Public diplomacy refers to the efforts of a state, or its surrogates, to conduct foreign policy and improve its foreign image by engaging and influencing foreign publics directly, rather than through traditional diplomatic channels which typically involve state actors and officials. It encompasses a range of activities including cultural exchanges, international broadcasting, social media engagement, and educational programs, aimed at building long-term relationships that enhance the understanding and appreciation of the state’s culture, values, and policies.
cf. “soft power”
Secret diplomacy
often treaties with secret clauses — if something happens, then something else would happen
blamed for wars
Woodrow Wilson pushes against it
Coercive diplomacy
diplomacy accompanied by military threats
“War is merely the continuation of policy (or politics) by other means” — not actually diplomacy
Shuttle diplomacy
High-level diplomats going back and forth between capitals
cf. Blinken in the Middle East
Summit diplomacy
heads-of-state can meet in person
traditionally very complicated
Diplomacy pertaining to particular areas:
economic diplomacy
cultural diplomacy
digital diplomacy
track ii diplomacy
environmental diplomacy
health diplomacy
defense diplomacy
Changing roles
Information gathering
it used to be very difficult to get information from foreign places
the “ears and eyes” of the government
this is no longer true
we seem to know everything
Why are diplomats still needed?
personal connections
knowing who to talk to
people who can call us
not all information is public
Extraterritoriality
immunity from jurisdiction
inviolability of the diplomatic premises
inviolability of the diplomatic bag
inviolability of diplomatic communications
immunity from taxation
immunity from social security provisions
exemption from customs duties
personal inviolability
right to use codes and receive papers or correspondence by courier
immunity from testifying as a witness
family immunity
Relations with home government
Degree of independence
has varied a lot historically
getting instructions from Europe to China
now it can be immediate
“Plenipotentiary”
a diplomat who has been given full and complete authority to represent their government and make decisions on its behalf in negotiations with another state or international organization
Air travel
go around the world and come back in a day
The corps diplomatique
resident diplomats
a mini-society
doyen – the longest serving senior diplomat is appointed to the position
coming together for their own safety
gathering information
getting angry on behalf of your country
Sociability of states
English school / realism
diplomatic recognition
you agree to talk – agree on being counter-parts
not only relations with friendly nations
the creation of an international society
usually broken off during war, but not always
Iran and Iraq had diplomatic relations during their war in the 1980s
Unrecognized countries
Taiwan
recognized as a sovereign entity by the Holy See as well as 19 member states of the United Nations. It maintains diplomatic relations with 57 other member states of the UN, although they are unofficial
Abkhazia
recognized by Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Nauru and Syria
North Cyprus
Recognised only by Turkey, Northern Cyprus is considered by all other states to be part of the Republic of Cyprus.
withdrawing diplomatic relations
ways of communicating
through third parties
other than diplomatic channels
Diplomatic protocol
not involving individuals, but states
It is the application of rank and precedence used when rendering courtesies, honors, and ceremony to certain persons or agencies for events having a defined agenda and sequence of events. More formally, it consists of the rules prescribing the etiquette accorded to ceremonies of state. In the military, it is the knowledge and application of established service customs.
Diplomatic “incidents”
Diplomatic culture
aristocratic heritage
way of relating to one another
glamorous position
prestigious job – but often not that well paid
Vienna Réglement, 1815
heads of state meeting for the first time
seniority principle
Barder, Multilateral diplomacy
Brian Barder was a British diplomat. Read more about him here. He maintained a popular blog.
This chapter is from his book What diplomats do: the life and work of diplomats, 2014. It has a very British focus, but is still interesting.
Zarif, “Four Mistakes In Our Negotiations We Need To Be Aware Of”
1. Not listening to each other and debate instead of dialogue
2. Presumptions about the intentions and plans of others
not everyone might want to eat the oranges, you can also use the peel
3. Assume that situations are zero-sum or win-lose
4. Self-fulfilling prophecies
United Nations
debates instead of discussions
defeating opponents
speak instead of listening
Our presumptions
can’t even imagine what the other one is up to
for example, they all assumed we wanted nuclear power for making bombs
Zero sum
We think that the party that loses less is the winner
the US in the Middle East
negotiations about nuclear weapons — both were losers
you are only safe if your partner is safe
if the other party fails, the country fails, and we fail too
Self-fulfilling prophecies
both sides in an international agreement think the other party will free-ride
no one dares investing in Iran
Btw, The nuclear weapons deal with Iran
The Iran Nuclear Deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was agreed upon in 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 group (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany), along with the European Union. The deal aimed to curb Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions, addressing international concerns over Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The JCPOA was designed to extend the time Iran would need to produce a nuclear weapon if it chose to break the agreement, from a few months to at least one year, by imposing restrictions on its nuclear enrichment program and allowing for comprehensive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
However, the deal began to unravel when the United States, under President Donald Trump, unilaterally withdrew in 2018, reinstating harsh sanctions against Iran. This move was opposed by the other signatories, who strived to keep the agreement alive despite the U.S.’s withdrawal. In response, Iran began to reduce its compliance with the deal’s terms, accelerating its nuclear program and raising tensions.
Recent efforts to revive the JCPOA have been fraught with difficulty. Negotiations have seen ups and downs, with a final text based on a European offer ultimately falling through. Accusations of insincerity have been leveled by both Iran and the West, leading to a deadlock amidst significant internal and external developments, such as protests within Iran and the imposition of further sanctions by Western countries on Iran for various reasons including human rights abuses and alleged military support to Russia.
As of now, the future of the JCPOA remains uncertain. While there have been no public signs of progress in the talks, both Iran and the U.S. have hinted at alternative plans if the deal cannot be salvaged, raising concerns about potential military confrontation. Nevertheless, neither side has officially declared the accord dead. The IAEA has continued to push for more inspection and monitoring access to verify the peacefulness of Iran’s nuclear program, amid reports of Iran enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels.
The situation remains complex and fluid, with the international community closely watching for any developments that might impact the future of Iran’s nuclear program and regional stability.
Diplomatic language
Winston Churchill: “Telling other people to go to hell in such a way that they would ask for direction.”
Listen to this podcast from NPR, National Public Radio (US). The French ambassador to Washington is very skilled at using diplomatic language. https://ondemand.npr.org/anon.npr-mp3/npr/me/2021/09/20210902_me_european_leaders_had_urged_biden_to_extend_us_deadline_to_leave_afghanistan.mp3
Compare the following exchange at the United Nations.
The US and Denmark
“Jeg heter Rufus Gifford”
Relations between very large countries and very small ones can be fraught with problems. Relations between Denmark and the US were going very well as long as Rufus Gifford was the US ambassador. Can you figure out why?
Relations between the two countries soured once the US president had a bright idea. What was the idea and what was the problem with it? Why, btw, is Greenland a part of Denmark? Which other parts of the world has the US bought?
So what did Rufus Gifford think of Trumps idea? No, he didn’t think it was very smart.
talks in Egypt between Egypt, Qatari PM, and US and Israeli spy chiefs
Bill Burns a very special guy
Not that much about diplomacy actually …
ICJ decision
South Africa asking for a ruling
They could get their hostages back, but that requires negotiations
and the negotiations would stop if their was an invasion of Rafah
Egyptian proposal
Americans come to the region
more Palestinians arrested than released
Positions:
Israel: complete destruction of Hamas
Hamas: ceasefire and Israeli pullout of troops
What can the outsiders do?
Netanyahu is not prioritizing their own hostages
Egypt doesn’t want them there — they cannot be a part of any ethnic cleansing
Who will take over Gaza?
the Gulf states don’t want to do Israel’s bidding — like the PLO in the West Bank
The Vienna convention
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) is an international agreement that regulates treaties among sovereign states. Known as the “treaty on treaties”, the VCLT establishes comprehensive, operational guidelines, rules, and procedures for how treaties are drafted, defined, amended, and interpreted. An international treaty is a written agreement between countries subject to international law that stipulates their consent to the creation, alteration, or termination of their rights and obligations, as stipulated in the treaty. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties was adopted and opened to signature on 23 May 1969, became effective on 27 January 1980, and has been ratified by 116 sovereign states as of January 2018. Non-ratifying parties, such as the U.S., have recognized parts of the VCLT as a restatement of customary international law. In treaty law, the VCLT is the authority for resolving disputes about the interpretation of a treaty.