 |
|
WHO NEEDS
DIPLOMATS? THE PROBLEM OF DIPLOMATIC REPRESENTATION - Paul Sharp
|
|
|
 REPRESENTING INTERESTS AND
POWER
Representing Interests and Power
While the symbolic dimension never entirely disappears, it remains a source of unease
for diplomats and those who comment on them. If diplomats represent sovereigns, be they
princes, governments, or states, it would seem reasonable to suppose that they represent
their interests just as other professionals represent the interests of their clients. This
gets one off the difficult metaphysical level and allows a freer discussion of diplomacy,
but the cost is high in terms of conceptual clarity and an ability to evaluate diplomatic
activity. Once diplomatic representation is seen to represent interests, virtually
everything a diplomat does must be viewed both as an aspect of representation and as an
attempt to serve the interests of governments or countries. In R.P. Barston’s
standard work on diplomacy, six "tasks" of diplomacy are listed. The first is
representation, which is divided between "ceremonial" and
"substantive."(9) Into the latter are packed
explaining and defending national policy, negotiating, and interpreting the policies of
receiving governments. As may be expected, the distinction between these three components
of substantive representation and some of the other tasks (which include listening,
preparing the ground for initiatives, reducing friction, and contributing to orderly
change) is by no means clear, and one is left wondering why representation qualifies as a
distinct, let alone important, activity at all.
One possible way out of this confusion is provided by Hans Morgenthau, although at a
price which one suspects most students of diplomacy would be reluctant to pay. He
distinguishes between political, legal, and symbolic representation.(10) The first two provide catch-alls for all functions
of diplomacy. Surprisingly, given his reputation as a realist of the power political
school, he also declares that the diplomat is "first of all. . .the symbolic
representative of his country." The letdown follows swiftly, however, as it becomes
clear that symbolic representation, like sovereignty, soldiers, and dollars, is just
another instrument in the arsenal of power and influence. Diplomacy is merely "one of
the lesser tools of foreign policy."(11) The
task of the diplomat is to assert the prestige of his own country while testing that of
others. If power is primarily a psychological relationship, then prevailing beliefs and
ideologies are significant only insofar as they provide ways of obtaining influence over
others and denying them influence over you. All the functions of the diplomat reduce to
what Ermolo Barbaro, the Venetian ambassador to Rome in 1490, called the "first duty
of an ambassador. . .that is, to do, say, advise and think whatever may best serve the
preservation and aggrandizement of his own state."(12)
In the political world associated with Morgenthau, in which national and self-interests
are defined in terms of power, what else could diplomats do but represent their own power?
|