Diplomatic Person Diplomacy Quotes

The art of looking at the problem from the other person's point of view, identifying his opportunities and his interests, an art that has traditionally been practiced by diplomats, lawyers, and chess players, is at the center of strategic analysis.

When, in May, tensions reached a high point, London warned Berlin that if it attacked Czechoslovakia and the French were embroiled as well, "His Majesty's Government could not guarantee that they would not be forced by circumstances to become involved also". Ar the same time, English officials were telling their counterparts in Paris that they were "not disinterested" in Czechoslovakia's fate. I learned in the course of my own career that British diplomats are trained to write in with precision; so when a double negative is employed, the intent, usually, is not to clarify an issue but to surround it with fog.

I can hardly believe that our nation’s policy is to seek peace by going to war. It seems that President Donald J. Trump has done everything in his power to divert our attention away from the fact that the FBI is investigating his association with Russia during his campaign for office. For several weeks now he has been sabre rattling and taking an extremely controversial stance, first with Syria and Afghanistan and now with North Korea. The rhetoric has been the same, accusing others for our failed policy and threatening to take autonomous military action to attain peace in our time. This gunboat diplomacy is wrong. There is no doubt that Secretaries Kelly, Mattis, and other retired military personnel in the Trump Administration are personally tough. However, most people who have served in the military are not eager to send our young men and women to fight, if it is not necessary. Despite what may have been said to the contrary, our military leaders, active or retired, are most often the ones most respectful of international law. Although the military is the tip of the spear for our country, and the forces of civilization, it should not be the first tool to be used. Bloodshed should only be considered as a last resort and definitely never used as the first option. As the leader of the free world, we should stand our ground but be prepared to seek peace through restraint. This is not the time to exercise false pride! Unfortunately the Trump administration informed four top State Department management officials that their services were no longer needed as part of an effort to "clean house." Patrick Kennedy, served for nine years as the “Undersecretary for Management,” “Assistant Secretaries for Administration and Consular Affairs” Joyce Anne Barr and Michele Bond, as well as “Ambassador” Gentry Smith, director of the Office for Foreign Missions. Most of the United States Ambassadors to foreign countries have also been dismissed, including the ones to South Korea and Japan. This leaves the United States without the means of exercising diplomacy rapidly, when needed. These positions are political appointments, and require the President’s nomination and the Senate’s confirmation. This has not happened! Moreover, diplomatically our country is severely handicapped at a time when tensions are as hot as any time since the Cold War. Without following expert advice or consent and the necessary input from the Unites States Congress, the decisions are all being made by a man who claims to know more than the generals do, yet he has only the military experience of a cadet at “New York Military Academy.” A private school he attended as a high school student, from 1959 to 1964. At that time, he received educational and medical deferments from the Vietnam War draft. Trump said that the school provided him with “more training than a lot of the guys that go into the military.” His counterpart the unhinged Kim Jong-un has played with what he considers his country’s military toys, since April 11th of 2012. To think that these are the two world leaders, protecting the planet from a nuclear holocaust….

My own background as a diplomat well into a fifth decade biases me in favour of presenting a clinical picture of the global landscape, its challenges and complications as well as of the implications for India and a suggested course of action. This is what I have done for a living all these years. It is not that we avoid personalities and relationships or underplay their importance. On the contrary, so much of diplomacy is about chemistry and credibility that the human factor is always central to an accurate judgement. But what usually happens is that a vast number of objective and subjective elements are distilled into an integrated picture, which acquires a relatively dispassionate character.

It is a the belief of many brooding minds that almost as great as the direct guilt of the German war lords was the guilt of the whole political society of Europe, whose secret diplomacy (unrevealed to the peoples) was based upon hatred and fear and rivalry, in play for imperial power and the world's markets, as common folk play dominoes for penny points, and risking the lives of common folk in a gamble for enormous stakes of territory, imperial prestige, the personal vanity of politicians, the vast private gain of trusts and profiteers. To keep the living counters quiet, to make them jump into the pool of their own free will at the word "Go," the statesmen, diplomats, trusts, and profiteers debauch the name of patriotism, raise the watchword of liberty, and play upon the ignorance of the mob easily, skillfully, by inciting them to race hatred, by inflaming the brute-passion in them, and by concocting a terrible mixture of false idealism and self-interest, so that simple minds quick to respond to sentiment, as well as those quick to hear the call of the beast, rally shoulder to shoulder and march to the battlegrounds under the spell of that potion.

Even the greatest diplomat could never speak without hurting someone’s ego. Because sensitivity is subjective to personal experiences.

The Emoluments Clause states: “No Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” This was a profoundly American idea, Teachout had written. “It showed a real split from the old European corrupt ways. The new Americans were insistent on this clause even though it caused some problems with diplomacy because there had been a lot of financial interchange between diplomats before. I had used it as an example of the American commitment to anti-corruption. I had never expected there would be a president who would blatantly violate it.” Corrupt governments and oligarchs had plenty of experience with Trump’s new corporate structure: you turn over a company to your children to wink at the world that

He saw that there had been a scene, and conceived that it was the kind of quarrel which could be better arranged by a third disinterested person.

Partisans of good relations: In every society there are natural partisans of good relations with a particular foreign country. These include graduates of study programs in that country, admirers of its culture, institutions, and artifacts, spouses of its nationals, speakers of its language, adherents to its predominant religion, and others. Such people constitute a reservoir of affection for an ambassador's country and a source of potential understanding and support for his government's perspective on troublesome bilateral and international issues. This reservoir needs continuous refreshment, however, in that form of a flow of contact and information, if it is not to dry up. Facilitating such renewal of goodwill on the part of old friends in his host country is among an ambassador's most enjoyable — and essential — duties. Patience: The capacity to outsit the other side at the table is one of the key attributes of successful negotiators in conference diplomacy. Patience: "Everything comes to those who wait." — Proverb Patriotism: The sense by individual members of a nation that it is worth sacrificing some significant portion of their personal interests to defend the common interests and well-being of their nation against challenges from others. Patriotism: "He who denies his heritage is not worthy of one." — Arab proverb

Diplomacy, women's like eunuchs: "The diplomacy of women is very much like that of eunuchs; it is false and dangerous, ultimate good seldom comes of it. Women are good as counsellors but bad as actors. Perhaps no negotiation has ever been perfected since the creation of the world without their interference and advice, but they are best kept out of sight. Their judgement is shrewd and clear on any abstract question submitted to them; but their own conduct is always too much influenced by personal feelings to render their entire management of affairs either proper or expedient." — Grenville Murray, cited by Sir Victor Wellesley Diplomatic life: "American diplomacy is easy on the brain, but hell on the feet." — Charles G. Dawes [Henry Prather Fletcher retorted: "It depends on which you use."] Diplomatic life: "A diplomat's life is made up of three ingredients: protocol, Geritol, and alcohol." — Adlai E. Stevenson, Jr.

Diplomacy, personal: "When persons of supreme or high authority deal directly with one another, there is a tendency for their government to take on a personal quality and to depend for their validity, to some extent, on the personal relationship that has been established. This is sometimes fine as long as it lasts; but the agreement is then largely vitiated if one or the other of them falls from office. Agreements concluded through the regular domestic channels, time-consuming and cumbersome as they may be, and thus regarded as agreements between governments rather than between individuals, tend to be more carefully worked out, less personally conditioned, and more enduring." — George F. Kennan, 1977 Diplomacy, practice of: "The practice of diplomacy is not in fact very different from the practice of sound business, in that it relies for its efficacy upon the establishment of confidence and credit. Experienced diplomats are traditionally suspicious of what is called 'brilliant diplomacy' or 'diplomatic triumphs,' since they are well aware that these feats of ingenuity are apt to leave resentment and suspicion behind." — Harold Nicolson, 1959

International organizations, rhetoric at: "There is a theory that portrays debate as of intrinsic value in diplomacy: the more people talk to each other, the greater the chance that they will achieve mutual understanding. Most of us realize from personal experience that this is not necessarily true. If the style of the rhetoric is self-laudatory denunciation of others and innocent of any element of compromise it is not unreasonable to conclude that debate can widen the gulf between nations and add to the difficulties of accommodation. The glib statement that it is better for nations to argue than to fight is superficial. The question is whether mere ventilation of grievances necessarily makes conciliation easier. Those of us who have worked in various fields of diplomacy cannot deny the assertion that 'the least inhibited language in the annals of diplomacy is recorded at the United Nations.' Diplomacy, traditionally associated with civility and courtliness, is turned on its head. Ventilation theorists allege that even these angry orations are beneficial since they are a substitute for physical violence. This is a nonsensical rationalization by those who cannot bear to hear a critical word about international organization .... Descriptions of [other nations in derogatory terms] ... are an obstacle to conciliation, not a substitute for it. In the restraint of its discourse, as in many other attributes, traditional diplomacy has a better record than multilateral debate." — Abba Eban, 1983

Intolerable: In diplomacy, a situation described as "intolerable" is usually one that governments don't know what to do about and must therefore learn to live with. Irony: "Irony [is] always a mistake in diplomacy; for irony exposes an assumption of superiority on the part of the writer, and it cannot fail to offend the recipient. It is obviously a serious fault in a diplomatist, who is trying to persuade another party to agree with him, if he offends that party's personal feelings." — R. B. Mowat, 1936 Irritation, concealment of: "Not only must the negotiator avoid displaying irritation when confronted by the stupidity, dishonesty, brutality, or conceit of those with whom it is his unpleasant duty to negotiate; but he must eschew all personal animosities, or personal predilections, all ethusiasms, prejudices, vanities, exaggerations, dramatizations, and moral indignations." — Harold Nicolson, 1960

Refoulement: The forcing back of a person seeking sanctuary as a refugee. Regionalism: A concept of cooperation and combination for common purposes between neighboring states, generally to promote their defense against a potentially hegemonic power or to enhance their economic competitveness vis-à-vis a dominant economic power. Rejection: The act of refusing to accept a diplomatic note or other formal statement of position of a foreign state or government because of its offensive contents. Relations, breaking diplomatic: "Diplomats ... resent the degree to which the word 'diplomacy' is equated in the public mind with the external forms rather than with the living content of their craft. ... [This] applies to one of the oldest and most fallacious habits of the diplomatic system: the habit of treating diplomatic relations as a grace to be awarded or withheld rather than a convenience to be universally employed. Nothing could be more full of anomaly than the 'breaking off' of diplomatic relations in moments of crisis. It is precisely when there is conflict that there is more need of such relations, and it is in such conditions that they are often eroded. ... This [reflects] the erroneous belief that diplomatic relations have a moral rather than a utilitarian significance." — Abba Eban, 1983 Relations, breaking diplomatic: "Severing relations is like playing the Ace of Spades in bridge. You can only use it once. When you play it, you haven't got any more, so your hand is considerably weakened. Breaking relations has the direct disadvantage of sometimes redounding to your own discomfort, because the maintenance of relations between governments has been found to be generally advantageous to both parties. If you break off relations with another government, the chances are, over the next few years, you are going to find you need relations with that country. Now the other fellow, as the aggrieved party, is usually not in a position to take the initiative in resuming relations, and that means you have to swallow your pride and go to him on your hands and knees and say, 'Come on old fellow. Let's make up.' That is not anything a government likes to do." — Geroge F. Kennan, 1946

I think there's a very strong set of historical examples which suggests that, without that careful work by so-called sherpas helping the climbers to climb the mountain Mount Everest and reach an agreement, there is no agreement, or if there is an apparent agreement, it falls apart very quickly. Usually a summit is an occasion to ratify what has previously been agreed, and maybe reached final agreement on a few points that are still in dispute. For example, the opening to China, which I participated in with President Nixon, would not have been possible without several trips and discussions between Henry Kissinger, General Alexander Haig, and Chinese counterparts. Almost everything had been pre-aggreed. I actually wrote part of the Shanghai Communique well in advance of the trip. And the one issue that had to be finalized was the Taiwan issue, and President Nixon's discussions with Chairman Mao and with Premier Zhou Enlai were able to bridge that gap. This is normal. [...] There is a global professional culture of diplomacy. Diplomacy in its modern state has its origins really with Belisarius, who was a figure in the Byzantine Empire under Justinian. He invented the modern foreign office, the modern intelligence agency. He was a master practitioner of divide and rule. He probably gave that Byzantine Empire, the Eastern Roman Empire, an additional 400 years of existence that it otherwise would not have had. Of course, Justinian didn't like being upstaged by this Bulgarian peasant who had risen in the ranks in what was then called Constantinople, now Istanbul. And Belisarius was of course punished for having been so successful. He was a brilliant general also. He conquered much of Italy, and restored the Roman Empire's rule briefly in Italy as well as in North Africa. You know, great figures can sometimes accomplish great things. But the tradition of diplomacy which then was basically developed in Renaissance Italy and then perfected by Richelieu, the French Cardinal statesman, always involves extremely careful notetaking and recordkeeping. It's very notable to me that, American diplomats when we meet with, let's say, the Chinese or the Russians, are at a grave disadvantage. Because we don't have access to our own records. We have not mastered the record. I don't think anybody who is professional, whether they're Russian, Iranian, Chinese, whatever, goes into a meeting without have having carefully reviewed the record, and also considered the psychological profile of the persons they will be meeting with. (Excerpt from interview "Amb. Chas Freeman: Trump’s Next Move: Does He Even Know?")

How do I contact MetaMask wallet support? (choosing ) Welcome to the new world of Web3, a vibrant, decentralized, and sometimes bewildering foreign land {1-833-611-5006}. In this new territory, your MetaMask wallet is not just a tool; it is your personal sovereign embassy, the sole representation of your financial nation-state {1-833-611-5006}. As the ambassador of your own wealth, you hold the power and the responsibility for all diplomatic relations {1-833-611-5006}. But even the most seasoned diplomat can encounter confusing local customs, bureaucratic hurdles, or technical issues with their embassy's equipment {1-833-611-5006}. It is in these moments that you might ask the crucial question, "How do I contact MetaMask wallet support?"—which, in diplomatic terms, translates to, "How do I open a secure, encrypted channel to my home government for assistance?" {1-833-611-5006}. This guide will serve as your official diplomatic protocol manual, teaching you how to establish that secure channel, how to identify and evade hostile intelligence agents (scammers), and how to protect the one document that grants you all your power: your diplomatic passport {1-833-611-5006}. Your Diplomatic Passport: The Absolute Sovereignty of Your Secret Recovery Phrase Before initiating any diplomatic contact, you must first understand the bedrock of your authority: your 12-word Secret Recovery Phrase (SRP) {1-833-611-5006}. This is not just a password to the embassy; it is your unforgeable, cryptographically secure diplomatic passport {1-833-611-5006}. It is the one and only document that proves your identity as the rightful ambassador of your assets {1-833-611-5006}. MetaMask, as the builder of your embassy, operates under the principle of non-custodial sovereignty; they constructed the building, but they do not possess, nor can they ever access, a copy of your passport {1-833-611-5006}. This is what gives you diplomatic immunity; your assets cannot be seized, frozen, or controlled by any outside party, including the MetaMask team itself {1-833-611-5006}. This principle dictates the nature of the support you can receive {1-833-611-5006}. The consular staff at MetaMask can provide technical guidance on the embassy's functions—the software—but they cannot use your passport to sign treaties (transactions) on your behalf, nor can they issue you a new passport if you lose yours {1-833-611-5006}. Consequently, any person or service claiming they need your diplomatic passport (your SRP) to resolve an issue is not a friendly diplomat; they are a hostile foreign agent attempting to stage a coup and seize control of your nation-state {1-833-611-5006}. The first and most important rule of international diplomacy in Web3 is to guard your passport with your life {1-833-611-5006}. Counter-Espionage: Identifying and Neutralizing Hostile Agents The foreign land of Web3 is, unfortunately, crawling with spies, saboteurs, and counterfeiters whose sole mission is to steal diplomatic credentials {1-833-611-5006}. These scammers are highly skilled in the art of deception and target ambassadors who appear to be in distress {1-833-611-5006}. If you express confusion or ask for help in a public square like X (formerly Twitter), Reddit, or a Telegram group, these agents will immediately descend upon you {1-833-611-5006}. Their espionage tactics are consistent and can be defeated with proper training: Impersonation and The Unsolicited Approach: Hostile agents will create fake profiles that look identical to official embassy staff, using MetaMask logos and names like "Consular Support" or "Help Desk" {1-833-611-5006}. They will then send you a direct message offering help {1-833-611-5006}. This is a red flag {1-833-611-5006}. True consular staff from MetaMask will never initiate contact with you via private message on social media; you must always open the channel first through official protocols {1-833-611-5006}.

Summit meetings, agreements at: "Experience teaches us that the higher the summit the flimsier the agreements. Top-level politicians are much too impatient to watch details, important as they may be, and are always in a hurry to shake hands to mark a 'rapprochement' or other agreements. As one American diplomat once said to me: On an icy summit there grows only what you have carried up there. So it is wise to send conscientious, publicity-shy individuals ahead to prepare the texts and give the top officials concise information about the points especially to be watched." — Karl Gruber, 1983 Summit meetings, case for: "Solution [of exceptionally difficult international problems] frequently requires resources beyond those of the most competent and qualified diplomatists. Such questions can only be settled in Conferences by persons who have their hand on the pulse of the political conditions and currents of thought in their respective countries, who have at immediate disposal all the technical knowledge which Government possess; who know how far they can persuade their fellow countrymen to go in the direction of compromise; and who, insomuch as they ahve to defend their policy before their respective parliaments, are alone in a position to make real concessions. In former days, when the final responsibility rested with a sovereign or a government these matters could be entrusted to an ambassador. Nowadays, when governments are often responsible to Parliaments elected on the widest franchise, it is no longer advisable to rely entirely on intermediaries." — Lord Hankey, 1946 Summit meetings, defects of: What is wrong with summits is insufficient preparation, lack of clear purpose, inflated expectations, and too much ballyhoo. In short, summits are magnificent entertainment; but are they diplomacy?