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
Men of all shades of opinion are agreed that the people are not greatly
interested in foreign affairs, and the opponents of proposals of
democratic control argue that it would be useless to create machinery
for action where there exists no interest, nor purpose to act.
It is quite true that the public during the nineteenth century seemed
less interested in foreign affairs than during the eighteenth. At the
earlier time, diplomacy was a fascinating, personal game, about which
the wiseacres in the coffee houses were eager to make their criticisms
and prognostications. When the middle class came to power in the
nineteenth century, it was primarily interested in economic and other
domestic questions, and was satisfied to leave the conduct of foreign
affairs to statesmen and diplomats. The constantly growing political
consciousness of the public at large was concentrated chiefly on
questions of internal politics and reform. Foreign affairs, as they
reached the public, were thought of still from the point of view of
the onlooker, rather than of him who actually had to bear the brunt of
the burden. Those who had to bleed and die when hostilities had been
brought about, never had any chance, nor determination, to influence
the course of diplomacy leading up to wars.
With such a general apathy of the public, it was not surprising that
diplomacy should cling to its caste privileges, should try to preserve
its discretionary powers, and should often attempt deliberately to keep
people in the dark. “In the public interest” is the curtain beyond
which no one may peer. Even in the American Government, particularly
during and since the war, foreign affairs have been handled with what
would ordinarily seem insufficient information to the public; in fact,
with occasional putting forth of misleading and entirely partial
information, or the refusal to furnish information even when requested
by those having official responsibilities. This is a notable change,
as up to 1914 it was substantially true that the United States had no
diplomatic secrets.
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