Diplomacy and Post-War Reconstruction:
Interactions between States, International Organisations and Local Authorities
in the Implementation of the Dayton Accords for Bosnia and Herzegovina 
Dr Nadia Boyadjieva (Plovdiv University)
Dr Kostadin Grozev (Sofia University)

This paper will examine the implementation of the Dayton Accords for Bosnia and Herzegovina as a case study of the new type of involvement of the international community in crisis management and post-war reconstruction. In the new, post-Cold War international environment serious challenges occurred to the traditional channels of diplomatic communication. In the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina a new multi-ethnic, federal state appeared under international supervision but its survival depended on the ability of the international community to realize in practice the institutional framework agreed upon in Dayton. Thus the paper will present an analysis of the interaction at the level of diplomacy between foreign states involved in the area, local authorities and international organisations. Serious consideration will be given to the venues and approaches for non-state, non-governmental actions as well as to the new culture of communication that evolved as a result of this interaction. 
» PowerPoint presentation 95KB
 
 
The Interaction between Organisational Culture and National Culture
Professor Marie-Therese Claes (ICHEC Brussels Business School and the University of Louvain)

Culture can be found in many places: regional cultures within nations, between groups of countries, industry cultures, and corporate cultures (professional or functional), each with its own artifacts and values. This paper will examine how all these cultures interact, in particular with diplomatic professional culture, and how in a globalised world, where differences in national culture seem to persist, professional culture has to develop new competences. With the increasing emphasis on organisational learning, networking and knowledge management, the new competences include facilitation of the mediation of knowledge, values and experience, and contribution to organisational learning capabilities.
» PowerPoint presentation 80KB
 
 
Jargon, Protocols and Uniforms: Barriers to Inter-professional Communications
Dr Eduardo Gelbstein (DiploFoundation)
Stefano Baldi (Permanent Mission of Italy to the United Nations in New York, and DiploFoundation)

Observers tell us that we live in the Information Society. It is true that we communicate more, handle more information than any generation before us and have access to unprecedented amounts of data and information. It is also true that communicating across professions and cultures remains a challenge for most, and sharing information has improved little since Francis Bacon said, more than 400 years ago, that “information itself, is power”.

Why does this matter? Simply because at best, it creates stressful environments for those who need to participate in teamwork, increasingly of a “virtual” nature thanks to the outreach that technology now allows, and at worst, it creates major problems in crisis situations. Those who work in field operations for humanitarian crises have experienced technical incompatibilities and, more importantly, the reluctance to share information between, for example, the military, international organisations and NGOs. This paper discusses a number of case studies. The case studies suggest that jargon and tacit knowledge, protocols ranging from the form of address and degree of formality to the Command Chain and finally uniforms, ranging from a nurse’s to the military and their medals and other insignia, make a package of identity and cultural factors. Effective communications among different professions – where in addition to jargon, protocols and uniforms there are national cultures, communications style and gender, quickly become complicated.

This paper presents a framework for these barriers to communication, illustrates them with case studies and – perhaps optimistically - proposes mechanisms that could facilitate information sharing and more effective interactions.
 
 
Diplomats as Cultural Bridge Builders
Professor Geert Hofstede (Maastricht University and Institute for Research on Intercultural Cooperation, Tilburg University) 

Diplomats are specialists at bridging cultural gaps between the countries where they are posted and the countries they represent. Outsiders often underestimate the degree to which governments and citizens of different countries think, feel and act differently as a result of the different ways in which they were socialized as children. The gaps deal with ways of handling power, ways of handling ambiguity, the strength and consequences of family and other ingroup ties, the emotional and social implications of being a woman or a man, and the time span of need gratification. Diplomats experience these gaps and while they may not be aware of the system behind them, most have developed skills to deal with them in getting their governments’ messages across. 

Diplomats share with other diplomats a professional culture, regardless of their country. This professional culture enables them to see two sides of a problem and to remain on speaking terms with colleagues from very different cultures. It separates them from their countries’ politicians, who often rose to their present position by manifesting strong opinions for the home audience and by not minding the opinions of opponents. Resolution of burning international problems demands trust and cooperation between diplomats and politicians, which is a precious asset that merits careful conservation.

Diplomats pay a personal price for their brinkmanship; by their frequent moves into very different cultural contexts they and their families often suffer from a loss of identity. They show that having a home base is an important component of emotional well-being.
» PowerPoint presentation 1.9MB
 

The Birth and Evolution of a Diplomatic Culture
Professor Dietrich Kappeler (DiploFoundation)

Primitive forms of diplomacy go back to the early times when human groups decided to interrupt basically hostile interaction with occasional exchanges of messages. More organised human societies, especially urban ones, resorted to ad hoc diplomacy of sometimes considerable sophistication. But the appearance of a degree of professional diplomacy and an ensuing diplomatic culture only resulted from the creation of permanent diplomatic missions in the 15th and 16th centuries. This emerging diplomatic culture underwent little change up to World War I. Since then however, diplomats and their professional culture have not stopped changing. Foreign ministry diplomats were joined and sometimes supplanted by specialists from other ministries. Multilateral diplomacy became an important part of diplomatic interaction with the consequent extension of some forms at least of diplomatic culture to international secretariats and their staff. Internal actors of states such as parliaments, political parties, professional associations, and other types of non-governmental organisations initiated international contacts and thus practiced some kind of diplomacy of their own. On the international scene intergovernmental organisations were joined by non-governmental ones in increasing numbers, whose representatives are now seeking a proper place in multilateral diplomatic interaction and thus introducing new elements into diplomatic culture. Traditional inter-state diplomacy is also seeking new forms and approaches that tend to affect the profile of the modern diplomat and thus of course also diplomatic culture. As a latest development, cyber-diplomacy is about to once more transform diplomatic culture in ways that are still difficult to assess.
 

Diplomatic Training and the Multistakeholder Approach
Jovan Kurbalija (DiploFoundation)

The traditional and still predominant approach to diplomatic training is through courses or programs restricted to diplomats only, at diplomatic academies or ministries of foreign affairs. The exclusivity of diplomatic training is sometimes challenged by the inclusion of a few participants from other ministries who deal with foreign affairs issues (finance, defense, trade, etc.). This approach reflects the diplomatic reality of the 19th and the early 20th century, when diplomats communicated mainly among themselves. 

Modern reality is very different. Diplomats interact both at home and abroad with people from different professional circles. First, within the concept of diplomacy as a “gate-keeper,” diplomats have to communicate more with their colleagues from other ministries. Second, with the increasing relevance of economic issues they are more and more in touch with business people in their attempts to attract investment, promote trade and perform other functions of economic diplomacy. Third, with the growing importance of civil society and NGOs especially in the last 15 years, diplomats have entered a new community which they now need to address. Unlike their colleagues from Metternich’s or Wilson's time, modern diplomats communicate with very diverse professional cultures that have specific ways of approaching issues, specific language, specific ethics, etc. 

How can diplomats be prepared for this task? One approach is to reform training practices and to adopt a multistakeholder approach as one of the basic principles of diplomatic training. Through close daily contact with a variety of professions, diplomats can absorb information and develop the skills to communicate easily with different professional cultures. In this context, the highly relevant example of DiploFoundation’s Internet Governance Course, recently run in Belgrade, will be presented. This course was attended by diplomats, civil servants from other ministries, business people and representatives of the NGO community.
» PowerPoint presentation 500KB
 

Roma Rights Activists and the Political Establishment:
Communication Problems and Barriers
Valeriu Nicolae (European Roma Information Office)

Open and effective communication and interaction between the government and civil society is considered one of the fundamental conditions of a representative, working democracy. Theoretically, this communication ensures that individuals are treated equally, regardless of their race, creed, gender or ethnic origins. This paper examines the existing situation and some of the problems of communication between professional politicians and diplomats on the one hand, and Roma rights activists on the other side. I believe that many of the difficulties encountered in communication between these two groups apply equally to the interaction between the political class and other human rights activists, and activists for other causes such as the environment as well. This paper will examine several aspects of this communication in detail: ethnic cultural differences, professional cultural differences including educational and language barriers, racism, and lack of interaction and common ground.
» PowerPoint presentation 49KB
 

Professional Diplomatic Culture and Dialogue with Domestic Stakeholders
Ambassador Kishan S Rana (DiploFoundation)

Some characteristics of professional diplomatic culture are common across countries, though this element of unity has weakened with the expansion in the number of states and their multiform diversities. Nevertheless there is a shared diplomatic culture that is often different from the domestic context of states. It is interesting to focus on these differences, and to identify the ways in which such differences impact on the quality of the home dialogue within countries. Some of the elements are: one, diplomats are seen as elites, taking superior airs with home compatriots (regardless of where truth may lie). Second, everywhere diplomatic services perceive themselves as “under siege”, some of the criticism bordering on the absurd. Third, in this age of “networked diplomacy” foreign ministries need domestic line ministries as never before as effective partners; there is a cultural dimension to the way this problem shapes and needs to be handled. Fourth, diplomatic training takes new meaning to cope with the situations sketched above. The paper sums up the observed scene in different courtiers and offers some practical ideas.
» PowerPoint presentation 44KB 
 

International Economic Diplomacy: The Challenge of Coping with Multiple
National, Organisational and Professional Cultures
Dr Raymond Saner and Dr Lichia Yiu (Center for Socio-Eco-Nomic Development)

Non-state actors like business diplomats and transnational economic NGO diplomats with their multitude of transborder alliances and pressure groups have added to the traditional domain of economic diplomacy a "supraterritorial relations" component thereby partially undermining the sovereignty of states in conducting international economic relations. At the same time, faced with globalisation and competition for foreign direct investment as well as with the growing influence of international economic standard setting organisations (WTO, ITU, ILO etc.), many countries have come to expect that their diplomats specialised in economic diplomacy and commercial diplomacy more effectively serve their national interests in the economic and business spheres. The speakers suggest that ministries of foreign affairs need to expand their institutional capabilities in dealing with non-state actors and other government ministries and learn to better understand and manage the multiple cultures (national, professional, organisational and gender) of today's complex realities of international economic diplomacy.
 

A Clash of Professional Cultures: Scientific Caution versus Public Diplomacy
Dr Biljana Scott (Centre for Linguistics and Philology, Oxford University)

The distinctive characteristics of individual professional cultures become most apparent under one or both of two conditions: (1) when distinct cultures come into contact with each other and attempt to translate across their differences; and (2) when the members of one professional culture transgress the rules and mores of their community and are exposed for their mistakes. 

The Hutton Inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, the senior British arms inspector in the UN Inspection mission to Iraq who was found dead in an English wood in July 2003, offers revealing insights into the contrasting professional cultures of journalists, scientists and politicians. Not only does the Hutton inquiry reveal essential differences in the styles of discourse of each culture and the misunderstandings which arose when they came in contact with each other under sensitive and high-pressure circumstances, but it also reveals the errors of judgement on the part of three key players representing each professional culture, namely the journalist Andrew Gilligan, the scientist David Kelly, and the political spin-doctor Alastair Campbell. The Hutton Inquiry therefore provides a uniquely well-documented and contemporary case study of both conditions mentioned above. 

This paper adopts a two-tiered approach to establishing the distinctive attributes of each of the professional cultures under investigation. First it undertakes a comparative linguistic analysis of the three discourse styles involved. In particular it investigates the claim that journalistic language is careless and sensation-seeking, scientific language cautious and empirically-driven and political language manipulative and spin-laden. Second, it looks at the values and practices which give rise to these differences in language, and considers the boundaries between citation and inference, truth and lies, and finally spin and trust. These boundaries, when breached, may cause the ethos of a professional culture to be called in question. They may also cost lives.

The relevance of this paper to diplomacy is two-fold. On the one hand, diplomacy provides the backdrop against which the Kelly affair unfolded. In an act of public diplomacy aimed at winning both national and international support for increasing the pressure on Iraq, the Blair government exaggerated the threat of Iraqi WMDs in its September 2002 Dossier through what came to be known as the 'forty-five minute claim'. It is because of his misgivings about the misrepresentation of scientific evidence for the benefit of government policy that Dr David Kelly first approached BBC journalists. 

On the other hand, all three protagonists may be deemed, in retrospect, to have in varying degrees perpetrated the same fault, that of “careless talk”. As second world war UK propaganda cautioned: “Careless talk can cost lives” (known in the US as: “Loose lips sink ships”). The power of language to sway public opinion, and to make or break not only individuals but governments, is clearly central to the concerns of diplomacy. The interest of the Kelly affair is that it reveals how particular phrases and speech acts resulted in an ultimately fatal clash between professional cultures.
» PowerPoint presentation 663KB
 

The Idea of Diplomatic Culture and Its Sources
Professor Paul Sharp (Alworth Institute for International Studies, University of Minnesota, Duluth)
Dr Geoffrey Wiseman (School of International Relations, University of Southern California)

This two-paper panel seeks to address growing interest in the idea of diplomatic culture: the various ways in which the cultures in which diplomats operate help shape their senses of themselves ("self-image") and of foreigners ("other-image"), what they actually do, and what they ought to do. Building on Hedley Bull's idea that diplomatic culture underpins the international society of states, this panel explores some of the key cultural ideas, practices, and processes that give diplomacy its distinguishing characteristics. In other words, the panel considers what it means to be a diplomat, how diplomats relate to, are socialized by, and in turn socialize this diplomatic culture over time.

Building on ideas about how international society socializes the diplomatic practices of putatively revolutionary regimes, Paul Sharp develops the idea of "Outlaw and Revolutionary Diplomacy". With this concept he explores the influences of two sources of diplomatic culture on those charged with representing revolutionary and/or outlaw regimes: the expectations of established states and the expectations of revolutionary and/or outlaw leaderships and their supporters. Geoffrey Wiseman considers whether the apparent eclipse of soft power agents of diplomatic persuasion in the U.S. State Department by hard power agents of brute force in the Department of Defence over policies in Iraq and elsewhere implies that the US somehow escapes the socializing embrace of diplomatic culture, whether U.S. diplomatic culture and practices contribute to unilateralist and hegemonic impulses, or whether the US, as with other states in the international system, is also socialized in important - if generally unnoticed - ways by the global diplomatic culture.
 

Advantages of Multi-professional Experience in Diplomatic Judgment and
Communication: Experience of a Physicist in the Diplomatic Profession
Professor Lamija Tanovic (Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina and University of Sarajevo)

As a physicist I have had 20 years of experience in research and teaching at the university level and I have also been a diplomat during a particularly difficult period of war and post-war reconstruction. I hope that this makes me competent to answer the following question: how can contrasting professional cultures be combined in order to get successful diplomatic results? I hope to elaborate on the effects of the presence of both scientific precision and diplomatic vagueness in one profession as well as on their mutual support and combination. I wish to show how the scientist can help the diplomat to come to a more precise definition of a situation in negotiations, to work out a better model for improving a critical situation while at the same time their frankness can make diplomatic communication difficult.
» PowerPoint presentation 1MB
 

Selection and Training for Intercultural Competence
Thomas Vulpe, Doug MacDonald, Dr Daniel J. Kealey
(Centre for Intercultural Learning, Canadian Foreign Service Institute)

The Centre for Intercultural Learning (CIL) of the Canadian Foreign Service Institute is the largest provider of intercultural training programs in Canada for outgoing government and private-sector personnel working in diplomacy, development, business and peacekeeping. In providing learning and research support to Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Centre offers pre-departure training for Foreign Service officers and their families; an internet-based assessment of intercultural effectiveness and readiness for undertaking an international assignment; an e-learning course entitled Fundamentals of Intercultural Effectiveness; a web-based country information portal; and, a distance learning course developed for locally engaged staff in Canadian missions to become more knowledgeable about Canada.

Despite the rapidly growing number of training providers in this area, clear and measurable statements of learning objectives and outcomes in intercultural training are rarely found in practice. When the Centre embarked on a process to review and re-design its training curriculum and evaluation systems four years ago, it did so with the ambitious precondition
of addressing this major shortcoming by establishing measurable and evaluable indicators of intercultural effectiveness. The detailed indicators of effective intercultural performance derived from this work are now the foundation for the Centre's work in personnel selection, learning design and evaluation.

The conference paper will describe the inspiration, methodology, challenges and results of this undertaking, and discuss the value and implications of a competency analysis of intercultural effectiveness for the field of diplomacy and beyond. The presenters will also discuss the Centre's vision for addressing new challenges in the areas of intercultural learning and performance.
» PowerPoint presentation 1MB
 
 
Distortions of Culture: The Challenge of Communicating with Domestic Publics
Dr R.S. Zaharna (American University, Washington DC)

Cultural differences have been an enduring communication challenge throughout human history. Misunderstandings in cross-cultural communication between people are not a new phenomenon. What is new is the communication between nations and people. The revolution in global communication has pushed traditional diplomacy out of the private corridors of governments and into the international fray of public discourse – bringing culture with it. Whereas traditional diplomacy relies on the shared international language of diplomacy to negotiate cultural differences, the currency of public diplomacy is multicultural communication. Culture reins supreme, dictating style as well as perception. While a government may be oblivious to culture’s impact on its communication, foreign publics are not. Misunderstandings reverberate in what David Hoffman has termed “an international echo chamber.” Governments must now compete to be heard; yet when they are heard, they are likely to be misunderstood.

Distortions of Culture explores prominent differences in cross-cultural communication styles and illustrates how culture can undermine the effectiveness of public diplomacy as a communication tool of foreign policy. A greater awareness of the different styles is key to developing multicultural strategies and reducing cultural distortions when communicating with the domestic public.

N E W S


Intercultural Communication Portal
(open for contributions)

Photo Gallery

Keynote Paper presented
by Prof. Geert Hofstede