Due to Korea's geographical location and geopolitical situation, diplomacy has always been crucial to its survival. Today, Korea has many competent and trustworthy diplomats. In the past, however, the country did not always seem to excel at foreign affairs. During the Joseon era, for example, diplomacy was largely based on toadyism because the state was subservient to a big, strong neighboring country.
Some of our history teachers, too, misunderstood the true nature of diplomacy. They often thought that simply winning an argument with another country constituted a diplomatic victory. For example, they taught that during the Goryeo kingdom, Seo Hui achieved a diplomatic triumph by prevailing in an argument with the commander of an invading foreign army. However, true diplomacy means reaching a settlement through negotiation and persuasion, not merely winning a debate. Therefore, teachers should have emphasized that Seo Hui was a superb diplomat precisely because he succeeded in persuading and negotiating with the enemy general in a time of national crisis.
A dozen years ago, I wrote a newspaper article entitled, “Are we good at foreign affairs and diplomacy?” In it, I quoted a French statesman, Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Perigord, who famously noted, “A diplomat who says 'yes' means 'maybe,' a diplomat who says 'maybe' means 'no,' and a diplomat who says 'no' is no diplomat at all.”
According to his logic, if a government official directly and publicly says “No!” to another country, he is acting more like a soldier than a diplomat. Indeed, diplomacy should be so subtle and refined that the other party does not even realize their request has been declined.
Because diplomacy is so vital, many experts have left memorable insights on the subject. Isaac Goldberg once wrote, “Diplomacy is to do and say the nastiest thing in the nicest way.” He meant that if you lose your temper and shout insults, you are acting as a warrior rather than a diplomat. Perhaps that is why John Dingell observed, “War is a failure of diplomacy.” Indeed, adroit diplomacy has the power to prevent conflict entirely.
There are times when foreign nations enforce outrageous demands, threaten revenge if their wishes are not met, or betray mutual trust. Under no circumstances, however, should diplomats express their anger directly. Instead, they must seek quiet solutions through persuasion and negotiation. They should never forget Art Linkletter’s wise words: "Diplomacy is the art of jumping into trouble without making a splash."
Madeleine Albright also enlightened us on how to act in times of crisis, stating, "When we're trying to solve difficult national issues, it's sometimes necessary to talk to adversaries as well as friends. Historians have a word for this: diplomacy."
Furthermore, true diplomats are those who know exactly what to say, how to say it and when to remain silent. As Jon Huntsman noted, “The secret about diplomats is that we're trained to say something when there is nothing to say, and to say nothing when there is something to say.”
We must also recognize that in addition to traditional, conventional statecraft, public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy are equally important. Traditional diplomacy involves formal negotiations between governments and official envoys. Public diplomacy, on the other hand, refers to interactions between people-to-people or government-to-people. For public diplomacy to succeed, personal relationships with influential foreigners are crucial.
The scope and potential of public diplomacy are immense. Antony Blinken acknowledged that public diplomacy served as an effective Cold War weapon, implying that personal relationships allowed individuals to bridge the divides of the Iron Curtain. Unlike professional diplomats who must strictly represent their governments, public diplomats can freely build friendships with foreigners to exchange ideas and promote mutual understanding. They can leverage their integrity, candor and modesty to gain trust and build a strong reputation abroad.
Meanwhile, cultural diplomacy utilizes soft power — such as Korean culture, including K-pop, K-film, K-drama and K-literature — to project a positive national image through people-to-people connections. It fosters mutual understanding among different nations by exchanging ideas within the cultural domain.
As Cynthia P. Schneider said, "The most successful cultural diplomacy strategy integrates people-to-people or arts/culture/media-to-people interactions into the basic business of diplomacy."
Looking back upon my own life, I have devoted much of myself to public and cultural diplomacy. I have consistently tried to ensure that my colleagues and friends at various foreign universities and governments maintain a positive, favorable image of Korea. I also had the privilege of teaching young diplomats at the Korea National Diplomatic Academy for three years as a visiting professor — some of whom later went on to serve as ambassadors. Throughout these experiences, I have always believed that the importance of skilled diplomacy cannot be overstated.
If we are not good at diplomacy, the future of our country is undoubtedly grim and bleak. We strongly hope that our country can navigate reefs and rough seas safely, guided by our political leaders’ excellent diplomatic skills.
- - -
Kim Seong-kon
Kim Seong-kon is a professor emeritus of English at Seoul National University and a visiting scholar at Dartmouth College. The views expressed here are the writer's own. — Ed
khnews@heraldcorp.com
