Blog

 Over time, various definitions of what diplomacy is have been given by experts, international scholars, historians and diplomats. Sometimes it is characterized as a complex practice in the management and handling of the external relations of a people, a country or a "nation" in earlier times, while other times as an official state institution in organized states. The deviations that are observed are related to the historical, chronological or political context in which each one discusses or places the specific issue. 

Undeniably, diplomatic practice from era to era knew new forms of expression and itself Diplomacy adapted to the new historical circumstances little by little, while following the various local developments or changes that were to take place from the correlation of forces in the international environment. Nowadays, diplomacy functions as a leading institution within the framework of an international, "globalized" system, supporting the communication of its members at all levels.

The practice of diplomacy, already widely known since Homeric antiquity from the embassies of the Iliad, passed during the classical era to the jurisdiction of ambassadors – envoys of the city-state, who were elected in democratic Athens by the Church of the City, while in oligarchic Sparta they were appointed by the kings and the ephors. In the Hellenistic period, until the dominance of Rome in the Greek East, the relations between cities and kings constituted a central issue of diplomatic practice, which at that time had a personal character, that is, it was practiced by well-known and prominent figures of the time (athletes, politicians, actors, philosophers, scholars), outside of institutional functions or historical circumstances that determined the relationship of a city or a “common” with a king.

From the traditional diplomacy of the Hellenistic city-states, Rome moved to a more sophisticated form with legati (ambassadors) elected by the Senate or appointed directly by the emperor himself. During the Hegemony, the way the Empire conducted its internal diplomacy blurred the lines between diplomacy and administration, with high-ranking administrative officials participating in embassies to the emperor – something that was considered the crowning glory of a successful career.

In the Byzantine Empire, diplomacy was a leading institution and compass in all aspects of its long life. The practice of diplomacy was multi-layered and there was a wide variety of means and mechanisms as well as the participation of many actors in public and private life. The diversity with which it contributed to the conduct and handling of its external relations – from which it is difficult to distinguish – was largely aimed at strengthening the security and subsequently the survival of the Empire, within a framework of an insecure and mainly anarchic international environment.

However, beyond the identification with foreign relations, Byzantine diplomacy also contains another very important dimension, the technique used by the Byzantine state in its relations with peoples outside its borders, a technique constantly changing and adapting to the circumstances at hand. Because of this, Byzantine diplomacy has often been characterized as “the science of governing barbarians”, “the science of the background”, “a tool for avoiding and preventing war”, “the foundation and means of survival of the Byzantine state”.

The main objective was, in addition to avoiding war and peacefully approaching foreign peoples, the promotion and dissemination of the Empire's ideology, institutions and cultural values ​​in their societies, so as to strengthen its influence and consolidate its power. It is noteworthy that despite the high position that diplomacy held in the institutions of the Empire, it did not have a permanent body of diplomatic officers and permanent diplomatic missions, while diplomatic duties were exercised by extraordinary high officials of the state, the army or the Church, who were sometimes selected on the basis of certain virtues, such as "economy - flexibility, prudence, piety, magnanimity, insight, etc."

As a special category of high-ranking state officials, diplomats appear in the forefront of history during the Italian Renaissance. The city-states of Italy are the first to exchange representatives among themselves, equipped with special official credentials, the well-known diplomata, a term that refers to the long-standing relations that Byzantium maintained with the states of the Italian West. From this word, which is a linguistic loan from Greek Byzantine terminology, the term “diplomat” will come and be established in international linguistic use, as the official name of the accredited representative of one country in another foreign country.

The system of permanent diplomatic missions of the Italian states began in Venice, where the great need for constant communication with other European powers during the Renaissance period led to the development of its main consular authorities into permanent diplomatic missions. The Venetian diplomatic system, after Italy, spread to the other kingdoms of Europe (England, France, Germany, Spain) and in the 18th century became an institution in only a few eastern European states.

In modern times, after the decline and gradual collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the establishment of national Balkan states, diplomacy, as an institution and as a leading state service for the management of the foreign relations of the time, was reorganized and its function expanded. In the struggle of the Greeks for independence, the intense diplomatic activity, mainly of the Philistines, contributed greatly, while the successful maneuvers of major political figures of the Greek diplomacy of the time (Andreas Kountouriotis, Ioannis Kapodistrias, Spyridon Trikoupis, Ioannis Kolettis, Alexandros Mavrokordatos, Charilaos Trikoupis, etc.), led, within a period of about a hundred years, to the gradual liberation of enslaved Hellenism and to a now free Greece.

It should be noted that today, with the expansion of older European and international organizations and the creation of new ones, in the context of which the direct cooperation of all their member states is necessary, the work of central diplomatic services as well as permanent diplomatic missions has become complex and intricate, but particularly interesting. With the ever-increasing technological development, the active participation of the leading relevant political actors as well as the leaders of the member states of the international community in the diplomatic processes, which take place on the global political chessboard every day, is made possible.

Although the new “global diplomatic system” in the modern world manages the external relations of nations, some of the practices and principles used are based on models of older advanced societies. Thus, for a more complete knowledge of the history of diplomacy, it is considered necessary to study older written sources, which have been characterized as “archetypes” of later diplomatic manuals. Such were, for example, the famous works, “Explanation on the Order of the Kingdom” and “De administrando Imperio” by the Byzantine emperor Constantine Porphyrogenitus or the work “Relatio de legatione constantinopolata” by the politician and diplomat bishop of Cremona Liutprand, who was assigned two of the most important embassies of the Western Empire to Constantinople. The exact term that would characterize diplomacy in the European Middle Ages is political barbarism. The Church, the imperial institution and the royal power are the three pillars from which the diplomacy of the Christian Middle Ages emanates, as well as the diplomatic, that is, the documents that cover diplomatic activity. Diplomacy and the related diplomacy gradually developed in the Middle Ages based on the breakdown of Roman unity and the growing influence of the religious factor in international relations.

The First World War radically changed the international environment. New needs and new ideological approaches led to new forms of diplomatic activity, which scholars called “new diplomacy”. The First World War negatively affected the prestige of diplomacy. The causes were identified in the secret agreements and complex alliances that were agreed upon without the knowledge of the peoples but also in the antagonisms of the elected representatives that led the countries to war.

The old diplomacy had failed and a new one had to be found, the basis of which would be the first of the 14 points – terms of peace that President Wilson presented to the American Congress in January 1918: << Transparent peace conditions… transparent procedures… diplomacy will always proceed with honesty and publicity>>. These views were also shared by the leaders of the three victorious powers, Lloyd George of Britain, Clemenceau of France and Wilson of the USA. The role of multilateral diplomacy in relations between states was also strengthened by the establishment of the League of Nations, the brainchild of Woodrow Wilson.

During World War II, diplomatic practice was not particularly enriched. Interstate relations followed the patterns that had been formed during the previous war. There was a number of times that the Ministers of Foreign Affairs were bypassed and the role of professional diplomats was downgraded due to the enormous financial needs that arose from the conduct of the war and led to the direct contact of specialists from various ministries and services of the belligerents.
The failure of the League to prevent World War II did not prevent the idea of ​​collective security from being abandoned by the international community, but on the contrary, the hardships of the war convinced the American people that the creation of a strong, international organization that would prevent future war was of vital importance to everyone. In April 1945, the founding Treaty of the United Nations was signed in San Francisco by 50 states. Soon the functioning of the UN was undermined by the Cold War and the American-Soviet rivalry.

After the end of the Cold War, the various interventions of the UN in the context of fulfilling its mission increased spectacularly. The contribution of the UN to the development of diplomatic practice is significant. The participation of almost all the states of the world in the Organization and their high-level representation with permanent missions, enables states with meager financial means, which cannot maintain a large number of embassies, to develop relations with a large number of states.

International Non-Governmental Organizations also play a significant role in the diplomatic sector. NGOs undertake complementary action with states and governmental organizations when the above actors do not want or cannot get involved in issues related to the fight against poverty (OXFAM, CARE), health (Doctors Without Borders, Red Cross), education (Action Aid, Library Project), human rights (Amnesty International, Survival International) and the environment (Greenpeace, WWF).

The large number of actors and communication bodies in modern diplomacy has drastically reduced the role of both traditional diplomats and bilateral relations through permanent diplomatic missions. Negotiations are now conducted directly by technocrats on very important issues, with typical examples being the US-Soviet Union (Russia) nuclear arms control agreements and the negotiations on the Greek debt.

Embassies and diplomats have overcome difficult political situations and continue to provide valuable services to their country. The negotiations that take place between heads of government, ministers and other officials in a direct manner do not cover all issues of common interest to two states. Several issues need to be discussed by the permanent diplomatic staff. They have a clear advantage as they can gather information about the country of their accreditation, knowing people and things and focusing their attention on issues of special interest.

The role of diplomats involves the continuous and systematic cultivation of friendly bilateral relations and through public appearances and the use of the media they try to influence public opinion for the benefit of their country. They therefore exert pressure in a special way to promote their national interests and help their country's citizens who need protection and guidance. It is also often necessary to clarify the intentions of their government and diplomats intervene in order to avoid misunderstandings or the creation of a negative climate.

The need for international representation of each country is therefore understandable, but above all, an important element is the maintenance of open channels of communication between governments, which in cases of crisis or immediate need are difficult to create. Through the constant, on-site and personal presence of specialized diplomatic officials, it constitutes an essential component of modern diplomacy. Despite the significant limitation of their role, the future of Diplomacy appears assured.