutch Golden Age, which fell in the 17th century, the upper classes and
nobility created social rules to distinguish themselves from the lower and middle classes.
These rules were called curtail: the practice of commits and suavities, of politeness and
courtesy.
This encompassed the titles and forms of address used before a king or queen, how
ambassadors should address each other in formal situations, which in fact form the basis of
the titles and forms of address we now use among ourselves.
With the spread of French culture around the world, the meaning of "etiquette" began
to take on the definition we use today. Over the last two centuries, many books on etiquette
have appeared, and they are continually adjusted to the social conventions of the time.
Etiquette was, and still is, indispensable in a society where social conventions and
mutual respect remain of great importance.

4. International Organizations
International organisations have existed since the world's existing societies became
organised groups, with their own sovereign entity and their own governing bodies. -s
These international organisations are associations of states or legal entities from
different countries, founded for the purpose of carrying out the functions set out in the
statutes, and equipped with permanent organs with specific competences.
However, thanks to globalisation, global organisations have gone further. Their main
objective is to create a climate of respect for diversity, although it is not only international
cultural diversity, but also ethnic, gender, age, historical diversity...

4.1 Concept
The concept of international personality can initially be defined as the capacity to act
in international relations, to establish legal relations with other international subjects, to be a
creator and addressee of rules and to be the holder of rights and obligations under
international law.
We can highlight four types of features or requirements present in most of the
proposed definitions, as follows:
 regarding the nature and formal status of them, that they have a permanent or
stable character and a certain degree of international legal personality;

17
  regarding the number and type of members, that they belong to at least two or
three states (as private or public representatives) and that this status is acquired
on a voluntary basis;
 with regard to objectives, that they do not explicitly pursue the particular
interest of one of their members, but the common interest of all their members.
 regarding its structure and organisation, that there is a treaty, agreement or
founding charter that establishes a formal structure with a will of continuity
and impossible to control by one of its members, as well as a minimum
permanent autonomous structure.
In accordance with the above, and significantly extending a recent proposal (Archer
1992: 37), we will define an IO as a formal and permanent organisational structure,
independent of its members and with a precise legal nature, established by explicit and public
agreement between its members (governmental and non-governmental), belonging to two or
more sovereign states, whose purpose is to pursue objectives that benefit the common
interests of their respective members.
As international society has evolved, the sense of cooperation and the establishment of
common rules for all states has become stronger. International organisations have to respond,
according to Paul Reuter, to "two distinct needs: a general aspiration for peace and the
advancement of peaceful relations and a series of precise and limited needs relating to
particular issues".
The first non-political organisations (International Red Cross, Postal Union, etc.)
emerged in the course of the 19th century. After the First World War, the first political
organisation emerged: the League of Nations, followed by the UN and other international
organisations.
If we look at the legal-political nature of the membership, the distinction par
excellence is between organisations with exclusively public, exclusively private or mixed
membership.
Organisations with exclusively public members - i.e. those formed by
intergovernmental or inter-state agreements - are generically called intergovernmental
organisations.
Classic examples include administrative unions, the League of Nations or the United
Nations, the European Economic Community (EEC) or the North Atlantic Treaty
Organisation (NATO).
On the other hand, those formed exclusively by private members - i.e. those created by
agreements of a non-governmental nature - are called non-governmental organisations
(NGOs).
They may be of different types, but are usually made up of representatives of
groupings belonging to two or more countries. Examples include the National Olympic Inter-
$ Committee, studied by Sureda in this issue of Papers, the World Council of Churches,
Amnesty International and the World Esperanto Association.

4.2 Treaties
Ever since the existence of the nation-state began to take hold in the Renaissance,
international treaties have played a central role in international politics and history.

18
 The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, adopted in 1969, underlines "the
growing importance of treaties as a source of international law and as a means of developing
peaceful cooperation between nations, whatever their constitutional and social systems.
They can establish the terms of peace between two countries, such as the Treaty of
Versailles, which ended the First World War. They can create or reform multinational or
multinational bodies, such as the Treaty of Lisbon, which now governs the functioning of the
European Union.
They can regulate very specific issues, such as maritime or air traffic, or, as is the case
here, recognise fundamental rights of individuals and determine the obligation to protect and
promote them.
All treaties have a corresponding committee within the Office of the UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights and the Human Rights Council that reviews the compliance
of States parties with the treaties, but these committees only issue recommendations.
Massive human rights violations can lead the UN Security Council to pass sanctions
and even military interventions against states on the basis of the Responsibility to Protect
principle.
Four concepts that affect international politics and international relations need to be
highlighted
The term war has changed its conceptualisation from "a situation of struggle between
states, according to A. Verdross, to "a situation of violence between two or more states,
accompanied by the breakdown of peaceful relations".
There are various types of wars, such as just defence wars, liberation wars, economic
wars, imperialist wars, annexation wars and so on.
The word peace can be seen from different points of view, ranging from the political
to the religious, which are in contrast to the previous concept, as it is the manifestation of the
tranquillity and calmness of states, which give rise to friendly and cooperative relations.
The term security, which later came to be known as collective security, came more
into vogue among different authors after the First World War, but especially since 1945, when
the world began to experience an unstable situation, demonstrating that international
organisations or good intentions were not enough to establish tranquillity and security.
The concept of neutrality goes practically hand in hand with the concept of war, since,
as Professor Verdross points out, "A state is neutral if it does not participate in a given war.
Therefore, unlike neutralised states, there can only be neutral states during a war"; neutrality
therefore means the non-participation of a state in aiding one of the belligerent states,
although it is true that this legal status depends on many factors and can be realised in three
ways: permanently, benevolently and partially.
Treaty of Versailles
The Treaty of Versailles, for example, imposed economic reparations, territorial losses
and disarmament on the losing powers of the First World War. Hitler's rise to power caused
Germany to progressively breach the pact, but the "appeasement" policy of France and the
United Kingdom meant that this had no consequences until 1939, when Germany's invasion
of Poland started the Second World War.

19
Treaty of Lisbon
Accession to a supranational entity - in this case, the European Union - marks
sanctions for member states that fail to comply with its fundamental clauses.
Vienna Convention
The Vienna Convention, which in its section on the application of treaties establishes
the principle Pacta sunt servanda (treaties must be complied with). This implies that "every
treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith".
It also means that "a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for
its failure to perform a treaty".
The Vienna Convention distinguishes between facilities, privileges and immunities,
the most important of which are the following:
1.-Obtaining premises for the mission and accommodation for its members.
2. Freedom of movement and transit for diplomatic personnel.
3.-Free communication of the mission on official matters.
Human Rights Treaties
International human rights treaties developed after the Second World War and
emanate from the principles set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by
the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1948.

5. United Nations
After World War I there was an organisation called the League of Nations, which was
designed to stop international conflicts before they started and, when they did occur, to end
them quickly. It was considered a failure after it failed to prevent the Second World War.
World War II comprised three conflicts that later merged into one: Japan's conflict
against China, which began in 1931 with the surprise invasion of Manchuria and then spread
to all of Southeast Asia and Oceania, culminating in the Japanese attack on the United States
at Pearl Harbor.
But the idea of an international body to fight for peace among nations was still desired
by many countries, especially after World War II. The United Nations originated from a
declaration drafted by and 26 countries signed the initial declaration in order to bring nations
closer together.
In 1945, the countries that created the UN tried to avoid another world war. The main
powers were given to the Security Council, made up of the five countries considered the
victors of World War II. Today it is the largest organisation in existence.

5.1 Concept
When the agreements of the countries that fought in the 1914-1918 war - considered at
the time to be the most brutal in history - ended at Versailles, it was said that nothing like it
could ever be repeated. However, 17 years later, the second conflagration began, which was
truly universal and ten times bloodier.
US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in his Message to the US Congress,
enunciated the doctrine of the "Four Freedoms", for which the world should strive: "freedom

20
of speech, freedom of labour, freedom from want and freedom from fear, everywhere in the
world".
Months later, the President and UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill issued a joint
declaration known as the Atlantic Charter. It proclaimed a set of principles and policies to be
implemented when peace came, aimed at enabling the people of the earth to live "free from
fear and want".
Five months later, 26 nations, including eight from Central America and the
Caribbean, signed a declaration that had far-reaching consequences: the United Nations
Declaration.
The Declaration endorsed the content of the Atlantic Charter and affirmed the
signatories' opposition to Axis aggression. They adopted the General Security Declaration, in
which they pledged to continue their joint action for the organisation and maintenance of
peace.
The next step was the Dumbarton Oaks Talks in Washington, D.C., in which the
United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and China participated. The first two
had prepared detailed proposals on the "establishment of a General International
Organisation".
The draft was sent to all countries that had signed the Declaration of Nations. On 25
April 1945, the Conference on the World Organisation, convened by the four great powers,
opened in San Francisco. It was then, and remains to this day, the most important congress in
history.
It gave birth to the Charter of the United Nations, an international treaty of
unprecedented breadth and significance; one hundred and eighty-four nations are now parties
to this treaty. Only the 46 countries that had signed or acceded to the UN Declaration were
invited to this great event.
At the initiative of the developing countries, the vast majority of which were Latin
American, the Charter broadened and extended the purpose of the United Nations in the
economic, social and human rights spheres.
The Charter's exceptional importance was further accentuated by the institutional
change it introduced. It gave the Economic and Social Council the status of a principal organ
of the United Nations.
The Charter of the United Nations was adopted unanimously by the Conference
participants on 26 June 1945 and entered into force on 24 October of the same year, after
ratification by the Member States.

5.2 Aims and Principles

5.2.1 Aims of the United Nations

To maintain international peace and security and, to this end, to take effective
collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace and for the
suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace; and to bring about by
peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law,
adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach
of the peace.

21
 To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal
rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen
universal peace.
To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an
economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging
respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race,
sex, language or religion.
To serve as a centre for harmonising the efforts of nations to achieve these common
ends.

5.2.1 Principles of the United Nations

The Organization is founded on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its
Members;
The Members of the Organisation, in order to secure the rights and benefits of
membership, shall fulfil in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with
this Charter.
The Members of the Organization shall settle their international disputes by peaceful
means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered.
The Members of the Organisation shall refrain in their international relations from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or
in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
The Members of the Organisation shall give the Organisation every assistance in any
action it undertakes in accordance with this Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance
to any state against which the Organisation undertakes preventive or enforcement action.
The Organisation shall cause states which are not Members of the United Nations to
conduct themselves in accordance with these Principles to the extent necessary to maintain
international peace and security.
Nothing in the present Charter shall authorise the United Nations to intervene in
matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.

5.3 History
At the end of the agreements in Versailles between the countries that fought in the war
of 1914-1918 - considered at the time to be the most brutal in history - it was said that nothing
like it could ever be repeated. However, 17 years later, the second conflagration began, which
was truly universal and ten times bloodier.
US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in his Message to the US Congress,
enunciated the doctrine of the "Four Freedoms", for which the world should strive: "freedom
of speech, freedom of labour, freedom from want and freedom from fear, everywhere in the
world".
Months later, the President and UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill issued a joint
declaration known as the Atlantic Charter. It proclaimed a set of principles and policies to be
implemented when peace came, aimed at enabling the people of the earth to live "free from
fear and want".

22
 Five months later, 26 nations, including eight from Central America and the
Caribbean, signed a declaration that had far-reaching consequences: the United Nations
Declaration.
The Declaration endorsed the content of the Atlantic Charter and affirmed the
signatories' opposition to Axis aggression. They adopted the General Security Declaration, in
which they pledged to continue their joint action for the organisation and maintenance of
peace.
The next step was the Dumbarton Oaks Talks in Washington, D.C., in which the
United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and China participated. The first two
had prepared detailed proposals on the "establishment of a General International
Organisation".
The draft was sent to all countries that had signed the Declaration of Nations. On 25
April 1945, the Conference on the World Organisation, convened by the four great powers,
opened in San Francisco. It was then, and remains to this day, the most important congress in
history.
It gave birth to the Charter of the United Nations, an international treaty of
unprecedented breadth and significance; one hundred and eighty-four nations are now parties
to this treaty. Only the 46 countries that had signed or acceded to the UN Declaration were
invited to this great event.
At the initiative of the developing countries, the vast majority of which were Latin
American, the Charter broadened and extended the purpose of the United Nations in the
economic, social and human rights spheres.
The Charter's exceptional importance was further accentuated by the institutional
change it introduced. It gave the Economic and Social Council the status of a principal organ
of the United Nations.
The Charter of the United Nations was adopted unanimously by the Conference
participants on 26 June 1945 and entered into force on 24 October of the same year, after
ratification by the Member States.

5.4 Organs of the UN

The fundamental organisational structure of the United Nations is set out in Article 7
of the Charter. It distinguishes between principal organs and subsidiary organs.
The subsidiary organs are created by the principal organs on the basis of the generic
power conferred on the latter by Article 7, paragraph 2, which states that: "such subsidiary
organs as may be deemed necessary may be established in accordance with the provisions of
the present Charter"; consequently, their existence, composition and functions are the result of
an internal normative act of the Organisation itself, more precisely of its principal organs, on
which they depend organically.
One of the most significant characteristics of the Charter, in relation to these principal
organs, is the imperative functional coordination it establishes between them for a large
number of important matters and issues, for example, the admission, suspension and
expulsion of members, the election of the Secretary and judges of the ICJ, etc., in such a way
that the action of each principal organ is conditioned by the initiatives and controls of other
principal organ(s).

23
 The UN Charter specifies the following as principal organs: the General Assembly, the
Security Council, the Economic and Social Council, the Trusteeship Council, the Secretariat
and the International Court of Justice (Article 7(1)).
 The General Assembly
Under the UN Charter, it is the central deliberative, policy-making and representative
organ of the United Nations. The General Assembly is composed of the 193 Members of the
United Nations and provides a unique forum for multilateral deliberations on the full range of
international issues covered by the Charter.
 The Secretariat
The Secretariat is headed by the Secretary-General. The Secretary-General is the chief
administrative officer of the Organization. He is the symbol of the ideals of the United
Nations and the spokesperson for the interests of the peoples of the world, especially the poor
and vulnerable.
 Security Council
The Security Council has primary responsibility under the UN Charter for the
maintenance of international peace and security.
It directs the work of determining the existence of threats to peace or acts of
aggression. It calls on parties to a conflict to reach agreement by peaceful means and
recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement.
 International Court of Justice
The principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It is based in the Peace Palace in
The Hague, the Netherlands. Its function is to adjudicate, in accordance with international
law, legal disputes brought before it by individual States and to give advisory opinions on
legal questions submitted to it by authorised organs and special agencies.
 Economic and Social Council
The Economic and Social Council is responsible for dealing with economic, social and
environmental issues, reviewing and coordinating policies and making recommendations. It
also monitors the implementation of internationally agreed development goals.
In addition, it serves as the central mechanism for the activities of the UN system and
its specialised agencies in the economic, social and environmental fields, overseeing
subsidiary and expert bodies. It is the UN's central platform for reflection, debate and
innovative thinking on sustainable development.
 Trusteeship Council
The Trusteeship Council's mission under Chapter XIII of the UN Charter was to
exercise international supervision over the 11 Trusteeship Territories, placed under the
administration of 7 Member States, and to ensure that they were ready for self-government
and independence.

5.5 Protocol at the United Nations

It is the set or series of diplomatic, ceremonial or palatine rules that regulate and
provide for the conduct or development within certain events.

24
 International organizations, like States, have established rules designed to order and
facilitate the activities of representatives of member countries within them. These rules relate
to the treatment and precedence of these representatives.
According to the practice in various international organisations, such as the United
Nations or the Organisation of American States, all member states are equal among
themselves. However, in order to establish a criterion of precedence, alphabetical order is
followed. In the United Nations, in order to avoid repetition, a lottery is held to vary the letter
that begins the alphabetical order.
With regard to the United Nations: "This precedence applies to the Permanent
Representatives of all member countries and to the staff of their Missions, with the exception
of those who are circumstantially elected to the General Assembly (although the election is in
their personal capacity)..." in the UN.

6. Case Study; how diplomacy and protocol have failed in the conflict of Russia and
Ukraine

6.1 International Conflict and its relation to diplomacy protocol

Calduch (1991: 92), quoted by Borau Boira & García García, (2014: 5), define
international conflict as the "social relationship whereby two or more collectivises aspire to
satisfy incompatible interests or demands, using their inequalities of power to maintain
antagonistic or opposing actions, resorting, in the last resort, to violence".
Fisas (1998: 29-30) considers that, in order to approach the phenomenon, it is
necessary to understand the context in which the conflict develops, as this is a determining
factor for the study, understanding and resolution of the conflict and takes into account other
factors, such as the existence or not of violence, the intervening parties and their motivations:
"Conflict is an interactive process that occurs in a given context. It is a social
construction, a human creation, differentiated from violence (there can be conflict without
violence but not violence without conflict), which can be negative or positive depending on
how it is approached and ended, with the possibility of being conducted, transformed and
overcome (it can become peace) by the parties themselves, with or without the help of third
parties, which affects the attitudes of the parties, in which as a result there are disputes, it is
usually the product of an antagonism or incompatibility (initial, but surmountable) between
two or more parties, the complex result of valuations, instinctive drives, affections, beliefs,
etc…
Diplomacy and protocol have a close connection with conflicts. Recalling the
relational and peace-promoting function of diplomacy, Vilariño Pintos (2011: 75-76) argues
that diplomacy, in its negotiation sphere, can be understood both as a tool for conflict
resolution and as a means of prevention to maintain a peaceful system.
Likewise, the negotiation dimension of diplomacy is necessarily present in this sphere,
highlighting the increase in cooperative negotiations as opposed to conflictive ones as a
conflict resolution mechanism.
Among the main functions of diplomacy is conflict resolution, through negotiation,
resulting in a prior - and preferable - step to the use of force (Borau Boira & García García,
2014: 5; Panizo Alonso, 2018: 19)

25
 Ukraine is in an extremely delicate situation, as on the one hand, the inhabitants of
western Ukraine have a strong affinity with Europe and, in particular, want to join the
European Union.
In sharp contrast, those living in the east and south of Ukraine recognise Russia as the
source of their culture, religion and language, and want to belong to that nation.
Protocol and international diplomacy have made global coexistence possible through
various stages, from bilateral to multilateral diplomacy, and according to Vilarrubias
(2004:333), with a very clear purpose: "to safeguard the right of every independent country,
no matter how small, and to make its voice heard".
Therefore, we agree that both disciplines are fundamental for any government that
wants to manage its international positioning well, and essential, in short, to maintain the
balance that the world needs and that is so difficult to maintain.
We are witnessing the current conflict in Ukraine and how complicated it is to reach
an agreement in the international community. This is where diplomacy becomes
indispensable, and protocol clearly helps its ultimate success.
Just as diplomacy is a discipline recognised by society, protocol must encompass a
triple level: scientific, professional and academic.
Nowadays, protocol invades all facets of our society and there is no act that is not
regulated and organised according to established rules, which shows that it is not only one of
the disciplines with the longest tradition, but also one of the most innovative and whose
power of modernity is coherent with the times in which it is applied.

6.2 Historical Framework

Two civilisations coexist in Ukraine, Western and Slavic-Orthodox. Since 1992, this
civilisational division has decisively shaped the country's political future, especially in foreign
policy, despite the fact that the regions of Ukraine that belong to the Western civilisation
(Zhytomyr, Vinnitsia, Khmelnitsky, Rivne and Volynia) are a clear minority in the country as
a whole.
From being the most politically, economically and socially stable post-Soviet republic
during the 1990s, it has become an unstable area, plagued by armed conflicts and nationalist
resentments encouraged to some extent, and especially in the beginning, from outside its
borders.
Following the demonstrations in Kiev's Maidan Square (October 2013), which resulted
from the refusal of the then President Viktor Yanukovych to sign the Association Pact with
the European Union, a process of confrontation within Ukrainian society began.
The internal political atmosphere became more polarised and tense than ever before,
and a new de facto government was installed that never had the necessary credentials or
powers to make progress in the process of negotiation and national pacification.
However, the new government's violations of the human rights of citizens who
opposed the Kiev interim government in the Eastern territories were covered up in the
national media.
The formation of the National Guard demonstrated the bias of the new Kiev
authorities by favouring the incorporation into its ranks of young people with open neo-fascist
tendencies and members of the notorious Pravyi Sektor (Right Sector) group, whose purpose

26
was not so much to restore peace and order in the conflict regions, but rather to recapture the
eastern cities that had become the headquarters of separatist rebel forces.
These pro-Russian forces called themselves "self-defence militias" and demanded the
definitive separation or, in some cases, a federalisation of the country. This was the beginning
of an internal conflict unprecedented in modern Ukrainian life.
Since October 2013, Ukraine has become a priority in Russia's foreign policy and in
the overall foreign policy of the Russian state.
Among the fundamental objectives of the current Russian foreign policy doctrine is to
maintain a strategy of protecting the national interests of the Russian state that does not
encourage confrontation with other states, as well as protecting the human rights and
legitimate interests of Russian citizens and fellow countrymen living outside the country.
To understand the scale and scope of the strategy deployed by the Russian government
in the face of instability and conflict in its neighbouring country, one must take into account
the historical background of the complex, yet close, interdependent and intense bilateral
relationship that has existed between Russia and Ukraine for more than a thousand years,
since the creation of Kievskaya Russ (Kievan Rus) in the ninth century.
The territory known as Ukraine has a past plagued by wars and continuous ethnic,
territorial, political and ideological division. Ukraine's past can be understood on the basis of
the history of several European empires, including the Ottoman Empire. Among the conquests
of the Ottoman Empire was the Crimean Khanate, whose territory was occupied by a Tatar
majority.
This territory belonged to the Ottomans until 1774, after which the Crimea was
annexed to the Russian Empire in 1783, during the rule of Empress Catherine the Great.
Under Catherine the Great, several "Russification" campaigns were undertaken to
culturally and politically influence the Ukrainian population to adopt Russian customs,
incorporating Uniate Church practitioners into the Orthodox Church.
On the western side of Ukraine there has always been a stronger cultural, historical
and ideological identification with a Western European root due to the belonging of these
territories to Poland and the Austro-Hungarian Empire from the 18th century onwards.
In contrast, the eastern part of Ukraine has a much closer context to Russia since its
conquest by the Russian Empire after the partitions of Poland. For much of the 19th century,
publications in Ukrainian were banned, as was literacy in the Ukrainian language on
Ukrainian territory.
During the first years of the Soviet Union's existence (mainly during Lenin's rule), a
policy of inclusion of non-Russian ethnicities within the fledgling Soviet state was pursued.
As a consequence of this multicultural strategy of the Bolshevik state, the use, study
and publication of works in the Ukrainian language was permitted. In contrast, from 1924
onwards and during the regime of Iosif Stalin, a policy of forced Russification was adopted,
in which Ukrainian nationalism was persecuted in an extremist and bloodthirsty manner.
In 1954, Nikita Khrushchev took the decision to cede the strategic territory of Crimea
to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. The Soviet leadership never imagined that exactly
sixty years after this decision was taken, a conflict of such magnitude would break out
between Russia and Ukraine over this strategic enclave, which also holds a valuable historical
legacy from the Soviet victory over fascism in 1945.

27
 Under Mikhail Gorbachev, opportunities opened up for the peoples and nationalities
that were part of the Soviet Union to gain a space to defend their national interests and
concerns. Thus began the end of the Soviet state as separatist tendencies gained strength and
eventually defeated the Soviet regime with the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
On 20 January 1991, a referendum was held in Crimea in which an overwhelming
majority of voters (93.26%) voted in favour of the reconstruction of the Crimean Autonomous
Soviet Socialist Republic as a subject of the USSR and a member of the Union Treaty.
This referendum demonstrated citizens' dissatisfaction with the transfer of its territory
to Ukraine in 1954 and with the abolition in 1945 of the Crimean SSR and the creation of the
Crimea region in its place.
However, at the end of the same year the USSR disappeared as a state and Ukraine
and Russia became two independent countries, so Crimea would remain under Ukrainian
control.
In 1992, the Russian Federation demanded the return of Crimea, but Leonid
Kravchuk's government opposed this and granted it the status of an autonomous republic.
In 2010, with the arrival of Viktor Yanukovych, an agreement was signed with Russia
to extend the Russian Black Sea Fleet's stay in Crimea until 2042, in exchange for a 30%
reduction in the price of gas for Ukraine.

6.2.1 Official EU and US positions on the conflict in Ukraine

It is important to note that the supportive stances taken by representatives of the
European Union and Western governments - including the United States - in relation to the
anti-government demonstrations in Kiev acted as a major trigger, which, far from appeasing
popular discontent, served to accelerate the process of the fall of the regime of the corrupt and
authoritarian, but also democratically elected President Yanukovych.
As we said, the main cause of the uprisings was Yanukovych's refusal to sign an
agreement with the European Union. After months of conflict, a similar agreement was finally
signed with the EU (27 June 2014) that would also include Georgia and Moldova.
The EU promoted negotiations with the post-Soviet countries to find a solution that
would respond to their integration interests but would not affect their relations with Russia:
the creation of the Eastern Partnership.
On 7 May 2009 in Prague, the EU ratified the creation of the Eastern Partnership,
which, at the proposal of Poland and Sweden, aimed to deepen the EU bloc's bilateral
relations with its post-Soviet European neighbours: Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Georgia,
Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The Eastern Partnership proposal represented a smart way to strengthen ties with these
countries, while not offering them immediate and permanent EU membership. This was in the
interests of both the EU and Russia, which did not look favourably on these countries' entry
into the EU.
However, the goal of these countries, and first and foremost Yushchenko's Ukraine,
was to become permanent members of the European organisation.
Precisely the tensions and frictions that have prevailed for several years in the bilateral
relations of countries such as Great Britain, Poland, Lithuania, Romania, Sweden and
Bulgaria with Russia predetermined the EU bloc's more enthusiastic and active support for the
opposition forces to the pro-Russian government in Kiev, as well as the imposition of harsher

28
sanctions on Russia from the outset, while Germany - dependent on Russian gas and with a
post-Cold War regional leadership - once again demonstrated a conciliatory and mediating
stance towards Russia, especially at the beginning of the conflict, while maintaining its formal
support for the EU's policy of pressure, diplomatic warnings and even the application of
economic, political and military sanctions against the Moscow government. Germany and
France were the two EU states with which Russia had the most bilateral contacts from the
outset.

6.2.2 US and EU economic and trade sanctions against Moscow

A number of experts inside and outside Russia believe that the sanctions against
Moscow have been counterproductive and exaggerated. Some think they are totally
inadequate on the basis of the Kremlin's objectives.
However, the Russian economy is already suffering as a result of these sanctions,
although Putin's government has established new business ties with companies in other
regions such as Asia and Latin America.
It should be analysed whether the main purpose of these sanctions is to preserve
Ukraine's territorial integrity and bring about the pacification of the rebel territories. If this is
the purpose, then sanctions against Russia are not an appropriate way forward; precisely this
is what the unfolding of events over the past months has shown.
The EU's second package of economic and trade sanctions against Russia is seen as
more focused on directly affecting key sectors of the Russian economy, such as energy,
military and financial-trade, as well as blocking exports of specific goods and technologies to
the national defence and energy sector.
All these new sanctions could affect the Russian economy in the medium term,
especially those coming from EU member states, with which Russia has much more important
and permanent economic, commercial and financial ties than with the United States.
Putin's Russia views the development of the conflict in Ukraine from a purely
geopolitical and ideological perspective; from this spectrum of analysis, Russia's geopolitical
distancing from Russia's influence and its rapprochement with NATO, the European Union
and, above all, its closer economic, political and military relations with the United States, is
considered a direct threat to its national security.
On the contrary, the US government would need to foster cooperative and trusting
relations with Russia - which seems increasingly remote and unlikely with the political,
economic, commercial and military pressures on Putin - in order to act in a joint and
coordinated manner in relation to other conflicts and scenarios in which the Russian
government has geopolitical advantages, such as Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Central Asia
and even China itself.
Putin's regime can be defined as a semi-authoritarian regime that defends the theses of
nationalism, patriotism, multipolarity and pragmatism, but does not emphasise communism or
Marxism-Leninism as was the case with the Soviet regimes.
In contrast, China's communist regime does keep these principles alive in its official
discourse; however, this does not disturb the West enough to apply a policy of sanctions
similar to those used against Moscow. China could become a real rival - not only
economically and commercially - to the United States.

29
6.2.3 Analysis of the measures
In terms of blocs, Western cities have taken a strong stance against the invasion and
have aligned themselves with their national governments by supporting sanctions against
Russia and building bridges of solidarity with their peers in Ukraine.
On the other side of the chessboard, Russia's local authorities stand by the Kremlin,
while China and many other countries in the global South have refrained from denouncing the
conflict and persist in a tense equidistance that makes their Western partners uncomfortable.
Since Russian troops entered Ukraine, thousands of cities in Europe, the United States,
Canada, Japan, Australia and Latin America have forcefully denounced what they consider to
be an unacceptable aggression. They have done so by taking an unequivocal stand for peace
and against war, supporting sanctions and the expulsion of Russia from multilateral spaces.
In recent months, diplomatic action by cities, especially in Europe and North America,
has kept up a frenetic pace. In March the mayor of Rotterdam sent a letter to his counterpart in
St Petersburg to denounce the invasion.
The two cities are twinned and linked by the destruction they suffered during World
War II. Others, such as Glasgow, Karlsruhe, Chicago or Tokyo, have cancelled any activity
with their Russian counterparts and networks such as the Coalition of Cities for Digital Rights
have suspended their membership.
However, the perspective in Russia and other countries such as China, Iran, India,
Pakistan, South Africa or Senegal is totally different. Russian municipalities, starting with the
mayors of the country's two main metropolises, Moscow and St. Petersburg, are fully aligned
with Vladimir Putin and his government.
As are Chinese cities and many of the major cities in Iran, India, South Africa and
other African and Southeast Asian countries that have benefited from Russian aid over the
years.
Like their national governments, they advocate peace, but oppose sanctions and point
out that NATO and the West share responsibility for a conflict of uncertain consequences.
They show solidarity with the refugees, but point to the hypocrisy of Europeans and
Americans who, while they are pouring their hearts out to the Ukrainians, forget the plight of
others displaced by conflicts considered second-rate or generated by the West itself.
The EU has joined the 'sanctions war', banning 33 Russian and Crimean individuals
from travelling to any of its 28 member states. The EU also claims that it has not yet decided
to adopt economic sanctions against Russia, although it threatens that there would be 'greater
consequences' if Russia does not back down on its actions in Crimea.
In other words, all there has been so far is a 'fireworks war' in which President
Vladimir Putin has mocked the sanctions imposed by Western governments.

6.3 UN and Ukraine

Throughout 2016, negotiations stalled and the conflict escalated. The chancelleries of
France and Germany referred to the conflict in Ukraine less regularly, shifting the bulk of
their resources to more urgent issues such as BREXIT, Donald Trump's election victory in the
United States or the so-called "refugee crisis". This is how the situation in the east of the
Slavic country was relegated to the background.

30
 The UN report also documents threats and mistreatment of Ukrainians by Russia, as
well as the lack of legal order in the territories controlled by armed groups. It also reports on
the lack of freedom of movement of the population living close to the contact line.
A more recent report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR)
refers to cases of sexual violence. For its part, the entry of UN observer missions, such as the
UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, is becoming more and more necessary.
The United Nations has warned that during the armed conflict in eastern Ukraine,
human rights have been violated in the territory of the rebels. Cases of murder, torture,
kidnappings, threats, as well as curtailment of freedom of expression of journalists and
international observers.
Russia denied and condemned the report, saying that the Ukrainian government had
also committed acts against human rights such as torture and abductions of former members
of the Ukrainian army.
The UN also warned of a humanitarian crisis, as thousands of children had no access
to social services and many families had been forced into exile. Humans Right Watch
condemned the use of rockets against civilians on both sides as war crimes.
According to various estimates by humanitarian organisations, there were some 15,000
to 20,000 refugees in cities such as Svyatohirsk, without water, gas or electricity. Another
75,000 have reportedly crossed the border into Russia, and some 100,000 have applied for
refugee status.
Relations are not clearly defined, the discussion on whether or not to "adequately" arm
Ukraine is back on the political agenda in the US capital, and the government's position is
unclear. What was clear in the US position is which side of the chessboard they are on,
quoting the Secretary of Defence, "Make no doubt about it. The United States stands with
Ukraine".
As for the United Nations, its response was veto. The lack of consensus between
Russia and the rest of the Western countries means that a resolution that satisfies the parties
will never be reached.
As with the Oslo accords or the Iranian nuclear negotiations, the Ukrainian peace
negotiations took place outside the UN framework. Invoking the prevailing "minilateralism",
the negotiations took place between the parties to the conflict and the most influential states
on the international stage that might have certain interests at stake.
The European Union has not been able to realise its goals of further eastward
expansion by incorporating Ukraine into the EU.
EU and US sanctions against Russia have not changed the status quo much. Rather,
they have given Putin greater legitimacy and, taking advantage of this situation, he has
offered a nationalist discourse with which he has gained greater domestic popular support.
Europe must wake up and come to terms with the fact that Ukraine is still part of
Russia's Soviet-era pride. President Putin is acting on Geopolitics, the old Realpolitk.

7. Conclusion
The discontent of Ukrainian society was directly related to the dismal economic and
social management of previous Ukrainian governments, as well as the corruption of the

31
prevailing political system, including first and foremost that of the Yanukovych regime, but
also that of his predecessor Yushchenko.
The crisis in Ukraine has been ideologised both inside and outside the country,
reminiscent of the tense climate of mistrust and ideological confrontation that existed during
the Cold War. This makes it difficult to achieve a climate of understanding and dialogue
between the parties that would lead to a negotiated solution.
Ukraine is a key player on the European and Russian geopolitical scene, due to its
population, its territory, its history, etc. It has not been able to find its place on the
international scene after the fall of the Soviet Union, and this fact has greatly conditioned its
domestic and foreign policy, dividing the country between those in favour of westernisation,
located in the west and centre of the country, and those in favour of a rapprochement with
Russia, especially in the east and south of the country, for historical and ethnic reasons.
Before Ukraine chooses which side to take, it must be a strong and stable country
internally, in order to later negotiate a possible European accession or any other action to
improve its situation.
Ukraine's approach to the association agreement with the EU was misguided, as it
turned out to be an ultimatum with a deadline, placing the EU as the victor and leaving Russia
as the loser, which it obviously would not tolerate.
The reality is that if Ukraine had finally signed the association agreement with the EU,
its economy would have suffered greatly in the short and medium term, and the EU does not
currently have the liquidity to finance this adaptation.
On the Russian side, its policy has been more intelligent and logical, with Vladimir
Putin making paternalistic speeches towards a nation he still considers part of Russia, with
whom they share language and ethnicity, opening the doors without forcing or obliging a
possible collaboration in a future Eurasian Union, while at the same time demonstrating his
power of influence with clear and concise actions when Ukraine was close to signing a
possible membership agreement with the EU, such as closing borders, prohibiting the import
of certain Ukrainian products, withdrawing Russian work and citizenship permits, etc.
Thus demonstrating without resorting to force that a Ukraine-EU rapprochement
would be totally unwise for the country. Russian policy should continue along these lines, not
forcing any position on Ukraine's part and continuing along the lines of economic aid, both
gas price discounts and money lending.

32
8. Bibliography
Colomer, P. (2020, May 4). Orígenes de la diplomacia: la antigüedad clásica. Política

Exterior. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from https://www.politicaexterior.com/origenes-la-

diplomacia-la-antiguedad-clasica/#:%7E:text=Los%20pueblos%20griegos%20fueron

%20los,de%20que%20surgieran%20estas%20figuras.

Diplomacy and Intercultural Communication | American Diplomacy Est 1996. (2015,

September 20). Diplomacy. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from

https://americandiplomacy.web.unc.edu/2015/09/diplomacy-and-intercultural-

communication/

Edwards, M., & Kotlow, B. (2015, January 8). Five challenges for the UN in 2015. The

Conversation. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from https://theconversation.com/five-

challenges-for-the-un-in-2015-35943

Freedman, R. (2017, January 18). How to make the United Nations fit for purpose in a new

globalised era. The Conversation. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from

https://theconversation.com/how-to-make-the-united-nations-fit-for-purpose-in-a-new-

globalised-era-71022

Jackson, S., & O’Malley, A. (n.d.). Why is the United Nations still so misunderstood? UN.

Retrieved 2 June 2022, from https://theconversation.com/why-is-the-united-nations-

still-so-misunderstood-59284

Jurado, G. R. (2022). Maquiavelo. Sociedad y política en el renacimiento (2nd ed., Vol. 4).

Editorial Terracota.

Manuel Rivero Rodríguez. (n.d.). Dialnet. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from

https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/autor?codigo=21825

ONU HISTORIA - Resultados de la búsqueda - United Nations Digital Library System. (n.d.).

UN. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from https://digitallibrary.un.org/search?ln=es&p=ONU

33
 %20HISTORIA&f=&c=Resource%20Type&c=UN

%20Bodies&sf=&so=d&rg=50&fti=0

Otros tratados y protocolos - EUR-Lex. (n.d.). Protocolos. Retrieved 2 June 2022, from

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/collection/eu-law/treaties/treaties-other.html?locale=es

Putin’s Way (full documentary) | FRONTLINE. (2022, March 2). [Video]. YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIgqhU4lkgo

Ramírez, S. P. T. (n.d.). El Conflicto en Ucrania: El primer enfrentamiento serio de Rusia

con Occidente durante la etapa de la Post-Guerra Fría. Conflicto. Retrieved 2 June

2022, from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0185-

013X2016000200470

The United Nations Explained | Casual Historian. (2016, October 24). [Video]. YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWFiUX1wz9Q

34