Online education

Summary

This panel discussion focused on unpacking competencies and equipping diplomats for success in a rapidly changing global landscape. Speakers from various diplomatic institutions and organizations shared insights on developing effective training programs and competency frameworks.

The discussion highlighted the importance of adapting diplomatic training to meet evolving challenges. Speakers emphasized the need for a balance between traditional diplomatic skills and new competencies required in the modern world, such as digital literacy and cross-cultural communication. The European Union Diplomatic Academy was presented as an example of innovative training, focusing on creating a European diplomatic mindset while respecting national identities.

Several speakers stressed the importance of practical, hands-on experience in diplomatic training. The Diplomatic Academy of Peru outlined a comprehensive approach to developing core competencies, including academic knowledge, diplomatic management, soft skills, and global understanding. The Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute shared its experience with regional cooperation through its Winter School of Diplomacy program.

The discussion also touched on the challenges of measuring success in diplomatic training and the need for alignment between training programs and human resource policies. Speakers agreed that while there is no universal competency model for diplomats, certain core skills remain essential across different contexts.

The importance of ethics, cultural sensitivity, and a commitment to global peace and development was emphasized, particularly by the representative from China’s Diplomatic Academy. Overall, the panel underscored the complex task of preparing diplomats for an uncertain future while maintaining the core values and skills of the profession.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The importance of competency frameworks and core diplomatic competencies in recruitment and development of diplomats

– The need for diplomatic training to evolve and adapt to changing global challenges

– The role of diversity, cultural awareness, and networking in diplomatic training

– The challenge of measuring success and effectiveness in diplomatic training programs

– Regional approaches to diplomatic training, such as the EU Diplomatic Academy and Bulgaria’s Winter School of Diplomacy

Overall purpose:

The purpose of this panel discussion was to explore best practices in diplomatic training, with a focus on developing key competencies and equipping diplomats for success in a rapidly changing global landscape. Panelists shared insights from their respective institutions and countries on approaches to diplomatic education and training.

Tone:

The overall tone was professional and collaborative, with panelists building on each other’s points and offering complementary perspectives. There was a sense of shared purpose in improving diplomatic training, despite differences in specific approaches. The tone remained consistent throughout, with panelists maintaining a constructive and forward-looking attitude in addressing challenges and opportunities in the field.

Speakers

– Jerome L’host: Trainer and consultant, senior fellow for UNITAR

– Muneera Khalifa Hamad: Director General of the Diplomatic Academy in the Kingdom of Bahrain

– Tanya Mihaylova: Director of the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute

– Federica Mogherini: Director of the College of Europe and the European Union Diplomatic Academy, former High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the European Union

– Julio Hernan Garro Galvez: Director of the Diplomatic Academy of Peru, Ambassador in the Peruvian Diplomatic Service

– Carlo Borghini: Assistant Secretary General for Executive Management at NATO

Additional speakers:

– Wang Zhiting: Vice-Chancellor of China Diplomatic Academy, former ambassador

Expanded Summary of Panel Discussion on Diplomatic Training and Competencies

This panel discussion, moderated by Jerome L’host, brought together experts from various diplomatic institutions and organizations to explore best practices in diplomatic training, with a focus on developing key competencies and equipping diplomats for success in a rapidly changing global landscape. The discussion highlighted the complex task of preparing diplomats for an uncertain future while maintaining the core values and skills of the profession.

Competency Frameworks and Core Diplomatic Skills

A central theme of the discussion was the importance of competency frameworks in the recruitment and development of diplomats. Speakers agreed that while there is no universal competency model for diplomats, certain core skills remain essential across different contexts. However, there was debate about the extent to which competency frameworks should be tailored to specific national or regional needs.

Muneera Khalifa Hamad, Director General of the Diplomatic Academy in the Kingdom of Bahrain, argued that competencies need to be tailored to each country’s specific needs and context. She emphasized the importance of institutional frameworks and human resource policies in supporting effective diplomatic training. This view was echoed by Julio Hernan Garro Galvez, Director of the Diplomatic Academy of Peru, who outlined a comprehensive approach to developing core competencies, including academic knowledge, diplomatic management, soft skills, and global understanding.

Federica Mogherini, Director of the College of Europe and the European Union Diplomatic Academy, presented a case for a unified European approach to diplomatic training. The European Union Diplomatic Academy focuses on developing European-specific competencies, with an emphasis on creating a European diplomatic mindset while respecting national identities. Mogherini highlighted the academy’s practice-oriented learning approach and the use of practitioners as lecturers.

Carlo Borghini, Assistant Secretary General for Executive Management at NATO, presented NATO’s new HR strategy, emphasizing the need for a diverse workforce with both traditional diplomatic skills and the ability to use advanced technologies. This perspective underscored the evolving nature of diplomatic work and the need for adaptable, multi-skilled diplomats.

Wang Zhiting, Vice-Chancellor of China Diplomatic Academy, discussed China’s approach to diplomatic training, emphasizing the importance of devotion to one’s country and mankind. He highlighted the moral dimensions of diplomacy and the importance of personal values in diplomatic work.

Adapting Diplomatic Training to Modern Challenges

Speakers emphasized the need for diplomatic training to evolve and adapt to changing global challenges. Tanya Mihaylova, Director of the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute, stressed the importance of balancing theoretical knowledge with practical exercises and simulations. She highlighted the role of regional cooperation in diplomatic training, sharing insights from Bulgaria’s Winter School of Diplomacy programme, which focuses on the Western Balkans and Black Sea region.

The discussion touched on the challenge of balancing generalist versus specialist training, particularly for smaller diplomatic services. Muneera Khalifa Hamad noted that neither approach is inherently better, and the best approach depends on the needs of the specific diplomatic service.

Practical Experience and Experiential Learning

Several speakers stressed the importance of practical, hands-on experience in diplomatic training. Federica Mogherini emphasized that experiential learning and living together are crucial for developing European diplomatic competencies. Julio Hernan Garro Galvez highlighted the importance of practical embassy management skills for new diplomats.

Measuring Success and Effectiveness

A significant challenge identified in the discussion was the difficulty of measuring success and evaluating the effectiveness of diplomatic training programmes. Muneera Khalifa Hamad raised this issue, highlighting the need for better evaluation methods to assess both the training programmes and the performance of diplomats in their roles.

Diversity, Cultural Awareness, and Networking

The importance of diversity, cultural awareness, and networking in diplomatic training was a recurring theme. Federica Mogherini noted that the intercultural dynamic within training groups is a crucial part of developing the right attitude for European diplomats. Tanya Mihaylova emphasized how diplomatic training can be used as a tool for regional cooperation, particularly in complex geopolitical regions.

Unresolved Issues and Future Directions

The discussion left several issues unresolved, including how to effectively measure the success of diplomatic training programmes, how to balance generalist and specialist training approaches, and how to best prepare diplomats for rapidly evolving global challenges and technological changes. These unresolved questions point to areas for future research and development in diplomatic training.

Conclusion

The panel discussion provided a comprehensive overview of current approaches to diplomatic training and competency development. While there was general agreement on the importance of practical experience, adaptable competency frameworks, and the need to foster regional and international understanding, differences emerged in specific approaches to training and the balance between traditional and modern diplomatic skills. The discussion highlighted the ongoing challenge of preparing diplomats for an increasingly complex and rapidly changing global landscape while maintaining the core values and skills of the diplomatic profession.

In his closing remarks, Jerome L’host mentioned UNITAR’s involvement in developing competency frameworks and noted the time constraints that prevented a Q&A session at the end of the panel.

Jerome L’host: We’ll start in about ten minutes. Are we all complete here with the panellists? I think we’re still missing one who should be joining us and all right, so well, there’s an additional guest actually, but that’s fine, I believe the person is in the audience now and all right, so let’s get started. So Excellencies, esteemed guests, and ladies and gentlemen, this is my pleasure to welcome you to the first panel of a series of panels dedicated to a mastery of diplomatic competencies and we’re glad to welcome you on this panel dedicated to unpacking competencies and equipping people for success. I think it’s been already mentioned this morning during the opening speech that competencies need to be acquired, developed, and of course the expertise and the talent can make the difference. We will be exploring the importance of competency frameworks and core diplomatic competencies in both recruitment and future developments. And the following presentations and concrete cases will be highlighting the necessity of equipping diplomats to become knowledgeable, skilled, adaptable, and effective professionals. We will now be examining the best practice from multilateral settings in order to understand how to attract and develop the best talents. My name is Jerome L’host, I’m a trainer and a consultant, I’m a fellow, senior fellow for UNITAR. I’ve been collaborating with UNITAR now for about 15 years, I’ve lost count, I think, and working with the UN and the private sector as an expert and consultant for about 30 years. So it is my pleasure now to ask our panelist and guest speaker to introduce themselves. Perhaps we could start at the end of our panel here, and about three minutes to introduce yourselves.

Muneera Khalifa Hamad: Sure, I’ll be briefer than three minutes in introducing myself, I’ll try to be. My name is Muneera , I’m the Director General of the Diplomatic Academy in the Kingdom of Bahrain. I’m very happy to be here, I think we’ve been active members of the IFBT for quite some time, so I think we are also part of the alumni that keep coming back. We keep coming back because we feel like this platform, especially in this day and age, is also a very important platform where we can engage and reflect together in open space, openly about the challenges that we face, and how we could produce better diplomats. I have prepared a lot of jumbled thoughts, hoping that it will trigger further conversation, and it’s not a presentation, so when we get to my point, forgive me from the beginning, because I’m just hoping that I actually trigger a lot of confusion. That is my main purpose. Thank you.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. Over to you, please.

Tanya Mihaylova: Thank you very much. I would like to thank organizers and to say that I feel at home, and this is because I’m from Bulgaria. I’m Director of the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute, so I feel in the neighborhood here, and this is our neighborhood. I represent the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute, which combines training, research, and public diplomacy. It was established 20 years ago, and we try to work in those three activities in coherence. I would like to add also the project activities of the Diplomatic Institute and the network that we build all over the world, and I would like to say how happy I am to participate for the 12th time in the IFDT format in different places in the world. I learned a lot, and I really would like to encourage all of you that are participating for the first time to encourage the others, because this is a place to exchange knowledge and practice, and I’m going to focus later one of the examples that we have at the Diplomatic Institute, our Winter School of Diplomacy. A few words about myself. I’ve been appointed as Director 12 years ago, but I joined the Diplomatic Service 22 years ago, and I have an experience in the Diplomatic Institute from different perspectives as Head of Research Program and as Director, and I would like, of course, to thank Ron Ton, who has been mentoring the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute since the very beginning, and what we learned in methodology and implementing the methodology in the training, we really thank you very much for this Tutu Klingendau. And I’m a lawyer as education, but I joined the Diplomatic Service. I’m not a career diplomat, but nowadays behind me a lot of experience, and today I’m a member of the Steering Committee of the European Security and Defense College, and the Steering Committee of the European Union Diplomatic Academy as well, as a national representative, and also we deal at the Institute with the European Institute for Security Studies. So this is so far. Thank you very much for being together, and I believe the panel will provoke you in a way, and we’ll have some discussion after that.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much.

Federica Mogherini: Thank you. Well, it’s a pleasure to be here. It’s my first time, not in Montenegro for sure, but it’s the first time that I attend such a gathering. I’m very pleased to do so. My name is Federica Mogherini. I am today Director of the College of Europe and the Director of the European Union Diplomatic Academy, which is not a pilot project anymore, but I’ll tell you more about that later. Since 2020, I am the Director of the College of Europe in Bruges. We have three campuses, one in Bruges with 350 students, one in Warsaw in Poland with 120 students, and we just opened a brand-new campus in Tirana, Albania, next door, with 32 pioneering students, and we have – we are a postgraduate institute on European studies. So our students come from 50 nationalities more or less, but they all focus on European affairs, and many of them afterwards become diplomats. But in my intervention afterwards, I will focus more on the European Union Diplomatic Academy, but I just wanted to say a few words about the college and what it is. On myself, before joining the College of Europe in 2020, I was High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of the European Union, Vice President of the European Commission. Many people ask me how is it to jump from the institutions to academia. It’s great. I love it. I’m not a diplomat, but I’ve been working with diplomats all my life, because before being High Representative of the EU, I was Italian Minister of Foreign Affairs, and before that I was in the Italian parliament in the Foreign Affairs and in the Defense Committee for eight years. So both from national parliaments, national governments, or EU institutions, I’ve been dealing with diplomats all my life, and now I try to help them, giving the best of themselves. And that’s all. And I’m Italian, by the way. I’m Italian, ten years in Brussels, Belgium now, so that’s me.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. Over to you, please.

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez: Thank you so much. My name is Julio Carro. I’m the Director of the Diplomatic Academy of Peru. As required by law, I’m an ambassador in the Peruvian Diplomatic Service. The Diplomatic Academy of Peru, Javier Pérez de Cuella, is an academically independent institution, and as such, it grants master’s degrees recognized by the university system of Peru after completion of its two-year program. Administratively, on the other hand, it is linked to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Center for Professional Training and Research, and all its graduates are incorporated to the Peruvian Diplomatic Service as third secretaries. In this double capacity for the last 69 years already, it has been responsible for recruiting, training, and educating the applicants to the Diplomatic Service of Peru, and we have focused on the study and research on diplomacy, international relations, and Peruvian foreign policy. It’s also responsible in conjunction with the Human Resources Directorate of the Ministry on the updating of its members during their career, and also in preparing the promotion exams. So we have a huge responsibility in the field of recruiting and exercising the permanent training of the diplomats. diplomats of the Peruvian Diplomatic Service. I myself, I have been a diplomat for quite a time already. I have served in several of our embassies and the ministry, and now I have changed to academic activities, which is also a changed, challenging. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much.

Carlo Borghini: Thank you. Good morning. My name is Carlo Borghini. I’m a bit different type of stakeholder here, because I’m not coming from the Diplomatic Institute, but I’m one of the major beneficiaries of the work you do, especially the Diplomatic Services in our 32 Allied Nations, because I represent the Secretary General of NATO. I’m an Assistant Secretary General for Executive Management. The title is complex, but at the end, I’m the advisor to the Secretary General on all the management issues inside the organization. So I have a responsibility for what we call the corporate services in the organization. I’ve been working 20 years-plus in the European institution, finishing as Chief Executive of one of the major agencies. I had the honor to work with Federica Mogherini when she was in office, as well as many other colleagues in the past. And as much as I’ve learned on the field the diplomatic and the world of diplomacy, I am a manager. So I came from merger acquisition, where I spent my initial 10 years of career. And this remained with me a lot, and I will speak about it also when I will have the opportunity later on. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much, Mr. Borghini, and just a few words about how the session is going to unroll. We’re going to have our successive panelists presenting for about eight minutes, and it will be followed by questions and answers briefly. We still have a bit of time at the end of the four panelists, a bit of time for Q&A. But first I’m giving the floor now to Mr. Borghini for the opening speech here. Yes, you can be there.

Carlo Borghini: Thank you. Again, me. So I will not say any more anything. I will give a short presentation on what we are doing in NATO to give the framework under which I will also explain why the need and competencies. The title of the event, Unleash the Competencies of the Young Talent, is a fundamental one. We have a new Secretary General since one week now, is Mark Rutte, who will take over from Jens Stoltenberg after 10 years. It’s not only the 50th anniversary of this event, it’s the 75th anniversary of NATO, and 20th anniversary, 25th anniversary of nation that joined NATO in between. Secretary General Rutte, when took over the office, established three key priorities that are nothing so new, but they are shaped in a quite different manner. The first one is about the role of NATO in reinforcing the role of NATO in order to provide defense and deterrence and ensure crisis management in the transatlantic area. But I will come back to this because the problem are becoming global to a certain extent. The second is about Ukraine, the unwavering support to Ukraine that has been stated also by his visit the second, the third days he was in office with President Zelenskyy. And clearly there are different actions we are bringing forward to support Ukraine in their work defending from brutal aggression. And the fourth is about partnership. European partnership is becoming one essential element in the geopolitical situation, starting with the partnership with the European Union, that is one – 23 allied nations of NATO are also member states of the European Union, and – but especially also with other like-minded nations around the world, in Asia Pacific, South Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, the countries in the Western Balkans beyond the membership we have, and other elements. When you look at the three objectives, I think as we said this morning, we have some cross-cutting issues that we have to deal with – climate change, pandemic, civil type, immigration, economic security, value chains. All this is across, is delocalized, so it’s not the transatlantic area, it’s global. And all these influence each other. And this is – there is something else. Someone mentioned, I think Ambassador Ischinger this morning mentioned, risk management, how we will be able to anticipate what we don’t know. It’s easy to know and to replicate history, but what we will – what we don’t know is not what – we don’t know how we manage it. And risk management, I’ve been working in my – beginning of my career, I continue to do this. I manage the organization, looking at things, which are the risks I don’t know, which are how I can protect the Secretary General, the allied nations, in order to ensure that we continue our mandate to defend, deter, to create security and peace in the world. And this is important because it requires a specific workforce. Often NATO is being considered a military organization. I think many people also in the academic world look at NATO as a military organization, and we are not. We are a political military decision. All decision to activate the famous Article 5 and Article 4 become from a political decision that is taken in the Council with the 32 allied nations around the table chaired by the Secretary General. So we have adopted a new HR strategy. When I joined, I joined 18 months ago, and at the beginning of this year we have adopted a new HR strategy that is built on the concept of a diverse workforce in all its form, and this cover clearly gender, religion, sexual orientation, cultural, ethnicity, especially with particular attention to equitable geographical distribution, because we need to have an alliance in organizational level that represents the allied nation around the table, the one billion people we are defending. Clearly, all this is based on the principle of merit that remain the most important merit. As I said, during the past year, the organization grew up exactly with the image of military organization, fundamentally making use of the stuff coming from the military forces, and they brought a lot of professionalization in this respect. But now we realize that we need to have something different. We need to be able to deal with the change type of the recruitment we are doing to face all this cross-cutting activity. We need to have diplomatic people able to do policy analysis, to understand the body language of the enemies or the friends, but they need to do and be able also to make use of advanced technologies, solutions to understand the geopolitical situation, decrypt it, anticipate risk, and anticipate opportunities to ensure peace and security. It’s not a question that we need to have all digital engineers being able to make artificial intelligence or quantum computing or whatever will come up from the technology. For this, we have the industry and we have the knowledge. We do our core business in security, defense, and crisis management. We need to have the people with the diplomatic skills capable to make use of this tool more and more to anticipate this risk and opportunity in a manner that they are able to take advantage of these technologies. So we are looking at a workforce, fundamentally, that collectively is capable to bring together this type of knowledge. It’s not a question of one individual, but collectively we need to have the diplomatic new talents being able to bring inside this knowledge to cover all the full spectrum of activities within the alliance. So they need to come up with their intrinsic skills coming from diplomacy together with the new skills to understand how the world works, from social media, fusion of data. We talked before about misinformation. Fundamentally, misinformation, there is no one single answer to misinformation. The real problem is who we can trust, which is the source we can trust at the end. And this is a continual type of exercise that requires to be able to take information from movies, from everything, any type of source, that when you bring together the data, you can understand the strategic approach that anyone around the world can put in place, which type of value chain are established, which type of raw material are established, and so on and so on. We do also something more, because it’s not sufficient to acquire new talent. We need to retrain our people internally. So we are collaborating with different institutes. We have three or four important programs, a NATO executive development program for what we call the iFLYers, and we have already the 15th anniversary of the training. Every year we have 25 people participating to it. We have a management development program. We have a senior leadership training program. But also with regard to the young talent, we have a young talent group, resource group, exactly with the objective to listen how is the vision of the young talent. And this is something for us really important. They will challenge us. The UK Diplomatic Service, I’ve been told, when an ambassador is appointed, has a conversation with the young people, and they will decide if the person is fit for the job. Quite interesting. But that’s exactly what we are. This I think is really where we need to change. And I’ve launched something else. I’ve launched what we call NATO Square Ways of Working. So we are looking at how we will be working differently at all levels in the organization in the future. And for this, we need to count on your work to provide us the resources to be capable to benefit from it. Attractiveness, preparedness of candidates, and retraining is really what we want to achieve, building upon skills that are not anymore this classical scheme, but hybrid solution and hybrid possibilities. So to conclude, when I look at Bill Burns’ 10 points that were presented this morning, I was thinking how this will fit with a new young talent that doesn’t speak, doesn’t communicate because he communicates via social media, he doesn’t use the phone, they don’t use the phone. And also myself, when I joined NATO, was surprised because I’ve been working in European institutions where we are using social media internally, teams, digital meetings, and I started to use the phone again, and it was really quite a strange thing for me. But how all this will work with the objective we have and the cultural environment that we have in our society. So we are looking forward to working together, and please help us to shape a peaceful, secure, sustainable world for the future of humankind, built upon rule of law and ethical values. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much, Mr. Borghini. If there is any question, a quick question, we have a bit of time. If there is a comment or a question you would like to ask before our next panelist, be good. Perfect. Thank you very much. So, Ms. Federica, you are next. If you wish to present from where you are or from the pupil, it’s your choice.

Federica Mogherini: I can also stay here as I’m checking my phone for my time. I forgot to mention two important things when I was presenting myself. One is that, indeed, the College of Europe shares the same anniversary date with NATO and with the Council of Europe to celebrate its 75th anniversary. So the College of Europe was born before the European institutions actually to form the generations that would have created the European Union. And I have a terrible cold. It’s not COVID. So I have to wear a mask before coming, but I apologize for my voice and for my performance in general and also to reassure you that it should not be contagious. But you will find out in a couple of days, I guess. So today I will not share with you a theory, but I thought the best thing for me is to share with you what I believe is a best practice or a good experiment that we have built together with, by the way, many in this room in the last two years. As you – I told you, you probably already know, since two years the European Union has decided to establish a European Union Diplomatic Academy. For two years it was a pilot project. As of this semester, this academic year, it’s a fully-fledged project that is here to stay with the steering committee with member states represented. And we have been implementing and running this project now for two years. Three cohorts, more or less 100 alumni already have gone through this program. And I thought that the best use of my time would be to tell you what we do there and how we do it, and what we’ve seen works in this kind of environment, and why there is a need for sometimes some creative approaches to training of diplomats. And I would start – my starting point would be the very first point of those ten that we were reminded about this morning. And that is the fundamental question that a diplomat has to ask himself or herself is do – who do I represent? And if you work for the European Union, this is an interesting question. What is my position? What is the position I’m representing outside? And this is the biggest difference between a national diplomat and a European diplomat, even if you can discuss if a national European diplomat is a European diplomat, but this is another story. If a diplomat works for the European Union, he or she has not only to represent a position, a foreign policy position or an interest, he or she also has to shape or help shaping the policy, because you have to negotiate twice, once internally and once externally. You have to get to a position, and then you have to make it work in the rest of the world. So we have identified that there is a layer of knowledge, of skills, of networking, of attitudes that is complementary and needed for a national diplomat to be able to work as a European Union diplomat. And that is something that no national diplomatic academy in the member states provide, because if you are trained as a diplomat in a member state of the European Union, you’re trained to represent your own country in the European Union internally. But nobody trains anyone to work on the external work of the European Union. So what we do basically in Bruges is to – in Belgium – is to gather junior diplomats of member states. We’ve done it also with candidate countries for the first promotion, and we hope and we aim at restarting that again in the future. Also with also young diplomats from the Balkans, from Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, and Turkey. We have them living together for five months, which is a social experiment in itself. And we train them for five months, 30 hours a week of modules in class. It’s groups of maximum 30 people, so very small and interactive, with a program that covers all the fundamentals of the EU external action – the foreign policy, the security and defense policy, but also the geographical areas, the skills, but also what traditionally is not covered in, let’s say, foreign policy on diplomacy, which is everything else, which is much bigger than the traditional foreign policy today, being it economics, trade, communication, social media, public diplomacy is much more than press conference today, partnerships, EU-NATO, EU-UN. We basically cover – try to cover in five months everything that the European Union does externally. And how do we do it? First, working on the different layers of knowledge, attitude, skills, and networking. These are the four elements that we identify as key elements for the curriculum. It’s not only knowledge-based. We assume that diplomats have already gone through their training process, they’re already trained, they’re already skilled and knowledgeable. But we try to build these other niches of both knowledge, skills, attitude, and networking. We work a lot on the creation of the network, because we have seen that in particular working on the external action of the European Union, what you need is to understand the dynamic of the inter-institutional play. Which institution does what? I know that this is something also very difficult to understand for the partners of the European Union from the outside, but also for Europeans. Who takes the decision? Is it the commission? Is it the parliament? Is it the council? Which level? How much time it takes? The complexity of the machinery is very tough to understand. It’s even tougher to operate within it. And it’s not necessarily a job of an ambassador. I always have in my mind an anecdote of a top diplomat of a member state that has really top diplomatic service, that after having served the European Union external action service for a few months, came to my office when I was a representative and told me, almost crying, Federica, I need this job, it’s not my job, and I’m an ambassador. And he was right. Working inside the European Union is a different job than being a bilateral ambassador or a national ambassador of a country. We focus on the creation of the network, because this is what helps them then running their activities and their job after they finish the training. We focus on – and for that, the living together part is, as much as it might sound weird, is a fundamental element, because they not only have classes together six hours a day, but they also eat together, they have social activities together, they spend weekends together, and they learn from each other much more than sometimes they learn from lecturers. The fundamental element on which we focus, and then I’ll stop, is the focus on practice. The College of Europe, which is the implementing of this academy, is a contribution to our efforts to help academics delivering the modules. Actually, we are doing the contrary. Eighty percent of the modules are taught by practitioners, either former officials or current officials, from different institutions – diplomats, officials of the commission – at different levels – top management, ambassadors, secretary generals. We have ministers, we have commissioners, former ministers or commissioners, but also desk officers or heads of units, because this way they can see the entire spectrum of the decision-making, how the decisions are formed and implemented. Everything is chatter-mouse. All participants are not representing their own institutions, but just sharing their personal opinion and experience, and in this way focus on the reality of how things are really happening. Because everybody can read the treaty, especially diplomats should be able to read the EU Fundamental Treaties, everybody should be aware of how it functions in theory, but it’s very hard to know how it functions. in reality, and so what we’re trying to do is to give the first-hand experience of those who live those experiences in different roles, honestly and candidly, also having a reality check of what you might not like to hear, but still it’s there, so that you’re prepared to face it and to act into that environment. So the practice-oriented focus is for us, it’s proven to be very, very useful. A participant told me at the end of one of the programs, the cycles, it’s like having two ears in Brussels squeezed into five months of training, and I think this is a sign of success. I’ll stop here, I’m happy to interact and exchange and answer your questions or comments. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much, Mr. Mogherini, and I think the experiential learning experience here is something that we can take away, and there are probably questions now, we have the time for that. Comments and questions are not welcome. Yes, please.

Audience: Yeah, okay, good morning, thank you very much for your introduction. You mentioned that you’re training the diplomats on knowledge, attitude, skills, and networking, and I was wondering how do you train the attitude, and what type of tools you use for that? And yes, my name is Anca Montan, I’m from the Geneva Center for Security Policy, and we do three others, knowledge, skills, and networking, attitude is something new, and I was wondering how you do it. Thank you very much.

Federica Mogherini: I’m afraid I cannot yet probably answer your question on a very solid, solidly constructed theory, but what I can share with you is what we do in practice, and maybe at a certain moment we will be able to consolidate this into something that is shareable in a methodology, a solid framework. The attitude is indeed probably the most innovative part of what we’re doing, and it comes together with the need for a European diplomat to negotiate internally. So the attitude comes from the intercultural dynamic within the group. We have the 27 member states, nationalities, so a lot of what we do is about intercultural learning within the European Union, and the attitude of thinking European, acting European, without losing the national background, because they’re national diplomats. So that is the attitude on which we are working, the attitude skills, I would say, that we are trying to develop the most, and we do that mainly with exercises, group exercises, individual exercises, in class, orally written, and yes, it’s probably something that is still in the testing and that hopefully you’re actually, with your question, giving me a good idea, we might at a certain point consolidate that into a methodology toolkit that we could be able to share. It’s mainly, the reasoning around that is mainly how you develop a European attitude, starting from a national identity, without losing it, because this is the peculiarity of the thing, a European diplomat is also a national diplomat, and the question of who am I comes very often, who am I, who am I serving, which is my loyalty link, and which is the strongest one, and which is the attitude that you need to create consensus within the system. All that we heard about negotiations today, I was noticing, is about bilateral negotiation, I’m representing one side against another. In the European system, the negotiations are to create consensus, so it’s a completely different mindset.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. A comment or a question?

Carlo Borghini: I can share my experience as a former official of the European Commission, and I can say that having worked in the institution, in different institutions, by the way, of the European Union, there is a strong culture inside, as Federica Mogherini was saying, about the corporate culture of European institutions that is permeated, I think, to the world also, to a certain extent, and I think the experience shared also by the officials that come to speak at this group, for sure, let this experience, this concept of going through the process, is something that, for people like me who have been working in institutions, but also in agencies and other bodies, I’ve always realized that there is this corporate core activity we are doing together, thinking and something like this, and at the same time it’s something that we need to challenge regularly, because collective thinking can be dangerous, especially in a geopolitical situation like this, so it’s a really difficult balance, I think, to develop people. In NATO we have the same cultural problem, because having a large majority of people coming from the same community, large part military community, they have a way of thinking that is quite particular, and we need to challenge them also in a different type of situation. If you go back to the pre-invasion days, how many were thinking that it would not be possible, and so on and so on, so the attitude of people is really something that you build up without a mathematical way, most probably, but the transfer of knowledge is a fundamental one. Thank you.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. And maybe one last question, over to you please. I’m the ruthless time manager, so the next panelist will be talking after this question.

Audience: Thank you. Federica Mogherini, this is a very special case, because all of the colleagues here, they have national objectives, and they have to find equipping people for success for their nation. Your task is more difficult, because you have to accept that there are 27 different cultural backgrounds and ideas which have political impact, but at the same time you have to create something like a common spirit. How difficult is it, sitting on the fence between the national spirit and the European spirit, and do you feel among the participants this difference? Do you see the political movement of Hungary has a problem with the European Union? Do you feel it in the group?

Federica Mogherini: This is a wonderful question, because it touches exactly the most delicate elements of the human perception. And yes, we do feel it. We spent the first week focusing a lot on this, but it’s almost psychological. Sometimes we feel we’re doing therapy together, all together. I spend a lot of time with them directly. Because the question of who I am comes out very strongly. Some of the participants come with a very idealistic vision of the European Union and feel frustrated because then they have the reality check of some things they don’t like, and they didn’t think about that. Some others feel challenged in their national identity, because being in the same room and in the same group and in the same course with colleagues that are all Europeans but have all prejudices about other Europeans, because we grow with ideas that we associate with countries, and sometimes they are rooted in reality. This is one fundamental aspect that we try to deal with in the very first week. And it needs a lot of work to, first of all, get out the pre-assumptions, I would say, that we associate with how a German, a French or an Italian relate to Russia rather than an Estonian or a Polish. There are things that need to come out in the very beginning of the process, as much as other elements that are unspoken around the official institutional tables but are there in our minds and in our practices all the time. Sorry, I made one example because it’s always the most obvious. But we deal with that, having them talking about that openly and stressing from the very beginning, all the time, that they are there in their personal capacity. They are not representing their institution, they are not representing their ministry, they are there as participants to a training. So they have to be free, they have to feel free to speak their minds, but they also have to know that whatever they say, they are carrying a history and a geography that has an impact on what they are doing, and the others will perceive that. And that is part of the European Union game. Whenever you sit around the table, even if you are a EU official, you might say the country I know best, because in the European Union we don’t say my country, we say the country I know best, because we pretend we are all Europeans. Which is a little bit hypocritical, but still, I like to use it because I’m not sure it’s a country I know best. But this element of being open and bringing up elements of nationalities and prejudices and perceptions is a big, big part of the exercise. And we deal with that telling them, you are individuals participating to a training, you are not sitting here representing your ministry, even if it’s not always real easy.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. And now, in the interest of time, we need to move to the next panel. So, Ambassador Ruggiero, you can do it from the pupil or from the chair as you wish, yes. I do believe you have a PowerPoint you would like to use?

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez: Yes, I do.

Jerome L’host: All right.

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez: Okay, it’s there, thank you. Thank you so much. Well, to begin with the confessions, I have to confess a two-day travel and a horrible eight hours jet lag, so if I say something dumb, you’ll excuse me. We are in good shape. Yeah, this is a pandemic, very good shape. Okay, so to begin with, at a difference from the previous speakers, this is a national school. The Diplomatic Academy of Peru is a national school and we have a quite different mission of the one. I’m going to present you on the new program that we’re working out for the school, taking in the global context that we understand that is rapidly changing and especially unpredictable. So, we have to prepare our students for this environment at which they will have to make their career to replace us because that’s basically what’s going to happen. They are going to be sitting where we are now in a few years’ time. So, we have prepared this training proposal update that I’m going to present to you and I have organized the ideas into competencies and the equipment to get these competencies. The competencies, we organized them around these four areas that you can see there. A basic academic knowledge, diplomatic management, soft skill, and what we get to know for lack of a better name, global understanding. I will develop them in a few minutes. But first, I’d like to mention how do we get to these four areas or competencies because I think that’s important. Maybe it will be helpful to you too. We have extensive consultations about what do our people thought about what’s needed and these consultations included former alumni, for example. The gentleman was talking about young diplomats. We get together with former alumni of the school who were coming back from their first postings abroad and we asked them what from what you learned in the school was useful to you and what didn’t help you. We asked ambassadors and the top brass of the ministry what does the younger generations need to know if you don’t find. We get together with former teachers of the school. We talk to civil society and businessmen. You travel abroad, are they useful or not, the diplomats you get to know, and so on and so forth. Finally, we get a consultancy, a specific consultancy, which was very helpful and they were specializing on that. These four competencies, the first one is what we call the academic knowledge, which is the basic academic knowledge, what diplomats will always need to know to be complete diplomats and function as diplomats and know about the Peruvian foreign policy in the interest of Peru abroad. This is what diplomats have always studied and will probably always be studying in diplomatic school. But then we found that this was not completely, that was not complete. Then we found that a lot of what was necessary for the diplomats to do is diplomatic management. Specific regulations and procedures, tools to manage their role as diplomatic functionaries. Ambassadors will always complain, okay, this new secretary that you sent me is an expert in foreign policy law and this, but I need him on basic stuff running the embassy and he’s completely useless. Happens a lot, happens a lot. We heard it, genius, he can read words and all that, but the embassy, nothing. Finally, soft skills. The world now needs a challenging professional environment at which these new functionaries and even mid-careers can exercise leadership role. Leadership role is one of the main basic principles in which diplomats we think should be able to perform, of course, in accordance with their rank. A third secretary can be a leader if he’s able to convince his ambassador on a particular course of action. An ambassador, a consular can also be a leader if he is able to formulate policy guides that are useful to the embassy or to the ministry in the area at which he’s working, even though he’s not the one taking the final decision. We heard Ambassador Relations this morning talking about that, if he proposes solutions, of course. Finally, the global understanding. The global understanding is what we thought, how these students are going to be aware of the international agenda now and what are the challenges that they will be faced in their immediate career. One, they have to perform. This is basically what we want the graduate profile to look like. So the graduate from our school should have these competencies. Now, what’s the equipment to follow the reasoning of this panel? What’s the equipment you have to give them to apply those competencies? There are some things that are basic. As I mentioned, basic academic knowledge are the first thing. From now on, you move on. We, many of you have already gone this path already, but we thought, and I engage on what Ms. Mogherini mentioned, what would be an experimental experience. We thought that we were not going to wait until we have a complete picture of what our methodology and what the system is going to be, and we’ll begin with what we have. And then we have already begun with some other parts of our proposal of this equipment. The second one regarding diplomatic management. And then we went to very practical stuff, but our students need to be knowledgeable. The embassy management, the specific embassy management. How do you hire and fire people? In prison, because you get in trouble if you do it wrong. Cooperation, economic promotion, cultural promotion, product, consular management. the nitty-gritty jobs of the embassy that you are going to be doing once you graduate. The soft skills are now the most important abilities that everybody probably needs in the job-related environment, but a job for young people may be challenging. It is said that young people are very performing in digital media, for example, but how do you translate that in diplomatic use? That’s not that easy. That’s not that easy, and that’s where you need to find, for example, the difficult question is how you find specific teachers that can do and teach those courses, for example, oral and written communication, digital skills, teamwork and networking, what we were talking about, strategic thinking, negotiation. That’s an easy one, but maybe decision-making and ethics. Ethics. How can you not have a diplomat who has been trained in that? And crisis management. At least in Peru, that’s your daily bread. You have crisis every day. But then you have to find specific teachers and faculty that can translate those abilities in diplomatic environments and people who are able to design syllabi adapted to the diplomatic environment and the diplomatic course that you’re going to be needing. Finally, there’s one more. Okay, this is what we call the global engagement, which has basically two parts, regions and global changes. And then what we do is have them acquainted what is going on in the principal regions of the world that are of interest for Peru. Latin America, the first, the global north, the emerging countries, and the global south. Those are the main areas. Each one, on one semester, six areas, different methodology. And the global changes, and the global challenges is the main problems that they will probably face in the immediate future, or at least in the first years of their career, again, from the Peruvian interests. Technology, climate, diversity and identity, transnational organized crime, international security, and migrations. That makes that makes a curricula in which the colors can show the colors we use in the presentations, the ones who refer to the essential fields, the diplomatic engagement, the soft skills, and the global understanding. This is more or less the way in which we have organized this new update of our training proposal. And the final comment, at least in a quite conservative institution as it is ours, you have to know what to change and what not to change. So, be careful with what you meddle, because otherwise, maybe you won’t go anywhere. Thank you so much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you, Ambassador Garro. And we have a limited time for questions, unless you want to be late for lunch. But we have a question here.

Audience: Thank you very much. Thank you, Director, for this beautiful presentation, which made me realize that there is an element that I need to ask to our moderator, because this is his speciality. You know, we are using the words competencies, skills, and abilities. Can you shed a light, very quickly, what are the definitions and how do they complement each other? Thank you.

Jerome L’host: Yes, thank you. Thank you very much. Maybe I should start apologizing on behalf of the consulting community, who has probably created a lot of confusion around the terms. You will find – by the way, the acronym is well known in the Gulf countries, because it stands for KSA, and knowledge, skills, and sometimes also attitude, not always abilities. We also mentioned the A for awareness, because training also is supposed to be creating awareness by giving them feedback and making them realize where they start from and where they need to go to. So, ability is one of the possible interpretations of this acronym that is well known in training and development. And now training is also associated not only to development of competencies, but also assessment of competencies to identify – and I believe this is the objective of any academy, or these five months of a boot camp in the beginning, to also identify those who are the most promising elements in an academy. So, ability could be – I mean, the whole KSA is what we call a competence in general, but there might be different definitions depending on which consulting firm you’ve been working with. McKinsey, Accenture, or PCW may have different definitions. It’s a bit of a confusion here. But in general, this is the competence, yes. Does that answer the question? All right, good. And yes, okay, very good. For the sake of time, I think we need to move on, and I think this is – yeah, your turn, yes.

Muneera Khalifa Hamad: Good afternoon. If you allow me, I prefer to stand. I have a strap around my wrist that will judge me harshly at the end of the day if I sit for too long. Distinguished guests, I have the honor, obviously, of participating in this panel amongst such esteemed experts and practitioners. This, as I mentioned earlier, this is not our first IFDT meeting that we attended. The first IFDT meeting that we attended was in DC. It was less than a year after we established the Diplomatic Institute, and quite honestly speaking, having conversations with people who have operated within this industry for quite some time was one of the most interesting and useful conversations that we had. So, thank you very much for that opportunity and for continuously creating this platform for us. I prepared my notes for this panel, and I prepared with the aim to be relevant, concise, and useful. So, I’ll start by identifying what I have consciously sought not to do, to repeat what has already been discussed in former IFDT panels, and thereby being redundant, to showcase what we have successfully achieved in Bahrain. I’ve done this in previous years, and I’m happy to do so on a one-on-one basis, to give you insight that you can gain in less than five seconds on ChatGPT. I did this exercise a couple of days ago to ask ChatGPT for relevant competency frameworks for diplomacy, and then to make it more relevant for small island states, and it gave me a very, very impressive answer. So, wish me luck, since I’ll try to be more useful than AI. What I tried my best to do, on the other hand, is to raise points for actual discussion, engagement, and reflection on how best we can be more effective in diplomatic training. So, there are two main parts in my intervention today, which are based on the title of the panel, unpacking competencies, and then equipping people for success. On unpacking competencies, my first point that I’d like to raise is that there are key variables that matter in impacting how we unpack competencies, how we choose the competencies that work best for our diplomatic corps, how we design courses based on these competencies, and if I was to tackle the question of is there a universal competency model for training diplomats, my answer would be a clear no. It varies. Look around you in less than a minute while conversing with your colleagues, you will reach to this conclusion. And to further elaborate on this point, I’ll choose the variable of size. I think it goes without saying that this is one of the most important factors in determining how a country structures its diplomatic training programs, particularly in the debate over whether diplomats should be trained as generalists or specialists. For countries with relatively small diplomatic representation, such as Bahrain, with limited diplomatic personnel, training diplomats as generalists often makes the most sense. These diplomats need to be versatile. They may be called upon to represent their country in a wide range of areas, from trade negotiations to peace talks to dealing with the endless range of consular affairs, and to manage the embassy, of course. They also have to be proficient in the administrative financial aspects. They have to be able to produce a budget, act as auditors, manage the affairs of local staff. So because of the constraints of size, we can’t afford to put our diplomats on, say, a pure political or consular track, which impacts how we have defined our own competency framework. And since our inception, we were clear that our entire training philosophy is going to be geared towards producing a well-rounded diplomat. You know, even our foreign minister likes to say that we need a diplomat that is a jack-of-all-trades and a master of all. And as you might imagine, this is not an easy task of either the diplomats or ourselves as diplomatic trainers, and so we in the academy are slightly more realistic in our expectation, and we rephrase it as a jack-of-all-trades and a master of at least one. Of course, we do offer specialised training on a range of matters, from regional geopolitics to climate affairs, but this builds on a solid foundation of competency-based training that is essentially generalist in nature. But here’s the thing. Neither approach is inherently better than the other. Both generalist and generalist training certainly have their advantages, and the best approach depends entirely on the needs of the diplomatic service in question. Countries with smaller diplomatic corps may prioritise versatility and the ability to adapt to different roles, while larger countries can afford to cultivate deep expertise in key areas. My second point on competencies is that we’ve moved away from knowledge-based learning, and we’ve agreed that success in diplomatic training strikes a balance between competencies, knowledge, skill, KSA, and character-building. Diplomacy is a profession that brings together people from all walks of life, each with their own unique perspectives, experiences, and worldviews. This diversity is one of the key strengths of the diplomatic community, but it can also present a challenge for training programs, and this is not only in the multilateral setting. Diplomatic services are becoming increasingly diverse, not just in terms of nationality, but also in terms of ethnicity, gender, socio-economic background, and educational experience. This diversity is a tremendous asset, as it brings a wide range of perspectives to the table, but diplomats come to the table with different strengths, weaknesses, and ways of seeing the world. For instance, a diplomat who has spent their career working in a multilateral organisation will have a very different perspective than someone who has focused on bilateral negotiations. The challenge for a diplomatic training program is to find a way to harness this diversity, while ensuring that all diplomats, regardless of their background, are equipped with the core skills they need to succeed. This is where a competency framework comes into play. At the same time, it’s important to recognise that while diplomats may come from different backgrounds, they must also be able to present a unified front when representing their country. Diplomats may have different perspectives on an issue. We in the Middle East know quite a bit about this, but when it comes to engaging in negotiations or representing their country in international forums, they must speak with one voice. This is why cohesion is such an important element of diplomatic training. Diplomats need to be able to work together as a team, even when they come from different backgrounds or have different approaches. An example of how we’ve tried to do so, we’ve tried, is to create a safe space for a debate on controversial issues and allow our diplomats to voice their opinions, maybe similar to the group sessions or group therapy sessions that you’ve done in the European Diplomatic Academy, although sometimes I feel we need something stronger than group therapy these days. Diplomats need to understand how to align their personal perspectives with their country’s strategic objectives and how to represent their country in a way that is consistent with its values and principles. And we, obviously, and diplomatic training entities, need to help them to do so. My third and final point on unpacking competencies is that unpacking and repacking and unpacking and then dissecting and unpacking again is required to stay relevant. Our programs need to be relevant for the world today, but more so for the world tomorrow. And we heard a similar theme in one of the key ten points earlier this morning. If we were to take the example of just effective communication skills, which we might agree is a core competency for diplomats, then dissect it even further, just an exercise, what does effective communication skills mean? Do cultural norms, which essentially evolve over time, impact how we communicate, thereby impacting how we assess effectiveness? And how have the channels of communication changed, and how will it change in the future? We, as diplomatic trainers, need to revisit our competency framework and adapt it to remain relevant, which brings me to the second part of the discussion on equipping people for success. And here I’d like to raise two main points. First, success in diplomatic training requires a robust institutional framework in which human resource policies and procedures are competency-based as well. Second, how we determine success depends on foreign policy objectives and values. On human resource policies and diplomatic training, briefly, equipping diplomats in particular for success is very broad, and it’s very subjective, obviously. How do we determine the success of diplomats? Is it quantitative or qualitative in nature? Is it measured on how strong a bilateral relationship becomes, which is essentially impossible to actually measure when it comes to the performance of a diplomat? The key point here is that in order for us to measure whether or not we’ve successfully developed diplomats and trained them effectively, there needs to be an institutional framework that defines the relationship between training and human resources. Once an institution, large or small, defines its competency framework at the junior, mid, and senior level, then recruitment has to be based on this framework. Training needs to be based on this framework, and appraisals and promotions also need to reflect this framework. Otherwise, we are simply training for the sake of training. Therefore, the relationship between diplomatic training centers and ministries of foreign affairs need to be clearly defined. And once the competencies are outlined, training calendars and priorities are set, although we’re not able to actually fully measure success, we can be one step closer to ensuring that we’re not training for the sake of training. I think it’s also worth noting that instead of measuring success, we need to define success, maybe unpack success. My second point on unpacking success is related to foreign policy objectives. Every nation has a unique set of foreign policy objectives, and these objectives should be reflected in how their diplomats are being trained, and how we measure whether or not they were successful in doing so. So the question we must ask ourselves, which was also said earlier on, what is our nation’s message to the world? What values and priorities do we want our diplomats to promote? On this particular point, if I invite you all to reflect on the way nations operate in spaces like the UN Security Council, for example, how a Russian diplomat operates differs entirely from a diplomat from the United States. They are both diplomats, I would assume both able and successful diplomats, but very, very different in how they operate, what they represent, and how they carry themselves as diplomats. Our diplomats are not mere messengers, or they should be trained to do so, and thereby, they are effective. Now finally, and this point is largely based on some of the discussions I had yesterday with colleagues, particularly Ron, all the time, determining the success of diplomats themselves on our success as diplomatic training entities. But to reflect on our success, we must also determine what we actually are. Are we a think-tank? And if we were, we would determine success based on how impactful our research was on high-level policymaking. Are we academic institutions? So we determine success based on rankings on alumni. Are we training centres? Which means we determine success based on how effective we are in high-quality diplomatic training that is interactive and able to produce better diplomats. As we look to the future, it’s clear that diplomatic training must continue to evolve and meet the changing needs of the global landscape. To prepare the next generation of diplomats for the challenges of not just today, but of tomorrow as well, we need to embrace an adaptive approach to training. This means that while we all face certain shared challenges, every country’s needs are different. And how we effectively respond to these challenges is unique. I also think it’s important to define who we are as diplomatic academies or institutions, allowing us to have an honest conversation with ourselves and an honest reflection on what we do and how we can be better at doing it constantly. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you. Thank you very much, Director. And for the sake of time, if you don’t mind maybe holding your questions so that we can address them at the end of the overall presentations, if it’s all right with you as well. And the questions will come all at the same time related to one or the other presentations. And I think, yes, you want to go there, of course.

Tanya Mihaylova: Thank you. So last one, I’ll try to be very brief, and I’ll speak as European, who is from Bulgaria, and going back to the region from the Balkans. I choose to focus on a concrete, specific question. example in training that we have in the Bulgarian Diplomatic Institute, it’s called the Winter School of Diplomacy, and in a way I will respond to the opinions that Mr. Dreschinger this morning mentioned, that he has an experience years ago when he was a diplomat, he doesn’t know anything about the Western Balkans. At the same time, he spoke about building a trust. I will focus on this Winter School of Diplomacy that we organized for already 18 years, before the time we became a member of the UN NATO, by the understanding that we, in a region which is very complex, will provoke and we will invite and we will have a platform for discussion to fill some gaps and lacks of knowledge about us in the region. We call this region not just the Balkans, but Western Balkans and Black Sea region, and I would say that we call it the wider Black Sea region. Why it is so important for us, it is of a strategic relevance for Bulgaria and for the Diplomatic Institute, and it reflects on the training both of a national and international level. That’s why I’ll mention a few of the trends very specifically for this region, we call it wider Black Sea region, just to understand better, especially those colleagues who are not from our region here, not from Europe, how important is the strategic geography that we have here, where Europe crosses and meets Asia and North Africa, East Mediterranean. The region has been driven by historical rivalries and cooperation and present uncertainties and many expectations. There are global and regional players meeting here, and having in mind that the history is centuries ago, you know that many empires meet here, starting from Roman Empire, Byzantium, Ottoman Empire and the Soviet Union. It’s not necessary to mention all of the countries around the Black Sea and the wider Black Sea region, and nowadays I could name, as I mentioned, global and regional players like European Union and NATO, United States, Russia and Turkey and recently China. In the same time, the region lacks of, I would call it, not sense, but the spirit of regionalism, because we are very diverse economically, linguistically, culturally, very diverse region. At the same time, the region is militarized. Having in mind the annexation of Crimea ten years ago and having the war of Russia against Ukraine, the European Union entered this region when Bulgaria and Romania, as a literal Black Sea countries, joined the European Union. And it became, in a way, I would say, internal EUC. And in 2016, during the NATO Warsaw Summit, the Black Sea basin become a strategic priority for the alliance, and nowadays it’s not necessary to explain again all of the, not just tensions, but conflicts that we have. That’s why the Western Balkans and the Black Sea region, the wider Black Sea region, remains for us, as Bulgaria, at the same time as a member of the EU and NATO, a long foreign policy priority in the terms of strengthening regional security and stability. In this context, as we agreed on the competences, all of us we know what we are speaking about, the diplomatic competences, the core communication and presentation skills, negotiation skills, analytical skills, and it’s not necessary to go into details, how we understand and how we implement this in our trainings. Our winter school that I mentioned, we started to organize it 18 years ago, and this is one of the flagship training activities that we have in the Diplomatic Institute. We have already almost 500 alumni, and most of them have been posted after participation in the winter school in Bulgaria or in the region, in the respective embassies, maybe with the idea that those people have learned not enough, but just to start a real understanding what is going on in the region. If we speak about competences, so the knowledge is one of them, of course. How we organize this winter school, we invite junior career diplomats from the member states of the wider Black Sea, and some of them, you know, even from the moment they are in the tensions among them, and we try to organize and to give them a platform to exchange not just a knowledge, but also as we speak about attitude and behavior and empathy, and all of those cross-human or cross-personal and cross-cultural exchange. And recently, I mean in the last 10 years, we invite also junior diplomats from the EU member states in order to give them a chance to understand better the region, and at the same time for the countries from our region, because we are countries from the EU, from NATO, some others are not members of those alliances, to understand better the policies of the UN, NATO, and the other, to understand what we are thinking here in our region. Of course, the main challenge is how to design the curriculum. As I mentioned, we should adapt it every year because of the very fast changing of the circumstances around us, but in the world it’s not necessary to explain that. That’s why each year we start to think again from the beginning what would be the curriculum, and I remember three years ago, two years ago, 2022, when we have designed the program, it was really peacefully organized because the world is going to be better. At that time, Russia entered in Ukraine, and we redesigned the program one week before that completely in order to discuss the new threats, the security issues, and the energy and the reflections about all of the aspects of what is going on to happen. So, the curriculum is the main challenge, what would be the curriculum, what content and which content should be trained, how to find the proper balance, because if you have some training for one week, it’s necessary to have both lectures, but also some interactive approach to the diplomats. It could be role play, simulation game, so what would be the balance between substance and practical exercises, which kind exactly of interactive approach would be the best for this group of people. They are usually among 25 to 30 people, and maybe the most difficult for us is evaluating, and when we speak about success and keeping people or diplomats for success, how we measure success, and how to measure the input and output in terms of budget allocated, because we are limited in budget everywhere. In terms of recruitment of participants, it’s not easy to communicate, to invite, to be sure that they have joined this kind of training. In terms of evaluating, as I mentioned at the end, did we achieve success, how we measure that. In our methodology to measure this performance of the participants and to help them to develop the core diplomatic competences, it includes some classical approach like classroom observation, measure the intensity and quality of participation in Q&A session, tutoring measuring, and use the simulation exercises as a tool to see all of the skills and presentation and problem solving and capacity of effective teamwork, which is absolutely necessary to have it, and the cultural sensitivity. I would say that maybe this project is successful. That’s why I chose to present it to you, because I mentioned many of those people have been posted after that in the region. Some of them become ambassadors in the region, and I chose also this case because one of the alumni of the winter school became ambassadors like from Montenegro years ago. I would mention just two of the cases in the simulation games that we use. Recently, this is international climate negotiation with the framework of the United Nations. It is really interesting exercise for all of us what EU expects from the partners, keeping in mind that most of the participants are not from the EU. exercises, I’m trying to skip most of the notes that I have here. At the end I would like to share the message that in a way we try, and I repeated it for many years, we try to use this training, diplomatic training, for regional cooperation, or we try to cooperate regionally, diplomatic trainings. And this is one of the trainings that we have in our portfolio. We have for energy and climate diplomacy, open for foreign diplomats, and the so-called introduction seminar for newly arrived diplomats in Sofia. And of course it’s not panacea for understanding others or to solve all the problems, but I believe in the platforms that give a chance and opportunity for young, especially young diplomats, to understand better the others and to communicate among them in a way, in an optimistic way, as again to quote Ambassador Ischinger. And in the same time we try to fill in the gap of knowledge of our region. So these are a combination of achievements that I believe we have, and of course a lot more would be done. And just to mention the last sentence is, in a way, this complement the European approach with the European Diplomatic Academy, how to behave as a European diplomat. We try in our regional focus very closely, not in such a scale, how to work, how to cooperate in a regional manner, having all of those challenges around, including wars, because the work of the diplomat is to prevent, if possible, or to solve at the end with the peaceful tools, the problems. This was my message, and if we have no time for questions, I’ll be available and it will be my pleasure to discuss with all of you whatever you might be interested of our work at the Diplomatic Institute of Bulgaria. Thank you.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much. And without transition or the good management of time, I would like to invite Mr. Wang Zhiting from the Vice-Chancellor of China Diplomatic Academy to now conclude with a statement of yours. Yes, please. Over to you. Yes, of course.

Audience: Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Jerome, the host, for giving me this opportunity to make brief remarks. Just now I listened very carefully to the speeches of the panelists and the speakers, and thank you for your very inspiring remarks. All of you attach great importance on how to improve diplomatic competency and put forward good opinions and suggestions on how to enhance the competency of diplomats. These are very highly commendable, I would like to see. And I’m from China. I served three ambassadorships before. Most of my career, I devoted my most of career in Africa. I worked in four African countries, two ambassadorships. But my last foreign service is in Switzerland. I was the former ambassador to Switzerland. So, well, in China, only best students could be admitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I believe this is also the case of the other countries. A student’s IQ determines his or her exam scores. But, however, a high IQ does not equate to high competency, I would like to say. So how can we cultivate high competency? First, practice is essential. Without practice, everything is just theoretical. Second, training. That is our topic. The training is crucial for enhancing the competency of diplomats. A diplomat, in my opinion, in addition to having good educational background and knowledge level, must also have a strong sense of devotion. First, they must love their motherland, their own country. Only in this way can they serve their country well. Second, they must love all mankind. They cannot only love their own country. They must love us all, all the mankind, and to devote to the world peace and development. Because we all have a common goal, that is to build a community with a shared future, to build an open, inclusive, including everybody of us, not only some. To build an open, inclusive, we’re talking about inclusive that China now we are. We would like to continue to carry out our policy, which is open to everybody, to the outside world. We are not going to close our doors. Many people now ask the questions, is China going to close your doors? No, we are not. We are not. We support to build an open, inclusive, clean, and beautiful world that enjoys lasting peace, universal security, and common prosperity. We’re faced with the ever-changing and complex world. Here, requirements are placed on competency of diplomats. We need professional, high-quality, and all-around talents. The Foreign Affairs of China has made beneficial explorations in this regard. For instance, our ministry has established China Foreign Affairs University, which mainly focuses on cultivating diplomats through degree education. We offer bachelor’s, master’s, and PhDs in the Foreign Affairs University. And recently, not long ago, the ministry also established China Diplomatic Academy, which is focused on training of in-service diplomats. I’m the person in charge of the both two institutions. Those two institutions complemented each other, and they have played an important role in cultivating and training Chinese diplomatic talents. We look forward to cooperating with all participants. If you have good suggestions for cooperation, we would be very happy to talk with you at any time. We would like to explore the potential opportunities with all of you. I would also like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to the host, the Montenegro Diplomatic Academy, for their considerate arrangements for all of us, and I wish the forum a complete success. Thank you very much.

Jerome L’host: Thank you very much, Vice Chancellor. Thank you very much to all of you. I think we are getting close to the end of this session. I think we could have some time for the questions, but I don’t want to be blamed by the host organizers, and I’m not sure if we can do that now or if this has to be taking place on a bilateral basis. I believe the two of us have a plane to catch. Oh, yeah, all right. So that’s a clear answer to my question. Before concluding, I would like to thank you for your attention and for the interest you have been manifesting during these presentations. I would like also to mention that together with UNITAR, being represented here by the Director of the Multilateral Diplomacy Division and Mr. Rabih El-Haddad, I think most people know you here. You’ve been participating in most IFDT, as well as Mr. Philippe Aubert, representing UNITAR. UNITAR has been developing and refining competency frameworks for different governments, and they are experts, of course, at doing this. I was also part of some of the missions we’ve been doing together in some countries. And so for that purpose, we have positioned there some flyers and leaflets on the table there. If you want to pick them there, they are available for all of you if you’re interested in exploring, and the starting point being the competency framework, and the rest all goes from here. So thank you very much for your attention and bon appétit. Merci beaucoup. De rien.

Agreement Points

Importance of practical skills and experience in diplomatic training

Speakers

Federica Mogherini

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Tanya Mihaylova

Audience

Arguments

Experiential learning and living together is crucial for developing European diplomatic competencies

Practical embassy management skills are essential for new diplomats

Training should balance theoretical knowledge with practical exercises and simulations

Practice and on-the-job experience is essential for developing competencies

Summary

Speakers agreed that practical experience, simulations, and hands-on training are crucial for developing effective diplomatic competencies, complementing theoretical knowledge.

Need for adaptable and diverse competency frameworks

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Federica Mogherini

Carlo Borghini

Tanya Mihaylova

Arguments

Competencies need to be tailored to each country’s specific needs and context

European Union Diplomatic Academy focuses on developing European-specific competencies

NATO requires diplomats with both traditional diplomatic skills and ability to use advanced technologies

Adapting training to rapidly changing global circumstances

Summary

Speakers emphasized the importance of tailoring competency frameworks to specific contexts (national, regional, or organizational) and adapting them to changing global circumstances.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for a comprehensive approach to diplomatic training, balancing general skills with specialized knowledge, particularly for smaller diplomatic services.

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Arguments

Balancing generalist vs. specialist training for smaller diplomatic services

Peruvian Diplomatic Academy organizes competencies into four key areas: academic knowledge, diplomatic management, soft skills, and global understanding

Both speakers highlighted the importance of bringing diplomats from different countries together for training, fostering understanding and cooperation through shared experiences.

Speakers

Federica Mogherini

Tanya Mihaylova

Arguments

Experiential learning and living together is crucial for developing European diplomatic competencies

Regional cooperation and understanding can be fostered through diplomatic training programs

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of ethical and value-based training

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Audience

Arguments

Measuring success and evaluating effectiveness of diplomatic training programs

China focuses on cultivating diplomats with strong sense of devotion to country and mankind

Explanation

Despite representing different diplomatic traditions, both speakers emphasized the importance of instilling values and ethical considerations in diplomatic training, suggesting a shared recognition of diplomacy’s moral dimensions.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement included the importance of practical training, the need for adaptable competency frameworks, and the value of fostering regional and international understanding through diplomatic education programs.

Consensus level

There was a moderate to high level of consensus among the speakers on core principles of diplomatic training, despite differences in specific approaches. This suggests a shared understanding of key challenges and opportunities in diplomatic education, which could facilitate international cooperation in this field.

Disagreement Points

Universal vs. tailored competency frameworks

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Federica Mogherini

Arguments

Competencies need to be tailored to each country’s specific needs and context

European Union Diplomatic Academy focuses on developing European-specific competencies

Summary

While Muneera Khalifa Hamad argues for tailored competency frameworks based on each country’s specific needs, Federica Mogherini presents a case for a unified European approach to diplomatic training.

Generalist vs. specialist training

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Carlo Borghini

Arguments

Balancing generalist vs. specialist training for smaller diplomatic services

NATO requires diplomats with both traditional diplomatic skills and ability to use advanced technologies

Summary

Muneera Khalifa Hamad emphasizes the need for generalist training in smaller diplomatic services, while Carlo Borghini argues for a combination of traditional diplomatic skills and specialized technological knowledge for NATO diplomats.

Unexpected Disagreements

Role of devotion and patriotism in diplomatic training

Speakers

Audience (China representative)

Other speakers

Arguments

China focuses on cultivating diplomats with strong sense of devotion to country and mankind

Other speakers did not explicitly mention patriotism or devotion as key competencies

Explanation

The emphasis on devotion to country and mankind by the Chinese representative was not echoed by other speakers, who focused more on skills and knowledge-based competencies. This difference in approach to diplomatic training was unexpected and highlights cultural differences in diplomatic education.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement centered around the universality of competency frameworks, the balance between generalist and specialist training, and the specific skills and attitudes emphasized in diplomatic training programs.

Disagreement level

The level of disagreement among the speakers was moderate. While there were differing approaches and emphases, there was a general consensus on the importance of adapting diplomatic training to meet contemporary challenges. These disagreements reflect the diverse needs and contexts of different countries and organizations, highlighting the complexity of developing effective diplomatic training programs in a rapidly changing global environment.

Partial Agreements

Both speakers agree on the importance of experiential learning and fostering cooperation through diplomatic training programs, but they differ in their focus – Mogherini emphasizes a pan-European approach, while Mihaylova focuses on regional cooperation in the Black Sea area.

Speakers

Federica Mogherini

Tanya Mihaylova

Arguments

Experiential learning and living together is crucial for developing European diplomatic competencies

Regional cooperation and understanding can be fostered through diplomatic training programs

Both speakers emphasize the importance of practical skills for diplomats, but they differ in their focus – Garro Galvez emphasizes traditional embassy management skills, while Borghini stresses the need for technological competencies in addition to traditional skills.

Speakers

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Carlo Borghini

Arguments

Practical embassy management skills are essential for new diplomats

NATO requires diplomats with both traditional diplomatic skills and ability to use advanced technologies

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for a comprehensive approach to diplomatic training, balancing general skills with specialized knowledge, particularly for smaller diplomatic services.

Speakers

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Arguments

Balancing generalist vs. specialist training for smaller diplomatic services

Peruvian Diplomatic Academy organizes competencies into four key areas: academic knowledge, diplomatic management, soft skills, and global understanding

Both speakers highlighted the importance of bringing diplomats from different countries together for training, fostering understanding and cooperation through shared experiences.

Speakers

Federica Mogherini

Tanya Mihaylova

Arguments

Experiential learning and living together is crucial for developing European diplomatic competencies

Regional cooperation and understanding can be fostered through diplomatic training programs

Key Takeaways

Competency frameworks for diplomatic training need to be tailored to each country’s specific needs and context

Practical experience and experiential learning are crucial for developing diplomatic competencies

Diplomatic training programs should balance theoretical knowledge with practical skills and simulations

There is a need to adapt diplomatic training to rapidly changing global circumstances

Measuring the effectiveness and success of diplomatic training programs remains a challenge

Regional cooperation and understanding can be fostered through specialized diplomatic training initiatives

Resolutions and Action Items

None identified

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively measure success and evaluate the impact of diplomatic training programs

How to balance generalist vs. specialist training, especially for smaller diplomatic services

How to best prepare diplomats for rapidly evolving global challenges and technological changes

How to recruit and retain top talent for diplomatic service in a competitive job market

Suggested Compromises

Combining generalist and specialist training approaches to produce well-rounded diplomats capable of handling diverse responsibilities

Balancing traditional diplomatic skills training with instruction on using advanced technologies and navigating modern geopolitical complexities

The attitude is indeed probably the most innovative part of what we’re doing, and it comes together with the need for a European diplomat to negotiate internally. So the attitude comes from the intercultural dynamic within the group.

Speaker

Federica Mogherini

Reason

This comment highlights the unique challenge of training EU diplomats to balance national and European identities, introducing the concept of ‘attitude’ as a key competency.

Impact

It shifted the discussion towards the importance of intercultural skills and identity negotiation in diplomatic training, especially in multinational contexts.

We need to have diplomatic people able to do policy analysis, to understand the body language of the enemies or the friends, but they need to do and be able also to make use of advanced technologies, solutions to understand the geopolitical situation, decrypt it, anticipate risk, and anticipate opportunities to ensure peace and security.

Speaker

Carlo Borghini

Reason

This comment emphasizes the need for diplomats to combine traditional skills with technological literacy, highlighting the evolving nature of diplomatic work.

Impact

It broadened the conversation to include the role of technology in modern diplomacy and the need for adaptable, multi-skilled diplomats.

Neither approach is inherently better than the other. Both generalist and generalist training certainly have their advantages, and the best approach depends entirely on the needs of the diplomatic service in question.

Speaker

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Reason

This comment challenges the notion of a one-size-fits-all approach to diplomatic training, emphasizing the importance of tailoring programs to specific national needs.

Impact

It encouraged a more nuanced discussion about the pros and cons of generalist vs. specialist training approaches in different contexts.

We try to use this training, diplomatic training, for regional cooperation, or we try to cooperate regionally, diplomatic trainings.

Speaker

Tanya Mihaylova

Reason

This comment introduces the idea of using diplomatic training as a tool for regional cooperation, particularly in complex geopolitical regions.

Impact

It shifted the discussion towards the potential of diplomatic training to foster understanding and cooperation between countries, especially in tense regions.

A diplomat, in my opinion, in addition to having good educational background and knowledge level, must also have a strong sense of devotion. First, they must love their motherland, their own country. Only in this way can they serve their country well. Second, they must love all mankind.

Speaker

Wang Zhiting

Reason

This comment introduces a perspective on the personal qualities and values required for effective diplomacy, beyond just skills and knowledge.

Impact

It broadened the discussion to include the importance of personal values and motivations in diplomatic work, adding a new dimension to the concept of diplomatic competencies.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by expanding the concept of diplomatic competencies beyond traditional skills to include attitudes, technological literacy, and personal values. They highlighted the need for adaptable, culturally sensitive diplomats capable of navigating complex multinational environments. The discussion evolved from focusing on specific training approaches to considering how diplomatic training can be tailored to national needs and even serve as a tool for regional cooperation. Overall, these comments contributed to a more holistic and nuanced understanding of the challenges and opportunities in modern diplomatic training.

How can diplomatic training programs effectively develop and measure attitude-related competencies?

Speaker

Anca Montan from the Geneva Center for Security Policy

Explanation

This question addresses a gap in current training methodologies and highlights the need for more concrete approaches to developing and assessing diplomatic attitudes.

How can diplomatic training programs balance the development of a European identity while maintaining national identities?

Speaker

Federica Mogherini

Explanation

This area of research is crucial for understanding how to train effective European diplomats who can represent both their national interests and the collective EU perspective.

How can diplomatic training institutions effectively measure the success of their programs and the diplomats they train?

Speaker

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Explanation

This question highlights the need for better evaluation methods to assess the effectiveness of diplomatic training and the performance of diplomats in their roles.

How can diplomatic training programs adapt to rapidly changing global circumstances while maintaining a consistent curriculum?

Speaker

Tanya Mihaylova

Explanation

This area of research is important for ensuring that diplomatic training remains relevant and effective in an ever-changing geopolitical landscape.

How can diplomatic training programs incorporate advanced technologies and digital skills while maintaining focus on core diplomatic competencies?

Speaker

Carlo Borghini

Explanation

This question addresses the need to balance traditional diplomatic skills with new technological competencies required in modern diplomacy.