Diplomatic Briefing
Your exclusive news aggregator handpicked daily!Archive for Commentaries
Commentary: Troubled SA diplomacy could doom climate talks
A United Nations climate change summit, which already promises only modest steps for cutting greenhouse gas pollution, could be in more trouble unless host South Africas harpens up its international image. The 190-nation gathering inDurbanat the end of this month follows years of fraught attempts to win agreement on strong emission curbs from big polluting nations. Expectations of success are already low for the talks, where parties are trying to find a way of saving the landmark Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which expires at the end of 2012. Analysts expect all the same that the talks will produce a face-saving measure to prevent the Kyoto deal from dying in Durban. But the cloud has deepened after a series of diplomatic gaffes by the host country that have eroded confidence in its ability to take a grip on the debate and help shape the summit’s outcome. Furthermore, South Africa has strained relations with major Western powers which are normally major fund sources of global policies but are increasingly reluctant to allocate money due to debt worries in the eurozone and US. South Africa has found itself on the wrong side of the mainstream argument over Libya and Ivory Coast. Western powers also raised their eyebrows when Pretoria blocked a visit by the Dalai Lama to please China, its biggest trading partner. Analysts recall the Copenhagen climate talks of 2009 which were roundly regarded as a failure, in part because the host country could not do the heavy lifting to broker the deals required. The talks in 2010 in Cancun were regarded as a relative success, with many negotiators crediting Mexican envoys for pushing the process forward. South Africa’s environment minister is Edna Molewa, a highly regarded domestic political operative with almost no experience in global negotiations. Foreign Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane has more international experience, serving as an ambassador, but has not been seen as a force in regional or global diplomacy. It was Mashabane’s diplomacy that came in for Western criticism when Pretoria supported entrenched and autocratic leaders in Libya, Syria and Ivory Coast. Its stance strained ties with the European Union and Washington. The refusal to allow the Dalai Lama, a Nobel peace prize laureate seen as a dangerous separatist by Beijing, to attend the 80th birthday of South Africa’s national hero Desmond Tutu, also provoked an outcry. Foreign Policy magazine dubbed South Africa a “cowardly lion”. Critics said the ANC has compromised ideals it embraced when it fought to end apartheid. “Principles have fallen to such an extent that nobody expects them to do the right thing,” said a diplomat in Pretoria.
http://m.timeslive.co.za/?i=3692/0/0&artId=4169350&showonly=1
Commentary: Canadian diplomats being told to do less with less
At a time when most are having to do more with less, a government report says Canadian diplomats should be discouraged from going above and beyond the call of duty for fear of raising expectations. In particular, the Foreign Affairs department evaluation cites Canadian envoys working in other countries for exceeding established standards when it comes to their treatment of visiting dignitaries and officials, such as airport pick-ups. “The evaluation found that the use of discretion to exceed service standard has resulted in inconsistent service delivery to stakeholders across missions,” the reports reads. This is an issue, the report says, because when those same visitors do not receive the same treatment at another Canadian embassy or consulate, “this leads to confusion and a sense of dissatisfaction.” In their defence, diplomats told evaluators a degree of flexibility in applying the standards was necessary given the different contexts and environments in which Canadian embassies operate around the world. They also noted that smaller diplomatic posts generally get fewer visits from senior officials, and so picking dignitaries up at the airport gives the envoys an important opportunity to discuss strategic issues. Former Canadian ambassador to the UN Paul Heinbecker said he ran up against government rules and standards when he was in the foreign service, “but I never listened to that much.” Heinbecker said he believes things have gotten worse since he was in government, particularly as accountability has become a major buzzword in recent years. “What you have to do is keep firmly in mind what you’re there for, which is (to) advance Canadian interests,” he said of the foreign service. “The rules are not supposed to be there to prevent you from doing that.” Staff at Foreign Affairs, like at all federal government departments, are being forced to submit to cabinet proposals on how to cut five and 10 per cent from their spending. Experts expect travel and hospitality funds to be one of the first areas to be hit.
Commentary: Do diplomats need UK in-transit visas?
You should be aware that not only diplomats but also government officials and members of governments need to complete certain application forms when they are travelling through the UK, even though they may be travelling in an official capacity. The application form that is completed will vary, and it will depend on your purpose for travelling to or through the UK. If the diplomat, government official or member of government is travelling to or through the UK for private reasons, such as a tourist or on a course of study, then that person would have to make an application for a visa in the conventional way. With respect to diplomats, government officials and members of government, there are various reasons these categories of travellers could be required to complete the appropriate diplomatic application forms. Such officials in these categories would be required to do so if they are a diplomat going to the UK on an official posting. In addition, a particular application form would need to be filled out for a dependant of a diplomat who is also entering the UK on an official posting. Also, a certain form would be needed to be filled out if the diplomat is in transit through the UK and is on his or her way to take up a diplomatic post in another country, and this would also apply to a diplomat who was travelling to theUKon official business. When a diplomat is posted to the UK he or she would have to fill out the form VAFDIP1. With respect to a dependent of a diplomat who is posted to theUK, he or she would have to apply for entry using form VAFDIP1DEP. Also, when diplomats are ‘in transit’ through the UK and who are on their way to take up a diplomatic posting in another country or for members of foreign governments who are also ‘in transit’ through the UK to another country on official business, those individuals would have to make their applications to transit through the UK using VAFDIP3. In addition, as stated above, diplomats who are travelling to the UK on official business and for members of foreign governments who are travelling to the UK on government business would also need to make an application and would need to use form VAFDIP2. Further, diplomats, government officials and members of government, as part of their application, will need to enrol their fingerprints and facial image, this is known as ‘biometric information’, at a visa application centre in whatever country they are travelling as part of their application.
Commentary: The Saudi Ambassador of Sangfroid
There were women who lost their heads over Adel al-Jubeir, back when the Saudi ambassador was a charming playboy. Given that his father was a diplomat too – one of the first Saudis to have a college degree – maybe the 49-year-old’s equanimity is in his genes. He is far more understated than his flamboyant predecessor, Prince Bandar, who was so plugged into the Bush dynasty he was known as “Bandar Bush.” Jubeir stayed cool even when American officials informed him several months ago about the latest stunning chapter in theSaudi Arabia-versus-IranGreat Game for supremacy in theMiddle East: an outlandish plot by an Iranian-American used-car dealer inTexaswho said his cousin was a senior member of the Iranian Quds Force. As evidence mounted of money transfers and taped conversations, Jubeir accepted that, as President Obama said, the plot was “paid by and directed by individuals in the Iranian government.”Irandenies that, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told Fareed Zakaria: “Do we really need to kill the ambassador of a brotherly country?” ”It went from ‘I can’t believe this,’ ” the ambassador said with a dry smile, “to ‘Man, these guys really know how to ruin a man’s day.’ ” He had to force himself to live a normal existence for months, not telling family or staff, until a criminal complaint was unveiled and theTexascar dealer was before a judge. Gathering his shaken staff in the embassy, he said: “Nothing befalls us except that which God has written for us. If anything, it should reinforce our resolve. Otherwise the bad guys win.” He got a standing ovation. His family was “shocked” and his frightened twin 9-year-old daughters called his office to grill him. He reassured them that there was “a bad guy but no danger.” Still, they pressed: “O.K., when are you coming home?”‘ I asked if he thought he was targeted because of his tough position onIran, underscored in a 2008 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks quoting him reiterating that King Abdullah wanted theU.S.to “cut off the head of the snake.” “You should ask the perpetrators, not me,” he said wryly. “We do what we have to do, and we can’t let issues like this deter us.”
Commentary: Nations are exploiting power of ‘weiplomacy’
The world became a smaller and flatter place thanks to the Internet. But with the emergence of Weibo, the micro blog, cyberspace has again become multidimensional, as Weibo has been chosen as the most effective and immediate platform for people to say not only who they are, but also how they got that way. The micro blog frenzy continues to expand, spreading to the Chinese and foreign embassies in China. In the West, it’s called “twitplomacy” – after Twitter. InChina, “weiplomacy” has come into being in this country with nearly 500 million netizens and 195 million micro-bloggers. So far, a large number of foreign embassies and international organizations in Beijing have registered their accounts on China’s various micro blog service providers. The list of nations includes the United States, Japan, India, Thailand, Belgium and many others, covering nearly all the major continents. Some, such as the US, have also registered official accounts for each of their consulates in the country’s different regions. While some embassies, such as those of the US, India and Korea, have posts on their micro blogs explaining their visa application policies, the embassies of Thailand and France offer language courses, and the French micro blog also often holds Q&A sessions and distributes gifts to the its followers. All the embassies have created innovative ways to bond with their fans. The up-to-the-minute news and messages these embassies post show that the micro blog has become the medium of choice for foreign diplomatic agencies to conduct public diplomacy. While diplomatic events and news conferences, for example, were previously open only to diplomats and journalists, times have changed. Anyone interested in diplomacy can now become involved with the help of these modern media. China’s Foreign Ministry registered a micro blog account, in April, which is named Waijiao Xiaolingtong (Diplomacy Source). As the first Chinese ministry with a micro blog account, it attracted around 470,000 followers within a few months and has more than 1,300 posts to date. More than a platform for releasing information about top Chinese officials’ state visits and providing timely contact information to overseas Chinese when emergencies occur, the micro blog operates seven days a week and sometimes after office hours. It also shares with netizens the experiences of diplomats working abroad and other, more whimsical information, such as proper table manners.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2011-10/03/content_13833561.htm
Commentary: New U.S. Ambassador To China Sees Growing Frustration
In a high-profile speech in Beijing to two U.S. business groups, new U.S. ambassador to China Gary Locke said his “top priority” would be to work to generate American jobs by trying to expandU.S.exports toChina, increasing Chinese investment in the U.S., and seeking a level playing field for American companies in the mainland. Locke, a former commerce secretary whose relatively modest workstyle has captured the attention and support of ordinary Chinese, told a gathering of the American Chamber of Commerce and U.S.-China Business Council yesterday that the U.S. welcomes a prosperous and strong China because it’s helpful to people in both countries and will benefit the global economy. However, he also said that China needed to move away from an economic model that emphasized low-cost exports, noting “if anything, China’s challenges have accelerated in the past few years in the wake of the global financial crisis and the continued weakness in China’s overseas export markets.” The country can “redefine its economic position in the world as well as its partnership with the United States” by pursuing goals laid out in its latest five-year plan that emphasize the expansion of domestic consumption, innovation in new industries, and the service sector, along with cutting energy intensity, he said. Locke noted, however, that “there is a gap between the goals China identified in its five-year plan and the steps it is taking to achieve them. Goals like the expanding domestic consumption and fostering innovation require an acceleration and expansion of the economic reforms China has undertaken in the past decade versus a return to the state planning and industrial policies of the past.” Speaking even more bluntly, Locke then said, according to a prepared text, “China’s current business environment is causing growing frustrations among foreign business and government leaders, including my colleagues in Washington.” Locke then identified what he believed to be “the single largest barrier to improved U.S.-China cooperation: A lack of openness in many areas of Chinese society—including many areas of the Chinese economy.” “A few areas where more opening could help create a more dynamic and prosperous Chinese economy,” he said, include foreign direct investment policies. “Foreign businesses face substantial restrictions in participating in a variety of industries in China, ranging from healthcare to energy to financial services and several others,” Locke said. Businesses including Microsoft are widely seen as being hurt by Chinese IPR protection standards. Other U.S. businesses active in China include GE, GM, Citicorp and Boeing. Besides IPR, Locke also addressed another hot topic, the value of China’s currency. “Almost all economists believe the renminbi remains substantially undervalued in relation to other currencies,” Locke said. “Allowing the renminbi to appreciate more rapidly would help reduce inflation, including the price of goods and services coming into China, allowing Chinese consumers to buy more with their income,” he said.
Commentary: Diplomats scramble ahead of Palestinian UN bid
With a tense week ahead for the future of theMiddle East, the United States and Europe scrambled Sunday for a strategy that would help avoid a jarring showdown over whether to admit an independentPalestineas a new United Nations member. Instead, they sought to guideIsraeland the Palestinians back into the tough bargaining on a long-sought peace agreement. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton discussed the current trajectory in New York, in which the Palestinian plan to gain statehood and membership at the U.N. would run headfirst into an American veto in the Security Council, and possible Israeli recriminations. Yet there was no apparent and immediate solution to the many problems that have hinderedMideastpeace efforts for months. Diplomats were working feverishly as part of an increasingly desperate effort to guide the two parties back into direct negotiations, but were tight-lipped on whether the slim chances for a breakthrough were improving. The Palestinians are frustrated by their inability to win fromIsraelconcessions such as a freeze on settlements in the West Bankand east Jerusalem. And with violence out of the question and bilateral talks with Israel failing, they see the U.N. route as the only viable route for progress in the short term. To address the Palestinian concerns, Western officials were discussing the possibility of including some timeframes, however vague, in any statement put out by theMideastpeace mediators _ the U.S., EU, U.N. and Russia_ known as the Quartet, officials said. These would focus on the restart of Israeli-Palestinian talks and signs of tangible progress. Envoys from all four gathered Sunday inNew Yorkand U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon met with Quartet envoy Tony Blair. A further meeting of Quartet officials was planned for Monday, officials said, with Ashton possibly presenting some ideas to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on the same day. The timeframes wouldn’t be deadlines, as such, but would seem to address the Palestinian desire to see quick action. The offer would come with an unchanged message thatWashingtonwould veto a Palestinian bid at the Security Council for U.N. recognition and membership, but at the very least it would represent a dignity-saving compromise for Abbas’ U.S.-backed government. The alternative concern is that an embarrassment for his government would embolden Hamas, which the U.S. and Israel consider a terrorist organization and which would be far less eager to negotiate a two-state settlement with the Jewish nation. The irony is that only 12 months ago, President Barack Obama said he wanted the U.N. to be welcomingPalestineas its newest member this year. But talks broke down long ago, and theU.S.is in the unenviable position of leading the opposition to something it actually supports, fearful a Palestinian victory might cause a debilitating rift withIsraeland set the talks back further. American officials were working to secure additional opposition to recognition, officials said. Without nine affirmative votes in the 15-member Council, the Palestinian resolution would fail andWashingtonwouldn’t have to act alone.U.S.officials believe six other members may vote against or abstain, meaning the Palestinians would fall short. That tally could not be immediately confirmed. Heading off or watering down the Palestinian resolution had been the goal of international diplomats. If they can accomplish that, they hope to parlay it into a meeting between the Israeli and Palestinian leaders where the two sides would re-launch negotiations. But the Palestinians have refused to back down and give up the little leverage they hope to win. Even with a loss in the Security Council, the Palestinians were expected to take their case for recognition to the General Assembly, where they enjoy widespread support and the U.S. cannot block it. A nod from the General Assembly could give the Palestinians access to international judicial bodies such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court. The Israelis fear such courts would target them unfairly. Given the stakes and entrenched positions, the best theU.S.and its allies may be able to achieve is a delay in action on the Palestinian bid.
http://m.billingsgazette.com/mobile/article_55d0c58c-b7b3-5a91-963b-9624ade8d14d.html
Commentary: Damaging consequences of WikiLeaks’ latest cables
Foreign offices and intelligence agencies of the world interact with each other and among themselves at two levels — formal and informal. In the case of foreign offices, the formal component is much more than the informal. In the case of intelligence agencies, it is the other way round. The formal component of foreign offices’ interactions consists of exchanges of notes verbales, memos, aides-memoires, non-papers etc. They remain as permanent records in the files of the respective foreign offices for purposes of future reference. The informal component consists of chats between diplomats and officials and other interlocutors of the host governments over a drink or a cup of tea. It does not involve exchanges of papers of any kind. The diplomat after going back to the Embassy will send a cable to his foreign office as to what transpired during such informal interactions. Intelligence agencies having a liaison relationship also follow a similar procedure when exchanging intelligence, assessments etc. Certain exchanges do involve formal papers — for example, exchanges of forensic evidence and reports. Officers responsible for liaison will meet informally over a drink in a safe house or in the lobby of a hotel, orally brief each other and then take leave of each other. When they do exchange intelligence documents, they will not indicate which agency prepared the document. An examination of State-to-State relations between countries will reveal that often breakthroughs are achieved and policies are better understood during such informal interactions and not during formal meetings. People tend to speak much more freely when there is no paper trail and when the meetings are informal than during formal interactions with a lot of possible paper trail. One of the major casualties of the WikiLeaks would be such informal tete-a-tete exchanges. After seeing the damage caused by the Wikileaks, all public servants — whether political leaders or foreign office bureaucrats or intelligence officers — will hesitate to agree to informal meetings and to speak freely during such meetings.
Commentary: China debate over US envoy’s coffee run
The low-key actions of two top US officials have sparked heated debate among China’s netizens about the nature of public servants. A photograph of new US Ambassador to China Gary Locke ordering coffee and carrying his own backpack generated thousands of online comments. A visit by Vice-President Joe Biden to a small Beijing eatery fuelled debate. Many praised the informality of the two men’s actions, contrasting them with status-conscious Chinese officials. It was Mr Locke’s arrival inChinathat started the debate. After being photographed at the airport inSeattleordering coffee with his young daughter, the new ambassador arrived inBeijingat the weekend. His family carried their own bags from the airport and were then driven away in a minivan. Chen Weihua, writing in the China Daily, said that while to most Americans this would not be out of the ordinary, to Chinese people “the scene was so unusual it almost defied belief”. “In China even a township chief, which is not really that high up in the hierarchy, will have a chauffeur and a secretary to carry his bag,” he said in an editorial headlined “Backpack makes a good impression”. The two episodes generated considerable comment on the internet, with the photo from Seattle- taken by a passing businessman – re-posted more than 40,000 times. The tone of the debate was overwhelmingly in favour of Mr Locke’s down-to-earth actions. “American officials are to serve the people, but Chinese officials are served by the people, that’s the difference,” said one commentator on Sina.com, in a representative post. The debate continued when Mr Biden, who is paying a five-day official visit to China, ate noodles and dumplings at a family-run restaurant after his talks with Vice-President Xi Jinping. Netizens reported that his bill came to $13 (£8), and compared it with the more lavish meals enjoyed by top leaders. The debate was not all positive, with some commentators suggesting the move was part of a diplomatic strategy to make Chinese officials look bad. And others took the opportunity to poke fun at the US. “If American officials are so frugal, why can’t the government control spending and why do they borrow so much?” one netizen asked.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/world-asia-pacific-14578252
Commentary: US steps into a virtual Iranian world
December 15, 2011 at 7:18 am · Filed under Commentaries, Iran, US
The administration of United States President Barack Obama has launched a virtual US Embassy in Iran that, as expected, has been immediately filtered.Tehran sees it as yet another subversive initiative by Uncle Sam to sow divisions between the people and the Islamic regime that overthrew a US-friendly dictator and then took American diplomats as hostage for 444 days in 1979-1980, prompting theUSto sever diplomatic ties with Iran. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ramin Mehmanparast has called theWashingtoninitiative an historical admission of its mistake in cutting off diplomatic relations withIran. The Americans, on the other hand, scoff at the notion that they could have maintained relations with their embassy taken over and their diplomats in custody. For sure, there is no lack of blame on both sides as to the cause and effect of the long diplomatic alienation between the US and Iran. The US’s Virtual Embassy Tehran website aims to bring information and dialogue to Iranian citizens. For some ordinary Iranians, the ability to file for visas through the virtual embassy, instead of undertaking the chore of traveling abroad, at least for the initial application, represents a plus, while others see this as a US trap to lure Iranians with the promise of rewards by mobilizing them against their government. The lines between consular and political activities are cut pretty short here. Nearly a decade ago, both sides briefly entertained the idea of aUSconsular office on one of Iran’s Persian Gulf islands, such as Kish or Qeshm, and for a while the Iranian government under president Mohammad Khatami seemed amenable to the idea. But it was quickly forgotten in the quicksand of mutual hostility that has consistently dwarfed any and all initiatives to restore diplomatic relations betweenTehranandWashington. One reason for Iran’s objection at the time was the fear that the US would use its facility in thePersian Gulf to spy on Iran’s naval activities. Another concern was the possibility of unwanted long lines reflecting a big desire on the part of many Iranians to visit the US. However, from Tehran’s point of view, a diplomatic foothold by the US in Iran would enlarge the US’s eye and ears. The US is actually taking advantage of no diplomatic relations for a free hand in covert and other similar activities, whereas with a full-staff embassy, the US would be forced to respect some boundaries. In other words, the US is definitely on a war path with Iran, all the more reason why Washington is presently content with only a virtual embassy instead of an actual one that could act as a buffer handicapping the US’s war moves. The virtual one is not a prelude to an actual one, but rather a substitute as far as the US is concerned, one that fulfills less a consular and more a soft power function, as a tool of influence.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/ML14Ak02.html
Comments