Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 5th ed. Hence Catholics to the Vatican, a man rather than a woman to Muslim states, Ottoman Christians from the Sultan to Britain in the nineteenth century, an African-American to South Africa when the writing was on the wall for apartheid, and so on. One is bound to ask, therefore, whether it was really a good idea for Donald Trump, at a time of serious tensions between Japan and South Korea, to send to Seoul as US ambassador not only a Japanese-American but also one with a moustache that made him resemble a Japanese governor-general of less than fond memory anywhere on the Korean peninsula. But, then, when did the Donald ever have a good idea? A grim picture of this sort of arrangement at the Soviet mission in Rangoon in the late s is vividly described by Aleksandr Kaznacheev see Further reading below. A recent example is provided by the announcement of the recall of the Australian Ambassador from Indonesia, Paul Grigson, at the end of April he left on 3 May in protest at the execution on Anzac Day by firing squad of two Australian citizens convicted many years earlier of drug offenses but whom Canberra maintained had since been completely rehabilitated.
|Published (Last):||16 September 2016|
|PDF File Size:||12.93 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.63 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Berridge as essential reading for Robinson Crusoe, had he been a student of diplomacy. We all know that eventually Crusoe ended his assignment on the foreign island and returned to his native country where he found himself a wealthy man for whom bibliography no longer had a role to play … unlike the rest of us, who have continued to practise diplomacy and read books about it.
Ten years after, with this fifth edition, I am as pleased as I was with the third one. From practice to theory As I flew from the third to the fifth edition without a stopover at the fourth, I will not highlight specific additions to the contents. I prefer to contrive this review from the perspective that animates the explicit approach of the book: theory vs. In practice, they are not. The theorist is supposed to know more than the practitioner.
In turn, the practitioner is obviously expected to do more than the theorist. Yet, Berridge knows so much about the practice of diplomacy that the intelligent practitioner ought to learn from his book if he aims at doing better. The author gives the impression that he does not spend his time among books on shelves, but among diplomats at work.
He interprets facts so ably that he makes theory very comfortable for practitioners. Politically incorrect, for a while The reverse of the above conclusion is that the practitioner is deprived of the chance to contradict the theorist, be it cordially. It is the case with this review. In the absence of a polemic option, it is difficult to avoid monotonous eulogies. Hence, what I can do is to handpick a couple of conclusions that diplomats in office cannot formulate without running a serious risk of being admonished.
Rebranding Propaganda, pp. The next example of brilliant and audacious conclusion relates to summitry. At this juncture, one will certainly understand why, as a diplomat, I will jump directly to a citation without unnecessary comments: The case against summitry turns chiefly on certain assumptions about heads of state and government as a class.
They are held to be poor negotiators because vain, ignorant of details, pressed for time, addicted to publicity, and prone to cultural misunderstanding; also too often overtired if not actually suffering from jet-lag, insomnia, or serious ill-health; and too readily swayed by personal likes and dislikes towards fellow leaders Chapter 12, Summits, p. You, humble and obedient colleagues, if you feel like nodding when reading these lines, do it with discretion, please!
Tweet me, if you wish! A certain box in that chapter on the so-called Twitter for diplomats is particularly reassuring for people who are used to more meaningful ways of expressing ideas and feelings. Or, for that matter, for those who are unable to write but long sentences. Here is a superb statement which makes Berridge eligible for a well deserved place in the history of Twitter: In any case, in the light of the brevity imposed on [ The result is that they risk either embarrassing blunders or studied banality.
Nevertheless, diplomats who know better — and have got better things to do — are being bullied into tweeting by foreign ministries pathetically fearful of being thought out of touch. It is an open secret that some — probably most — senior diplomats in the foreign ministries and embassies of major states have someone else to write their tweets for them, which should not surprise anyone Chapter 13, Public Diplomacy, p.
Tweet those thoughts if you wish, distinguished readers! Back to work These examples are delicious to my taste, but Berridge has many other subtle ways of alerting us when the emperor has no clothes.
An assiduous reader — as all diplomats are supposed to be — will find them among the pages of a book written with an undeniable literary touch. Berridge continues to bring fresh perspectives on traditional topics related to the study of diplomatic exercise. The classification of embassies into four categories — normal, fortress, mini-, and militarized — is quite surprising at first sight, but convincing in the end.
So is the conclusion Another very interesting window is opened on an issue which is really a persistent dilemma in the diplomatic routine: which Capitals are better suited to taking the first steps in negotiations?
The author offers an example close to his own house: Britain has usually preferred to negotiate through its own embassies rather than through a foreign embassy in London. This gives it greater assurance that its messages to the foreign government are delivered quickly and securely to the right people, and are not distorted en route Chapter 2, Prenegotiations, p. While I have no intention of challenging the long-established practice of British diplomacy which cannot but be wise, inspired as it is by centuries of world-wide practice, I am not sure about the motivation behind.
From what I have noticed, one cannot generalise the righteousness either of the course taken or the reasons for it. The choice depends on many factors: the nature of the matter, the profile of the other party in negotiations, the skills of the diplomats involved.
Apart from comforting the reader with a charming narration, always pigmented with useful and colourful illustrations of various episodes of diplomatic occurrences, Berridge knows how to speak ex-cathedra and be purposefully didactic. Notes for the next edition I have reasons to expect a sixth edition of this excellent book. The dynamic of international relations and of diplomacy will produce new inputs and trigger new reflections.
We do not know where the insertion of novelty ought to come. Some of the reasons for this remark are already examined; inter alia, normal population movements and economic migration, as well as refugees. The glorious existence of the Schengen space for European citizens and its collapse against massive waves of refugees from the Middle East has put consular work into a different perspective.
For example; granting a visa is no longer what it was during the Cold War, or in the aftermath of the conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria. I will not challenge the statement, but I would extend the time until well into the twenty-first century: I can assure Professor Berridge that this particular view is still entrenched in corners of both of embassies and consulates.
From where I stand, it is not a random occurrence that there are two different treaties dealing with the two categories of holders of diplomatic passports: the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.
Despite numerous similarities in status, there are solid differences between the two functions as to the nature of the work. Diplomatic relations are more formal and they take place between diplomats for the benefit of states. Consular relations aim generally at citizen level. The parties to the interaction are different. The main work of consulates is to deal with the affairs of its citizens travelling or residing in a country. Moreover, in many countries, my own included, the ambassadors are appointed by the head of state, while consul-generals are assigned by the head of government.
Surely, I agree that this distinction does not imply differences in the capacity to perform of diplomats and consuls, as defined by the two Conventions. The beauty Berridge confirms with this new edition not only his profound and panoramic knowledge of diplomacy but also his very user-friendly style.
No matter the expectations, the end result is an enjoyable reading experience. As a diplomat I like to think that our profession is a beautiful one, and there is no doubt that this book makes it look even better. The bridge The author sits on a very solid pedestal which is not built exclusively on erudite comprehension and the processing of hundreds of volumes as testified by the lists of further readings and references.
It is obvious that Diplomacy: Theory and Practice is a living body which absorbs and grows new facts as they emerge. Berridge is such a perspicacious observer of the diplomatic landscape that he appears to be an active diplomat himself. He builds a really useful bridge: the distance between theory and practice has never been so short.
Disclaimer: Any view and opinion expressed are solely those of the author in his personal capacity and they do not engage the institution to which he belongs. Review by.
Berridge as essential reading for Robinson Crusoe, had he been a student of diplomacy. We all know that eventually Crusoe ended his assignment on the foreign island and returned to his native country where he found himself a wealthy man for whom bibliography no longer had a role to play … unlike the rest of us, who have continued to practise diplomacy and read books about it. Ten years after, with this fifth edition, I am as pleased as I was with the third one. From practice to theory As I flew from the third to the fifth edition without a stopover at the fourth, I will not highlight specific additions to the contents. I prefer to contrive this review from the perspective that animates the explicit approach of the book: theory vs. In practice, they are not.
Secret Intelligence G. Compared to this chapter, it has much greater historical depth, is more up to date, and is treble the length. It also has 17 illustrations, and I am updating it on this page. Most information of this sort obtained by stealth seems to be the result of home-based cyber attacks on foreign targets but much is still acquired with the assistance of embassies, consulates, and trade missions. Corera also provides detail on the diplomatic postings of numerous other SIS officers some of whom rose to be head of the service , all of whom can readily be tracked from his index. Two more examples came to light in January when the authorship of the sensational Trump-Russia dossier was revealed. Instead, they are persons whose positions make them valuable contacts for an exchange of views and for backchannel diplomacy should the need ever arise.