The Foreign Service Journal, January-February 2015

32 JANUARY FEBRUARY 2015 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL As American economic, political and military power wanes, however, the achievement of American foreign policy objectives will depend to a greater extent on Foreign Service professionals’ knowledge and skills. theory. More surprising, perhaps, they also teach diplomatic practice by incorporating memoirs, case studies and compara- tive examination of the structures and processes of di erent states and regions in their syllabi. ey consider the ethical dimension of diplomatic practice as well as diplomatic law. Some non-American practitioners, like the former ambassadors Kishan S. Rana (India), Jorge Heine (Chile) and Geo rey Wise- man (Australia), are active diplomatic studies scholars. eir work is important in highlighting the di erences in Western and non-Western diplomatic structures, processes and styles. The Tapestry of International Diplomacy Academics take care in their texts and course design to illu- minate non-Western diplomatic traditions and systems in order to highlight the Eurocentric principles of traditional diplomacy that many assume to be natural and universal. ey separate out the American diplomatic style as only one of many to be studied and compared, and discuss the di ering national negotiating styles. Diplomacy studies scholars also speculate on the future of diplomacy. Some wonder if, among the possible futures, there might be a return to the rules of Westphalia—mutual non-inter- ference, an emphasis on sovereignty and the formal equality of states—once rising powers like China and India gain power and in uence. is literature on diplomacy is essentially unknown to most FSOs teaching diplomacy. When I mentioned the names of prominent diplomacy studies scholars, such as Paul Sharp, Jan Melissen and Brian Hocking, during my interviews with practitioners, most did not recognize them. Similarly, with few exceptions, I got no reaction when I mentioned recent texts on diplomacy: Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: eories and Practices (2013), e Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy (2013), or Diplomatic eory of International Relations (2009). is is neither surprising nor alarming. Although by design, the study of foreign policy has been excluded from the diplo- macy studies paradigm since Harold Nicolson made the distinc- tion between foreign policy and diplomacy in 1939, American diplomats do not accept that distinction and do not employ it in their teaching. As master American practitioners, FSOs teach what they have experienced and know. Whether American diplomats are outliers because of our particular political culture or because of our predominant power position in the world is a matter of debate. As American economic, political and military power wanes, however, the achievement of American foreign policy objectives will depend to a greater extent on Foreign Service professionals’ knowledge and skills. Studying both the American diplomatic tradition and the evolving international diplomatic culture within which Americans must operate will be essential to succeed. Keeping faith with the calling to serve the United States as a diplomat, in an era when Congress cannot manage to con rm career ambassadorial nominees for months on end, must be di cult. ese prescient words of George F. Kennan, from 1961, might o er some solace: “Diplomacy is always going to consist to some extent of serving people who do not know that they are being served, who do not know that they need to be served, who misunderstand and occasionally abuse the very e ort to serve.” A profession that stands still for its portrait in our rapidly changing world, however, runs the risk of becoming a still life. e times demand rededication to the quality of American diplomacy. Professional renewal requires continuing education in diplomacy, understood to be an international institution, a national practice and a set of expectations members of the inter- national community have of one another. Try as we might to avoid being in the world politically, work- ing with others and having our objectives modi ed by them, the United States has no choice. Exceptional as we might be, we do not have the wherewithal to reweave global society on a univer- sal loom we control. Nor can we pull our national threads out of the fabric of international society without unraveling the whole that serves our interest. Consequently, we need to master diplomacy: the practice of sustaining o cial international relationships capable of with- standing vigorous political argument, even con ict, increasingly conducted in the public square. n