Talk:Sherpa (emissary)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

As far as I am aware, the term 'sherpa' is used extensively to refer to the advance-negotiators at international summits, and has no special relevance in the G8 or the European Union. There are no outside references to show that this term has a specific origin, history or application. This article probably needs to be cleaned up - can anyone provide any actual examples of usage, references, any sources at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.135.149 (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, this article is wrong. I might, however, be accused of being too close to the subject, as my late wife was integral in getting the system working in the first place. The origins of the practice are in the Spaak method, but were simplified firstly through experience in the WEU Assembly, which brought the Foreign Affairs and Defence Parliamentary Select Committees of Europe together, and then the simple question of management of, initally, the interests of 10 nations, and ultimately up to 32, depending on the activity under debate.

Getting a decision from the spokesmen of 32 nations' Foreign and Defence ministries, 64 individuals, all of whom have a valuable input but none of who should be dictatorial, can be like herding cats: it requires a sense of toleration, humour and quasi-familial collegiality on the part of all to produce a debate productive to all.

In general in WEU, the base-level working parties comprised the Defence Attachés and First Secretaries of each Member State's Embassy to the appropriate body. The working-parties would often meet a number of times each week, reporting back to their Ministries immediately after each meeting, often in the evening, and receiving fresh instructions the next morning - it can be a stressful life. It is to be noted that at one time, Brussels had no less than four embassies from each Nation, the principal one to Belgium, one to NATO, one to the EU and one to WEU, albeit that the last two were often partially or wholly integrated. The outcome of their deliberations were usually reviewed by their Ambassadors in full Council each week or fortnight, and set in stone by the Ministers themselves in Ministerial meetings on at least a six-monthly basis: crises were short-tracked at all levels. These are not automatically rubber-stamp meetings, as the most essential work of the sherpas is to produce a concensus on the balance of opinions of the matter, rather than a reasoned decision in and of itself, although if such can be arrived at the bosses will be only too happy.

Since the transfer of WEU's function to the Council of the European Union, which has a far wider scope, the same principle has been extended to all ministerial interaction, so that the main Council has now somewhat fragmented into a number of more specialist subgroup Councils. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.240.137 (talk) 16:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Would be nice to have an updated list of the sherpas for the G8 and the G20. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.252.206.73 (talk) 11:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]