DIPLOMACY

MEANING
It is mainly through diplomacy that a nation communicates its wishes, desires, objectives and
goals to other nations and again it is through diplomatic negotiations that it attempts to secure
these objectives. In fact, establishment of diplomatic relations forms the first major step
towards the establishment of relations between the two nations. Morganthau describes
diplomacy as the best means for promoting international peace in the best way – peace
through accommodation. It was at the Vienna conference on Diplomatic Intercourse and
Immunities (1961) that a comprehensive agreement covering nearly all aspects of diplomatic
activity was signed.
Sometimes, it is described as the art of telling lies on behalf of the nation and as such an
instrument for employing deceit and duplicity in international relations. A diplomat has
observed, “When a diplomat says yes, he means perhaps; when he says perhaps, it means no;
and when he says no, he is not a diplomat.” No doubt, diplomacy always attempts to cloak
the real goals of national interest with several idealistic principles or morality or rule of
international behavior, yet it cannot be described as the art of deceit and concealment. In
general, diplomacy can be described as the art of negotiations and conduct of foreign
relations or the means of implementing foreign policy.
DEFINITIONS
 Padelford and Lincoln, “diplomacy is the process of representation and negotiation by
which states customarily deal with one another in times of peace.”
 Sir Earnest Satow, “diplomacy is the application of intelligence and tact to the
conduct of official relations between governments of independent state.”
 The Oxford English Dictionary defines diplomacy as “the method by which
international relations are adjusted and managed.”
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF DIPLOMACY
 Diplomacy is not immoral
 It is an instrument of conducting international relations
 It is machinery for action in international relations. Its use and value depends upon the
intentions and abilities of those who practice it.
 It works through organized networks and set procedures like foreign offices,
embassies, consulates and special missions all over the world.
 Diplomacy is both bilateral as well as multilateral in form.
 It handles all types of matters from the simplest matter of detail in the relations
between the two states to vital issues of war and peace.
 Breakdown of diplomacy always leads to crisis of war.
 Diplomacy operates both in times of peace and war.
  Diplomacy works in an environment in which conflict and cooperation both are
simultaneously present. It becomes irrelevant when there are all agreements; likewise
it becomes ineffective when there are all disagreements.
 Diplomacy always works for securing the national interest of the nation it represents.
 Diplomacy is compatible with international law. Sometimes it is held that diplomacy
seeks to uphold national interest and international law seeks to secure international
objectives of peace and security. But this is an erroneous view because diplomatic
practices have been one of the richest sources of international law.
 Diplomacy is backed by national power. Diplomacy uses persuasion and influence as
the means for exercising power in international relations just like USA.
OBJECTIVES OF DIPLOMACY
THE POLITICAL OBJECTIVE
Diplomacy, as such, always works for increasing the influence of the state over other states. It
uses persuasion and promises of rewards and aids for this purpose. Through rational
negotiations, it seeks to justify the objectives of the foreign policy as compatible and just
objectives. It seeks to promote the goal of security by working for the promotion of
friendship and cooperation with other nations.
NON-POLITICAL OBJECTIVES
Diplomacy always seeks to promote the economic, commercial and cultural links of one
action with other nations. In this age of science, technology and industrialization, economic
diplomacy has come to be a vitally essential aspect of diplomacy. The role of Oil Diplomacy
and Dollar Diplomacy in contemporary international relations illustrates the importance of
economic diplomacy in international relations. Diplomacy depends upon economic means for
promoting the interest of the nation and this is indeed an important non-political objective of
diplomacy1.
TYPES OF DIPLOMACY
OLD DIPLOMACY
The diplomacy practice which originated somewhere at the close of 16 th century and
continued up to 1919 has come to be popularly called the old diplomacy. In the words of
Harold Nicholson, “it was courteous and dignified and was supposed to be best adapted to the
conduct of relations between civilized states.”
FEATURES OF OLD DIPLOMACY
 It was primary confined to Europe. Hence it is called as European diplomacy.
 Being confined to Europe, it was limited in scope.
It was conducted by a professional class of diplomats and was characterized by an air of
aristocracy, nobility and class consciousness. It was both formal and elitist in nature and
approach.

1
Jordan, World Politics in Our Times,p.67
  Special emphasis upon virtues like honesty, integrity, truthfulness, politeness,
fairness, strict conformity to protocol, secrecy and total commitment to national
interest.
 More secretive
 Freedom of action for ambassadors. The lack of speedy and continuous means of
communication made it essential for the state to give wide powers to its ambassadors.
NEW DIPLOMACY
Diplomacy in the 20th century, more particularly diplomacy in the post-war period is
characterized by new techniques, new practices and new types of diplomats. The emergence
of multilateral negotiations as well as various other forms of diplomacy coupled with the
increase in the sphere of relations subject to diplomatic negotiations-the addition of cultural
and educational field to international relations: have all given a new dimension to diplomacy
and that is why modern diplomacy has came to be known as new diplomacy.

FEATURES OF NEW DIPLOMACY

 It is global. The rise of Asia, Africa and Latin America, as reflected in the emergence
of large number of sovereign independent states, has changed the character of post
war international relations.
 New diplomacy is multilateral which we have seen in multilateral negotiations in
international conferences, institutionalized diplomacy at the UN and the emergence of
direct personal contact among the statesman.
 It is less formal and flexible.
 It is mostly open. Diplomatic negotiations are given full coverage over the radio,
press, television and other means of mass-media.
 Democratic nature of new diplomacy. At present, the increased influence of public
opinion, political parties, pressure groups, world public opinion, the rise of a more
democratic class of civil servants have all given a new dimension to new diplomacy.
 It depends more on propaganda.
 The role of a diplomat has suffered a decline. It has reduced the role of diplomats to
glorified representatives who really act as highly dignified messengers and actors with
the responsibility of faithfully carrying out the instructions of the foreign office.
OTHER FORMS OR STYLES OF DIPLOMACY
 DEMOCATIC DIPLOMACY – In this type of old form of diplomacy, the
diplomats have to take into account the factors of political ideology, public opinion
and policies of the party in power. They have to keep the people informed of the
nature and progress of negotiations and the people have the right to express their
opinion over the agreements reached. It works for the promotion of the collective and
general interest of all the people of the states and it is ultimately accountable to the
people of the state.
But at the same time the people may not accept the harmful consequences that might
crop up as a result of popular interferences in diplomatic negotiations because the
common man is not competent enough to understand the complexities and intricacies
 of international relations. It also makes the process of decision making and diplomatic
negotiations slow and less fruitful.
 TOTALITARIAN DIPLOMACY- the rise of several totalitarian regimes in the 20 th
century led to the development of totalitarian diplomacy. These states subordinated
the individual the glorified war, conquest and expansionism as the natural rights of the
states. They used diplomacy for exporting their views and for attempting an
imposition of their selfish interests upon others in the process; they paid scant
attention to the norms, procedures and protocols of old diplomacy. Its object is to
create and maintain bad and tense relations. It looks upon all gestures of friendship by
other nations as evidences of weaknesses.
 SHOPKEEPER DIPLOMACY – It is characterized by a spirit of toleration,
compromise, reconciliation, adjustment and devoid of all sensational extremes. Like a
shopkeeper who is never prepared to annoy his customers, but who is always
committed to earn his profit through the skill of salesmanship, diplomats practicing
shopkeeper diplomacy always act and negotiate with all warmth and goodwill and in
the spirit of give and take. They depend upon reason, norms, conventions, traditions
and rules of international intercourse for securing the desired national objective. For
ex, the British model of diplomacy.
 WARRIOR DIPLOMACY – It is characterized by emotions, arrogance, high
handedness and is not open to reason and tolerance. It pays scant attention to the rules
of behaviour and diplomatic protocols. It is aggressive and expansionist in approach
and style. It seeks to impose its interest upon others through threats, intimidations,
pressures, force and subversion.
 SECRET DIPLOMACY – The term is used to designate the diplomatic practice of
conducting secret negotiations and making secret pacts, alliances and treaties. No
attempt is made to take people into confidence and little information about diplomatic
activity is provided to the public. Secrecy is considered vital. The underlying
assumption is that people in general, have neither the interest nor the ability to
understand foreign affairs and that involvement of general public in foreign affairs
can lead to unwanted and unhealthy pressures on the functioning of diplomacy.
 OPEN DIPLOMACY – In the age of democracy, it is argued that the people have
the right and duty to know and to participate in foreign policy decision making. Being
the sovereign people, they have the right to secure accountability of all the personnel
of governments including the diplomats.

 PARLIAMENTARY DIPLOMACY – In this style of diplomacy, nations create

permanent commissions or agencies for conducting negotiate
“ ions in respect of specified spheres, issues or problems. It has been customary with
nations to organize joint commissions, for conducting their economic, trade, cultural
and educational relations. A continuing organization, regular public debate exposed to
mass media, a set of rules governing the procedures and formal conclusions expressed
explicitly in the form of resolutions passed by majority are the four essential features
of parliamentary diplomacy. It offers a useful institutionalized and democratic way of
conducting negotiations, effecting bargains and arriving at shared decisions.
 CONFERENCE DIPLOMACY – Conference diplomacy provide opportunity for
direct multilateral diplomacy among nations and have in a big way, supplemented the
 normal channels of diplomacy through foreign office and diplomatic and consular
missions. It is multilateral and open. It leads to personal contact among world leaders;
it successfully combines secrecy with openness, formality with informality and
deliberations with pleasure.
 PERSONAL DIPLOMACY – Palmer and Perkins have described Personal
diplomacy as Summit or Near-Summit Diplomacy because it involves direct
personal talks and negotiations among the top leaders of several nations. It usually
comes into operations when certain major political issues or problems are to be
discussed and resolved. Its emergence has been a factor in the decline of the role of
diplomats and has been responsible for politicizing negotiations which previously
used to be characterized by professional bargaining by diplomats.
FUTURE OF DIPLOMACY
Since the end of the second world war, diplomacy has suffered a substantial decline because
of the following factors highlighted by Morganthau :
 Speedy communications
 The depreciation of diplomacy: The feeling that diplomacy is a source of secret
underhand, double dealing and undesirable power politics has been the factor
responsible for its decline.
 Advent of new diplomacy: The new diplomacy offers a middle way of combining
secrecy with openness, formality with informality, deliberations with leisure and
business with increased personal contact and hence has made traditional diplomacy
less popular.
 The changed nature of contemporary international system which include the end of
cold war, the emergence of a single superpower, nuclear weapons, the concept of total
war, the UN, the rise of new states etc. have seriously affected the role of diplomacy
in international relations.2
However, it does not mean the diplomacy stands rejected as an instrument of national
interest. So long as the need to eliminate or at least reduce the chances of war remains the
dependence on diplomacy as a means for the conduct of relations is bound to be felt by all the
nations as a normal and a natural necessity. Morganthau believes that diplomacy can become
effective by observing nine rules:
 It must be divested of the crusading spirit.
 The objectives of foreign policy must be defined in terms of national interest and must
be supported with adequate power.
 It must look at political scene from the point of view of other nations.
 Nations must be willing to compromise on all issues that are not vital to them
 Give up the shadow of worthless rights for the substance of real advance.
 Never put yourself in a position from which you cannot retreat and from which you
cannot advance without grave risks.
 Never follow a weak ally (even a strong one) to make decisions for you.

2
Palmer and Perkins, International Relations
  The armed forces are the instruments of foreign policy, not its masters.
 The government is the leader of the public opinion and not its slave.

BALANCE OF POWER (BOP): Meaning

It has been traditionally the most powerful device of power management. In Kautilya’s
Arthashastra, we find a full fledged development of the concept of balance of power.
DEFINITIONS
 Sidney B.Fay, “ it is such a ‘just equilibrium’ in power among the family of nations as
will prevent any one of them from becoming sufficiently strong to enforce its will
upon the others.”
 George Schwarzenberger, “it is‘equilibrium’ or ‘a certain amount of stability in power
relations’ that under favorable conditions is produced by an alliance of states or by
other devices. Balance of Power is of universal application wherever a number of
sovereign and armed states co-exist.”
 Hans J.Morganthau, “it refers to an actual state of affairs in which power is distributed
among nations with approximate equality.”

NATURE OR CHARACTERISTICS
 It signifies some sort of equilibrium in power relations which is subject to constant
ceaseless change.
 It is temporary and unstable
 It is to be achieved by the active intervention of men.
 Favors status quo
 A real balance of power seldom exists. It comes to an end when war breaks out.
 The objective view of historians holds balance of power as a situation in which the
opposing nations or groups of nations are almost equal in power. The subjective view
of a statesman holds BOP as a situation involving freedom to join one side other
according to its own interests.
 It is not a device of peace but admits war as the means for securing balance.
 In it, the big powers are the actors and the small powers are either the spectators or the
victims of the game.
 Multiplicity of states and not eliminating anyone in a war are the two fundamental
features of the BoP.
 National interest is its basis.
 Security and peace are the main purposes of the BoP.
METHODS OF BALANCE OF POWER
 COMPENSATION – it usually entails the annexation or division of the territory of
the state whose power is considered dangerous for the balance.
 ALLIANCES – it is a device by which a combination of nations creates a favorable
BoP by concluding military or security pacts or treaties aimed at augmenting their
own strength vis-à-vis the power of their opponents. An offensive alliance seeks to
upset the balance in favor of its embers whereas; the defensive alliance seeks to
maintain balance which is in favor of its members.
 INTERVENTION AND NON-INTERVENTION – intervention is a dictatorial
interference into the internal affairs of states with a view to change or maintain a
particular desired situation. Non-intervention involves deliberate non-action in a
particular situation which is considered to be harmful to the other competing
opponents.
 DIVIDE AND RULE – it has been resorted to by all such nations who try to make or
keep their competitors weak by keeping them divided or by dividing them.
 BUFFER STATES OR ZONES – the major function of a buffer is to keep the two
powerful nations apart and thus minimize the chances of clash and hence to help the
maintenance of balance.
 ARMAMENTS AND DISARMAMENTS – armaments are used as the means for
maintaining or securing the favorable position in power relations in the world. Now-a-
days, disarmaments and arms control are regarded as ideal devices for maintaining
world peace and security.
 THE BALANCER – the balancer is a nation or group of nations which remains aloof
from the policies of the two rivals and the opponents and plays the role of ‘the
laughing third party’. Each contending party tries to win over the support of the
balancer. If any party to the balance becomes unduly weak resulting into a threat to
the balance, the balancer joins it and helps the restoration of balance.
MERITS OF BALANCE OF POWER
 It is a source of stability in international relations
 It helps continuous adjustments and readjustments in relations without any grave risk
of war among nations.
 It ensures multiplicity of states.
 It guarantees the freedom of small states.
 It discourages war.
 It checks imperialism
 It is a source of peace in international relations
DEMERITS OF BALANCE OF POWER
 BOP cannot ensure peace. In fact several wars were fought in the name of
preservation of BOP.
  Preponderance of one power can also secure peace.
 It has a narrow basis. It fails to give proper weight age to other socio-economic,
cultural and moral factors.
 Equality of number of states is a myth
 Nations are not free to break alliances at their will.
 It is uncertain3.
RELEVANCE OF BALANCE OF POWER
The following structural changes in the international relations have adversely affected the
role of BOP –
 End of European domination of international politics
 The rise of propaganda, psychological and political warfare as instruments of national
policy
 Emergence of ideology as a key factor in post war international relations
 Reduction in the number of major powers.
 The emergence of bipolarity and its recent transformation into unipolarity
 The disappearance of imperialism and colonialism
 Disappearance of the ‘balancer’
 The change in the concept of war like ‘total war’.
 Emergence of global actors’ like UN.
Many of its critics like Earnest Haas 4, Arjun Appadorai and others go to the extent of
describing it as a totally obsolete concept. But the concept of BOP despite having lost much
of its validity is still a meaningful concept. Palmer and Perkins make an optimistic prediction
about the continuance of BOP. To quote them, “as long as the nation states system is the
prevailing pattern of international society, BOP policies will be followed in practice, however
roundly they are damned in theory.”
COLLECTIVE SECURITY: Meaning
It postulates a commitment on the part of all the nations to collectively meet an aggression
that may be committed by any state against another. War and aggression is viewed as a
breach of international peace a security and hence, it calls for collective action by all the
nations in defense of peace. Its purpose was stated to be: “to prevent the outbreak of war, or
failing that, to protect the intended victim.” Morgenthau has observed the principle of “one
for all and all for one” is the watch word of collective security
DEFINITIONS
 George Schwarzenberger, “it is machinery for joint action in order to prevent or counter
any attack against an established international order.”

3
Bull, The Anarchical Society, p.58
4
Haas and Whiting, Dynamics of International Relations
 Palmer and Perkins, “it clearly implies collective measures for dealing with threats to
peace.”
 Schliecher, “in essence, it is an arrangement among states in which all promise, in the
event any member of the system engages in certain prohibited acts against another
member, to come to latter’s assistance.”
NATURE/FEATURES OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY
 A devise of power management
 It accepts universality of aggressions
 All nations are committed to pool their power and eliminate aggression
 It involves the concept of an ad hoc global preponderance of power. It rules out the
policy of isolationism
 It postulates the presence of international organization.
 Collective security is a mid way between the concepts of balance of power and world
government.
 It acts as a deterrent
 Aggression/war is the enemy and not the nation state which commits it. The action is
limited to the elimination of war. It does not stand for the elimination of the state
which commits it.
Collective Security System and its Functioning
 The Collective Security Under the League of Nations
In the Manchurian crisis of 1931-1932 the League branded Japan as the aggressor but the
decision proved counter productive in so far as it led to the withdrawal of Japan from the
League.
In 1935-1936, another bold attempt was made to operationalise collective security system in
the Ethiopian crisis by branding Italy as aggressor. But the members of league did not apply
sanctions automatically, simultaneously and comprehensively but haltingly, gradually and
piecemeal which defeats the very purpose of the sanctions.
The Nazi conquest of Austria followed by the obliteration of Czechoslovakia and finally the
invasion of Poland that led to the outbreak of war and hence to end to the collective security
system and the league.
The failure of the USA to join, the rise of the Soviet Union outside the League, the reluctance
of Britain to assume international obligation, the French quest for her own security and the
open defiance of the system by Japan, Italy and Germany, all these combined to wreck the
collective security under the League.
Methodically, the collective security system, as laid down by the League was defined in
Article 10, 11, and 16 of the Covenant.
Article 10 – to respect and preserve territorial integrity of all the members of the League.
Article 11(1) – any war or threat of war is hereby declared a matter of concern of the whole
League and the League shall take any action that may be deemed wise an effectual to
safeguard the peace of the nations.
Article 11(2) – it is also declared to be the friendly right of each member of the League to
bring to the attention of the Assembly or of the Council circumstanced affecting international
peace.
Article 12, 13, and 15 of the Covenant listed the peaceful means which the members could
use for the settlement of their disputes.
Article 16 – it is the bedrock of the collective security system of the league.
Article 16(1) - should any member of the League resort to war, it shall be deemed to have
committed an act of war against the league which undertakes immediately to subject it to the
severance of trade and financial relation.
Article 16(2) – it shall be the duty of the council to recommend to the several governments
concerned what effective military, naval or air force shall be necessary and the members of
the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces.
Article 16(3) – the members of the League agreed further that they will mutually support one
another in the financial and economic measures taken against the aggressor and in resisting
any special measures aimed at one of their members by the covenant breaking state and to
afford passage through their territory to the league forces.
Article 16(4) – any member of the league which has violated the covenant may be declared to
be no longer a member of the league.
Article 17 – tried to cover the non-members also.
 Collective Security under the United Nations Organisations (UNO)
The charter of the UNO laid down elaborate architecture of protection to give nprimacy to the
task of maintaining international peace and security as the most major objective of
international relations. The collective security has been laid down in chapter 7 of the UN
charter. It contains 13 articles from Article 39-51, which together provide for detailed
measures in respect of the collective action which the Security Council can initiate and which
all the members are duty bound to uphold and undertake.
Article 39 – makes it the responsibility of the Security Council to determine the existence of
any threat to the peace
Article 40, 41 and 42 specify the nature of measures that Security Council is called upon to
undertake. Article 40 lays down Security Council can take provisional measures. Article 41
refers to the enforcement action which includes complete or partial interruption of economic
relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio and other means of communication and
severance of diplomatic relations. Article 42 empowers the Security Council to take military
action.
Article 43 – makes it the responsibility of all the members of the UN to contribute their
efforts, support, resources and forces.
The next four articles of the UN charter (44-47) lay down the procedure for raising,
maintaining and using the UN peace keeping force.
Article 48 – the action required to carry out the decision of the Security Council shall be
taken by all the members of the UN or by some of them as the Security Council may
determine.
Article 49 – the members of the UN shall join in affording mutual assistance in carrying out
measures decided upon by the Security Council.
Article 50 – relates to the possible ways in which non-member states or members can adjust
their policies and actions towards the decision that may be taken up by the Security Council
under article 41 and 42.
Article 51 – accepts the right of the states to individual and collective self-defense.
WORKING OF THE COLLECTIVE SECURITY SYSTEM UNDER THE UN
Since 1945, the collective security system has been tried in a number of cases but due to
several reasons its working has not been satisfactory.
 Korean crisis (1950)
 Suez crisis (1956)
 Iraqi aggression by USA on account of Iraqi’s occupation of Kuwait (1991)
CRITICAL EVALUATION OF COLLECTIVE SECURITY SYSTEM
 It is idealistic in nature and scope
 At times it is not possible to identify the aggressor
 It admits war
 Rules out ‘neutrality’ in times of war
 A limited concept
 Absence of a permanent international peace keeping force
 Lack of provisions for the termination of collective security system
 Unhelpful environment of the cold war era
 Dependence of the system on powerful states
The weakness of the UN further made its operation difficult. The nuclear age further rendered
its application very difficult. Morganthau holds that collective security is not only
unworkable but also an unwise and dangerous principle which can lead to extension of a local
war into a world war5.

5
Morganthau, Politics Among Nations, p.30
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS
1. What do you understand by term ‘International Relations’? Discuss its nature and scope
2. What is the difference between ‘International Relations’ and ‘International Politics’?
3. What is national Interest? Discuss the components of National Interest.
4. What do you understand by the term National Interest? Explain its forms.
5. Discuss briefly the methods for the promotion of National Interest.
6. What are the main instruments for the promotion of National Interest?
7. Explain briefly the means by which a nation seeks to secure its National Interest.
8. How do you define an Ideology? Discuss the role of Ideology in international relations
9. Define Ideology. Discuss the various types of Ideology, which are usually used by nations
for justifying their policies and actions.
10. “Ideology is probably the most important factor in international affairs, as it determines
and is a part of the setting within which decision-making takes place.”(Schleicher). In the
light of this statement discuss the impact of ideology on international politics.
11. Explain the nature and role of some of the particular ideologies, which are playing a role
in determining international relations of our times.
12. Define Diplomacy. Discuss its nature.
13. What do you understand by Diplomacy? Explain its characteristics.
14. Explain the nature of diplomacy as an instrument of national interest. Briefly trace the
history of its development.
15. Discuss briefly the objectives of diplomacy. What are its functions?
16. What are the objectives of diplomacy? Discuss the techniques which Diplomacy can use
for achieving these objectives.
17. Explain the objectives and functions of diplomacy.
18. Discuss the distinctive features of the Old Diplomacy and New Diplomacy. How do you
account for the emergence of New Diplomacy?
19. Describing the features of Old Diplomacy and new Diplomacy analyze the difference
between the two.
20. Discuss briefly the various styles of Diplomacy.
21. Critically examine the various forms of diplomacy.
22. Discuss the main reasons for the decline of Diplomacy. Also assess the future of
Diplomacy in international relations.
23. Examine the meaning and nature of Balance of Power. Discuss its characteristics.
24. “The problem with the Balance of Power is not that it has no meaning but that it has too
many meanings” (Innis Claude Jr.). Discuss the problem of defining Balance of power
and explain its characteristics.
25. Discuss the various methods or devices for maintaining Balance of Power.
26. Attempt a critical evaluation of Balance of Power as a concept in International relations.
27. Evaluate the utility of Balance of Power as a device of maintaining international peace
and security.
28. Has the Balance of power of Power become totally obsolete in contemporary times?
Discuss the factors responsible for its decline.
29. Discuss the relevance of Balance of Power in contemporary times.
30. What is Collective Security? Discuss its nature and fundamental assumptions.
31. Write a brief note on the collective security system under the League of Nations and give
the reasons that led to its failure.
32. Discuss the Collective Security system as laid down by the UN Charter. Briefly evaluate
its working. Critically examine the concept of Collective Security and discuss the
conditions essential for its success.