Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diplomats and Politicization

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Diplomatic Reform and Innovation

Part of the book series: Studies in Diplomacy and International Relations ((SID))

  • 530 Accesses

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to examine the “politicization of diplomacy” proposition and its impact, if any, on the effectiveness of contemporary diplomacy. Questions about the effectiveness of contemporary diplomacy and diplomats are challenging and are major themes in this edited volume, the assumption being that diplomatic reform is needed and urgently. In this chapter one approach is to consider if the “politicization of diplomacy” proposition, including if and how it might be valid, impacts the core functions and institutions of diplomacy, or whether indeed these constituting fundamentals are themselves wanting. And if they are, are claims of politicization part of the problem and furthermore what changes or reforms to these fundamentals might positively impact the “politicization of diplomacy” process. In this study, the “politicization of diplomacy” proposition is explored by researching how diplomats respond to politicization. Despite there being very few sources on the topic, the study’s turn toward public policy research on public servants’ experiences with politicization in the domestic context provides both a framework for studying diplomats’ responses in several countries including Australia, as well as hypotheses for further work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Several clarifications and definitional points are in order. The terms public service, public servants and civil service, civil servants are used interchangeably. Politicization in this chapter refers mostly to its presence within the Westminster system of governance rather than presidential systems like that in the United States. Given that the meaning of the terms “profession” and “professionalism” is debated, the stipulative meaning adopted here is that public servants and particularly diplomats belong to a profession insofar as they demonstrate their “expert knowledge, ideals of public service and a code of professional ethics” (Matheson 1998, 16).

  2. 2.

    The importance of diplomats having a “deep knowledge of places” is the subject of insightful research by the critical geographer Merje Kuus (Kuus 2016, 549). Her work on diplomatic professions and professionals is equally insightful (Kuus 2021).

  3. 3.

    For example, Shaw and Eichbaum point out that in regard to the relationship between minister and political adviser it can concern the “structuring and directionality of power” (Shaw and Eichbaum 2017, 18).

  4. 4.

    Reelection can serve staffers career prospects, including, for some advisers, later becoming a politician. In Australia “over half of all federal politicians had worked as an adviser at some time before they were elected” (Daley 2021a, 47–48). And furthermore, the number of ministerial staff in Australia is increasing (ibid.).

  5. 5.

    In Australia the formalization of the Westminster system at the federal level began on January 1, 1901, following the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900 passed by the British Parliament. Prior to that, from the late 1800s the colonies followed the Westminster model though with oversight by the British Parliament which could overrule the colonies’ laws.

  6. 6.

    “Agency is a synonym of power. As nouns the difference between agency and power is that agency is the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power” (https://wikidiff.com/power/agency).

  7. 7.

    Kerry Brown, a former British first secretary in the Beijing Embassy, argues that during his time there in the early 2000s, “foreign services were poor in engaging with new ideas—and didn’t do much in terms of actually trying to generate their own unique thinking. They were the ultimate defenders of the current paradigms and resisted the idea of any new ones emerging to make their lives harder. A lot of the work of colleagues back then was in operating as a highly boutique travel agency for visiting politicians” (Brown 2022, n.p.).

  8. 8.

    In his book Diplomacy Henry Kissinger wrote that: “It is almost always a mistake for heads of state to undertake the details of a negotiation. They are then obliged to master specifics normally handled by their foreign offices and are deflected onto subjects more appropriate to their subordinates, while being kept from issues only heads of state can resolve. Since no one without a well-developed ego reaches the highest office, compromise is difficult and deadlocks are dangerous” (quoted in Varghese 2016a, 595).

  9. 9.

    Lesquesne and Wiseman do raise the general question. Lesquesne asks: “Is it possible to observe forms of resistance from diplomats against growing populist politics in the West, or will diplomats just obey and serve loyally populist leaders like Donald Trump in the United States or Viktor Orban in Hungary?” (2019, 782). Wiseman asks “In an age of populist leaders who thrive on being undiplomatic, how do national diplomats, trained in the art of civility and tact, deal internally with embarrassing leaders, serious policy disagreement, or dissent?” (Wiseman 2019, 792). Wiseman also notes that “Resisting overt politicization is challenging for diplomats, sometimes requiring both moral courage and an unwavering professional persona and reputation” (2022, 131).

References and Further Reading

Download references

Acknowledgment

My thanks to my colleague Geoffrey Wiseman whose ground-breaking work on the politician-diplomat nexus inspired me to pursue this topic (Wiseman 2022). He, of course, is not responsible for my interpretations of his work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia

    Pauline Kerr

Authors
  1. Pauline Kerr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

    Paul Webster Hare

  2. School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., USA

    Juan Luis Manfredi-Sánchez

  3. Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey

    Kenneth Weisbrode

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kerr, P. (2023). Diplomats and Politicization. In: Hare, P.W., Manfredi-Sánchez, J.L., Weisbrode, K. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Diplomatic Reform and Innovation. Studies in Diplomacy and International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10971-3_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation