-Specially for those who wish to learn about the “Evolution of Diplomacy”.
________________________________________________
Bhim Nath Baral
Associate Professor
Department of Political Science
Prithvi Narayan Campus,
Tribhuvan University, Pokhra, Nepal
Begin text:
The government of every state involves in international politics and maintains interstate relations by making a foreign policy. Hence, one of the major instruments or techniques of executing foreign policy is diplomacy. This job is carefully carried by the personnel called diplomat. The diplomats are the state officials who practice method or technique of diplomacy in day to day international affairs and in achieving foreign policy goals (Malhotra, 2014:328). It is the diplomacy which assists the government in the execution of its foreign policy. The states in the global system, either far or near, rich or poor, big or small, are governed by certain standard of norms. Maintenance of inter-state relation is the principle job of foreign policy and diplomacy.
The foreign policy making is closely related to one important function of diplomacy that is reporting and negotiation. The feedback and reports received from ambassadors by the home government(s) as well as negotiations carried simultaneously at different world capitals and the UNO greatly influences its foreign policy decisions. In this way, diplomacy plays an important role in foreign policy decision making process.
On the other hand, in these days politicians do not only frame foreign policy but at times conduct negotiation, participate in summit and conferences and actively indulge in diplomacy of foreign visits (Malhotra, 2014:328). So, the terms ‘foreign policy’ and ‘diplomacy’ are used interchangeably and are interdependent.
In spite of interchangeable character, both terms are technically different. In the interest of maintaining some precision of language in the description of international relation ‘diplomacy’ encompasses a method or technique whereby states conduct their relationship with one another. Hence, diplomacy is not the substance of foreign policy nor does it represent the process whereby governments formulate foreign policy. It is one of the ways in which policies are being implemented day to day through the world (Ghosh, 2015:104). According to Palmer and Perkins, “the foreign policy is the substance of foreign relation whereas diplomacy proper is the process by which policy is carried out” (2015:84). Policy is made by different persons and agencies; but presumably on major matters in any state, whatever its form of government, it is made at the highest levels, through subject to many different kinds of controls. Then, it is the purpose of diplomacy to provide the machinery and the personnel by which foreign policy is executed. Hence, one is substance and the other is method. Harold Nicolson, one of the most astute student of diplomacy, is of the opinion that foreign policy is based on a general conception of national requirement. Diplomacy on the other hand, is not an end but a means; not a purpose but a method. It is the agency through which foreign policy seeks to attain its purpose by agreement rather than by war (Quoted, Palmer and Perkins, 2015:84). Nicolson further says that where diplomacy ends and foreign policy begins. Foreign policy depends upon national necessity whereas diplomacy is the means to attain the target (Quoted, Roy, 1978:9). Every state executes its foreign policy by the use of diplomacy. Foreign policy is the planned course of action followed by a government in guiding its relations with foreign countries. A country’s foreign policy is designed to protect and promote the welfare and interest of that country and of its people whereas diplomacy is the management of international relations by negotiation (Roy, 1978:10). The fundamental difference between foreign policy and diplomacy is that the former is the ends and the latter is the means. Foreign policy is the substance which is achieved by the use of diplomatic technique. So, foreign policy is what you do; and diplomacy is how you do it (Ghosh, 2015:105). Finally, foreign policy lays down basic principles on which state is to deal with other states and these principles are executed through diplomats. In other words, diplomacy is the channel through which foreign policy is executed.
Historical Evolution and Development of Diplomacy:
The study of the evolution and development of diplomacy is a subject of great interest. Its history is as old as human civilization. Diplomacy is the human behavior developed along with the existence of human society. Once the state system was introduced, the need of diplomacy was realized for the maintenance of peace and stability. So, diplomacy came into practice for the systematic management of behavior of two human groups. It can be reasonably assumed that when men had started to live in groups, some contacts, including negotiations, for the use of pasture ground, exchange of brides etc. amongst the different human groups, may be regarded as the evidence of diplomacy in the pre-historic period (Roy, 1984:38). However, the concept of modern diplomacy is the product of systematic evolution through the history which can be mentioned as follows:
# Diplomacy in Hindu mythology:
Hindu mythology is considered to be connected as the oldest culture of the world civilization. We have several evidences of the existence of diplomacy even in pre-historic period.
Earliest literature describes angels as the bearers of messages between heaven and earth. According to Nicolson, theorists of the sixteenth century contended that the first diplomatists were angels, in that they served as angeloi or messengers between heaven and earth (1969:17).
The Rigveda often portrayed Agni as the accredited messenger of Gods. He is a mediator between the Gods and men and he is requested to bring the Gods to the sacrifice (Roy, 1984:38). It was the angel who used to coordinate between earth and heaven. Even in Vedic period, we find a reference to different types of envoys like duta, prahita, palgala, suta etc. The Hindu mythology states that Narad was the real diplomat and considered as the “Wandering envoy of Lord Indra’(Roy, 1978:20). Ramayana, the holy Hindu epic, states the role of Hanuman and Angad as the envoys of Lord Ram. The role of Lord Krishna between Kaurav and Pandav and Sanjay at the palace of Kaurav in Mahabharat is equally mention worthy as diplomat. Beside this, Agni Puran, Markandaya Puran, Bhagawat Geeta, Shukraniti etc. have explained a lot regarding diplomacy and diplomat. Kautilya, the scholar of Eastern philosophy, has propounded the ‘Theory of Mandals’ in his famous book Arthasastra. He has made thorough analysis of the objectives, instruments, practices and methods of diplomacy. He has given priority to ‘Dandaniti’ (policy of punishment) with its four bases i.e. Sama, Dana, Danda and Bhed (Roy, 1978:22). He also explained Maya, Upekshya and Indrajaal. Besides these, he has dealt with six fold theory and made the diplomatic sector as the perfect area of subject. Hindu philosophy has equal contribution in establishing the rules of diplomatic intercourse including their immunities and functions (Kapoor, 1992:70). On the whole, ancient Hindu civilization and its practices became the prelude for the development of diplomacy in modern times.
# Diplomacy in Greek mythology:
The diplomatic history of Western civilization goes back to Greek civilization. It was in 2850 B.C, two city states called Lagash and Umma, signed a treaty on Satt al Hai and settled their boundary disputes (K.C., 2058:4). The root of the evolution of diplomatic intercourse is found in Greek. According to Greek mythology, the Olympian God Hermes was involved with diplomatic activities (Roy, 1984:41). As Greek civilization developed and the relation between the several city states became at once closer and more competitive, it was found that the art of entailed qualities of a higher level than those possessed by the town crier. For the purpose of addressing such complexities, the ‘Heralds’ or bearers of messages were given more responsibilities. They were also aware about the qualities of ‘Heralds’. The main qualification of an efficient herald was that he should possess a retentive memory and a very loud voice. In fact, persons like Odysseus, a man with a loud voice and great oratorical capacity, were more welcomed for diplomatic assignments (Krishnamurty, 1968:10). So, the Greek City States from the sixth century onwards adopted the practice of choosing as their ambassadors, the finest orators.
The writings of Thucydides-Greek historian, provides us with much more valuable information regarding diplomatic practice prevailing in Greece in that period. The practice of many Greek words that stood for reconciliation, arrangement, convention, ceremonial, treaty, conclusion of peace etc. proved the fact of diplomatic activities. Some qualities of such diplomat like talent, influencing, strong memory, boldness etc. were also explained. The envoys were entrusted with the task of pleading their case before the popular assemblies of foreign league or cities where they had been sent to negotiate. They were expected to put forward their proposals publicly in the magnificent speech. Thus, the negotiations were conducted orally and in full public view (Roy, 1984:42). In addition to this, the Greek had elaborated some systems of constant diplomatic relations that members of diplomatic mission were accorded certain immunities and considerations.
But the diplomatic devices practiced by the ancient Greek had some imperfections as well. The Greeks had negative attitude towards the foreigner(s). The foreigners, before entering other’s land, had to be testified by various means of purifications. The process was full of hardships like Tunamuna, Agniparikshya, and Dance etc. The republic of Venice had declared death penalty to the city dwellers, who contracted with foreigners. But after the purification, the ‘Hermes’ could enjoy certain immunities. Feeling of jealousy, lack of mutual confidence and diplomatic inefficiency ultimately led to the downfall of their civilization (Roy, 1984:44).
_________________________________________________________________________
“Hindu mythology is considered to be connected as the oldest culture of the world civilization. We have several evidences of the existence of diplomacy even in pre-historic period. Earliest literature describes angels as the bearers of messages between heaven and earth. According to Nicolson, theorists of the sixteenth century contended that the first diplomatists were angels, in that they served as angeloi or messengers between heaven and earth (1969:17). The Rigveda often portrayed Agni as the accredited messenger of Gods. He is a mediator between the Gods and men and he is requested to bring the Gods to the sacrifice (Roy, 1984:38). It was the angel who used to coordinate between earth and heaven. Even in Vedic period, we find a reference to different types of envoys like duta, prahita, palgala, suta etc. The Hindu mythology states that Narad was the real diplomat and considered as the “Wandering envoy of Lord Indra’(Roy, 1978:20).”
______________________________________________________________________________
# Evolution in ancient Rome:
The Roman civilization had been greatly influenced by Greek civilization. The tradition of diplomacy and diplomatic methods and practices were transmitted from Greek to Romans. The Romans could not be able to contribute their originality in diplomatic practices though they exhibited their excellent capacity in the field of administration and justice. They were keener in imposing their will rather than negotiating on a basis of reciprocity. According to Nicolson, the Roman were not gifted with any special aptitude for the art of negotiation and during the many centuries of their supremacy their methods were those of the legionary and the road-maker rather than those of the diplomatist (Quoted, Roy, 1978:26).
In spite of their less contribution to the growth of diplomatic device, the Romans, however, made substantial contribution in the growth and development of international law. They invented a number of phrases like Jus Civile (the law as it was applied between Roman citizen), Jus Gentium (the law as it was applied between Roman citizens and foreigners) and Jus Naturale (the law that was common to all mankind) (Kapoor, 1992:70).
The Romans entered into treaties with other states on a reciprocal basis and the original Latin coalition started as a coalition of equal partners. But it could not be continued later when Rome became more powerful. However, they laid stress on sanctity of treaties. The Romans also evolved an elaborated system governing the regulation system regarding the reception of foreign embassies. Certain privileges and immunities were granted to them. But so long as the Rome remained all powerful, it treated the other nations with barely veiled contempt. But as the power of Rome began to decline, the rulers felt it necessary to take advantages of the art of negotiation or diplomacy to preserve its supremacy (Roy, 1984:46).
# Byzantine Empire and diplomatic practice:
The Holy Roman Empire could not be consolidated forever. It started to be fragmented during fourth and fifth century. The Eastern Roman in this context is named as Byzantine. The Byzantine Emperors displayed their genuine capacity in the art of diplomacy. According to Nicolson, the Byzantine Emperors were the first to organize a department of external affairs to deal with the foreign affairs (Roy, 1984:46). They also trained the ambassadors whom they sent to foreign countries. These envoys were given guidance in the form of written instructions and were told to be courteous in their dealings with foreigners. They had become a fine art and the reception of foreign missions was attended by ceremonies of great pomp. Equal attention was given in the appointment of diplomatic personnel. They preferred the man of trained powers of observation, long experience and sound judgement (Roy, 1978:28).
The diplomatic tact and intelligence exhibited by Byzantine emperors were really mention worthy. They had to fight against many odds for survival, yet they managed to survive and even increased their power considerably through skillful diplomacy. ‘Divide and rule’ and ‘divide and survive’ were the main strategies adopted for survival by managing their rivals. The Eastern Roman Emperors also sought to purchase the goodwill and friendship of the frontier tribes by cajoling or by giving subsidies to them.
They sought to win them over to their side by converting them to Christianity. This created some sorts of cultural as well as religious identity which in that age of religious fanaticism considerably strengthened hands of the Christian rulers by Byzantine (Roy, 1984:47). All above facts tell that the Byzantine made significant contribution in the evolution of diplomacy.
# Middle age and diplomatic practice:
The demise of Roman Empire led to the rise of Christian Empire. This was the period where there was the complete control of Christianity and the society was characterized by theocratic norms. The period till renaissance and reformation was known as the Dark Age in the history of Western civilization. No significant achievement was made in the field of diplomacy during this period. However, the thirteenth and fourteenth century witnessed the development of modern diplomacy. Some scholars have divided the evolution of diplomacy in post renaissance in three broad phases- Italian, French and Modern.
# Italian diplomacy:
Italy is the pioneer country where modern diplomacy was originated. Though the history of diplomacy goes back to the ancient period, however, the systematic evolution of modern diplomacy is supposed to have begun from renaissance Italy. According to Nicolson, “it was not until the fifteenth century when the Italian states began to appoint permanent ambassadors that diplomacy as a profession can be said to have been generally recognized (Quoted, Roy, 1978:28). Italian city states have contributed in modern diplomatic practices for various reasons. The main reason was that they stood outside the main feudal system and among themselves they were bound together by many common interests. They also nourished bitter rivalries for furthering their own interests. In order to obtain supremacy, they often formed coalitions which assisted them in the acquisition of this goal (Roy, 1984:48).
The renaissance Italy was accompanied by the important beginning in the art of diplomacy. Machiavelli’s work, “The Prince”, was the most famous of many contemporary discourses on the subject. He himself was appointed for twenty four times representing his state, Florence, was famous for professional diplomat (Suda and Kumar, 1978:6). It was during this period that the establishment of permanent legations gradually came into use. The need for establishing a corps of professional diplomats was also gradually recognized. Diplomats during early period were expected to perform several duties including obtaining information, safeguarding political, military and commercial interest of their state.
_____________________________________________________________________________
“The Holy Roman Empire could not be consolidated forever. It started to be fragmented during fourth and fifth century. The Eastern Roman in this context is named as Byzantine. The Byzantine Emperors displayed their genuine capacity in the art of diplomacy. According to Nicolson, the Byzantine Emperors were the first to organize a department of external affairs to deal with the foreign affairs (Roy, 1984:46).”
______________________________________________________________________
# The French system of diplomacy:
According to Nicolson, “by the French method I mean the theory and practice of international relations originated by Richelieu, analyzed by Callieres and adopted by the European countries during the three centuries that preceded the change of 1919” (Quoted, Roy, 1984:51). But the post- renaissance period of Europe witnessed several ups and down in their diplomatic intercourse. The diplomatic Practice almost remained in chaotic conditions. Basically, the publication of Jure belli et pacis (on the Law of the War and Peace) by Hugo Grotius in 1625 brought substantial change in the evolution of orderly diplomacy. Cardinal Richelieu, a leading French statesman and a contemporary of Grotius, was of the opinion that the art of the negotiation should not be a hurried process but one of the permanent activity. He advocated for the establishment of stable relation through diplomatic dealings based on a durable footing. The narrow conception of diplomatic theory based on exclusive tribal rights gradually changed into the wider conception of inclusive common interest.
But the 16th and the 17th century diplomacy proved to be more immoral and low level of dealing. They bribed courtiers; they stimulated and financed rebellions; they encouraged opposition parties; they intervened in the most subversive ways in the internal affairs in the countries to which they were accredited; they lied, they spied, they stole (Krishnamurthy 1968:13). So, an ambassador in those days was regarded as an honorable spy. The practice of “official lie” was very common and an ambassador was considered as an honest man who is sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.
The post renaissance European diplomacy is equally blamed for its ugly form. It was basically after the publication of ‘The Prince’ in 1513 by Machiavelli. The book was the outcome of the solution of the problems faced by the then Europe and Italy in particular. Many more pragmatic suggestions were given to the prince (ruler) for the successful conduction of state by keeping view the security of the nation. It became very popular in Italy and abroad.
As an ambassador, he suggested that every ruler must know that there are two methods of fighting, the one by law, the other by force. The first method is that of human beings, the second of beasts; but as the first method is often insufficient, one must have recourse to the second (Roy, 1978:47). Machiavelli further suggested that “when the safety of one’s country is at stake, there must be no consideration of what is just or unjust, merciful or cruel, glorious or shameful; on the contrary, everything must be disregarded except, the course which will save her life and maintain her independence (Quoted, Roy, 1978:47).
However, the French method remained a model of diplomacy for a long time. The French diplomat Francois de Calleirs wrote a book called De la maniore de negocier les souverains in 1716 which focused in the practice of good diplomacy. According to him, confidence and sincerity, not deception, were the basis of good and effective diplomacy (K.C., 2058:7). The trend was also developed to appoint permanent diplomat. Venice initiated this practice.
Luis XIV also began to send the permanent diplomat. England and Germany also agreed to appoint the envoy in 1520 and later it was encouraged by the treaty of Westphalia which ended the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) and embraced the notion of sovereignty (Mingst, 2004:25). Still there were very limited number of sovereign states in Europe and the affairs of one did not frequently impinge on the interest of others. Moreover, in the succeeding centuries most of the royal houses of Europe were related to each other by marriage alliances. It was because of these personal connections that they usually followed a norm in their diplomatic relations (Roy, 1984:57).
There have been sea changes in the political scenario of Europe during eighteenth and nineteenth century. In the eighteenth century, the common interest in the maintenance of an international equilibrium led to a fundamental reorganization. The balance of power fundamentally affected the conduct of diplomacy. It demanded constant vigilance from its participants; hence, diplomatic mission became permanent instead of sporadic. This in turn, led to the consolidation of diplomatic procedures and practices which were facilitated by the common aristocratic origin of practitioners and by the common interest in the existing international order. For nearly three centuries, however, the machinery appears to have been neither adequate nor standardized. Diplomacy was still the diplomacy of the court; its object was to promote the interests of the sovereign abroad by various means, direct or devious, fair or foul; and its standards were low and ill-defined (Palmer and Perkins, 2015:92).
Diplomatic relations and its principles were also developed by various treaties, agreements and conventions. After the end of Napoleonic war, the Congress of Vienna was set up in 1815 (Frankel, 1990:136). It made systematic provision of diplomatic representatives. The protocol also explained about the immunities and privileges of diplomat along with the division of their classes. The Vienna Congress classified the diplomat into followings:
i. Ambassador; ii, Envoy extraordinary and; iii. Charģe d’ affaires.
Besides these, the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle of 1818 formalized the regulation and also made provision of ‘Minister Resident’ in between ambassador and envoy extraordinary. The Vienna Convention (1815) set the rules of diplomatic agency, diplomatic representatives, their rights, privileges and functions. These rules became the assisting facts later in Vienna Convention of 1961. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations was concluded in Vienna, Austria, from 22nd March to 14th April 1961. Altogether 18 countries participated. The convention also passed the optional protocol which was later enforced in 1964 after the ratification made by 22 countries. It is codified into different 53 articles along with a preamble. The member states are committed to incorporate the provisions of the convention by making law in their respective countries (The detailed of the convention is given in the Appendix ‘A’).
End text:
# Text courtesy: An Introduction to DIPLOMACY, By Associate Professor Bhim Nath Baral, Department of Political Science, Prithvi Narayan Campus, Tribhuvan University, Pokhra.
# Published in the larger interests of those who wish to learn about Diplomacy.
# Published with the straight permission from the distinguished author Shri Bhim Nath Baral: Ed. N. P. Upadhyaya. # The distinguished author could be reached at: baralbhimnath@gmail.com
# Shortly to begin with Level of Diplomatic Analysis: Ed. Upadhyaya. N. P.