embassies and intelligence services: the perpertation of the old diplomacy

The forces of globalization are deeply changing and shaping the international scenario, affecting the individual nation states as well as the way they interact with each others. In fact it can be argued that globalization, promoting a grater interconnectedness among states, is leading to further progresses in the new diplomacy advocated by W. Wilson. This can lead to think that the new diplomacy is taking precedent over the old one, which nowadays can be considered obsolete.
Although it is true that nowadays diplomacy is more open, inclusive and more focused on issues of law politics, it remains, as Morgenthau stated, the main way to promote the national interests by peaceful means 1, and this is why the old diplomacy is still relevant today.
In a world dominated by a realist view, nation states are concerned about matters on national security and want to maximize their national interests, and the main institution of the old diplomacy, the embassy, well serves these aims. In fact, although many scholars argue that embassies are losing their functions, and others, such as Jozef Batora and Brian Hocking 2, claim that embassies are accommodating the occurring changes, the embassies are still the locations of secret information gathering, the meeting point of bilateral relations, and the place where diplomats come to bilateral agreements.
An example supporting the relevance of the old diplomacy in the contemporary scenario is the case of the United States re-engaging diplomatic relations with Syria, re-opening the US embassy in Damascus, with the purpose to cut the Syria-Iran relations, intending to isolating Teheran in order to push the latter to abandon the nuclear programme 3. In this case diplomacy is a matter of high policy, is exclusive, since it is aimed at the isolation of Teheran, and secrecy might play an important role in the negotiations between Washington and Damascus.
The point is that no one can guarantee that "modern Treaty of London" occurs in the contemporary world since many states enjoy the privileges of embassies where secret diplomacy can be undisturbed carried on, supported by intelligence services. In fact it can be argued that the intelligence services and the Official Secret Acts do not encourage an open diplomacy, but reinforce the old one.
Overall, it is true that multilateral diplomacy is acquiring more importance, and the increased number of summits shows this, but this does not mean the irrelevance of the old diplomacy. In fact, as it emerges from the framework presented above, the old diplomacy is perpetrated by the presence of permanent embassies and the the role of the intelligence services, so that it can be argued that old and new diplomacy coexist is the contemporary international system.


1 Russell, R., ‘American Diplomatic Realism: A Tradition Practised and Preached by George F. Kennan’ in , Vol. 11, No. 3, 2000 p 163
2 Jozef Batora and Brian Hocking, “EU-Oriented Bilateralism: Evaluating the Role of Member State Embassies in the European Union”