Read and translate the following text

DIPLOMATIC PROTOCOL

SUPPLEMENTARY

GENERALIZATION (Unit I)

Exercise 10 A ROLE PLAY.

Timothy Barrow’s (British Ambassador to Russia) Curriculum Vitae

Full name: Tim Barrow

Born: 15 February, 1964

Marriedto: Alison Barrow

Children: two sons and two daughters

2011 Her Majesty’s Ambassador to the Russia Federation

2008 UK Representative to the European Union

2006-2008 British Embassy Kiev, Her Majesty’s Ambassador to Ukraine

2005-2006 FCO, Deputy Political Director

2003-2005 FCO, Assistant Director EU External

2000-2003 FCO, Head of Common Foreign and Security Department

1998-2000 FCO, Private Secretary to the Foreign Secretary

1996-1998 UKRep Brussels, First Secretary

1994-1996 FCO, Private Secretary to Minister of State

1993-1994 FCO, Head of Russia Section

1990-1993 British Embassy Moscow, Second Secretary

1989 British Days Exhibition, Kiev

1988-1989 Russian Language Training

1987-1988 FCO, Desk Officer, Western European Department

1986 Joined the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Awards: Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, The Royal Victorian Order, the most Excellent order of the British Empire.

Tim Barrow Named British Ambassador to Russia

August 2011

The British Foreign and Commonwealth Office has appointed Timothy Barrow, a career diplomat with previous experience in Russia, as the country’s new ambassador to the Russian federation.

He will succeed Dame Anne Fyfe Pringle, who was British ambassador to Russia since 2008 and the first woman to hold the job in the more than 450 years of diplomatic relations between two countries

Barrow, an Oxford graduate, who worked at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office since 1986, was the second secretary at the embassy in Moscow from 1990 to 1993 and headed the Russian section at the ministry for a year after that.

He’s held various diplomatic jobs since, mostly at the agency’s central office, and was British ambassador to Ukraine from 2006 t0 2008. He proceeded to become Britain’s representative at the EU’s political and security committee following the Kiev job and held that post until his current appointment.

Tim Barrow has different awards including: Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, The Royal Victorian Order, the most Excellent order of the British Empire.

He’s is married, with two sons and two daughters.

UNIT II

TEXT FOR RENDERING

Negotiations

Negotiation is one of the main functions of diplomacy. It is a complex process leading to agreement based on compromise. The object of international negotiation is not necessarily to reach agreement; it is to advance the interests in an ambassador’s charge.) The topic of negotiation and the timing of initial overtures are set by the ambassador’s foreign ministry. The foreign ministry also specifies the diplomatic strategy to be used. Usually this is specific to the goals and circumstances. For example, the Marshal Plan, through which the United States provided several western and southern European countries with financial assistance after World War II, was the strategy used by the U.S. to pursue its goals in Europe in 1947. The foreign ministry also establishes broad tactics, often regarding initial demands, bargaining counters, and minimum final position. For the rest the negotiator, either an ambassador or a special envoy, is in most countries free to employ whatever tactics seem best.

These practices are fairly standard, though bilateral negotiations vary greatly and multilateral ones more so. The parties have common interests to negotiate over and areas of disagreement to negotiate about. There are two basic approaches: tackling issues piece by piece and establishing a framework of agreed principles at the outset. The latter works well, but, if it cannot be done, the piecemeal approach is necessary.

In most negotiations initial demands far exceed expectations; concessions are as small and as slow as possible, for early concession indicates eagerness and engenders demands for more concessions. There is intermittent testing of the other side’s firmness and will for an agreement. There may be indirection, lulling of the other party, and bluffing to gain an edge, though it is important for diplomats not to be caught bluffing. Lying in diplomatic negotiations is considered a mistake, but stretching or abridging the truth is permissible. Coercive diplomacy involving the threat of force is risky but cheaper than war; other coercive pressures may include the setting of conditions for concessions, such as debt rescheduling. Compensations to sweeten the offer, warnings, and threats speed agreement if well timed, as do deadlines, whether agreed, imposed by external events, or contained in ultimatums.

Negotiations vary according to whether the negotiating states are friends or foes, whether they are of similar or disparate power, whether they genuinely want agreement or are negotiating only for propaganda purposes or to avoid condemnation for refusing to negotiate, and whether their aim is to prolong an existing agreement or to change the status quo, perhaps redistributing benefits or ending hostilities. Some of the most difficult negotiations plow new ground, as do those that create new cooperative or regulatory institutions, such as the International Sea-Bed Authority, and those that transfer authority, such as the 1984 Sino-British agreement by which Chinese sovereignty over Hong Kong was restored in 1997.

Whatever the problem, the diplomatic negotiator must display reliability and credibility. He tries to create trust and seem both honest and fair. He must strive to understand the other side’s concerns. Stamina, precision, clarity, courage, patience, and an even temper are necessary, though calculated impatience or anger may be used as a tactic. A skilled negotiator has a sense of timing, knowing when to use threats, warnings, or concessions. Sometimes a third party is discreetly used to facilitate initial contact or to press the sides toward agreement. The negotiator must be persuasive, flexible, tenacious, and creative in devising new solutions or reframing issues from a new angle to convince the other party that agreement is in its interest. Smaller and easier issues are tackled first, building an area of agreement, which is then stressed to create a stake in success, whereas harder issues are postponed and played down. Through a process of proposal and counterproposal, inducement and pressure, the diplomat keeps talking and, in the last analysis, proceeds by trial and error.

Multilateral negotiations demand the same skills but are more complex. The process is usually protracted and fragmented, with subsidiary negotiations in small groups and occasional cooling-off periods. Skillful representatives of small states often play important roles. For example, American-led negotiations to end South African colonial rule in Namibia were significantly aided by Martti Ahtisaari, a notably able Finnish diplomat acting on behalf of the UN. During Ahtisaari’s term as president of Finland (1994–2000), he also helped bring about a peace settlement in Kosovo. The principal intermediary with the Iraqi government in an effort to secure the release of Western hostages during the Persian Gulf War (1990–91) was the UN’s Kofi Annan, a highly regarded career diplomat from Ghana who would later win the Nobel Prize for Peace as secretary-general of the UN. Decisions are reached by unanimity, majority, or consensus (to avoid voting). For simplicity, changes are often made to apply across the board, as with tariff cuts.

Iraq’s refusal to end its occupation of Kuwait peacefully in 1990 and the failure of Israel and the Palestinians from the mid-1990s to reach a negotiated settlement of their disputes are sad reminders that when negotiations fail, the consequences can be bloody. In the end, war, not words, remains the ultimate argument of the state. What cannot be decided by dialogue over a negotiating table is often left to be decided on the battlefield or in civil conflict.

Unit III