The Knowledge Necessary to a Negotiator.
A man born to diplomacy and feeling himself called to the practice of negotiation must commence his studies by a careful examination of the position of various European states, of the principal interests which govern their action, which divide them from one another, of the diverse forms of governmentwhich prevail in different parts, and of the character of those princes, soldiers, and ministers who stand in positions of authority. In order to master the detail of such knowledge he must have an understanding of the material power, the revenues, and the whole dominion of each prince or each republic. He must understand the limits of territorial sovereignty; he must inform himself of the manner in which the government was originally established; of the claims which each sovereign makes upon parts which he does not possess; for these ambitions are the very material of negotiation on those occasions when a favourable turn of events prompts the ambitious sovereign to hope that a long-cherished desire may be realised; and, finally, the negotiator must be able to make a clear distinction between the rights and claims which are founded on treaty obligation and those which rest upon pure force alone. For his own instruction he must read with the most attentive care all public treaties, both general and particular, which have been made between the princes and states of Europe and in our time; he should consider the treaties concluded between France and the House of Austria as those which offer the principal form and model for the conduct of all the public affairs of Christendom on account of the network of liaisons with other sovereigns which surrounds these twogreat Powers. And since their disputes took their origin in the relations and treaties existing between the King LouisXI.and Charles, the last Duke of Burgundy, from whom the House of Austria descends, it is vital that the negotiator of our time should be well acquainted with all the treaties made at that period and since; but especially all those which have been concluded between the principal Powers of Europe beginning with the Treaty of Westphalia right up to the present time.
Europe is his Province.
Let him also study with understanding and open eye the modern history of Europe. Let him read the memoirs of great men, the instructions and despatches of all our ablest negotiators, both those which are printed in public books and those which are stored in manuscripts in our Office of Public Records, for these documents treat of great affairs, and the reading of them will convey not only facts which are important for the making of history, but also a sense of the true atmosphere of negotiation, and will thus help to form the mind of him who reads them and give him some clue to guide him in similar occasions on his own career. One of the most profitable readings that I know for this purpose is the despatch of Cardinal d’Ossat, of whose letters I make bold to say, for a man entering upon negotiation, what Horace said to the poets of his time regarding the works of Homer: That he shouldhave them in his hands night and day if he desires perfection in his own art. In a simple and modest manner the despatches of this Cardinal reveal the force and the address which were his great merit, and which, in spite of the antiquity of his style, still give keen pleasure to those who have a taste for good diplomatic writing. One may see thus how by his ability alone, without the assistance of noble birth, title, or other character than that of agent of his queen, Louise de Vaudemont, widow of King HenryIII., he was able gradually to conduct the high enterprise of reconciling King Henry the Great with the Holy See after the most famous ambassadors of the time had failed in it; with what dexterity he escaped all the pitfalls laid for him by the Roman Court, and all the traps which the House of Austria, then at the height of its power, devised for his undoing. The reader will marvel, as he turns each page, how nothing escaped his penetrating eye. He will find even the least movements of Pope ClementVIII.and his nephew the Cardinal recorded with care. He will see how Monseigneur d’Ossat profited by everything, how he is firm as a rock when necessity demands, supple as a willow at another moment, and how he possessed the supreme art of making every man offer him as a gift that which it was his chief design to secure.
The Study of Famous Despatches.
Then again in the collection of manuscript despatches regarding the negotiations of Münster, as well as in the memoirs of Cardinal Mazarin, we may read the instructions to the French plenipotentiary, which are indeed masterpieces of their kind, for in them the Cardinal examines the interests of each European Power. He suggests overtures and expedients for adjusting their differences with a capacity and a clearness of view which is altogether surprising, and that in a language which was not his own. His despatches on the Peace of the Pyrenees, by means of which he conveyed to the King the results of his conferences with Don Louis Dharo, Prime Minister of Spain, have also a beauty of their own. We recognise in them also the superiority of his genius and the easy ascendancy which he had gained over the spirit of the Spanish minister with whom he was dealing. There are also other manuscript despatches which deserve recognition. They are to be found in great numbers in the Royal Library and in other collections of books, as, for instance, those of De Noailles, Bishop of Acs, and of Montluc, Bishop of Valence, in which one may also read the authentic account of two noble and able men. We have, too, the letters of President Jeannin, a man of great common sense and solid judgment, who contributed largely to the consolidation of the young Republic of theUnited Provinces by the twelve years’ truce which he prepared, and by the wise counsels which he gave touching all matters of government in that Republic. The reading of such letters as his is well designed to form the judgment of him who will consent to read with intelligent care.
Dynastic Liaisons.
In order to understand the principal interest of European princes, the negotiator must add to the knowledge which we have just been describing that of dynastic genealogies, so that he may know all the connections and alliances, by marriage and otherwise, between different princes, for these liaisons are often found to be the principal causes of conflict and even of war. He must also know the laws and established customs of the different countries, especially in all matters relating to the succession to the throne and the prevailing habits of the court. The study of the form of government existing in each country is very necessary to the diplomatist, and he should not wait until his arrival in a foreign country to study these questions; he should prepare himself beforehand, for, unless he is equipped with a certain measure of this knowledge, he will be like a man at sea without a compass. Our own negotiators, who have never travelled before taking up some foreign post and who therefore know nothing of these questions, are usually so saturated in our own national customs and habitsas to think that those of all other nations must resemble them; the truth being that the authority which one king has within his kingdom in no way resembles that of the neighbouring monarch, although the superficial likeness between royalty in every country is obvious to every eye.
England and Poland.
There are, for instance, countries where it is not enough to be in agreement with the prince and his ministers, because there are other parties who share the national sovereignty with him and who have the power to resist his decisions or to make him change them. Of this state of affairs we have an excellent example in England, where the authority of Parliament frequently obliges the King to make peace or war against his own wish; or again in Poland, where the general Diets have an even more extended power, in which one single vote in the Diet may bring to nought the all but unanimous resolution of the assembly itself, and thus not only defeat the deliberations of that assembly but bring to nought the policy of the King and of the Senate. Therefore the good negotiator in such a country will know where to find the balance of domestic power in order to profit by it when occasion offers.
Besides the general public interests of the state there are private and personal interests and ruling passions in princes and in their ministers or favourites, which often play a determining part inthe direction of public policy. It is therefore necessary for the negotiator to inform himself of the nature of these private interests and passions influencing the spirits of those with whom he has to negotiate, in order that he may guide his action by this knowledge either in flattering their passions, which is the easiest way, or by somehow finding means to deflect such personages from their original intentions and engagements and cause them to adopt a new line of policy. Such an enterprise carried to success would indeed be a masterpiece of negotiation.
Testimony of the Duc de Rohan.
That great man, the Duc de Rohan, tells us in the treatise which he wrote upon the interests of European sovereigns, that the sovereigns rule the people and that interest rules the sovereign; but we may add that the passions of princes and of their ministers often overrule their interests. We have seen many cases in which monarchs have entered engagements most prejudicial to themselves and their state under the influence of passion. There need be no surprise on this account, for the nations themselves are not free from this error, and are prepared to ruin themselves in order to satisfy hatred, vengeance, and jealousy, the satisfaction of which is often antagonistic to their veritable interests. Without recourse to ancient history it would be easy to prove by modern examplesthat men do not act upon firm and stable maxims of conduct; that as a rule they are governed by passion and temperament more than by reason. The bearing of this knowledge upon diplomacy is that since the passion and caprice of men in authority so largely influence the destiny of their subjects, it is the duty of the able negotiator to inform himself as accurately as possible regarding the inclination, state of mind, and the plans of men in authority in order that this information may be placed at the service of his master’s interests. And we may be sure that a negotiator who has not laboured to acquire a fund of this general and particular information will reason falsely regarding events, affairs of state, and men, and is liable to make false estimates and give dangerous advice to the prince who employs him. Such knowledge is not to be found in books alone; it is more easily to be gathered by personal communication with those engaged in public service and by foreign travel, for, however profoundly one may have studied the customs, the policy, or the passions of those who govern in foreign states, everything will appear differently when examined close at hand, and it is impossible to form a just notion of the true character of things except by first-hand acquaintance.
Importance of Foreign Travel.
It is therefore desirable that before entering the profession of diplomacy the young man shouldhave travelled to the principal courts of Europe, not merely like those young persons who on leaving the academy or college go to Rome to see the beautiful palaces and the ancient ruins, or to Venice to enjoy the opera and the courtesans; he should indeed embark on his travels at a somewhat riper age when he is more capable of reflection and of appreciating the form and spirit of government in each country, and of studying the merits and faults of princes and ministers—doing all this with the deliberate design of returning to these countries at a future day with profit to himself and his master. Travel conducted on these lines obliges the traveller to keep a vigilant eye upon everything that comes under his notice. It would be well that in certain cases they should accompany the King’s ambassadors or envoys as travelling companions after the manner of the Spaniards and the Italians, who regard it as an honour to accompany the ministers of the Crown on their diplomatic journeys. There is nothing better calculated for instruction upon the manner of events in foreign countries or for the training of a young man to represent his own country abroad.
Foreign Languages Indispensable.
It is highly desirable that such novices in diplomacy should learn foreign languages, for thus they will be protected from the bad faith or the ignorance of interpreters, and from the grave embarrassmentof having to use them for the purpose of audiences with the sovereign. It is obvious, too, that an interpreter may be a betrayer of secrets.Every onewho enters the profession of diplomacy should know the German, Italian, and Spanish languages as well as the Latin, ignorance of which would be a disgrace and a shame to any public man, for it is the common language of all Christian nations. It is also very useful and fitting for the diplomat, on whom grave national responsibility rests, to have such a general knowledge of science as may tend to the development of his understanding, but he must be master of his scientific knowledge and must not be consumed by it. He must give science the place which it deserves, and must not merely consider it as a reason for pride or for contempt of those who do not possess it. While devoting himself to this study with care and attention he must not become engrossed in it, for he who enters the public service of his King must consider that he is destined for action and not for academic study in his closet; and his principal care must be to instruct himself regarding all that may affect the lives of living men rather than the study of the dead. His professional aim is to penetrate the secrets and hearts of men; to learn the art of handling them in such a manner as to make them serve the great ends of his royal master.
A Rule for the Diplomatic Service.
If one could establish a rule in France that no one should be employed in negotiation until he had passed some such apprenticeship as this, and had shown his capacity to profit by study and travel in rendering a good account of the countries which he had seen; and, further, if one could also establish the rule in the same manner that no high command in the army can be entrusted to an officer who has not made many campaigns, we should be more confident that the King would be well served in his negotiations, and that by these means he would be able to raise up around him a large number of reliable negotiators. This is a most desirable end, for as we have seen there are many actions in which the perfect practice of the art of negotiation is not less useful than that of war, and that in France at the present time the art of war stands far above that of diplomacy in public esteem.
Rewards for Service.
But as men are not yet perfect enough to serve without hope of reward, it is desirable that there should be in France a higher degree of honour and fortune for those who have deserved well of their country in diplomacy, as indeed there are in many other courts in Europe where the King’s subjects have gained high distinction in that branch of the public service. There are indeed countries in which the distinguished diplomatist may hope to reach the highest place and most exalted dignitiesin the realm, by which means we in France may learn to raise the profession of diplomacy to that degree of public recognition which it deserves, and from which the service of the King and the greatness of the kingdom must certainly profit.
On the Choice of Diplomatists.
The right choice of negotiators depends upon their personal quality, their training, and to some extent their fortune, and as the endowments of mankind vary in a wide degree, so it is found that one kind will fit better into the office of diplomacy than another. At the same time there are men of such wide capacity that they can be safely employed in very different enterprises, and even in very different countries. Such men by their adaptability, by the receptiveness of their nature, and the pliancy of their character are well fitted for the province of diplomacy, and quickly accommodate themselves to new surroundings. It should be the aim of all governments to develop a whole race of such men from whose ranks they may draw their diplomatic agents. It is true that in any one generation there will only be a few geniuses of the first order, and that the rank and file of the diplomatic service will be composed of persons of a more limited type, in which case it is all the more incumbent upon the Minister for Foreign Affairs to exercise the greatest care in assigning ambassadors to foreign posts. He must therefore be wellacquainted with the whole service in order to know where to lay his hand upon the appropriate person for any given enterprise.
The Three Professions.
There are, broadly speaking, three principal human professions. The first is the Ecclesiastical; the second is that of the Gentlemen of the Sword, which besides those actually serving in the army includes courtiers and squires and other ranks of gentlemen in his Majesty’s service; and the third is the profession of the Law, whose devotees in France are called ‘Gentlemen of the Cloth.’ There are not many countries where ecclesiastics can be employed in diplomacy, for one cannot properly send them to heretical or infidel countries. At Rome, which appears to be their home, their attachment to the Pope, and their desire to receive honours from him as well as other benefits which depend upon service at his Court, undoubtedly places them under the suspicion of following too closely the Jesuitical maxims which rule papal policy, and often operate to the prejudice of the temporal power of other kings.
The Example of Venice.
The Republic of Venice has shown much wisdom in this matter, for she is so convinced of the partiality of Venetian prelates towards the Holy See that not only does she exclude them from all diplomatic offices in connection with the Court of Rome, but she actually excludes them from alldiscussion of the political relation between Venice and Rome. It is obvious indeed to all that a dignitary of the Church owes a divided allegiance, and it seems probable that where his loyalty to the Church conflicts with his loyalty to his sovereign, the former is likely to prevail. Indeed, the more closely one examines the proper duties of a bishop, for instance, the more firmly convinced does one become that these duties are not compatible with those of an ambassador; for on the one hand it is not fitting that a minister of religion should run about the world and thus neglect those duties which should have first claim upon him, and on the other, as we have seen, political and ecclesiastical allegiance may come into collision with disastrous results. And surely a state must be poorly endowed with men if it can find nowhere but in the Church a sufficiency of adept diplomatists. I am the last to dispute the great services which certain prelates have rendered to the French state in the past, but I consider it useful to be guided as a general rule by the foregoing considerations.
The Ambassador a Man of Peace.
The best diplomatist will usually be found to be a man of good birth, sometimes a knight trained to the profession of arms, and it has occasionally been found that a good general officer has served with success as an ambassador, especially at a time when the military affairs of either state were prominentsubjects of negotiation. But diplomacy is not to be regarded as linked with war, for, although war arises out of policy, it is to be regarded as nothing more than a means to an end in itself. Therefore the ambassador should be a man of peace; for in most cases, and certainly wherever the foreign court is inclined towards peace, it is best to send a diplomatist who works by persuasion and is an adept in winning the good graces of those around him. In either case it will be observed that the public interests will be best served by appointing a professional diplomatist who by long experience has acquired a high aptitude for the peculiar office of diplomacy. Neither the soldier nor the courtier can hope to discharge the duties of diplomacy with success unless they have taken pains to instruct themselves in public policy, and in all that region of knowledge which I have already described as necessary for the negotiator.
Lawyer Diplomats.
It is true that sometimes a lawyer diplomat has made a great success of negotiation, especially in countries where the final responsibility for public policy lay with public assemblies which could be moved by adroit speech, but in general the training of a lawyer breeds habits and dispositions of mind which are not favourable to the practice of diplomacy. And though it be true that success in the law-courts depends largely upon a knowledge ofhuman nature and an ability to exploit it—both of which are factors in diplomacy—it is none the less true that the occupation of the lawyer, which is to split hairs about nothing, is not a good preparation for the treatment of grave public affairs in the region of diplomacy. If this be true of the advocate or barrister, it is still more true of the magistrate and judge. The habit of mind engendered by presiding over a court of law, in which the judge himself is supreme, tends to exclude those faculties of suppleness and adaptability which are necessary in diplomacy, and the almost ludicrous assumption of dignity by a judge would certainly appear as arrogance in diplomatic circles. I do not say that there have not been great lawyers and great judges who were endowed with high diplomatic qualities, but again I place these considerations before my readers in the belief that the more closely they are observed the more surely will they lead to efficiency in the diplomatic profession.
Diplomacy demands Professional Training.
Let me further emphasise my conviction, which, alas, is not yet shared even by ministers of state in France, that diplomacy is a profession by itself which deserves the same preparation and assiduity of attention that men give to other recognised professions. The qualities of a diplomatist and the knowledge necessary to him cannot, indeed, all beacquired. The diplomatic genius is born, not made. But there are many qualities which may be developed with practice, and the greater part of the necessary knowledge can only be acquired by constant application to the subject. In this sense diplomacy is certainly a profession itself capable of occupying a man’s whole career, and those who think to embark upon a diplomatic mission as a pleasant diversion from their common task only prepare disappointment for themselves and disaster for the cause which they serve. The veriest fool would not entrust the command of an army to a man whose sole badge of merit was his successful eloquence in a court of law or his adroit practice of the courtier’s art in the palace. All are agreed that military command must be earned by long service in the army. In the same manner it should be regarded as folly to entrust the conduct of negotiations to an untrained amateur unless he has conspicuously shown in some other walk of life the qualities and knowledge necessary for the practice of diplomacy.
Fatality of Bad Appointments.
It often happens that there are men in public life who have won a reputation for themselves without earning it. That is possible in the political world, which has many camp followers and hangers-on of all kinds, and there is always a risk that a minister in search of an ambassador for a foreign post willuse the occasion to pay an old debt to some powerful patrician family or to some blackmailer behind the scenes. Those who take the responsibility of appointing to high diplomatic offices persons of this character are responsible before God and man for all the injuries which may thereby accrue to the public interest. It cannot be too plainly stated that, while in many cases where trouble has arisen the negotiator himself is to blame, the true responsibility must rest with the minister at home, who not only devises the policy itself but chooses the instruments of it. It is therefore one of the highest maxims of good government that the public interest must be supreme, and that therefore both the prince himself and his ministers must steel themselves to resist the pressure of friends and relations who seek employment for unworthy persons. In diplomacy, above all things, since peace and war and the welfare of nations depend upon it, the best minds, the most sagacious and instructed of public servants should be appointed to the principal foreign posts regardless of the personal affairs of the prince himself or the party attachments of the chosen ambassadors.
‘We have fools in Florence, but we do not export them.’
Nothing should stand in the way of the creation of a vigilant, sagacious, and high-minded diplomatic service. Men of small minds should content themselves with employment at home, where their errorsmay easily be repaired, for errors committed abroad are too often irreparable. The late Duke of Tuscany, who was a remarkably wise and enlightened prince, once complained to the Venetian ambassador, who stayed over-night with him on his journey to Rome, that the Republic of Venice had sent as resident at his court a person of no value, possessing neither judgment nor knowledge, nor even any attractive personal quality. ‘I am not surprised,’ said the ambassador in reply; ‘we have many fools in Venice.’ Whereupon the Grand Duke retorted: ‘We also have fools in Florence, but we take care not to export them.’
The Duke’s remarks show how important it is in every respect to choose the right man for the diplomatic service, and, in order to give the Foreign Minister an adequate freedom of choice, his diplomatic service should contain men of different characters and a wide variety of accomplishments. Thus he will not be compelled to send an unsuitable man merely because he was the only one available. He should have most careful regard in this choice to the type of government and the religion which prevails in the foreign country in question. There used to be a jest current in Paris on this very subject. The French King had sent a bishop to Constantinople and an heretic to Rome, and it was said that the one had gone to convert theGrand Turk and the other to be converted by the Pope!
The Persona Ingrata.
Apart from any higher consideration, it is a mere measure of prudence to avoid sending an envoy who may be presumed to be apersona ingrataat the foreign court, for he will certainly, whether he will or not, create a prejudice against his own country and will be quite unable to meet his competitors in diplomacy on equal terms, for he will start with the handicap of unpopularity. The Foreign Minister, therefore, should not wait until matters go wrong at a foreign capital, but should be in a position, when each appointment is made, to know the character of the new ambassador, and thus to veto a bad appointment. This, alas, is not by any means always the case. I do not need to enter upon a minute examination of the faults to avoid and the virtues to encourage in the complete diplomat. I have already said enough to show where my opinion lies in a general way. I will only add one or two further considerations. I said a few moments ago that loose living is a great handicap in diplomacy; but, since there is no rule which has not some exception, let me point out that a too abstemious negotiator will miss many opportunities of finding out what is going on. Especially in the northern countries the diplomat who loves a glass will quickly make friends among ministers, though,to be sure, he should drink in such a manner as not to lose control of his own faculties while endeavouring to loosen the self-control of others.
The Nation judged by its Servants.
In diplomacy a nation is judged by its ministers, and its whole reputation may rest upon the popularity or unpopularity of an ambassador. In this respect the personal conduct of the ambassador and his staff is almost as important as the policy with which he is charged, for the success of the policy will depend largely upon the actual relations which exist between the two nations. The ambassador is, as it were, the very embodiment of these relations, and if a proper adept in his profession will know how to turn every occasion to advantage. I need not repeat my tale of the qualities and practices by which such advantage may be drawn from the current of events, but I may perhaps point out that obviously men of birth and breeding are better able to discharge the kind of function which I have described. Their rank will command a certain respect, and the qualities usually inherited by those of good birth should stand them in good stead at a foreign court. At the same time such qualities must not be regarded as more than a foundation. They cannot in themselves equip a diplomatist for his office. He must by assiduous application acquire the other necessary qualities, for there is no man more liable to suspicion thanhe who plumes himself on an experience which he does not possess. Further, it is usually unwise to entrust important negotiations to young men, who are commonly presumptuous and vain as well as indiscreet. Old age is equally inappropriate. The best time of life is its prime, in which you find experience, discretion, and moderation, combined with vigour.
Men of Letters.
Other things being equal, I prefer a man of letters before one who has not made a habit of study, for his reading will give him a certain equipment which he might otherwise lack. It will adorn his conversation and supply him with the necessary historic setting in which to place his own negotiations; whereas an ignorant man will be able to quote nothing but the will of his master, and will thus present his argument in a naked and unattractive form. It must be obvious that the knowledge gained in a lifetime of reading is an important adjunct in diplomacy, and above all, the reading of history is to be preferred, for without it the negotiator will be unable to understand the meaning of historical allusions made by other diplomatists, and may thus miss the whole point at some important turn in negotiations. And since it is not enough to think aright, the diplomatist must be able to translate his thoughts into the right language, and conversely he must be able to pierce behindthe language of others to their true thoughts. It may often happen that an historical allusion will reveal the purpose of a minister’s mind far better than any direct argument. Herein lies the importance of culture in diplomacy. The name of orator has sometimes been given to ambassadors because in certain past times they have been in the habit of delivering their instructions in the form of an eloquent address; but diplomatic eloquence is a very different thing from that of Parliament or the Bar. An ambassador’s speeches should contain more sense than words, and he should studiously avoid every affectation. His aim should be to arouse the minds of his hearers by a sympathetic touch, after which it will be easy to deliver his message in an appropriate way. He should therefore at the outset think rather of what is in their minds than of immediately expressing what is in his own. It is in this that true eloquence consists, and indeed the words I have just used are the beginning and end of all diplomacy.
The Fitting Mode of Address.
In general his mode of address, whether he speak to the sovereign or to his ministers, should be moderate and reserved. He should not raise his voice but should maintain the ordinary conversational tone, at once simple and dignified, revealing an innate respect both for his own high office and for the person whom he is addressing. Heshould, above all things, avoid the prolix, pompous approach which is natural to princes who attach more importance to ceremonial than to the essence of any matter. But if the ambassador be called upon to deliver his message to a Senate or a Parliament, he will bear in mind that the means for gaining the good graces of an individual and of an assembly are by no means the same. In such public speech he may permit himself a certain freedom of rhetoric, but even here he must beware of prolonging his speech beyond a tolerable limit. The reply of the Spartans to ambassadors from the Isle of Samos stands as a warning for all times against prolixity: ‘We have forgotten the beginning of your harangue; we paid no heed to the middle of it, and nothing has given us pleasure in it except the end.’ God forbid that any French negotiator should receive so damning a rebuff!
The Well-Stored Mind.
Even at the best of times a man of good sense will not rely entirely on his native wit. He will find that knowledge of historical precedents will often act as a lever with which to remove obstacles from his path. Such knowledge of history, and particularly the true aptitude in applying it to current events, cannot be learned except by long experience. Even in those cases where success has attended the efforts of an amateur diplomatist, the example must be regarded as an exception, for it isa commonplace of human experience that skilled work requires a skilled workman. The more important the business on hand, the more vital it is that ministers of state should ensure for themselves the services of trained men. I am well aware that even the greatest courts sometimes neglect this vital precaution, and fill their embassies with improper persons, mainly because the minister or the prince had not sufficient strength of mind to resist appeals made on illegitimate grounds such as that of family influence. It will usually be found that the real expert does not push himself or his claims, and that the superior minds in diplomacy, as in other walks of life, are not found crying their wares at every street corner, but must be sought out with care in their own closets. It is also to be observed that in previous times the profession of diplomacy stood too low in public esteem to attract the services of first-class men—partly because higher emoluments were to be earned elsewhere, and partly on account of the prolonged absence from home which diplomatic service entails.
Diplomacy an Honourable Exile.
If diplomacy be a labour in exile, the state should see to it that it is at least an honourable exile. To counteract this drawback, the home government should so reform the system of diplomacy that it may offer attractions to the most ambitious as well as to the most refined spirits. There is no reasonwhy not merely honour but adequate daily recompense for his services should not be offered to the diplomatists from the very beginning of their career. Having regard to the expenses which fall upon the diplomatists of all ranks in their service abroad, and in maintaining the honour of their own profession and their country, the prince will be well advised to pay good salaries and in other ways to mark his esteem of the diplomatic profession. Thus and thus alone can a prince gather round him a diplomatic bodyguard worthy of the name. If he follows this advice, his diplomatic service will quickly outstrip all others and a deeper mutual confidence will arise between himself and his diplomatic agents upon which the success of all his negotiations will rest secure. No diplomatist is less to be envied than he who finds himself at a foreign court bereft of the confidence of his own.
Value of a Well-Equipped Service.
Now the equipment of the state in diplomacy will be incomplete unless the diplomatic service contains within its ranks so large a number of practised and seasoned diplomatists that the King may be able to retain several of them at his side as special advisers in foreign affairs. In every campaign the true commander will take as much trouble for his reserves as for his first line of attack, and similarly the position of reserves in diplomacy has a great importance, for it means not only that the Ministerfor Foreign Affairs will have at his elbow a number of skilled diplomatists to assist him in a moment of crisis, but also that when one of the embassies abroad suddenly falls vacant his choice of a successor will not be too narrowly restricted. He thus will be able to avoid the fatal practice, which has prevailed too often in recent French history, of having to choose an ambassador haphazard at the last moment from among the courtiers and hangers-on at the palace.
The Right Man in the Right Place.
The nature of the business on hand must largely govern the choice of the ambassador who is appointed to carry it out, and if the diplomatic service be large enough and varied enough it will certainly contain within its ranks many different characters showing a wide variety of aptitude. Thus in all those secret negotiations which are so necessary in order to prepare the ground for treaties it is often found that the ambassador himself is not the best person to employ. It may be highly embarrassing for him to attempt to combine such secret negotiations with the ordinary duties of his office, and therefore a clever man who is not yet clothed with the prestige of high office is a more proper agent for this kind of secret traffic. The very fact that the high public position of an ambassador is apt to make the court and the general public familiar with his person and his face is certainly a drawbackto his employment on more secret affairs, and though it is true, as we have said, that part of the business of an ambassador is that of an honourable spy, he should beware of doing any of the spying himself. Most of the great events in recent diplomatic history have been prepared by ministers sent in secret. The Peace of Münster, one of the most intricate negotiations I have ever known, was not really the work of that vast concourse of ambassadors and envoys which met there and appended their signatures to the document. The essential clauses of that treaty were discussed and drawn up by a secret agent of Duke Maximilian of Bavaria sitting at a table in Paris with Cardinal Mazarin. In a similar fashion the Peace of the Pyrenees was concluded as the result of secret negotiations at Lyons between Cardinal Mazarin and Pimentel, the secret envoy of the Spanish King; and finally, the Peace of Ryswick, to which I was a party throughout the negotiation, was devised by the same secret diplomacy before its public ratification in Holland in the year 1697.
Each Embassy a Miniature of the Whole Service.
Now the bearing of these considerations upon the organisation of diplomacy is fairly clear. If it is only a question of maintaining good relations between one state and another and of rendering a more or less correct account of all that happens at a foreign court, a diplomatist with a couple of secretarieswill suffice, and indeed in ordinary times it is undoubtedly better not to have more than one diplomatist of the same rank at any foreign court. But it is equally obvious that there are occasions when it is of the highest advantage to maintain a more elaborately equipped mission at a foreign court, and even to send two or three diplomatists of higher rank to assist in the conduct of negotiations and in the other activities of diplomacy. This is of course true whenever a peace conference is about to meet, for negotiations of that character require great preparation beforehand, and it would be impossible for a single diplomatist to overtake all the work which is necessary in such circumstances together with the manifold duties of his own office. In a certain sense the embassy itself should be a reproduction in miniature of the whole diplomatic service.
Variety of Talent.
There is undoubtedly room in all the larger embassies for a great variety of talent, which will find an appropriate field of action if the head of the mission is wise enough to give the younger men their chance. For instance, it sometimes happens that an embassy will find it is in a country distracted by civil war, and then the best practice of the ambassador will be severely tested. If he has encouraged his juniors to form relationships of various kinds with different parties in the country for thepurpose of acquiring information, he will find that on the outbreak even of so distracting a commotion as civil war he has the means within his own embassy of keeping touch with both sides in the dispute. Naturally he will find it a difficult and delicate task not to be embroiled with either side; but he will certainly find all his previous trouble amply repaid by the fulness of the information which he receives from both sides. On no account should he allow prejudice regarding social rank or political opinion to stand in the way of the formation of useful relations between members of his staff and different parties in the country. He himself is debarred from such action, and indeed if he were alone with nothing but one or two secretaries to assist him, it would be quite impossible for him to know what was passing in either camp, and he would have to rely on second-hand information which he was not in a position to test. Still worse would be his case if, having become the personal friend of the chief of one of the parties, he should find the other party coming into power, and thereafter treating him as an enemy.
Merit the only Standard.
Such considerations must ever be borne in mind by the Minister for Foreign Affairs. But least of all men should he be influenced by regard for rank, social station, or political opinion in his choice of attachés and other persons in any rank in diplomacy.Especially where he is about to despatch an embassy to a state under popular government, he will remember that the ambassador will require many agents to keep him in touch with all the different parties. It is therefore to be observed that those embassies which are sent to popularly governed states must be chosen with greater care and equipped with a more varied staff than those despatched to a foreign court where the government rests entirely in the hands of the King.
The Diplomatic Hierarchy: Ambassadors.
Before discussing in detail the duties of negotiators, I shall describe the different titles which they receive, and the functions and privileges attached to their office. Negotiators are of two kinds: of the first and second order. Those of the first order are Ambassadors Extraordinary and Ambassadors Ordinary. Those of the second are Envoys Extraordinary and Residents. Ambassadors extraordinary receive certain honours and distinctions not accorded to ambassadors ordinary. The ambassadors extraordinary of crowned heads are lodged and entertained in France for three days, by order of the King, in residences set aside for them, while ambassadors ordinary are not so entertained by the King, though in other respects they enjoy the same honour and privileges as the former. These privileges consist in the enjoyment under international law of immunityand security, in the right to remain covered before the King in public audiences because they represent their masters, in the privilege of being borne in the King’s coach, and of driving their own coaches into the inner court of the Louvre. They have still their own dais in the audience-chamber, while their wives have a seat by the Queen; and they are permitted to drape the driving seat of their coaches with a special saddle cloth. In France the ambassadors of the Dukes of Savoy enjoyed the same honours as those of the crowned heads of Europe. Abroad the King’s ambassadors enjoy different ceremonial rights according to the customs established in different courts. The French ambassador in Rome, for instance, gives his hand to the ambassadors of certain crowned heads and of Venice, but there are certain ambassadors of other sovereigns who do not receive this courtesy, though at other courts it is accorded to them by the French ambassador. The French ambassador takes first rank in all ceremonies in Rome after the ambassador of the Emperor. These two ambassadors receive the same salary, and are treated otherwise on a footing of equality. There are several courts at which the French ambassadors give their hand to certain princes of equality in the country: in Spain, for instance, we find the Grandees; in London, the Peers of the Realm;in Sweden and in Poland the Senators and Grand Officers; but to the negotiators of the rank of envoy this courtesy is not accorded. The King does not send an ambassador to the Electorates of Germany, but conducts his negotiation with them merely by means of envoys.