3 days ago
Are diplomats becoming obsolete in the information age?
Revolution or Relic? Dr Vusi Shongwe delves into the future of diplomacy in a today's data-driven world.
Image: Ron AI
'If you want to invest in the future, invest in specialists in information management. If you want to take further risks, concentrate your efforts on linguistics. Of course, we will still need computer engineers and graphic designers, but not as key players.' — Jovan Kurbalija
THE knowledge explosion and the speed of information transmission have radically transformed society, including diplomacy. Diplomats now operate in an intensely competitive environment where they must continually prove their relevance.
In this information-intensive era, the ability to analyse data, distil insights, and convert information into actionable knowledge is critical. Countries engaged in global politics, in particular, must ensure their embassies are staffed with well-informed representatives.
As IB Neumann argues in At Home With The Diplomats, diplomats abroad function as knowledge producers, operating within fleeting social dynamics shaped by their perceptions and sociability. At home, however, their work becomes more bureaucratic, often conforming to institutional consensus rather than personal insight.
In 1797, the first Ottoman ambassador to London, Yusuf Agah Efendi, was recalled, but not before Britain's King George III praised him for strengthening the 'ancient friendship' between their nations. This historical example underscores the diplomat's timeless role: fostering trust and continuity in state relations.
Traditional diplomacy prizes discretion and tact, qualities increasingly challenged by today's media-saturated world. Yet figures such as Talleyrand and Kissinger demonstrate that professional subtlety can endure, even under scrutiny. Harold Nicolson speaks of diplomatic detachment — not from life itself, but from impulsive reactions.
Despite these ideals, diplomacy has long been viewed sceptically. Ambrose Bierce cynically defined it as 'the patriotic art of lying for one's country', while Sir Henry Wotton quipped that an ambassador is 'an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country'. Even Trygve Lie, the first UN secretary-general, suggested a good diplomat should 'cut his neighbour's throat without having his neighbour notice'. Edmund Burke, meanwhile, disparaged 'double diplomacy' and 'mendicant diplomacy'.
Yet honesty remains the diplomat's cornerstone. Reputation hinges on reliability, not deception. As former French ambassador Hervé Alphand noted, a diplomat must 'tell the truth to any foreign government without offending, and to his own government at the risk of offending.' This principle, rooted in Proverbs, remains diplomacy's bedrock.
History shows that personal qualities define diplomatic success. François de Callières, the 17th-century French diplomat, outlined the ideal envoy: observant, disciplined, judicious, and self-controlled — a skilled listener with broad knowledge, resistant to frivolity.
Today's diplomats face new challenges. Volker Stanzel identifies four key shifts: Fragmented public spheres, both within and between societies.
Digital transformation reshaping diplomatic tools.
Rise of non-state actors influencing foreign policy.
Demands on diplomats to represent societal diversity, adapt linguistically, and engage digitally.
While these changes challenge state diplomacy, they also empower civil society to shape public diplomacy.
Bernard du Rosier declared the ambassador's duty was peace, a sacred mission for the common good. Yet as Barbaro noted, this ideal often clashes with loyalty to one's sovereign. Historically, diplomacy emerged as war-weary princes sought alternatives to conflict.
Modern diplomats, like Britain's 1960s ambassador to West Germany, often serve as mediators, presenting 'the other side of the story' to reluctant ministers or foreign governments. Anatoly Dobrynin, in *In Confidence*, saw his role as fostering 'a correct and constructive dialogue' between Cold War rivals.
Paul Sharp argues that diplomats embody a 'transformative conception of peace', though their profession is often misunderstood. Some dismiss them as cynical or power-hungry; others see them as realists. Sharp contends that diplomacy demands 'intelligence, tact, and a sense of proportion', qualities that steady nations when emotions run high.
