The South African government, not known for its sensitivity to the feelings of others, seems to have developed a radically different form of diplomacy. Forget carefully worded notes in diplomatic pouches; the new diplomacy, as practiced by South Africa’s Ambassador to Canada Glenn Babb, involves inflammatory rhetoric publicly aimed at the host country.
This new policy, alternatively referred to as The Big Stick Approach or Scorched Earth Diplomacy, does not, at first blush, seem conducive to friendly relations between nations. However, now that Babb is returning to South Africa after 20 months in Canada, one benefit of the new policy has emerged: a new Ambassador will be a welcome relief.
The first manifestations of this policy came in January, when Babb likened South Africa’s repression of blacks to Canada’s repression of native peoples. Such a comparison was uncalled for. In the first place, Canada’s repression of its native peoples is not comparable, in kind or severity, to South Africa’s repression of blacks. In the second place, what Canada does to its native peoples does not lessen the gravity of what South Africa does to its blacks (this is a rhetorical device known as “you too-ism”).
(This echoed accusations that the American treatment of its black population was similar to that of South Africa; again, an unfair and obfuscatory statement. If nothing else, South Africa appears to be consistent in its application of The Big Stick Approach.)
The Canadian government was not moved by this argument, so, more recently, Babb has stated that the Canadian government weakened its own sovereign decision-making power by agreeing to abide by a Commonwealth sanctions plan known as The Nassau Accord. Would Babb have used the same logic if Canada had agreed to South Africa’s demands? Would he have been satisfied if Canada hadn’t entered into the Accord, but had adopted tougher measures?
The Big Stick Approach is undoubtedly new enough to be flexible on such matters.
To further explore the differences between the old and new forms of diplomacy, consider the following scenarios:
SITUATION: Your country has been sending troops into your smaller, weaker neighbours, to the protests of the international community. THE OLD DIPLOMATIC APPROACH: Apologize profusely to the international community, reaffirming your belief in the sovereignty of nations while not committing your country to ending the attacks. THE BIG STICK APPROACH: Accuse your neighbours of harbouring enemies of your state, being sympathetic to Communists or not helping little old ladies across the street, and defy the international community to stop you.
SITUATION: Foreign press agencies have been escalating their pressure on you to loosen restrictions on journalists as your government has escalated its censorship efforts. THE OLD DIPLOMATIC APPROACH: Apologize profusely to the foreign press agencies, reaffirming your belief in the freedom of the press without committing your government to actually lightening the restrictions. THE BIG STICK APPROACH: Blame the foreign press for your poor international image, citing inflammatory reports of police atrocities, and threaten foreign journalists with expulsion, or, worse, second class hotel accommodations.
SITUATION: Foreign governments have adopted economic sanctions against your country and counseled major corporations to boycott you until you change your policies. THE OLD DIPLOMATIC APPROACH: Quietly point out that sanctions only hurt those whom foreign governments are trying to help and suggest to the corporations that nobody benefits from the nationalization of industry. THE BIG STICK APPROACH: Dare foreign governments to do their worst, claiming that your country can stand alone if it has to, then accuse them of interfering with the internal policies of a sovereign nation.
SITUATION: A prominent clergyman has traveled the world, making speeches condemning your government. THE OLD DIPLOMATIC APPROACH: Hold parties at your embassy in nations where the clergyman has spoken, allowing the Ambassador to take prominent politicians aside and interpret what the clergyman has said. THE BIG STICK APPROACH: Establish clergymen sympathetic to your government in positions of authority and claim that the renegade does not speak for your people.
SITUATION: The Prime Minister of an influential foreign power has met with members of an outlawed opposition group. THE OLD DIPLOMATIC APPROACH: Have your Ambassador suggest to key members of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet that he risks losing popular support, not to mention campaign funds, if he continues meeting with unpopular folks. THE BIG STICK APPROACH: Call the government “malevolent,” accuse it of having “no understanding of the complexities” of the situation and insist it’s the one hurting international relations.
Old-fashioned diplomats shudder at the thought of implementing Scorched Earth Diplomacy. Can you blame them?