There seems to be a terrible misunderstanding about diplomacy. Many people believe diplomacy means compromise. They imagine two leaders entering a room with strong opinions and walking out with weaker ones, each holding half of what they originally believed.
That is not diplomacy. That is simply splitting the chocolate bar and hoping nobody notices that you have given the other fellow the bigger piece.
Which is exactly what we are doing with China and even Iran.
A good diplomat does not abandon principles like luggage at an airport carousel. A good diplomat holds firmly to what he believes, but explains it so clearly and politely that the other person begins to see the logic behind it.
Diplomacy is persuasion without shouting.
If shouting solved international disputes, Indian housing society meetings would have ended every war on earth by now. One raised voice from the third row and global peace would immediately follow.
But diplomacy works differently.
It is the art of saying, “I understand your concern,” without immediately adding, “but you are completely wrong and should apologise to civilisation.”
It is the ability to listen without grinding your teeth and then calmly explain your position in a way that even your opponent respects.
Which is exactly what we need in times of war.
Diplomacy during war is not standing between two sides like a confused referee saying, “You are both correct and you are both incorrect and we would like to remain friends with everyone while deciding absolutely nothing.”
That is not diplomacy. That is a man sitting on a fence so long that the fence begins to think he belongs there.
True diplomacy is far more honest.
It is telling one side, “We may not agree with your policies, but we would still like to remain friends, even as we tell you that you could be wrong.” It is saying this clearly and respectfully without pretending that both sides are equally right just to keep everyone happy.
Do we have the courage to do that? Because only then will we grow in the eyes of the world.
Because the world respects clarity far more than clever hugs or strategic silence.
Sitting on the fence and inventing beautiful sounding phrases like “strategic neutrality” or “non aligned wisdom” may make speeches sound impressive, but the rest of the world is quietly wondering whether we are diplomats or acrobats performing balancing acts.
Real diplomacy wins respect because it is based on honesty and courage.
It does not insult one friend in order to flatter another. It simply speaks truth in a voice calm enough that even disagreement does not become hostility.
And when diplomacy is done well, something remarkable happens.
Even the person who disagrees with you walks away respecting you.
Which is far better than having the entire world laugh at you as you wobble uncertainly on the fence while you insist you are merely “carefully balanced.”..!
————————————————
Would love to hear from you in the COMMENTS section below…and IF YOU WANT TO RECEIVE BOB’S BANTER EVERYDAY, PLEASE SEND YOUR NAME AND WHATSAPP PHONE NO TO [email protected]
————————————————–
Robert Clements is a newspaper columnist and writes a daily column, which has graced the pages of over 60 newspapers and magazines, from a daily column in the Khaleej Times, Dubai, the Morning Star, London, and in nearly every state in India, from The Statesman in Kolkata, to the Kashmir Times in Kashmir to the Trinity Mirror in Chennai.
👍
Thank you Joseph.
Hey Bob, you have defined Diplomacy perfetly.
I also see that you have applied the criteria perfectly to yourself too. If you were trying to point out someone as sitting on the fence you have neither specified them by name, nor given any hints to know who or what you were talking about.
Would have been so much more fun if you culd have been a little LESS diplomatic ?
Ha ha ha. Thank you Pankaj!
Agreed that most often diplomacy can win wars but what strategy should a leader of a diverse nation of many religions take when he is responsible for the safety and livelihoods of around 10 million of our people who reside or work in the Middle East?
Should he continue to sit on the fence, stay passive temporarily and perform a balancing act, hoping that the raging war will subside and save lives and our economy or practise diplomacy knowing fully well that the opponent is a bruised tiger, threatening to burn the entire forest?
A tough call for any leader to take in complex situations, especially when our goal is to save human lives, religion no bar and our economy. Winning small battles hoping to promote peace in a raging war.
We stand for “UNITY in DIVERSITY” unlike the rest of the world and this is our “strategic diplomatic compromise” for peace. Our diversity happens to be our strength in this raging war.