Diplomacy in the Digital Age

While the means of diplomacy have changed, the ends have not.

Today, the contributors to a recently released collection of essays -assembled under the title Diplomacy in the Digital Age and edited by Janice Stein - will gather in Toronto to discuss former Canadian Ambassador to the U.S. Allan Gotlieb’s lifetime contribution to the diplomatic profession.

It is encouraging to see attention of this nature being directed towards the study of diplomacy. Throughout my 30 years of diplomatic practice and scholarship, I have never been able to understand why so many mainstream educators, senior officials, and analysts spend so little time trying to understand or assess the inner workings of the world's second-oldest profession.

Diplomacy is an approach to the management of international relations founded upon the use of non-violent political communications such as dialogue, negotiation, and compromise for purposes of conflict resolution and problem-solving. In my experience, many serving diplomats are not entirely sure of that definition, or of how their work is related to the achievement of international peace, security, and prosperity. That observation notwithstanding, I would argue that diplomacy has never been more relevant.

I expect that many of the participants in today's symposium share that perspective.

Three of the new volume's four subtitles – Diplomacy with the United States in the Era of WikiLeaks, The Professional Diplomat on Facebook, and Personal Diplomacy in the Age of Twitter – make reference to manifestations of what is widely referred to as the “new media,” an interactive, on-demand mode of communication that has come to occupy a significant place within the operations of several of the world's more innovative foreign ministries.

“Digital diplomacy” is a catchy term, but, like diplomacy itself, it is not clearly understood. Also referred to variously as e-, i-, cyber-, or virtual diplomacy, it has been made possible by the adoption, within diplomatic institutions and government more generally, of digitally based systems of data creation, transmission, and storage using the internet, social media platforms, computers, and a variety of wireless electronic devices.

The modes of diplomatic communication, therefore, are evolving to keep pace with the times, and especially with the need to connect directly with foreign populations. However, the end goals remain largely unchanged.

The threat or use of armed force will always have its place in the world, but that place is now dramatically over-represented. Since the end of the Cold War, and in the wake of disasters in Iraq and Afghanistan, the limitations associated with the continued militarization of international policy could not be clearer.

The reality is that the solutions to the most profound threats and challenges that imperil the planet – climate change, resource scarcity, diminishing bio-diversity, and environmental collapse – are rooted in science, and driven by technology.

International co-operation to broach these complex and difficult issues cannot be undertaken using anything other than diplomacy, whether traditional, public, digital, or guerrilla, which combines elements of all three.

Long-term, sustainable, and human-centred development has become the basis for durable security in the digital age. For that reason, diplomacy must displace defence as the centre of international policy. In the globalized precincts of the 21st century, talking rather than fighting is the only way forward.

I hope that conviction finds enthusiastic support at today's event, and is expressed forcefully in the mainstream media coverage that follows.

Photo courtesy of Reuters.