Towards a Structured Parliamentary Diplomacy Model

1. Towards a Structured Parliamentary Diplomacy Model Potential Models for Co-operation between Parliament of South Africa and Third Parties K Ahmed Acting Manager:International Relations Section

2. 1. Central Question • Since Parliament of South Africa has already established relations with various multilateral organizations, would it be beneficial for Parliament to (1) expand its scope of international diplomacy through a structured process and if so, (2) develop a parliamentary diplomacy model to facilitate the expansion?

3. 2. Parliament’s Current International Relations • Structured relations currently exist between Parliament and the following multilateral organizations: • CPA • IPU • SADC-PF • ACP-EU • PAP • APU

4. 3. Transnational Parliamentary Bodies • Approximately 35 parliamentary bodies, such as: • European Parliament • Latin American Parliament • Asian and Pacific Parliamentarians Union • Benelux Interparliamentary Consultative Assembly

5. 4. Bilateral Parliamentary Bodies • Hundreds of bilateral (parliament-to-parliament) friendship groups, such as: • US-Australian Parliamentary Friendship Group • European Parliament Delegation for Relations with South Africa

6. 5. Issue-Centered Parliamentary Groups • Association of Western European Parliamentarians Against Apartheid • Parliamentarian Conference on WTO

7. 6. History of Bilateral Relations • 1994: SA seen as the “flavour of the month” • Post 1994: Agreement entered into between former Speaker and European Parliament • 2004: Greater push for North-South Relations, particularly by the EU • Past three months: 14 bilateral requests

8. 7. What are the Current Issues? • Who do we establish relations with? • North-South or South-South • What form do these relations take? • Structured or unstructured • What guides our approach? • SA foreign policy • Mission & Vision: oversight, public participation • What about resources and capacity?

9. 8. Theories of International Relations • Realism: maximising self interest • Idealism: transnational cooperation • Gender theory: constructed gender roles impact on relations

10. 9. Parliament’s Conventional IR Model • Advocates Parliament-to-Parliament relations as opposed to friendship groups. • Relationships at an international level are (theoretically) managed by the sub-committee on International Relations. • Allows for membership of regional and international multilateral bodies such as PAP, SADC-PF and IPU. • No formal structured relationship exists with any regional body of which Parliament is not entitled to be a member.

11. 10. Alternative IR Models • Formal model: formalization of relations through Joint Rules Committee. • Political model: formalization of relations through PC on Foreign Affairs. • Ad hoc model: semi-formal relations through ad hoc committee.

12. 11. Third Party-SA Relations: Options • Informal relations administered through the Sub-Committee on International Relations/ IR Section. • Semi-formal relations managed by an ad hoc committee. • Formal relations through PC on Foreign Affairs. • Formal relations through the Joint Rules Committee.

13. 12. Observations • Continuous pressure on Parliament to establish structured relations • Careful analysis and debate required • Lack of capacity in the IR Section to deal with structured relations • IR Section has proposed a discussion on parliamentary diplomacy in July/August

14. 13. Conclusion • Parliamentarians role in IR has changed • As a result, services provided by IR Section has to be transformed • Before Parliament embarks on forming structured relations with third parties, greater debate is required