FTerminology
martedì 23 settembre 2025 16:14
BASIC DIPLOMACY TERMINOLOGY
18.09
ACCESSION= it is a frequent practise to insert an "accession clause" into an international treaty under which Powers who were not represent at the negotiations and who did
not sign the original treaty can "accede" to it later. A good instance is Article 22 of the International Opium Convention of January 23 1912 which provides that "Powers who
have not been represented at this Conference shall be admitted to sign the present Convention".
- = an agreements is signed by some powers and it is clearly in itself open to further other memberships.
- In some treaties founding a new organization, the powers who signed and accede later can be recognized as the founders power.
- In the 19th century the United Kingdom had waged war against China to impose the free trade of drugs, then some Western powers acknowledged that is was shameful
that the trade was free for dangerous goods and started thinking that the production and the trade should have been regulated for specific goods (like opium).
ACCORD: matters of general international concern which are not of sufficient importance to justify a formal treaty or convention are frequently arranged by means of an
"accord" or "agreement". The subjects dealt with by such agreements are copyright, public health, pharmacopoeia formulas, and so on.
- There is a hierarchy in the international agreements: Agreement is the most general and the lower layer of possible treaties, it regards the less important subjects.
- The terms "accord" is not now used much, it's preferable to use "agreement".
ACTE FINAL= it often occurs that at the conclusion of some conference or congress it is found convenient to draw up some formal summary or statement of its proceedings. Such
statements enumerate the treaties signed as a result of the conference, and often contain certain expressions of opinion, or agreed comments, on the subjects discussed. Such a
summary is sometimes called "Acte", "protocol", or "Procès Verbal Final". But the expression "Acte Final".
- In the history, some languages were dominant languages, frequently preferred as international languages and the one used in the agreements. The official language was
LATIN for a long time. Then, in many fields LATIN starred to be replaced by NATIONAL languages and it caused PROBLEMS because it was, until then, perfectly fitted. This
caused to choose Latin as a neutral language for diplomacy, solving the problem of the different and many languages used.
- Treaties written in national languages caused different interpretations. The national languages act only for translation in another language and to solve the controversies
and to explain and interpretate, but the treaties were exclusively written in the dominant language. This caused often in history of foreign relations wars caused by
different interpretations, either in good or bad faith.
- In late 19th century, French became the trans-national language of diplomacy. French got prestige -> that's why many words are still used in French.
- One of the most important "Act final" is the one of the Congress of Berlin (1878).
AD REFERENDUM = a negotiator often finds it convenient to accept some proposition on the part of those with whom he is negotiating without committing his own
government. He therefore accepts it "ad referendum"; meaning thereby "subject to the approval of my government"
- "referendum" now it's used to refer to an official consultation of citizens in a community and of a country about a specific question.
- = to be reported; I ask the opinion of citizens about a topic, the opinion is reported to the legitimate power who work to satisfy the requests of the majority.
- In the past:
○ When there are free negotiations, an ambassador that decides to sign something or to assure the counterpart about the purposes and the will of his government,
but he clarify that this statement must be confirmed by his own government.
○ When the representative of a power is PLENIPOTENTIARY, so he has the right to sign and he is expected to sign, but still it need the approval of the govern.
-> in both cases, what it is signed is subject to an upper level of approval.
- Ad referendum is when there is not an official negotiation and a Conference, but simply there are negotiations between 2 powers about a specific matter; the
ambassador, who normally has not right to sign, decides that it is useful to sign in order to prevent negative effects. It is an uncommon and difficult decision to take
because he takes the responsibility to sign.
- Normally, the signature of an agreement is not the last step; but the last step is the sanction of ratification of the legitimate power of a country.
23.09
AGRÉMENT OR AGREATION = when one government wishes to accredit an ambassador or a minister to another government, it is necessary that the individual selected should
be approved by the government of the country to which he is being sent. It is customary, in order to avoid personal embarrassments, to sound a foreign government privately
before making a formal application for an agrément. A famous instance of an agrément having been withheld was when the Emperor Nicholas of Russia refused to accept Sir
Stratford Canning as British Ambassador in St. Petersburg.
- French terms
- A government points a diplomat person as an ambassador who is politically responsible for his country; the other political figures have to accept him.
- To avoid gaff, usually is better to know before if this person is accepted among the others. The practise of an agrément in advance (before the official appointment) is one
of the many profs that experience the way we name our mistakes.
- Sir Stratford Canning was known for his anti-Russian ethic view as an ambassador: it was considered a provocative move and the Emperor of Russia formally said that he
didn't want him in St. Petersburg as an ambassador of the United Kingdom.
- Generally, we use the term "Minister" as an individual carrying for one administrative units of a State. In foreign relations and diplomacy, normally Minister is an
individual acting as an ambassador without having the formal status of ambassador because even in this field there is an hierarchy (ambassador is the top title that is
given to a diplomatic). There is hierarchy for capitals: London, Paris, Ankara … are capitals where a country is expected to send an ambassador, to send a Minister will be
an offense -> to avoid gaff, whoever is the official representative of a country is normally called "ambassador".
ASYLUM = it is generally accepted pratice that a political refugee who takes asylum in a foreign country should not be deported back to his own country from which he has
escaped. A more difficult question arises when a political refugee takes asylum, not in a foreign country, but in a foreign embassy or legation in his own capital. In some Oriental
countries, notably in Persia, this system is much abused and whole tribes of politicians and their families take refuge or "bast" in a Legation compound in order to escape the
vengeance of their master. Prolonged negotiations are often necessary before such refuges can be induced to depart.
- An individual escaped from his country (for political reasons), asking another country to grant asylum, should be sure not to be sent back to his country
- Embassy is the place where an ambassador lives, the other one are legacies (minus terms).
- An embassy of a country inside another country, is part of the "host" country sovereignty.
- Sometimes, individuals of the host country took refuge in an embassy.
ATTACHÉ = there are 3 types of attaché
- 1st are naval, military, air or commercial attachés who are generally senior officiers and who are attached to a mission for specialized services
- 2nd are diplomatic attachés who represent the lowest grade of diplomatic secretaries. Of recent years this grade has in many countries been abolished and the name of
attaché changed to Third Secretary
- 3rd type is that of the Honorary Attaché, who is an unpaid volunteer, who is not a permanent member of the service, but who is generally a young man of private means
History of IR Pagina 1
, - 3rd type is that of the Honorary Attaché, who is an unpaid volunteer, who is not a permanent member of the service, but who is generally a young man of private means
and excellent connections who spends a space of time in a embassy or legation between finishing his university career and settling down to the serious business of life
- Is one of the French words that are still used today.
- The 2nd terms is not used today. The 3rd one is a disappeared figure.
THE BAG = an ambassador or minister communicates with his government either by cypher telegram, by telephone, or in the form of written reports and despatches. The latter
are placed in mail bags which are carried by special couriers or "King's Messengers". Occasionally the Foreign Office bags are entrusted to the safe keeping of the captains of
British vessels and the whole courier service has of late been much reduced. The King's Messengers or couriers are provided with special passports and their bags are inviolable.
In the old days members of missions abroad were allowed to send and receive "by favour of the bag" not only their private correspondence but a large number of commodities.
This privilege has now been much restricted in so far as the British diplomatic service is concerned.
- Telegrams were used to keep what it is being said, between the ambassador and his State, secret
- 30 years ago, some historical were preoccupied that the documents were replaced by cell calls. Now the situation has changed because calls are replaced by written
messengers (mail). In the last 50 year, we are witnessing a confused situation in which States don't know how to organize and arrange the exchange of information.
25.09
BELLIGERENT RIGHTS= this expression is one which concerns international law rather than diplomatic practice. Under international law a government which is engaged in war
possesses certain recognized rights and duties. The most important of these rights is that which enables them to declare a blockade of the coasts and ports of their enemy.
Insurgents and revolutionaries do not possess these rights until they are recognized as "belligerents". The general practise has been to grant belligerent rights to insurgents the
moment it is clear that the situation has passed from the stage of a rebellion into the stage of a civil war. But there is no absolute rule governing such procedure.
- Belligerent in Latin means “make a war”.
- The country that starts the war can try to stop and boycott the commercial relations of the enemies. The belligerent power have the right to implement this kind of war
to block as much as possible the relationships of the enemies with others countries. The other countries are harmed by this operation, however they can't complain, but
they have to accept that the belligerent country harming the enemy, harms them as well.
- You can't deny a belligerent power to implement such kind of attack.
- Nicolson in 1938 wrote this definition having n mind Spain: in 1936 some parts of the Spanish army had rebelled against the legitimate republican power of Spain because
a leftists coalition had come to power. The conservative part of the army rebelled and tried to cease the power in the old country and to take officially the power of the
formal government and establish a military rule. However, they were not so successful, the insurgents succeeded in ceasing the power in some areas of Spain, but in the
1st stage the majority of the territories remained under the legitimate governate. However, slowly, the revolutionary army extended the area under their control and the
liberal powers, mainly UK and France, despite of being officially by the side for the legitimate power, preferred the insurgents and when they had extended even more
the areas under their control, the insurgents were recognised has a legitimate power. In 1939 the forces of the legitimate republican power were then defeated and Spain
fell to the power of fascist dictatorship of Francisco Franco.
CAPITULATIONS= the powers were able in the course of centuries to impose treaties on certain non-Christian countries, under which their own nationals residing in the country
should enjoy special privileges and immunities. Among these privileges was exemption from taxation and from trial by native courts. These treaties were called "Capitulations"
and the whole infinitely complicated system was called "The Capitulatory System". The powers who enjoyed the benefits of such treaties were called the "Capitulatory Powers"
as distinct from those smaller powers who were outside the system. After the war, Turkey and Persia abolished the capitulations with the consent of the power.
- "non-Christian countries" were not powers in Nicolson mind, so we can feel the Eurocentric mind in this sentence.
- 1914: the Ottoman Empire abolished the capitulations, later when the Ottoman Empire was defeated, the powers reimposed the Capitulations and later riabolished by
signing a Treaty (it was an unilateral decision).
- So the capitations were abolished twice, unilaterally by the Ottoman Empire in 1914 and with the consensus of interested powers in completing this Treaty in 1923.
30.09
CASUS BELLI= a casus belli is an act committed by one country against another country of such a nature as to justify war. Thus the invasion of Egypt by a foreign power would
be regarded by Great Britain as a casus belli.
- The Latin word "casus belli" means events that leads to a war
- Generally, in the mind of the interested power, it's a legitimate of war.
- Generally it’s up to the interested country to decide if something is so terrible to justify a war or if it requires a negotiation.
- = it's harmful actions for the strategic interests of important powers.
- It's important that all the States know what is the casus belli of a State.
CASUS FOEDERIS= a casus foederis is different from the above. It means some action or event which brings into operation a particular treaty of alliance and justifies one party
to that treaty in calling upon another party to come to his assistance. A German invasion of Czechoslovakia would have constituted a casus foederis in that the Czech
Government could then have called upon the French and Russian Governments to fulfil their treaty obligations.
- Undoubtedly if there is a mutual defence pact and one of the signatories States is attacks by another country, this will be a casus belli and all the other signatories powers
have the duty to intervene and defend the attacked country.
- There are many events that are ambiguous and it is a matter of subjective interpretation.
- Compared to the past, now the distinction that justify the casus foederis has become much less clear; the international scenario seems blur.
- Sometimes some signatories parties do not respect the pact that they signed -> it's a questionable behaviour.
CHANCELERIES= a confusion is often made between the word "Chancellery" and the word "Chancery".
A Chancellery was originally the secretariat of a chancellor. It is now employed only to designate those ministers and officials who control, or advise upon, foreign policy. The
phrase "The Chancelleries of Europe" is in practise indistinguishable from the phrase "The Foreign Offices of the Powers".
The word "Chancery" designates the actual office of a head of a diplomatic mission, namely his 1st, 2nd and 3rd secretaries, plus the attendant clerks. It is also used to
designate the premises in which they exercise their functions. A "Chancery Servant" corresponds to the "Office Messenger" in a government department.
CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES= when an ambassador or minister goes on leave he entrusts the conduct of his mission to the next senior officer of the staff, either the counsellor or the 1st
secretary. This official becomes, for the time being, head of the mission, conducts negotiations with the foreign government, and reports to his own government. On occasions
when it is desired to manifest displeasure with a foreign government the chargé d'affaires is maintained for a long period and no successor to the departed ambassador or
minister is appointed. No agrément is required in the case of a chargé d'affaires.
- Sometimes after the departure of a representative and before the coming of another one, the chargé d'Affaires is the representative of the country for a short time
without becoming a Minister or an ambassador.
- Is the highest personality in delegation during the time on which the time of an ambassador is expired.
2.10
History of IR Pagina 2
, 2.10
COMPROMIS D'ARBITRAGE= when 2 countries agree to submit a dispute to arbitration it may be found convenient to draw up a compact defining the course of procedure to be
followed. This compact is called a "Compromis d'Arbitrage", or more usually a "Compromis".
- There is a dispute and 2 powers can agree to have it resolved by third parties, or by the Legal of Nations or by the Organization of the United Nations. Before submitting
the issue to a third power, something must be agreed so the Compromis d'Arbitrage provides the guidelines for deal the issue.
CONCORDAT= when the Pope signs a treaty with the head of a State it is called a "concordat". These treaties begin with the words "In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible
Trinity". One of the most striking of recent concordats is that between the Pope and the King of Italy for the settlement of the "Roman Question", which was signed at the
Lateran on February 11, 1929.
- Nicolson made a confusion in this case, what he wrote is wrong
- In 11 February 1929, the Lateran pacts were signed, so 2 different pacts were signed:
1) the Conciliation (=formal peace between the Italian Kingdom and Pope as Head of State that never recognized the annexations of its State achieved by the Italian
Kingdom); with this pact and peace the Vatican State was born.
○ The Pope regained the title of Head of a State which is the Vatican (little State of the world).
○ No formal peace was signed -> that's why the pact was called "Conciliation". Pope agreed to be the Head of the Vatican State.
○ It created the peace between the Italian Kingdom and the Pope.
○ It's a conciliation and not a concordad as it solved an international problem.
2) the Concordat= agreement between the Italian Catholic church as an organisation and the Italian State; the various national Catholic churches, under the control of the
Vatican, can sign agreements with the States they operate in.
9.10
CONFERENCE AND CONGRESS= there is no accepted difference between these 2 words. It is sometimes contended that a Congress is a more important version of a Conference,
or that the word "Congress" is used when territory is redistributed after a general war, or when practically all the Great Powers are represented. History does not show that such
distinctions have been made in practice, for whereas there was the Congress of Vienna, the discussion held in Paris after the war of 1914-18 was styled a "conference". It might
be argued with greater justification that the word "Conference" is more applicable to meetings at which only the victors in a war, or the directly interested parties, are
represented, and that when both the conquered countries and neutral countries are admitted the word "Congress" is more correct. Even this distinction would be questioned by
purists.
- There isn't a clear distinction between these 2 words.
- Now the terms "Conference" prevails.
CONVENTION= a convention is a less important form of treaty, namely one which is concluded, not between heads of States, but between governments.
- This description is not very convincing because
- In the framework of a general peace treaty several conventions can be signed.
- A convention can be also a completely independent agreement.
CORPS DIPLOMATIQUE= the diplomatic body in any capital is composed of the diplomatic staffs of the several missions, including the attachés. Consuls and student interpreters
are not generally regarded as forming part of the body. The senior ambassador or minister becomes the "dean" or "doyen" of the diplomatic body, and represents them in any
disputes affecting their corporate rights and interests.
- It's the group of the highest personalities in delegation.
COUNSELLOR= the senior secretary at an embassy (and in exceptional cases at a legation) has the title of "Counsellor". At important embassies, such as those in Paris and
Washington, the Counsellor is given the rank of minister. It is he who, in the absence of the head of a mission, acts as "Chargé d'Affaires".
- Normally, he is the number 2 of a mission and replace the number 1 when the latter is not present.
CREDENTIALS= an ambassador or minister is, on being appointed to a post, provided with credentials, or Letters of Credence, signed by his sovereign or the head of his State.
Until he has formally "presented his letters" he is not officially recognized.
DÉMARCHE= the closest English equivalent for the expression "faire une démarche" is "make representations", but it should be remembered that the word in French covers all
manner of representaions from proposals to threats.
- It's when a country starts a formal diplomatic action towards other countries.
- It officially informs another country about the purposes, the position, … on an issue on the table.
DÉTENTE= the word "détente" is not, as some people suppose, the opposite of "entente". It simply means "a relaxation of tension".
- It's when a rest between 2 countries is finished.
DIPLOMATIC ILLNESS= it is frequently convenient for a statesman or a negotiator to absent himself from some ceremony or meeting. In order not to cause undue offence, he
pleads illness. In cases where this malady is a feigned pretext it is called "diplomatic".
- Generally, it's known that the illness is a pretext for the representative to not join a meeting (it's an excuse and he is not ill).
- The counterpart appreciates this way to avoid participating because is a way not to make clear that there is a strong disagreement.
16.10
DIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGE= members of diplomatic missions are accorded certain privileges and immunities in the countries where they reside officially. These privileges are given,
not merely to the head of the mission, but to his staff, their wives and families, and his servants. They include such immunities as inviolability of person and domicile, exemption
from local taxation and from local criminal and civil jurisdiction. A member of the diplomatic body cannot be summoned, sued or forced to give witness in a Court of law. He
may be asked to "waive his diplomatic privilege", but he is not obliged to comply with such a request. In extreme cases (which, for diplomatists are a mild race, are fortunately
rare) the government of the country in which a diplomatist has committed a criminal offence can demand his recall and can even arrest him once he has been divested of his
official status. Diplomatic privilege is sometimes extended to persons 8such as members of the League Secretariat) who are not technically diplomatists).
- It is one of the gains of diplomacy
- Idea that the ambassadors or diplomats can't be touch
23.10
History of IR Pagina 3
martedì 23 settembre 2025 16:14
BASIC DIPLOMACY TERMINOLOGY
18.09
ACCESSION= it is a frequent practise to insert an "accession clause" into an international treaty under which Powers who were not represent at the negotiations and who did
not sign the original treaty can "accede" to it later. A good instance is Article 22 of the International Opium Convention of January 23 1912 which provides that "Powers who
have not been represented at this Conference shall be admitted to sign the present Convention".
- = an agreements is signed by some powers and it is clearly in itself open to further other memberships.
- In some treaties founding a new organization, the powers who signed and accede later can be recognized as the founders power.
- In the 19th century the United Kingdom had waged war against China to impose the free trade of drugs, then some Western powers acknowledged that is was shameful
that the trade was free for dangerous goods and started thinking that the production and the trade should have been regulated for specific goods (like opium).
ACCORD: matters of general international concern which are not of sufficient importance to justify a formal treaty or convention are frequently arranged by means of an
"accord" or "agreement". The subjects dealt with by such agreements are copyright, public health, pharmacopoeia formulas, and so on.
- There is a hierarchy in the international agreements: Agreement is the most general and the lower layer of possible treaties, it regards the less important subjects.
- The terms "accord" is not now used much, it's preferable to use "agreement".
ACTE FINAL= it often occurs that at the conclusion of some conference or congress it is found convenient to draw up some formal summary or statement of its proceedings. Such
statements enumerate the treaties signed as a result of the conference, and often contain certain expressions of opinion, or agreed comments, on the subjects discussed. Such a
summary is sometimes called "Acte", "protocol", or "Procès Verbal Final". But the expression "Acte Final".
- In the history, some languages were dominant languages, frequently preferred as international languages and the one used in the agreements. The official language was
LATIN for a long time. Then, in many fields LATIN starred to be replaced by NATIONAL languages and it caused PROBLEMS because it was, until then, perfectly fitted. This
caused to choose Latin as a neutral language for diplomacy, solving the problem of the different and many languages used.
- Treaties written in national languages caused different interpretations. The national languages act only for translation in another language and to solve the controversies
and to explain and interpretate, but the treaties were exclusively written in the dominant language. This caused often in history of foreign relations wars caused by
different interpretations, either in good or bad faith.
- In late 19th century, French became the trans-national language of diplomacy. French got prestige -> that's why many words are still used in French.
- One of the most important "Act final" is the one of the Congress of Berlin (1878).
AD REFERENDUM = a negotiator often finds it convenient to accept some proposition on the part of those with whom he is negotiating without committing his own
government. He therefore accepts it "ad referendum"; meaning thereby "subject to the approval of my government"
- "referendum" now it's used to refer to an official consultation of citizens in a community and of a country about a specific question.
- = to be reported; I ask the opinion of citizens about a topic, the opinion is reported to the legitimate power who work to satisfy the requests of the majority.
- In the past:
○ When there are free negotiations, an ambassador that decides to sign something or to assure the counterpart about the purposes and the will of his government,
but he clarify that this statement must be confirmed by his own government.
○ When the representative of a power is PLENIPOTENTIARY, so he has the right to sign and he is expected to sign, but still it need the approval of the govern.
-> in both cases, what it is signed is subject to an upper level of approval.
- Ad referendum is when there is not an official negotiation and a Conference, but simply there are negotiations between 2 powers about a specific matter; the
ambassador, who normally has not right to sign, decides that it is useful to sign in order to prevent negative effects. It is an uncommon and difficult decision to take
because he takes the responsibility to sign.
- Normally, the signature of an agreement is not the last step; but the last step is the sanction of ratification of the legitimate power of a country.
23.09
AGRÉMENT OR AGREATION = when one government wishes to accredit an ambassador or a minister to another government, it is necessary that the individual selected should
be approved by the government of the country to which he is being sent. It is customary, in order to avoid personal embarrassments, to sound a foreign government privately
before making a formal application for an agrément. A famous instance of an agrément having been withheld was when the Emperor Nicholas of Russia refused to accept Sir
Stratford Canning as British Ambassador in St. Petersburg.
- French terms
- A government points a diplomat person as an ambassador who is politically responsible for his country; the other political figures have to accept him.
- To avoid gaff, usually is better to know before if this person is accepted among the others. The practise of an agrément in advance (before the official appointment) is one
of the many profs that experience the way we name our mistakes.
- Sir Stratford Canning was known for his anti-Russian ethic view as an ambassador: it was considered a provocative move and the Emperor of Russia formally said that he
didn't want him in St. Petersburg as an ambassador of the United Kingdom.
- Generally, we use the term "Minister" as an individual carrying for one administrative units of a State. In foreign relations and diplomacy, normally Minister is an
individual acting as an ambassador without having the formal status of ambassador because even in this field there is an hierarchy (ambassador is the top title that is
given to a diplomatic). There is hierarchy for capitals: London, Paris, Ankara … are capitals where a country is expected to send an ambassador, to send a Minister will be
an offense -> to avoid gaff, whoever is the official representative of a country is normally called "ambassador".
ASYLUM = it is generally accepted pratice that a political refugee who takes asylum in a foreign country should not be deported back to his own country from which he has
escaped. A more difficult question arises when a political refugee takes asylum, not in a foreign country, but in a foreign embassy or legation in his own capital. In some Oriental
countries, notably in Persia, this system is much abused and whole tribes of politicians and their families take refuge or "bast" in a Legation compound in order to escape the
vengeance of their master. Prolonged negotiations are often necessary before such refuges can be induced to depart.
- An individual escaped from his country (for political reasons), asking another country to grant asylum, should be sure not to be sent back to his country
- Embassy is the place where an ambassador lives, the other one are legacies (minus terms).
- An embassy of a country inside another country, is part of the "host" country sovereignty.
- Sometimes, individuals of the host country took refuge in an embassy.
ATTACHÉ = there are 3 types of attaché
- 1st are naval, military, air or commercial attachés who are generally senior officiers and who are attached to a mission for specialized services
- 2nd are diplomatic attachés who represent the lowest grade of diplomatic secretaries. Of recent years this grade has in many countries been abolished and the name of
attaché changed to Third Secretary
- 3rd type is that of the Honorary Attaché, who is an unpaid volunteer, who is not a permanent member of the service, but who is generally a young man of private means
History of IR Pagina 1
, - 3rd type is that of the Honorary Attaché, who is an unpaid volunteer, who is not a permanent member of the service, but who is generally a young man of private means
and excellent connections who spends a space of time in a embassy or legation between finishing his university career and settling down to the serious business of life
- Is one of the French words that are still used today.
- The 2nd terms is not used today. The 3rd one is a disappeared figure.
THE BAG = an ambassador or minister communicates with his government either by cypher telegram, by telephone, or in the form of written reports and despatches. The latter
are placed in mail bags which are carried by special couriers or "King's Messengers". Occasionally the Foreign Office bags are entrusted to the safe keeping of the captains of
British vessels and the whole courier service has of late been much reduced. The King's Messengers or couriers are provided with special passports and their bags are inviolable.
In the old days members of missions abroad were allowed to send and receive "by favour of the bag" not only their private correspondence but a large number of commodities.
This privilege has now been much restricted in so far as the British diplomatic service is concerned.
- Telegrams were used to keep what it is being said, between the ambassador and his State, secret
- 30 years ago, some historical were preoccupied that the documents were replaced by cell calls. Now the situation has changed because calls are replaced by written
messengers (mail). In the last 50 year, we are witnessing a confused situation in which States don't know how to organize and arrange the exchange of information.
25.09
BELLIGERENT RIGHTS= this expression is one which concerns international law rather than diplomatic practice. Under international law a government which is engaged in war
possesses certain recognized rights and duties. The most important of these rights is that which enables them to declare a blockade of the coasts and ports of their enemy.
Insurgents and revolutionaries do not possess these rights until they are recognized as "belligerents". The general practise has been to grant belligerent rights to insurgents the
moment it is clear that the situation has passed from the stage of a rebellion into the stage of a civil war. But there is no absolute rule governing such procedure.
- Belligerent in Latin means “make a war”.
- The country that starts the war can try to stop and boycott the commercial relations of the enemies. The belligerent power have the right to implement this kind of war
to block as much as possible the relationships of the enemies with others countries. The other countries are harmed by this operation, however they can't complain, but
they have to accept that the belligerent country harming the enemy, harms them as well.
- You can't deny a belligerent power to implement such kind of attack.
- Nicolson in 1938 wrote this definition having n mind Spain: in 1936 some parts of the Spanish army had rebelled against the legitimate republican power of Spain because
a leftists coalition had come to power. The conservative part of the army rebelled and tried to cease the power in the old country and to take officially the power of the
formal government and establish a military rule. However, they were not so successful, the insurgents succeeded in ceasing the power in some areas of Spain, but in the
1st stage the majority of the territories remained under the legitimate governate. However, slowly, the revolutionary army extended the area under their control and the
liberal powers, mainly UK and France, despite of being officially by the side for the legitimate power, preferred the insurgents and when they had extended even more
the areas under their control, the insurgents were recognised has a legitimate power. In 1939 the forces of the legitimate republican power were then defeated and Spain
fell to the power of fascist dictatorship of Francisco Franco.
CAPITULATIONS= the powers were able in the course of centuries to impose treaties on certain non-Christian countries, under which their own nationals residing in the country
should enjoy special privileges and immunities. Among these privileges was exemption from taxation and from trial by native courts. These treaties were called "Capitulations"
and the whole infinitely complicated system was called "The Capitulatory System". The powers who enjoyed the benefits of such treaties were called the "Capitulatory Powers"
as distinct from those smaller powers who were outside the system. After the war, Turkey and Persia abolished the capitulations with the consent of the power.
- "non-Christian countries" were not powers in Nicolson mind, so we can feel the Eurocentric mind in this sentence.
- 1914: the Ottoman Empire abolished the capitulations, later when the Ottoman Empire was defeated, the powers reimposed the Capitulations and later riabolished by
signing a Treaty (it was an unilateral decision).
- So the capitations were abolished twice, unilaterally by the Ottoman Empire in 1914 and with the consensus of interested powers in completing this Treaty in 1923.
30.09
CASUS BELLI= a casus belli is an act committed by one country against another country of such a nature as to justify war. Thus the invasion of Egypt by a foreign power would
be regarded by Great Britain as a casus belli.
- The Latin word "casus belli" means events that leads to a war
- Generally, in the mind of the interested power, it's a legitimate of war.
- Generally it’s up to the interested country to decide if something is so terrible to justify a war or if it requires a negotiation.
- = it's harmful actions for the strategic interests of important powers.
- It's important that all the States know what is the casus belli of a State.
CASUS FOEDERIS= a casus foederis is different from the above. It means some action or event which brings into operation a particular treaty of alliance and justifies one party
to that treaty in calling upon another party to come to his assistance. A German invasion of Czechoslovakia would have constituted a casus foederis in that the Czech
Government could then have called upon the French and Russian Governments to fulfil their treaty obligations.
- Undoubtedly if there is a mutual defence pact and one of the signatories States is attacks by another country, this will be a casus belli and all the other signatories powers
have the duty to intervene and defend the attacked country.
- There are many events that are ambiguous and it is a matter of subjective interpretation.
- Compared to the past, now the distinction that justify the casus foederis has become much less clear; the international scenario seems blur.
- Sometimes some signatories parties do not respect the pact that they signed -> it's a questionable behaviour.
CHANCELERIES= a confusion is often made between the word "Chancellery" and the word "Chancery".
A Chancellery was originally the secretariat of a chancellor. It is now employed only to designate those ministers and officials who control, or advise upon, foreign policy. The
phrase "The Chancelleries of Europe" is in practise indistinguishable from the phrase "The Foreign Offices of the Powers".
The word "Chancery" designates the actual office of a head of a diplomatic mission, namely his 1st, 2nd and 3rd secretaries, plus the attendant clerks. It is also used to
designate the premises in which they exercise their functions. A "Chancery Servant" corresponds to the "Office Messenger" in a government department.
CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES= when an ambassador or minister goes on leave he entrusts the conduct of his mission to the next senior officer of the staff, either the counsellor or the 1st
secretary. This official becomes, for the time being, head of the mission, conducts negotiations with the foreign government, and reports to his own government. On occasions
when it is desired to manifest displeasure with a foreign government the chargé d'affaires is maintained for a long period and no successor to the departed ambassador or
minister is appointed. No agrément is required in the case of a chargé d'affaires.
- Sometimes after the departure of a representative and before the coming of another one, the chargé d'Affaires is the representative of the country for a short time
without becoming a Minister or an ambassador.
- Is the highest personality in delegation during the time on which the time of an ambassador is expired.
2.10
History of IR Pagina 2
, 2.10
COMPROMIS D'ARBITRAGE= when 2 countries agree to submit a dispute to arbitration it may be found convenient to draw up a compact defining the course of procedure to be
followed. This compact is called a "Compromis d'Arbitrage", or more usually a "Compromis".
- There is a dispute and 2 powers can agree to have it resolved by third parties, or by the Legal of Nations or by the Organization of the United Nations. Before submitting
the issue to a third power, something must be agreed so the Compromis d'Arbitrage provides the guidelines for deal the issue.
CONCORDAT= when the Pope signs a treaty with the head of a State it is called a "concordat". These treaties begin with the words "In the name of the Most Holy and Indivisible
Trinity". One of the most striking of recent concordats is that between the Pope and the King of Italy for the settlement of the "Roman Question", which was signed at the
Lateran on February 11, 1929.
- Nicolson made a confusion in this case, what he wrote is wrong
- In 11 February 1929, the Lateran pacts were signed, so 2 different pacts were signed:
1) the Conciliation (=formal peace between the Italian Kingdom and Pope as Head of State that never recognized the annexations of its State achieved by the Italian
Kingdom); with this pact and peace the Vatican State was born.
○ The Pope regained the title of Head of a State which is the Vatican (little State of the world).
○ No formal peace was signed -> that's why the pact was called "Conciliation". Pope agreed to be the Head of the Vatican State.
○ It created the peace between the Italian Kingdom and the Pope.
○ It's a conciliation and not a concordad as it solved an international problem.
2) the Concordat= agreement between the Italian Catholic church as an organisation and the Italian State; the various national Catholic churches, under the control of the
Vatican, can sign agreements with the States they operate in.
9.10
CONFERENCE AND CONGRESS= there is no accepted difference between these 2 words. It is sometimes contended that a Congress is a more important version of a Conference,
or that the word "Congress" is used when territory is redistributed after a general war, or when practically all the Great Powers are represented. History does not show that such
distinctions have been made in practice, for whereas there was the Congress of Vienna, the discussion held in Paris after the war of 1914-18 was styled a "conference". It might
be argued with greater justification that the word "Conference" is more applicable to meetings at which only the victors in a war, or the directly interested parties, are
represented, and that when both the conquered countries and neutral countries are admitted the word "Congress" is more correct. Even this distinction would be questioned by
purists.
- There isn't a clear distinction between these 2 words.
- Now the terms "Conference" prevails.
CONVENTION= a convention is a less important form of treaty, namely one which is concluded, not between heads of States, but between governments.
- This description is not very convincing because
- In the framework of a general peace treaty several conventions can be signed.
- A convention can be also a completely independent agreement.
CORPS DIPLOMATIQUE= the diplomatic body in any capital is composed of the diplomatic staffs of the several missions, including the attachés. Consuls and student interpreters
are not generally regarded as forming part of the body. The senior ambassador or minister becomes the "dean" or "doyen" of the diplomatic body, and represents them in any
disputes affecting their corporate rights and interests.
- It's the group of the highest personalities in delegation.
COUNSELLOR= the senior secretary at an embassy (and in exceptional cases at a legation) has the title of "Counsellor". At important embassies, such as those in Paris and
Washington, the Counsellor is given the rank of minister. It is he who, in the absence of the head of a mission, acts as "Chargé d'Affaires".
- Normally, he is the number 2 of a mission and replace the number 1 when the latter is not present.
CREDENTIALS= an ambassador or minister is, on being appointed to a post, provided with credentials, or Letters of Credence, signed by his sovereign or the head of his State.
Until he has formally "presented his letters" he is not officially recognized.
DÉMARCHE= the closest English equivalent for the expression "faire une démarche" is "make representations", but it should be remembered that the word in French covers all
manner of representaions from proposals to threats.
- It's when a country starts a formal diplomatic action towards other countries.
- It officially informs another country about the purposes, the position, … on an issue on the table.
DÉTENTE= the word "détente" is not, as some people suppose, the opposite of "entente". It simply means "a relaxation of tension".
- It's when a rest between 2 countries is finished.
DIPLOMATIC ILLNESS= it is frequently convenient for a statesman or a negotiator to absent himself from some ceremony or meeting. In order not to cause undue offence, he
pleads illness. In cases where this malady is a feigned pretext it is called "diplomatic".
- Generally, it's known that the illness is a pretext for the representative to not join a meeting (it's an excuse and he is not ill).
- The counterpart appreciates this way to avoid participating because is a way not to make clear that there is a strong disagreement.
16.10
DIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGE= members of diplomatic missions are accorded certain privileges and immunities in the countries where they reside officially. These privileges are given,
not merely to the head of the mission, but to his staff, their wives and families, and his servants. They include such immunities as inviolability of person and domicile, exemption
from local taxation and from local criminal and civil jurisdiction. A member of the diplomatic body cannot be summoned, sued or forced to give witness in a Court of law. He
may be asked to "waive his diplomatic privilege", but he is not obliged to comply with such a request. In extreme cases (which, for diplomatists are a mild race, are fortunately
rare) the government of the country in which a diplomatist has committed a criminal offence can demand his recall and can even arrest him once he has been divested of his
official status. Diplomatic privilege is sometimes extended to persons 8such as members of the League Secretariat) who are not technically diplomatists).
- It is one of the gains of diplomacy
- Idea that the ambassadors or diplomats can't be touch
23.10
History of IR Pagina 3
