Secret Diplomacy: How Far Can It Be Eliminated?Reinsch, Paul S. (Paul Samuel)
Philosophy
Secret Diplomacy: How Far Can It Be Eliminated?
Reinsch, Paul S. (Paul Samuel)
Diplomacy; Europe -- Politics and government
“That, in the opinion of this House, a Standing Committee of
Foreign Affairs should be appointed, representative of all
parties and groups in the House, in order that a regular channel
of communication may be established between the Foreign Secretary
and the House of Commons, which will afford him frequent
opportunities of giving information on questions of Foreign
policy and which, by allowing Members to acquaint themselves
more fully with current international problems, will enable this
House to exercise closer supervision over the general conduct of
Foreign Affairs....”
Mr. Balfour expressed himself quite in length on this motion and
further elaborated the ideas which he had put forward in 1914. In a
speech delivered March 19th, he gave what is probably the most complete
and persuasive exposition of the value of traditional methods in
diplomacy:
“... A Foreign Office and a Diplomatic Service are great
instruments for preventing, as far as can be prevented, and
diminishing, even when you cannot prevent, friction between
States which are, or which ought to be, friendly. How is the
task of peace-maker--because that is largely the task which
falls to diplomatists and to the Foreign Office, which controls
diplomatists--to be pursued if you are to shout your grievances
from the housetop whenever they occur? The only result is that
you embitter public feeling, that the differences between the
two States suddenly attain a magnitude they ought never to be
allowed to approach, that the newspapers of the two countries
agitate themselves, that the Parliaments of the two countries
have their passions set on fire, and great crises arise, which
may end, have ended sometimes, in international catastrophes....
Office officials, or officials of any Department,--to expend some
of their energy in getting ready for cross-examination, you will
really be destroying the public service. There is nothing on
which I feel more strongly than that. They are not accustomed to
it, and they ought not to be accustomed to it.... I do not hold
the view that antique methods are pursued by diplomatists which
no man of common sense adopts in the ordinary work of every-day
life. On the contrary, the work of diplomacy is exactly the work
which is done every day between two great firms, for instance,
which have business relations, or between two great corporate
entities which have interests diverging or interests in common.
If you are a man of sense you do not create difficulties to
begin with. You try to get over all these things without the
embitterment which advertisement always brings with it. It is
when you begin to press your case in public that antagonism
arises. In private--in conversation which need not go beyond
the walls of the room in which you are,--you can put your case
as strongly as you like, and the gentleman with whom you are
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account