History of Diplomacy
Introductory Questions
Origins of Diplomacy
You Scratch My Back | The Instruments of Diplomacy
Pen to Paper | The Outcomes of Diplomacy
Off in Paris For So Long | The Role of Diplomats
Selected Readings and Speeches (Examples)
Additional Cases & Questions
Introductory Questions
- What is the purpose of diplomacy?
- Essentially, the purpose of diplomacy is to resolve a conflict between two parties (or more) who possess opposing views on a topic. Whether that topic is a peaceful one or one during hostile situations.
- How is diplomacy different than discussion?
- Diplomacy is different than discussion in the fact that the former aims to arrive at an agreement or resolution of sorts between the two (or more) parties. A discussion on the other hand, only aims to share thoughts without necessarily reaching an agreed conclusion.
- Does a diplomat always represent one party’s interests to another party?
- While technically speaking that is the duty of a diplomat, sometimes personal interests can also come into play. Generally speaking however, within diplomatic delegations such as the UN, a diplomat focuses only on representing the interests/desires of their country.
- How did modern diplomatic protocols come about—and do these protocols do more to strengthen diplomacy or to limit it?
- Like majority of most protocols, diplomatic protocols have been developed as history has progressed, shifting to adjust to the situation within the world. Scroll down below to see the specific protocols/strategies. From my own knowledge, I can say that these protocols have certainly formalized the concept. Whether or not they’ve strengthened it is yet to be seen.
- When two countries sign a treaty, what guarantees it will be upheld?
- When two countries sign a treaty, the main guarantee is that usually, somewhere in fine print on the treaty is a list of consequences that will come down upon the violating party. Usually these consequences will be generated by yet another round of diplomacy or from previous diplomatic groundwork (i.e other treaties/rules)
- Is diplomacy inherently political? Are diplomats politicians?
- Not necessarily, though yes the stereotypical belief is that diplomacy is essentially politics. In historical eras diplomacy was not political, diplomats were representations of their own nations and not their political standpoints.
- What is the difference between an ambassador and a diplomat?
- An ambassador is someone who represents their country within a foreign one, usually residing in an embassy. While the ambassador is technically also a diplomat, their duties are mostly relegated to ensuring good standings between the two countries. Diplomats are also numerous, while only 1 ambassador can ever be appointed to 1 country at a time.
- Does diplomacy need to look different in the 21st century?
- Certainly, with society and the world advancing ever forward into the future, there are always new issues and conflicts that need diplomatic solutions. Where once simply signing an armistice was acceptable for all parties, now most wars require extensive terms for both sides, ones that are all agreed with.
- How do countries come to diplomatic agreements—and what happens when two nations cannot reach a diplomatic agreement?
- Obviously how they come to diplomatic agreements depends on the situation. Though generally diplomats will meet and discuss the issue and what their own nations want from the resolution. In the increasingly common case that a diplomatic agreement cannot be reached, then the 2 parties are still at conflict and may try other forms of resolution, not exactly peaceful ones though.
- What problems has international diplomacy helped to solve in recent years – and what problems has it helped to create?
- Within the past 5 years alone, diplomacy has actually not had a good run. There are still numerous problems that exist that haven’t been adequately reviewed by diplomats, though the Migrant crisis does come to mind when thinking about the successes of diplomacy. As for problems it has helped to create, the South China Sea dispute has been escalated as a result of diplomatic attempts at a solution, while the increasingly growing threat of North Korea has yet to be quelled peacefully.
- Is it ever appropriate for a diplomat to express disagreement with his or her country’s leader?
- Certainly, especially if the interests/thoughts of the leader are seemingly detrimental (bad) for both sides and is only expressed in the interest of the leader. However, generally speaking diplomats are obligated by duty to always agree with the interests of their nation’s leader, no matter how impossible those interests may be to fulfill.
- Should diplomats be granted special privileges when they are representing their nations abroad?
- In my opinion no, diplomats are always on the same playing field and elevating it for one party would only worsen the attempt at reaching a successful resolution. If a diplomat does receive special treatment, they will feel more powerful and deserving of better terms than their opponents, thus nullifying any actual discussion.
- Do businesses and other non-governmental institutions need diplomats—and if so, under what circumstances? How about revolutionary movements, or terrorist organizations?
- I think the answer is yes for all of them. For the first group, the circumstances that would require diplomats are if the group is in conflict with another or even the government itself. As for the latter, terrorist organizations and revolutionary movements need diplomats to try to get the world (especially the government of their country) to listen to their views and wants.
Origins of Diplomacy
- Explore the origins of diplomacy in historical civilizations. How different was it than diplomacy today?
- Diplomacy actually wasn’t that different 100 years ago, it still consisted of orderly and civilized discussions between two or more opposing parties. However, the main way in which it differs now is that there is a framework for diplomats to follow and protocols that need to be carried out in specific situations. Historically it would be a simple discussion to reach a treaty or other signatorized document that would signal a compromise between the conflicting parties.
- Example civilizations to research:
- City-States of Ancient Greece | Han Dynasty China
- City-States of Ancient Greece: Back when Greece was still divided into city-states such as Sparta and Athens, diplomacy was in its infancy. Politics was hardly a key factor, while philosophy mainly directed the thoughts of their diplomats. For majority of their existence, Greek diplomacy focused on resolving disputes between other city-states. Only later did some city-states bother to make diplomatic negotiations with foreign powers, such as Persia or Rome. Perhaps the most picture of Greek Diplomacy was a bunch of men in togas, all taking the floor to discuss the interests of their states and hopefully reach an agreement.
- Han Dynasty China: During the Han Dynasty (202 BC - 220 AD), Chinese foreign relations had a groundbreaking new field. With the travels of the diplomat Zhang Qian, diplomatic relations with other Asian territories was established. In the wake of his travels, Emperor Wu of Han was able to expand the Chinese territory to include many new regions. The opening of the Silk Road meant that many diplomats, missionaries and merchants were now able to make contact with European and Middle Eastern states, allowing the Silk Road to prosper until it’s eventual demise.
- Byzantine Empire | Renaissance Italy | Ancient India
- Byzantine Empire: With the Byzantine empire literally surrounded by other civilizations on either side of (what is now Istanbul) Byzantium, the main challenge was establishing good relations with the Georgians, Iberians, Bulgars, Slavs, Armenians, Huns, Avars, Lombards and Arabs. With a fairly small army of only 120,000 - 140,000 men, the Byzantines relied on diplomacy to ensure the security of their people. The “Bureau of Barbarians” was the first foreign intelligence agency; gathering information on any rivals the empire had, while also ensuring that any envoys travelling within the lands had adequate access to facilities and security. Secretly however, the organization also sought to ensure that these envoys and diplomats didn’t hear more than what they needed to, by ensuring they didn’t ask normal civilians any probing questions.
- Renaissance Italy: Similar to Ancient Greece, Italy during the Renaissance was split into separate states that each had their own interests and objectives. These states included Rome, Florence, Venice, Milan and Ferrara. Each was ruled by their own powerful family and each wanted something the others possessed. It was during this period that the first true diplomatic system was developed. Taking cues from the diplomatic methods of the Byzantine empire (espionage, bribery and deception), the Italians further developed the idea of permanent diplomatic missions, diplomatic reporting and privileges. As one of the few positions that were allowed to freely travel between city-states. It is widely accepted in historical circles that the first official diplomatic mission was in 1455, when a group of diplomats represented the Duke of Milan in Genoa.
- Ancient India: With Ancient India, actual texts existed on the matter of diplomatic negotiations and how kings should manage their relations. Especially from the Mauryan empire, which ruled during the 3rd century BC. In this civilization, we notice envoys sent to other king’s courts residing for an extended period of time and the suggestion that a wise king will build alliances and tries to checkmate his adversaries.
- City-States of Ancient Greece | Han Dynasty China
- Look into the evolution of modern diplomatic institutions, concluding (for now) with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations in 1961. Have the roles, responsibilities, and privileges of diplomats changed significantly over time?
- As has been discussed above, the role of diplomats and their privileges has shifted over time to adapt to the roles and responsibilities they had. In Ancient times, diplomats simply had the job of representing their state’s interests to another state. Thus they had limited privileges and received limited diplomatic immunity. Over the course of history, as diplomacy was not exactly a fair game, espionage and coercion did not allow diplomats many safeties. After the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations in 1961, it was clearly stated the responsibilities of both the diplomat and the host country. In broad terms, the document essentially gives rules and regulations on the boundaries of diplomatic immunity, protecting not only the diplomat but also the families and couriers. It also states that all conversations may be confidential, and that no diplomatic bags can be opened at any time. It places quite a bit of responsibility on the host country, but also gives them the option of declaring any diplomat a persona non grata, meaning that the host country must recall them within a suitable period of time.
You Scratch My Back | The Instruments of Diplomacy
- Diplomatic Institutions
- embassy | consulate | mission | asylum
- Embassy: A building within a country where a foreign ambassador and his/her staff will work and live. Embassies are also where people from the respective country go for bureaucratic procedures. An embassy represents the “soil” of its country on foreign land, any violations of law within it will be considered a criminal act against the country that owns the embassy.
- Consulate: A synonym for an embassy, where the consul (another synonym for ambassador) will work and live.
- Mission: Not exactly diplomatic, but a mission is a group of establishments used by missionaries to spread their religion/faith. Another definition is a group of people sent from one state to another to represent the sending state officially.
- Asylum: An asylum is where people seeking refuge from their own country are moved to. Usually granted by a foreign power, asylum seekers will stay here until they’ve been allowed to move/live elsewhere.
- diplomatic immunity | diplomatic bags | rezidentura
- Diplomatic immunity: A form of legal immunity granted to diplomats travelling abroad that protects from any sort of legal prosecution by the host country. Essentially a free “get out of jail” card, however the diplomat is still susceptible to being expelled or prosecuted by the country of origin.
- Diplomatic bags: Literally a bag, pouch or container given certain legal protections. Diplomatic bags usually contain correspondence between a diplomatic mission and it’s home government. The legal protection entails the bag to prevention from being searched, confiscated, or in anyway mistreated in the process of delivery.
- Rezidentura: Russian word. A base of operations for a resident spy in a foreign country. Usually resident spies will work from here for an extended period of time.
- embassy | consulate | mission | asylum
- Diplomatic Offices
- ambassador | envoy | minister | consul
- Ambassador: Single representative of a foreign state to another. Highest ranking diplomat within a foreign country.
- Envoy: A messenger or representative on a diplomatic mission, ranking below the ambassador.
- Minister: A head of a government department and a diplomatic agent, again below an ambassador, representing a state in a foreign country.
- Consul: An official who works and lives in a foreign country, given the duty of protecting and promoting the citizens and interests of their government.
- secretary | counselor | charge d'affaire
- Secretary: Someone employed by a diplomatic office (usually an embassy or consulate) to manage correspondence, make appointments, keep records and perform other official duties.
- Counselor: A senior officer in the diplomatic service
- Charge d’affaire: When an ambassador is on leave or unable to work, the charge d’affaire (literally translating to “charged of matters”) will head the embassy and carry out the duties of the ambassador.
- ambassador | envoy | minister | consul
- Approaches to Diplomacy
- gunboat | coercive | preventive | appeasement
- Gunboat: The use of military force to support a foreign policy. Usually a naval one, wherein the superior power threatens to declare war or act aggressively if it’s terms are not met. A famous example of this was in the run-up to the First Opium War, in which Britain threatened to bombard and invade Chinese Coastal cities if their terms for unchecked opium trade wasn’t met.
- Coercive: An attempt to get the opposing party to switch their aims by threatening to use force if their demands aren’t met.
- Preventive: The action of preventing disputes between conflicting states and from preventing any existing disputes from degenerating into armed conflict. In the case of the latter, Preventive diplomacy will attempt to minimize the conflict and resolve it immediately.
- Appeasement: A procedure in which political or material concessions are made to an aggressive power to avoid conflict. The most common example of this was when Britain decided to appease Nazi Germany in 1938 by allowing it to take over the Sudetenland (modern-day Czechoslovakia)
- paradiplomacy | soft power | hard power
- Paradiplomacy: International relations/activities conducted not by the national government, but by sub national or regional governments pursuing their own interests. It should be noted that with globalization, these factions are becoming more influential on the international scale.
- Soft Power: A strategy in which a party persuades others to agree with its terms or interests without any need of force. As opposed to Hard Power, soft power uses appeal and attraction to achieve its aim.
- Hard Power: Similar to coercive, this strategy entails the use of military strength and economic incentives to influence the behavior/interests of another party.
- nuclear | counterinsurgency | public
- Nuclear: Nuclear diplomacy concerns the deadliest weapon known to mankind, nuclear weapons, and their proliferation in peacetime as well as the prevention of their use in wartime. It mainly sets down rules for nations as to their development of nuclear weapons and their ability to proliferate (multiply) their arsenals.
- Counterinsurgency: Fairly obvious, counterinsurgency refers to the prevention of extremist, insurgent or other terrorist actions. Counterinsurgency diplomacy is the use of negotiation between extremist factions and countries where they are active to avoid any hostile actions.
- Public: Public diplomacy focuses on manipulating the opinions/interests of the public within a foreign country to support the interests of one’s own government.
- dollar | cyber | zero-sum | third neighbor
- Dollar: Specific to the United States, Dollar Diplomacy was a term used during the term of President William Howard Taft, wherein American foreign policy furthered its aims in Latin America through the use of guaranteeing loans to foreign countries.
- Cyber: An evolution of Public Diplomacy, Cyber Diplomacy focuses on using the many widespread communication devices of the 21st century to widen the voice a foreign power has on manipulating the public of another country.
- Zero-sum: Zero-sum diplomacy focuses on creating terms or interests that entail a gain for one country, but a corresponding loss for the other. One example of this can be found in the Treaty of Versailles, wherein the Triple Entente gained money, while Germany suffered a loss of it.
- Third Neighbor: The Third Neighbor diplomacy is a concept rooted in history. It traces back to when Mongolian foreign policy meant developing relations with countries other than China and the USSR, since these two superpowers possessed a sphere of influence on the country. As such, help from other foreign powers was necessary should either China or the USSR try to exploit Mongolia’s market on mineral extraction.
- gunboat | coercive | preventive | appeasement
- Additional Terms to Know
- proxenos | paiza | plenipotentiary | peacemaker
- Proxenos: In Ancient Greek History, a proxenos was a citizen of a foreign state chosen by another state to host it’s ambassadors and other diplomats and represent its interests there.
- Paiza: A Paiza was yet another historical diplomatic artifact. Given to Mongol officials and envoys, this tablet allowed the wielder special privileges and authority. These essentially enabled those who possessed them to demand goods and services from the civilian population. In the later stages of the Mongol empire, the Khans tried to entice foreign merchants to their shores by promising Paizas that would exclude them from taxes.
- Plenipotentiary: A diplomat within a foreign country who is given the full power of independent action on behalf of their government.
- Peacemaker: A person who brings peace to a diplomatic negotiation.
- non-state actors | alliance | summit | embargo
- Non-state actors: An individual or party that has significant political influence but is not affiliated with any particular nation.
- Alliance: A treaty/formal agreement between two or more nations to cooperate for a shared goal/interest.
- Summit: A diplomatic meeting where none other than the heads of government gather to negotiate any pressing issues.
- Embargo: An official ban on trade or other commercial activity with another foreign country.
- persona non grata | extraterritoriality | sanctions
- Persona non grata: An unacceptable or unwelcome person. In diplomacy, this means a person whose entry and residence or even communication with their state is prohibited.
- Extraterritoriality: A place where the inhabitants/citizens are immune to prosecution by local law, usually given by a foreign nation. Places that are usually common with this status are foreign embassies, military bases and UN offices.
- Sanctions: Actions taken against foreign countries due to displeasure with diplomatic opinions or entirely personal reasons. These can include Diplomatic Sanctions, where diplomatic ties are cut. Economic Sanctions, where trade is limited to certain goods and amounts or stopped entirely. Military sanctions, where an armed force intervenes and sport sanctions, where teams and athletes from a foreign country are prohibited from participating in any international sporting events.
- self-determination | polarity | realpolitik | ultimatum
- Self-determination: Self-determination is the right for all peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue any economic, cultural and social developments.
- Polarity: Any way in which power is distributed within the international stage. Be it superpowers such as the USA and Russia, or with seemingly less powerful countries such as African or South American ones.
- Realpolitik: A system of politics and principles based on considerations of given circumstances and factors, as opposed to considering ideological notions or moral and ethical frameworks.
- Ultimatum: A final demand or statement of terms by one party, the rejection of which will lead to breakdowns in relations and retaliation.
- proxenos | paiza | plenipotentiary | peacemaker
Pen to Paper | The Outcomes of Diplomacy
- Notable Pacts and Treaties (examples)
- Amarna letters | Treaty of Nerchinsk | Peace of Westphalia
- Amarna letters: The amarna letters were an archive on clay tablets consisting of diplomatic correspondence between Egyptian, Canaan and Amurru diplomats (the latter two being civilizations in the Middle East who shared borders with one another. While Canaan had a border with Egypt) Interestingly however, the letters are written in Sumerian Cuneiform, as opposed to the Egyptian hieroglyphic system. As of now 382 tablets are known to have existed, with the period of sending being at most over 30 years.
- Treaty of Nerchinsk: Russia and China, two superpowers that dominate the global diplomatic stage. The treaty of Nerchinsk was a fundamental document for both nations, as it set the borders for both Russia and China that existed for almost 200 years. Before this treaty, the Manchus had just taken over all of China and established their Qing dynasty. In the treaty, Russia gave up the lands north of the Amur river until the Stanovoy Mountains, while it kept the land between the Argun river and Lake Baikal. Later treaties, such as the Treaty of Kiakhta, Treaty of Aigun and Treaty of Beijing continued to shift the borders. The current one now runs along the Argun, Amur and Ussuri rivers.
- Peace of Westphalia: The peace of Westphalia is actually somewhat regarded as a turning point in Western European history and a key stepping stone in establishing diplomatic congresses in wartime. Between May and October of 1648, a series of treaties were signed by diplomats out of a delegation of 109. These were signed in the Westphalian (a region in northwestern Germany) cities of Osnabruck and Munster. These treaties effectively ended the European wars of Religion. These included the 30 years war (1618-1648) between the Habsburgs and Catholic powers and the Protestant Anti-Habsburgs powers. It also ended the Eighty Years War (1568-1648) between Spain and the Dutch republic. The treaties ended the latter by letting Spain officially recognize the Dutch Republic. Many of the treaties included territorial adjustments, tenets and internal political boundaries.
- Abuja Treaty | Treaty of Utrecht | Treaty of Versailles
- Abuja Treaty: The Abuja treaty is an interesting document, as it doesn’t focus on resolving a conflict or dispute, rather it lays the foundations for an economic union of Africa. It focuses on advancing the cultural, social and economic value of all African states through cooperation. It’s end goal is to ensure self-sustainability and modernization.
- Treaty of Utrecht: The establishing documents of the Peace of Utrecht, the Treaty of Utrecht is a series of individual peace treaties signed by the parties involved in the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714). The treaty was signed in the Dutch city of Utrecht in March and April of 1713. Those combatant nations included Spain, Great Britain, France, Portugal, Savoy (a region in Western Europe) and the Dutch Republic. Surprisingly however, the majority of negotiation occured between the delegations of France and Britain. The treaty put an end to the Spanish Succession matter, recognizing Philip of Anjou (Grandson of King Louis XIV of France) as king of Spain. It also benefited Great Britain massively, by gaining French and Spanish territories in both Europe and the Americas (it also gave them a monopoly on the Latin America Slave Trade).
- Treaty of Versailles: A complete blunder of a diplomatic negotiation. The Treaty of Versailles was signed in 1919, a year after the end of the First World War. It tried to solve many problems, but instead was a key factor in kicking off the Second World War 20 years later. In it, the Triple Entente demanded that Germany give up almost everything it had. From land concessions to France, War reparations to Britain and any military strength. It also set up the League of Nations, a forerunner to the UN that tried to resolve any world issues. Unfortunately, it was a mess for the diplomats. The French thought Germany needed harsher consequences, the Americans wished all nations would undergo disarmament, the Germans begged for lighter punishments. In reality it was only the British diplomat, David Lloyd George, who got what his nation wanted (Justice, but not revenge)
- Paris Peace Accords | Antarctic Treaty | Khitomer Accords
- Paris Peace Accords: The Paris Peace Accords was a treaty signed on January 27th 1973 to put an end to the fighting in Vietnam, a country which had seen almost 20 years of internal conflict between the Communist aligned North and the Democratic South. The treaty obviously included the governments of North Vietnam, South Vietnam and the US, which had aligned with the South in the fighting. The main provisions of the document were a ceasefire, withdrawal of American and other foreign troops within 2 months and for peaceful negotiations to be carried out between the South and the North. Unfortunately however, the conflict still continued albeit in smaller scale. On the 30th of April 1975, North Vietnamese troops along with Viet Cong Guerrillas stormed the presidential palace in Saigon, marking the “true end” of the Vietnam war.
- Antarctic Treaty: Signed in Washington on the 1st of December 1959 by the twelve countries whose scientists were active in the Antarctic region during the 1957-1958 International Geophysical Year. It stipulated that Antarctica would be free region for scientific exploration and discovery and that said discoveries were to be shared with all signatories. It essentially gave the region of Antarctica the government of science.
- Khitomer Accords: Not exactly a realistic treaty, the Khitomer Accords were signed in the science fiction series Star Trek. It was a collection of 2 peace treaties between the Klingon Empire and the United Federation of Planets and was mainly focused on helping to repair relations between the two.
- Treaty of Tordesillas | Paris Climate Agreement | Sugauli Treaty
- Treaty of Tordesillas: Signed between Spain and Portugal on June 7 1494. Recently the discovery of the New World by Christopher Columbus sparked fears of territorial wars between the two major exploring European powers. A line was drawn roughly 320 miles west of the Cape Verde islands. Spain was given exclusive rights to all newly discovered and undiscovered lands to the west of this line, while all Portuguese expeditions were to remain on the east of this land. Neither power was allowed to occupy territory already in the hands of a Christian ruler. Initial disagreement led to the line being moved to 370 miles west of the Cape Verde islands.
- Paris Climate Agreement: No-brainer here. The Paris Climate Agreement is perhaps one of the biggest modern treaties ever to grace the covers of newspapers and discussions all across the globe. Essentially the Paris Climate Agreement brings all countries of the globe (with 3 exceptions: the US, Syria and Nicaragua) together in combatting the effects of climate change through new innovations or old techniques.
- Sugauli Treaty: Yet another perfect example of how a nation’s power can influence the outcome of a diplomatic negotiation. The Sugauli Treaty established the boundaries of Nepal, thus ending the Anglo-Nepalese War of 1814-1816. Some of the territories currently controlled by Nepal would be given back to the British, a British representative would be allowed to stay in Kathmandu and Britain’s army was now capable of recruiting Nepalese Gurkhas for armed service. It was a huge blow for Nepal, as most of the conceded territory was land they had just won in multiple conquests over the last 25 years.
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty | Douglas Treaties
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty: Yet another world-famous treaty, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation entails exactly what it sounds. It aims to stop the development and construction of Nuclear arsenals worldwide as well as peaceful use of any existing weapons.
- Douglas Treaties: A total of 14 treaties and documents made during 1850-1854 that gave the Hudson Bay Company almost complete control over Vancouver Island. It was signed between said company and multiple different indigenous groups that already inhabited the island. It allowed these groups to use any village or field lands already existing and permission for them to hunt or fish on surrendered territory. In total, the treaties gave over 930 square kilometers of land to the Hudson Bay Company.
- Amarna letters | Treaty of Nerchinsk | Peace of Westphalia
- Institutions of Accord (examples)
- Congress of Vienna | Congress of Berlin | Conference of Ambassadors
- Congress of Vienna: Named after the capital city in which it took place, the Congress of Vienna was a meeting of ambassadors from European states chaired by Austrian statesman Klemens von Metternich. For a congress it was fairly long, taking place from November of 1814 to June of the next year. With Europe having been shaken up quite badly with the French Revolutionary Wars as well as the Napoleonic Wars, the diplomats aimed to draft a long-term peace plan for the continent. This meant everything from restoring old borders to resizing the main powers so they could balance each other out. In this conference, the main powers were held by those that had forced Napoleon Bonaparte to surrender not 4 months earlier (Britain, Prussia, Russia and Austria). When it came to border gore, the main contesters were Russia, Prussia, Austria, Sweden, Denmark as well as the borders of multiple German states (Germany had yet to be unified under Otto Von Bismarck). Frankly the exchange of land is complex, confusing and requires some cleanup. The image at the very bottom of the page illustrates the border gore before and after the conference. While this act of diplomacy was effective at the time (peace would remain for another 40 years), the agreements were drawn up with no input from the citizens who lived on the territory. Perhaps we can blame the fact that the diplomats were mostly conservative, with not much tolerance for republican ideas. Many historians argue that this would be the first step in preparing Europe for the First World War a century later.
- Congress of Berlin: Hosted 60 years after the Congress of Vienna in the German capital (that region of Eastern Europe sure does love to host diplomats, ironic isn't it?). From June 13 to July 13 of 1878, the congress held far less representatives than the number in Vienna, only 7 attended in comparison to the 23 who went to Vienna. The main participants were Britain, the newly created German Empire (under the guidance of the ruthless Otto Von Bismarck), the Russian empire and the Ottoman empire. In order to understand the context of the congress, we must backtrack a bit. In 1856, the Paris Peace Treaty had ended the Crimean War (which saw the Ottomans and British square off against the Russians for the Black Sea and it's peninsula) rather badly. The Black Sea remained neutral territory, the Holy Alliance (of Russia, Prussia and Austria. Should've been called the "Holy Sias's") and greatly weakened the Russian position in Europe in favor of protecting the Ottomans. In 1870 however, Russia revoked the treaty and breached the neutrality of the Black Sea, with the Great Powers becoming concerned that the Ottoman Empire would not be able to hold it's newly acquired territories should Russia attack. 5 years after that, the Herzegovina Uprising resulted in the Great Eastern Crisis, which in turn led to the Russo-Turkish war of 1877. That war ended with the treaty of San Stefano, essentially Russia giving the Ottomans an absolute crushing after invading most of their Balkan territory. Thus the Congress of Berlin was held in an effort to diffuse the tension between the two states and prevent subsequent wars (cue WW1). In summary, it was a turning of tables, where Russia was humiliated while the Ottomans were able to regain power in the area. Three new states emerged in the Balkans: Romania, Serbia and Montenegro. Austria-Hungary was able to occupy Bosnia and Herzegovina as well, which would lead to later Balkan crises and would ultimately spark the First World War.
- Conference of Ambassadors: I just realized that all the events on this list were those that helped to build up the First World War, slowly yet surely. How ironic that, in trying to satisfy the diplomats, they were only riling up the countries for conflict. While known as the Conference of Ambassadors, this event was also called the London Conference of 1912-1913 (Conference of Ambassadors sounds much better than that). An international summit of the six most powerful empires and countries in Europe at the time, the conference aimed to resolve the territorial disputes and restore the balance of power in the Balkan region (not again!). Great Britain, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia and Italy were the six countries that sent their world leaders to London in December of 1912 to discuss a treaty that would resolve the First Balkan War. Also present were representatives of the Balkan states that had taken part in the war, along with an Ottoman diplomat. Rather funny then, that the last diplomat mentioned would have limited part in the negotiations. While sessions of the conference started on the 16th of December 1912, they were ended on the 23rd of January 1913, when the 1913 Ottoman coup d'etat removed the Ottomans from the conference. Ignoring the absence of one of the key combatants in the war, the remaining participants signed the Treaty of London (1913) in May of that year, agreeing that the Ottomans would give up all territory west of the Enos-Midia Line and in July the Principality of Albania was formally recognized. Again this conference's effects would be long-lasting, further giving tension to the Ottomans and their Balkan enemies (including Greece). Yet again conservative views and lack of public opinion meant that more border gore followed the treaty, with half of the territory that Albania proposed being handed over to Serbia and Greece, along with 30-40% of the total Albanian population.
- League of Nations | United Nations | ASEAN | G20
- League of Nations: Forerunner to the United Nations, was laid down in the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. The League of Nations had some successes, namely in stopping small disputes from exploding into all-out war. These included territorial disputes between Germany and Poland, Greece and Bulgaria, Sweden and Finland and Turkey and Britain. Ultimately however the league had no power when bigger countries were involved, as was evident when Turkey and Greece went to war in 1922, the French invasion of the German Ruhr in 1923 and general disarmament was not reached.
- United Nations: If you know about the United Nations, you know the basics of diplomacy within the world. Founded in 1945 after the end of the Second World War, the UN was another attempt (by America) to establish an organization that would try to ensure the conflicting interests of two states would never reach the point of armed hostilities. In that time, the UN has expanded greatly to also include topics such as climate change, inequality, education, sustainable development and economic growth amongst others. Only 2 states are not full members, the Vatican City and Palestine.
- ASEAN: Standing for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, ASEAN is made up of 10 nations within the Southeast Asian region of the world (Indonesia, Burma, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei and the Philippines. The main goals for diplomats within this organization are to resolve disputes between member states as well as foreign powers, while also drafting and signing treaties that will ensure economic, cultural and social development in all states.
- G20: With a particular focus on ensuring financial stability globally, the G20 is made up of 20 member states (Hence the name Group of Twenty) and acts as an international forum for the Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the European Union. This is a large delegation, the member states of the G20 account to roughly 85% of Gross World Product, 80% of Global Trade, two-thirds of the world’s population and half of the world’s land area.
- NATO | OPEC | Arab League | Commonwealth of Nations
- NATO: The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO is an intergovernmental military alliance between several North American and European states who signed the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949. Similar to an alliance, NATO is made of a collective defence system wherein its member states agree to protect or retaliate against attacks by any foreign countries not in the alliance. It’s big three nations are Great Britain, France and the US.
- OPEC: Petrol, a valuable resource our modern society relies on. OPEC is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and constitutes of 14 nations as of May 2017. It was founded in Baghdad back in 1960 by the first five members (Iraq, Kuwait, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela). It’s current members are Algeria, Angola, Ecuador, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, Saudi Arabia (the de facto leader), United Arab Emirates, and Venezuela. The mission of OPEC is “to coordinate and unify the petroleum policies of its member countries and ensure the stabilization of oil markets, in order to secure an efficient, economic and regular supply of petroleum to consumers, a steady income to producers, and a fair return on capital for those investing in the petroleum industry” Seems rightly too, since it’s member nations account for roughly 44% of global oil production and 73% of “proven” oil reserves. Two-thirds of the oil produced by OPEC are from the six Middle Eastern member countries.
- Arab League: Formed on the 22nd of March 1945 in Cairo, the Arab League is a regional organization of 22 states around North Africa, The Horn of Africa and Arabia. Similar to NATO, the aim of the Arab League’s aim is to improve relations between member states in order to ensure that all their interests may be fulfilled as well as their independence and sovereignty safeguarded.
- Commonwealth of Nations: An intergovernmental organization consisting of 53 member states, the Commonwealth is formed of territories that were mostly former lands owned by the British Empire. There really is no obligation that member states have to one another, they are just binded by language, history, culture and their shared values of democracy, free speech, human rights and the law. Back when the British Empire was beginning to lose lands due to self-independence of many nations, the Commonwealth was formally constituted in 1949 in London.
- APEC | African Union | European Union
- APEC: The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation was established in 1989 to promote free trade throughout the Asia-Pacific Region. It is currently made up of 21 states, whose government heads meet annually. In a common tradition, the heads of state all wear the traditional costume of their country. Along with encouraging free trade, APEC also aims to establish new markets and opportunities for its members in other areas of the world.
- African Union: Discussed in the Abuja treaty above, the African Union is a continental union consisting of all 55 nations on the African continent. It was established in Ethiopia on 26 May 2001 and launched in South Africa roughly a year later. Similar to most other unions, the African Union aims to ensure social, cultural and economic development for all member nations, to the point where they can be self-dependent and do not require aid from any foreign nations.
- European Union: Made up of 28 states in Europe, the European Union aims to pass policies that ensure the development of all it’s member nations in every field, from economic growth to legislative matters. It’s most notable feature is the Schengen Area, which allows any passport holder from a member state to visit any other member nation.
- Congress of Vienna | Congress of Berlin | Conference of Ambassadors
Off in Paris For So Long | The Role of Diplomats
- Famous Diplomats and Peacemakers (examples)
- Niccolo Machiavelli | Otto von Bismarck | Henry Kissinger
- Niccolo Machiavelli: Italian diplomat, writer, philosopher, historian and politician; Niccolo Machiavelli has been deemed the father of modern political science. For many of his years he was a senior official in the Florentine Republic, with responsibilities in diplomatic and military affairs. Machiavellianism is a term used to describe the sort the politicians that Machiavelli outlined in his book The Prince. Similar to realpolitik, Machiavelli described immoral behaviour (such as deceit or even killing) normal in politics (in some situations he even encouraged it as being effective).
- Otto Von Bismarck: Perhaps one of the more famous diplomats on this list, Otto Von Bismarck was the founder and first chancellor of the German Empire. Commonly nicknamed the “Iron Chancellor”, Bismarck’s form of diplomacy was most associated with realpolitik. During the earlier years of Bismarck’s life, Germany was not a unified state. It was made of 39 smaller independent German states that he then united under Prussian rule. After being appointed Chief Minister by Wilhelm I in 1862, Bismarck set about starting and winning a series of wars against neighbouring countries (Denmark, France and Austria-Hungary) to protect and unite all German states. Bismarck was most known for his use of unconventional methods to declare war. It was from his conduct that the concept of realpolitik truly became a concern for diplomats across the world, wherein they would throw all ethical and moral considerations out in favor of achieving their objectives.
- Henry Kissinger: A former American diplomat and political scientist, Henry Kissinger served as the United States Secretary of State and National Security Advisor for some of the most tumultuous periods in US political history. These included the presidential administrations of Richard Nixon and his successor, Gerald Ford. Yet another practitioner of realpolitik, Kissinger received the 1973 Nobel Peace Prize for his (later unsuccessful) actions in negotiating a ceasefire in Vietnam during the signings of the Paris Peace Accords. Kissinger’s other notable achievements during his official service was easing strained relations with the Soviet Union and opening relations with China. Quite a bit of controversy surrounds Kissinger’s 1973 Nobel Peace Prize, since peace did not come to South or North Vietnam and the conflict would only continue (with the exclusion of US intervention) 2 years later. His diplomatic partner who also received the prize, Le Duc Tho, refused the prize (becoming the first person in history to do so).
- Eleanor Roosevelt | K. R. Narayanan | Thomas Jefferson
- Eleanor Roosevelt: Former First Lady of the United States from March 1933 to April 1945 during Franklin D. Roosevelt’s (her husband) four terms in office. President Harry S. Truman later called her the “First Lady of the World” for her achievements in Human Rights. Roosevelt was very involved as a First Lady, especially when it came to Human Rights, Women’s rights and world peace. It was she who pressed the United States to join the UN and became its first delegate.
- K.R Narayanan: The tenth president of India, Kocheril Raman Narayanan began his diplomatic career as member of the Indian Foreign Service in the Nehru Administration. His most notable achievement was his lifetime devoted to Indian diplomatic service. For the first years of his time in office he was the Indian ambassador to multiple countries. These were: Japan, Thailand, Turkey, China, UK and US. During this time, he was referred to by Nehru as “The best Diplomat of the Country”. After this, he was asked to enter the Indian political world at the request of Indira Gandhi, where he won three successive elections to the Lok Sabha (the lower part of India’s bicameral Parliament). He then served as Minister of State in the Union Cabinet under former prime minister Rajiv Gandhi. In 1992, Narayanan was elected as the ninth Vice President and 5 years later, would go on to become President himself. It is perhaps his time as an ambassador that astounds one the most, for his multiple terms in different countries helping to mend and maintain relations was exemplary.
- Thomas Jefferson: 3rd President of the United States, Thomas Jefferson was a pioneer in foreign diplomatic procedure and the main author of the Declaration of Independence. Before his terms as President, Jefferson was a major player in the drive for America’s freedom from British colonial rule. During his presidency, he organized the Louisiana Purchase (doubling the territory of the United States), pursued shipping and trade interests against pirates and British forces and negotiated peace with France (decreasing military forces of both countries).
- Kim Dae-jung | Oscar Arias | Zhou Enlai | Mikhail Gorbachev
- Kim Dae-Jung: Nicknamed the “Nelson Mandela of South Korea”, Kim Dae-Jung was President of South Korea from 1998 to 2003. Before and during his time in office, Dae-Jung was regarded as a gifted orator and charismatic politician, whose controversial views would often land him in trouble with the government. This was apparent when in 1973, he was kidnapped from his hotel room in Tokyo by agents of the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA) for his constant criticisms against the policies of President Park Chung-Hee. After a long and winding road to presidency, he began working on some of the more positive achievements in his life. His actions in overcoming the financial crisis allowed South Korea to emerge from economic jeopardy. His “sunshine” policies allowed South Koreans to visit their relatives in the North and eased regulations on South Korean investment in the country. From the 13-15 June 2000, Dae-Jung would make history as a participant in the first meeting between North and South Korean leaders (where Kim Jong-il was the current leader of the North). During the summit, both leaders agreed to work towards eventual reunification.
- Oscar Arias: One of the lesser known people on this list, Oscar Arias was the President of Costa Rica from 1986 to 1990 and from 2006 to 2010. He was a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1987 for his efforts in ending the Central American Crisis. During this turbulent period in the 1980s, various countries in Central America were consumed by civil wars and pro-communist revolutions. It was during this time that Arias, with help from John Biel and Rodrigo Madrigal Nieto, worked towards the signing of the Esquipulas II Accords. The accords aimed to promote democracy and peace on the Central American landform and remove any foreign intervention from current military affairs (mostly US). During his first presidency, Arias also promoted the creation of the Central American Parliament, in an effort to ensure greater integration throughout the region. While his second presidency was marred with criticisms and few notable achievements, it can be said that Arias played a key, albeit overlooked part in preventing Cold War tensions erupting.
- Zhou Enlai: After Chairman Mao Zedong gained control of the People’s republic of China, Zhou Enlai became its first Premier, serving from October 1949 to his death in January 1976. During his service, he played a key part in the Communist party’s rise to power, developing the Chinese economy and formation of foreign policies. As a diplomat, Zhou Enlai served as the Chinese foreign minister from 1949 to 1958. During this time, some of his most admirable work occured. He advocated for a peaceful coexistence with the West after the Korean War and devised policies regarding relations and bitter disputes with the US, Taiwan, the Soviet Union, India and Vietnam. He also attended the Geneva Conference of 1954, the Bandung Conference of 1955 and orchestrated Nixon’s visit to China in 1972 (helping ease relations between the two superpowers).
- Mikhail Gorbachev: As the eighth and final leader of the Soviet Union from 1985 until it’s dissolution in 1991. In a time of negative relations between America and the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev is credited as one of the people instrumental in bringing the Cold War to an end. His policies of glasnost (openness) and perestroika (restructuring) were blamed for bringing about an end to the Soviet Union, due to the role they played in removing the Communist Party from having any influence over the actions of the state. Yet for his actions in creating positive relations with other Western states and for resolving 4 decades worth of hostilities, Gorbachev received the 1990 Nobel Peace Prize. It was perhaps the policy of glasnost that he is most associated with. In 1988, the introduction of this policy allowed Soviet people new freedoms they had never experienced before. These included freedom of speech, freedom of the press and the release of thousands of political prisoners. While initially aimed at getting the Soviet people to back his radical economic changes, glasnost eventually appealed to the leaders of other countries.
- Yasser Arafat | Ban Ki-Moon | Dag Hammarskjöld
- Yasser Arafat: Israel and Palestine, one of the most conflicting regions and matters to dominate the modern diplomatic world. Yet between 1969 to 2004, Yasser Arafat took up the challenge of ensuring that relations between the two would not erupt into another Middle Eastern war. Named as chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Yasser Arafat would work towards the signing of many treaties and accords that would try to achieve everlasting peace between the two disputed territories. For his efforts, along with those of two Israeli diplomats (Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres) in the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, Arafat received the 1994 Nobel Peace Prize. How unfortunate it is that the ambitions and dreams of this empowered and inspiring diplomat (peace between Israel and Palestine as well as Palestinian prosperity) would never be fully realized despite his extensive efforts.
- Ban Ki-Moon: Regarded by many critics as the “worst UN Secretary General”, Ban Ki-Moon was the eighth secretary general of the United Nations from January 2007 to December 2016. It is an immense responsibility to be at the helm of an organization spanning almost all nations of the world and it must take a steady hand to decide on the best course of action on some of the world’s most pressing and dividing issues. In a way, we cannot blame Ban Ki-Moon for his inaction during most of his term. Rather we can say he was unfortunate to have been sworn into office at a troubled time in the world. With the ongoing war in Syria, Migrant Crisis, Rohingya persecution and South Sudan, it can be said that Ban Ki-Moon was simply overloaded with far too much to deal with in so little time. Yet perhaps most overlooked was his success before he became Secretary General, Ban-Ki Moon was the foreign minister of South Korea from from 2004 until 2006. Even though several crises occured after he took up the position, Ban was able to improve relations with North Korea and help resolve the North Korean nuclear missile crisis.
- Dag Hammarskjöld: A truly tragic story of a diplomat trying to hold the world together. Dag was a Swede who became the second Secretary General of the United Nations and has been widely regarded as one of the best men ever to hold that position. Before he came to be known however, Dag was a successful Swedish public servant who helped to alleviate economic problems after the Second World War and helped to establish better relations with other European states. After he came to become Secretary General, he was involved in multiple disputes. These included smoothing relations between Israel and other Arab states, a 1955 visit to China to negotiate the release of 11 captured US pilots (all of which served during the Korean War), the 1956 Suez Crisis (in which multiple foreign powers tried to invade Egypt to gain control to the Suez canal). Yet perhaps his most notable involvement was in the 1960 Congo Crisis, where he desperately tried to find a way to unite the recently independent African state. The Congo Crisis was a time of political upheaval and instability within the region, which saw the ore-rich area of Katanga break away under Moise Tshombe. One notable time during this period was the Siege of Jadotville, where a company of Irish UN peacekeeping troops was besieged in a small outpost by Belgian and Congolese troops commanded by Moise Tshombe. During the six-day siege, Dag personally attempted to fly down to Congo to set up peace negotiations between the two parties. Unfortunately, he would never arrive, his plane was later found in a crash site near Northern Zambia with no survivors. Many suspect that the plane was shot down by Katangan fighters. For his attempts at defusing the Congo Crisis, he was posthumously awarded the 1961 Nobel Peace Prize.
- U Thant | Ambassador Spock | Colin Powell
- U Thant: Dag’s successor as Secretary General of the United Nations, Thant was a Burmese Diplomat who became the first Non-European to hold the position. He was in office for a record 10 years and 11 months, from 1961 to 1971. It was he who literally took over the challenge of the Congo Crisis as soon as he was sworn into office. Yet before tackling that challenge, Thant facilitated negotiations between the US and Soviet Union in response to the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. A few months after that, he ordered Operation Grandslam, which finally put down the rebellious Katangese army and reintegrated the region into the Congo. Appointed Secretary General once again after a unanimous vote by the UN Security Council on December 1966. During his second term, Thant was publicly known for his criticisms of American military intervention during the Vietnam war and oversaw the induction of many new African and Asian states into the UN.
- Ambassador Spock: Star Trek character, extremely famous throughout the Sci-Fi universe. Spock was an ambassador for the Federation of United Planets and the Klingon Empire, helping to ease strained relations between the two. Later on in the series, Spock became an ambassador to the Romulan Star Empire, where he was involved in the unsuccessful attempt to save the capital planet of the empire (Romulus) from being consumed by a Supernova.
- Colin Powell: Colin Powell is a man of many jobs, all of which were in a way related to diplomacy and politics. These included the US National Security Advisor (1987-1989), Commander of US Army Forces Command (1989) and as Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs (1989-1993). He was also the 65th Secretary of State, serving the George W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2005, becoming the first American African to serve in such a position. During his time as the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Powell helped the United States lead a coalition force against Iraqi troops who’d invaded Kuwait in Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. In his term as Secretary of State, Powell unsuccessfully tried to get another coalition to combat reports of Iraqi weapons proliferation yet later revealed his sources were inaccurate and likely untrue. One of his most notable legacies was the Powell Doctrine, a concept of warfare wherein a nation utilizes overwhelming force to minimize casualties and maximize success.
- Niccolo Machiavelli | Otto von Bismarck | Henry Kissinger
- How were diplomats (and diplomacy) involved in… (examples)
- July Crisis | Cuban Missile Crisis | Fashoda Incident | Great Game
- July Crisis: Eventually the spark that would ignite the First World War. Directly after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand by members of the Serbian Black Hand terrorist group. Enraged by this action, Austria-Hungary issued an ultimatum, asking the Kingdom of Serbia to stand down after it was announced that their intention was to take control of the Northern Balkans and their significant Bosnian Serb population. Unfortunately however, the indecisiveness of the Serbian diplomats and the coercive strategy of their Austrian opponents meant that war was inevitable. So it was that on July 28th 1914, a month after the assassination, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. As more nations took up arms to join their allies, Europe would plunge itself into 4 years of death, desperation and stalemate in the Great War.
- Cuban Missile Crisis: In October of 1962, the Cold War was a few steps away from becoming an all out Nuclear War. It would be the quick and decisive actions of the diplomats on both sides that would ultimately save the world from impending doom. On October 14th 1962, a U2 spy plane photographed Soviet ballistic nuclear missiles being assembled on the small island nation of Cuba (which had just earned its independence from the US 3 years prior). The government was thrown into a state of panic, the DEFcon military alert state was thrown into DEFcon 2, the highest stage in history (essentially this meant all US troops were to be readied for imminent nuclear war, which would be signalled by DEFcon 1). On October 22nd, President John F. Kennedy announced the presence of the missiles to the public and announced his plan to put a naval blockade around Cuba until a more diplomatic solution was found. On October 24th, the fate of the civilized world hung in the balance when a Russian Convoy bound for Cuba approached the US blockade, if the ships tried to break through they would immediately be fired upon and war declared. Yet the Soviet ships held off from breaching the blockade and the 26th of October the Soviet premier, Nikita Khrushchev, proposed a solution. The Soviets would withdraw all their missiles from Cuba if the US promised to not to invade Cuba (referring to their failed 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion). In a follow-up letter, Khrushchev also proposed the US withdraw their missile arsenal from Turkey. While the Kennedy administration ignored the Turkey detail, they secretly withdrew their arsenal to avoid any incidents in the future. On October 28th, the Cuban Missile Crisis officially came to a close.
- Fashoda Incident: Slightly older than some of the other events on this list, the Fashoda incident occurred in 1898 and is similar to the Great Game below. During this time period, European powers were still trying to consolidate their grasp on the African continent, a land of untapped human labour and resources. A French expedition to Fashoda (modern day South Sudan) sought to gain control of the Upper Nile River Basin and block any British access to Sudan. In Africa, a British-Egyptian force outnumbering the French 10 to 1 was sent to meet on friendly terms. Back in Europe however, the event became a war scare. Under heavy pressure and fear of all-out war, the French eventually withdrew their expeditionary forces and left Egypt under British Control, while they were given full control over Morocco. It was a humiliating defeat for the French, whom later considered the event a symbol of British brutality and injustice. Yet in the long run it allowed the two nations to benefit, as their positive relations meant that the two were able to enter an alliance against Germany. Proving invaluable at the turn of the century and in the First World War.
- Great Game: While related in terms of diplomatic disputes and form to the Fashoda Incident above, the Great Game lasted far longer due to the great scale on which the diplomats were asked to negotiate on. For most of the nineteenth century, the Great Game was a diplomatic and political dispute between the British Empire and Russian Empire over control of Afghanistan and neighbouring Central Asian territories. It was fueled by Russian fears of British commercial and military dominance of trade routes in Central Asia and by British fears of Russian expansion into the “jewel in the crown” that was India. On January 12th 1830, the first seeds of distrust were planted when British Lord Ellenborough formed a new trade route to Uzbekistan using Turkey, Persia and Afghanistan. While the British were seeking to control a monopoly over these trade routes, Russia wished for the creation of a neutral zone in Afghanistan allowing shared use of these crucial trade routes. This kicked off a series of unsuccessful wars for the British in an attempt to control all of Afghanistan. These were the First Anglo-Afghan War of 1838, the first Anglo-Sikh war of 1843, the Second Anglo-Sikh war of 1848 and Second Anglo-Afghan War of 1878. These wars resulted in Russia taking control of several major regions in the area including the original trade route destination, Bukhara (a city in Uzbekistan). While the British had suffered a string of humiliating defeats, Afghanistan would hold as a buffer zone between Russia’s Asian empire and India. The Great Game finally ended with the Anglo-Russian Convention of 1907, which divided Persia into a Russian controlled northern zone, an independent central zone and a British controlled southern zone. The Convention also settled the burning question of Afghanistan by declaring it a British territory and that the border between Russia and Britain in Asia would stretch from the eastern point of Persia to Afghanistan. The actual term “great game” was popularized by author Rudyard Kipling in 1904, wherein he plays with the idea of a power struggle between two countries as a game of sorts.
- One China Policy | Middle East Qatari embargo | Zimmerman Telegram
- One China Policy: Ask a learned person how many countries exist in the world and their answer will differ depending on where they come from. Perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of this is whether or not they consider Taiwan its own separate country. This is where the One China Policy comes into play. The One China Policy is the idea that there is only one Chinese government, that of the People’s Republic of China. The One China Principle however, states that Mainland China and Taiwan are one single unalienable China. Under the policy, most foreign powers only keep ties with China and not with Taiwan. It is this policy that has caused many countries confusion over their Chinese relations. The Taiwanese government claims it is an independent country known as the Republic of China (confusing!). Yet in order to establish diplomatic ties with mainland China, all countries must first break off any relations with Taiwan, excluding it from the international diplomatic community. The origins of this diplomatic tightrope can be traced back to post-war Asia, where the end of the Chinese civil war in 1949 marked a defeat for the Kuomintang (Nationalists) and a victory for the Communists. While the Kuomintang retreated to Taiwan and made it their seat of government and the Communists set about consolidating their rule over the mainland, both still claimed that they represented all of China. Since then, the ruling Communist party has used coercion in an attempt to deter any formal declarations of Taiwanese independence, but eventually switched to more peaceful diplomatic negotiations. For most of the Cold War, the US and other Western powers recognized Taiwan as the true China, shying away from any Communist ties. Yet in the 1970s eventually relations began to form and the US finally accepted the People’s Republic of China as the true voice of all China.
- Middle East Qatari embargo: One of the most recent diplomatic upheavals, the Qatar Crisis began in June of 2017, when several Middle Eastern and West African countries (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain Yemen, Maldives, Egypt and Libya) cut off any ties to Qatar. For the first three countries, these were severe cutbacks. All Qatari citizens living within their borders were given 14 days to return to Qatar and banned their own citizens from travelling to or residing in Qatar. The main area of concern however is the trade and travel embargoes placed on the nation. For a nation dependent on trade by its neighbours, Qatar was in serious trouble after the ties were cut. Any ships flying the Qatar flag were prohibited from docking at many ports, any aircraft from Qatar (including the national carrier) were denied access to Saudi, Egyptian, UAE and Yemen airspace and the only land border with Saudi Arabia was closed. The main motives of this sudden diplomatic move can be traced to two key ones, the first being Qatar’s support of Islamist groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the second being the positive relations the country has with Iran, the Shia Muslim power which has long been the Sunni-ruled Saudi Arabia's rival. On the 22nd of June, Qatari diplomats were given a list of 13 points that would lift the embargoes and resume diplomatic ties, these were mostly linked to denying support of Islamist and terrorist groups, cutting ties with Iran and establishing better ties with other Arab countries. A couple were unusual, mainly the shutting down of any Qatari-funded news outlets (such as Al-Jazeera), the closure of any joint military cooperation within the country and the end of any interference with internal affairs in foreign nations. Qatar was quick to deny the points, stating that they were essentially being asked to “surrender our sovereignty” which they would never do. The crisis is currently ongoing with limited intervention from Western powers with ties to Qatar such as the US.
- Zimmerman Telegram: Perhaps one of the more admirable attempts at realpolitik democracy, the Zimmerman Telegram was a piece of secret diplomatic correspondence to Mexico from the Foreign Office of Germany that proposed a German-Mexican Alliance incase the US declared war on Germany. The Telegram promised that Mexico would retake control of Southern states such as Texas, Arizona and New Mexico and that Germany would send reinforcements and supplies if need be. The message was intercepted and decoded by British intelligence workers, who quickly handed it over to the American government. Enraged by this telegram, the US would soon take up arms and join the Triple Entente on the battlefields of Europe. It is actually surprising to note that the Mexican President Venustiano Carranza actually had his military generals assess the possibility of a war with the United States, the end conclusion being that such a war would be costly and would yield limited benefit to the country.
- South China Sea disputes | XYZ Affair | U-2 Incident | Christmas Truce
- South China Sea disputes: An ongoing dispute, the South China Sea affair concerns a 3,500,000 square kilometer plot of ocean between the Chinese mainland and Philippine islands. The dispute is over which country has the rights to control the region, which includes the Paracels and Spratly island chain. It is estimated that over 5 trillion dollars of trade passes through the area every year and that the small island chains may hold precious untapped resource reserves. China has claimed that they control the largest area of the South China Sea, with a famous nine-dash line (literally a line with nine dashes) which originated in 1947. Other countries however, are skeptical of China’s claim, as the nine-dash line includes no coordinates and it is unclear whether China owns only the land within the line or the waters as well. Vietnam is the major rival here, with documents dating from the 17th century to prove that it is the sole owner of the Spratly and Paracel islands and the waters around them. The Philippines is also involved, using its geographical proximity to the islands as a basis point for argument (it should be noted that the Philippines and China also lay claim to the Scarborough Shoal. Brunei and Malaysia also lay claim to some of the waters, saying that it falls within their economic exclusion zones (EEZs, as outlined by the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea). Within the past 40 years, a number of armed conflicts have occured due to the dispute. Chinese and Vietnamese troops clashed once in 1974 for the Paracel islands (ending with a Chinese victory) and once again in 1988 for the Spratlys (another Chinese victory). While diplomatic negotiations have only recently started, the progress made has been limited due to the large disagreement on both sides. Many countries are pressing that ASEAN become a platform for discussion between China and the other Southeast Asian nations involved. Yet China refuses to do so and ASEAN is divided on how to solve the matter. The Philippines has decided to take it to international courts, with a UNCLOS tribunal in 2016 supporting the Philippine's claim, accusing China of violating their sovereign rights. China has ignored the ruling, calling it “ill-founded” and perhaps biased.
- XYZ Affair: The oldest diplomatic scuffle on this list, the XYZ Affair occurred between 1797 and 1798 during the early years of John Adams presidency in the newly formed United States. The conflict itself actually began several years earlier, when in 1794 the US and Britain signed the Jay Treaty (resolving several long standing issues between the two countries), this infuriated France, who saw it as a violation of several earlier treaties between them and America. In retaliation, the French seized several American merchant ships in the Caribbean, under the Washington administration,Charles Cotesworth Pinckney was sent as an ambassador to France, but the French refused to accept him. When John Quincy Adams became president, he sent a three-man delegation to France in hopes of improving relations, these three men were Pinckney, John Marshall and Elbridge Gerry. Yet upon their arrival in France, the three were dissuaded by the foreign minister, Charles de Talleyrand. Talleyrand refused to see them until they had agreed to pay a large amount of money, both as a bribe and as a loan to France. While this behaviour was not uncommon in European diplomacy at the time, America’s government was infuriated by the demands of the French. This upheaval came to be known as the XYZ affair when John Adams handed over the transcripts of the three diplomats, having substituted the names of the three french agents who gave the delegation Talleyrand’s demands with the letters X, Y and Z. Congress soon authorized defensive measures, such as the creation of the Department of the Navy and the construction of US Warships. A year later in July 1798, Congress gave permission for any US ship to attack French ships, thus leading to an unofficial naval war known as the Quasi-War. It would continue until 1801, when the treaty of Mortefontaine ended hostilities.
- U-2 Incident: During the Cold War, the American government orchestrated a major reconnaissance operation that would consist of planes flying over the Soviet Union, photographing the entire area it flew over. One of the most notable aircraft used was the U2, at its time holding the record for the highest service ceiling of any aircraft (70,000ft or 21,000m). It was highly regarded as the best spy plane, as there was nothing in the Soviet arsenal that could shoot it down. That is, until the 1st of May 1960, when a U-2 was shot down over Soviet airspace using a surface-to-air missile. The pilot, a CIA operative by the name of Gary Powers, was able to eject from the plane and survived the landing. The United States was extremely embarrassed by this event, as it came just two weeks before a scheduled east-west diplomatic summit in Paris, further deteriorating relations between the Soviet Union and US. Powers was convicted of espionage and sentenced to three years in prison as well as seven years of hard labor, but was released in 1962 after the US negotiated an exchange with Soviet spy and officer Rudolf Abel. As a result however, the Four Power Paris Summit failed miserably, with both sides refusing to enter negotiations with another. Yet it is perhaps the act of diplomacy in organizing the exchange that catches historians’ fancy, so much so that an entire movie tells the story of this fateful exchange (Bridge of Spies, 2015). The exchange occurred on 10 February 1962, on the Glienicke bridge connecting East Germany and West Berlin. The story of the US lawyer who negotiated the release of Abel, James B. Donovan, is perhaps one of the most overlooked roles in early Cold War history. Despite a nation clamouring for Abel’s execution, Donovan continued with his argument that Abel might be a useful asset to them in arranging an exchange should the Soviets capture one of their own spies.
- Christmas Truce: No diplomats involved here whatsoever. The Christmas Truce of 1914 was a truly touching time when the First World War began. Many troops, sensing a quick end to the war arriving next year, were eager to celebrate a human tradition by arranging widespread yet unofficial ceasefires across the entire western front. In most areas, British and German troops were able to climb out of their trenches without fear of being gunned down or blown to bits by artillery, instead they shared packages and goodies from home (such as cigarettes, tobacco, rum, beer and chocolate). In some areas, the ceasefire would even last for the whole of Christmas day, with troops playing a friendly game of soccer in no man's land (the British winning most of them). This would be the first and only time in history that such an event would take place, no more Christmas ceasefires would occur on such a scale ever again. The most related thing to a diplomat here were the army commanders, who walked across to meet their counterparts and agree on a ceasefire to bury the dead and celebrate Christmas.
- Pig and Potato War | the Falkland Islands | Partition of India
- Pig and Potato War: The tale of the Pig and Potato war begins in 1846, when the US and British North America (modern-day Canada) signed the Oregon treaty. The treaty itself tried to settle a long standing border dispute, specifically concerning the land between the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific Coastline. The treaty ran into confusion when it came to the set of islands situated to the southwest of Vancouver. It stated that the border be placed through “the middle of the channel separating the continent from Vancouver’s islands”. The awkward positioning of the islands did not help solve the border disputes there. Of high important to both sides was the island of San Juan, valued both for its strategic position at the mouth of the channel and abundance in arable land. As such, both British and US citizens began settling there, by 1859 the British outweighed the US presence on the island. This was achieved through the arrival of the Hudson’s Bay company and a large amount of settlers. The US only had about 20 to 30 people on the island at the time. Records show that both sets of islanders actually got along pretty well, but on June 15th of 1859 that peace would be broken by a seemingly insignificant event. A pig belonging to a British Hudson Bay employee by the name of Charles Griffin wandered onto the lands of an American farmer named Lyman Cutlar. Noticing the pig eating his potatoes, Cutlar grew enraged and shot the pig, killing it. While Cutlar offered to pay a compensation fee of $10, Griffin reported him to the local British authorities. Subsequently, threats of arrest prompted the US citizens there to draft a petition requesting US military support. The following month, both the US and British sent troops as a show of force. The US sent a 66 man company while the British sent 3 warships and far more troops there. It was not until the arrival of the Commander-in-chief of the British Navy in the Pacific, Admiral Robert L. Baynes, that the situation finally passed. Ordered by the governor of British Columbia, James Douglas, to engage the US troops, Baynes refused. He famously quoted that he would not “involve two great nations in a war over a squabble about a pig”. Concerned that the situation could escalate further, British and US diplomats hastily began negotiation, concluding that both parties would maintain a presence of no more than 100 people on the island. It was not until 1872 that an international commission led by Kaiser Wilhelm I finally gave San Juan island to US Sovereignty.
- The Falkland Islands: In April of 1982, the peaceful British colony of the Falklands was invaded by Argentine troops and the remote land would become a hotspot for diplomatic and military action. For ten weeks, two sides would clash on a few small specks of rock in the South Atlantic in order to protect their sovereignty. Argentina had long claimed internationally that these islands were their territory, yet the British would not let go of one of their last remaining colonies, a relic of when the British Empire covered a large part of the Earth’s land area. It seems almost petty that British PM Margaret Thatcher and the Parliament voted to send a fleet of 127 ships along with a landing force 8,000 miles South to protect a seemingly non-valuable asset. The war ended with a British victory on June 14th, with Argentine troops surrendering at the capital of Port Stanley. Back home, the military junta of Argentina collapsed, allowing the restoration of democracy to begin. While not nearly as disputed as regions such as the South China Sea, the Falklands Islands still remains a bed for diplomatic negotiations between Britain and Argentina.
- Partition of India: When Britain decided to finally allow their “jewel in the crown” to gain independence, the Indian subcontinent was divided on how to split itself. With religion playing a key part, the final decision was to split the Bengal, Assam and Punjab provinces based on their Muslim and Hindu majorities. Yet what seemed to be an ideal partition was far more violent and grisly beneath the surface. It was Britain that initially stoked the fires of a new Muslim state separate from India, for it was they who gave legislative protection to the Muslim minority of India for the later half of their rule over the nation. The main figureheads for the partition were the leaders of both the Indian National Congress (Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru) and the All-India Muslim League (Muhammad Ali Jinnah). After the chaos and conscription of Indian troops in the Second World War, British PM Clement Attlee sent a Cabinet Mission with the intention of speeding up India’s process of gaining independence. Unfortunately, the mission was unable to find a solution as to which of the two main parties would constitute the government of India. In March of 1947, Lord Louis Mountbatten further deteriorated conditions when he announced that independence would be given in August of that year. This presented the diplomats of both sides with an ultimatum that presented no alternative but to agree to the creation of two separate states. On August 14th, Pakistan, its western and eastern regions separated by 1,700 miles of Indian land, celebrated independence. India followed suit the next day and the borderline, splitting the provinces of the Punjab and Bengal in two was approved on August 17th. That line came to be known as the Radcliffe line, for the British lawyer Cyril Radcliffe, it was he who led the Border Commission that drew up the final line. Unfortunately, the post-partition stage was a violent and costly one, it is estimated that between 200,000-2,000,000 people were killed when Pakistan and India were split, either by communal violence or disease.
- July Crisis | Cuban Missile Crisis | Fashoda Incident | Great Game
Selected Readings and Speeches (Examples)
- The Practice of Diplomacy (“The Art of Negotiation” to “Courage” p. 7-29) | Francois de Callieres
- It was in this book that the first known principles of diplomatic conduct and procedure were listed. Mainly the art of negotiation and the power a diplomat must have to defy the interests of other nations. It is still looked back on as one of the key cornerstones of diplomacy and how it should be done.
- Remarks on Russia | Samantha Power
- Samantha Power, a former US Ambassador to the UN, gave this speech in her final tenure in January of 2017. In the speech, Power denotes that Russian and US interests have been aligned for much of history, referring to the recent Syrian conflict and World Wars as evidence. However, her speech then turns to harsh criticism of how the modern-day Russia, under Vladimir Putin’s leadership, has deteriorated and drifted away from the alliances with the US the country once had. She calls Russia as a threat to the US Government and politics and urges all member nations of the UN to stand with America against the Eastern European country.
- Blood and Iron (excerpt) | Otto von Bismarck
- Delivered by the iron chancellor himself, the Blood and Iron (Blut und Eisen) speech by Otto Von Bismarck was delivered on the 30th of September 1962. It came in response to the Prussian House of Representatives (essentially the congress at the time) refused a bid for increased military spending submitted by King Wilhelm I. Bismarck appeared in front of the House’s Budget Committee and stressed the need for military readiness to solve the German Question (a debate throughout the 19th century regarding how best to unify the separate German states). It was during the end of his speech that he earned his nickname as the Iron Chancellor. Here it is: "The position of Prussia in Germany will not be determined by its liberalism but by its power [...] Prussia must concentrate its strength and hold it for the favorable moment, which has already come and gone several times. Since the treaties of Vienna, our frontiers have been ill-designed for a healthy body politic. Not through speeches and majority decisions will the great questions of the day be decided—that was the great mistake of 1848 and 1849—but by iron and blood."(During 1848 and 1849 there were multiple unsuccessful German revolutions in uniting the area).
- An Independent Diplomat | Carne Ross
- In the world of international politics, some developing and small countries have no say in votes or other matters, their say considered insignificant or their inability to produce diplomats overwhelming. This is where Carne Ross comes in, a former British Foreign Office worker, he now runs a nonprofit organization called the Independent Diplomat. The Independent Diplomat offers freelance diplomatic representation to small, developing and unrecognized nations in the confusing tangle of international negotiations.
- The Fog of Peace (excerpt) | Gabrielle Rifkind and Gianni Picco
- Ah the negotiations of peace, a problem diplomats throughout history have feared and dreaded, yet why is that so? In this book, Gianni Picco combines his experience as a UN diplomat and hostage negotiator and Gabrielle Rifkind uses her expertise as a psychotherapist to analyze a new approach to resolving conflict. This new approach stems from the problems that modern diplomacy face, namely the lack of empathy diplomats have towards the situation in reality. The main focal point of argument for this book is that diplomats need to understand their opponents as individuals and not as institutions. This means putting oneself in the shoes of the opposing diplomat and trying to grasp the pain, ambitions, resentments and trauma.
Additional Cases & Questions
- Should schools teach be required to teach courses in diplomacy and conflict resolution?
- Not necessarily, though certainly in the modern world with our I&S classes, it might be a logical step in the right direction.
- If you were a diplomat working on behalf of your school, where would you be sent and what would you be asked to do?
- If I were a diplomat representing NIST, there would be many locations to travel to and problems for me to tackle. From the service groups wanting a bigger voice on the regional scale to sport competitions demanding greater participation. I don’t think I would be asked to voice the concerns of the leadership, rather I would be representing the interests and wishes of the student body as a whole.
- In first inaugural address, American president Thomas Jefferson called for "honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none" - a doctrine that guided the foreign policy of the United States for many years. Discuss with your team: what are entangling alliances, and is it good for nations to avoid them? To what degree does the United States follow this doctrine today? How about your own country?
- Entangling alliances is simply the diplomatic action of signing treaties that create alliances between two or more nations. It certainly can be debated whether or not nations should avoid them, though in the modern world alliances certainly have their benefits to developing states. The United States has completely thrown this doctrine out of the window today, 25 years after the end of the First World War America had allied itself with over half the countries in the world. Indonesia as my country does not follow this doctrine but also doesn’t have quite as many alliances as the US.
- Want to try diplomacy firsthand? Try playing this online version of a famous diplomatic board game, one ostensibly beloved by figures such as John F. Kennedy and Henry Kissinger. What can we learn from it?
- While not able to play the game, I was able to watch a couple videos online about how it’s played. The main takeaway from the game is that diplomacy is a complex and often dark art. The art of diplomacy often requires you to betray allies and enemies alike in order to get to your own end goal.
- How do different cultural expectations affect negotiations between countries? Consider the case of Chen Guangcheng, which required some tricky diplomacy between two countries with very different approaches to directness.
- In 2012, Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng put the Obama administration’s diplomatic prowess to the test. Having escaped from house arrest to the US embassy in Beijing, Chen’s dramatic escapade came on the eve of annual negotiations between America and China about economic and strategic issues. Negotiations between diplomats of the two countries regarding his fate were kept under wraps, adhering to the Chinese societal concept of subletely. Even when Hillary Rodham Clinton appeared at the annual meeting, she did not mention Chen’s name in any negotiations. It was only when he requested to immigrate to the United States that she brought the matter up, but even then she said she would need to speak about the dissident when she appeared before the press. Within hours, Chen had been granted permission to study in New York and the annual meeting went on successfully, showing the potential of adapting the negotiation style of your counterpart.
- To thrive in today’s economy, nations must participate in regional and global trade agreements. Research some of these agreements—including those that are up for renegotiation, and those that failed. What is the difference between a bilateral and multilateral trade agreement, and why might one be more difficult to negotiate than the other?
- The main difference between bilateral and multilateral agreements is the amount of parties involved. Bilateral agreements only involve 2 nations, each with different sides. Multilateral agreements involve more than 3 parties, each with their own interests. Obviously a multilateral trade agreement is far more complex and difficult to negotiate, as more parties with more interests require more compromises and talks to resolve.
- As you explore how nations attempt to influence one another, consider the difference between "hard power" and "soft power". Under what circumstances would you recommend a nation employ one or the other, or are they always best used in tandem? Discuss with your team: do we have the equivalents of hard and soft power in our everyday interactions and entanglements?
- There should be few circumstances where a nation uses hard power (the use of aggressive and coercive methods) nowadays. Most countries should use soft power in order to get their desired aims. Using both in tandem might have been effective historically, but in a violent modern world, it is best to avoid gambling on hard power. In our everyday interactions, one example of hard and soft power is simply in trying to convince someone or ask them for a good/service. The use of manipulation and persuasion represents soft power, while aggression and violent threats constitute hard power.
- Amidst all of the bloodshed of World War I, there was one Christmas day when thousands of soldiers on either side temporarily banded together for the sake of festivity. Are there any lessons we can take from this brief moment of harmony to apply in diplomatic efforts today—and if so, are they also applicable to interpersonal situations?
- Not really, the truce was informally organized and in some sectors of the front officers refused to let their troops mingle with the enemy. One lesson we might take in interpersonal situations is how we can use informal acts of human kindness and good to instill a sense of peace and calm in both parties. This isn't exactly applicable in diplomacy today, where majority of the discussion revolves around hard facts and little room for emotion and the human spirit is allowed.
- Sometimes, the little ball moves the big ball. Explore how "ping pong" may have paved the way to improved relations (and, arguably, economic interdependence) between the United States and China. Discuss with your team: are there lessons to be learned from this case for other difficult international relationships in the world today?
- In April of 1971, the US Table Tennis team arrived in China for a ten-day visit that would reopen the doors to positive relations between the two superpowers (and would inspire Nixon’s visit to the country a year later). During the 1971 Table Tennis world championships in Japan, an American athlete by the name of Glenn Cowan hopped on the bus carrying the Chinese players. The star player of the Chinese, Zhuang Zedong, shook hands with the American and even exchanged a few gifts with him. When news reached Mao Zedong of this political opportunity, he took it gladly. The Americans were given a 10 day all-expenses paid tour of China, reopening relations between the two countries. Richard Nixon announced shortly after their return that the US would lessen trade and travel embargoes on China and would in the next year travel to the country himself for a historic visit. There are lessons from this event that can be taken to today’s strained international relationships. In one case, it was a simple photo that opened the gateway to talks and possible reunification. I refer of course, to the iconic selfie of South Korean gymnast Lee-Eun Ju and North Korean gymnast Hong Un-Jong. It was from this that the North and South suddenly began to consider the possibility of further diplomatic talks and reunification. Most notable in recent development last year, North Korea reopened their hotline to the South after it was confirmed by both governments that they would host talks in the DMZ over North Korean participation in the Winter Olympics of 2018 (which would be hosted in the city of Pyeongchang, South Korea). So the main takeaway from these cases is that often times, the bonds formed between athletes of completely different backgrounds can often be exploited as opportunities to improving relations between two nations.
- Consider this iconic image of the Yalta Conference toward the end of World War II, then (after researching the details of the conference) discuss with your team: was this one of diplomacy's finest hours?
- There was a lot of controversy surrounding the decisions made at the Yalta conference. While some were good, others were questionable in terms of their results. While the separation of postwar Germany into different Allied controlled sectors was effective at quelling any rebellious groups, it also gave birth to some of the most notorious events of the Cold War (such as the Berlin Wall, Berlin Airlift and East German Communism). It can be argued that it was diplomacy’s finest hours, or that it was a dark hour concealed in light. I can however confidently conclude that the Yalta conference was far better than its predecessor, the Treaty of Versailles. All parties were satisfied eventually and the compromises were acceptable.
- Learn about the diplomatic maneuvering behind the signing of the Iran Nuclear Deal. Is it indeed a triumph of diplomacy, and could similar arrangements be made with other nations?
- The historic nuclear deal between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the world powers is primarily a non-proliferation agreement. It began when the Obama administration and its European partners, suspicious of Iran's intentions, have framed the agreement as an arms-control mechanism aimed at keeping Tehran's nuclear programme within strictly civilian parameters. (Tehran=Capital of Iran) From the Western perspective, the nuclear deal represents the most important security agreement since the signing of the Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF) Treaty between Washington and Moscow during the twilight years of the Cold War. Meanwhile, Iran has successfully managed to legitimise its nuclear enrichment programme, protect its rights as a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and ostensibly end its pariah status in favour of greater integration and interaction with the international community. A closer look, however, reveals how two years of non-stop negotiations - anchored by patient and determined diplomatic manoeuvres of both Tehran and Washington - has triggered a seismic shift in the global geopolitical landscape. Thanks to the "extraordinary intelligence and luck" of negotiating parties, they were able "to squeeze out the last drop" of concessions from each other after missing multiple self-imposed deadlines. In terms of geopolitical dividends, Iran has expressed its willingness to cooperate with Washington on a whole range of issues of common concern, particularly in the protracted campaign against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq and Syria. To summarize the answer for the question, it is indeed a triumph of diplomacy, a great success. Although it was truly time consuming and difficult, similar methods could be used to make similar arrangements with other nations.
- Consider the practice of "panda diplomacy" by the People's Republic of China. Discuss with your team: what makes panda diplomacy so effective, and do other countries use similar tactics? Is it fair to the pandas?
- I suppose that Panda diplomacy is so effective simply because of the eagerness it shows. When a country is willing to gift an endangered species, it truly shows how much trust the country has in repairing relations with the recipient of those gifts. This was apparent when 2 Pandas, Ling-Ling and Hsing-Hsing, were gifted to the US after President Richard Nixon visited China in 1972. There they were greeted with great public appeal, with over 1.1 million people visiting the panda exhibit in Washington D.C’s National Zoo that year. Few other countries have been noted to use these tactics and not necessarily for diplomatic purposes. The Seychelles Island gifted China a pair of Aldabra Giant Tortoises in thanks for assisting the small island nation in participating in the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai. Mongolian horses have been gifted to several visiting dignitaries as a sign of good wishes for future positive relations.
Picture 1: Territories of European states prior to the Congress of Vienna in 1815
Picture 2 and 3: Territories of European states after the Congress of Vienna (the latter picture in greater detail)