Political diplomacy: educational manual 9786010401129

Citation preview

KAZAKH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY AT AL-FARABI

Sh.B. Khalikova

POLITICAL DIPLOMACY Educational manual

Аlmaty «Kazakh University» 2013 1

UDC 327(4/9) BBK 66.3я73 Kh 20

Recommended for publication by the Scientific Council of the Faculty of Philosophу and Political Science of al-Farabi Kazakh National University

Rreviewers: doctor of political science, professor G.O. Nassimova doctor of political science, professor S.K. Kushkumbaev doctor of philosophy science, professor R.K. Kadyrzhanov

Khalikova Sh.B. Kh 20 Political diplomacy: educational manual. – Almaty: Kazakh university, 2013. – 126 p. ISBN 978–601–04–0112–9 The manual is includes abstracts of lectures, assignments for independent work of students, preliminary questions to prepare for the exam, and recommended reading list. The educational manual is intended for students of the department of Political Science, studying the discipline «Political diplomacy» in English. Пособие включает конспекты лекций, задания для самостоятельной работы студентов, предварительные вопросы для подготовки к экзамену и список рекомендуемой литературы. Предназначено для студентов отделения политологии, изучающих дисциплину «Политическая дипломатия» на английском языке. UDC 327(4/9) BBK 66.3я73 ISBN 978–601–04–0112–9

2

© Khalikova Sh.B., 2013 © KazNU al-Farabi, 2013

INTRODUCTION The educational manual is intended for students of the department of Political Science, studying the discipline «Political diplomacy» in English language. No doubt the relevance and practical importance of manual, because currently there is a great necessity for training-methodical literature in English. The manual is includes abstracts of lectures, assignments for independent work of students, preliminary questions to prepare for the exam, and recommended reading list. An important place in the manual topics devoted to the diplomatic relations, diplomatic protocol, diplomatic documents and language, formation of diplomatic service of independent Kazakhstan, the organizational structure and functioning of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the establishment of the legal framework of foreign policy of the young state. It extensively covered the entire spectrum of modern diplomacy. The author reveals the intricacies of the art of diplomacy, the variety of techniques and methods of diplomacy, describes peculiarities of diplomacy of Kazakhstan and other countries of the world. The author shows the evolution of relations between the Republic of Kazakhstan and other countries in the field of diplomacy, security, as well as in dealing with pressing issues in international relations. The book is an attempt to provide an overview of modern diplomacy. Educational manual can be used in educational institutions, which examines foreign policy and international relations, and diplomacy.

3

1. DEFINITION OF DIPLOMACY The words ����������������������������������������������������� «���������������������������������������������������� diplomacy������������������������������������������� »������������������������������������������ and «������������������������������������ ������������������������������������� diplomatic�������������������������� »������������������������� are used in several different meanings. In fact, the words have been characterized as ����� «���� monstrously imprecise», simultaneously signifying «content, character, method, manner and art». First, «diplomacy» sometimes refers to the content of foreign affairs as a whole. Diplomacy then becomes more or less synonymous with foreign policy. Second, «diplomacy» may connote the conduct of foreign policy. The word is then used as a synonym of statecraft. Henry Kissinger’s book Diplomacy, which draws on his experiences as US Secretary of State, is a case in point. Ostensibly, the broad understanding of diplomacy in terms of foreign policy or statecraft is more common in the United States than in Europe. A third connotation of diplomacy focuses on the management of international relations by negotiation. Thus, the ����������������������� Oxford English Dictionary defines diplomacy as «the conduct of international relations by negotiation». Adam Watson offers a similar definition as «negotiations between political entities which acknowledge each other’s independence». In more elaborate terms, G.R. Berridge characterizes diplomacy as «the conduct of international relations by negotiation rather than by force, propaganda, or recourse to law, and by other peaceful means (such as gathering information or engendering goodwill) which are either directly or indirectly designed to promote negotiation». Fourth, diplomacy may be understood as the use of diplomats, organized in a diplomatic service. This usage is more time-bound, as the organization and professionalization of diplomacy is rather recent. Only in 1626 did Richelieu institute the first foreign ministry, and England established its Foreign Office as late as 1782. Not until the latter half of the nineteenth century did European governments begin to recruit diplomats on the basis of merit rather than social rank, so that by the outbreak of World War I diplomacy could be considered a fairly well established profession. Fifth, diplomacy, and especially the adjective «diplomatic», often refers to the manner in which relations are conducted. To be diplomatic means to use «intelligence and tact», to quote Ernest Satow’s classical formulation. A sixth, related conceptualization is to under4

stand diplomacy more specifically as the art or skills of professional diplomats. The craftsmanship of diplomats includes shared norms and rituals as well as a shared language, characterized by courtesy, nonredundancy and constructive ambiguity. To be sure, all these different conceptualizations can be related to conflict resolution. Diplomatic efforts to resolve international conflicts constitute integral parts of the foreign policy and statecraft of the involved states; they invariably include negotiations; they engage professional diplomats, and rely on their mores and skills. When related to conflict resolution, diplomacy is perhaps most commonly understood as diplomatic practice. As noted, negotiation is the most prominent practice associated with diplomacy, with mediation as an important subcategory. Negotiation and mediation are subjects of other chapters of this Handbook and will not be treated at length here. Suffice it to point out that the prefix «diplomatic» implies that these and other practices are carried out by diplomats, that is, official representatives of states. An alternative understanding of diplomacy, which transcends the ambiguity referred to initially, avoids duplication with other chapters and facilitates a discussion of its contributions to conflict resolution, is in terms of a transhistorical international institution. Diplomacy, like war, can be seen as a perennial institution, influencing relations between polities throughout history1. First of all the origin of the word diplomacy derives from the Greek verb ���������������������������������������������������������� «��������������������������������������������������������� diplono�������������������������������������������������� »�������������������������������������������������  meaning to fold and referred to the folding metal plates used in Roman time as formal documents (passports, passes, etc.). As for the term diplomacy, it would be very difficult and oversimplified to attempt to define diplomacy with one single definition since numerous distinguished political scientists have tried so far to give their definition of the term. The simplest definition defines diplomacy as an instrument of Foreign Policy used in order to achieve certain goals considered to be vital to a state. It is a peaceful means of achieving goals through established diplomatic routes through the use of certain accredited agents. Harold Nicolson defines diplomacy as Christer J., Karin A. Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution // Рrepared for the NISA conference on «Power, Vision and Order in World Politics», Odense, 23-25 May, 2007. – Р.56-63. 1

5

«an ordered conduct of relations between one group of human beings and another group alien to themselves�������������������������������� »������������������������������� . He also elaborates this definition by calling it «����������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������ the need to be informed of the ambitious, weaknesses and resources of those with whom one hopes to deal»2. Indeed, diplomacy is a peaceful means of implementing national strategy through win-win approaches. Since we live in an anarchic international environment, each state focuses its policy on sustaining its status quo or improving its position in a clearly hierarchical system. This system has the form of a pyramid. The closer a state is to the top, the better its chances to achieve its goals. Consequently, diplomacy is more probable to bear fruit when a country is independent, autonomous and developed. In practical terms, that means that the diplomacy practised by powerful states may be different and has diametrically different goals from that of smaller states which are less autonomous.   However, this word began to be used later, in the early XVII century. In England, for example, the first case of the use of the term «diplomacy» refers to 1645. In 1693, the famous German philosopher, mathematician and linguist G.Leibniz published a «Code of diplomatic law». There he used the word «diplomatic» (in Latin diplomaticus). Since then, it has come to mean relating to international relations. But, perhaps, the first in the importance that we attach to the word, the concept of «diplomacy» began to be used by F. Kaler, a French diplomat, ambassador of Louis XIV in several European countries, the participants of important and successful negotiations. In 1716, he published the book «Ways of negotiating with the sovereigns»3. The word «diplomat», he still did not eat, preferring to speak of «negotiators». But the word «diplomacy» we have already met, and that in the sense in which we understand it now. His book not lost its importance. It is now being studied as a compulsory subject in all western and eastern schools for diplomats. With the introduction of its diplomacy has been regarded as a science and an art, based on the theoretical approach and high moral principles. The fact is that in the Greek and the Roman period, diplomacy was a profession for which the cunning and deception are considered the norm, and in the Byzantium Nicolson H. Diplomacy. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. – Р.47. Попов В.И. Современная дипломатия: теория и практика. – М.: Международные отношения, 2010. – С.13. 2 3

6

and Middle ages, methods of lies and deception are brought to the level of art. F. Callieres was first who firmly rejected lie as a means of negotiation. «Deception – it is actually indicator of narrow mind who conduct negotiations. It’s no secret that success always practiced lie. The successful fair and based on high intelligence negotiations create tremendous advantages for diplomat in the following dialog, which he will lead»4. Among the most interesting for us its definition should be noted such as: «Diplomacy – the study of foreign relations, which is based on the study of diplomas or written acts emanating from the monarchs,» «diplomacy – the study of foreign relations and foreign affairs of the state or the art of mutually align the interests of the peoples, and in a strict sense – the science or art of negotiation «this last definition is due to the prominent Russian international lawyer Martens» diplomacy – a complex of knowledge and principles necessary for the correct management of public affairs between states. «Diplomatic Dictionary, edited by A. Gromyko, gives this definition: «Diplomacy – the principal activity of the Heads of State, Government and External Relations of the special bodies to implement the goals and objectives of foreign policy, and to protect the rights and interests of the state abroad»5. This definition generally was accepted, but with some adjustments. There is no mention that it is provide peacefully, because foreign policy can be provide by the military, aggressive methods. Often, the word «diplomacy» used the term «diplomatic practice» or «diplomatic service», referring the work of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, embassies, general consulates and consulates. J. Cambon, the prominent French diplomat, does not give a direct determination of diplomacy in his book «The Diplomat», but in the stage it tends��������������������������������������������������������� to defining diplomacy as the art of negotiation, conclusion of agreements directed to finding ways to allow the avoid extreme means – force in the relationship between the people6. E. Satow says: «Diplomacy is the application of intelligence and 4 Callieres F. On the Manner of Negotiating with Princes. – New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2000. – P.121. 5 Дипломатический словарь. – Т.1. – М., 1971. – С.479. 6 Камбон Ж. Дипломат / Под ред. А.А. Трояновского – М., 1946. – С.176.

7

tact to the conduct of official relations between the governments of independent states, and even shorter, conduct affairs among nations through peaceful means»7. Finally what is the mean of «diplomacy», diplomacy – the science of international relations and the art of negotiating the heads of state and government and special agencies of foreign relations – foreign ministries, diplomatic missions, diplomats involved in the definition foreign policy of the country and its implementation by peaceful means. To protect the interests of the state and its citizens is main goal and purpose. So diplomacy is the science and art. Some Western diplomats even believe that it is more art than science. Thus, they give priority to the personal qualities of diplomats as negotiators, stressing that they are highly skilled performers decisions, intelligent «information gatherers», through their contacts with persons who have such information. Among Western diplomats popular compare among this profession with the surgeons of high class. Every doctor knows how to do the operation, but one does it perfectly, and save seemingly hopeless patient, and the other to send the patient to the next world, which is not too hard it would be to cure. Others believe that foreign policy is similar to the notes in the music, and diplomat – is singer musical parts. One performer plays like a virtuoso and unique that you listen to, the other – even spoil the wonderful music, and you’ll go away from the middle of the concert. Diplomat – they say – is primarily Artisan, craftsman, a virtuoso, but otherwise he so mangled wood that no master could not fix it.

2. THE FUNCTIONS OF DIPLOMACY Diplomacy has existed since the beginning of the human race. The act of conducting negotiations between two persons, or two nations at a large scope is essential to the upkeep of international affairs. Among the many functions of diplomacy, some include preventing war and violence, and fortifying relations between two nations. Diplomacy is 7

Satow Ernest M. A guide to diplomatic practice. London: Longmans, 1932. – Р.98.

8

most importantly used to complete a specific agenda. Therefore without diplomacy, much of the world’s affairs would be abolished, international organizations would not exist, and above all the world would be at a constant state of war. It is for diplomacy that certain countries can exist in harmony. There has not been a documented start of diplomacy; however there have been instances ranging back to the 5th century where diplomacy arose in certain nations. Dating back to 432 B.C, the Congress of Sparta was an «illustration of diplomacy as organized by the Greek City States». Sir Harold Nicolson who was an English Diplomat born in Tehran, Persia, states that: «Diplomacy is neither the invention nor the pastime of some particular political system, but is an essential element in any reasonable relation between man and man and between nation and nation»8. For the upkeep of the International System, diplomacy is used in every corner of the world. Without it many nations would not be able to conduct successful negotiations. While many are not able to find a clear beginning or creation of diplomacy, modern diplomacy has become much more advanced and many aspects have changed over the years. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 created the first modern diplomatic congress in addition to creating a new world order in central Europe based on state sovereignty. Much of Europe began to change after the introduction of modern diplomacy. For example, «France under Cardinal Richelieu introduced the modern approach to international relations, based on the nationstate and motivated by national interest as its ultimate purpose»9. The New World Order began to bloom in all of Central and Western Europe. Great Britain argued for the «balance of power» which kept European diplomacy alive for the next 200 years. Every country in Europe contributed a little to the diplomacy the world has today. The balance of powers theory that many famous realists such as Francsesco Sforza, Machiavelli, and Guiciardini argued was and still is an essential component of modern diplomacy. Many could argue that diplomacy is a product of society and history itself. 8 9

Nicolson H. Diplomacy. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. – Р.154. Kissinger H. Diplomacy. – New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. – Р.256.

9

As countries progress different aspects are added to diplomacy. Separation of powers, national interest, and a country’s sovereignty are only a few elements that were added to modern diplomatic history. Therefore, diplomacy can be seen as an ever-changing concept, the same way International Relations between countries fluctuate. There are in fact many functions of diplomacy that make diplomacy an essential ingredient for any peaceful and efficient change. The reason to negotiate with other persons has always been the same, to have better relations. Over the course of diplomacy being in existence, the structure of diplomatic posts has changed from a loose one to an organized institution made for a specific purpose. While the structure of diplomatic posts has changed, the functions always remained the same. There are four functions of diplomacy. The first function involves “representing a state’s interests and conducting negotiations or discussions designed to identify common interests as well as areas of disagreement between the parties, for the purpose of achieving the state’s goals and avoiding conflict”. Representations of a state as well as negotiation are the most important functions of diplomacy. Negotiations between two representatives are a key component in diplomacy, because in doing so the representatives find a common interest. Finding a common interest is vital in conducting negotiations because with a common interest representatives are able to devise a solution that is in the interest of both sides. G.R. Berridge that negotiation «can produce the advantages obtainable from the cooperative pursuit of common interests; and it is only this activity that can prevent violence from being employed to settle remaining arguments over conflicting ones»10. The second function of diplomacy involves «the gathering of information and subsequent identification and evaluation of the receiving state’s foreign policy goals». Diplomatic posts are concerned with gathering information; however when the information is sent back to their native country a Foreign Ministry analyzes the data and determines what foreign policy should be enacted. Political leaders choose what path is right for their country then. The third major function of 10 Berridge, G. R. Diplomatic Theory From Machievelli to Kissinger. New York: Palgrave, 2001. – Р.145.

10

diplomacy is expansion of political, economic, and cultural ties between two countries. For example, after WWII countries such as the United States and Britain aimed their foreign policy at the extermination of communism. In present day, the United States State Department engages international audiences to speak about politics, security, and their values to help create an environment receptive to US national interests. In addition, the State Department annually sponsors more than 40,000 educational and cultural exchanges. Finally, the fourth function of diplomacy is that diplomacy is the facilitating or enforcing vehicle for the observation of international law. It is the diplomat’s job to promote the country’s national interests and keep ties with other countries open. The emphasis put on diplomacy is not just dominant in today’s world, however it was a developing concept in the Renaissance as well. Great thinkers such as Machiavelli, Guicciardini, Grotius, Richelieu, Wicquefort, Satow, Nicolson, and Kissinger had a profound impact on diplomacy. For Machiavelli diplomacy was a tool of deception to grant more power to the state. Machiavelli’s impact on leaders was a major one because he argued for leaders to be headstrong as well as reserved. Guicciardini promoted the upkeep of good relations; to be careful with whom one deals with and that reputation is key in a negotiation11. His contribution to diplomacy was that diplomatic posts are given to people who can be trusted and can promote their country’s state interests. What these great thinkers contributed to diplomacy was immense. All of them contributed a different element to the ever-growing concept of diplomacy. Since the subject of diplomacy is always growing and changing, it can be said that because of its vast effect on the world, everybody needs diplomacy to survive. It has become such a vital part of everyone’s life that is indirectly becoming a trait for survival. Throughout the course of history diplomacy has been a paramount element in the upkeep of peace and in the creation of positive change. Without diplomacy much of the world’s affairs would not exist. There are many examples of how diplomacy has affected countries, and even 11 Berridge G.R. Diplomatic Theory From Machievelli to Kissinger. – New York: Palgrave, 2001. – P. 43.

11

individual citizens. An example of how negotiation positively can affect someone is Clinton’s negotiation with Kim Jung In in North Korea. Their peaceful negotiation resulted in the release of two American citizens. An example of how power can corrupt diplomacy is Libya and Switzerland. With the introduction of power, in other words oil, countries such as Libya with the leader Ghaddafi are able to have a stronger presence in the world and say things that can normally not be said. Power corrupts, however diplomacy seeks to rid corruption and reinforce the international system as well as international law. It is for diplomacy that international organizations can exist. In a diplomatic way, an international organization is merely a many members finding a common ground on a particular subject. In the United Nations for example, all the members try to find a common interest for positive change. Although it is sometimes perceived to be slow change, the method of diplomacy causes fewer casualties than any other one. If diplomacy were not in existence, international organizations would not exist. The world would be at a constant state of war, and war would in fact never end because they normally end with diplomatic negotiations.

3. THE HISTORY OF DIPLOMACY We do not know when human societies first felt the need to communicate with each other, but it is safe to assume that they did so from the very earliest times. We know that diplomatic status existed very early and it is both evident and instructive why it should have been so. If it has been decided that it may be better to hear the message than to eat the messenger, then there have to be rules about who a legitimate messenger is, and there have to be sanctions which will ensure his inviolability. The earliest diplomats were a response to a felt need for a mechanism to convey messages between societies safely and reliably. It is instructive to note that right from the beginning, diplomacy, even in its crudest forms, evolved in response to political needs reciprocally felt. It has continued and is continuing thus until today and we shall shortly look at some outstanding and complex examples of the process in action. Once diplomacy actually existed and was conceded to be 12

irreplaceably useful, a reverse factor also became possible. The nature and functioning of the diplomatic machine at any particular historical moment could of itself shape the way in which principals – whoever they might be – conducted their exchanges. Thus it has occasionally occurred that functions which had developed within diplomacy came to create a particular international activity simply because they existed.  Origin – when it became the world diplomacy, and who was the first diplomat? Originally generation of diplomacy associated with the activities of the gods. So it was in Greece and Rome, the middle ages, in the XVI century. Believes that the first diplomats were angels – they were negotiating between heaven and earth. More seriously, it should be noted that diplomacy came with the emergence of tribal society, the emergence of the tribes, the first exchange of products, goods, the first issue of problems related areas for hunting, farming, fishing – properties and their boundaries. There were the first group of people who are having problems and the relationships between them, controversy flared even conflicts. At first, they were resolved by force, but very quickly people come to the conclusion that it is often disagreement to resolve disputes, not by force, not a fight, not a battle, but agreed. Moreover, that the settlement of disputes by the principle – who is strong is right – did not lead to the settlement, and to the bitterness and the new deeper conflicts. Disputes often arise and within the tribe, within the family, and people gradually learned to solve them, not with weapons, and to the decision of oldest, who acted as a kind of diplomat. Of course, this was only the first primitive beginnings of the future of diplomacy. Prototypes of agreements appeared during the settlement of disputes. This «diplomacy» is not based on science and the arts. It was purely diplomacy practices. It is largely dictated by the desire to avoid a forced tribal wars whose outcome – win or lose – is not always possible to predict. It was another «primitive diplomacy». Diplomacy in the sense in which we understand it now, there was only with the development of the productive forces, with the advent of social consciousness and the first legal norms. Unfortunately, we know little about the activities of diplomacy in ancient times, and these data are fragmentary. We have the mention that Egypt in the XV century BC concluded international treaties by the rules which close to the present 13

day. In particular, in the XII century BC he concluded a military alliance with the Hittites, which provides assistance to each other, including assistance in the fight against the enemy. Such article is rarely present in the contracts of modern diplomacy. This shows that the Egyptian diplomat had already reached a high level. But it seems that in Asia, particularly in India, even earlier – in the third millennium BC, that is more than 4,000 years ago – there was even more advanced diplomacy. According to the laws of Manu, there already existed the beginnings of international law and diplomacy as the art. Indian diplomacy notice to the professional qualities of a diplomat, on which depended the results of their overseas mission. Indian diplomats thought about methods of preventing war (modern preventive diplomacy). Ancient China had a high level of diplomacy, which has adopted the signing of agreements on contentious issues and agreements on non-aggression against each other. It was the first known case in the history of diplomacy, signing such a treaty. However, diplomacy in Asia and Africa had little impact on world diplomacy by isolation of the East from the West. Another thing – the diplomacy of Greece, Rome and then Byzantium. Greek diplomacy though gave a lot to follow the methodology of foreign relations, but by G.Nikolson’s statement Greeks were bad diplomats. English diplomat did not like the overly democratic, open, public nature of Greece diplomacy. He didn’t like that diplomacy was openly associated with deception. Tradition of deception and cunning in diplomacy passed from the Greeks to the Romans. Rome was, by our standards, «superpower» and its diplomacy has taken on its arms the use of force against a weaker opponent, method of stirring up strife between neighbors. The principle of «divide and rule» has its basic principle. Cheating in diplomacy has become the norm, and the benefits at all costs – the main creed. However, even positive initiatives Rome used it for personal gain. Elaboration of the basic postulates of international law, including such as «Pacta sunt servanda» («treaties must be respected») were directed at strengthening power of Rome and the weakening of its partners. Because contracts were profitable to Rome and weakened already weak partners12. 12

Nicolson H. Diplomacy. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. – Р.135.

14

The ability to practice diplomacy is one of the defining elements of a state, and diplomacy has been practiced since the formation of the first city-states. Originally diplomats were sent only for specific negotiations, and would return immediately after their mission concluded. Diplomats were usually relatives of the ruling family or of very high rank in order to give them legitimacy when they sought to negotiate with the other state. One notable exception involved the relationship between the Pope and the Byzantine Emperor. Papal agents, called apocrisiarii, were permanently resident in Constantinople. After the 8th century, however, conflicts between the Pope and the Emperor (such as the Iconoclastic controversy) led to the breaking down of these close ties. Modern diplomacy’s origins are often traced to the states of Northern Italy in the early Renaissance, with the first embassies being established in the thirteenth century. Milan played a leading role, especially under Francesco Sforza who established permanent embassies to the other cities states of Northern Italy. It was in Italy that many of the traditions of modern diplomacy began, such as the presentation of an ambassador’s credentials to the head of state. The practice spread from Italy to the other European powers. Milan was the first to send a representative to the court of France in 1455. Milan however refused to host French representatives fearing espionage and possible intervention in internal affairs. As foreign powers such as France and Spain became increasingly involved in Italian politics the need to accept emissaries was recognized. Soon all the major European powers were exchanging representatives. Spain was the first to send a permanent representative when it appointed an ambassador to the Court of England in 1487. By the late 16th century, permanent missions became the standard. Many of the conventions of modern diplomacy developed during this period. The top rank of representatives was an ambassador. An ambassador at this time was almost always a nobleman - the rank of the noble varied with the prestige of the country he was posted to. Defining standards emerged for ambassadors, requiring that they have large residences, host lavish parties, and play an important role in the court life of the host nation. In Rome, the most important post for Catholic ambassadors, the French and Spanish representatives some15

times maintained a retinue of up to a hundred people. Even in smaller posts, ambassadors could be very expensive. Smaller states would send and receive envoys who were one level below an ambassador. Ambassadors from each state were ranked by complex codes of precedence that were much disputed. States were normally ranked by the title of the sovereign; for Catholic nations the emissary from the Vatican was paramount, then those from the kingdoms, then those from duchies and principalities. Representatives from republics were considered the lowest envoys. Ambassadors at that time were nobles with little foreign or diplomatic experience and needed to be supported by a large embassy staff. These professionals were sent on longer assignments and were far more knowledgeable about the host country. Embassy staff consisted of a wide range of employees, including some dedicated to espionage. The need for skilled individuals to staff embassies was met by the graduates of universities, and this led to an increase in the study of international law, modern languages, and history at universities throughout Europe. At the same time, permanent foreign ministries were established in almost all European states to coordinate embassies and their staffs. These ministries were still far from their modern form. Many had extraneous internal responsibilities. Britain had two departments with frequently overlapping powers until 1782. These early foreign ministries were also much smaller. France, which boasted the largest foreign affairs department, had only 70 full-time employees in the 1780s. The elements of modern diplomacy slowly spread to Eastern Europe and arrived in Russia by the early eighteenth century. The entire system was greatly disrupted by the French Revolution and the subsequent years of warfare. The revolution would see commoners take over the diplomacy of the French state, and of those conquered by revolutionary armies. Ranks of precedence were abolished. Napoleon also refused to acknowledge diplomatic immunity, imprisoning several British diplomats accused of scheming against France. He had no patience for the often slow moving process of formal diplomacy. After the fall of Napoleon, the Congress of Vienna of 1815 established an international system of diplomatic rank. Disputes on precedence among nations (and the appropriate diplomatic ranks used) 16

persisted for over a century until after World War II, when the rank of ambassador became the norm.

4. DIPLOMATIC MISSION AND REPRESENTATION There are two types of diplomatic representations: embassies and missions. There is not significant differences between the embassies and missions, most states prefer to exchange diplomatic representations – embassies. Embassy headed by Extraordinary Ambassador and Plenipotentiary, mission – Extraordinary Ambassador and Plenipotentiary, or charge d’affaires. A diplomatic mission is a group of people from one state or an international inter-governmental organization (such as the United Nations) present in another state to represent the sending state/ organization in the receiving state. In practice, a diplomatic mission usually denotes the resident mission, namely the office of a country’s diplomatic representatives in the capital city of another country. As well as being a diplomatic mission to the country in which it is situated, it may also be a non-resident permanent mission to one or more other countries. There are thus resident and non-resident embassies. Basic functions of a diplomatic mission include: Represent the home country in the host country; Protect the interests of the home country and its citizens in the host country; Negotiate with the government of the host country; Monitor and report on conditions and developments in the commercial, economic, cultural, and scientific life of the host country; Promote friendly relations between the host country and the home country; Develop commercial, economic, cultural, and scientific relations between the host country and the home country; Issue passports, travel documents, and visas. Types of diplomatic missions A country may have several different types of diplomatic missions in another country. 17

Embassy A diplomatic mission located in the capital city of another country which generally offer a full range of services, including consular services. High Commission An embassy of a Commonwealth country located in another Commonwealth country. Permanent Mission A diplomatic mission to a major international organization. Consulate General A diplomatic mission located in a major city, other than the capital city, which provides a full range of services, including consular services. Consulate A diplomatic mission that is similar to a consulate general, but which does not provide a full range of services. Consulate Headed by Honorary Consul  A diplomatic mission headed by an Honorary Consul which provides only a limited range of services. Diplomatic relations were established on the basis of an agreement between the States concerned. Heads of diplomatic missions are divided into three classes: the ambassadors accredited by Heads of State, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary accredited by Heads of State, Chargé d’affaires accredited by Ministers for Foreign Affairs. Of the charge d’affaires to be distinguished temporary charge d’affaires – the person, the interim head of the function of any class in his absence (vacation, reviews, etc.). Appointment of the Head of Representation Before the appointment of the head of Representation by the sending State requests the competent authorities of the host country agremane (consent) to the appointment of the head of the particular person in the State. Refusal to agremane or no response to a request prevent the head of the designated person. State is not required to motivate their refusal to agremane. Upon receipt of agremane head of the mission is appointed. Chapter Representative issued credentials – a document addressed to the authorities of the host country, which asked to believe that 18

the person will express, on behalf of the State. Upon arrival in the destination country the head present his credentials to the head of state or foreign minister (if the head of the – charge d’affaires). A permanent diplomatic mission is typically known as an embassy, and the person in charge of the mission is known as an ambassador. The term «embassy» is often used to refer to the building or compound housing an ambassador’s offices and staff. Technically, however, «embassy» refers to the diplomatic delegation itself, while the office building in which they work is known as a chancery. Ambassadors can reside within or outside of the chancery; for example, American diplomatic missions maintain separate housing for their ambassadors apart from their embassies. Ambassadors residing outside of the chancery retain special protection from the host country’s security forces and the ambassadorial residences enjoy the same rights as missions. Like embassies, such residences are considered inviolable and, in most cases, extraterritorial. The residences of high commissioner, who are similar to ambassadors, have the same rights. All missions to the United Nations are known simply as permanent missions, while EU Member States’ missions to the European Union are known as permanent representations and the head of such a mission is typically both a permanent representative and an ambassador. European Union missions abroad are known as EU delegations. Some countries have more particular naming for their missions and staff: a Vatican mission is headed by a nuncio (Latin «envoy») and consequently known as an apostolic nunciature. Under the rule of Muammar Gaddafi, Libya’s missions used the name people’s bureau and the head of the mission was a secretary. Missions between Commonwealth countries are known as high commissions and their heads are high commissioners. This is because ambassadors are exchanged between foreign countries, but since the beginning of the Commonwealth, member countries have nominally maintained that they are not foreign to one another (the same reason as the naming of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office). In the past a diplomatic mission headed by a lower-ranking official (an envoy or minister resident) was known as a legation. Since the ranks of envoy and minister resident are effectively obsolete, the designation of legation is no longer used today. 19

A consulate is similar to (but not the same as) a diplomatic office, but with focus on dealing with individual persons and businesses, as defined by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. A consulate or consulate general is generally a representative of the embassy in locales outside of the capital city. For instance, the United Kingdom has its Embassy of the United Kingdom in Washington, D.C., but also maintains seven consulates-general and four consulates elsewhere in the US. The person in charge of a consulate or consulate-general is known as a consul or consul-general, respectively. Similar services may also be provided at the embassy (to serve the region of the capital) in what is sometimes called a consular section. In cases of dispute, it is common for a country to recall its head of mission as a sign of its displeasure. This is less drastic than cutting diplomatic relations completely, and the mission will still continue operating more or less normally, but it will now be headed by a chargé d’affaires (usually the deputy chief of mission) who may have limited powers. (A chargé d’affaires ad interim also heads the mission during the interim between the end of one chief of mission’s term and the beginning of another). Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state. Rather, the premises of diplomatic missions remain under the jurisdiction of the host state while being afforded special privileges (such as immunity from most local laws) by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Diplomats themselves still retain full diplomatic immunity, and (as an adherent to the Vienna Convention) the host country may not enter the premises of the mission without permission of the represented country. The term «extraterritoriality» is often applied to diplomatic missions, but only in this broader sense. As the host country may not enter the representing country’s embassy without permission, embassies are sometimes used by refugees escaping from either the host country or a third country. For example, North Korean nationals, who would be arrested and deported from China upon discovery, have sought sanctuary at various thirdcountry embassies in China. Once inside the embassy, diplomatic channels can be used to solve the issue and send the refugees to another country. 20

Notable violations of embassy extraterritoriality include repeated invasions of the British Embassy, Beijing (1967), the Iran hostage crisis (1979–1981), the Japanese embassy hostage crisis at the ambassador’s residence in Lima, Peru (1996), the overrunning of the Israeli Embassy in Cairo, Egypt (2011). The functions of a diplomatic mission consist, inter alia, in representing the sending State in the receiving State; protecting in the receiving State the interests of the sending State and of its nationals, within the limits permitted by international law; negotiating with the Government of the receiving State; ascertaining by all lawful means conditions and developments in the receiving State, and reporting thereon to the Government of the sending State; promoting friendly relations between the sending State and the receiving State, and developing their economic, cultural and scientific relations13. Between members of the Commonwealth of Nations their diplomatic missions are not called embassies, but High Commissions, as Commonwealth nations share a special diplomatic relationship. It is generally expected that an embassy of a Commonwealth country in a non-Commonwealth country will do its best to provide diplomatic services to citizens from other Commonwealth countries if the citizen’s country does not have an embassy in that country. Canadian and Australian nationals enjoy even greater cooperation between their respective consular services, as outlined in Canada-Australia Consular Services Sharing Agreement. The same kind of procedure is also followed multilaterally by the member states of the European Union (EU). European citizens in need of consular help in a country without diplomatic or consular representation of their own country may turn to any consular or diplomatic mission of another EU member state. The staff of the diplomatic representation The staff of the diplomatic mission is divided into three groups: the diplomatic staff, administrative and technical staff and maintenance staff. Diplomatic staff – persons having diplomatic rank (special titles). By diplomatic personnel are: ambassadors and envoys, advisers, sales representatives, special officer (military, naval, air force), the first, second, third secretaries, attachés. 13

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961.

21

Members of the diplomatic staff, as a rule, are citizens of the countries they represent, the members of the administrative and technical staff may be nationals of the host country. Diplomatic staff include:  ambassadors;  messengers;  advisers;  sales representatives and their deputies;  special officer (military, air force, etc.) and their deputies;  first, second, third secretaries;  attache. For administrative and technical staff are:  the head of the chancellor;  accountants;  translators;  clerks, etc. Service personnel are:  drivers;  couriers;  Switzerland;  elevator operator;  wipers  other persons who are directly involved in the maintenance of diplomatic representation14.

5. DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITY Diplomatic immunity is a form of legal immunity and a policy held between governments that ensures that diplomats are given safe passage and are considered not susceptible to lawsuit or prosecution under the host country’s laws, although they can still be expelled. It was agreed as international law in the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961), though the concept and custom have a much longer history. Many principles of diplomatic immunity are now considered 14

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961.

22

to be customary law. Diplomatic immunity as an institution developed to allow for the maintenance of government relations, including during periods of difficulties and even armed conflict. When receiving diplomats – who formally represent the sovereign – the receiving head of state grants certain privileges and immunities to ensure they may effectively carry out their duties, on the understanding that these are provided on a reciprocal basis. Originally, these privileges and immunities were granted on a bilateral, ad hoc basis, which led to misunderstandings and conflict, pressure on weaker states, and an inability for other states to judge which party was at fault. Various international agreements known as the Vienna Conventions codified the rules and agreements, providing standards and privileges to all states. It is possible for the official’s home country to waive immunity; this tends to happen only when the individual has committed a serious crime, unconnected with their diplomatic role (as opposed to, say, allegations of spying), or has witnessed such a crime. However, many countries refuse to waive immunity as a matter of course; individuals have no authority to waive their own immunity (except perhaps in cases of defection). Alternatively, the home country may prosecute the individual. If immunity is waived by a government so that a diplomat (or their family members) can be prosecuted, it must be because there is a case to answer and it is in the public interest to prosecute them. The concept of diplomatic immunity can be found in ancient Indian epics like Ramayana (between 500 and 301 BC) and Mahabharata (around 4th century BC) where messengers and diplomats were given immunity from capital punishment. Pope Gelasius I was the first pope recorded as enjoying diplomatic immunity, as it is noted in his letter Duo sunt to emperor Anastasius. As diplomats by definition enter the country under safe-conduct, violating them is normally viewed as a great breach of honour, although there have been a number of cases where diplomats have been killed. Genghis Khan and the Mongols were well known for strongly insisting on the rights of diplomats, and they would often take terrifying vengeance against any state that violated these rights. The Mongols would often raze entire cities to the ground in retaliation for the execution of their ambassadors, and invaded and 23

destroyed the Khwarezmid Empire after their ambassadors had been mistreated. The British Parliament first guaranteed diplomatic immunity to foreign ambassadors in 1709, after Count Andrey Matveyev, a Russian resident in London, had been subjected to verbal and physical abuse by British bailiffs. Modern diplomatic immunity evolved parallel to the development of modern diplomacy. In the 19th century, the Congress of Vienna reasserted the rights of diplomats; and they have been largely respected since then, as the European model has spread throughout the world. Currently, diplomatic relations, including diplomatic immunity, are governed internationally by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which has been ratified by almost every country in the world. The United States has had a tendency to be generous when granting diplomatic immunity to visiting diplomats, because a large number of U.S. diplomats work in host countries less protective of individual rights. If the United States were to punish a visiting diplomat without sufficient grounds, U.S. representatives in other countries could receive harsher treatment. Some countries have made reservations to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, but they are minor. Most important are the reservation by most Arab nations concerning the immunity of diplomatic bags and non-recognition of Israel. A number of countries limit the diplomatic immunity of persons who are citizens of the receiving country. As nations keep faith to their treaties with differing zeal, other rules may also apply, though in most cases this summary is a reasonably accurate approximation. The Convention does not cover the personnel of international organizations, whose privileges are decided upon on a case-by-case basis, usually in the treaties founding such organizations. The United Nations system (including its agencies, which comprise the most recognizable international bodies such as the World Bank and many others) has a relatively standardized form of limited immunities for staff traveling on U.N. laissez-passer; diplomatic immunity is often granted to the highest-ranking officials of these agencies. In reality, most diplomats are representatives of nations with 24

a tradition of professional civil service, and are expected to obey regulations governing their behaviour and they suffer strict internal consequences (disciplinary action) if they flout local laws. In many nations a professional diplomat’s career may be compromised if they (or even members of their family) disobey the local authorities or cause serious embarrassment, and such cases are, at any rate, a violation of the spirit of the Vienna Conventions. A particular problem is the difficulty in enforcing ordinary traffic regulations such as prohibitions on double parking. For example, the Autobahn 555 in Cologne, Germany was nicknamed the «Diplomatenrennbahn» (Diplomatic Raceway), back when Bonn was the capital of West Germany, because of the numerous diplomats that used to speed through the highway under diplomatic immunity. Certain cities, e.g., The Hague, have taken to impounding such cars rather than fining their owners. Diplomats cannot demand the release of impounded cars based on their status. This also includes parking violations. In New York City, the home of the United Nations Headquarters (and hence thousands of diplomats), the city regularly protests to the Department of State about non-payment of parking tickets because of diplomatic status. Diplomatic missions have their own regulations but many require their staff to pay any fines due for parking violations. A 2006 study by two economists found that there was a significant correlation between home-country corruption (as measured by Transparency International) and unpaid parking fines; nonetheless, approximately 30 countries (or 20%) had fewer than one unpaid fine per diplomat over a five-year period, and 20 had none at all. Six countries had in excess of 100 violations per diplomat: Kuwait, Egypt, Chad, Sudan, Bulgaria and Mozambique. In cities that impose a congestion charge, the decision of some diplomatic missions not to furnish payment has proved controversial. In London, embassies have amassed approximately £58 million in unpaid charges as of 2012, with the American embassy comprising approximately £6 million and the Russian, German and Japanese missions each have around £2 million of outstanding fines. Diplomatic immunity from local employment and labor law when employing staff from the host country has precipitated abuse. The 25

local staff are employed where local knowledge is needed (such as an administrative assistant, press/PR officer), or as menial staff like a cleaner, maid or mechanic. When the employer is a diplomat, the employees are in a legal limbo where the laws of neither the host country nor the diplomat’s country are enforceable, so that an abusive diplomat employer can act with virtual impunity. Diplomats have ignored local laws concerning minimum wages, maximum working hours, vacation and holidays. Historically, the problem of large debts run up by diplomats has also caused many problems. Some financial institutions do not extend credit to diplomats because they have no legal means of ensuring the money is repaid. Local citizens and businesses are often at a disadvantage when filing civil claims against a diplomat, especially in cases of unpaid rent, alimony, and child support. The bulk of diplomatic debt lies in the rental of office space and living quarters. Individual debts can range from a few thousand dollars to $1 million in back rent. A group of diplomats and the office space in which they work are referred to as a diplomatic mission. Creditors cannot sue missions individually to collect money they owe. Landlords and creditors have found that the only thing they can do is contact a city agency to see if they can try to get some money back. Diplomats are not necessarily exempt from paying governmentimposed fees when there are «charges levied for specific services rendered.» In certain cases, such as central London’s congestion charge, the nature of the fee may lead to disputes; but there is an obligation for the receiving State not to «discriminate as between states»; in other words, any such fees should be payable by all accredited diplomats equally. This may allow the diplomatic corps to negotiate as a group with the authorities of the receiving country. In August 2009, it was reported that the Government of the UK believed the United States owed £3,500,000 in unpaid congestion charge fees. It was also reported in 2006 that at least one embassy has agreed to pay the disputed charges15. Diplomats are exempt from import duty and tariffs for items for 15 ACLU: Abused Domestic Workers of Diplomats Seek Justice From International Commission. Commondreams.org. Retrieved 2011-12-19. – Р.78.

26

their personal use. In some countries, this has led to charges that diplomatic agents are profiting personally from resale of «tax free» goods. The receiving state may choose to impose restrictions on what may reasonably constitute personal use (for example, only a certain quantity of cigarettes per day). When enacted, such restrictions are generally quite generous so as to avoid tit-for-tat responses.

6. DIPLOMATIC PROTOCOL In international politics, protocol is the etiquette of diplomacy and affairs of state. It may also refer to an international agreement that supplements or amends a treaty. A protocol is a rule which guides how an activity should be performed, especially in the field of diplomacy. In diplomatic services and governmental fields of endeavor protocols are often unwritten guidelines. Protocols specify the proper and generally-accepted behavior in matters of state and diplomacy, such as showing appropriate respect to a head of state, ranking diplomats in chronological order of their accreditation at court, and so on. One definition is: Protocol is commonly described as a set of international courtesy rules. These well-established and time-honored rules have made it easier for nations and people to live and work together. Part of protocol has always been the acknowledgment of the hierarchical standing of all present. Protocol rules are based on the principles of civility. – Dr. P.M. Forni on behalf of the International Association of Protocol Consultants and Officers. There are two meanings of the word protocol. In the legal sense, it is defined as an international agreement that supplements or amends a treaty. In the diplomatic sense, the term refers to the set of rules, procedures, conventions and ceremonies that relate to relations between states. In general, protocol represents the recognized and generally accepted system of international courtesy. The term protocol is derived from the Greek word protokollan (first glue). This comes from the act of gluing a sheet of paper to the front of a document to preserve it when it was sealed, which imparted additional authenticity to it. In the beginning, the term protocol related 27

to the various forms of interaction observed in official correspondence between states, which were often elaborate in nature. In course of time, however, it has come to cover a much wider range of international relations. In the Middle Ages, the term «protocol» mean the rules of registration of documents and archives. Later, the word «protocol» was used in the sense of diplomacy and foreign service. Its content was expanding too: in addition to the rules of registration of diplomatic documents to diplomatic protocol were treated questions of etiquette and ceremony. And now, the diplomatic protocol of the year to year is changed through the political reasons of science, technology and factors of international life. History of diplomatic protocol Rules of diplomatic protocol are the result of centuries of relations between states. The human experience accumulated and selected from the infinite repetition of behavior the rules, conventions and traditions that are consistent with the maintenance of communication. In the historical development the protocol has undergone profound changes, but always the issue of high politics and prestige of supreme power was behind the conventions of the ceremonial. Diplomatic protocol for its intended purpose is an international category. His basic rules must be followed for all states. However, diplomatic protocol of each country has its own particulars. States make the amendments, changes and additions based on the socioeconomic system, ideology, national characteristics and historical traditions. Currently required strict adherence to the rules of diplomatic protocol, when there is recognition of new states, the establishment of diplomatic relations, when the heads of diplomatic missions appointed by, presents his credentials, made diplomatic visits, conduct interviews, negotiations, sign contracts and agreements, etc. But recently the trends accepted observed in international practice protocol: protocol standards make easier and more comfortable. Rules of international comity are not binding. But, as evidenced by the practice of international protocol, state and diplomats try to follow them. Indeed, in the course of international relations there are representatives of the various sovereign states, they could have 28

different (and sometimes conflicting, irreconcilable) ideological, religious beliefs, political attitudes, moral principles, etc. Protocol rules make their contacts was possible, and communication is enjoyable. Protocol rules now seem old-fashioned. But do not follow them just as stupid as not to remove his hat when entering a church or shoes when entering a mosque. As a result, a lot of effort, a reasonable compromise in 1961, the state managed to work out the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. All the nations of the world, including those that abstain from formally joining the Convention, compliance fixed in its rules and protocol services include these standards in their practical work. In some states, the Vienna Convention has been incorporated into national legislation, and has been regarded by them as a national law. Others have chosen to make their own laws in addition to the obligations arising from the provisions of the Vienna Convention. Diplomatic protocol includes etiquette and ceremonial. Etiquette is the set of rules, the behavior of diplomats and other officials in the various diplomatic activities (talks, visits and receptions). Includes rules and customs associated with the culture of behavior, culture, way of life, communication, etc. Ceremony is the established order of the gala official act (the meeting of Heads of State, and so on). Diplomatic receptions play an important role in the Foreign Service. Receptions are held in connection with important events and through their daily activities, such as the central bodies of foreign relations, and diplomatic missions. In diplomatic protocol techniques are divided into day and evening, receptions with seating arrangements and without seating at the table, with their wives and without them. Today, the most widely used the following methods: breakfast, lunch, dinner, lunch buffet (buffet), and techniques such as banquet and cocktail. The diplomatic protocol performs numerous functions in all countries. The structure of these services may various. Every foreign ministry maintains a protocol department. The Chief of Protocol is an officer responsible for advising government authorities on matters of national and international diplomatic protocol. The Chief arranges itineraries for foreign dignitaries visiting 29

state and accompanies the president on all official international travel. Additionally, the Office of the Chief of Protocol is responsible for accrediting foreign diplomats and publishing the list of foreign consular offices in the country, organizing ceremonies for treaty signings, conducting ambassadorial swearing-in and State Arrival Ceremonies, and maintaining an official guest house for state visitors. Protocol goes as far back as there have been contacts between states, with evidence of diplomatic protocol being found in reliefs at Persopolis. The twentieth century has witnessed a growing informality in the practice of diplomacy in the existing Westphalian system based on the sovereign equality of states, that states must see that they are being treated equally. Historically, personal meetings between rulers of states were infrequent before the nineteenth century. Developments in technology and transport have made meetings easier and safer to arrange meetings, and there has been a vertical rise in summitry since 1960. One important turning point came at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, convened to settle the events of the First World War. France insisted that the peace conference be held at Paris, supposedly as a tribute to France’s role in the conflict. By custom, the head of the host state chairs the conference, and therefore has a greater degree of control over the agenda. Both Britain and the United States were unhappy with this arrangement, and advocated neutral Geneva. Indeed, one reason why Switzerland was originally such a favorite venue for meetings is not only its oft cited neutrality but the advantages of it unique head of state, the Federal Council in corpore, which meant Switzerland was unlikely to interfere in this way. French plans almost came unstuck, however, when the American president, Woodrow Wilson, announced his intention of attending in person. He hoped to play the leading role in the negotiations and therefore wanted to chair the conference. As the only head of state present (the others being heads of government) he would have precedence. The French were flabbergasted, as no American president had previously travelled abroad, much less personally participated in a conference. French complaints were so great that Wilson agreed not to press his claims for precedence, a solution which confirmed the drift to greater informality at these gatherings. This was an important breakthrough, establishing a precedent that, 30

for working purposes, there would be no difference between heads of state and heads of government. The practice has now become general, for example with ASEAN agreeing that at its meetings no difference will be applied between heads of state and heads of government, confirming this break with traditional formality. During the Second World War, Stalin, in his three summit meetings with his fellow allied leaders refused to travel to any destination which would force him to leave territory he controlled. There was no willingness to rotate the venue among the allies. The postwar era, however, has seen the principle of rotation become the norm. The EU rotates the now semi-annual EU Council summits. While the first EC/EU summits were held in the capital cities, it has become more common to hold the sessions in provincial settings, allowing for a more informal atmosphere. An increasingly favoured way of meeting, again the by-product of modern travel, is the «unarranged» holiday drop-in. Tony Blair, at the beginning of his 1997 summer holiday in France did admit that he knew Premier Lionel Jospin «lives nearby. We will see one another», which almost had the feel that he expected to bump into him in the local place. In fact, Jospin dashed from a papal visit to Paris, hundreds of miles away, to «drop-in on» Blair. The aim was to have as informal an atmosphere as possible. As it was a «drop-in» visit Jospin could justify not meeting the British prime minister along with President Chirac, which would be the normal practice in a period of cohabitation in French political life. Another indicator of the move away from status based protocol is the increasing use of other formulas. At the 1818 Congress of Aix-laChapelle it was agreed that states would sign treaties in alphabetical order. Many International Organizations now use this principle for seating representatives, rather than working out precedence as one still does with ambassadors accredited to states. One recent phenomenon is the increasing importance of handshakes as part of diplomatic practice. The proffered hand is now taken as an signal of good faith and willingness to cooperate, the refusal to do so is seen as the opposite, and ignoring a proffered hand a significant diplomatic insult and a clear signal of disapproval. British Prime Minister Tony Blair in meeting Sinn Fein leader 31

Gerry Adams temporized, shaking hands with him, but out of public sight. There is, of course, the issue of paranoia amongst leaders. Nicolae Ceacescu feared assassination from poison made to be absorbed through the palm and so kept his hand to himself. President de Gaulle was a master at ignoring proffered hands. The diplomatic insult has existed since the origins of diplomacy. The diplomatic insult can be a carefully crafted instrument of statecraft used as a way of communicating extreme displeasure when all other efforts at communication have failed. Forms of address for foreign government officials and people holding professional, ecclesiastical, or traditional titles vary among countries. The correct local usage can be verified at post. Everyone in the diplomatic and consular community understands the need to make friends quickly. Therefore, it is perfectly acceptable to invite new acquaintances, as well as individuals one wishes to meet, even before receiving an invitation from them. A common way to extend an invitation to a formal event and/or official function is through official stationary cards followed by a telephone call. Increasingly, however, the invitation is extended over the phone, and a card is sent as a reminder. If using place cards, follow the rules of precedence to determine who will be placed in the seat of honor (for a man, the seat to the right of the hostess and for a woman, the seat to the right of the host). If there is no prepared seating plan, ranking guests should be invited to sit at the host’s table. Unless there is a receiving line, the host(ess) and his/her spouse should stand near the entrance to greet guests as they arrive and also to say good-bye as they leave. Dressing Through tradition and usage, diplomats have come to wear certain kinds of clothes for certain occasions. Sometimes, wearing the country’s ethnic or national dress in lieu of traditional dress is appropriate. In various parts of the world, a specific nomenclature for dress has arisen. Contrary to the common meaning within US culture, in the diplomatic community, «informal dress» equates to business dress. In some parts of the world, other terms for informal dress for men include «lounge suit», «national dress», «tenue de ville», «planters», «shirt and tie», «island casual», and «bush shirt». «Planters» refers to 32

a long sleeved white shirt with a tie and dark trousers. «Bush shirt» is a long or short sleeved shirt with a finished bottom edge worn outside rather than tucked into the slacks, or a long or short sleeved embroidered man’s shirt. «Island casual» means a Hawaiian shirt and casual (usually khaki) slacks. Similarly, various terms apply to formal dress for men. «Tuxedo» and «smoking jacket» mean black tie, whereas a «Red Sea Rig» or «Gulf Rig» means a tuxedo minus the jacket. «Dinner jacket» may refer to either a dark-colored or white jacket. If you are unsure of the terminology used, it is always appropriate to clarify before the event. For many posts, the overwhelming choice for day-to-day business is a suit and tie for men and a business suit or conservative dress for women. Formal «Black Tie» or «White Tie» Formal wear may be worn at evening performances of the opera, the theater, balls and for the most formal of dinners and evening affairs. White tie requires the additional formality of a cutaway («tails») and white tie for men and a floor-length ball gown for women. Cultural differences abound in issuing and responding to invitations. In most cases, the invitation will come addressed to all the family members invited. However, in some places, one invitation addressed to the family is meant to include everyone in the house. Responding is very important and should be done, generally by phone, within two days of receiving the invitation. Be sure to observe the request on the invitation. «Regrets only» means to call only if you will not attend, and «RSVP» means to respond whether you will or will not attend. Even something as simple as bringing a gift to the host can be tricky. Many rituals and customs often surround the meaning of gifts. The type, color and number of flowers you bring, for example, may have a hidden meaning. A guest may be expected to bring a small gift, or it may be better to bring nothing at all. Rituals often surround thanking someone. Without exception, thank your host before you leave. Tradition determines how you should thank the host the day after the event16. 16

Diplomatic Protocol // www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/protocol/protocol-en.asp.

33

Today in the world there were two such systems: Decentralized or distributed. Under this system the protocol division present in different state institutions at different levels of government and public administration. This is the most commonly used system (U.S., UK, Germany, and Japan). Centralized system, according to which in the country the main coordinating body, which carries out the unified state policy in the protocol providing international contact officials at various levels. Examples of this system can serve as a protocol services in France and Italy. But this division is rather arbitrary. Often in the some country we can see elements of both of these systems.

7. THE DIPLOMAT’S ROLE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Diplomats do a very important job for their countries. Almost every country in existence has diplomats who are sent out to various countries for the purposes of negotiating and mediating relations between the two governments. The main meeting place for diplomats is at the United Nations building in New York City, but they occur in embassies all over the world, and between most nations. It is good for people to understand foreign policy, because very often it can play an important role in the news. A diplomat lives in the country that he is trying to communicate with. They are placed in strategic locations that are close to many local government buildings, allowing all diplomats to quickly establish contact and begin their jobs of speaking with the foreign rulers. They are also granted something called diplomatic immunity to protect them while in a foreign country, and to allow them to do their job well. Usually a diplomat’s main goal is to simply maintain good relations with the country in question. By speaking with the leaders and establishing a friendly relationship, a diplomat not only establishes himself as a trustworthy person, but also builds trust in his own country. This could even be for the ultimate goal of establishing a 34

treaty or becoming allies. Usually much of the communication will cover issues such as foreign aid, and what exactly watch country expects of the other. If done correctly, diplomacy is a great way for countries to get every single issue out on the table and establish a great relationship. Unfortunately few career Diplomats are selected go overseas. Political appointments have seldom proved successful due to lack of expertise. In most countries a non career diplomat is given basic training on the etiquette of diplomacy and international relations. One should take a class on foreign policy. Some people find this boring, but if one is interested in how countries interact with each other it will surely find the classes on foreign policy to be intriguing. With the proper education, one could probably become a diplomat  and get involved with one of the most important aspects of the government. Diplomats maintain good relations with host country while advancing their home country’s foreign policy. Diplomats represent their home country and maintain good relations with the host country, or the country in which they work, which is normally located in the host country’s capital. “Diplomat” is the general term used to describe everyone in the foreign service from the ambassador to his entourage of assistants. To protect them while they are in a foreign country, they are granted diplomatic immunity, or freedom from prosecution, by the host country Promoting Friendly Relations Diplomats are responsible for developing commercial, economic, cultural and scientific relations between the host country and the home country. They negotiate with the government of the host country and discuss issues such as foreign aid or treaties. Protecting Interests of Home Country Diplomats protect the interests of their home country and its citizens by providing updates about political and economic developments in their host country. They help their citizens who are traveling abroad and they also evacuate refugees. They explain and defend the foreign policy of their home country in a diplomatic way. Providing Consular Services Diplomats issue passports, travel documents and visas. They also give financial assistance to the citizens of their home country who 35

become destitute in the host country. They visit their citizens who have been arrested and provide appropriate assistance. They help the relatives of citizens who died abroad. Acting as Spokesperson Diplomats hold press conferences in the host country on issues related to their home country. They answer questions from the local and foreign media assigned in their host country on matters that involve their home country and its citizens. What Are Diplomatic Roles? Some country’s diplomats take on many roles within the Foreign Service. Diplomats in the Foreign Service perform multiple duties on behalf of their respective countries while serving abroad. The Foreign Service separates its officers into five separate career subjects, called cones. Officers choose their cone at the beginning of their career and cannot shift to another. Each cone has specific responsibilities abroad, from helping their respective country’s citizens to working with foreign governments to managing embassies and consulates. Consular The consular cone focuses on aiding their respective citizens abroad as well as processing visa applications from foreigners. Consular officers ensure   their respective country’s citizens to have access to legal counsel abroad, evacuate their respective country’s citizens in security situations, facilitate adoptions and help their respective country’s citizens abroad with important travel information. They also review all visa applications from foreign nationals and are the first line of defense against terrorists attempting to enter the country. Political Foreign service political officers work directly with foreign government officials and spend the most time attempting to influence policy decisions of foreign countries. Political officers spend considerable time learning the details of the country in which they are stationed and become experts in the culture, policies and personalities of the country. Economic Officers in the economic cone represent the economic interests of their respective country’s citizens abroad. They have similar duties 36

as political cone officers but focus specifically on the economic conditions of their country assignment. They may negotiate free-trade agreements or bilateral investment treaties with foreign governments. Economic cone officers also work with their respective country’s companies operating in foreign markets, helping them with contract bidding and other bureaucratic issues. Pubic Diplomacy Public diplomacy officers in the Foreign Service interact the most with citizens of foreign countries. These officers speak with foreign journalists, act as embassy spokespeople and organize cultural exchanges. Management Management officers handle the administrative needs of embassies and consulates abroad. They arrange housing and transportation for embassy workers, coordinate visits from high-ranking oficials and maintain embassy buildings. Almost all aspects of the actual running of an embassy fall under the portfolio of the management cone. The duties of a UN Diplomat A diplomat at the U.N. has a multi-faceted role. The diplomat’s duties include: • Working out mutually agreeable solutions with other diplomats in a complex multinational arena. • Finding the best possible means of achieving the instructions of their foreign ministries and presenting the foreign policy of their governments. • Keeping their foreign ministry abreast of important developments at the United Nations and submitting recommendations and suggestions for initiatives or changes in policies or positions when circumstances suggest such initiatives and changes are both expedient and necessary. • Promoting understanding and stability among the members of the international community in spite of tensions and constant political change. U.N. diplomats perform their duties at the U.N. through intense communication and regular contact with other delegates. The exchange of information allows diplomats to parade their interests in the hope of finding endorsement by others. Cliques abound and caucuses emerge as the political landscape at the United Nations changes in response 37

to international political events. Information and knowledge are the most important tools of a diplomat. The most influential diplomats are recognized for their particular talents in communications, analysis and judgment. Information gathering constitutes an important part of a diplomat’s daily routine. All diplomats analyze the atmosphere at the U.N. where they frequently encounter new trends and developments in the multilateral sphere. They provide their foreign ministries with information that facilitates the formulation of foreign policy, and in turn utilize this same information to pursue new opportunities in their efforts to achieve national objectives. Accurately analyzing, interpreting, and predicting trends require expertise in the substance of the issues at the United Nations, as well as a certain amount of intuition. However, even the most intuitive diplomats must have some ability to judge the political implications of their analysis. Also, they should have exceptional knowledge of the institutions and fora of the U.N. as well as the political realities outside of the United Nations, to be successful. Effective diplomats spend considerable time preparing for the arduous work they face at the United Nations. The milieu of a U.N. diplomat involves a complex mixture of issues and personalities and involves constant adjustment to the fast pace of the U.N. diplomatic scene. Diplomats need to know who the important players on an issue are, and how to find opportunities to influence or become involved with those «calling the shots». When a diplomat’s government decides to take the initiative or assume leadership on an issue, he or she expected to know where contentions lie and with whom to discuss the matter. Of course, the most important people to negotiate with are individuals who can deliver votes or exert influence on a given resolution or issue. Networking is thus an essential part of a U.N. diplomat’s professional life. If a diplomat lacks the skills to build networks and relationships, he or she will find it difficult, perhaps even impossible, to effectively realize his or her government’s instructions and foreign policy objectives. Obviously, no one can be everywhere and do everything at once, so knowing where and when to sacrifice attention is essential. An experienced diplomat compensates by structuring relationships within 38

the missions, the delegations, or the caucus groups so that other can fill any gaps. Yet it is difficult and time-consuming to develop these relationships unless one has a good insight into human nature and considerable international experience to know what works and what does not. Many countries have a small diplomat’s staff in their missions. This adds to the already heavy workload of the men and women representing these countries at the U.N. In the case of the smaller missions, the diplomats are forced to carefully select the issues and meetings they will deal with. It is common not to have enough personnel to make individual assignments to an issue or committee, but instead to have each staff member cover several issues at the same time17.

8. DIPLOMATIC DOCUMENTS AND DIPLOMATIC LANGUAGE Written texts are an essential element of diplomacy. Texts provide powers and accreditation for the diplomat. Texts contain his instructions and negotiating briefs. Texts are the main outcome of negotiations. For certain texts – or parts of texts – there exist stereotyped formulas: letters of accreditation, full powers, opening and final clauses of treaties, even diplomatic notes. For all texts that are meant to be shared with another party or other parties, there are traditional requirements of polite formulations. On the other hand, internal documents only follow the rules of the entity which employs them. For countries long active in international diplomacy, there used to be all sorts of regulations regarding the writing of dispatches, instructions, briefs, reports, etc. New forms and means of communicating have affected the manner in which documents of diplomacy are written today, be they internal or addressed to one or more external entities. Documents exchanged between countries in the past were written in the single vehicular language then in use in Europe: Latin. In the 18th century French had become the generally accepted diplomatic 17 Telli C.R. The Role of a Diplomat for International Relations // http://www.onlanka. com/news/the-role-of-a-diplomat-for-international-relations.html.

39

language, so much so that even diplomatic notes addressed to the British Foreign Office by the Legation of the USA were written in that language. The 20th century saw a gradual emergence of English as a second and later even dominant diplomatic language. At the same time, a growing number of countries insisted on the use of their own language in diplomatic correspondence and joint diplomatic documents. As a result the United Nations admitted to five languages at its inception (Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish), to which Arabic has later been added by informal agreement. In the European Union, all twelve languages of the members are currently in use and their number is bound to grow as new members will be admitted. Translation and interpretation have therefore become a major element in present-day diplomatic life. In this presentation, we will consider the issues of formal diplomatic documents, multi-language diplomatic texts, and the impact of information technology on diplomatic texts. Full powers were traditionally given by a proclamation addressed to no one in particular. Until recently at least, even the foreign secretary of the British government was provided with such powers by the queen, although practice and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 have long admitted that a foreign minister, by virtue of his position, had all powers necessary to deal with foreign governments and to represent his government in international forums. Letters of accreditation are always addressed to a specific designator, head of state or government, foreign minister, secretarygeneral of an international institution, etc. Their content is stereotyped, stating the full confidence of the accrediting actor in the accredited person and expressing the hope that the actor of accreditation will accord full credence to that accredited person. Full powers for specific purposes may be written in the same manner. Diplomatic notes addressed by one entity to another had stereotyped beginnings and endings: XXX presents its compliments to YYY and has the honour to... XXX avails itself of this opportunity to renew to YYY the expression of its highest consideration. Each entity had to be presented with its full name, e.g. «The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of». In the operative text, shorter mentions, in particular «the Ministry», would be used. Courtesy of language had 40

to be respected even if the subject-matter was a strong protest or the notification of a rupture. Today, in most notes much of the formality is omitted and the style used is more reminiscent of the Aide-Mémoire of yore. Even where an agreement is embodied in an exchange of notes, it is no longer required that each side fully reproduces the content. It is considered sufficient if the note containing the offer states all relevant clauses whereas the note expressing acceptance simply refers to the offer and then states the terms of acceptance18. Treaties used to be written with much formality as regards the opening and the final clauses. The title mentioned the parties (two or more) in full and this was followed by an introductory statement again mentioning the parties in full as well as their representatives by name and title. This was mostly followed by a preamble and only then came the substantive clauses. The content of the final clauses varied but the style remained formal. For bilateral treaties there were two originals; each mentioning one of the parties first and being initialed and signed by the representative of that party on the left side. These originals were exchanged. Today, many treaties use simplified titles and mention of parties and omit the names of representatives altogether except at the bottom of the last page where the signatures have to be affixed. Consent to be bound by a treaty other than by signature used to be expressed in a very formal document, known as an instrument of ratification or of accession (in the case of participation in a multilateral treaty by a non-signatory). Instruments of ratification of a bilateral treaty contained the full text of the national version followed by the statement of ratification. In the case of multilateral treaties the instrument was a proclamation of ratification or accession in stereotyped terms. It was handed over to the depository of the treaty in a formal ceremony. More recently, expression of consent to be bound has also been expressed by notification using the form of a diplomatic note. This possibility must be indicated in the final clauses of the treaty. The advantage of this approach is particularly evident in bilateral treaties, where it replaces the exchange of instruments of ratification by duly empowered representatives, an exchange that has to be minuted. Notification of consent to be bound can be forwarded by a diplomatic mission or even by mail. 18

Kappeler D. Texts in Diplomacy. – 2001. – P.201.

41

Multi-language documents Except between countries using the same national or vehicular language, diplomatic documents, these days, tend to be written in two or more languages. In bilateral relations a difference is made between authentic languages and unofficial translations. If two languages are both authentic, the interpretation problems have to be solved by reference to both. Unofficial translations on the other hand have no value of authenticity. Sometimes, the unofficial translation is in the language of one party which is not used in international relations. Thus Israel used to insist that an unofficial translation in Hebrew be attached to bilateral agreements for which English would be used for the Israeli version. China on the other hand insists that all diplomatic documents emanating from it be written in Chinese, but accepts that an unofficial translation into English be attached to them. The writing of treaties in several languages is a complex task, especially if one or more of these languages are not used during the actual negotiation. Versions in working languages are based on the records of simultaneous interpretation. Versions in other languages have to be prepared separately. All have to go before the drafting com­ mittee which therefore needs at least one member for each language. Preferably however members of a drafting committee should master two or more of the languages used so as to ensure proper concordance of texts. The drafts submitted to the committee are prepared by the secretariat of the negotiating body, which must check recordings of simultaneous interpretation and produce versions in languages which were not used as working languages. The complexity of the task of a drafting committee explains why, in some cases, it will re-convene after the treaty has already been authenticated, with the express competence of making linguistic adjustments between the various versions. Problems akin to those encountered with multilingual texts may arise with diplomatic texts negotiated and written in a single language when two or more countries are involved. For German speakers from Austria, Germany and Switzerland the same word may not have exactly the same meaning. This is even more pronounced among countries using English as a vehicular language, or Spanish, whereas in the case of French the meaning attributed by France tends to be generally accepted. 42

The impact of information technology Information technology allows for working on a text which is displayed on computer screens or projected on a wall screen from a computer if the negotiation takes place in a conference room. This text can be directly amended, including by inserting versions in brackets on the display, or proposed amendments can be written into hypertext links. This last approach is particularly useful in multilateral negotiations conducted on the Internet, either in real time encounters or, even more, when negotiators can make their input in their own time and the secretariat from time to time sums up the situation. The recourse to information technology is probably going to modify the presentation of bilateral agreements. These are likely to be written in a single version and no longer put down in two original documents. The lengthy mention of parties with their full names and the names of negotiators is likely to disappear. Consent to be bound may be expressed by notification over the Internet. Multilateral treaties are always written in a single original, so recourse to information technology will not change anything in this regard. But ratification and accession can be notified over the Internet just as in the case of bilateral treaties. Information technology is also likely to help with multilingual texts. There already exists software for translation, although this can at best produce a very rough draft that will have to be carefully edited. By working on texts accessible over the Internet, translators from various countries will be able to compare notes and thus help to produce better adjusted versions in the various languages of the treaty. Information technology however also presents potential problems regarding the finalization of an agreed text, in particular if this takes place over the Internet. Safeguards will have to be found to prevent a party from tampering with a finally agreed version. Some final remarks regarding the general importance of language We are living in a time when attention to good use of language tends to lapse. Media often use deplorable language, both spoken and written, and there is a definite danger that future diplomats will no longer master properly even their own mother tongue, let alone vehicular languages like English, French or Spanish. This will create additional difficulties in the implementation of existing agreements. 43

As is well known, unclear language is often used to mask divergences under the appearance of agreement. When these divergencies reappear as a result of differing interpretation by the parties concerned, it is essential that those who may be entrusted with proposing solutions to such disputes fully master the languages concerned. Information technology could provide help in solving insufficient mastery of languages. Interactive teaching can force the student to really grapple with the language he is learning and thus to achieve more than just superficial fluency. New texts negotiated with recourse to information technology can be better understood because all successive versions and the reactions to them remain documented. Hopefully this will lead to a newly enhanced linguistic culture in diplomacy19. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 is an international treaty that defines a framework for diplomatic relations between independent countries. It specifies the privileges of a diplomatic mission that enable diplomats to perform their function without fear of coercion or harassment by the host country. This forms the legal basis for diplomatic immunity. Its articles are considered a cornerstone of modern international relations. It has been ratified by 187 countries. The 1961 UN Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations marked its 50th anniversary in April 2011. Throughout the history of sovereign nations, diplomats have enjoyed a special status. Their function to negotiate agreements between states demands certain special privileges. An envoy from another nation is traditionally treated as a guest, their communications with their home nation treated as confidential, and their freedom from coercion and subjugation by the host nation treated as essential. The first attempt to codify diplomatic immunity into diplomatic law occurred with the Congress of Vienna in 1815. This was followed much later by the Convention regarding Diplomatic Officers. The present treaty on the treatment of diplomats was the outcome of a draft by the International Law Commission. The treaty was 19

Language and Diplomacy. Ed by J.Kurbalija and H.Slavik. – 2001. – P. 55.

44

adopted on April 18, 1961, by the United Nations Conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and Immunities held in Vienna, Austria, and first implemented on April 24, 1964. The same Conference also adopted the Optional Protocol concerning Acquisition of Nationality, the Optional Protocol concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, the Final Act and four resolutions annexed to that Act. Two years later, the United Nations adopted a closely related treaty, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. The treaty is an extensive document, containing 53 articles. Following is a basic overview of its key provisions. For a comprehensive enumeration of all articles, consult the original text. Article 9. The host nation may at any time and for any reason declare a particular member of the diplomatic staff to be persona non grata. The sending state must recall this person within a reasonable period of time, or otherwise this person may lose their diplomatic immunity. Article 22. The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats. Article 27. The host country must permit and protect free communication between the diplomats of the mission and their home country. A diplomatic bag must never be opened even on suspicion of abuse. A diplomatic courier must never be arrested or detained. Article 29. Diplomats must not be liable to any form of arrest or detention. They are immune from civil or criminal prosecution, though the sending country may waive this right under Article 32. Under Article 34, they are exempt from most taxes, and under Article 36 they are exempt from most customs duties. Article 31.1c Actions not covered by diplomatic immunity: professional activity outside diplomat’s official functions. Article 37. The family members of a diplomat that are living in 45

the host country enjoy most of the same protections as the diplomats themselves. In the same year that the treaty was adopted, two amendment protocols were added. Countries may ratify the main treaty without necessarily ratifying these optional agreements20. Concerning acquisition of nationality. The head of the mission, the staff of the mission, and their families, shall not acquire the nationality of the receiving country. Concerning compulsory settlement of disputes. Disputes arising from the interpretation of this treaty may be brought before the International Court of Justice. State parties to the convention There are 187 state parties, where the convention is ratified. The states which neither signed nor ratified the convention are: Antigua and Barbuda, Sultanate of Brunei, Cook Islands, Republic of Gambia, Niue, Republic of Palau, Solomon Islands, Republic of Vanuatu and the states with limited recognition. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 is an international treaty that defines a framework for consular relations between independent countries. A consul normally operates out of an embassy in another country, and performs two functions: (1) protecting in the host country the interests of their countrymen, and (2) furthering the commercial and economic relations between the two countries. While a consul is not a diplomat,[citation needed] they work out of the same premises, and under this treaty they are afforded most of the same privileges, including a variation of diplomatic immunity called consular immunity. The treaty has been ratified by 173 countries. The treaty is an extensive document, containing 79 articles. Following is a basic overview of its key provisions. For a comprehensive enumeration of all articles, consult the original text. There are 173 state parties, where the convention is ratified. The signatory states that have not finished their ratification procedures are: Central African Republic, Israel, Ivory Coast and Republic of Congo. 20 Bordoloy S. Vienna convention on Diplomatic Relations // International relations. – 2013. – March 15. – P.23.

46

The states neither signed nor ratified the convention are: Afghanistan, Brunei, Burundi, Chad, Comoros, Cook Islands, Gambia, GuineaBissau, Ethiopia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, San Marino, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, South Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, Zambia and the states with limited recognition21. Diplomatic language Language is one of our most basic instincts. From birth humans communicate, at first in order to survive – to ensure that needs are met. But at an amazing rate communication becomes refined into language, one of the defining characteristics of human beings. In The Language Instinct Stephen Pinker writes: In any natural history of the human species, language would stand out as the pre-eminent  trait… A common language connects the members of a community into an information-sharing network with formidable collective powers. Anyone can benefit from the strokes  of  genius, lucky accidents, and trial-and-error wisdom accumulated by everyone else, present or past. And people can work in teams, their efforts coordinated by negotiated agreements. As Pinker points out, language is what allows us to build on the work of others, benefiting from their knowledge and collaborating to achieve more than one person can alone. The processes of diplomacy – communicating, negotiating, reaching and formulating agreements, collecting, creating, transmitting and recording knowledge – all depend on language. Studies of diplomacy usually concentrate on the message rather than the means. However, examination of language use in diplomacy can lead to a better understanding of the way diplomacy functions and why some diplomatic processes are more successful than others. Through careful and critical attention to various aspects of diplomatic language we can improve our understanding of both the explicit and implicit messages world leaders and other political figures send out, and improve our own ability to communicate in the most effective and appropriate ways.

21

Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961.

47

9. NEGOTIATIONS AS THE BASIS OF DIPLOMACY Diplomatic negotiations – a form of official communication between the heads of state and government, foreign ministers, commissioners government representatives, diplomats, heads and other officials. In the Hague Convention first diplomatic talks were considered an effective means of resolving disputes. Article 33 of the UN Charter. Diplomatic negotiations – formal discussion by representatives of political, economic and other issues of bilateral and multilateral relations with a view to harmonizing the foreign policy strategy, tactics or appropriate diplomatic actions; exchanges, mutual exchange of information, training and contracting, dispute resolution. 2 types of negotiations: 1) between the rivals: require endurance, the ability to restrain the emotional reaction. 2) between the partners: the joint search for mutually acceptable solutions, the situation of openness, transparency. The object of the negotiations can be any issues of interest to the country. Diplomatic negotiations can be classified by subject matter of the dispute (peace, political, trade-economic, military, on culture and scientific and technical cooperation, special / branch), the level of representation of the parties (the interstate, intergovernmental and interdepartmental expert level), the number of participants (bilateral and multilateral). Negotiations can be made in writing, through the diplomatic correspondence. Generally, oral and written form – in parallel. Functions of negotiations • Searching for a joint solution to the problem • Information function • The communicative function • The regulatory function • Advocacy function • The decision of their own internal and foreign policy objectives In general, it should be noted that any negotiations are 48

multifunctional and involve the simultaneous implementation of several functions. But at the same time the search function joint solutions must remain a priority. Types and classification of negotiations There are two main types of negotiations: • positional; • rational. The above two kinds of negotiations can take place either: • soft negotiations; • tough negotiations. Positional bargaining can take place in two forms – soft and hard. The essence of the first is that the parties are ready for the sake of reaching an agreement and maintain a good relationship going on endless concessions to each other, which in the end leads to inefficient solutions for both parties. The essence of tough negotiations – insisting any cost on their own, usually at the position, mostly ignoring the interests of the other party. Relative to other classifications of negotiations, they differ in the number and level of participants range of issues discussed, the mechanism of decision-making, duration, frequency of, the degree of formality and compulsory execution of decisions. Separate negotiations Separate negotiations – negotiations under way with the enemy in secret from the Allies or without the consent of the latter. The stages of negotiations 1. Preparing for negotiations; 2. The negotiation process; 3. Conclusion of the negotiations and the analysis of their results. Before you sit down at the negotiating table, consider the content aspect, which provides a clear analysis of the problems, the diagnosis of the situation, the formation of a common approach to the negotiations, their goals, objectives, positions, forecast changes in the situation and the results of, the definition of the possible solutions, design enabling environment; preparation of proposals and arguments, drafting required documents. It is also important to pay attention to tactical training, which is oriented to the choice of methods and means of negotiating roles of the team members working 49

on debugging, business relationships with a partner. And all of these recommendations, requirements and tips, in the end, boil down to a culture of business communication, to the transformation of the culture in the usual habits of everyday professional conduct to comply with the rules of respectable tone, deference to the partner, tolerance, tolerance to the shortcomings in the character of the people . To date, any person living in the community, is the man leading the talks. Negotiations – it is a fact of our daily lives, the main means of getting from other people what you want. Nowadays, more and more often have to resort to negotiations: after the conflict is, figuratively speaking, developing industry. Every person wants to participate in the decisions that affect it, fewer and fewer people agree with the decisions imposed by someone. Although negotiations are happening every day, maintain them properly is not easy. People find themselves in a dilemma. They see only two possibilities of negotiation – to be supple or rigid. The second standard strategy in the negotiations involves middle approach – between soft and hard, but involves a transaction between the desire to attempt to achieve the desired and get along with people. For the development of appropriate negotiation skills, in addition to government programs, in many countries it is possible to meet a number of organizations and communities that are individualized education programs in respect of the negotiation of all levels of difficulty. Today we know a lot of negotiating techniques. However, the most effective framework of the negotiation of experience accumulated in the field of political diplomacy. This is due to several reasons. First, the stakes in the political negotiations are very high. Unsuccessful political negotiation process could plunge the lives of tens, if not hundreds of millions of people into the funnel of severe crisis. Second, people who are professionally engaged in the political negotiations, working in situations of peak mental stress. This leads to the fact that their approaches to complex negotiation situations are usually sanded and worked on the brink of possibilities of the human psyche. Third, diplomats working in teams. And the team, with an 50

unchanged as the leader of the negotiating process, are formed from different specialists and experts for a specific project negotiation. The diplomatic approach to negotiations – is systematically elaborated methods. Methods of time-tested, who have repeatedly proven their effectiveness22. Diplomats have effective negotiating skills. In fact, the diplomat – is none other than as a political negotiator. For a diplomat involved in the negotiations, the work begins long before he meets his opponent. First of all it is necessary to study the problem that is discussed. The general rule is simple – the more you know, the better. The literature often talks about cultural differences in relation to diplomacy and national diplomatic styles. I think that such differences – an objective reality, although international organizations and multilateral diplomacy in general play an important role of the «melting pot» of cultural differences in diplomacy. The style of diplomacy and its national characteristics continue to maintain its value. Often major diplomatic problems arise out of lack of understanding of cultural features of the partners and inadequate diplomatic style.

10. MULTILATERAL DIPLOMACY Modern diplomacy is often called a multilateral or conference. What is the cause of its occurrence? First of all, having this kind of global problems, the solution of which the interests of all or nearly all sides and whose solution does not depend on one or two states, and all or nearly all sides. These include, for instance, include issues such as food, energy, environment, oceans, space, nuclear disarmament, maritime borders and border economic zones, the prohibition of new types of weapons, etc. With an increasing number of states with more than 50 in the mid 30s to nearly 200 today international relations and diplomacy have become more complicated and much more expensive affair. Only the collapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia led unexpectedly to the 22

Michele J.G., Jeanne M.B. Handbook of negotiation and culture, 2004. – Р.97.

51

creation of more than twenty new countries and increase the number of diplomats. In London, for example, has a population of 17 thousand foreign diplomats and their families. International relations have increased significantly, now for the solutions of this or that international problems should be part of most or all countries of the world. Bringing different perspectives to a common denominator has become much more difficult and time-consuming process. Moreover, because of the complexity and importance of the problems of their resolution usually takes place on several levels – experts, departmental, high and very high. As an example of this kind of negotiations are advanced Helsinki process of the Conference on arms limitation and disarmament conference on Bosnia and Herzegovina, meeting a big «G», the very activity of the United Nations and other international organizations. Practice shows that, firstly, in some cases, when interested in solving the problem, many countries, the method of the Conference of diplomacy is the only one that allows to achieve a result, and secondly, the same practice of recent decades, justifies the use of this method of resolving difficult issues shows, thus saving enormous amount of time, whereas the bilateral meetings, and even if, moreover, they are held to a high enough level, retard issues for many months. In 1899, in The Hague, there was the so-called multilateral discussion of sovereign states to ensure their safety and collective prosperity. This conference was attended by 20 major European powers, along with the United States, Mexico, Japan, China, Siam, and Persia. Thus, it was attended by 26 States.  It is well known that the predominantly interstate communication at that time was carried out by means of bilateral ties. Multilateral negotiations, much less international political conferences were a rarity. Historic milestone of international meetings with representatives of many countries is generally considered the Congress of Vienna in 1815 The term «multilateral diplomacy» has appeared just in the second half of the XIX century. Although multilateral diplomacy has become a regular practice in Europe after the Congress of Vienna in 1815, they were relatively rare events related international crises, post-war settlement. Since the 52

beginning of the twentieth century. the role of multilateral diplomacy is greatly increased, and now the bulk of diplomatic contacts is multilateral. The reasons for strengthening the role of multilateral diplomacy associated primarily with the growing number of global issues, need to be discussed and solutions. Also important is the fact that many of the poor countries of the Third World can not afford to maintain embassies in other countries and are used for diplomatic contacts international intergovernmental organizations. Diverse forms of multilateral diplomacy. This is the work of the UN and other intergovernmental organizations, international conferences and forums, including the informal, such as the annual economic forum in Davos. After the Cold War special significance this form of multilateral diplomacy as international mediation and conflict resolution. Currently, most researchers call a modern conference or multilateral diplomacy par excellence. Today, the vast majority of international conferences held by an international organization or under its auspices. There has been a tendency to view international conferences and congresses as a form of regular activities of international organizations. Multilateral negotiations can take place within the institutions themselves, and in the course of their regular meetings convened international conferences, as well as outside organizations. As a rule, international conferences are discussed in detail specific issues. At these conferences, specialized professional diplomats cannot make up the majority of the participants. They are actively involved politicians and experts. International conference is an international forum of a temporary nature. They are: the composition of participants – intergovernmental, non-governmental and mixed in a circle of participants – the universal and regional, on the project activities – general and specific. A special type of multilateral diplomacy are the summit (summits) heads of more than two states. During the «Cold War» such summits have been very rare. In the 1990s, multilateral summits have become the rule rather than the exception. They should also include the firstever meeting of the UN Security Council with the participation of heads of state and government – the permanent members of the 53

Security Council, held in January 1992. Since the mid-1970s, held a meeting of heads of the «Big Seven», which in 1990 joined the president of Russia. Multilateral summits of the leaders of the CIS as practiced within the framework of the Council of CIS Heads of State as well as outside it23. One of the essential conditions for success in the field of multilateral diplomacy should be considered as the ability to communicate with other countries in their own languages. As you know, the UN has six official languages, and even though the formal meetings of simultaneous interpretation in these languages, lobbying and preliminary discussions are informal meetings. Diplomats, owning two or more languages, achieved greater success than their «monolingual» colleagues. They can act as intermediaries and to be personally involved in a wide range of bilateral and multilateral negotiations. In a multipolar world multilateral meetings and conferences may be more important means of international politics than unilateral action by a single superpower. This, however, does not mean that a multipolar world will bring more sustainable world.

11. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS An  international organization is an organization with an inter­ national membership, scope, or presence. There are two main types: International nongovernmental organizations: non-governmental organizations that operate internationally. There are two types: International non-profit organizations. Examples include the World Organization of the Scout Movement, International Committee of the Red Cross and Medicines Sans Frontiers. International corporations, referred to as multinational corpora­ tions. Examples include The Coca-Cola Company and Toyota. Intergovernmental organizations, also known as international governmental organizations: the type of organization most closely 23 Hook S., Spanier J. America under Fire. American Foreign Policy since World War II: Press. 2007 – Р. 305.

54

associated with the term «international organization», these are organizations that are made up primarily of sovereign states (referred to as member states). Notable examples include the  United Nations (UN), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Council of Europe (CoE), European Union (EU; which is a prime example of a supranational organization), and World Trade Organization (WTO). The UN has used the term «intergovernmental organization» instead of «international organization» for clarity. The modern history of international organization reflects an uneven development of both the practice and concept that go under that name. The term is used in differing ways and we apply it to both international organization conceived as formal institutional organizations and in a more general sense of order creation. Furthermore, international organization includes not only interstate arrangements but, increasingly, arrangements among non-governmental and transnational actors. Thus, the landscape of international organizations includes both inter-governmental organizations and international non-governmental organizations. International organization is clearly a very broad concept, which has evolved with the practice of various forms of international governance. Our main task here is to chart the theoretical development of understanding about international organization. We emphasize approaches that are 9800 International Organization 693 most relevant to international law and economics, while noting important contributions and challenges posed by alternative perspectives. After a descriptive summary of the history and evolution of international organizations, we discuss three general conceptions of international organization as formal organization, as international ordering principle and as international regime. Cooperation theory then provides a theoretical bridge from the realist ordering principle of anarchy to the neoliberal argument regarding the role of regimes. In turn, elaboration of regime analysis has laid the ground for a reintegration of international law and international relations, an incorporation of various forms of new institutional analysis, a closer concern for specific institutional design principles and, finally, to a new appreciation of the role of formal institutions which had long ago been abandoned in theory if not in practice. Finally, we note the 55

challenges posed by other traditions of international organization and indicate promising future directions for productive theorizing. The signing of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, reinforced by the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, established the principle of national sovereignty, thereby placing the states of Europe on equal legal footing. This notion of sovereign equality – endowing each state with territorial integrity and the right to conduct domestic and foreign affairs without outside intervention – represents the first real ordering principle among states. After Westphalia, decentralized control by sovereign states provided the basis for a horizontal international order critical to the subsequent development of international organization. However, it was not until the nineteenth century that actual international organizations began to appear in significant numbers. Though the advent of states as sovereign political units was an important step, preconditions for the creation of IOs were not met during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. For example, there was insufficient contact between states, there was little recognition of problems arising from interdependence among states, and there was no perceived need for institutionalized mechanisms to manage international relations. The first serious attempt at formal international organization arose with the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), which established diplomatic foundations for a new European security order following the devastation of the Napoleonic Wars. Some credit the resulting «Congress system» as a fundamental turning point in the conduct and organization of international relations. It created a more systematic and institutionalized approach to managing issues of war and peace in the international system. The principal innovation at Vienna was that representatives of states should meet at regular intervals – not just in the wake of war – to discuss diplomatic issues. Accordingly, four major peacetime conferences were held between 1815 and 1822. After this period, the aspirations of the Congress system gave way to a more informal regime. As characterized by one historian, «A looser association of the Great Powers continued in existence – an attenuated Congress system limited to dealing with problems as they arose, not seeking to anticipate them or to iron them out of 56

existence»24. This «Concert of Europe» featured sporadic gatherings throughout the century, mostly in response to wars: Paris in 1856, Vienna in 1864, Prague in 1866, Frankfurt in 1871, Berlin in 1878, Berlin in 1884-1885, and The Hague in 1899 and 1907. These last two conferences went so far as to establish panels of arbitrators to settle international disputes and produced a Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes. These are the earliest examples of formal IOs designed to manage security issues. The result of the Concert was, indeed, quite a long period of relatively peaceful interstate relations among the great powers of Europe. Many of the most dramatic developments in international organization during the nineteenth century were not related to the goal of averting war but to an emerging mismatch between the geographic scopes of problems versus the scope of state authority. The technological changes brought on by the Industrial Revolution – especially in communication (telegraph) and transportation (steamship and railroad) – created an interdependence among states that required more stable forms of cooperation. A new set of international organizations was created to manage international economic transactions which were an increasingly important aspect of interstate relations but were difficult for national governments to manage on a unilateral basis. To facilitate shipping and international trade and to regulate traffic, the littoral states of the Rhine established the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Rhine in 1815 at Vienna. Similar commissions were established for the Danube (1856) and Elbe (1821) rivers. The Zollverein, a customs union of Germanic states established 1834, was the first effort at international economic integration and governance in Europe. A related set of IOs, the Public International Unions, was also a response to technological change. These were concerned primarily with nonpolitical, 9800 International Organization 695 technical matters, and included the International Telegraphic Union (1865), the General (later Universal) Postal Union (1874), the International Union of Railway Freight Transportation (1890), and the International 24 Hinsley F.H. Power and the Pursuit of Peace. Theory and practice in the history of relations between states: Cambridge University Press – 1963, P. 213.

57

Bureau of Weights and Measures (1875). Some of these organizations had elaborate institutional frameworks, including permanent bureaus that represented forerunners of secretariats (Archer, 1983, p. 12). The ultimate purpose of these IOs was to facilitate international trade by establishing market rules and standardization. It should be noted that the improved technology that increased the need for coordination among states also made communicating and convening easier, thus facilitating the process of organization. The periods following the two World Wars saw the greatest proliferation of institutions. Heads of state and diplomats met in 1919 at the Versailles Peace Conference to create a global security international organization in the League of Nations. This was the first attempt at collective security – that is, an institution operating on the notion of all against one. Under Article 16 of the League Covenant, all member states were required to come to the aid of a member that was the victim of military aggression. The League was overwhelmingly concerned with fostering peace, though economic and social issues did receive secondary attention. The Covenant further established the Permanent Court of International Justice, the first attempt to create a global forum of justice and predecessor to today’s International Court of Justice. All members participated in the General Assembly, while a separate League Council – consisting of five permanent members (the United States, Britain, France, Japan, and Italy) and several rotating members – guided the operation of the organization. Versailles also represented the first instance of widespread participation by national and transnational private interest groups in a large interstate conference. Though the nineteenth century saw the formation of a number of international non-governmental organizations – concerned with humanitarian, religious, economic, educational, scientific, political, and other matters – it was rare for private organizations to sit at the table next to governments. Two products of this non-governmental participation at Versailles were the establishment of the International Labor Organization and a more formal partnership between member states and the Red Cross (already founded in 1864). The architects of the postwar system set out to establish an extraordinarily ambitious framework of positive international law and 58

institutions. Though the number of formal IOs increased from about 50 to 80 during the interwar period, in the enthusiasm of the early postwar period they were created on a wide scale until they numbered over 600 by 1980. The most important was the United Nations, whose basic structure was decided by the US, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and China at the Dumbarton Oaks meeting of 1944 and the 1945 Yalta Summit. The drafters of the Charter, signed at the San Francisco conference of founding members in June 1945, were conscious of the limits inherent in the idealism of the League of Nations. Rather than count on collective security, the UN was to be primarily a peace and security organization based on the concept of the Four Policemen, that is, the USA, USSR, the United Kingdom and China as protectors against a recurrence of Axis aggression. Abstinence from unilateral use of force remained the main driving principle, however, and the Security Council was entrusted with primary responsibility for authorizing and overseeing military action. The reality of the Cold War dashed these expectations and rendered the UN ineffective, though not irrelevant, in global security affairs. But demand for an expanded range of UN security services has reemerged in the post-Cold War era and, despite some failures in recent years, the UN is playing an increasingly important security role. The United Nations is divided into six principal organs, though the General Assembly is clearly first among them. Of the other five, the Secretariat, the Trusteeship Council and the Economic and Social Council report to the General Assembly. The Security Council and International Court of Justice have limited mandates, the former dealing only with situations related to the outbreak or potential outbreak of war, and the latter ruling on legal questions brought to it by member states or other UN bodies. These central components of the UN are surrounded by a cluster of functional agencies, including the International Labor Organization, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organization and the Food and Agricultural Organization. Over the years, there has been a steady 9800 International Organization 697 proliferation of specialized and affiliated agencies, many designed to deal with development issues. Another set of organizations was created during and following World War II, for the purpose of avoiding economic conflict by, 59

especially, maintaining currency stability and free trade. The Bretton Woods monetary system established the US dollar as the central currency; other currencies would be valued according to the dollar, which in turn was pegged to gold. Two formal international organizations were created as part of this system: the International Monetary Fund was charged with monitoring balance of payments while the World Bank supervised economic development and postwar reconstruction. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was established in 1947 to maintain open trade based on the principle of non-discrimination. It was replaced in 1995 by the more encompassing and centralized – for instance, it contains strengthened dispute settlement procedures – World Trade Organization. These economic organizations were established as universal in principle but, in fact, began as closely held institutions of the Western powers. Their universality was overshadowed by the Cold War and, to a lesser extent, by North-South distributive conflicts. These institutions have become more inclusive over time, but effective control – both formal and informal – remains in Western hands. A further striking development in international organization in the postwar period has been the rise of regional international organizations. Some perform a range of functions within a given geographical area (the Organization of American States, the Organization of Central American States, the Arab League, the Organization of African Unity, and the Association of South East Asian Nations). Others are specifically security-related, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, and the now defunct Warsaw Treaty Organization. The largest numbers are economic, including the European Free Trade Association, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Southern Cone Common Market, the Council for Economic Assistance (formerly the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance), the Andean Common Market, and the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation. Of this last category, the European Union (formerly the European Community) has the most developed set of institutions in terms of economics, law, security and politics Recent Trends in International Organization Despite the frequent assumption that inter-governmental 60

organizations rarely die once created, fully one-third of the organizations that existed in 1981 were defunct by 1992. Many of those that became inactive were in the former Eastern bloc or were regional development organizations in the developing world. In the 19811992 period there was also a growing polarization between powerful countries – dominated by the literate, wealthy, and democratic – that establish and control inter-governmental organizations and countries whose populations and governments are badly off and increasingly disengaged from international organizations. Parallel to the growth in governmental organizations has been a rapid proliferation of international non-governmental organizations. The growth in private international associations matched that of public international unions in the second half of the nineteenth century, and has surpassed it in the twentieth century. Indeed, since the late nineteenth century there have been more international nongovernmental organizations than non-governmental organizations in existence. From 176 in 1909, there were 1,255 international nongovernmental organizations in 1960 and are now more than 5,500. Although these organizations cover countless functional areas, the most important categories are commerce and industry, technology, science, and health and medicine, and human rights. In terms of geographical distribution, almost half were founded in Europe; Africa and Asia account for the greatest number in the developing world25. Today, international organizations range in size from small consultative organizations such as the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization to very substantial bureaucracies like the World Bank or European Union with elaborate administrative structures, large budgets, many employees and extensive operational capacities. There has also been a striking, though uneven, development of international judicial bodies, most recently reflected in war tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and in the creation of an International Criminal Court. As this historical summary makes clear, international organization has generally been a response to or manifestation of deeper changes in international relations, not a driver of these changes. 25 Thompson A., Snidal D. International organization. – University of Chicago. – 1999. – Р.79.

61

12. INTERNATIONAL LAW International law is the set of rules generally regarded and accepted as binding in relations between states and nations. It serves as a framework for the practice of stable and organized international relations. International law differs from national legal systems in that it primarily concerns nations rather than private citizens. National law may become international law when treaties delegate national jurisdiction to supranational tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights or the International Criminal Court. Treaties such as the Geneva Conventions may require national law to conform. International law is consent-based governance. This means that a state member of the international community is not obliged to abide by international law unless it has expressly consented to a particular course of conduct. This is an issue of state sovereignty. The term «international law» can refer to three distinct legal disciplines: Public international law, which governs the relationship between provinces and international entities. It includes these legal fields: treaty law, law of sea, international criminal law, the laws of war or international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Private international law, or conflict of laws, which addresses the questions of which jurisdiction may hear a case, and the law concerning which jurisdiction applies to the issues in the case. Supranational law or the law of supranational organizations, which concerns regional agreements where the laws of nation states may be held inapplicable when conflicting with a supranational legal system when that nation has a treaty obligation to a supranational collective. The two traditional branches of the field are: • jus gentium – law of nations • jus inter gentes – agreements between nations A source of international law is where an international decision maker or researcher looks to verify the substantive legal rule governing a legal dispute or academic discourse. The sources applied by the community of nations to find the content of international law are listed under Article 38.1 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice: Treaties, international customs, and general principles are stated as the 62

three primary sources; and judicial decisions and scholarly writings are expressly designated as the subsidiary sources of international law. Many scholars agree that the fact that the sources are arranged sequentially in the Article 38 of the ICJ Statute suggests an implicit hierarchy of sources. However, there is no concrete evidence, in the decisions of the international courts and tribunals, to support such strict hierarchy, at least when it is about choosing international customs and treaties. In addition, unlike the Article 21 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which clearly defines hierarchy of applicable law (or sources of international law), the language of the Article 38 do not explicitly support hierarchy of sources. The sources have been influenced by a range of political and legal theories. During the 20th century, it was recognized by legal positivists that a sovereign state could limit its authority to act by consenting to an agreement according to the principle pacta sunt servanda. This consensual view of international law was reflected in the 1920 Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, which was succeeded by the United Nations Charter and is preserved in the United Nations Article 7 of the 1946 Statute of the International Court of Justice. Public international law (or international public law) concerns the treaty relationships between the nations and persons which are considered the subjects of international law. Norms of international law have their source in either: 1. custom, or customary international law 2. globally accepted standards of behavior 3. codifications contained in conventional agreements, generally termed treaties. Article 13 of the United Nations Charter obligates the UN General Assembly to initiate studies and make recommendations which encourage the progressive development of international law and its codification. Evidence of consensus or state practice can sometimes be derived from intergovernmental resolutions or academic and expert legal opinions (sometimes collectively termed soft law). International law has existed since the middle ages but much of its modern corpus began developing from the mid-19th century. Two sophisticated legal systems developed in the Western World: the codified systems of continental European states (civil law) and the judge-made 63

law of England (common law). The fall of the Roman civilization did not result in the loss of the concepts of Roman law. Starting in the later middle ages, unlegislated Roman law was applied by merchants in northern Italian city states and north-western European countries as the basis for commercial relationships. In the 20th century, the two World Wars and the formation of the League of Nations (and other international organizations such as the International Labor Organization) all contributed to accelerate this process and established much of the foundations of modern public international law. After the failure of the Treaty of Versailles and World War II, the League of Nations was replaced by the United Nations, founded under the UN Charter. The UN has also been the locus for the development of new advisory (non-binding) standards, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Other international norms and laws have been established through international agreements, including the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war or armed conflict, as well as by agreements implemented by other international organizations such as the International Labor Organization, the World Health Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the International Telecommunication Union, UNESCO, the World Trade Organization, and the International Monetary Fund. The development and consolidation of such conventions and agreements has proven to be of great importance in the realm of international relations. International Law, unlike most other areas of law, has no defined area or governing body, but instead refers to the many and varied laws, rules and customs which govern, impact and deal with the legal interactions between different nations, their governments, businesses and organizations, to include their rights and responsibilities in these dealings. The immense body that makes up international law encompasses a piecemeal collection of international customs; agreements; treaties; accords, charters (i.e. the United Nations Charter); protocols; tribunals; memorandums; legal precedents of the International Court of Justice (aka World Court) and more. Without a unique governing, enforcing entity, international law is a largely voluntary endeavor, wherein the power of enforcement only exists when the parties consent to adhere to and abide by an agreement. 64

Due to the diverse legal systems and applicable histories of different countries, laws addressing international law include both common law (case law) and civil law (statutes created by governing bodies). Their application covers all the facets of national law, to include substantive law, procedure, and remedies.  There are three main legal principles recognized in much of international law, which are not required, but are based chiefly on courtesy and respect:  - Principle of Comity – in the instance where two nations share common public policy ideas, one of them submits to the laws and judicial decrees of the other.  - Act of State Doctrine – respects that a nation is sovereign in its own territory and its official domestic actions may not be questioned by the judicial bodies of another country. It dissuades courts from deciding cases that would interfere with a country’s foreign policy.  - Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity – deals with actions brought in the court of one nation against another foreign nation and prevents the sovereign state from being tried in court without its consent. In the U.S., this is governed by the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 197626.  To be determined a sovereign state a nation must run its own government, with its own territory and population. There are both national laws and international agreements which govern/regulate international business transactions, which include investments, offshore banking, contracts, imports/exports, tariffs, dumping, trade and more.  Although there is no definitive governing body overseeing international law, the United Nations is the most widely recognized and influential international organization and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is its judicial counterpart.  International law may further be broken down as public or private. Public International law covers the rules, laws and customs that govern and monitor the conduct and dealings between nations and/or their citizens. The UN deals largely with public international law. Private The Free Dictionary Definition of Human Rights / The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition copyright by Houghton Mifflin Company. – 2011. – P. 387. 26

65

International law (Conflict of laws) handles disputes between private citizens of different nations. ABA International is the ABA in a smaller, but internationally focused version, working closely together with the other divisions and sections of the ABA, yet offering the full package in one place. As a result of our geographical diversity and its importance to us, our membership recruitment efforts are increasingly aimed outside the borders of the US. The United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law is a unique, multimedia resource which provides the United Nations with the unprecedented capacity to provide high quality international law training and research materials to an unlimited number of recipients on a global level. Department of State – Foreign Policy Department Mission Statement: Advance freedom for the benefit of the American people and the international community by helping to build and sustain a more democratic, secure, and prosperous world composed of well-governed states that respond to the needs of their people, reduce widespread poverty, and act responsibly within the international system. International Court of Justice The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It was established in June 1945 by the Charter of the United Nations and began work in April 1946. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). Of the six principal organs of the United Nations, it is the only one not located in New York (United States of America). The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. International Criminal Court (ICC) The International Criminal Court (ICC), governed by the Rome Statute, is the first permanent, treaty based, international criminal court established to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community. The ICC is an independent international organisation, and is not part of the United Nations system. Its seat is at The Hague in the Netherlands. Although 66

the Court’s expenses are funded primarily by States Parties, it also receives voluntary contributions from governments, international organisations, individuals, corporations and other entities. International Criminal Tribunals and Special Courts The United Nations has established special international criminal tribunals in Rwanda and Yugoslavia to prosecute those responsible for atrocities during times of war and genocide. Successful convictions of these political and military leaders are meant to bring justice to victims and to deter others from committing such crimes in the future. International Humanitarian Law International humanitarian law is a set of rules which seek, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It protects persons who are not or are no longer participating in the hostilities and restricts the means and methods of warfare. International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or the law of armed conflict. International Organization Immunities Act To vitalize the status of international organization of which United States is a member and facilitate their activities Congress has enacted the International Organization Immunities Act, which among other provisions defines the capacity of such organizations. Private International Law – Department of State Welcome to the Private International Law site, maintained by the Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Private International Law (L/ PIL) at the U.S. Department of State. The purpose of this web site is to provide a convenient location to find treaties in force for the United States, other international instruments, and information on current negotiations and projects covering the private international law of such areas as trade and commerce, finance and banking, trusts and estates, family and children matters, and international judicial assistance. US Foreign Relations – Office of the Historian The Office of the Historian is responsible, under law, for the preparation and publication of the official historical documentary record of U.S. foreign policy in the Foreign Relations of the United States series. It researches and writes historical studies on aspects of U.S. diplomacy for use by policymakers in the Department and in other agencies, as well for public information.nificant diplomatic activity. 67

US, UN and International Law By Global Policy Forum. This section posts articles on US policy towards the UN, international law and treaties. The section includes special coverage of the torture, prison abuse, rendition and indefinite detentions at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib and other US-run prisons around the world. International Treaties Brussels Convention and Lugano Convention The Brussels Convention and the Lugano Convention aim to «deter­ mine the international jurisdiction of their courts, to facilitate recog­nition and to introduce an expeditious procedure for securing the enforcement of judgments, authentic instruments and court settlements». GATT 1994 The Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations”, signed by ministers in Marrakesh on 15 April 1994 is 550 pages long and contains legal texts which spell out the results of the negotiations since the Round was launched in Punta del Este, Uruguay, in September 1986. In addition to the texts of the agreements, the Final Act also contains texts of Ministerial Decisions and Declarations which further clarify certain provisions of some of the agreements. Guide to Research on Vienna Convention on Consular Relations Notification Requirements Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to which 170 nations are party, requires a nation arresting or detaining a foreign national to afford the detainee access to his or her consulate and to notify the foreign national of the right of consular access. In the number of U.S. cases involving foreign nationals, defendants have raised the issue of failure by the detaining authorities to make the necessary notifications. Hague Conference on Private International Law Since 1893, the Hague Conference on Private International Law, a melting pot of different legal traditions, has developed and serviced Conventions which respond to global needs in the following areas: International Protection of Children, International Family and Family Property Relations, International Legal Co-operation and Litigation and International Commercial and Finance Law. 68

Inter-American Specialized Conferences on Private International Law Under the auspices of the Organization of American States, InterAmerican Specialized Conferences on Private International Law (known by the Spanish Acronym as CIDIPs) play a central role in the harmonization and codification of Private International Law in the Western Hemisphere. Six Conferences have been held in various cities in the Americas. Multilaterals Project The Multilaterals Project, begun in 1992, is an ongoing project at The Fletcher School, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts to make available the texts of international multilateral conventions and other instruments. Although the project was initiated to improve public access to environmental agreements, the collection today also includes treaties in the fields of human rights, commerce and trade, laws of war and arms control, and other areas. Most of the texts date from 1945 or later, but the collection also includes historical texts, from the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia to the Covenant of the League of Nations. NATO – North Atlantic Treaty Organization The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is an alliance of 26 countries from North America and Europe committed to fulfilling the goals of the North America Treaty signed 4 April 194927. Researching Customary International Law, State Practice and the Pronouncements of States regarding International Law This research guide is intended to be an introduction to the concept of international custom and its place as a source of international law. The primary focus is on researching state practice and the pronouncements of states regarding international law as evidence of custom. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Signed at Vienna, 23 May 1969. Entry into force: 27 January 1980. It applies to treaties between States. Organizations Related to International Law American Society of International Law 27 Bentham J. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. – London: T. Payne, 2012. – P. 6.

69

The mission of the American Society of International Law is to foster the study of international law and to promote the establishment and maintenance of international relations on the basis of law and justice. Inter-American Development Bank The IDB provides solutions to development challenges in 26 countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, partnering with governments, companies and civil society organizations. International Bar Association The International Bar Association (IBA), established in 1947, has a membership of 30,000 lawyers and 195 bar associations and law societies. The IBA has considerable expertise in providing assistance to the global legal community. International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) is the voice of world business championing the global economy as a force for economic growth, job creation and prosperity. Because national economies are now so closely interwoven, government decisions have far stronger international reper-cussions than in the past. International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Unidroit) The International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (Unidroit) is an independent intergovernmental Organisation with its seat in the Villa Aldobrandini in Rome. Its purpose is to study needs and methods for modernising, harmonising and co-ordinating private and in particular commercial law as between States and groups of States. International Law Institute For fifty years the International Law Institute has worked to address the challenges faced by the international community by promoting economic development and rule of law. International Monetary Fund (IMF) The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization of 185 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world. US Obligations Under International Law 70

Nations are bound by treaties they choose to sign and fundamental principles that fall under the category of customary international law. There is no single world body that passes laws that are bind all the nations of the world. Thus, application of international law to the United States is not as clear cut as the application of domestic U.S. law. World Bank The World Bank is a vital source of financial and technical assistance to developing countries around the world. We are not a bank in the common sense. We are made up of two unique development institutions owned by 185 member countries – the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Development Association (IDA). Publications Related to International Law American University International Law Review The American University International Law Review publishes articles, critical essays, comments, and casenotes on a wide variety of international law topics, including public and private international law, the law of international organizations, international trade law, international arbitration, and international human rights. AUILR also publishes pieces on topics of foreign and comparative law that are of particular interest to the international legal community28. Chicago Journal of International Law The University of Chicago Law School’s Chicago Journal of International Law is an interdisciplinary forum for discussion and analysis of international law and policy issues. CJIL is committed to presenting timely and concise scholarly work. CJIL is published twice yearly. Digest of International Law The Office of the Legal Adviser publishes the annual Digest of United States Practice in International Law to provide the public with a ready source of current information on the views and practice of the Government of the United States in public and private international law. Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 28 Slomanson W. Fundamental Perspectives on International Law. Boston, USA: Wadsworth. – 2011. – P. 4-5.

71

Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law is published each spring and fall. DJCIL is a very influential, specialized journal devoted exclusively to the issues of comparative and international law. Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy is a venue for the exchange of ideas pertaining to the international commercial and legal environment. It publishes high quality scholarly research to stimulate dialogue and debate on both topics of current interest to the international community and longer-standing issues of international relations. European Journal of International Law The European Journal of International Law is firmly established as one of the world’s leading journals in its field. With its distinctive combination of theoretical and practical approaches to the issues of international law, the journal offers readers a unique opportunity to stay in touch with the latest developments in this rapidly evolving area. Foreign and International Law – Library of Congress Researching foreign, international, and comparative law can be an intimidating proposition. There is such a vast amount of material available. In order to help provide a starting point for researching foreign, international, and comparative law, the Law Library of Congress has prepared a guide to reference sources, compilations, citations guides, periodicals (indexes and databases), dictionaries, web resources, free public web sites, subscription-based services, subjectspecific web sites, and country overviews. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies The Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies is a faculty-edited interdisciplinary journal focusing on the intersections of global and domestic legal regimes, markets, politics, technologies, and cultures. Students are also integrally involved in the production of the Journal. Penn State International Law Review Established in 1982, the Penn State International Law Review is celebrating twenty-five years of excellence during 2006 – 2007. Originally, the Dickinson Journal of International Law, the ILR was Pennsylvania’s first internationally focused student-edited law journal. Today, the Penn State International Law Review serves as an integral component for Penn State Law’s highly respected international legal 72

program. As one of the most respected and cited International legal perio­dicals in the world, the ILR publishes articles on public and pri­vate international law written by leading government (domestic and foreign) officials, legal scholars, private practitioners, and law students. Stanford Journal of International Law Founded in 1966, the Stanford Journal of International Law is one of the oldest and most reputed international law journals in the United States. Publishing two regular issues each year, the journal seeks to promote scholarship of the highest quality through timely, innovative, and important pieces on international and comparative legal topics. The journal invites contributions from professors, practitioners, legislators, judges, and Stanford Law School students. Touro International Law Review The Touro International Law Review is a student-run and facultyand-alumni-advised publication. Originally founded in 1989 as a print publication, it is now available solely online in order to meet its new mission to provide a forum for timely and engaging discourse in important international law issues29.

13. WORLD DIPLOMACY The Department for International Development (DFID) is a United Kingdom government department with a Cabinet Minister in charge. It was separated from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 1997. The goal of the department is «to promote sustainable development and eliminate world poverty». The current Secretary of State for International Development is Justine Greening. A 2010 report by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) identified DFID as an international development leader in times of global crisis. DFID’s main programme areas of work are Education, Health, Social Services, Water Supply and Sanitation, Government and Civil Society, Economic Sector (including Infrastructure, Production Sectors and Developing Planning), Environment Protection, Research, and Humanitarian Assistance. 29

International Law / http://www.hg.org/international-law.html.

73

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, commonly called the Foreign Office or the FCO is a department of the United Kingdom government. It is responsible for protecting and promoting UK interests worldwide. It was created in 1968 by merging the Foreign Office and the Commonwealth Office. The FCO promotes British interests overseas, supporting our citizens and businesses around the globe. FCO  is a ministerial department, supported by  12 agencies and public bodies30. The head of the FCO is the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, commonly abbreviated to «Foreign Secretary» (currently William Hague). This position is regarded as one of the four most prestigious appointments in the Cabinet, alongside those of Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary. Together with the Prime Minister, these are the Great Offices of State. The FCO is managed from day-to-day by a civil servant, the Permanent Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who also acts as the Head of the Diplomatic Service. This position has been held by Simon Fraser since late August 2010. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office The FCO was formed in 1968, from the merger of the short-lived Commonwealth Office and the Foreign Office. The Commonwealth Office had been created only in 1966, by the merger of the Commonwealth Relations Office and the Colonial Office, and the Commonwealth Relations Office had been formed by the merger of the Dominions Office and the India Office in 1947 – with the Dominions Office having been split from the Colonial Office in 1925. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office held responsibility for international development issues between 1970 and 1974, and again between 1979 and 1997. From 1997, this became the responsibility of the separate Department for International Development. The National Archives website contains a Government timeline to show the departments responsible for Foreign Affairs from 1945. When David Miliband took over as Foreign Secretary in June 2007, 30 Report by the Development Assistance Committee // www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/ publications1/OECD-DAC-UK-Peer-Review-Report-July2010.pdf.

74

he set in hand a review of the FCO’s strategic priorities. One of the key messages of these discussions was the conclusion that the existing framework of ten international strategic priorities, dating from 2003, was no longer appropriate. Although the framework had been useful in helping the FCO plan its work and allocate its resources, there was agreement that it needed a new framework to drive its work forward. The new strategic framework consists of three core elements: • A flexible global network of staff and offices, serving the whole of the UK Government. • Three essential services that support the British economy, British nationals abroad and managed migration for Britain. These services are delivered through UK Trade and Investment (UKTI), consular teams in Britain and overseas, and the UK Border Agency (UKBA). Four policy goals: • countering terrorism and weapons proliferation and their causes • preventing and resolving conflict • promoting a low carbon, high-growth, global economy • developing effective international institutions, in particular the UN and the EU. In August 2005, a report by management consultant group Collinson Grant was made public by Andrew Mackinlay. The report severely criticized the FCO’s management structure, noting: • The Foreign Office could be «slow to act». • Delegation is lacking within the management structure. • Accountability was poor. • The FCO could feasibly cut 1200 jobs. • At least £48 million could be saved annually. The Foreign Office commissioned the report to highlight areas which would help it achieve its pledge to reduce spending by £87 million pounds over three years. In response to the report being made public, the Foreign Office stated it had already implemented the report’s recommendations31. In April 2006 a new executive agency was established, FCO Services, to provide corporate service functions. In April 2008 it moved to Trading Fund status so it had the ability to provide similar services 31

Budget 2011. – London: HM Treasury. – 2011. – Р. 48.

75

which it already offers to the FCO, to other government departments and even outside businesses. On 25 April 2010, the department apologised after The Sunday Telegraph obtained a «foolish» document calling for the upcoming September visit of Pope Benedict XVI to be marked by the launch of «Benedict-branded» condoms, the opening of an abortion clinic and the blessing of a same-sex marriage. «Apology over Pope ‘condom’ memo». In 2012, the Foreign Office was criticised by Gerald Steinberg, of the Jerusalem-based research institute, NGO Monitor, saying that the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development to Palestinian NGOs provided more than £500,000 in funding to Palestinian NGOs which he says «promote political attacks on Israel». In response, a spokesman for the Foreign Office said, «we are very careful about who and what we fund. The objective of our funding is to support efforts to achieve a two-state solution. Funding a particular project for a limited period of time does not mean that we endorse every single action or public comment made by an NGO or by its employees»32. Investigate UK funding of Palestinian NGOs’ In September 2012, the FCO and the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs signed a Memorandum of Understanding on diplomatic cooperation, which promotes the co-location of embassies, the joint provision of consular services, and common crisis response. The project has been criticised for further diminishing the UK’s influence in Europe. Gaspers, Jan (November 2012). «At the Helm of a New Commonwealth Diplomatic Network: In the United Kingdom’s Interest?». This is a list of diplomatic missions of the United Kingdom, excluding honorary consulates. The United Kingdom has a large, global network of diplomatic missions. British diplomatic missions to other capitals of other Commonwealth countries are known as High Commissions (headed by ‘High Commissioners’). For three Commonwealth countries, (namely India, Nigeria and Pakistan) the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) still uses the term ‘Deputy High Commission’ for Consulates-General (headed by Deputy High Commissioners), although this terminology is being phased out. 32

Watson A. Diplomacy. The dialogue between states. – L., 1982. – P.76.

76

In 2004, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) carried out a review of the deployment of its diplomatic missions, and subsequently over a two-year period closed its missions in Nassau (Bahamas), Asunción (Paraguay), Dili (Timor Leste), Maseru (Lesotho), Mbabane (Swaziland), Antananarivo (Madagascar), Nuku΄alofa (Tonga), Tarawa (Kiribati) and Port Vila (Vanuatu). Additionally several consulates and trade offices were also closed, including those in Fukuoka (Japan), Vientiane (Laos), Douala (Cameroon), Phoenix, San Juan and Dallas (United States), Oporto (Portugal) and Frankfurt, Leipzig and Stuttgart (Germany). Other consulates in Australia, Germany, France, Spain, New Zealand and the United States were downgraded and staffed by local personnel only. In 2012, Foreign Secretary William Hague announced the opening of embassies in Laos, Liberia and Haiti, the re-opening of embassies in El Salvador and Paraguay and a Consulate-General in Recife, Brazil. He also said that by 2015, the UK would have opened up to eleven new embassies and eight new Consulates or Trade Offices. British diplomacy is a classic, a kind of standard, it had a huge impact on the development of diplomacy in the XIX-XX centuries. So far for the preparation of textbooks, for example, U.S. diplomats are works of British scientists and diplomats. First of all, the huge British diplomatic experience. The history of British diplomacy was started by a foreign country trade relations, and the first diplomatic document was Merchant Charter, dated 1303. The greatest strength of British diplomacy is the perfect knowledge of the subject, issues to be decided, the knowledge of the country in which to operate, encyclopedic information about foreign countries are passed from generation to generation. And when you consider that the British Empire, directly or indirectly owned almost half of the world («the country in which the sun never set»), it is clear that the English documentation usually is comprehensive. This British diplomacy and actively helped the British intelligence, which has been and continues to be closely linked to the Foreign Office. British diplomacy skillfully defends the interests of his country and its citizens. Establishing contacts with British diplomats and leading the conversation, keep in mind that they do not like to talk about global issues, 77

unlike the Americans, who had a passion for all kinds of doctrines. The British prefer to deal with specific issues of today or tomorrow, leaving the «space diplomacy» of the future scientists and journalists. The main purpose of British diplomacy was to not allow any state to dominate Europe, a Europe that now in connection with the creation of a united Germany is becoming more difficult, impossible task for her. That is why in the 90 years she has refused the theory of «balance of power». This theory would have forced her to act against Germany, which could worsen the situation in Britain. British diplomacy warily monitors changes in the international situation and the flexibility to react to all the changes in her. The British have a quality suitable for diplomacy. For example, their tendency to understatement, to hints. The British tend to avoid categorical. They are characterized by a tendency to avoid whenever possible simple answers «yes» and «no», which sometimes creates difficulties in understanding them foreigners. In the style of ornate (neither «yes» nor «no») are part and diplomatic documents. English is very idiomatic, one word can have many meanings, and therefore understanding the English language, an understanding of what is really meant to say an Englishman, and what he did not want to say it is not easy. Englishman extremely polite and requires the same treatment from others, he is silent, with new people will not talk and discuss any issues, it can be cold, and it is necessary to «talk». At the same time, it is very sensitive to hints, understands humor, but does not like «dirty» jokes, and sometimes condemned because noisy and not very decent German jokes. All this is reflected in diplomacy. «Silence gives consent», we say. For the English, silence is just silence, reluctant to answer and nothing more. It does not mean to agree with you. Cultural, educated Englishmen distinguished elegance of speech, and they like this refinement evaluate and respond in kind. British diplomats high professionalism, the ability to select the best time for negotiations. They insisted on improving their skills – undergo training in military colleges, universities, banks, various companies, etc33. By nature they are very cool, in critical situations, behave confi33 Попов В.И. Меняется страна традиций. Заметки посла и ученого о Британии восьмидесятых. – М., 1991. – С.151.

78

dently, do not exaggerate the danger calmly react to changing circumstances. Their experience of behavior in extreme situations is worth studying. Commending British diplomacy, we cannot see and the disadvantages. Three-year life of diplomats abroad annoys themselves diplomats and residents of the host country. Second, an English diplomat making contacts and a third is preparing for their dismantlement. Newly arrived diplomats begin to reestablish contact. Some distinguish overconfidence and snobbery of British diplomats. Sometimes it is so evident that prevents the establishment of truly friendly contacts on an equal basis. Of particular importance attached to British diplomats etiquette (it is very different from European). But the main thing is that British diplomats have set etiquette at the service of foreign policy. They either go to the breach of etiquette, if they are of benefit, or, conversely, bring the rules of etiquette to extremes. We can talk a lot about American diplomacy, even though it is relatively young and has a little more than a half century. It bears the imprint of the English, and his own face, it began to take on, perhaps, on the eve of the First World War, finally folded during the Second World War and after. One of the British researchers identified it with a phrase: «American diplomats seeking to create an idea of ​​their friendly relations with other countries, but it is necessary to win in competition with them». The arrogance of American diplomacy is often based on the idea that what is good for the United States – good for the world, which is good for the American citizen – good for any foreigner. They hardly realize that the American way of life and methods cause some irritation of the nations, they do not want to use «this way of life» to him. U.S. diplomats in comparison with other countries are relatively independent in making decisions, they love to bargain, great attention to link various issues that is a package solution. The fact that it represents the American diplomacy and diplomats, the best education system gives a young American diplomat in Washington. First place in the «technique of diplomacy» Americans put trust contacts and confidential meetings and work with so-called confidants – the ruling elite of the host State, to those who really know the situation in the country, its foreign policy, who to trust the country’s 79

leaders (not necessarily a Ministers should be, this could be the heads of departments and their deputies, through whose hands are all the solutions). As a rule, Americans give birth to contacts easier than the British, with little observance of the rules of etiquette. What to look for in the preparation of diplomats? Primarily on the ability of candidates to analyze. Interest requirements of the State Department documents. 1. Analytical part is to prevail over background, information. 2. Must be used in the analysis of all the available sources. 3. The document should be as short (1-2 pages). 4. In general, the document must be a model, «the art of diplomacy». Stringent requirements for the version of the document – it should be carefully edited – and to its submission (two days before the appointed time, he usually has to be prepared).  In the 70’s group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has attempted to create a generalized political portrait of an American diplomat. The survey revealed that the majority of foreign policy issues, U.S. diplomats hold more conservative views than employees of other government agencies, with the exception of the Pentagon. Although most diplomats applicant whether that «war is not a legitimate instrument of national policy», but 71% of the employees Foreign Service has approved the use of military force in the Caribbean, and 64.8% justified U.S. intervention in Southeast Asia34. In the U.S., the rules of etiquette and protocol is simpler than in England.  French diplomacy – one of the founders of modern international diplomacy, and she had a huge impact on diplomacy today. Without belittling the merits of diplomacy of other countries, for example, that in the first three of diplomacy for years to learn English, French, and Oriental.  French language, from the XVIII century became the diplomatic language and replaced Latin, which until then were all the diplomatic negotiations and drawing up a document. French diplomatic service was very large compared with the services of other foreign countries. 34 Матвеев В.М. Дипломатическая служба США. – М.: Международные отноше­ ния. – 1987. – С.167.

80

As one researcher said, «and now, even though French diplomacy does not take a leadership role in the world of diplomacy, it is the most impressive, in part due to its manner, in part because of its arrogance, which, as it is part of the national diplomacy.» Even in the 80 years of the French Foreign Ministry began to intensify the use of young diplomats in the field of economic relations, the company gladly accepted these professionals in the negotiations, and they often succeed. The French diplomacy is long and brilliant history. Cardinal Richelieu was one of the first public figures who said that diplomacy – is a continuous process involving constant negotiation. Back in the early XVII century. He understood the importance of public opinion for the success of diplomacy and directed the French diplomats to actively spreading propaganda on account of public opinion and the need to influence it. Formulating foreign policy and diplomatic line of France, A. Juppé, a former foreign minister, in the first place to the need for France to play an independent role in the world, he opposed to any state claim to world leadership. French diplomats are very careful to not to detract from the country’s independence and sovereignty. Frenchmen never underestimate power of partner when dealing negotiations. They are very careful to ensure to maintain its independence and not to yield. They negotiate hard and usually have no fallback position, hoping to win. They like to cite the example of Napoleon. French diplomacy distinguished charm, charisma. The French consider themselves the elite, the reason for this, they give the results of the French science and culture – art, literature, philosophy, and though they are, if they say it, deny it, but in his heart admired for its history. Of course, they appreciate people who know their history, culture, architecture, and it is necessary to keep in mind when talking with them. French Ministry of Foreign Affairs holds a very strict selection of candidates. For example, in 1952, of 681 people, taking exams at the National School of Administration, admitted 62, and adopted at the Quai d’Orsay only 6 people. France’s ambassadorial corps extremely strong – are professionals 81

of the highest class. Among them are the Ponse F., L. Noel, and J. Cambon, Foreign Minister L. Barth, a victim of fascist terror. Among French diplomats were many prominent writers. This is why the French Foreign documents differ grace, subtlety and yet informative. The French appreciate and beautifully composed paper that come to them. «The word from the French, not only precedes the cause and always accompanies him, but at times it replaces it with» – writes counselor of the Soviet Embassy in France, who knew the country and its diplomats. In 1946 he published a collection of texts from the works of the French writer-diplomats. Among them were François René Chateaubriand, founder of French Romanticism, Stendhal (consul in Italy), Alphonse Lamartine, Paul Claudel, Alexis Leger (he was not even the Secretary General Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and in France – it’s practically the head of the ministry). Writer Bourbon Bassett was assistant director of the Cabinet Minister of Foreign Affairs Robert Schuman, the writer Romain Gary Consul General of France in Los Angeles and won the Prix Goncourt as a novelist. Voltaire was the secretary of the French ambassador at the Hague. National characteristics of French diplomacy must note this: they pay more attention to the preliminary arrangements. French diplomats prefer to advance to discuss this or other issues, can be separated, only to resolve the question definitively. They were very courteous, polite, and friendly, tend to joke, but serious discussion not avoid confrontational style. Two more features of their style. First, a variety of methods and techniques. With some French diplomats and politicians conversations and contacts can be conducted in an elite Washington, on the same subject with other members – in a totally different. Second feature noted by Oxford professor T. Zeldin – between the French are very big differences as education, culture, and political views and these differences are growing. Therefore, to each other party should be taken very carefully and only get to know the partner, to develop tactics to communicate with him. The diplomats, who worked in France for a long time and who know her well, saying: «We need to break the crust, and then you have 82

to establish a good relationship of trust». Upper echelon of French society resembles the British and the French go to the ordinary contacts freely. However, in recent years relating to the various movements and parties are different. There is even hostility among ordinary Frenchmen to North Africans, especially the Arabs, and, oddly enough, a good attitude to blacks. Well the French are Russian. Maybe it’s the influence of large Russian emigration, which has established itself in France, on the positive side. Keep in mind an important role of French ambassadors, while France stingy assignment diplomats that rank. Until relatively recently, this rank had just five diplomats. For their education and erudition French diplomats have always stood out among the diplomats of other Western countries. German diplomacy. E. Clark characterizes German diplomats: they differ punctuality. In complex situations, especially young employees of embassies, sometimes nervous. In negotiations behave hard and forceful. No wonder Mr. Nicholson attributed German negotiators to «soldiers», noting their aggressive style of negotiating. The Germans paid great attention to the training of diplomatic personnel. German Foreign Ministry has huge library. And in the 5060’s, our diplomats and celebrated their good basic training. As for East Germany, she sent for training students in our School of Diplomacy, and then the academy. Its graduates, many advisers and ambassadors. It has trained and Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the GDR G. Krolikovsky. German perseverance, diligence, accuracy did their job, and they were among the best students of the Academy. German diplomats distinguishes good legal training, in-depth study of legal problems. In the negotiations of the systematic features, they like to discuss the issues one by one. From my personal experience with German diplomats would like to note the following. They are very resourceful; able to reach out and appreciate the connection is established. German diplomats are fluent in two or three languages. This is, as a rule, experts on this or another issue, country or region. Traditionally, the German diplomat distinguished sense of subordination, internal discipline and punctuality. Sensitive observer can observe the behavior of the German diplomats which manifestation of superiority, arrogance 83

and even omniscience. For young professionals officially high demands: diplomat «must possess important qualities: for example, a broad variety of interests, sociability and receptivity, flexibility, and the ability to endure mental and physical stress». Modern German career diplomat – is a well-educated professional, executive employee who values the ​​ paid site. Beginning in 1994, the Federal Foreign Office takes drastic measures to a significant improvement on the practical training with a focus on domestic business. 1. Tougher set in the Foreign Ministry, from candidates in diplomacy requires not only the availability of higher education, but some additional «plus» (work abroad, second degree, knowledge of complex and rare languages). 2. Enhanced control over the self-study literature diplomats. 3. Introduced the practice of a four-week training in international trade and finance. It is supplemented by a two-week workshop in which the participation of high-class managers of German companies played the typical model of lobbying national business abroad. 4. Young diplomats are two three-week internship at the German companies. 5. The Germans abandoned the example of the USA, who practices the principle of specialization of diplomats. The Foreign Ministry of Germany now believes that every diplomat should be able to work in any region and on any subject. 6. Although the normal period of service abroad for 3-4 years, but ideally they believe that in the future diplomat should be in the host country for much longer. Finally, a word about the peculiarities of German etiquette and table manners. Germans usually called title everyone with whom they talk (Mr. President, Mr. Minister, and so on). If you do not know the title of the interlocutor, the usual treatment of Herr Doctor, a married woman can be called a Frau Doctor. Germans do not like it when guests arrive late, and do not arrive late. Japanese diplomacy. Although Japanese diplomacy is relatively new (its history goes back to a little more than 100 years), it can be 84

proud of their professionalism. Diplomatic staff are carefully chosen. Candidates undergo rigorous examinations at the entry level. Japanese diplomats principle is constant updating of their knowledge. Required of them every day, «persevere» to spare no effort, forgetting the personal time. Much attention is paid to the study of English as a world language, as it is believed that its diplomats global knowledge is particularly important. One interesting feature of the features footage of Japanese diplomacy – the recognition of the positive role of the dynasty in diplomacy, which, according to the Japanese, promotes professional diplomats and their loyalty to the state. In Japan, one often encounters the diplomats in the third and even the fourth generation. Many of them rose to the highest positions. There are occasions when, after getting three brothers. Preference in hiring is given to children of diplomats or those who for a long time was abroad, it is believed that these young people already have some experience and know the language. In Japanese diplomacy is developed and maintained an atmosphere of high demands to the employees. All the successes and shortcomings of diplomatic fixed. The strength of Japanese diplomacy is a careful study of the issues, a good preparation for conversations, contacts, and negotiations. At the same time, not all Japanese diplomats are able to navigate the challenging environment. It is known that diplomats prefer not to say «yes» or «no» and do so only as a last resort. For the Japanese to pronounce the word «yes» and «no» is not a simple matter. They also carefully avoided the word «cannot», «do not know», extending this practice to the area of ​​the business relationship. The Japanese do not tend to express themselves in straight lines, and the meaning of phrases deliberately obscured reservations, which provide uncertainty. From generation to generation, they were taught to speak plainly, to avoid a clash of interests, advised to avoid direct statements. In conversations, contacts with the Japanese should be aware of another line, however, peculiar to diplomats and other countries – they do not tolerate the slightest insult or rude word spoken refrain themselves from such expressions. Their politeness makes them good company. Correctness, courtesy of Japanese even in vogue than ever 85

the diplomats. Naturally, they are waiting on you the same kindness and courtesy. Japanese delicacy prized above all else. And perhaps even more than the British, the Japanese valued silence, which is categorical words. All these qualities are necessary, of course, be borne in mind when you set a contact with the Japanese. A few words about the Japanese-style networking and negotiating. They pay much attention to the study of those who are contacted and negotiations, personal relationships with our partners. With the weaker partner, they can move away from his tactful handling and have to resort to threats. The Japanese are very sensitive to public opinion: an example of this – the campaign for the return of the «northern territories», which for many years to put the brakes on the development of bilateral Russian-Japanese relations. Japanese (as opposed to, say, the Italians) inherent accuracy. Their style – bound, the accuracy in time, in the performance of promises. The Japanese know how to listen to a partner, show the attention, encouraging the interlocutor to speak, which, however, is not to be understood as agreeing with your point of view35.

14. POLITICAL AND DIPLOMATIC RECOGNITION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN Kazakhstan’s foreign policy was formulated shortly after Kazakhstan gained its independence on December 16, 1991. The first President of the independent Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, indicated that diplomacy’s main objective was to create and maintain favorable conditions for steady development of the Kazakhstan based on political and economic reforms. The nature of these reforms determines the nation’s foreign policy priorities, impartiality, and a desire to be fully involved in both international and regional events. The primary goals of Kazakhstan’s foreign policy are as follows: • Protect national interests. • ���������������������������������������������������������������� Provide favorable conditions for political and economic development. 35

Berridge G.K. Diplomacy. Theory and practice. – L., 1995. – P.245.

86

• Develop strategic cooperation with leading countries and regions of the world. • Improve cooperation with international organizations. • Strengthen democratic principles within the new world order. • ������������������������������������������������������������������ Contribute to global and regional security and stability while opposing new threats such as, terrorism, drug trafficking, and organized crime. • Participate in the processes of regional and global economic integration. • Promote democracy as well as social and human development. • Protect the environment and sustain development. • The Government made key decisions and adopted policies regarding: • The military • Politics • Economics • Democratic reforms • A new state governing system These decisions were essential in easing Kazakhstan’s transition to the world community and helped create a foreign policy in harmony with the global political trend towards liberalization. One of the most important decisions Kazakhstan made during the last 15 years was to become a non-nuclear state and pursue a policy of nonproliferation. Kazakhstan’s diplomacy was successful in developing positive relations with 140 countries and helping it to become a member of 64 international political and economic organizations. In March 1992, Kazakhstan was accepted into the United Nations Organization and has played an active role in its initiatives for the past 18 years. There have been no conflicts or confrontations between Kazakhstan and other countries to date, thus further underscoring the effectiveness of the nation’s diplomacy. Global Integration Kazakhstan has signed more than 1,300 international and intergovernmental contracts and agreements establishing a practical, contractual, and legal framework for relations with other countries. Furthermore, to create conditions required for integration into global and regional processes, Kazakhstan has established active cooperation 87

with the majority of North American, European, and Asian countries as well as their chief regional organizations, including the: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Participation in regional and global affairs and events is necessary to strengthening Kazakhstan’s independence. The nation is involved in several global transformation processes that highlight the issue of interdependence. Problems that were once considered domestic or regional now have a larger impact on the world, causing globalization to become the dominant factor in world politics. Although interde­pen­ dence is a factor in areas such as finance, technology, and information technology (IT), the globalization of the economy is gaining influence and importance in society as it affects major political decisions. Foreign policy has become an integral part of Kazakhstan’s state policy. Consequently, the Republic has found ways to coordinate its own interests with those of other countries. Kazakhstan is represented by more than 70 diplomatic and consular offices worldwide. In the realm of diplomacy, the Republic has achieved several important milestones: Enactment of the Law on Diplomatic Service of the Republic of Kazakhstan Establishment of Kazakhstan’s foreign policy and international cooperation Gaining respect in the international community Increasing recognition of the Republic’s foreign policy’s principles within the diplomatic community For the first time in its history, Kazakhstan was elected to the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) in November 2006. It gained the support of 187 of 192 UN member states at the General Assembly – significantly more than the required two-thirds vote. Regional Alliances Kazakhstan continues to develop regional alliances in every corner of the world because of the increasing significance of globalization and economic integration. Many countries recognize their national goals can only be achieved through developing regional cooperation. For this reason, Kazakhstan has undertaken efforts to promote regional 88

economic integration. For example, the city of Astana has increased its cooperation with the: • Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) • Eurasian Economic Association • Central Asian Economic Association • Shanghai Cooperation Organization In early 2005, Kazakhstan called on its neighbors to help establish the Central Asian Union based on the following shared characteristics: • History • Ethnicity • Culture • Economy • Challenges • Future interests During a 1992 meeting with the UN, President Nazarbayev called for an initiative to establish the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-building measures in Asia (CICA), designed to develop and strengthen security and related organizations. Many Asian nations encouraged this initiative and a number of international organizations, including the United Nations, supported the process. In June 2002, the first CICA summit took place, and the “Almaty Act,” which outlines the principles of security and cooperation in Asia, was adopted. Kazakhstan continues to develop regional alliances in every corner of the world because of the increasing significance of globalization and economic integration. Many countries recognize their national goals can only be achieved through developing regional cooperation. For this reason, Kazakhstan has undertaken efforts to promote regional economic integration. For example, the city of Astana has increased its cooperation with the: • Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) • Eurasian Economic Association • Central Asian Economic Association • Shanghai Cooperation Organization In early 2005, Kazakhstan called on its neighbors to help establish the Central Asian Union based on the following shared characteristics: • History • Ethnicity 89

• Culture • Economy • Challenges • Future interests During a 1992 meeting with the UN, President Nazarbayev called for an initiative to establish the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-building measures in Asia (CICA), designed to develop and strengthen security and related organizations. Many Asian nations encouraged this initiative and a number of international organizations, including the United Nations, supported the process. In June 2002, the first CICA summit took place, and the «Almaty Act», which outlines the principles of security and cooperation in Asia, was adopted. Kazakhstan’s Stance on Current International Issues Kazakhstan believes new threats to regional and global peace and stability require collective political will and global effort. Such threats include: • International terrorism • Drug trafficking • Interethnic and religious conflicts • Humanitarian crises • Poverty and epidemics • Illegal migration • Man-made environmental disasters The root causes of these threats lie in economic and political underdevelopment and degradation. Therefore, comprehensive agreement on collective mechanisms and instruments is essential to successfully address these threats. Afghanistan The UN and its Security Council are the most appropriate commissions to accomplish this two-fold task. Kazakhstan supports the UN and looks to it to undertake effective efforts to address these new threats. The UN can play a decisive role in preserving cultural diversity and civilization in Afghanistan Kazakhstan favors a comprehensive and continued international effort, led by the UN, to bring lasting peace, economic recovery, and humanitarian relief to Afghanistan. Illegal drug production and trafficking in Afghanistan remain major international concerns, particu90

larly for neighboring countries like Kazakhstan. Consequently, Kazakhstan joined the International Antiterrorist Coalition and pledged assistance to the Afghan Government at the 2006 London Afghanistan Compact Conference. At the international conference in Afghanistan later that year, Kazakhstan’s Foreign Minister offered a concept of a «broader Central Asia» that envisions Afghanistan’s active economic cooperation with Central Asian countries. The institution of this concept could greatly contribute to the recovery and integration of Afghanistan both regionally and globally. Iraq Although the 2005 election was an important milestone in Iraq’s recovery, Kazakhstan believes the UN should continue to play an active and effective role in the nation by cooperating with Iraqi authorities and the international community. Joint efforts should ensure the following for Iraq: Independence Territorial integrity Sovereignty In cooperating with international efforts, Kazakhstan has sent a unit of 30 military engineers to join the International Stabilization forces in Iraq. The Middle East Kazakhstan supports the “road map” for the Middle East developed by the United States as a framework for establishing the peaceful coexistence of Israel and Palestine. To achieve this vision, the four sponsors of the Middle East Process must come to a consensus on how to fairly determine the legitimate interests and rights of both parties. Additionally, it is essential that Israel and Palestine demonstrate serious and significant signs of commitment before any additional steps are taken. Iran’s Nuclear Program As a state that voluntarily denounced nuclear weapons, Kazakhstan is committed to the principles of nonproliferation and the peaceful civilian use of nuclear energy. Therefore, Iran’s nuclear program remains a major concern as it affects both regional and global security. Kazakhstan supports the Treaty of the Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which allows nations to undertake nuclear research 91

and use atomic energy for peaceful purposes. However, they must cooperate closely with the UN and comply with the transparency and non-proliferation safeguards under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Kazakhstan believes diplomatic means must be employed by all invested countries to resolve the international issue related to Iran’s nuclear development program. Commitment to Assist Afghanistan Kazakhstan as a pro-active actor in the world scene regards the situation in Afghanistan as a priority on its foreign policy agenda and exerts serious efforts to facilitate reconstruction in this country which plays a crucial role in the long-term security and stability in Central Asia. That’s why rehabilitation of this country is a major foreign policy priority of Kazakhstan who strongly favours a comprehensive and continued international effort to bring lasting peace and economic development to Afghanistan. Over the last years Kazakhstan made significant contribution to stabilization of Afghanistan. In 2001 Kazakhstan provided no-cost over-flight rights for «Enduring Freedom» operation. Similar arrangements have been developed and adopted between Kazakhstan and Germany at the end of 2007. In 2002 Kazakhstan offered its emergency landing air fields for US military and cargo planes. Being one of the key parts of so-called Northern Distribution Network through which about 35% of all US cargo arrives to Afghanistan since 2009 Kazakhstan made its rail and motor roads available for transit of nonlethal shipments needed for NATO and U.S. forces in Afghanistan. In accordance with Bonn Process, 2006 London Conference, 2008 Paris Donor Conference on Afghanistan during 2006-2009 Kazakhstan has undertaken a number of steps like humanitarian aid to Afghanistan ($ 1 mln.), scholarships for 100 Afghani students to study in the national universities (geology, engineering, etc.), training programs for Afghanistan’s police and internal security service, signing with Government of Afghanistan the Protocol of Intentions to build railway road Termez (Uzbekistan) – Kabul (Afghanistan) with further access to the transport infrastructure of India, creation of the KazakhAfghan Intergovernmental Commission on Trade and Economic Cooperation. Kazakhstan is the only Central Asian country which has the As92

sistance Program on Reconstruction of Afghanistan. In 2007-2008 Governmental Action Plan on Assistance to Afghanistan has been successfully accomplished. Total financial funding in sum of $ 3 mln. has been provided to restore agricultural seed supply of Afghanistan ($0.5 mln.), to build a school in Samangan province ($0.28 mln.), a hospital in Bamiyan province ($0.57 mln.) and a road ($ 1.65 mln.). Under the next Governmental Action Plan on Assistance to Afghanistan for 2009-2011 Kazakhstan allocates $5 million for projects related to water supply, infrastructure development and delivery of grains and other commodities. Besides, Kazakhstan is ready to provide an enhanced education program to Afghanis in a variety of fields. The Action Plan allocates considerable resources for providing humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. The aid will include the delivery of commodities and materials as well as construction of four bridges crossing the river running through the town of Aibak and strengthening the river banks. According to the Action Plan, Afghan government will receive two aircrafts from their Kazakh counterparts: a MI-171 (to use for humanitarian cargo and rescue operations) and an IL-76 (for transporting humanitarian aid cargo from the United Arab Emirates to Afghanistan within the UN World Food Program). Another important step was decision by the Government of Kazakhstan to allocate $ 50 mln. to implement the Agreement on Cooperation in Education with Afghan Government. Under the Agreement Kazakhstan will educate 1000 Afghan people from 2010 to 2014. Education of Afghan people will be carried out in the universities of Kazakhstan in such specialties as healthcare, agriculture, police, border control, engineering, teachers and educators36. Kazakhstan also stands for more regional involvement to the solution of Afghan problem and, in this regard, fully supports US strategy on Afghanistan declared by President Barack Obama which contains comprehensive vision on how to operate in «AfPak» zone. Stabilization of Afghanistan was and continues to be one of the most important issues to discuss during high-level exchanges between Kazakhstan and USA. Contributions to International Security 36

Foreign Policy // http://www.kazakhembus.com/page/foreign-policy.

93

Nonproliferation has been the cornerstone of relations between two countries that traveled a long way from newly born cooperation to mature strategic partnership between Kazakhstan and the United States. Kazakhstan’s adherence to building peaceful world resulted in open and constructive Kazakh-US cooperation in nuclear nonproliferation based on the Nunn-Lugar Initiative «Cooperative Threat Reduction Program». In August 1991 President Nazarbayev has signed a historic decree to close the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site. Kazakhstan by then dismantled its infrastructure, and had signed agreements concerning nuclear armaments. Now Kazakhstan is implementing the proposals made by the President N. Nazarbayev during the Disarmament Conference to include Kazakhstan’s seismic stations in the International Monitoring System. On the 29th of December 1991 the leaders of Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine signed the Almaty Declaration in which they agreed on the control mechanisms over the operation of the nuclear arsenal of the former USSR and affirmed their international obligations concerning the strategic arms reduction. On the 23rd of May 1992 in Lisbon the representatives of Kazakhstan, Belarus, Ukraine, Russia and USA signed a five party Protocol to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. At the same time Belarus, Ukraine and Kazakhstan, as the states possessing nuclear weapons, committed themselves to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Thus Kazakhstan has made a historical decision to renounce its nuclear heritage which was an important step strengthening the statehood of our country as an integral part of existing world civilization. In accordance with the Lisbon Protocol, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine, as successor states to the USSR in terms of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, have agreed to participate, along with Russia and USA, in the work of the joint Commission on observance and inspection. They have also agreed to conclude agreements on the limits and restrictions specified by the Treaty. Kazakhstan ratified the Treaty and the Lisbon Protocol, which is an integral part of the Treaty, on the 2nd of July 1992. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty came into force in 1994 and paved the way to disarmament and the elimination 94

of more than 9,000 nuclear warheads under strict supervision. Kazakhstan was the first among the participants of the Lisbon Protocol to implement the provisions concerning removal of nuclear warheads. On the 21st of April 1996 the process of removal of 1416 nuclear warheads from Kazakhstan territory was completed. On the 30th of May 1995 the last nuclear test warhead, which was located in a gallery on the Semipalatinsk test site, was destroyed. Finally Kazakhstan had got rid of its nuclear inheritance forever. During the Soviet era, Kazakhstan was the site of the world’s fourth largest nuclear arsenal of more than 1000 deadly ICBMs which posed a menacing, if not dangerous, threat to international peace, depending on the leadership and direction of that country when it became independent in 1991. Fortunately, that leader was Nursultan Nazarbayev who acted decisively to order the dismantling and removal of the country’s entire nuclear weapons system. In 1994, Kazakhstan transferred more than a half-ton of weapons-grade uranium to the U.S. In 1995, Kazakhstan removed its last nuclear warhead and, with U.S. assistance, completed the sealing of 181 nuclear test tunnels in May 2000. Kazakhstan has signed the START Treaty (1992), the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (1993), the Chemical Weapons Convention, and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (2001). On March, 21, 2009 the Treaty on Nuclear Weapon Free Zone in Central Asia, signed on September, 8, 2006 in Semei, Kazakhstan, went into force. Kazakhstan welcomes the Treaty’s becoming effective and believes that it will contribute to global non-proliferation process and promote regional and international security. The new denuclearized zone in Central Asia has a number of unique features. First, one of the zone’s state namely, Kazakhstan, in the past possessed the fourth largest nuclear arsenal. Secondly, for the first time the denuclearized zone is created in Northern hemisphere. Thirdly, this Treaty becomes the first multilateral agreement in security area which brings together all five Central Asian countries. And finally, for the first time the denuclearized zone has been created in the region which borders upon two nuclear states. The Protocol on negative security assurances is an integral part of the Treaty. Under the Protocol, the nuclear weapon states pledge not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against any states member to the Treaty. 95

On June 18, 2009 over 25,000 locals, Kazakh dignitaries and world media gathered in Semey city to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Kazakhstan’s decision to stop nuclear tests at the Semipalatinsk Test Site. The meeting was held in Semey where President Nursultan Nazarbayev addressed an appeal to the international community to back up the peaceful mission of Kazakhstan. In his speech, President Nazarbayev emphasized that refusal to conduct nuclear testing has become possible due to courage and enthusiasm of millions of Kazakhs that put an end to the crimes against lives and health of the whole people of Kazakhstan. Besides he noted that «starting from the first days of the country’s independence, Kazakhstan did not leave its citizens alone with their problems. The work on social rehabilitation of the population and the territories suffered the harm of the nuclear tests is being constantly carried out. For these purposes the state utilized nearly KZT 34 billion (approximately $215 million)». In December 2009, the UN General Assembly unanimously accepted a resolution put forward by Kazakhstan proclaiming August 29, the day when in 1991 President N. Nazarbayev signed a decree on the closure of Semipalatinsk Test Site, as the ‘International Day against Nuclear Tests’. Recognizing the negative impact of nuclear testing on human life and the environment, as well as the importance of ending nuclear tests as one of the key means of achieving a nuclearweapon-free world, the Resolution sets out to commemorate a significant date in Kazakhstan’s – and, indeed, – the world’s history. The international community has fully appreciated Kazakhstan’s contribution to this nuclear disarmament programme. Paying a visit to Kazakhstan in April 2010 U.N. Secretary General Ban Kim-moon said «I highly commend the extraordinary leadership of president Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan, who courageously closed this nuclear test site and initiated the nuclear weapon-free zone in Central Asia. That’s a big milestone». During the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, D.C. in April, 2010 Obama praised President Nazarbayev «as really one of the model leaders in the world on nonproliferation and nuclear-safety issues». U.S. President B. Obama and other leaders also took positive view on President Nazarbayev’s proposition to establish an International 96

Nuclear Fuel Bank on the Kazakh territory. President Nazarbayev highly appraised the antinuclear initiatives and achievements of the U.S. President in ensuring international security, namely, convocation of the Global Nuclear Security Summit, signing the New START Treaty with Russia, adoption of the new US nuclear posture review which had become a great step towards establishment of the nuclearfree world. The Government of Kazakhstan’s contribution to the nuclear disarmament program demonstrates its commitment to the objectives of global security, establishing Kazakhstan as a critical member of the world community. Domestic and OSCE Political Agenda In May 2007, Kazakhstan modified its Constitution by: • Allowing for two consecutive presidential terms of five years each • Increasing the powers of Parliament • Introducing a proportional representation to elect members of the Majilis (Lower House) • Establishing a party-based parliamentary system Kazakhstan’s Foreign Minister Marat Tazhin outlined the agenda of Kazakhstan’s priorities and further political reforms at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE) Ministerial Meeting on November 29, 2007 in Madrid. The Madrid commitments were incorporated into the 2008 «State-of-the-Nation» address, in which President Nazarbayev declared that the government, judiciary, and legislature, in close cooperation with the ODHIR/ OSCE, international NGOs, and Kazakh civil society, are to define and implement upcoming political reforms. OSCE Chairmanship In its role as the 2010 OSCE Chairman-in-Office (CiO), the Republic of Kazakhstan intends to follow the «Ministerial Troika» of 2009-2011 and the newly developed «Quintet» format. Kazakhstan, the first non-European CiO, will pay specific attention to its Chairmanship agenda by focusing on longstanding OSCE agenda items, such as: • Democracy • Human rights • Unresolved conflicts 97

At the same time, Kazakhstan intends to introduce its own agenda: • Security – Strengthening security in Central Asia is one of the most important priorities of Kazakhstan’s efforts within the OSCE. In addition, Kosovo’s independence can potentially help end unresolved conflicts in Transcaucasia (Nagorno-Karabakh, Abkhazia) and other European regions (Crimea, Moldavia). • Inter-religious tolerance – Kazakhstan will enhance international laws that strengthen inter-religious and ethnic tolerance within the OSCE’s zone of responsibility. Foreign Minister Tazhin’s 2008 commitments to cooperate with the OIC and OSCE also illustrate Kazakhstan’s determination in strengthening inter-religious and interethnic dialogue at all levels. • Energy security – In support of the European Union energy security agenda, Kazakhstan will strengthen alternative energy. This corresponds with the United States’ policies of energy security, such as the Clean Technology Fund, that focus on alternative energy and the development of clean energy technologies. • Economic dimension – The core of Kazakstan’s economic vision consists of the following goals:  Promote systemic market reforms  Enhance healthy financial systems and markets  Improve governance  Increase transparency  Expand anti-corruption efforts These goals, along with additional assistance and significant investments, will be directed towards OSCE member countries, including: • Georgia • Kyrgyzstan • Tajikistan • Armenia • Ukraine • Romania • Bulgaria • Turkey Political integration 98

Kazakhstan is the only Central Asian country to adopt a government plan to provide $3 million in aid to assist Afghanistan. Accordingly, Kazakhstan will construct a highway, build a school and hospital, and supply agricultural stock to Afghanistan. This nation has also become one of Kazakhstan’s national security priorities; consequently, methods to enhance cooperation are being discussed in the following fields: • Trade • The mining sector • International auto and air communication • Mutual protection of investments37.

15. MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF KAZAKHSTAN Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan is the central executive body of the Republic of Kazakhstan. MFA is conduct foreign policy and heads the single system of the diplomatic service of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The Ministry carries out its activities in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan, international treaties, acts of the President and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan and other normative legal acts and the Regulations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan. «Regulations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan» Approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated 28 October 2004. It is a founding document of the Ministry. The main tasks of the Ministry are:  development of the concept and the basic directions of the foreign policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the submission of the relevant proposals to the President and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 37

Foreign Policy // www.kazakhembus.com/page/foreign-policy.

99

 implementation of the foreign policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the promotion of foreign policy and strengthening the international authority of the Republic of Kazakhstan;  protect the rights and interests of the Republic of Kazakhstan, its citizens and legal persons abroad;  implementation of diplomatic means and methods of Kazakhstan’s efforts to promote international peace, global and regional security;  provision of diplomatic means and methods to defend the sovereignty, security, territorial integrity and inviolability of borders of the Republic of Kazakhstan, its political, trade, economic and other interests in relations with other countries and in the international arena;  development of the Republic of Kazakhstan for the President proposals for foreign policy and economic strategy of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the international initiatives of the President;  the implementation of diplomatic and consular relations of Kazakhstan with other countries and international organizations;  coordination of international activities of other central government bodies of the Republic of Kazakhstan in order to place a common foreign policy, foreign economic policy and investment policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the relations with foreign states and international organizations;  analysis of the political and socio-economic situation in the world, foreign and domestic policies of foreign countries, international organizations and the provision of central state bodies of the Republic of Kazakhstan the necessary information. The main functions of the Ministry:  mission of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the relations with foreign states and international organizations;  implementation of the strategy of the international policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan;  organization of the negotiation and conclusion of international treaties of the Republic of Kazakhstan;  preparation of proposals for the conclusion, performance, amendment, suspension and termination of international treaties, making them in the prescribed manner to the President or the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 100

 representation in the prescribed manner to the President, Parliament and Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan of proposals and recommendations on relations of Kazakhstan with other countries and international organizations;  ensure the participation of the Republic of Kazakhstan in international organizations, conferences, meetings, forums, promoting the role of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as a member of the international community in addressing global and regional issues;  promotion of inter-parliamentary relations of the Republic of Kazakhstan and other countries;  implementation in the Republic of Kazakhstan and abroad consular functions regulated by rules of international law and the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan;  to support the development of relations and contacts with compatriots living abroad;  to promote the implementation of diplomatic and similar missions of foreign states and international organizations and consulates in the Republic of Kazakhstan to conduct within its competence coordination serving their organizations; Ministry is headed by the Minister, who is appointed and dismissed by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Minister has deputies, appointed and dismissed by the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, on the proposal of the Minister and in consultation with the Prime Minister of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the Head of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Minister directs the work of the Ministry and is personally responsible for the execution and implementation of its functions. Minister: - represents the Republic of Kazakhstan in the relations with foreign states and international organizations; - represents the Ministry in government agencies and other organizations; - defines the duties and powers of deputies.

101

102

This is a list of foreign ministers of the Republic of Kazakhstan. These persons head the  Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan. There were 6 people who headed this ministry since 1989. Three of them had been heading twice. Table – foreign Ministers of the Republic of Kazakhstan № 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Name Akmaral Kh. Arystanbekova Toleutay Y. Suleymenov Kanat B. Saudabayev Kassym-Jomart K. Tokayev Erlan A. Idrisov Kassym-Jomart K. Tokayev Marat M. Tazhin Kanat B. Saudabayev Yerzhan Kh. Kazykhanov Erlan A. Idrisov

Begin 1989 1991 1994 1994 1999 2003 2007 2009 2011 2012

End 1991 1994 1994 1999 2002 2007 2009 2011 2012 present time

ASSIGNMENTS FOR INDIVIDUAL WORK OF STUDENTS IWS 1. Think and say how important gestures, manners and body language in general are for creating an image of a person. Ask one or two of your classmates to show some gestures so that the rest of the class guess their meanings. To what extent are gestures and manners culturally deter­mined? Can you think of examples? Imitate the following actions; learn the vocabulary you don’t know. 1. Lick your lips. 2. Smile. 3. Grin. 4. Stare at the classmate. 5. Peer at them. 6. Frown. 7. Scowl. 8. Wink at a classmate. 9. Out. 10. Raise your eyebrows. 11. Point at a classmate. 12. Shrug your shoulders. 13. Make a face. 14. Nod. 15. Stake your head. 16. Blow smb. a kiss. 17. Sneer. 18. Beckon to smb. 19. Poke your tongue out at smb. 20. Scratch your head. 21. Wave goodbye. BODY LANGUAGE IN AMERICAN POLITICS Body language plays a big part in all communication. We can hardly say anything without expressing more through the movements 104

of our faces and bodies. It’s no wonder, then, that body language has been displayed in American Politics. When George Washington crossed the Delaware, according to the fa­mous painting, he was showing a body language stance of confidence. He did this by standing erect with his hands on his hips. There is evidence of the same stance by Woodrow Wilson during a time when he was lecturing at a university and by Walter Mondale during his presidential campaign. Many presidents and presidential hopefuls have shown body language signs of confidence and dominance. In the 1992 presidential debates, much of this was going on. Former President Bill Clinton, Ross Perot, and former President George Bush were all showing a palms-down gesture that symbol­ized their belief in their superiority. Another nonverbal cue of body language is a way you tilt your head back and hold it there. This has shown up in speeches by Mussolini, Roosevelt, George Wallace, and even Al Gore. It symbolizes a feeling of being disdain­ful, arrogant, and superior. Sometimes, body language shows how uncomfortable a politician is. In 19S8, former Vice President Dan Quayle was speaking in a televised debate. His opponent came out with a rather cutting remark, and Quayle’s response was an immediate «Adam’s apple jump». This is a classic sign of nervousness. The angle that you put yourself in relationship to others is a part of body language. Former President Richard Nixon was known for being uncom­fortable around people. This was shown in the way he set himself at a ninety degree angle to others he was dealing with. Much has been made of a 1988 Time magazine cover photo. It shows Jesse Jackson, who was making a run for president at the time. He is stand­ing with his arms crossed in front of his chest. Some say this is a classic de­fensive pose. This may or may not be a correct interpretation of his body language. A tense, pouting mouth can show uncertainty, frustration, and sadness. Photos were taken of former President Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky ordeal. In them he is often displaying such a form of body lan­guage. Former President Ronald Reagan and the Russian leader Mikhail Gorbachev had important matters to discuss at summit. There were 105

times when they didn’t agree. However, when they did agree, their body language showed it. At such times, they would face each other. They would also sit in similar postures. A Republican pollster, R. Teeter, did an experiment about body lan­guage in politics. He showed people visual footage of politicians campaign­ing. They were doing their usual speech-making, hand shaking, and the rest. There was no sound, only video. As it turned out, those who had only the body language of the candidates to read rated them the same way as those who knew their politics and views. It was shown that a lot is determined about choice of candidate by body lan­guage alone. Body language has played a part in American politics and will continue to do so. As long as Americans can see who they’re voting for, they will watch as much as they will listen. Thanks to body language, leaders are easier to judge. Task Answer the questions on the text. 1. What is the role of body language in communication? 2. How was George Washington shown when crossing the Delaware? 3. Who was showing a palms-down gesture and what did it symbolize? 4. What does tilting one’s head back and holding it there symbolize? 5. Which politicians were known for this gesture? 6. What does «Adam’s apple jump» mean and what does it signify? 7. What body language was President known for? What did it symbolize? 8. How do you interpret «standing with your arms crossed in front of your chest»? 9. What does pouting mouth show? 10. Who was depicted with this sign of body language? 11. What did body language reveal about Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gor­ bachev’s relationships? 12. What experiment did R. Teeter do? 13. Are leaders easier to judge thanks to body language? Prove it.

Read the text «Public Speaking and Body language» and give a 3-5-minute summary of it. TALKING HANDS Before the midterm elections, politicians have bombarded voters with ads and speeches. One neuroscientist says that their hand gestures make all the difference in how we perceive their message. 106

In the 2000 presidential campaign, many observers labeled Al Gore as stiff. Lauren Solomon, an image consultant, has worked with politicians and executives for 13 years on how to handle themselves in public speaking situations. She thinks the problem wasn’t just his language, it was his body language. «If you don’t believe that there is a link between your words and your ges­tures, then you’re only going to get half of the languaged message across to your audience», she says. Colgate University neuroscientist Spencer Kelly found that hand ges­tures actually influence how our brain processes speech. «Some people think that gestures are actually separate from language», he says. «I believe they are part of language and that means if you’re going to understand language, you can’t just focus on speech, you have to focus on speech and gesture». Task Read the text «Some Common Body Language Signals». Ask ten comprehension questions on the text. Ask your peer to give answers. SOME COMMON BODY LANGUAGE SIGNALS Everyone is constantly sending nonverbal information to the world through body language. It has been shown that even people blind from birth exhibit complex expressions of body language. Since it is so much a part of the human condition, it is important to know at least a little of this language. Body language tells others how you feel. If you walk briskly and erect, you exude confidence. If you sit back with your hands behind your head and your legs crossed, it can mean confidence too. However, it can also mean that you feel superior or are arrogant. Many different body language cues point to a lack of self confidence. If you are patting your hair or playing with it, you seem less self assured. Most people see nail-biting as a nervous behavior. Yet, it can also suggest a feel­ing of inferiority. Body language can help a person to tell if you are interested or bored. If you are bored, you might sit with your legs crossed and you might kick one leg slightly. You could rest your head in your hands and look down. This body language would make you appear bored. Your body language can show others if you are thinking. If you 107

hold your hand to your cheek you might be evaluating a situation. If you pinch the bridge of your nose with your eyes closed you might feel a negative evaluation. Making a decision might come when you are stroking your chin. Indecision could be shown by your body language when you tug at an ear. If you stand with your hands on your hips, your body language indicates that you are at the ready, and maybe even aggressive. If you steeple your fin­gers, you are showing the body language of authority. If you show an open palm, you are signaling sincerity and openness. Sit with your legs apart and you will also show that you are open and relaxed. If you are lying, be aware that you will probably show it with your body language. You will most likely rub or touch your nose. You can hardly help it because lying causes blood to rush there. You will also tend to look up and to the right. This body language corresponds to thinking about the future, which you are doing as you think up your lie. Doubt or disbelief can be shown through your body language as well. You might find yourself rubbing your eye as if you can’t believe what you’re seeing. You might also turn your head completely away, or even look down, as if you want no part of this tale. Learning what you do in displaying body language can be very impor­tant to you. It can keep you from leaving a bad impression. It can help you to get a point across. Even more than that, it is wise to be aware of the same behaviors in other people. Their body language can alert you to problems before any words can ever come close. Task Prepare a 3-5-minute summary of the text. IWS 2. Task Tell whatever you know about Winston Churchill. Task Read the general outline of Winston Churchill’s portrait and be prepared to do the tasks that follow. Give a Russian trans­lation of the text. Winston Churchill was born in 1874 at Blenheim Palace, the son of Sir Randolph Churchill, second son of the Duke of Marlborough, and Jenny Jerome, daughter of an American tycoon. Although immensely privileged, he was not happy as a child. Like many Victorian parents, 108

Churchill’s were distant figures, and he was brought up by his nanny before being sent away to boarding school. Churchill’s school career at Harrow was undistinguished and he was only accepted at the Royal Military Academy at Sandhurst after one failed attempt. He felt intellectually inferior because of his lack of university ed­ucation and also regretted the lack of practice in public speaking that he would have gained at university debates. Churchill also suffered from a slight lisp and a stammer, so from the begin­ning he set about drafting his speeches in such a way as to avoid many of the patterns of everyday speech that he found so difficult. He visited speech thera­pists and practiced both words and gestures in front of a mirror until he had mastered his craft. He sometimes spent weeks constructing the speeches them­selves, refining and improving them, and in this way came up with a style that was unique. His vocabulary was extremely large and he loved to fill his speeches with inventive word play, alliteration, vivid imagery and metaphors. However, this style of speech and his manner of delivery did not always suit the mood of the times. His big set-piece speeches in the House of Com­mons, to which he was first elected in 1901, were often criticized as being out of touch and contributing little to the debate. He delivered apocalyp­tic messages so often that politicians and the public alike were tempted to believe that he was crying wolf. But in the period from 1938 leading up to World War II people began to take more notice of his message. Elected Prime Minister in 1940 he suddenly appeared to be the right man for the time, and he was finally able to use his remarkable powers of oratory to rally and uplift the whole British nation in its struggle against the Nazi threat. It was in this context that Churchill delivered his short speech to the House of Commons just three days after being elected Prime Minister and forming his coalition cabinet. Task Give answers to the questions on the text. 1. Where and when was Winston Churchill born? 2. What did you learn of W. Churchill’s origin? 3. How did he spend his childhood years? 4. What did you learn about his education career? 5. How did Churchill acquire his two abilities of a successful public speaker? 6. Was he immediately successful as a rhetoric person? 109

Learn the vocabulary from the text. Translate the items into Russian and use them in contexts of your own. • а tycoon • to feel intellectually inferior • lack of university education • to lisp • to master one’s craft • to construct a speech • to refine • inventive word play • vivid imagery • to be elected to the House of Commons • the powers of oratory • to rally and uplift the nation • to deliver a speech • a coalition cabinet Read and the listen to W. Churchill’s speech «Blood, Sweat and Tears» which is his first speech to the House of Com­mons as Britain’s new Prime Minister (May 13, 1940). Trans­late it into Russian. Get prepared to do the tasks that follow. Upon his very first entrance into the House of Commons as Britain’s new Prime Minister on May 13, 1940, Winston Churchill only received a luke­warm reception from the assembly, while at his side, outgoing Prime Min­ister Neville Chamberlain was heartily cheered. Churchill then made this brief statement, which became one of the greatest calls-to-arms ever ut­tered. It came at the beginning of World War II when the armies of Adolf Hitler were roaring across Europe, seemingly unstoppable, conquering country after country for Nazi Germany, and when the survival of Britain itself seemed quite uncertain. On Friday evening last I received from His Majesty the mission to form a new administration. It was the evident will of Parliament and the na­tion that this should be conceived on the broadest possible basis and that it should include all parties. I have already completed the most important part of this task. A war cabinet has been formed of five members, representing, with the Labour, Opposition, and Liberals, the unity of the nation. It was 110

necessary that this should be done in one single day on account of the extreme urgency and rigor of events. Other key positions were filled yesterday. I am submitting a further list to the king tonight. I hope to complete the appoint­ment of principal ministers during tomorrow. The appointment of other ministers usually takes a little longer. I trust when Parliament meets again this part of my task will be completed and that the administration will be complete in all respects. I considered it in the public interest to suggest to the Speaker that the House should be sum­moned today. At the end of today’s proceedings, the adjournment of the House will be proposed until May 21 with provision for earlier meeting if need be. Business for that will be notified to MPs at the earliest opportunity. I now invite the House by a resolution to record its approval of the steps taken and declare its confidence in the new government. The resolution: «That this House welcomes the formation of a government representing the united and inflexible resolve of the nation to prosecute the war with Germany to a victorious conclusion». To form an administration of this scale and complexity is a serious un­dertaking in itself. But we are in the preliminary phase of one of the great­est, battles in history. We are in action at many other points-in Norway and in Holland-and we have to be prepared in the Mediterranean. The air battle is continuing, and many preparations have to be made here at home. In this crisis I think I may be pardoned if 1 do not address the House at any length today, and I hope that any of my friends and colleagues or former colleagues who are affected by the political reconstruction will make all allow­ances for any lack of ceremony with which it has been necessary to act. I say to the House as 1 said to ministers who have joined this government, I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat. We have before us an ordeal of the most grievous kind. We have before us many, many months of struggle and suffering. You ask, what is our policy? I say it is to wage war by land, sea, and air. War with all our might and with all the strength God has given us, and to wage war against a monstrous tyranny never surpassed in the dark and lam­entable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. 111

You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word. It is victory. Victory at all costs – Victory in spite of all terrors – Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival. Let that be realized. No survival for the British Empire, no survival for all that the British Empire has stood for, no survival for the urge, the im­pulse of the ages, that mankind shall move forward toward his goal. I take up my task in buoyancy and hope. I feel sure that our cause will not be suffered to fail among men. I feel entitled at this juncture, at this time, to claim the aid of all and to say, «Come then, let us go forward together with our united strength.» Winston Churchill, May 13, 1940 Task Answer the questions based on the speech. 1. Who was W. Churchill’s predecessor as a Prime Minister? 2. What was the political situation in Europe when the speech was made? 3. What did Churchill mean by saying «I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat»? 4. How does Churchill answer to the question of what Britain’s policy is? What words does he use to define this policy? 5. How does Churchill answer the question of what the aim of Britain is? Which words exactly does he use? 6. What rhetoric means does W. Churchill use in his speech to make it more emphatic? 7. Find cases in the speech where the speaker uses rhetoric questions. Com­ ment on them. 8. What do you think the role of repetitions in the speech is? How do they con­tribute to making greater impact on the listeners? Find the examples of rep­ etition in the speech. Task According to some authors there are seven Basic Principles of Effective Speaking: 1. Purpose: why are speaking? 2. Audience: how will you adapt to your audience? 3. Logistics: where and when will you be speaking? 4. Content: what ideas and information should you include? 5. Organization: how should you arrange your content? 6. Credibility: are you believable? 7. Performance: how should you deliver your speech?

112

Basing on these principles prepare a speech «Politicians should not be rich». Give arguments and counter-arguments. You can use W. Churchill as one of the illustrations, as he comes from a well-off family. Remember, the seven princi­ples of effective speech-making cannot produce a successful presentation – only you can. These principles are designed to serve as a road map. ISW 3 To prepare for the discussion on the topic: is it possible to control and regulate the principles of international law? (students at will be divided into two groups, choosing a leader and developing a strategy to protect their position.) 1. The task for the first group of students: an analysis of the specific factual material on the history of international relations in the twentieth. Provide examples of unpunished violations of the principles of international law in any state. 2. The task for the second group of students: an analysis of the specific factual material on the history of international relations in the twentieth. Provide examples, when in violation of the principles of international law by a state, the international community failed to achieve compliance with international law (or submit your own model out of this situation.) ISW 4 The legal basis for foreign policy of Kazakhstan Working with text documents - law of the republic of Kazakhstan. «On the diplomatic service in 1997» - law of the republic of Kazakhstan. «On the diplomatic service in 2002» - «consular statute of the republic of Kazakhstan» approved by presidential decree of 27 September 1999. Number 217 - regulation of the ministry of foreign affairs of the republic of Kazakhstan (MFA) of 21 October 1999. To do this, use the recommended literature. Carefully read the texts and record your answer in writing: 1) on the basis of the law. «On the diplomatic service in 2002», to answer the following questions: 113

A) what are the rights and obligations of the republic of Kazakhstan and the diplomatic staff of the diplomatic service? B) what is the system of appointments to diplomatic posts and assigning ranks? C) what are the key definitions? Why? 2) perform a comparative analysis of the laws of the republic of Kazakhstan on the diplomatic service from 1997. And 2002.? Highlight the commonalities and differences. 3) on the basis of the «Consular statute of the republic of Kazakhstan» approved by presidential decree of 27 September 1999. 217 number to answer the following questions: A) what are the rights and duties of the consular authorities of Kazakhstan and consular service staff? B) types of consular offices and classrooms of the consuls? C) what are the key definitions? Why? 4) based on the statute of the ministry of foreign affairs of the republic of Kazakhstan (MFA) of 21 October 1999. To answer the following questions: A) what are the key provisions? Why? B) what are the characteristics of the organization of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan?

EXAM QUESTIONS 1. Definition of diplomacy 2. The evolution of the concepts and terms of diplomacy 3. The functions, Methods and means of diplomacy 4. Ancient Greek, Roman and Byzantium diplomacy 5. Renaissance diplomacy, its theory and application 6. Main European powers diplomacy in 18th century 7. Diplomacy in Europe in the 19th century 8. Diplomacy of 20th century till the start of WW I 9. Diplomatic missions 10. The concept of ambassador 11. Diplomatic representation 12. Diplomatic protocols 13. Diplomatic privileges 14. Diplomatic immunity and inviolability 15. Diplomacy as an instrument of foreign policy 16. The first diplomatic documents 17. Form of recognition of the state and the order of establishment of diplomatic relations. 18. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations as one of the main legal acts in the field of diplomatic law. 19. Agrement, the credentials, letters of recall. The concept and the order of service. 20. Aggravation of diplomatic relations and their break. 21. Definition and basic diplomatic documents: verbal and personal notes, memos, memoranda, policy writing, Coded Telegram. 22. The characteristic features of the modern diplomatic language. 23. Multilateral and bilateral diplomacy: general and specific. 24. Diplomatic negotiations. The characteristic features of modern negotiations. Milestones and negotiating skills. 25. Psychological aspects of the negotiation process. National characteristics of negotiation. 26. Features of British diplomacy. 27. Describe the diplomacy of the United States. 28. What are the characteristics of French diplomacy. 29. The distinctive features of German diplomacy. 30. The similarities and differences between Chinese and Japanese diplomacy. 31. The formation of the diplomatic service of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 115

32. The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations 33. «Diplomacy» of G.Nicholson 34. «Diplomacy» of H. Kissinger 35. UN purposes and principles 36. International law and practice 37. Definition and general principles of international law 38. Types and functions of diplomatic missions 39. The head of the diplomatic representation 40. Diplomatic etiquette and ceremonial 41. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan 42. Regulatory and legal framework of the MFA 43. The role of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to conduct the foreign policy of the Republic of Kazakhstan 44. The main tasks of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan 45. The main functions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan 46. Ministers of foreign affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan 47. The structure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan 48. Forms of diplomatic activity in the Republic of Kazakhstan 49. The role of diplomacy in contemporary international relations 50. International organizations, the United Nations

RECOMMENDED READING 1. Berridge, G. R. Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger. New York: Palgrave, 2001. – Р.145. 2. Callieres F. On the Manner of Negotiating with Princes. – New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2000. – P.121. 3. Carrol M.J. Modern American Diplomacy: Revised and Enlarged Edition / M.J. Carrol, C.G. Herring. – Washington: SR Books, 1996. – 293p. 4. Confronting new challenges 1995: Report on the work of the organization from the 49th to the 50th Session of the General Assembly. – New York: United Nations, 1995. – 380p. 5. Divine Robert A. Since 1945 Politics and Diplomacy in Recent American History / Robert A. Divine. – 3rd ed. – New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1985. – 285p. 6. Ferrell Robert H. American Diplomacy: A History / Robert H. Ferrell. – New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1975. – 881p. 7. International Rules: Approaches from International Law and International Relations / ed.by Robert J.Beck, Anthony Clark Arend, Robert D.Vander Lugt. – NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1996. – 310p. 8. Kennan George F. American Diplomacy / George F. Kennan. – Expanded edition. – Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1984. – 179p. 9. Kurmanguzhin S.A. Diplomatic and consular service / Salim Almaganbetovich Kurmanguzhin. – Almaty: KazNU, 2003. – 200p. 10. Kissinger H. Diplomacy / Henry Kissinger. – New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.- 912p. 11. Language and Diplomacy. Ed by J.Kurbalija and H.Slavik. – 2001. – P. 55. 12. Lippman Thomas W. Madeleine Albright and the New American Diplomacy / Thomas W. Lippman.- USA: Westview Press, 2000.- 372p. 13. Michele J.G., Jeanne M.B. Handbook of negotiation and culture, 2004. – Р.97. 14. Nicolson H. Diplomacy. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977. – Р.47. 15. Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949: Resolutions of the 1974-77 Diplomatic conference. Extracts from the final act of the 1974-77 Diplomatic conference. – Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1996. – 134 p. 16. Satow Ernest M. A guide to diplomatic practice. London: Longmans, 1932. – Р.98. 17. Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961. 117

GLOSSARY Agrément Diplomatic courtesy requires that before a state appoints a new chief of diplomatic mission to represent it in another state, it must be first ascertained whether the proposed appointee is acceptable to the receiving state. The acquiescence of the receiving state is signified by its granting its agrément to the appointment. It is unusual for an agrément to be refused, but it occasionally happens. Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary  The chief of a diplomatic mission; the ranking official diplomatic representative of his country to the country to which he is accredited, and the personal representative of his own head of state to the head of state of the host country. The term «extraordinary» has no real meaning. Years ago it was given only to nonresident ambassadors on temporary missions and was used to distinguish them from regular resident ambassadors. The latter resented others having this appellation, as it seemed to imply a lesser position for themselves. Eventually therefore, it was accorded to them as well. «Plenipotentiary» also comes down through the years. Today it simply means possessed of full power to do an ambassador’s normal job. Ambassador is capitalized when referring to a specific person (i.e. Ambassador Smith). Attaché Civilian attachés are either junior officers in an embassy or, if more senior, officers who have a professional specialization such as «labor attaché», «commercial attaché», «cultural attaché», etc. On the military side, an embassy will generally have either an army attaché, naval attaché, or air attaché – and often all three. In American embassies, the senior of the three is called the defense attaché and is in charge of all military attaché activities. These consist largely of liaison work with local military authorities and of keeping informed on host country order of battle. Bilateral Bilateral discussions or negotiations are between a state and one 118

other. A bilateral treaty is between one state and one other. «Multi­ lateral» is used when more than two states are involved. Breaking Relations The formal act of severing diplomatic relations with another state to underscore disapproval of its actions or policies. It is generally an unwise step, because when relations between states are most strained is when the maintaining of diplomatic relations is most important. It makes little sense to keep diplomats on the scene when things are going relatively well and then take them away when they are most needed. An intermediate step which indicates serious displeasure but stops short of an actual diplomatic break is for a government to recall its ambassador indefinitely. This is preferable to a break in relations as his embassy will continue to function; but again this comes under the heading of cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face. If a dramatic gesture of this kind is needed, it is far better promptly and publicly to recall an ambassador for consultations, and then just as promptly return him to his post. Chancery The office where the chief of mission and his staff work. This office is often called the embassy but this is a misnomer. Technically, the embassy is where the ambassador lives, not where he works, although in earlier times when diplomatic missions were smaller, this was usually the same building. Today, for clarity’s sake, many diplomats now distinguish between the two by using the terms «embassy residence» Chargé d’Affaires, a.i. Formerly, a chargé d’affaires was the title of a chief of mission, inferior in rank to an ambassador or a minister. Today with the a.i. (ad interim) added, it designates the senior officer taking charge for the interval when a chief of mission is absent from his post. Chief of Mission  The ranking officer in an embassy, permanent mission, legation, consulate general or consulate (i.e. an ambassador always, and a minister, consul general, or consul when no more senior officer is assigned 119

to the post). A «chief of mission» can also be the head of a special and temporary diplomatic mission, but the term is usually reserved for the earlier listed examples. Communiqué  A brief public summary statement issued following important bilateral or multilateral meetings. These tend to be bland and full of stock phrases such as «full and frank discussions», and the like. Occasionally, getting an agreement on the communiqué turns out to be the most difficult part of the meeting. Conference or Congress  International meetings. In the diplomatic sense, a congress has the same meaning as a conference. Consulate  An office established by one state in an important city of another state for the purpose of supporting and protecting its citizens traveling or residing there. In addition, these offices are charges with performing other important administrative duties such as issuing visas (where this is required) to host country nationals wishing to travel to the country the consulate represents. All consulates, whether located in the capital city or in other communities, are administratively under the ambassador and the embassy. In addition to carrying out their consular duties, they often serve as branch offices for the embassy, supporting, for example, the latter’s political and economic responsibilities. Consulates are expected to play a particularly significant role in connection with the promotion of their own country’s exports and other commercial activities. Officers performing consular duties are known as consuls or, if more junior, vice consuls. The chief of the consulate is known as the consul. Counselor of Embassy A senior diplomatic title ranking just behind an ambassador and a minister. In many embassies there is no minister, and the counselor is the number two man, i.e., the deputy chief of mission. (In a very small embassy, the second may not have this rank). In a large embassy, the 120

second ranking officer may be a minister, or minister-counselor, in which case the heads of the more important sections have counselor rank. Thus, for example, the embassy’s political counselor, economic counselor, an administrative counselor are well-known and much-respected positions in diplomatic life. Credentials  The name for letters given to an ambassador by his chief of state, and addressed to the chief of state of his host country. They are delivered to the latter by ambassadors in a formal credentials ceremony, which generally takes place shortly after his arrival at a new post. Until this ceremony has taken place he is not formally recognized by the host country, and he cannot officially act as an ambassador. The letters are termed «letters of credence» because they request the receiving chief of state to give «full credence» to what the ambassador will say of behalf of his government. Declaration  This can have two quite distinct meanings in diplomacy. It can first, of course, mean a unilateral statement by one state, ranging from an expression of opinion or policy to a declaration of war. It can also mean a joint statement by two or more states having the same binding effect as a treaty. In this latter connection declarations can be put forward either in their own right or appended to a treaty as an added understanding or interpretation. Delegation  Again used in two senses in diplomacy. «Delegation» can be the term used to refer to the specific powers delegates by his government to a diplomat acting in certain specific circumstances. It also refers to an official party sent to an international conference or on some other special diplomatic mission. Diplomatic Agent A generic term denoting a person who carries out regular diplomatic relations of the nation he/she represents in the nation to which he/she has been accredited. 121

Diplomatic Corps  The body of foreign diplomats assembled at a nation’s capital. In cities where consuls and consul general are resident, the are collectively known as the consular corps. The dean of both corps is usually that official who had been at his post the longest. There are exceptions to this later rule, however. For example, in some Catholic countries, the papal nuncio is always the dean. The dean represents the corps in collective dealings with host country officials on matters of a ceremonial or administrative character affecting the corps as a whole. Diplomatic Immunity A principle of international law by which certain foreign government officials are not subject to the jurisdiction of local courts and other authorities.  Diplomatic Note A formal written means of communication among embassies. Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities  Historically accorded in recognition that the diplomat represents (and is responsible to) a different sovereignty; also in order that the legitimate pursuit of his official duties will not be impeded in any unnecessary way. They include inviolability of person and premises and exemption from taxation and the civil and criminal jurisdiction of local courts. Diplomatic Ranks Listed in order of precedence: Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary Ministers Plenipotentiary Ministers  Chargé d’Affaires ad hoc or pro tempore  Chargé d’Affaires ad interim  Minister-Counselors  Counselors (or Senior Secretaries in the absence of Counselors)  Army, Naval and Air Attachés  Civilian Attachés  122

First Secretaries  Second Secretaries  Assistant Army, Naval and Air Attachés Civilian Assistant Attachés  Third Secretaries and Assistant Attachés Diplomatist  It has the same meaning as «diplomat». An outdated word rarely used now in spoken diplomacy but occasionally still appearing in the literature of diplomacy. Dual Accreditation Having two or more responsibilities, such as an ambassador who is simultaneously accredited to two nations. Embassy  The residence of an ambassador. In recent years, also inaccurately used to denote the building which contains the offices of the ambassador and other key members of his staff. The proper term for the latter, as noted above, is the «chancery». As also noted above, confusion is nowadays avoided through the practice of using the two terms «embassy residence» and «embassy office». Envoy  Nowadays used to refer to any senior diplomat. Earlier it had a specific hierarchical connotation, being used to designate diplomatic agents of less than the highest rank. Mission A generic term for embassy. Mission also describes the entirety of official representation in a given foreign country which functions under the supervision of the Ambassador, including civilian and military personnel. Persona Non Grata An individual who is unacceptable to or unwelcome by the host government. 123

Protocol  Refers to the ceremonial side of diplomacy, including matters of diplomatic courtesy and precedence. Ratification  The act, subsequent to a treaty’s having been negotiated, by which a government commits itself to adhere to that treaty. In the United States, it is inaccurate to speak of the Senate’s ratifying a treaty. The executive does this, but only after the Senate has given its consent. Recognition  Commonly used in connection with the recognition by one state of 1) the existence of another state (for example when a new one is formed), or 2) the existence of a government which is in effective control of a state. The term «de facto recognition» means recognition that a state, or a government of a state, in fact exists – but it also means the withholding of full official recognition of this. When the latter is extended, it is termed «de jure recognition». It is a distinction based more on diplomatic convenience than on logic. Treaty  A formal mutually binding agreement between countries. The term comes from traiter, to negotiate.

CONTENTS Introduction.....................................................................................................3 1. Definition of diplomacy..............................................................................4 2. The functions of diplomacy........................................................................8 3. The history of diplomacy.......................................................................... 12 4. Diplomatic mission and representation..................................................... 17 5. Diplomatic immunity................................................................................ 22 6. Diplomatic protocol.................................................................................. 27 7. The diplomat’s role in international relations........................................... 34 8. Diplomatic documents and diplomatic language...................................... 39 9. Negotiations as the basics of diplomacy................................................... 48 10. Multilateral diplomacy............................................................................ 51 11. International organizations...................................................................... 54 12. International law .................................................................................... 62 13. World diplomacy..................................................................................... 73 14. Political and diplomatic recognition of the Republic of Kazakhstan...................................................................... 86 15. Ministry of foreign affairs of Kazakhstan............................................... 99 Assignments for individual work of students.............................................104 Exam questions...........................................................................................115 Recommended reading................................................................................117 Glossary......................................................................................................118

Учебное издание

Khalikova Shakhnaza Bakhitzhanovna POLITICAL DIPLOMACY Educational manual Выпускающий редактор Гулмира Бекбердиева Компьютерная верстка Сауле Сарпековой Дизайнер обложки Ринат Скаков ИБ №6594 Подписано в печать 22.08.2013. Формат 60х84 1/16. Бумага офсетная. Печать цифровая. Объем 7,87. Тираж 70 экз. Заказ №870. Издательство «Қазақ университеті» Казахского национального университета им. аль-Фараби. 050040, г. Алматы, пр. аль-Фараби, 71. КазНУ. Отпечатано в типографии издательства «Қазақ университеті».

126