Contacts, Visits, Negotiations. The Vienna Convention (Article 3)

Contacts, Visits, Negotiations

The Vienna Convention (Article 3) of 1961 has defined the actual scope of a diplomat’s obligation with the visits as the milestone of the practical turn-over. Ideally a first-class diplomat should be knowledgeable of the country of stay with its culture, customs, traditions, philosophy of the external policy and the links that bound up with internal one. In effect it means to know the people from all the walks of life with the idea to get the complex information from all the available sources. The easiest one is to keep the track of all publications out coming from the Mass Media. It is not enough as this sort of information can be inspired by some extreme interests of small groups. This sort of information can be incorrect and draw the wrong picture of the real state of things. So, everything should be double checked with the residual to be eliminated. The only way is the live contacts which are set up on handing-in the credentials. The accredited ambassador visits the officials of the receiving state. There is no fixed list of the visits to be made. It stays with the choice of the ambassador.

There is a distinction of the visits as courtesy and businesslike. The initial visits of the newly arrived ambassador are courtesy ones confined to saying “Hello” with the idea to get to know each other. These meetings do not last long as the problems are not discussed and never go beyond some 15-20 minutes. The initiative of the departure stays with the ambassador. The visit of an ambassador before he leaves the country is businesslike when the discussion goes along the lines of the achievements for the time of the joint cooperation. The businesslike visits can be initiated by the diplomats as well as the officials of the receiving state. We should make some special point to the meetings with the counterparts – ambassadors of some other countries and the Dean of the Diplomatic Corp. These sort of meetings are very helpful with creating the right picture of “Who is Who” in the country.

The ambassador visits the colleagues of his seniority exclusively from the countries with the full format diplomatic relations. The Protocol provides for putting across the list of the persons to be met by the ambassador to be forwarded to the Protocol Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the receiving state. He is informed in due course when he can meet this or that top ranking person. The Protocol of arranging meetings varies from country.to country. In some one should ask for the permission at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and in others one should make arrangements on his own. All the meetings of the diplomats involve the political issues as they represent their states. All the outcomes of the meetings are reported to the Centre. Diplomatic Talks is the key source of the generated information. They can be of different scale. The numerous receptions create a good opportunity for meeting the right people. But they are not the right format for some detailed discussion, but the right place for arranging the meetings to come. All the meetings should be well prepared in every detail. That concerns the person and the topic of the discussion. Each party involved in the discussion works out a good plan with the stages of the strategic plan.

All the serious topics are not raised at breakfast or lunch and it is out of question to try to pull out the information from someone you are hardly familiar with. Not every sporadic contact grows into the talk. It should not be approached until the partner shows some definite interest. In connection with the talks and negotiations we came across the phenomenon of Empathy that is the extended scenario of each involved parties. Each side is aware of the boundaries of the target to be achieved. Not every talk or negotiation can be a success, but nonetheless it is a positive result as the talks can be resumed to the best of the parties. The Etiquette details of the diplomatic talks and negotiations are never ignored and can have the legal consequences. One should never forget that the meetings are held by the official representatives of the sovereign states which are absolutely equal. One should never be late for the meeting. If something out of the way comes out with no way to fix it the other party should be informed with apologies. To avoid the uncertainty it is better to arrive in advance and wait for the fixed time at the canteen round the corner.

The meeting should be held in some special room with no phones and other appliances that can interfere into the matter in hand. It should also be free from the noise and other negative factors. All the participants should be well settled in with the focus on the subject matter of the meeting. Timing as the plan of the time budget. Both parties should realize that time is the capital that should not be wasted. So the key points are discussed as the top priority after the exchange of some introductory comments. The other comment which is quite important – how you communicate, is your tune structure acceptable. To have strong arguments is not enough if you tone is imperative, husky or unpleasant at all. The other part of it is the self control. If the slip of the tongue comes out it can provoke the wrong drive of the dialogue or cause confusion. The diplomatic meetings are often held when the positions are at the opposite poles and success comes to the professionals when they manage to create the atmosphere of confidence and trust.

When the parties get to the point of the “Dead End” the “Cooling Off Period” is declared for relaxation and reconsideration of the opinions and stand points. What are the requirements for the diplomatic meetings: To have the right motivation To be respectful to the partner To be well prepared for the meeting To be a good negotiator and communicator To have a clear idea of what the real objective is (Empathy) To be a good listener with the reasonable sense of parity

Since information is the most valuable commodity in diplomacy, the most active and intensive exchange takes place at negotiations as the area of the highest intensity. The obvious fact is that there are quite definite interest behind the reality stuffed with facts. There three types of negotiations known to be the subject of typology. The first one is known as confronting when the two parties are fighting like soldiers on the battle field. This sort of interactions is doomed to failure with no luck for the positive result. The second variant (asymmetrical) is friendly when one party dominates and the other expects concession or compromise. This sort of negotiations is quite uncommon and not frequent these days. The third variant is reasonable driven as the rule by the desire to solve the problems to the mutual benefit of the parties. This is the most productive way of negotiating that requires a high level of confidence.

There are two approaches to the negotiations. The first ones begins with the key issues with the transit to the details. The second one is ascending to the top after sorting out minor details. The order is not important provided both parties are motivated the right way. The quite recent phenomenon is the “Package discussion” of the set of problems with the reasonable concession and compromise. What should be clearly kept in mind is that negotiation is not a one way street, but the area of active interaction of the parties targeted to the objective acceptable for both. Empathy is a good guideline, but discussion can go beyond the topic in hand. Such phases like “to the best of my knowledge” and “author’s record” can be put into effect. If one party is not sure of the figures or numbers referred by the other then it comes up with the statement that it should be double checked. The other phrase which is quite common is “we are not ready to discuss this issue as it needs to be considered and consulted.

The Protocol and Etiquette provides for some rules which are obligatory to follow: Negotiations is the format of the interactive dialogue None of the parties should never demonstrate its intellectual superiority If one round of discussion is ended up in your favor the second round should never started with developing the achieved success. What is never debatable is whether to be truthful or take up some tricks. Irrespective of the skill the lie will eventually come out and the credibility of a diplomat will be undermined.