SAMENVATTING DIPLOMATIE
1 WHAT IS DIPLOMACY?
1.1 DEFINITON
What are the basic features that distinguish the Westphalian diplomatic system from its
predecessors? Several definitions of diplomacy exist, putting emphasis on different aspects of the art:
A. “The institutions and processes by which states and others represent themselves and their
interest to one another” Diplomacy is a social institution, reflecting the social world and
thus cultural biases. Its primary function is representation. Foreign policy/International
Relations is the outcome of diplomacy, which is guided by the interests of states and others.
B. “Diplomacy is the art of negotiating agreements in a precise and ratifiable form.”
C. “Diplomacy = MEDIUM of International Relations” it’s about managing relationships in
International life that have become more complex & divers... what separates countries
and what binds them (elements of rivalry and cooperation)?
There is also diplomacy besides states. It should be understood in its evolution and adaptation to
states. Actors do not have the capacity to shape the order of things but should rather adapt to
changing things. This is not a linear development of diplomacy, but an uneven development in
different regions. Some lessons that were learned were unlearned.
• The way diplomacy was done in Europe, was exported to the world, but diplomacy existed before
the rise of the West. Ancient world is a reminder that diplomacy is not an invention of the West,
but people tried to figure out how they could conduct international RELATIONS how to
develop meaningful relations (even similar in civilisations that aren’t connected to each other)
• In a Sinocentric world, relations are very important. The Chinese are talking about relational than
transactional bonds. To discuss things, you sit down for lunch and have a proper lunch, glass of
wine. In the Netherlands, only 20 minutes lunch break, so no time to discuss things. Further
south, the relationship comes before business.
• How is Renaissance Italy Relevant? turning point in civilisation: people started to acknoledge
the fact that they are dependent on each other (part of a system instead of rivals)
• How can ideas travel < Cohen? trade routes: This is how states came to understand that doing
business within your own cultural environment is qualitatively different than doing international
trades. There was no drawing board of diplomacy. Even if we started with an empty board,
perhaps we would do things differently e.g. to get rid of expensive embassies and big houses
for ambassadors, showing the grandeur. But it all has a reason why things evolved in this way.
,1.2 CHARACTERISTICS / TAKEAWAYS DIPLOMACY
1. Broader than a History of Foreign Policy/ History of International Relations
2. Institution of the Society of States (Regulating Mechanism)
3. A Social Institution Reflecting the World in Which it Operates
4. Simultaneously at Work in Different Worlds
5. Neither Linear nor Teleological Development (kijken naar cause ipv purpose)
6. People-made Institution Growing in Complexity
7. Cumulative Learning in a Process of Trial and Error
8. (Diplomacy Travel Across Cultures + Awareness of Diplomacy Cannot be Taken for Granted)
1.3 HISTORICAL DIPLOMATIC SYSTEMS
1.3.1 A CONCEPTUAL HISTORY OF DIPLOMACY
• No abstract international system as of 1648 (Peace of Westphalia) but 17th and 18th society of
princes and their courts and armies.
• Diplomacy entered the lexicon of IR between communities organized within system of states in
18th century in France (‘treaties and agreements’) < Emergence of term “corps diplomatique”
• After: diplomacy associated with opposition to diplomacy: absolute rule, aristocracy, secrecy,
duplicity, wars and alliances wiseman mentions the 14 points of Wilson of open governance
1.3.2 TOWARDS A NEW DIPLOMATIC HISTORY
• Conventional def & understanding of diplomatic practice to be questioned by historical research.
• Greater historical interest in diplomacy as a practice in diverse and changing societal context.
• A history of multiple diplomatic actors with a variety of roles
• Global diplomatic practices and extra-European encounters (de-centering IR)
• A fresh look at the processes of professionalisation and formalisation of diplomacy gendered
effects (exclusion women) New approaches & tools, more theory, evolving research priorities.
1.3.3 3RD MILLENNIUM BEFORE CHRIS: ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN DIPLOMACY
The traditional definition of diplomacy, being “Diplomacy is the art of negotiating agreements in a
precise and ratifiable form”, is based upon the origins of Diplomacy it relies upon literature
Conditions for the rise of diplomacy in the Ancient World:
• Urban culture
• Literacy
• Administrative capacity
• Telecommunication
,1.3.3.1 Cuneiform diplomacy
The earliest evidence of diplomacy is found in royal inscriptions on a baked clay tablet dedicated to
the Gods in Mesopotamia, modern Iraq. This CUNEIFORM DIPLOMACY (referring to the script) dates
to about 2500 BC to +/- 500 BC and refers to relations between city-states. In the scripts references
are made to
armed struggles
coalitions
border disputes
marriage alliances
ARBITRATION (the settlement of a dispute by a third party).
classic formula: “your friend is my friend, your enemy is my enemy”
extraterritorial rights for commercial means (taxation to foreigners, trade and damages)
Apparently, there was a sense of family of nations, interdependence and business. Main function of
the diplomats: Carrying messages of Kings. Characteristic of early diplomacy is slowness (camels)!
Later, from the archives of Mari, it is found that cuneiform diplomacy became even more advanced
and truly multicultural, including three continents: Europe, Asia & Africa
• Envoys were now upgraded from being plain messengers to “ambassador plenipotentiary”
= individual who could negotiate and conclude an agreement.
• & diplomatic corps = community of ambassadors in one city receiving hospitality from the
palace and possible even accommodations.
• Early diplomatic passports and letters of accreditation were also found.
• Amarna Archive: the emissary = a person that possessed refined diplomatic skill and would
travel in an envoy. With the neo-Assyrian Empire, the international system shifted from
strategic parity to imperial hegemony. Reciprocity remained important but it was now
protection in return for loyalty.
1.3.3.2 ! Important to note
• parties to a treaty were city-states and not kings, meaning that states were considered legal
personalities, which is advanced legal thinking.
• envoys were accountable to the people and sometimes these diplomats were punished for doing
a bad job negotiation was a complicated process: no mandates, rivals, …
• The fact that diplomats were going in pairs shows that there was still a mistrust, which makes
things more complicated. Ancient Greece was experimenting with something that looks like an
embassy today: resident of another city-state was doing business on behalf of that city-state in
another.
1.3.3.3 A diplomatic letter from Ebla (Modern Syria) to Hamazi
(Modern Iran) captures some of the characteristics of
cuneiform diplomacy
, 1. Use of envoys as messengers who represent their political masters (as representatives, even
negotiators?) delegated authorothy (trust of the messenger is very important)
2. obligation of RECIPROCITY = basic building block
3. maintaining a working relationship between kings bound by ties of brotherhood (not friendship)
the greek: rivals but exchanged good (treaties under oath) and wives (dynastic marriages)
interdependence avant la lettre but no brotherhood
4. Recognition of equal status referring to family relationships.
Still common in Middle-East, but here more symbolic family; Kings and Kings.
Today, diplomacy still recognizes equal status; Belgium and US are equals regardless of
positions in world arena (polycultural)
5. the use of an international language Lingua franca (language that is adopted as a common
language between speakers whose native languages are different)
6. Embryonic foreign policy bureaucracy; a palace bureaucracy that dispatched (and received)
envoys to-and-from of messengers and emissaries
7. Archive: use of lingua franca and documentation to storage institutional memory
Later in FOREIGN MINISTRY (a palace bureaucracy that recorded and filed documents)
8. a code of correct international custom aka protocol including polite forms of address
9. Exchange of gifts (abolished by Greeks)
1.3.3.4 Characteristics
long-lasting stability and peace
resistance towards expansionist powers
(although the contemporaries didn’t think in terms of balance of power)
great sense of brotherhood amongst the great kings legitimacy of one strengthened the other
Diplomacy is not a Western invention
It flourishes in a polycultural environment
Trade was at the heart of diplomacy
Notions about diplomacy travel
1.3.4 DIPLOMACY IN ANCIENT GREECE
1.3.4.1 Characteristics of diplomacy in Ancient Greece = classical
diplomacy
1. Diplomacy in a single cultural context (vs. poly cultural context in near Eastern diplomacy)
“provincial”
Diplomacy in ancient Greece was designed to handle matters among the Greek polities
rather than to conduct international affairs unlike ANE.
Compared to Persian cosmopolitanism, Greek diplomacy was provincial and unpolished.
1 WHAT IS DIPLOMACY?
1.1 DEFINITON
What are the basic features that distinguish the Westphalian diplomatic system from its
predecessors? Several definitions of diplomacy exist, putting emphasis on different aspects of the art:
A. “The institutions and processes by which states and others represent themselves and their
interest to one another” Diplomacy is a social institution, reflecting the social world and
thus cultural biases. Its primary function is representation. Foreign policy/International
Relations is the outcome of diplomacy, which is guided by the interests of states and others.
B. “Diplomacy is the art of negotiating agreements in a precise and ratifiable form.”
C. “Diplomacy = MEDIUM of International Relations” it’s about managing relationships in
International life that have become more complex & divers... what separates countries
and what binds them (elements of rivalry and cooperation)?
There is also diplomacy besides states. It should be understood in its evolution and adaptation to
states. Actors do not have the capacity to shape the order of things but should rather adapt to
changing things. This is not a linear development of diplomacy, but an uneven development in
different regions. Some lessons that were learned were unlearned.
• The way diplomacy was done in Europe, was exported to the world, but diplomacy existed before
the rise of the West. Ancient world is a reminder that diplomacy is not an invention of the West,
but people tried to figure out how they could conduct international RELATIONS how to
develop meaningful relations (even similar in civilisations that aren’t connected to each other)
• In a Sinocentric world, relations are very important. The Chinese are talking about relational than
transactional bonds. To discuss things, you sit down for lunch and have a proper lunch, glass of
wine. In the Netherlands, only 20 minutes lunch break, so no time to discuss things. Further
south, the relationship comes before business.
• How is Renaissance Italy Relevant? turning point in civilisation: people started to acknoledge
the fact that they are dependent on each other (part of a system instead of rivals)
• How can ideas travel < Cohen? trade routes: This is how states came to understand that doing
business within your own cultural environment is qualitatively different than doing international
trades. There was no drawing board of diplomacy. Even if we started with an empty board,
perhaps we would do things differently e.g. to get rid of expensive embassies and big houses
for ambassadors, showing the grandeur. But it all has a reason why things evolved in this way.
,1.2 CHARACTERISTICS / TAKEAWAYS DIPLOMACY
1. Broader than a History of Foreign Policy/ History of International Relations
2. Institution of the Society of States (Regulating Mechanism)
3. A Social Institution Reflecting the World in Which it Operates
4. Simultaneously at Work in Different Worlds
5. Neither Linear nor Teleological Development (kijken naar cause ipv purpose)
6. People-made Institution Growing in Complexity
7. Cumulative Learning in a Process of Trial and Error
8. (Diplomacy Travel Across Cultures + Awareness of Diplomacy Cannot be Taken for Granted)
1.3 HISTORICAL DIPLOMATIC SYSTEMS
1.3.1 A CONCEPTUAL HISTORY OF DIPLOMACY
• No abstract international system as of 1648 (Peace of Westphalia) but 17th and 18th society of
princes and their courts and armies.
• Diplomacy entered the lexicon of IR between communities organized within system of states in
18th century in France (‘treaties and agreements’) < Emergence of term “corps diplomatique”
• After: diplomacy associated with opposition to diplomacy: absolute rule, aristocracy, secrecy,
duplicity, wars and alliances wiseman mentions the 14 points of Wilson of open governance
1.3.2 TOWARDS A NEW DIPLOMATIC HISTORY
• Conventional def & understanding of diplomatic practice to be questioned by historical research.
• Greater historical interest in diplomacy as a practice in diverse and changing societal context.
• A history of multiple diplomatic actors with a variety of roles
• Global diplomatic practices and extra-European encounters (de-centering IR)
• A fresh look at the processes of professionalisation and formalisation of diplomacy gendered
effects (exclusion women) New approaches & tools, more theory, evolving research priorities.
1.3.3 3RD MILLENNIUM BEFORE CHRIS: ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN DIPLOMACY
The traditional definition of diplomacy, being “Diplomacy is the art of negotiating agreements in a
precise and ratifiable form”, is based upon the origins of Diplomacy it relies upon literature
Conditions for the rise of diplomacy in the Ancient World:
• Urban culture
• Literacy
• Administrative capacity
• Telecommunication
,1.3.3.1 Cuneiform diplomacy
The earliest evidence of diplomacy is found in royal inscriptions on a baked clay tablet dedicated to
the Gods in Mesopotamia, modern Iraq. This CUNEIFORM DIPLOMACY (referring to the script) dates
to about 2500 BC to +/- 500 BC and refers to relations between city-states. In the scripts references
are made to
armed struggles
coalitions
border disputes
marriage alliances
ARBITRATION (the settlement of a dispute by a third party).
classic formula: “your friend is my friend, your enemy is my enemy”
extraterritorial rights for commercial means (taxation to foreigners, trade and damages)
Apparently, there was a sense of family of nations, interdependence and business. Main function of
the diplomats: Carrying messages of Kings. Characteristic of early diplomacy is slowness (camels)!
Later, from the archives of Mari, it is found that cuneiform diplomacy became even more advanced
and truly multicultural, including three continents: Europe, Asia & Africa
• Envoys were now upgraded from being plain messengers to “ambassador plenipotentiary”
= individual who could negotiate and conclude an agreement.
• & diplomatic corps = community of ambassadors in one city receiving hospitality from the
palace and possible even accommodations.
• Early diplomatic passports and letters of accreditation were also found.
• Amarna Archive: the emissary = a person that possessed refined diplomatic skill and would
travel in an envoy. With the neo-Assyrian Empire, the international system shifted from
strategic parity to imperial hegemony. Reciprocity remained important but it was now
protection in return for loyalty.
1.3.3.2 ! Important to note
• parties to a treaty were city-states and not kings, meaning that states were considered legal
personalities, which is advanced legal thinking.
• envoys were accountable to the people and sometimes these diplomats were punished for doing
a bad job negotiation was a complicated process: no mandates, rivals, …
• The fact that diplomats were going in pairs shows that there was still a mistrust, which makes
things more complicated. Ancient Greece was experimenting with something that looks like an
embassy today: resident of another city-state was doing business on behalf of that city-state in
another.
1.3.3.3 A diplomatic letter from Ebla (Modern Syria) to Hamazi
(Modern Iran) captures some of the characteristics of
cuneiform diplomacy
, 1. Use of envoys as messengers who represent their political masters (as representatives, even
negotiators?) delegated authorothy (trust of the messenger is very important)
2. obligation of RECIPROCITY = basic building block
3. maintaining a working relationship between kings bound by ties of brotherhood (not friendship)
the greek: rivals but exchanged good (treaties under oath) and wives (dynastic marriages)
interdependence avant la lettre but no brotherhood
4. Recognition of equal status referring to family relationships.
Still common in Middle-East, but here more symbolic family; Kings and Kings.
Today, diplomacy still recognizes equal status; Belgium and US are equals regardless of
positions in world arena (polycultural)
5. the use of an international language Lingua franca (language that is adopted as a common
language between speakers whose native languages are different)
6. Embryonic foreign policy bureaucracy; a palace bureaucracy that dispatched (and received)
envoys to-and-from of messengers and emissaries
7. Archive: use of lingua franca and documentation to storage institutional memory
Later in FOREIGN MINISTRY (a palace bureaucracy that recorded and filed documents)
8. a code of correct international custom aka protocol including polite forms of address
9. Exchange of gifts (abolished by Greeks)
1.3.3.4 Characteristics
long-lasting stability and peace
resistance towards expansionist powers
(although the contemporaries didn’t think in terms of balance of power)
great sense of brotherhood amongst the great kings legitimacy of one strengthened the other
Diplomacy is not a Western invention
It flourishes in a polycultural environment
Trade was at the heart of diplomacy
Notions about diplomacy travel
1.3.4 DIPLOMACY IN ANCIENT GREECE
1.3.4.1 Characteristics of diplomacy in Ancient Greece = classical
diplomacy
1. Diplomacy in a single cultural context (vs. poly cultural context in near Eastern diplomacy)
“provincial”
Diplomacy in ancient Greece was designed to handle matters among the Greek polities
rather than to conduct international affairs unlike ANE.
Compared to Persian cosmopolitanism, Greek diplomacy was provincial and unpolished.
