Massachusetts parents sue school over AI use dispute

The parents of a Massachusetts high school senior are suing Hingham High School and its district after their son received a “D” grade and detention for using AI in a social studies project. Jennifer and Dale Harris, the plaintiffs, argue that their son was unfairly punished, as there was no rule in the school’s handbook prohibiting AI use at the time. They claim the grade has impacted his eligibility for the National Honor Society and his applications to top-tier universities like Stanford and MIT.

The lawsuit, filed in Plymouth County District Court, alleges the school’s actions could cause “irreparable harm” to the student’s academic future. Jennifer Harris stated that their son’s use of AI should not be considered cheating, arguing that AI-generated content belongs to the creator. The school, however, classified it as plagiarism. The family’s lawyer, Peter Farrell, contends that there’s widespread information supporting their view that using AI isn’t plagiarism.

The Harrises are seeking to have their son’s grade changed and his academic record cleared. They emphasised that while they can’t reverse past punishments like detention, the school can still adjust his grade and confirm that he did not cheat. Hingham Public Schools has not commented on the ongoing litigation.

Lisbon students break world record for largest programming lesson

Nearly 1,700 students gathered at the University of Lisbon’s IST school of technology on Saturday to set a new Guinness World Record for the largest computer programming lesson in a single venue. The event saw 1,668 participants, surpassing the previous record of 724 set in Dallas, United States, in 2016.

The Guinness World Records adjudicator, Paulina Sapinska, confirmed the official total of participants after the lesson. The organisers hoped the event would draw more international attention to Portugal as a rising hub for information technology and promote wider interest in computing.

Rogerio Colaco, the head of IST, underlined the growing importance of computing skills. He likened today’s computing literacy to the fundamental ability to read and write 100 years ago, stating that everyone should have a basic understanding of computer science and programming to navigate modern life.

The lesson demonstrated Portugal‘s commitment to fostering technological education, aiming to inspire more people to engage with the ever-evolving field of computer science.

New Roli Airwave makes learning piano easier with AI

Roli, the London-based company known for its innovative musical products, has introduced the Airwave system, designed to make learning the piano easier by integrating AI and hand-tracking technology. Airwave works with Roli’s existing keyboards, utilising 3D cameras to track hand movements, providing a personalised and immersive learning experience. This system, compatible with Roli’s Seaboard and the newly rebranded Piano M, aims to simplify piano lessons while enhancing creativity.

Airwave’s key feature combines light-up keys and hand-tracking, giving users real-time feedback on their playing. The system is powered by Roli Music Intelligence (MI), an AI platform trained on large language models. Users can interact with the system through voice commands for tips, chord help, and access to complete songs, making it a versatile educational tool.

Beyond education, Airwave also caters to musicians seeking creative expression. The system allows players to manipulate sounds and instruments through gestures, much like a conductor. Priced at $299, Airwave is available for preorder.

AI could help teachers save hours on marking

Schools in Liverpool are trialling AI to reduce teachers’ marking workload and help personalise lessons. The initiative, supported by a partnership between Century Tech and Mayor Steve Rotheram, aims to give teachers more time for other tasks while improving educational outcomes.

Runnymede St Edwards Primary in West Derby has already adopted the AI tool for three years, offering insights into how it can tailor homework based on students’ strengths and weaknesses. Year Six pupil Noah explained how the platform adjusts tasks according to each pupil’s needs, balancing focus areas like science and maths.

The AI system also marks the homework, freeing teachers from hours of manual grading. It generates detailed reports on pupils’ abilities, providing educators with crucial information on where extra attention is needed.

Mayor Rotheram hopes the scheme will address the city’s lagging educational standards, with plans for a national rollout. Improving students’ skills in key subjects like English and maths at an early stage could help avoid costly interventions later.

Building Future Leaders – Competency Driven Succession Planning

Building Future Leaders – Competency Driven Succession Planning

Session at a Glance

Summary

This panel discussion focused on building future leaders in diplomacy, exploring various aspects of leadership development and challenges faced by diplomatic institutions. The panelists, comprising experienced diplomats and academics, shared insights on competency frameworks, training approaches, and the evolving nature of diplomatic work.

Key points included the limitations of traditional competency frameworks in developing high-level diplomats and the need for more holistic, experiential learning approaches. Panelists emphasized the importance of adaptability, vision, and communication skills in diplomatic leadership. The discussion highlighted the value of diverse experiences, including work outside the foreign ministry, in shaping well-rounded diplomats.

Retention of talented diplomats emerged as a significant concern, with suggestions for mid-career development opportunities and sabbaticals to prevent burnout. The panel also addressed the challenge of identifying and nurturing leadership potential, noting that leadership skills can be developed but require innate qualities and situational experiences.

The discussion touched on the public perception of diplomats and the need to better communicate the value and complexity of diplomatic work. Panelists stressed the importance of engaging with the public and politicians to garner support and understanding for diplomatic institutions.

Overall, the panel highlighted the evolving nature of diplomacy in a complex world and the need for innovative approaches to leadership development that go beyond traditional training methods. The discussion underscored the importance of balancing competency-based training with opportunities for personal growth, diverse experiences, and the cultivation of essential leadership qualities in future diplomats.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The changing nature of diplomacy and diplomatic skills needed in the modern era

– Challenges in recruiting, retaining, and developing diplomatic talent

– The limitations of competency frameworks for identifying and developing leaders

– The importance of providing opportunities for diplomats to gain diverse experiences outside the foreign ministry

– How to better communicate the value and impact of diplomatic work to the public and policymakers

The overall purpose of the discussion was to explore approaches for developing future diplomatic leaders and the challenges faced by diplomatic academies and foreign ministries in this endeavor.

The tone of the discussion was thoughtful and collegial, with panelists building on each other’s points. There was general agreement on the need to rethink traditional approaches, but also some respectful disagreement on specific issues like the usefulness of competency frameworks. The tone became more energetic and engaged during the Q&A portion as participants shared their own experiences and perspectives.

Speakers

– Maria Edera Spandoni: UNITAR Senior Fellow, former parliamentarian and Vice President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies

– Abdulaziz Al-Horr: Director of the Diplomatic Institute State of Qatar

– Geoffrey Wiseman: Professor at DePaul University Gray School of Applied Diplomacy, former Australian diplomat

– Mohammad Kurniadi Koba: Head of Center for Education and Training at Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

– Didier Le Bret: Director of the French Diplomatic Academy

– Marina Jovićević: Ambassador of Serbia, former Assistant Minister for European Integration

Additional speakers:

– Nabil Ayad: Professor of Diplomacy at University of Europe for Applied Sciences and Glasgow Caledonian University

– Jolanda Spies: Director of diplomatic studies program at University of Oxford

– Barbara Bodine: Former U.S. diplomat

– Liliana Popescu: Director General of the Romanian Diplomatic Institute

– Najman Oteibi: Director of qualifying program at Prince Saud Al-Faisal Institute for Development Studies in Saudi Arabia

Full session report

Building Future Leaders in Diplomacy: Challenges and Innovations

This panel discussion brought together experienced diplomats and academics to explore the complex landscape of developing future diplomatic leaders. Panelists included Nabil Ayad, Marina Jovićević, Maria Edera Spandoni, Abdulaziz Al-Horr, Geoffrey Wiseman, Didier Le Bret, Barbara Bodine, and Yolanda Spies, each bringing unique perspectives from their diverse backgrounds in diplomacy and academia.

Leadership Skills and Challenges in Diplomatic Training

The discussion highlighted the evolving nature of diplomatic leadership and the challenges in developing effective training programs. Abdulaziz Al-Horr questioned the efficacy of competency frameworks, particularly for mid-career and senior diplomats, asking, “If all of us are working on developing diplomats according to this competency framework, does that mean that we are producing same quality and same prototype of diplomats?” This critique underscored a key challenge in balancing standardized training with the need for diverse, adaptable leadership skills.

Geoffrey Wiseman emphasized the importance of experience outside foreign ministries for leadership development, succinctly advising, “Don’t stay within the foreign ministry bubble.” This view was echoed by Didier Le Bret, who encouraged diplomats to gain experience in sectors such as NGOs, civil society, or the private sector. However, Le Bret also stressed the importance of ensuring diplomats can return to the ministry after these external experiences, highlighting a key challenge in talent retention.

Career Development and Retention

The panel addressed the critical issue of retaining trained diplomats, acknowledging the allure of opportunities in other sectors. Barbara Bodine suggested providing mid-career opportunities for further education and skill development, as well as implementing sabbaticals to prevent burnout. She emphasized, “We need to look at mid-career opportunities… to go back to school, to take a sabbatical… because burnout is real.”

Self-Awareness and Personal Development in Leadership

Maria Edera Spandoni highlighted the importance of self-awareness in leadership development, stating, “The first step is to be aware of yourself.” This sentiment was echoed by Barbara Bodine, who offered a nuanced perspective on leadership: “Real leadership is not a question of title. Real leadership is a function of character, characteristics, and experience put together.” These comments shifted the discussion towards the importance of personal qualities and experiences beyond formal training in shaping effective diplomatic leaders.

Public Perception and Communication

An unexpected area of consensus emerged around the importance of public perception and communication about diplomatic work. Didier Le Bret highlighted public misconceptions about diplomatic work, stating, “We have to explain better what we are doing.” This view was reinforced by an audience member from Romania, who noted that media portrayals can influence recruitment for diplomatic services. The discussion underscored the need to better communicate the value and nature of diplomatic work to both the public and politicians.

Conclusion

The panel discussion revealed both areas of agreement and divergence among experts on developing future diplomatic leaders. While there was consensus on the need for diverse experiences and ongoing personal development, opinions varied on the best approaches to formal training and skill development. The conversation highlighted the complex challenges facing diplomatic institutions in adapting their approaches to leadership development to meet the evolving demands of modern international relations. Key takeaways included the importance of balancing formal training with real-world experience, fostering self-awareness and personal growth, and improving public communication about the value of diplomacy.

Session Transcript

Maria Edera Spandoni: Okay, so good morning everyone, it’s a pleasure for me to be here and to moderate this panel about leadership. My name is Maria Edera Spandoni, I’m a UNITAR Senior Fellow, and it’s a great pleasure for me to be here with the panelists because we will talk about a really important subject, which is leadership and the skills you need to have in order to be a good leader. A brief premise about myself, I’ve been a parliamentarian for nine years, Vice President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies for five years, and Member of the Council of Europe for five years. So basically, one of the actors you have to deal with as a diplomat. So, in my ten years of experience, I understand that leadership is really an important role, and you need to have some skills. And what I’ve learned are basically three things. The first one is that a good leader has to have a vision. You need to have a vision, you need to inspire your colleagues, your team, your followers, in order to be able to get that goal, to get that vision. The second thing is influence. You need to be influent if you want to achieve that vision. And the third thing, I think the most important one from my point of view, is communication. You need to be able to communicate to others what you want to achieve and which is the goals, which is the goal you need to see and the vision you want to achieve. So these are the three things I learned from my personal experience. And now I’d like to give the floor to the panelists who will talk about leadership. So we will start with a brief introduction of themselves, and then we will talk about a scenario. So, as leaders, which kind of challenge did they have to face in one particular occasion? And then we will have a round of questions and answers. So, I would like to start with Ambassador Abdulaziz Al-Horr, which is the Director of the Diplomatic Institute State of Qatar. Ambassador, if you want to stay here. Okay, you come here, please.

Abdulaziz Al-Horr: Good morning, everybody. Has everybody recovered from the long day yesterday? Say yes. Okay. I am Ambassador Al-horr, the Director of the Diplomatic Institute State of Qatar. I would like to thank the host for the warm hospitality and wish you all the best. Next year will be in Peru, and the year after will be in Qatar. In my country, I will be more than happy to really host you in Qatar. Let me start by this question. How many of the institutions already have a competency framework? Raise your hand. Good. Keep it up. And how many institutions working on competency framework? Raise your hand. And how many planning to work on developing a framework? With these three questions, it seems that most of us either have a framework or working on one or will be working on one. I’m a fan of competency framework. I have introduced competency framework for three industries and fields that I worked in. But today, after 33 years of experience, I have more questions about competency framework than answers. Our competencies framework are available there in Arabic and in English, and there is one full episode of our magazine all related to developing diplomats. Feel free to grab one. They are available both in Arabic and in English. However, now I have the question to question the competency framework. Is it the best approach for developing diplomats? I mean, if all of us are working on developing diplomats according to this competency framework, does that mean that we are producing same quality and same prototype of diplomats? Are these becoming like assembly lines? Especially that competency is originated, it’s a very industrial corporate terminology used over there in a very highly regulated industry. Is diplomacy highly regulated industry? With the complex world we are living in, with the uncertainty we are facing, with the differences in regions and resources and the size of country and everything, is still competency framework is the best solution to develop our diplomats? I’m starting to question the competency framework because sometimes I felt it was very rigid. You have this competency framework, it’s becoming your point of reference, and it’s really limiting your creativity. It’s limiting the innovation that you can make as an institution. So the question then, and we are in the process of developing a program for our leadership level at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, so I asked myself the question, is it still identifying the competencies as the best way to develop such a program? Now I would like to share with you our new approach or a new journey, the alternative to the competency framework or the way we are developing our new leadership program. We developed a document called the vision document. In the vision document we answered several questions. What is our vision? What are we trying to do? What are the challenges that we are facing? What are our priorities? What are our national interests? Where are our ambassadors serving? What is required from them? So we listed a few questions as leading questions to develop this program for our leadership level. So the program now, it’s not about subjects, it’s about themes. For example, we sent this vision document to four different institutions and universities. One of them is the Fletcher School. I mean, Hillary is here. They already submitted their proposal to develop our leadership level. We are waiting from Georgetown University, from Oxford University, and we received from Johns Hopkins University also their proposal against this vision document. So the proposals came with themes rather than subjects and topics. And the value or the most important feature of these themes, these are holistic themes. It’s not a particular competency that you are targeting, but a holistic one doing it in a simulation style, in a scenario planning style. For example, one of the topics is the individualized lab, diplomatic lab. Mindset for complex world. So it’s not a normal topic or normal subject you did, but it’s a holistic approach that will include very sub-skills in a very interactive experiential learning. And we are waiting for more proposals to come. My conclusion here, try to think of alternative for your diplomats. Don’t stick to one approach that is competency framework. It’s perfect for the foundation program, perfect for juniors. But for mid-career and high-level diplomats, I think we need to find an alternative. Thank you very much.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you, Ambassador. Now I leave the floor to Professor Weisman. Professor, do you want to stay in the chair?

Geoffrey Wiseman: I think I too will be breaking some of the rules of the game, but nonetheless, bear with me. I’m going to just say something about my own career, which I’m going to characterize upfront as trans-professional. That is to say I’ve not been a lifelong diplomat, and I’m going to make a slightly subversive argument that I don’t want everyone in this room to think only in terms of lifelong careers in diplomacy. Try something else along the way. My very first posting, by way of introduction, was in Stockholm, Sweden. I was an Australian diplomat, and the leadership lesson that I learned in Stockholm was, in fact, think beyond the foreign ministry. Think about taking risks, which we heard about yesterday, but do so in a whole-of-government and a whole-of-society way. Don’t stay within the foreign ministry bubble. That’s the big lesson, leadership lesson, I think I took away from my posting in Stockholm, Sweden. My second posting was in Hanoi, Vietnam, and this is getting at the case study, I think to some extent that I want to just mention. Case study is a rather elaborate term, but nonetheless, in Hanoi I learned what it was like as a second secretary, very low in the pecking order, as you know, what is the role of being a number two in an embassy, what is the role of the deputy chief of mission, what is it like to be charge d’affaires when you don’t expect to be charge d’affaires, and in other words, what’s it like to be an acting leader? So that’s the question that I’m sort of putting on the table. And so after Hanoi, I was cross-posted to Brussels, and I would say that the great experience that I had there was in fact seeing this experiment in multinational parliamentary democracy, really quite extraordinary. The European Parliament came in for a lot of criticism then and now, but nonetheless I do think it’s an extraordinary democratic experiment, and the one thing I would just simply say there is that in fact dealing with politicians is an important, I think, skill that diplomats need to come to terms with. They are not monsters, although I should say that my nemesis at the European Parliament was none other than the British Conservative member of the European Parliament, Stanley Johnson. I recognise the family name as the father of Boris Johnson, the much-loved late British Prime Minister. Late, you know what I mean. So after I served in Brussels, I went back to Australia, I worked in the Foreign Minister’s office, and here I think I would make my sort of leadership point. If you do want to understand the relationship between the politician and the diplomat, work in a politician’s office, as an advisor, as a private secretary. If you get half an opportunity to do that, I strongly urge people to do that. After my foreign service career, I worked in the Ford Foundation in New York City. What did I learn there? That there are many diplomatic actors in the world, again a point that we heard yesterday, especially from Group 5. And what I realised is that there are thousands of think tanks, research institutes, university centres outside the beltway in Washington DC that contribute one way or another to foreign policy and to diplomacy. What’s my point? Don’t stay within the foreign ministry, the embassy bubble. I’ve since been an academic and what have I learnt here? A number of things. A project that I’m working on with Yolanda Spies is to how do diplomats balance the contending impulses between the international and the national. We heard that yesterday to some extent and I think the interesting point about the European Union Diplomatic Academy is that it’s trying to bring a regional diplomatic identity to the national identities. And I think in some ways that’s a relatively easy task for Federica Mogherini and her colleagues. The hard task is in a bilateral setting where in fact you can recognise the national interests much more quickly because you know what the national priorities are. It’s very hard to recognise your international obligations when you’re in a bilateral posting. I’m now an academic. I have been at the University of Southern California, the Australian National University and now at DePaul University at the Gray School of Applied Diplomacy. Delighted to be here with the director of the school, David Wellman. The case study that I wanted to mention, I just put on the table because I want your feedback. It was when I was in Hanoi, I was a second secretary. I had not been a second secretary for long so I was very inexperienced and I was charge d’affaires because we travelled from Hanoi to Bangkok often and that meant the ambassador travelled to Bangkok a lot which meant I was the charge. And being a charge d’affaires in an important country like Vietnam, important for Australia, was really quite a shock to the system. What was my point here? It was that I had not been trained to be an acting leader. I had not been trained to be charge d’affaires. I remember being at a reception where the German ambassador very kindly, and I was there because the ambassador was away, I was there as charge, he introduced me as the charge d’affaires of Australia and you can imagine I became six foot tall. But it was really kind of fascinating because the ambassador was being very generous to me of course but he made the point that you are now in a leadership role and that sort of hit me really quite dramatically. So the point that I wanted to raise for you is basically have things changed since my time in Hanoi? Are you now training for people to be acting leaders? I know that there are some people in the audience who have been number two, DCM, you know serious, much more experienced perhaps than I was, but for so many countries that are small countries this is a very big deal. You’re going to be charge d’affaires a lot in such circumstances. But my question is are you being trained for this acting leadership role that will hit a lot of people and in my case a lot earlier than you actually are? Thank you so much.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you very much. So now as the panellists have already understood we are going to do one speech with introduction and presentation. So that’s how the flow is going. So I leave the floor to Dr. Koba, Centre for Education and Training at the Ministry, oh no, sorry. Okay, so I leave the floor to Director Le Bret, Director of the French Diplomatic Academy, please take the floor.

Didier Le Bret: Good morning, everybody. To make it short, I had mainly four throughout 30 years diplomatic career, three main blocks of competences. First, I was a specialist of former Soviet Union, then Russia, then I became all of a sudden a specialist of ODA question and development. Third, I became a specialist of crisis management and security issues. That’s the main three blocks. And then I discovered that I could be as well a specialist in private sector as I worked for five years. And I met some, I didn’t manage to become a member of parliament but I tried at least. That is a good experience if you want to be sure that there are not only monsters among politicians. I had few key experiences of leadership and they were quite different and I would say first that you might make, you should make a difference between leadership in peacetime and leadership in crisis. Those are absolutely different things. When I was posted in Port-au-Prince in Haiti as a French ambassador, it was three months after the earthquake, 300,000 people died, as many were injured. So you came to a country to be part of some diplomatic adventure and all of a sudden you realized you have to change everything from what you thought was your mission. I got people, teams coming from Paris. At the end of the day, I had almost 1,000 people working in the embassy, for the embassy, doctors, people from police and so on and so forth. And to come back to what you just said, I think if I could try and capture the very essence of being a good manager in leadership, a good leader in crisis, I would say I hope you will find yourself knowing a little bit who you are because that’s the key issue. If you don’t know which are your true skills, your competences and your attitude, in French we have three similar words, we say savoir for knowledge. savoir-faire for skills, and savoir-être for attitude. So that means it’s all interlinked. Why the Greek have this expression, gnoti seoton, know yourself? And really, that’s a key issue. Because if you don’t know what kind of manager you are, you’ll be in big troubles once the crisis started. So what really saved me when I was in this situation first was that I had a fantastic team, and I relied on them. And be sure that if you have a deputy head of mission, for instance, who is very good at writing, but might be a poor crisis manager, then spare him. Put him in the other place than the hierarchic place where he’s supposed to be, and find the right person for the right places. The crisis organigram is absolutely different when you are in crisis or in peacetime. Then you said communication. It is of paramount importance. When I was in Haiti, we couldn’t communicate with Paris. So I found a very easy way to get in touch with my government, TV, radio, broadcast, direct TV. So every day, I organised with 100 journalists who were on the premises of the embassy. And on the morning and on the evening, I made the point where we stand, how many people we are going to evacuate, and so on and so forth. And it really helped. It really helped, first, to get the right message and to be sure that everybody, you said vision. So the vision is extremely deeply linked with your capacity to communicate the right messages. So three main lessons for this kind of management. Trust your team. Know yourself. Be sure that you have a good, strong, robust communication. And basically, that’s it. That’s in period of crisis. But you have other ways to manage people and to be a good leader, otherwise in crisis, hopefully. And I think that’s what I went through when I started first designing the new French Diplomatic Academy, then heading it. I spent six months listening to people. I was designing the next step. So it was easy for me. I was not in charge. But it helped me a lot, just spending so many months listening to people. And then to embark them to a new project, it was quite easy because it was their project. So this kind of leadership, it’s closely linked to what we heard yesterday, being a good listener. And being a good listener means you instill trust among your team, among your colleagues. And that is quite helpful for the next steps. And I would say, as it was said yesterday, you remember we were talking about being a good diplomat. It’s being optimistic. And I would say being optimistic is really closely linked, as well, to action. And that’s exactly what our governments expect from us, to have a difference between an optimistic and a pessimistic. People say it’s a matter of level of information. No, you can be well-informed, knowing that the situation is tragic. But nevertheless, you’ll keep being optimistic because you know that for action, if there is no optimism, there will be nothing. Nobody will follow you if you don’t show the vision. And the vision needs to be back to a form of optimism. So the optimism and action are very well together. And if you allow me, I will just end up with a quote. Yesterday, I was extremely happy, and it gave me some strength, to see that we share the same difficulties. And at one point, I heard somebody said, we are small structures. I mean, roughly, I guess, our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it’s less than 1% of the overall national budget, peanuts. And I think one of our key missions should be to call up our governments all together to say, what we are doing, training people, being smart and efficient diplomats. It’s part of the overall job of our diplomatic ministry. But we should remind that if we don’t have the political support, if we don’t have the money, if we don’t have the people, I mean, training will be viewed as a kind of desperate approach to compensate a little bit the fact that we are not taken seriously. And I think this is a message all together with our authorities. We have an excellent, I’ve been working in the private sector, we have an excellent return of investment. Our Ministry of Foreign Affairs are among those who make big profits to our government in hard power, sometimes, in soft power, more often. So this is something, I think, throughout this federation of diplomats. I think that we could work together and try to convince all governments that diplomats need to be recognized for what they do, try and achieve peace in troubled times as we have now. And we have a big added value in what we can do for our countries all together. Thank you.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you. So thank you very much. Sorry, I just have a problem with my throat. Dr. Jovicevic, please take the floor.

Marina Jovićević: Good day. I’m very happy to be in Budva because somehow I feel it is my second home. I was posted here, and this is the case I will talk about today. I’m Ambassador Marina Jovicevic. I’ve been a career diplomat for now maybe 22, 23 years. I primarily dealt with regional cooperation and EU integration. Twice, I was Assistant Minister for European Integration. And that also brought me on a number of occasions here to Montenegro before my posting. And when it comes to postings abroad, I was posted in Denmark. As the colleague mentioned, it was my very first posting. And I went there as a charge d’affaires after one and a half year of working for the ministry. It was a very strange case. But this is where you build really your not only personality but leadership because you have to deal with different issues. I was also, as I said, Consul General in this coastal part of Montenegro in Boca Cotor Bay, the most beautiful bay that I’ve ever seen. And last but not least, I was Ambassador of Serbia in Brussels, covering Belgium and Luxembourg. As I have mentioned, I was thinking, you know, what to talk about when it comes to leadership. And for me, if, you know, with all due respect for all other postings, I think this posting in Montenegro where I came as the first Consul General will be the most outstanding posting I’ve ever had. Not because I love the country, I love the people, but it always reflects your idea and vision that you have before you take the posting. As we opened it in 2011, somewhere springtime, I came and you realize that people are approaching you for different reasons. And many of them, of course, want to collaborate with you and to have some kind of support from you. And it’s not easy. You know, we are not the country like US, for example, that do things, you know, years in advance. Budget for that year was closed. So I had really to deal with different levels of cooperation at that point of time. First and foremost, with my home country, to explain that you really have certain ideas and vision and you want to do because they had it before coming here. It was not easy when it comes to steering your career. It was not easy to come from the position of Assistant Minister to be Consul General because your career diplomat’s colleague thinks that you should go somewhere for the Ambassador’s posting, not to take something that’s maybe a lower rank in their hands. In my head, this was the best posting I could have had. So I had to explain to my home state why I need some money. You have to deal with different actors in the field, local, different cities, with different associations, cultural institutions, et cetera. You also have to deal with your team that’s new. And we all came as a completely new team as it was newly opened Consulate General. So for me, I found myself that you have a certain goal. Of course, you have a certain vision. But you found yourself that you cannot fulfill the goal that you set yourself. And when it comes to the goal, I had, first and foremost, the pressure to do it. presence, that visible presence of the newly opened consulate general, then of course visibility and presenting Serbian culture as a tool of public diplomacy, and of course last but not least building partnership and cooperation. The problem that I had was that actually I had zero financing for that kind of support, cultural support, at the very beginning. So I had to act first and foremost towards Serbian institutions and to our embassy in Podgorica to explain, you know, how we can, how I can act with different projects. This approach had to be really persuasive and very steady. So you have to be boring person, right, to be all the time approaching people, and at one point of time I think they were fed up with me, and I think there was a kind of test. So I had a call from the secretary general who told me, like, okay, you want money, and now you have one hour to provide us with a list of projects. So I sat by the computer, I typed 17 projects that I had already, after the communication I had with different actors, and sent a letter to Belgrade. The result was that there was the rebalance of the budget, I received certain amount of money that was enough for me to start the cooperation in a sense that now you have different actors. So each of us would provide certain amount of money for something, and we would be able to make very important results. Not to be too long, but just to indicate that in less than three years we managed to organize 60 different cultural events, all with local partners from different kind, like concerts, exhibitions, book presentations, folk dances, whatever, theater plays, whatever you could figure out. We turned out to be, as Consulate General, very reliable partner for a number of festivals. We mentioned yesterday Budva festival, and in Kotor, in all the cities you have summer festivals. We also worked with different cultural institutions here, and also with different associations, including also different NGOs, but last but not least the Serbian Orthodox Church. For me, the first step was negotiations that you had to perform with different actors, and in order to be able to connect people and cultures. What was important during the negotiations period is to have a clear position what you want to achieve, to share the interest to have a certain project realized, needs of yourself and also of the other party, and values that we all needed to respect, which was not very easy. Then we might come in a political field that sometimes, you know, if you had the local governance from a political party that was not very keen to, let’s say, Serbian different actors, so it was not so easy to perform it also. The result of those negotiations was win-win, so each of us gained in this process, and I would just maybe would like to outline at the very end that, as my colleague said, you have to have vision, you have to really have trust, not in the partner, but they have to have trust in you, otherwise I would fail, particularly in some of the municipalities that were not, as I said, very open, so never to fail the expectation of the other side or to misuse this opportunity for some other interest. There should be, of course, interest for the cooperation, and as I said, result must be a positive sum, not the negative one. For example, if you have a theater play, you negotiate with the theater in Belgrade, you bring it to one municipality, then when you organize it for them, you know you pay for transportation, the others pay for their fee, then you tell them, like, okay, I will organize it in the other city, but now lower the price, so practically you have to be manager in culture, which I did all the time here. The problem is that you, of course, have risk management that you have to take care to be able to identify the challenges and to act accordingly, because it’s the money of your state and you are the responsible person, but as we said the other day, no risk, no benefit, so, you know, just be seated somewhere and doing nothing maybe is the easiest way to just follow the instructions of your state, but I don’t think this is the way that any head of the mission should act, so on the contrary, you should define the mission and the goal that you want to achieve, shape it, be active, and as I said, to be not only proactive, but to be reactive when you are requested to do so. I’ve chosen this case because this is actually the major leadership I had. I had it in a number of occasions, but for me, after 10 years, when I come to any of the cities, when you meet people and when they still tell you, we remember those times when you organized this or that, for me, this is the major result of me as being the Consul General in this coastal part of Montenegro. So just to wrap it up, thank you, colleagues, for bringing me here and thank you all for listening to my case. Thank you very much.

Maria Edera Spandoni: And now, last but not least, I leave the floor to Dr. Mohamed Kurniadi-Koba, please.

Mohammad Kurniadi Koba: Good morning, everyone, Excellencies, dear colleagues, to our hosts, thank you for having us in the last two days. I appreciate being able to speak here. I’m a career diplomat. I’ve served about 25 years. My first post was to our mission to the EU in Brussels, the second one to our mission to the UN in Geneva, and the last one was in New York, to our mission to the UN. So as you can see, I have no educational experience, except as a student. So you can imagine my headaches when I came home from New York and the minister appointed me as the head for the Center for Education and Training. So I will speak about what I did and what I’m planning to do. So what I did was we developed a human capital development plan based on the results of competency tests of each individual, assess the existing gap competency, and connecting the gap competency analysis and organization vision, mission, and priorities. That took three months, assessing 1,600 diplomats, 300 admin officers, and 200 commission officers. And based on the human capital development plan and the gap competency that we discovered, we developed a curriculum for the center, focuses on attitude, skills, and knowledge in the order. First attitude, because diplomacy is for people, we spoke a lot about it yesterday. And then skill, all the representing, reporting, protecting, and so on. And knowledge is the last one, not because it’s the least important, because I don’t have time to cram all the knowledge that a diplomat needs to know in three or four months. So we have entry-level diplomatic school, we have mid-level diplomatic school, and the senior level. And the level is about six to eight months, depending the budget available on the year. The mid-level is about three months, and senior level is also about three months. So not enough time, so many knowledge to cover. So we opt to use the learning management system. So we use videos where applicable, protocol skills, we use games to arrange the protocol for the entry-level, and so on and so forth. And I really think LMS is the future. Not only it will help put all the materials available, and the students can learn on their own time, but also it will level the level playing field. Before, if you’re an expert in disarmament, is it because your first assignment back home is on the issue? When you send abroad, also dealing with the issue. But what if we – so you sort of have a privilege to have all the information that you need on disarmament or on any other topic, climate change. But what if we put those issues on LMS? Everybody can learn it. So you have to be – so to make a name for yourself, you have to be really an expert, because everybody else who has not had the privilege to be assigned the issue in their daily job, they will have access also to this issue. And then – so they have to be really good, because the information is available for everyone. And I will talk about this later when I come to the open bidding process for selecting the – Now let me speak about some issues that are currently on the menu in our learning management system and our curriculum at the center. First, economic diplomacy. It is, I think, every education center now has the same list. But what worries me the most is I need to make sure that what we, what diplomat thinks in our head, what economic diplomacy is the same, what people in the, the one who is doing trade, economic, and so on and so forth. So I invite a lot of CEOs, directors from the line ministries, and not so much about my own ministry, private enterprise, SMEs. We are fortunate to have a representative of Huawei in Jakarta, Google, Boeing, Airbus. Airbus was easy after I mentioned Boeing, and then he’s immediately, oh, when, when I’ll be able to speak in your, in your center. Second is, on the menu is regionalism. We heard a lot about European experience yesterday. Now let me offer you something different about ASEAN experience, not European attitude, but ASEAN attitude. Before I speak about that, let me put things in perspective. There are so many potential conflicts in the South China Sea, fishing rights, maritime boundaries, piracy, you name it. In Indonesia, we haven’t finished our negotiation about maritime boundaries with our own ASEAN neighbors. My colleague from Malaysia, Singapore, can testify to this one. But nevertheless, since the inception of ASEAN, none of those potential conflicts has erupted into open conflicts, which is more than we can say for any other regional organization. So maybe you know a thing or two about CBM, about patient, about, you know, dealing with crisis, about negotiation, and so on and so forth. And then current global issue, of course, climate change, sea level rise. Some experts say that in the South we lose 30 percent of our islands. What happens is we lose our outermost island. We lose the impact on our exclusive economic zone, to our continental shelf, and so on and so forth. So we need, our diplomats need to know about this. Artificial intelligence, of course, or coming back to ASEAN, we wish we can offer regionalism as an alternative, but as a complementary to multilateralism, because we are strongly for multilateralism. This is, I think, we think the only way that the rich and the powerful do not always win. Well, they will win most of the time, but not all the time. And then peace and conflict studies. The world is not getting any safer anytime soon, and a lot of sanctions going on in the world. Some country would like to buy a plane for our state-owned enterprise. We produce some plane cooperating with other country, but we cannot sell it because that particular country is under sanction. Our state-owned oil company cannot accept money from some country because that particular country is also under sanction. This is unilateral sanction. I mean, I’m not even talking about under WTO or Security Council. So we need to know about this sanction regime. Will it affect our national development? And then I will talk about the corporate university. We base the corp on the Lombardo’s work, the 70, 20, and 10 model. Ten percent of learnings begin through formal training and education. So whatever we do at the center, it will only contribute ten percent. Seventy percent are from daily activities at the office. So it makes sense that we also make sure that when they work at the office, they are also learning something. So we are developing this corporate university at the center now. Now for the succession planning, our ministry has also developed tools in preparing the succession planning. Because from my personal experience, I’m not sure they have any plan at all. Because when I was in New York, I was the DPR, and then suddenly they want my PR back home for the G20, to be the co-CERPA, and then suddenly I was the SACE. And the next day, Myanmar happened. I wasn’t prepared to be, you know, to be leading a mission in New York. I mean, I knew the routine and so on and so forth, but nothing prepared you for getting texts from your minister at midnight. Because Jakarta and New York is exactly 12 hours different. So when she wakes up, she gets to the office, usually at about 8 or 9 o’clock, it was 9 p.m. in New York. And then back and forth, what does the creditor community think about this accreditation and so on and so forth. So it’s a bit difficult if you’re not prepared to lead. And then we have this nine box, how should I put this, assessment. So during the training, we are supposed to assess the student from their performance and their potential. And then we put them in the right boxes accordingly. So incorporating the nine boxes into the evaluation and development of diplomats, I think it’s an effective strategy because then you can see, you know, you can see the right person for the right assignment. So we only have, you know, number one, number two, number three, which one is the best and so on and so forth. But with this, we can help the ministry to, is it for me? Yes, it’s for you. To help, you know, to help to spot talents when there is one. I mean, ministers like Minister Wira Yudha, or Minister Ratnam Marsudi, or Martina Naragawa, these extraordinary people, they always land on their feet. But we need a system that can, you know, for the rest of us, mere mortal, mere human, we need to have a system that, you know, can spot talent when there is talent. When there is a, I would like to use an example like, these talents, they do not play in Champions League, they do not play in Serie A, but this is a good player, they can play soccer very well. Just because they don’t play in Champions League or Serie A doesn’t mean they cannot play football. So we need to be able to spot that when there is people like that. So thank you.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Okay, so let’s see if I regain my voice. Yes, I think I can talk. Thank you very much to the panelists. Very interesting speeches, and also interesting experiences from your side. So, I’d like to know, okay, there is already a question. Can somebody give the microphone to the public? So we have, over there.

Nabil Ayad: Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes, hello everybody. I’m Nabil Ayad, Professor of Diplomacy at University of Europe for Applied Sciences and also Glasgow Caledonian University. When looking at the title, Building Future Leaders, I hope we are not talking about political leaders who lack credibility, because the essence of diplomacy is credibility, as you know. Yesterday, we were talking about competencies and assessment, performance assessment was not mentioned at all yesterday. Luckily, the Indonesian ambassador has just mentioned performance assessment, which is good. We talked about diplomacy, unclear and unknown environment. When diplomacy started in the 16th, 17th century, what were the skills and knowledge of diplomat at that time? A modern diplomat, he should have been a trained theologian. Unfortunately, there was no she at that time. Well-versed in Aristotle and Plato, an expert in mathematics and physics, an expert in civil law, able to speak and write Latin, Greek, Spanish, French, and German, and preferably had a taste for poetry. I mean, the role of ambassadors at that time, as we know in Holbein, ambassadors to ambassadors, their main role was to go around Europe looking for husbands and wives for the members of the nobility. I mean, obviously, we call it today matrimonial diplomacy. But diplomacy has changed since then. Sir Peter Marshall, who wrote the book Positive Diplomacy, he said, diplomacy is a child of its times, or rather a child of changing times. So today we speak about science diplomacy. What is the impact of science diplomacy on public health and the environment? And then we speak about the role of the diplomat has changed. I remember in 1980, I tried to introduce a course in London on diplomacy practice procedures and dynamics. And the local educational authority at that time refused to fund that course. And they said to me, why are you trying to train diplomats? Diplomats are lazy. They lead an extravagant life, alternating between protocol and alcohol, and they suffer too much from cholesterol. So today we introduced a new course on innovation called design thinking. How would you design a product or how would you design a public service? Obviously, diplomacy has survived as a concept and an institution, but it will keep changing. Diplomats today have become managers for globalization. They are managers of globalization. So when diplomacy started in the 80s, in the 80s it used to be a minor branch of international relations. Today it is a discipline unto itself, and that’s why we are here today. It is a case in point. Thank you very much.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Okay, thank you. Let’s get a couple of questions so then the panelists can answer. Yes. Can we have the microphone, please? Over here, thank you. Will you raise the hand? Sorry, apologies.

Audience: Hello, my name is Jolanda Spies. I direct the diplomatic studies program at the University of Oxford, and I would like to offer a comment and perhaps invite some counter-comments on that. It occurred to me, and I’m also a person who served as a diplomat for 18 years before I entered academia. When we train diplomats, we do not own those people. We are not assembling cars, and we are not going to have them necessarily forever. And if you come from a country such as my own, South Africa, where we really treasure our resources, we do not have an abundance of highly trained resources, it’s very difficult to hold on to those trained resources. Because sometimes you put so much effort into training these people into elite operatives, just to lose them to the corporate sector, to other government ministries, to other departments. And then it helps to have a more holistic approach to diplomats and keeping them and getting them. And I wanted to give an example, if Director Alhor will forgive me, of Qatar. That happened just last year in our program. We had two representatives from Qatar in our diplomatic studies program. And the one person I want to mention did not represent the government of Qatar. She was in a different career. And she came into the program absolutely convinced that she did not want to be a diplomat working for a government, even if that was her own government. And then we invited the ambassador of Qatar to do a guest lecture to our students. And after that guest lecture, she was so inspired that she decided there and then and started the process of joining the foreign service of Qatar. So all the time we are training people, there are also people outside our organizations that are actually potentially leaders within our organization. And we should have that flexibility to know that we are going to lose people, but we are also going to gain people. And the element that really keeps people is that symbolism, that representation, that sense of working for a bigger something, that motivation. And that element of representation is intangible. It’s very difficult to train for that, but when we have that, we should really treasure it.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you very much. Any other questions, suggestions? Oh yeah, absolutely. We just gather all the information, all the questions, and then we let you talk. So if there are no other questions, I just leave the floor to the panelists.

Didier Le Bret: As you mentioned mobility, I mean the fact that you can have another opportunity, we encourage in the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs this type of attitude. For instance, when I came back from the private sector, I’m fully dedicated to l’intérêt général. This is my main engine. But nevertheless, if you talk about, for instance, economic diplomacy, without knowing the true day-to-day life of entrepreneurs, I mean you miss something. You have to speak the same language at one point if you want to be reliable or credible. So we encourage people to get out of the box of our ministry. But the key point is that we must be sure that once we tell them, get out of NGOs, civil society, whatever, private sector, we must be consequent and be sure that after a period of time, we can welcome them again. That’s the key, that’s really what is at stake for us right now, to be sure that once they come back, we welcome them and we optimize their potential, which is not an easy task. For me, a final note here. My concern that we are transferring our institutions to schools again, with the competencies, with the curriculum, with the assessment, with all of these procedures, reminds me of the very traditional schools. Do we want to do this? Do we really want to do this? Our diplomats are living in the real world, in a very complex world. We have diplomats working in difficult zones, facing issues, and things that are not faced in other multilateral, bilateral, a lot of different issues than what is taught in traditional schools. Competencies will take you in a very detailed, structured, rigid path, different than the capability-based development, which will open the door for you to adopt themes that can really utilize the interrelated skills and knowledge and attitudes that you need to think about. This is an exercise that I’m doing in my institute. I’m rethinking the competency framework approach as a whole and trying to find new and alternative ways. Thank you very much.

Maria Edera Spandoni: One of the participants in the mid-level diplomatic school, on one-on-one session, in the coaching and mentoring session, the coach asked him, where do you see yourself in 15 or 20 years? And then the answer was, I might not be doing this. I might leave the ministry. And then she changed strategy and started to shorten the timeline. So what do you do after the training? And then he answered and so on and so forth. And then where do you want to be posted after this, if you can choose? Because in our system we cannot choose where do you want to be posted. And then after 30 minutes, he outlined his dreams and then he said, okay, maybe I can be a diplomat in that country in 15 years. So the power of coaching and mentoring is we can use that to retain people. Because I have also friends who left the service, and most of them said, I wanted to come back, but our system is not designed to accept people who want to stay and leave the service and then we cannot come back.

Geoffrey Wiseman: I want to echo the points of my colleagues on this. I opened my remarks earlier by saying that try not to think of diplomacy or diplomatic career as a lifelong one in the foreign ministry. That was the point that I was trying to argue. And what I found in the Australian case was that people who went to work for the United Nations, for example, when they came back or when they were away, they were seen as something that was a little alien. They had left the fold. And I think this is a terrible mistake that foreign ministries make. If people go into the private sector, work with a civil society organization, go to a regional headquarters, to the United Nations, do a master’s, do a PhD, any of these things, they are going to come back with added value. And I say to all foreign ministries, welcome those people back because they are a national resource.

Marina Jovićević: I think when it comes to the colleague from Oxford that we should also reflect what diplomacy is nowadays because we are seeing as diplomats it cannot be compared to the period of 20 plus years, not to mention two or three centuries. Everything turned out to be a bit more superficial. It’s important what’s been happening in the public. And only in some situations when you really have a crisis management and when you have to deal with real issues, then you can see maybe who is what type of the diplomat, whether you can stand it or not. Which brings me to another point, that’s the recruitment of people. So what you get to shape into the diplomat, future diplomat. So you know you can train people but we have the situation that we recruit less and less people because of the financial resources. You have to have approval from the government. And it happens that when you recruit 15 people, for example, within a few months time or a year time, at least two will leave ministry because they had a better offer from the private sector. And I doubt that in our case they will come back. So that kind of mobility in our case is one-way mobility. And what we did, for example, maybe it’s not that bad, we have a cooperation with 15 faculties in Serbia, signed protocols so that they nominate 10 best students from the last year of bachelor or master studies. And then they spend three months working for the ministry. Full-time, eight hours from different parts of Serbia. For them, I think it’s a great professional orientation, meaning that out of those 15 people, for example, 13 were interns in the meantime. And they really get the clear picture of what this job is. Because the perspective of a diplomat, we discuss, it’s completely different in the heads of ordinary people to what we really do. So they think we are just finding dining, traveling, enjoying. For nothing, which is not at all to be compared with multi-task diplomacy that particularly small countries have to cope on a daily basis. So it’s really a challenge. And I think we also should think about those terms, not only the leadership, but you can make leader of someone who has the capacity, but not from all the people you get. And there is the tendency of some of the states, including my state, to centralize this process of recruitment. So they have national office that’s dealing with those issues, jointly with Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but it’s not only us. So they actually put you in the box before you are able to come to become a diplomat. So whether you know Excel, who cares? We will teach you later at the Diplomatic Academy for all IT skills that you need to have. So it’s a very complex issue, but not maybe for this session, I’m sorry.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you very much. I just want to add a quick personal note about that. Because I think it’s really important you talk about competences. And from my point of view, the competences that you have as diplomats are for sure integrity, empathy is absolutely critical, emotional intelligence is absolutely critical. Also, well, of course, cultural intelligence. Not to talk about negotiations. So the competences that you need to have are really competences that also a leader has to have. So that’s what you have in common, because, of course, you need to manage so many challenging affairs, and also communicate well with so many actors, which give you really lots of responsibilities on your back. So, yes. Can I have the microphone, please?

Audience: Thank you. I’m Barbara Bodine, and I do not work for the U.S. government anymore. But I will admit that I still talk about the State Department as we. It’s just something about us we don’t quite leave. I just wanted to address the two issues that were coming up. And they came up yesterday in the exercise. And one of them is retention. And then the other one is refreshing and revitalizing. And we face this problem, I think, like every foreign ministry does. Particularly your star diplomats. You know, the better you are, the more difficult and the higher position you get. And there’s always this great risk of just burnout. And then there’s also this need to bring in people who have a broader experience in NGOs and civil society and state and local government, not to mention health, cyber, and everything. And the two things that we do that I think are designed to address both of these is that we have a very active kind of mid-career the 10 to 15 year mark where the really high riser is just about to burn out. But about the 10 to 15 year mark, you can take a year, sometimes two, and you can be a fellow at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy. You can get a master’s at Princeton or Fletcher. You can work at a state and local government. And we also have them with corporations. So you’re understanding better, particularly our economic officers, the world of the entrepreneur and the world of globalization. And so they get the opportunity to get out, get away, clear their brain, see something else from a different point of view. But they also get exposure to all these various different worlds. What does humanitarian assistance look like if you’re working for Mercy Corps or Doctors Without Borders? So we’ve got this refresh, rethink, revitalize at that level. And the reason that we put it in is that we were losing too many of our really good officers because they were just exhausted and just wanted a break. And if given a choice between being exhausted and leaving, they sometimes left, often with regrets later. But if it was exhausted time out, productive time out, it’s hard on diplomatic corps because we all tend to be very small. We don’t have a lot of surplus officers, particularly of that quality and that rank. But it really came down to if we provide ways for them to refresh, revitalize, rethink, they would come back as a better officer. So the option was not, what do I do about not having them around for a year? The alternative was I wasn’t going to have them around at all. And so it works. The other thing that we’re just starting to do, so we don’t know if it’s going to work or not, is really recruiting for kind of a subcategory of people coming in with a background for health diplomacy, with a background in cyber, with a background in all of these emerging issues that we are trying to recruit, train, and get experience from. for our diplomats, but we need to backfill a little bit in the meantime, and then hope that once they kind of see it, they will also go, oh, this is cool. So we’re kind of trying to bring some of the outside more in, but then also giving our diplomats more of an opportunity to get out away and then come back. And so trying to get away from the either or ultimate loss or part-time, and that’s one of the ways that we’ve tried to do this. It does build, I think, also leadership skills, because you have to go out and do something different. So you can’t, if you were in a rut and you suddenly dropped in Mercy Corps or Doctors Without Borders, you have to unwrap yourself a little bit, and that’s usually a very healthy thing to do.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you very much. Excuse me. OK.

Didier Le Bret: It is so true that I’m trying right now to organize something which might be old, but it’s not mandatory. But if you have the choice between two excellent candidates, I would recommend my administration to choose the one who makes exactly what you said, get some fresh air outside. So I can’t make it mandatory, but I strongly recommend my colleagues to come, for instance, in the French Academy for one year. And then in the curricula, if you have to choose between two guys, you say, oh, this one, he spent one year transmitting, teaching, learning. And I even asked that the top of the 10 best diplomats would spend one year as a fellow researcher in the think tank. I said, guys, are you serious? I said, yes, because they will learn the best job for the rest of their career. They will make a network of international experts. They will know how to organize different things. And I think that’s part of the training. Not only train people, but give them opportunity to live the true life of other. You said, Médecin Sans Frontières, I’ve been a member of the board of Action Contre la Fin for three years. You don’t need training, then, to understand the true reality of a big NGO. But that means that the administration should work along with the training department and give you the backing in all your initiatives, which is not easy.

Audience: I’m Liliana Popescu, Director General of the Romanian Diplomatic Institute. And I would like to pick on a different issue that was presented here by our colleague from France, Didier Lebret. Towards the end of your presentation, you mentioned this idea that diplomats and the activity of diplomats is not well known. Then Professor Nabil mentioned this idea that there is this public image about diplomats that they are from protocol to alcohol. And there’s this image that diplomats live a glamorous life. And then, to be honest, I talked with several of our colleagues in the ministry. I, myself, was in the ministry for a long time ago, but for a short time. And I know what diplomatic activity means. This is not shown, actually. So my question is to you and to all of our colleagues, if you know any resources, like articles, materials, or if you have any idea in which we could actually put on the table and discuss maybe with and present to our governance and to our public, because we also face issues of budgeting as well. So I think that diplomatic activity actually has fantastic results, but I don’t think they are really seen as such. So that’s my question. Thank you.

Didier Le Bret: I can give you two short answers. First, when I was the French president as a special advisor for intelligence services, at that time, we were recruiting like hell for our secret service. Why? Because they made a fantastic movie, a series, Le Bureau des Gendarmes. For the next 10 years, we are sure we’ll get the best people in this very service because of that. That’s called soft power. So first recommendation, think about the best way to target those that you need. And the second that’s part of my new functions, I will make my best efforts to talk to French people because we diplomats live overseas, work overseas. We know the world, but we poorly know our own country. So I will spend half of my time talking to French people through the media, to the university, to schools. And even in the process, I’m recruiting an army of diplomats to talk. And outside of diplomat, we set up what we call a citizen reserve. I don’t know what’s the right word in English. The army does. You mean you want to serve your country? You don’t have to be diplomat or civil servant. Wherever you are, you can do something for your country. So I ask those people to be part of our efforts to talk to French people. And once French people or whatever people, they know what you do, I mean, members of parliament will defend your budget. They will protect you against adversity, which is the common rule of our life. So this is, to me, key. We have to talk to politicians. We have to talk to ordinary people. We have to justify what we are doing and say that what we’re doing is a great benefit for the country and overall, as it was said yesterday, for the international relations.

Maria Edera Spandoni: So then we go back to communication and how to communicate with people, communicate with the members of the parliaments, for example, and try to make a great picture about what you want to do. So then you get the funds and you get support. That’s really in a few words. I had another question there, and then we go back with. Yes, please.

Audience: Thank you very much. My name is Najman Oteibi. I’m the director of the qualifying program at Prince Saud Al-Faisal Institute for Development Studies in Saudi Arabia. Let us be realistic here. Ambassador Abdulaziz talked about the competency framework and its limitation, especially in identifying a leader or training them. And I can’t agree anymore. Human beings are, humans are complex. We are, we have emotions. We have psychology. We have cognitive behavior. We cannot quantify that on terms of scales. It’s very difficult. Yes, you can take it as an indicator, but not as a reference point that, OK, if that kind of list of competency, then he or she is a leader. That’s a kind of risk that should be, I think, considered during the process of selection to the right leader. I don’t know what’s the creative approach here. Maybe Dr. Abdulaziz’s unconventional way of identifying leaders and training them. But probably if that creativity is away from the traditional way of competencies framework, something that is in real environment scenarios, whether role-based or whatever, the creativity in that sense. So, yes, leaders are important from, whether in ministries or elsewhere, but the challenge is how to identify them, because it’s not easy. I need someone to elaborate on that a little bit more. I would appreciate it. Thank you.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you for your deep understanding of what I’m coming from. Now, we are talking about experiential learning. We are talking about simulations. We are talking about scenario planning. We are talking about on-job training. We’re talking about the coaching and mentorship. We are talking about real experience, putting these leaders in real experiences in terms of crisis management, complex zone management. Those third secretary, one overnight becomes the acting ambassador because of whatever circumstances happened. Competencies will not help you that much in these cases. It will only produce a prototype, typical diplomats. It’s good to start with, but I don’t think it’s good for… leadership. This is what I’m really talking about.

Geoffrey Wiseman: I think I would make an important conceptual distinction. First of all, it’s very difficult. The conceptual challenge about the leadership concept is that politicians are meant to lead and diplomats are meant to follow. That’s the basic distinction. That’s the basic binary. The issue is, of course, that it’s much more complicated and interesting than that. And I would basically advise everyone to ignore that distinction. But nonetheless, I think there is a… where I disagree with your assumption is that we should not be trying to identify leaders because there are such things as situational leaders. Like the jury foreman at a criminal trial. That is a situational leader. The second secretary who’s all of a sudden acting as charge is a situational leader. That person hasn’t been identified through a competency framework. This sort of thing happens. And I apply this situational thing to states. Small states in particular. Which small state do you know of that is currently running for one of the non-permanent positions on the Security Council? It’s a situational leadership. You don’t have to be a leader all the time. You can come and go. And I think that’s okay. That’s how I would sort of answer it. And I think there’s some similarities here without thinking on that. But that’s my take.

Maria Edera Spandoni: Thank you very much. Last reflection, suggestion. I’ll try to bring this up to something beyond the 17th century. I’m going to disagree with you, Jeff. Good friend. I highly respect you. But, comma however, I think that there’s a situational element to all leadership. That’s true. Some are born to it. Some have it thrusted upon them or something like that. But, developing leaders is a little bit like developing an athlete or an artist or a musician. There are people who have some of the innate skills, the judgment, the initiative, the empathy, and probably most importantly the vision. And then what you can do in a corporation or a diplomatic academy in a diplomatic corps is put people in situations as they are developing from junior to middle to senior where they both can work. They deal with crises, small crises, big crises, so that when it is a real crisis or it is a moment for real leadership, they have the innate skills and they have the experience and they’ve been given the confidence and the support that you are. I think we’ve all also dealt with people who are highly competent managers. Highly competent managers. And lord knows we need highly competent managers. But being a very competent manager of resources, people, even issues to a certain extent is not the same thing as having the vision and the drive and the ability to recruit people to follow you. The basic element of being a leader is somebody has to want to follow you. Those can be developed, refined, encouraged, supported, and then promoted. But they can’t be created. And so part of building future leaders is also identifying future leaders and then giving them the skills and the experience that they can do it. I would never say that, you know, I know that I would never say that politicians lead and diplomats simply follow. There are leaders within politicians and there are leaders within diplomacy, business, and everything else. So this is a skill and a talent that can be developed, identified, worked on. As I said, I think in a lot of ways, in this particular case, diplomatic academies are like a good coaching staff. And you spot talent. We talked about this in my team yesterday. That part of doing mid-level training is to do talent spotting. Who has those basic skills? And then like a good coach, how do I help you get better and better and better? So that when you’re thrown into something, you suddenly become charge at a second secretary. You know what you, you know yourself, you know the issues, you’ve been given the opportunity, and you can step forward. And I’ve had cases where the number two was the leader in an embassy and the number one went to the parties. And that was fine with the number two because they don’t want to go to all those stupid parties anyway. So real leadership is not a question of title. Real leadership is a function of character, characteristics, and experience put together. Thank you very much. If I can add something. I’m converting myself into a panelist, but this is so interesting. Exactly what you said. Being a leader doesn’t mean having the role of a leader, okay? Some people just have these leadership skills and they have because, you know, they’re natural for them. And maybe they’re not in a leadership role but they do have these leadership skills. So what you said, it’s really important. And then another thing I also believe is important is that you can learn to be a leader but you need to know yourself a lot. You need to know your potential strengths, your limitations, your natural strengths. So it’s also a journey within yourself and say, okay, what can you do? If I have some limitations, I delegate because I can also delegate and delegation is so important. I believe for everybody, not just for diplomats. So if I have limitations, I delegate if I can. If I need to manage conflicts, I will try to know myself and understand how, which is the best way to manage conflicts and also if I can improve in my leadership journey, I can do that. It’s not a role. Some people are natural leaders. Some other people have to be trained because of course we need training. But I personally believe it’s a great journey and I personally believe it’s important also to train leadership because when you go out from university at least that’s what happened to me. Nobody tells you how to be a leader or how to manage a team. They tell you thousands of stuff. You go out and you’re like, you know, you know everything about your subject. My subject was the languages and German language. So you know everything about that. But don’t tell you how to be, how to manage people, which is, I believe, one of the most challenging things I ever experienced. So that was just another reflection of mine. Thank you very much. I thank you, the panelists. I thank you, the public. That was so engaging. I really wish you a great day. It was great for me to be a moderator for this panel. Thank you very much to everybody. Dear colleagues, just one logistic note. Can I have your attention please?

M

Maria Edera Spandoni

Speech speed

137 words per minute

Speech length

2023 words

Speech time

885 seconds

Vision, influence and communication are key leadership skills

Explanation

Maria Edera Spandoni identifies three key leadership skills for diplomats: vision, influence, and communication. She emphasizes that these skills are essential for achieving goals and inspiring others.

Evidence

Spandoni draws on her personal experience as a parliamentarian and Vice President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies.

Major Discussion Point

Leadership Skills and Development for Diplomats

A

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Speech speed

110 words per minute

Speech length

743 words

Speech time

404 seconds

Competency frameworks may be too rigid for developing leadership

Explanation

Al-Horr questions the effectiveness of competency frameworks for developing diplomatic leadership skills. He suggests that these frameworks may be too rigid and limiting for the complex world of diplomacy.

Evidence

Al-Horr mentions his experience introducing competency frameworks in three industries and fields.

Major Discussion Point

Leadership Skills and Development for Diplomats

Disagreed with

Geoffrey Wiseman

Disagreed on

Effectiveness of competency frameworks for developing diplomatic leadership

Need to balance competency frameworks with more holistic approaches

Explanation

Al-Horr advocates for a more holistic approach to diplomatic training, particularly for mid-career and high-level diplomats. He suggests using themes and experiential learning instead of rigid competency frameworks.

Evidence

Al-Horr describes a new approach using a vision document and themes for developing leadership programs.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training and Retention

G

Geoffrey Wiseman

Speech speed

155 words per minute

Speech length

1450 words

Speech time

558 seconds

Diplomats need experience outside foreign ministries to develop leadership

Explanation

Wiseman argues that diplomats should gain experience outside of foreign ministries to develop leadership skills. He suggests that a diverse career path can enhance a diplomat’s abilities and perspective.

Evidence

Wiseman shares his personal experience working in various sectors, including the Ford Foundation and academia.

Major Discussion Point

Leadership Skills and Development for Diplomats

Agreed with

Didier Le Bret

Audience

Agreed on

Need for diverse experiences in diplomatic careers

Disagreed with

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Disagreed on

Effectiveness of competency frameworks for developing diplomatic leadership

Situational leadership is important for diplomats

Explanation

Wiseman emphasizes the importance of situational leadership in diplomacy. He argues that diplomats often need to step into leadership roles unexpectedly and should be prepared for such situations.

Evidence

Wiseman shares his personal experience as a charge d’affaires in Hanoi, Vietnam.

Major Discussion Point

Leadership Skills and Development for Diplomats

A

Audience

Speech speed

135 words per minute

Speech length

1483 words

Speech time

659 seconds

Leadership skills can be developed through training and experience

Explanation

An audience member argues that leadership skills can be developed and refined through training and experience. They emphasize the importance of identifying potential leaders and providing them with opportunities to grow.

Evidence

The speaker compares developing leaders to coaching athletes or artists, suggesting that innate skills can be honed through practice and experience.

Major Discussion Point

Leadership Skills and Development for Diplomats

Difficulty retaining trained diplomats due to other opportunities

Explanation

An audience member highlights the challenge of retaining trained diplomats who may be attracted to opportunities outside the foreign service. This poses a problem for diplomatic institutions that invest in training.

Evidence

The speaker mentions the example of losing trained diplomats to the corporate sector or other government ministries.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training and Retention

Importance of mid-career opportunities to refresh and retain diplomats

Explanation

An audience member emphasizes the importance of providing mid-career opportunities for diplomats to refresh their skills and perspectives. This approach can help retain talented diplomats who might otherwise burn out or leave the service.

Evidence

The speaker describes a program allowing diplomats to take a year or two for fellowships, further education, or work in other sectors.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training and Retention

Agreed with

Geoffrey Wiseman

Didier Le Bret

Agreed on

Need for diverse experiences in diplomatic careers

Need for diplomats with specialized skills in areas like health and cyber

Explanation

An audience member points out the need for diplomats with specialized skills in emerging areas such as health diplomacy and cybersecurity. This reflects the changing nature of diplomatic work and the need for diverse expertise.

Evidence

The speaker mentions efforts to recruit individuals with backgrounds in health, cyber, and other emerging issues.

Major Discussion Point

Changing Nature of Diplomacy

N

Nabil Ayad

Speech speed

105 words per minute

Speech length

432 words

Speech time

246 seconds

Modern diplomats are managers of globalization

Explanation

Ayad argues that the role of modern diplomats has evolved to become managers of globalization. This reflects the changing nature of diplomatic work in an increasingly interconnected world.

Evidence

Ayad contrasts the skills required of diplomats in the 16th and 17th centuries with the complex challenges faced by modern diplomats.

Major Discussion Point

Changing Nature of Diplomacy

Agreed with

Marina Jovićević

Agreed on

Evolving nature of diplomacy

M

Marina Jovićević

Speech speed

163 words per minute

Speech length

1955 words

Speech time

717 seconds

Diplomacy has become more complex and multifaceted

Explanation

Jovićević highlights the increasing complexity and multifaceted nature of modern diplomacy. She argues that the role of diplomats has changed significantly in recent years, requiring a broader range of skills and adaptability.

Evidence

Jovićević contrasts the current diplomatic landscape with that of 20 or more years ago, emphasizing the need for crisis management skills.

Major Discussion Point

Changing Nature of Diplomacy

Agreed with

Nabil Ayad

Agreed on

Evolving nature of diplomacy

D

Didier Le Bret

Speech speed

126 words per minute

Speech length

2064 words

Speech time

979 seconds

Need for diplomats to gain experience in other sectors

Explanation

Le Bret emphasizes the importance of diplomats gaining experience in other sectors, such as the private sector or NGOs. He argues that this broader experience enhances diplomats’ skills and credibility.

Evidence

Le Bret shares his personal experience working in the private sector and how it improved his understanding of economic diplomacy.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training and Retention

Agreed with

Geoffrey Wiseman

Audience

Agreed on

Need for diverse experiences in diplomatic careers

Public has misconceptions about diplomatic work

Explanation

Le Bret points out that the public often has misconceptions about the nature of diplomatic work. He suggests that these misconceptions can affect public support for diplomatic institutions.

Major Discussion Point

Public Perception of Diplomacy

Need to better communicate value of diplomacy to public and politicians

Explanation

Le Bret argues for the importance of communicating the value of diplomacy to both the public and politicians. He suggests that better understanding can lead to increased support and resources for diplomatic work.

Evidence

Le Bret mentions plans to spend time talking to French people through media, universities, and schools about diplomatic work.

Major Discussion Point

Public Perception of Diplomacy

Media portrayals can influence recruitment for diplomatic services

Explanation

Le Bret highlights how media portrayals of diplomatic or intelligence work can influence recruitment for these services. He suggests that positive portrayals can attract talented individuals to the field.

Evidence

Le Bret cites the example of a French TV series about intelligence services that led to increased recruitment for the secret service.

Major Discussion Point

Public Perception of Diplomacy

Agreements

Agreement Points

Need for diverse experiences in diplomatic careers

Speakers

Geoffrey Wiseman

Didier Le Bret

Audience

Arguments

Diplomats need experience outside foreign ministries to develop leadership

Need for diplomats to gain experience in other sectors

Importance of mid-career opportunities to refresh and retain diplomats

Summary

Speakers agreed that diplomats benefit from diverse experiences outside traditional foreign ministry roles, including work in other sectors or mid-career opportunities for further education and skill development.

Evolving nature of diplomacy

Speakers

Nabil Ayad

Marina Jovićević

Arguments

Modern diplomats are managers of globalization

Diplomacy has become more complex and multifaceted

Summary

Speakers concurred that the role of modern diplomats has evolved significantly, becoming more complex and multifaceted in response to globalization and changing global dynamics.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for flexibility in diplomatic training and leadership development, suggesting that rigid frameworks may not adequately prepare diplomats for the diverse challenges they face.

Speakers

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Geoffrey Wiseman

Arguments

Competency frameworks may be too rigid for developing leadership

Situational leadership is important for diplomats

Unexpected Consensus

Public perception of diplomacy

Speakers

Didier Le Bret

Audience

Arguments

Need to better communicate value of diplomacy to public and politicians

Media portrayals can influence recruitment for diplomatic services

Explanation

There was an unexpected consensus on the importance of public perception and communication about diplomatic work. Both Le Bret and audience members highlighted the need to address misconceptions and actively promote the value of diplomacy to the public and politicians, which is not typically a central focus in discussions about diplomatic training and leadership.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement centered around the need for diverse experiences in diplomatic careers, the evolving nature of diplomacy, and the importance of flexible approaches to leadership development. There was also unexpected consensus on the significance of public perception and communication about diplomatic work.

Consensus level

The level of consensus among speakers was moderate. While there was agreement on broad themes, speakers offered diverse perspectives on how to address challenges in diplomatic training and leadership development. This diversity of views suggests a complex landscape for diplomatic education and career development, with implications for how diplomatic institutions approach training, recruitment, and retention of personnel.

Disagreements

Disagreement Points

Effectiveness of competency frameworks for developing diplomatic leadership

Speakers

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Geoffrey Wiseman

Arguments

Competency frameworks may be too rigid for developing leadership

Diplomats need experience outside foreign ministries to develop leadership

Summary

Al-Horr questions the effectiveness of competency frameworks for developing leadership skills in diplomacy, suggesting they may be too rigid. Wiseman, on the other hand, emphasizes the importance of gaining experience outside foreign ministries to develop leadership skills.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of disagreement revolve around the most effective methods for developing leadership skills in diplomats, the role of competency frameworks, and the best approaches for training and retaining diplomatic talent.

Disagreement level

The level of disagreement among the speakers is moderate. While there are differing opinions on specific approaches to diplomatic training and leadership development, there is a general consensus on the need for more holistic and diverse experiences for diplomats. These disagreements highlight the complexity of developing effective diplomatic leadership in a rapidly changing global environment and suggest that a multifaceted approach may be necessary to address the challenges faced by modern diplomats.

Partial Agreements

Partial Agreements

All speakers agree on the need for a more holistic approach to diplomatic training and leadership development. However, they differ in their specific recommendations: Al-Horr suggests using themes and experiential learning, Wiseman emphasizes gaining experience outside foreign ministries, and Le Bret focuses on experience in other sectors like private sector or NGOs.

Speakers

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Geoffrey Wiseman

Didier Le Bret

Arguments

Need to balance competency frameworks with more holistic approaches

Diplomats need experience outside foreign ministries to develop leadership

Need for diplomats to gain experience in other sectors

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers emphasized the need for flexibility in diplomatic training and leadership development, suggesting that rigid frameworks may not adequately prepare diplomats for the diverse challenges they face.

Speakers

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Geoffrey Wiseman

Arguments

Competency frameworks may be too rigid for developing leadership

Situational leadership is important for diplomats

Takeaways

Key Takeaways

Leadership skills like vision, influence and communication are crucial for diplomats

Traditional competency frameworks may be too rigid for developing leadership in diplomats

Gaining experience outside foreign ministries is valuable for diplomatic leadership development

There’s a need to balance structured training with more holistic, experiential approaches

Retaining trained diplomats is challenging due to opportunities in other sectors

The nature of diplomacy has become more complex, requiring specialized skills in areas like health and cyber

There are public misconceptions about diplomatic work that need to be addressed through better communication

Resolutions and Action Items

Consider alternatives to competency frameworks for leadership development, especially for mid-career and senior diplomats

Provide more opportunities for diplomats to gain experience outside foreign ministries

Implement mid-career programs to refresh and retain diplomats

Improve communication about the value and nature of diplomatic work to the public and politicians

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively identify and develop leadership potential in diplomats

How to balance the need for specialized skills with traditional diplomatic competencies

How to address the tension between politicians leading and diplomats following, while still developing diplomatic leadership

How to effectively retain trained diplomats in the face of other career opportunities

Suggested Compromises

Use competency frameworks for junior diplomats but more flexible approaches for mid-career and senior levels

Balance formal training with experiential learning and real-world simulations

Encourage diplomats to gain experience in other sectors while providing pathways to return to diplomatic service

Thought Provoking Comments

Now I have the question to question the competency framework. Is it the best approach for developing diplomats? I mean, if all of us are working on developing diplomats according to this competency framework, does that mean that we are producing same quality and same prototype of diplomats?

Speaker

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Reason

This comment challenges the conventional wisdom of using competency frameworks for diplomat training, raising important questions about standardization vs. diversity in diplomatic skills.

Impact

It shifted the discussion towards considering alternative approaches to diplomat training and development, leading to exploration of more holistic and flexible methods.

Don’t stay within the foreign ministry bubble.

Speaker

Geoffrey Wiseman

Reason

This succinct statement encapsulates an important idea about broadening diplomatic experience and perspective beyond traditional boundaries.

Impact

It sparked discussion about the value of diverse experiences for diplomats, including working in other sectors or organizations, and how this can enhance leadership skills.

We encourage people to get out of the box of our ministry. But the key point is that we must be sure that once we tell them, get out of NGOs, civil society, whatever, private sector, we must be consequent and be sure that after a period of time, we can welcome them again.

Speaker

Didier Le Bret

Reason

This comment builds on Wiseman’s point, but adds the crucial aspect of ensuring diplomats can return to the ministry, highlighting the importance of retaining talent while allowing for diverse experiences.

Impact

It led to a deeper discussion about retention strategies and the value of diverse experiences in diplomatic careers.

And we are waiting for more proposals to come. My conclusion here, try to think of alternative for your diplomats. Don’t stick to one approach that is competency framework. It’s perfect for the foundation program, perfect for juniors. But for mid-career and high-level diplomats, I think we need to find an alternative.

Speaker

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Reason

This comment proposes a nuanced approach to diplomat training, suggesting different methods for different career stages.

Impact

It encouraged participants to think more critically about tailoring training approaches to career stages and the limitations of standardized frameworks for senior diplomats.

Real leadership is not a question of title. Real leadership is a function of character, characteristics, and experience put together.

Speaker

Barbara Bodine

Reason

This comment provides a insightful definition of leadership that goes beyond formal positions, emphasizing personal qualities and experience.

Impact

It shifted the discussion towards a more nuanced understanding of leadership in diplomacy, encouraging consideration of how to identify and develop these qualities beyond formal training programs.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by challenging conventional approaches to diplomatic training and leadership development. They encouraged a more nuanced, flexible, and holistic view of diplomat development, emphasizing the importance of diverse experiences, tailored approaches for different career stages, and leadership qualities beyond formal competencies. The discussion evolved from critiquing existing frameworks to exploring innovative alternatives that could better prepare diplomats for the complexities of modern international relations.

Follow-up Questions

Are diplomats being trained for acting leadership roles, such as being a chargé d’affaires?

Speaker

Geoffrey Wiseman

Explanation

Wiseman highlighted the lack of training he received for unexpected leadership roles as a junior diplomat and questioned if this has changed in current diplomatic training programs.

How can diplomatic institutions find alternatives to competency frameworks for developing mid-career and high-level diplomats?

Speaker

Abdulaziz Al-Horr

Explanation

Al-Horr questioned the effectiveness of competency frameworks for more experienced diplomats and suggested exploring alternative approaches for leadership development.

How can diplomatic institutions better retain talented staff and allow for mobility between sectors?

Speaker

Jolanda Spies

Explanation

Spies raised the issue of retaining trained diplomats and suggested a more flexible approach to allow movement between diplomatic service and other sectors.

What resources or strategies can be used to better communicate the value and reality of diplomatic work to the public and government?

Speaker

Liliana Popescu

Explanation

Popescu highlighted the need to improve public understanding of diplomatic work to gain support and funding.

What creative approaches can be used to identify and develop leaders beyond traditional competency frameworks?

Speaker

Najman Oteibi

Explanation

Oteibi questioned the limitations of competency frameworks in identifying leaders and called for more creative approaches to leadership development.

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed.

Unpacking Competencies, Equipping People for Success

Unpacking Competencies, Equipping People for Success

Session at a Glance

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

Full session report

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.

Session Transcript

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.

M

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Speech speed

170 words per minute

Speech length

2215 words

Speech time

780 seconds

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

Explanation

The speaker argues that there is no universal competency model for training diplomats. Factors like country size and diplomatic corps structure influence how competencies are defined and implemented.

Evidence

Example of small countries like Bahrain needing to train diplomats as versatile generalists due to limited personnel.

Major Discussion Point

Competency Frameworks for Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Federica Mogherini

Carlo Borghini

Tanya Mihaylova

Agreed on

Need for adaptable and diverse competency frameworks

Disagreed with

Federica Mogherini

Disagreed on

Universal vs. tailored competency frameworks

Balancing generalist vs. specialist training for smaller diplomatic services

Explanation

The speaker discusses the challenge of deciding whether to train diplomats as generalists or specialists, especially for smaller countries. They argue that smaller diplomatic services often need versatile generalists who can handle a wide range of tasks.

Evidence

Bahrain’s approach of training ‘jack-of-all-trades’ diplomats who are masters of at least one area.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training

Disagreed with

Carlo Borghini

Disagreed on

Generalist vs. specialist training

Measuring success and evaluating effectiveness of diplomatic training programs

Explanation

The speaker highlights the difficulty in measuring the success of diplomatic training. They argue that success depends on foreign policy objectives and values, and that diplomatic academies need to define what success means for them.

Evidence

Discussion of different potential measures of success for diplomatic academies, such as research impact, academic rankings, or effectiveness of training.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training

F

Federica Mogherini

Speech speed

157 words per minute

Speech length

2594 words

Speech time

989 seconds

European Union Diplomatic Academy focuses on developing European-specific competencies

Explanation

The speaker describes the unique approach of the EU Diplomatic Academy in training diplomats to represent the EU. They emphasize the need for diplomats to understand the complex EU decision-making process and to negotiate both internally and externally.

Evidence

Description of the EU Diplomatic Academy’s five-month program covering EU external action, foreign policy, security and defense policy, and other areas relevant to EU diplomacy.

Major Discussion Point

Competency Frameworks for Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Carlo Borghini

Tanya Mihaylova

Agreed on

Need for adaptable and diverse competency frameworks

Disagreed with

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Disagreed on

Universal vs. tailored competency frameworks

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

Explanation

The speaker emphasizes the importance of experiential learning in the EU Diplomatic Academy. They argue that living and studying together helps diplomats develop a European attitude and understand different national perspectives.

Evidence

Description of the academy’s approach of having diplomats from different EU countries live and study together for five months.

Major Discussion Point

Approaches to Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Tanya Mihaylova

Audience

Agreed on

Importance of practical skills and experience in diplomatic training

J

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Speech speed

93 words per minute

Speech length

1605 words

Speech time

1032 seconds

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

Explanation

The speaker outlines the competency framework used by the Peruvian Diplomatic Academy. This framework covers a range of skills and knowledge areas deemed essential for modern diplomats.

Evidence

Detailed description of the four competency areas and their components, such as basic academic knowledge, embassy management skills, soft skills like leadership, and global understanding of key issues and regions.

Major Discussion Point

Competency Frameworks for Diplomatic Training

Practical embassy management skills are essential for new diplomats

Explanation

The speaker emphasizes the importance of practical skills in embassy management for new diplomats. They argue that theoretical knowledge is not enough and that diplomats need to be prepared for the day-to-day tasks of running an embassy.

Evidence

Examples of practical skills taught, such as hiring and firing procedures, cooperation, economic promotion, cultural promotion, and consular management.

Major Discussion Point

Approaches to Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Federica Mogherini

Tanya Mihaylova

Audience

Agreed on

Importance of practical skills and experience in diplomatic training

C

Carlo Borghini

Speech speed

156 words per minute

Speech length

1944 words

Speech time

745 seconds

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

Explanation

The speaker argues that NATO needs diplomats who can combine traditional diplomatic skills with the ability to use advanced technologies. This is necessary to address complex global challenges and anticipate risks and opportunities.

Evidence

Description of NATO’s new HR strategy focusing on a diverse workforce and the need for diplomats to understand and use technologies like artificial intelligence and quantum computing.

Major Discussion Point

Competency Frameworks for Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Federica Mogherini

Tanya Mihaylova

Agreed on

Need for adaptable and diverse competency frameworks

Disagreed with

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Disagreed on

Generalist vs. specialist training

Recruiting and retaining top talent for diplomatic service

Explanation

The speaker discusses the challenge of attracting and retaining high-quality talent for diplomatic service. They emphasize the need for a diverse workforce that can handle complex global issues.

Evidence

Description of NATO’s efforts to recruit a diverse workforce and retrain existing staff through various development programs.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training

A

Audience

Speech speed

107 words per minute

Speech length

846 words

Speech time

472 seconds

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

Explanation

The speaker from China emphasizes the importance of cultivating diplomats with a strong sense of devotion to both their country and humanity as a whole. They argue that this dual commitment is essential for effective diplomacy.

Evidence

Description of China’s approach to diplomatic training, including the establishment of China Foreign Affairs University and China Diplomatic Academy.

Major Discussion Point

Competency Frameworks for Diplomatic Training

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

Explanation

The speaker argues that practical experience is crucial for developing diplomatic competencies. They state that theoretical knowledge alone is not sufficient and that real-world practice is necessary.

Major Discussion Point

Approaches to Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Federica Mogherini

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Tanya Mihaylova

Agreed on

Importance of practical skills and experience in diplomatic training

T

Tanya Mihaylova

Speech speed

134 words per minute

Speech length

2040 words

Speech time

910 seconds

Regional cooperation and understanding can be fostered through diplomatic training programs

Explanation

The speaker discusses how diplomatic training programs can promote regional cooperation and understanding. They argue that such programs can help fill knowledge gaps about specific regions and foster communication between diplomats from different countries.

Evidence

Example of Bulgaria’s Winter School of Diplomacy, which brings together junior diplomats from the wider Black Sea region and EU member states to learn about and discuss regional issues.

Major Discussion Point

Approaches to Diplomatic Training

Training should balance theoretical knowledge with practical exercises and simulations

Explanation

The speaker emphasizes the importance of balancing theoretical knowledge with practical exercises in diplomatic training. They argue that interactive approaches like role-playing and simulation games are crucial for developing diplomatic skills.

Evidence

Description of the Winter School of Diplomacy’s curriculum, which includes both lectures and interactive exercises like simulation games on international climate negotiations.

Major Discussion Point

Approaches to Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Federica Mogherini

Julio Hernan Garro Galvez

Audience

Agreed on

Importance of practical skills and experience in diplomatic training

Adapting training to rapidly changing global circumstances

Explanation

The speaker discusses the challenge of adapting diplomatic training programs to rapidly changing global circumstances. They argue that training curricula need to be flexible and regularly updated to reflect current geopolitical realities.

Evidence

Example of how the Winter School of Diplomacy program was redesigned on short notice in 2022 to address the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its implications.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training

Agreed with

Muneera Khalifa Hamad

Federica Mogherini

Carlo Borghini

Agreed on

Need for adaptable and diverse competency frameworks

J

Jerome L’host

Speech speed

0 words per minute

Speech length

0 words

Speech time

1 seconds

Developing diplomats who can navigate complex geopolitical environments

Explanation

The speaker highlights the importance of developing diplomats who can effectively navigate complex and rapidly changing geopolitical environments. This requires a combination of traditional diplomatic skills and the ability to adapt to new challenges.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Diplomatic Training

Agreements

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.

Disagreements

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

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

Takeaways

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

Thought Provoking Comments

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.

Follow-up Questions

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.

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed.

Mastering Diplomatic Competencies for an Ever-Changing World

Mastering Diplomatic Competencies for an Ever-Changing World

Session at a Glance

Summary

This discussion featured Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger sharing ten key lessons from his diplomatic career. He emphasized the importance of knowing one’s role, thinking ahead, and learning to listen effectively. Ischinger stressed the value of understanding adversaries’ perspectives and not seeking total defeat in negotiations. He highlighted the need for diplomats to adapt to technological advances and hybrid challenges. The ambassador advised defining missions based on available leverage and encouraged offering solutions, not just identifying problems. He cautioned against excessive risk aversion while promoting optimism in diplomacy. Ischinger’s most crucial point was the importance of building and maintaining trust, calling it the “currency of diplomacy.”

The discussion touched on Germany’s diplomatic shift regarding Russia, with Ischinger acknowledging failures to foresee Putin’s strategy. He suggested the need for dedicated risk managers in government. Regarding the Ukraine conflict, Ischinger recommended backchannel diplomacy and noted China’s emerging role in European conflicts. The topic of Chinese electric vehicles in Europe was briefly debated. Ischinger addressed the challenge of disinformation, proposing that diplomatic institutions offer fact-checking services and engage more in public diplomacy. He emphasized the need for accessible, provable facts to counter misinformation, citing the example of NATO expansion myths. The discussion concluded with Ischinger advocating for diplomatic officers to be more active in public messaging, despite the associated risks.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– 10 lessons for diplomatic competence, including knowing who you represent, thinking ahead, learning to listen, understanding your adversary, and building trust

– The importance of listening skills in diplomacy

– Germany’s shift in foreign policy regarding Russia and weapons exports

– The role of backchannel diplomacy and potential US-Russia understanding in resolving the Ukraine conflict

– China’s emerging role in European and global conflicts

The overall purpose of the discussion was to share insights and lessons learned from a long diplomatic career to help train and advise current and future diplomats on effective diplomatic practices.

The tone of the discussion was primarily instructive and reflective, with the speaker drawing on his extensive experience to offer advice. It became more analytical when discussing current geopolitical issues like the Ukraine conflict and China’s role. The Q&A portion allowed for some respectful disagreement and additional perspectives to be shared, maintaining a collegial and intellectual tone throughout.

Speakers

– Moderator: Conference moderator

– Wolfgang Ischinger:

– Former Deputy Foreign Minister of Germany

– Former German ambassador to the United States and United Kingdom

– Former chairman of the Munich Security Conference

– Senior professor for security policy and diplomatic practice at the Hertie School in Berlin

– President of the Munich Security Conference Foundation Council

– Audience: Various audience members asking questions

Additional speakers:

– Bill Burns: Current CIA director, former American diplomat (mentioned but not present)

– Albert Rohan: Former Austrian diplomat (mentioned but not present)

– Wang Yi: Chinese foreign minister (mentioned but not present)

Full session report

Expanded Summary of Diplomatic Discussion with Wolfgang Ischinger

Introduction:

This discussion featured Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, a distinguished German diplomat with over four decades of experience in foreign policy and security affairs. Ischinger served as Germany’s ambassador to the United States and the United Kingdom, State Secretary of the German Foreign Office, and chairman of the Munich Security Conference from 2008 to 2022. The event included a presentation of key diplomatic lessons followed by a question-and-answer session with the audience.

Ambassador Ischinger’s Background and Experience:

Ischinger’s extensive diplomatic career includes significant roles in various international negotiations. Notably, he was involved in the NATO-Russia Founding Act negotiations, working closely with Russian diplomat Afanasyevsky. This experience, along with his tenure as chairman of the Munich Security Conference, provided him with unique insights into global diplomatic challenges and strategies.

Key Lessons in Diplomatic Competence:

Ischinger presented ten essential lessons for diplomatic competence:

1. Know who you are and whom you represent

2. Think ahead about the future

3. Learn to listen and understand

4. Try to understand your adversary’s position

5. Become experts on hybrid challenges and disinformation

6. Define your mission based on available leverage

7. Offer solutions, not just identify problems

8. Accept calculated risks

9. Maintain an optimistic outlook

10. Build and maintain trust

Ischinger emphasized that trust is the “currency of diplomacy,” asserting that without trust, no meaningful agreements can be reached. This point resonated strongly with the audience and served as a powerful conclusion to his list of lessons.

The importance of listening skills in diplomacy was a recurring theme. An audience member, identified as a teacher of diplomacy, expanded on this point, stating, “Learning to listen. Learning how to listen. And learning what to listen for. Sometimes it’s the blank space between the words.” This comment highlighted the nuanced nature of diplomatic communication, emphasizing the importance of understanding context and subtext.

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy:

The discussion touched upon several challenges facing modern diplomacy:

1. Failure to anticipate Russia’s actions in Ukraine: Ischinger reflected on the 2007 Munich Security Conference speech by Putin, acknowledging that consecutive German chancellors had spent decades building trust with Russia, only to see it fail. This led to a reflection on the limitations of trust-building and the need for better risk assessment in government.

2. Need for dedicated risk assessment: Ischinger suggested that governments should consider implementing dedicated risk management roles or processes to avoid strategic policy failures.

3. Importance of backchannel communications: In the context of the Ukraine conflict, Ischinger emphasized the crucial role of backchannel diplomacy in managing and potentially resolving conflicts.

4. China’s emerging role: In response to a question, Ischinger noted China’s increasing involvement in European and global conflicts, predicting that China would play a role in future conflict resolution efforts, including in the Middle East. This observation highlighted the changing dynamics of global diplomacy and the need for new approaches.

5. Addressing disinformation: The challenge of combating disinformation was discussed, with Ischinger proposing that diplomatic institutions offer fact-checking services. However, he acknowledged the difficulties in implementing such services while maintaining credibility and avoiding perceptions of government influence.

6. Balancing public diplomacy and risk management: Ischinger advocated for diplomatic officers to be more active in public messaging, despite the associated risks. This highlighted the need for improved training and institutional support for public diplomacy efforts.

7. Understanding history and regional context: Ischinger stressed the importance of diplomats having a deep understanding of historical and regional contexts when engaging in negotiations or conflict resolution.

International Relations and Future Negotiations:

Ischinger discussed the potential role of the United States in future negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, emphasizing the importance of maintaining open channels of communication. He also touched on the evolving nature of global diplomacy, noting that future conflict resolution efforts may involve a broader range of international actors.

Agreements and Disagreements:

There was broad agreement on the importance of listening skills in diplomacy and the need to address disinformation challenges. The discussion on international trade issues, particularly regarding Chinese electric vehicles in Europe, revealed differing perspectives within the EU, but this did not significantly impact the overall discussion on diplomatic competencies.

Unresolved Issues and Suggested Compromises:

Several issues remained unresolved, including:

– How to effectively resolve the ongoing conflict in Ukraine

– The specific role China might play in future European conflict negotiations

– How to structure and implement fact-checking services to counter disinformation effectively

Suggested approaches included using backchannel communications between Russia and Ukraine, involving China in future negotiation formats for European conflicts, and resolving trade conflicts through existing processes rather than confrontational measures.

Conclusion:

The discussion provided valuable insights into the complexities of modern diplomacy, emphasizing the importance of adaptability, communication skills, and understanding shifting geopolitical dynamics. It highlighted the need for diplomats to continually refine their skills and for diplomatic institutions to evolve in response to emerging challenges such as disinformation and changing global power structures. Ischinger’s extensive experience and reflections offered a unique perspective on the past, present, and future of international diplomacy.

Session Transcript

Moderator: Thank you. Very interesting, inspiring and motivating words. I think that we are ready to continue with the working part of our conference and it is my great pleasure to introduce our first keynote speaker of today’s session, Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger, who will address one very interesting topic, how to master diplomatic competencies in this ever-changing world. Before I give the floor to our distinguished speaker, allow me to say just a few words about his career, even though when you speak people of such a profile it’s very difficult to introduce them, but I will at least try to say some of the key points from his more than four decades long career. Ambassador Ischinger served as a Deputy Foreign Minister of Germany from 1998 to 2001, Germany’s ambassador to the United States from 2001 to 2006 and to the United Kingdom from 2006 to 2008. Perhaps most notably, he was the chairman of the Munich Security Conference from 2008 to 2022 when he fostered critical dialogue on global security issues. In addition to his impressive diplomatic career, Ambassador Ischinger has been an active figure in academia and policymaking, served as a senior professor for security policy and diplomatic practice at the Hertie School in Berlin. He has published widely on foreign security and defense policy issues. Presently, Ambassador Ischinger serves as the president of the Munich Security Conference Foundation Council. In addition, he advises the private sector, governments and international organizations on various strategic issues. Ambassador, it is a great pleasure to have you here and please, the floor is yours. And after Ambassador’s presentation, he will be more than happy to take comments, questions or remarks from the floor. Thank you. Ambassador, please.

Wolfgang Ischinger: Good morning, and let me first of all thank our hosts for inviting me. I think this is, for me, a great privilege. It’s a wonderful pleasure to be back in Montenegro where I haven’t been regrettably in a good number of years. This is a fascinating topic to cover for people like myself, a career diplomat. But let me start by saying that as we speak, and we should not forget that, as we speak, there’s a war, a rather brutal war, ongoing here in Europe. And this always raises for diplomats the question between hard power and soft power, and what is the relationship, and how does one use soft power to complement hard power if necessary. I remember exactly where we were 30 years ago when I was the German representative in the so-called contact group that tried, at the end successfully, fortunately, to end a bloody war in this neighborhood, in Bosnia-Herzegovina. I remember Dayton, that was in 1995. And then, of course, once again in this neighborhood, the bloody conflict in Kosovo. And this is only 30 or a little less than 30 years ago. So that takes me, that takes me to my, that takes me to really to my topic. I could speak at length about how diplomacy in a conflict situation does sometimes require the application of hard power, of military threats, or even of military force. But I’ll leave that to others. I will do what I’ve been asked to do, to talk about diplomatic competence, and the lessons that I believe I’ve learned over the last 40, 45 years of my diplomatic career. I benefited, I have to admit, I benefited a lot from rereading something which my old friend, American friend, Bill Burns, who is currently the CIA director, which Bill Burns published when he left the Foreign Service, I guess a decade ago or so, for the first time. He left 10 parting thoughts for American diplomats. And I will not quote the 10 parting thoughts, but I will admit that I use some of his 10 points in the list of 10 lessons, which I’m now going to present to you rather briefly, and I look forward to having an active discussion with your questions or comments or contributions. So I have, I’ve put together 10 points. First point is, as a starting point, if you’re engaging in diplomacy, you need to know who you are and whom you represent and why. This sounds obvious, but it is not always there. So it does make a difference if you represent Montenegro on the global stage or if you represent, say, the United States of America, because there are different means and tools at your disposal. So know who you are. My second lesson is diplomacy is actually not so much about today. It’s also about today, but it’s mostly about tomorrow. So in other words, think ahead. Think about of where you want to be, where you want your country to be, where you want this negotiation to be going forward in the future. In other words, diplomacy is about the future and not so much as about the past. That also, by the way, makes it easier to overcome past controversies and past hate and past inability to talk to each other if one thinks about the future. My third lesson is something which Bill Burns didn’t have in his list, but it is something which I thought I have often missed when I dealt with other diplomats. My third lesson is learn to listen. When I went through our diplomatic academy, I think there’s a friend of mine from the German institution, and of course this was many decades ago, we were taken through various exercises to learn how to speak, how to speak publicly, how to speak effectively, how to make a point, etc. That’s all very relevant for the kind of public diplomacy that increasingly we’re being asked to carry out. But more importantly, I think, is the ability to listen. It’s the most underrated ability in diplomacy. And understanding and learning how to listen means not only to understand what’s being said by your adversary or your opposite number, it’s also important that you understand why something is not being said. What is he or she saying to you between the lines? Are you capable of grasping that? Of course, that requires a bit of understanding your opposite number, and that takes me to another lesson, which is particularly relevant if you are engaged in action. active diplomatic negotiations, regardless on what kind of issue, whether it’s cultural or economic or military or scientific. Try to walk in your adversary’s shoes. Try to understand what his mission is, where his or her red lines may be, and try to understand that you don’t really want to send your adversary back with a total defeat. Because if he or she goes back home totally defeated, next time you meet, she or he will come better prepared and you will have a harder time dealing with that particular country or that particular negotiating team going forward. So don’t go for the kill. Go for the advantage that you can possibly create and try to understand what he or she needs to stand for and what he or she needs to bring home as a minimum. That’s part of the ability to listen. That’s one of my most important points to make here. Another one, the next one, has to deal – deals with current and future technological advances. I think we diplomats have no choice but to become experts on hybrid challenges, on how to deal with disinformation, how to deal and how to use social media, both at the personal level but also at the institutional level. The amount and the intensity of disinformation, of all kinds of hybrid challenges to the stability of our countries, to our foreign policies, et cetera, is and has become quite staggering. And I – and the number of books on my desk, which I get from all sorts of people, books that are being written about the subject, is incredibly increasing. I find it difficult to swallow and digest all of that, but I think it’s very important that we understand these modern challenges that didn’t exist at all when I joined our German Foreign Service approximately 50 years ago in 1975. The next one is a tactical one. Define your mission and shape it to your toolbox. What do I mean by that? I mean that you need to think hard about how you connect your leverage to your strategy in order to obtain a result. If you don’t have any leverage, don’t pursue an over-ambitious strategy because you will fail. If you have a lot of leverage, whether it’s economic pressure or incentives – thank you very much – or economic incentives, you can define a more ambitious strategy. So make sure that your strategy responds and correlates to the kind of leverage that you can bring with you in your ongoing negotiations. My next lesson is one particularly directed at the young diplomat, the person who is a new member of a foreign service and who wishes to make herself or himself noticed as a successful member of the diplomatic service. In other words, you want to be seen as being capable of identifying the challenge, of writing a really exciting paper about, let’s say, the Russian threat or the Chinese threat in terms of electric automobiles on the European market or so. Well, that’s all important to define the challenges. What you want to do, if you want to take my advice, is to add a little chapter at the end that offers a solution. Many, many diplomats find it wonderful to identify problems without offering a solution. So make it a point that if you present a problem to your minister or to your prime minister, make sure you don’t ask him to come up with the solution. Present your solution or your solution options, as Henry Kissinger would have said. Kissinger always said, don’t give me one option, give me two or three or four. And that is not a bad recipe for young diplomats to follow. So come up with solutions, even if it’s hard. Three more points. The most risk-free approach to diplomacy is, of course, to do nothing. So if you want to make sure that no one can accuse you of making mistakes, just don’t ever come up with a risky proposal. I think that is a very, very bad recipe for the future successful diplomat. Any action – and that is true in diplomacy as it is in most other walks of life – any action carries some degree of risk. So don’t be totally risk-averse. Accept risk as a matter of life and as a matter of diplomacy. Accept risk wisely. Don’t take unnecessary risks, but accept risks as part of your profession. The one before last is more a kind of a character issue. I remember seeing this American movie, the title of which was something like No Place for or No Time for Old Men. No Place for Old Men. Exactly. In changing that around, I would say in diplomacy, there is no place for pessimism. If you are by nature a pessimist, become a dentist or do something else. If you wish to be a good diplomat, you need to be in principle an optimist that problems can and hopefully will be resolved. That’s what the public expects you and that’s actually what your minister wants you to be, a problem solver, not somebody who cries out about all the ills of our world. So no place for pessimism. And my last point, ladies and gentlemen, is really I left the last point for a good reason because I think it’s the single most important one. The last point is this. Build and maintain trust. Trust is a very precious kind of thing. Losing trust in a marriage, in a personal relationship. relationship between countries. Losing trust is very easy. It happens overnight. You take one wrong step and boom, trust is gone. Rebuilding it, rebuilding it may take weeks, months, years. Rebuilding trust once it’s been lost is very hard in personal relationships but also in international relations. So building and maintaining trust is probably the single greatest asset if you are successful in doing that. Maintaining your relationships, making sure people know they can trust you even if the going is rough and difficult and even if you have totally opposite views and even if you are in an adversarial relationship. Trust – I forget who said that first but I’ve repeated it I don’t know how many hundreds of times – trust is the currency of diplomacy. In the absence of trust you will not get anyone’s signature on any document if you want people to sign a treaty or an agreement or an MOU or whatever is on the agenda. But if you have the trust then you are in a great position. This is the single biggest asset you can have and it actually works not just once or twice in a particular negotiating format or diplomatic situation. It is something which if you handle it wisely will accompany you through your entire career and you will be known and you will be seen as somebody regardless of which government you represent, even if the government has changed over time, et cetera, the people behind him or her, people will say, this guy, this person can be trusted and I know he has not lied to me a single time. That’s I think the single biggest piece of advice I can offer on the basis of what I’ve learned over these last four, four and a half decades. So I think I’ve more or less taken up my time and I’d love to have questions or comments from you. I don’t know how much time we have. I’m sure our hosts will cut me short when the time is over. So please, who would like to offer a comment or disagree with me violently on the trust issue or so? No one? Sure. Please.

Audience: First of all, I just want to thank you for those ten lessons. I do teach diplomacy and this is going to be typed up, made clean and handed out to my students. And I really just want to reinforce rather than challenge one of your points, and that’s the third point, the importance, the criticality of learning to listen. Learning how to listen. And learning what to listen for. Sometimes it’s the blank space between the words. And I was told once by a boss that you get paid as much to listen as you get paid to talk. So shut up. And I just recommend that if you do this again, that you put learning to listen at the top. Because I think it is one of the most critical skills that we can impart to young diplomats, young business people, almost anybody, maybe young marriages, is the ability to listen. So I want to underscore that. I think sometimes when we look at competencies, we’re looking at the ability to code, the ability to do this, the ability to do that. And I think your point that sometimes our greatest ability is not to be doing something, but to be quiet and listening and watching. So thank you for that.

Wolfgang Ischinger: Thank you very much. If I may just add another comment to this. When I first got involved in Balkan politics, actually in 1994, 30 years ago, I had no idea about this region. I had never served there. I had not lived there. I knew very little. I knew, you know, what an average German young diplomat knew about the Western Balkans, but that was actually not a lot. What I learned, what I benefited from, was that in those years, in the mid-90s, I found an Austrian friend, Albert Rohan, who has since passed away, who, unlike myself, knew everything about this region. He knew the people. He knew the leaders. He knew their relationships. And with his help, with his personal help, he was the political director at the time in the Austrian foreign ministry. I had the same job in our foreign ministry. With his help and his advice, I managed to get over the hurdles that presented themselves to us in those days. So what am I trying to say here? Listening, and I couldn’t agree more with you. I should probably put it as the number one lesson, as you suggest. Listening is very important, but it does also imply that you need to know a little bit about what’s going on. You need to know about the history of the region that you’re talking about, the country, the people. One of my more experienced negotiation colleagues, in that case it was a Frenchman, he said to me once, I have the ambition of understanding my opponent’s thinking and his red lines and his instructions and what his government wishes him to achieve. I have the ambition of understanding that better than he himself. Now that’s, in most cases, not really doable, but the ambition to understand your opponent and his motivation and his objective will help you to listen better and to understand better why certain things he or she is not going to say to you. Because it’s implied that there are certain things that, of course, are relevant, but are not being put on the table. So simply put, take time to learn history. Take time to learn about the people. Take time to learn about the political arrangements in that region or in that particular country. Don’t take it for granted that they act on the exact same principles as your friends at home. They may have very other different priorities and arrangements and afterthoughts and strategic, long-term strategic ideas. So that’s also really quite important. Any other questions? Oh yeah, there is one. The gentleman right behind, Barbara. Yes, please.

Audience: Thank you so much. Your recommendations, your ideas were as illuminating as if they were descending from Mount Sinai and I’m really appreciating it. And I also very much signed to your last tenth point, which is about building trust. And you are a German career diplomat. Your chancellors, consecutive chancellors, for decades were building, building, building trust. And you know what I’m referring to, it all failed. Which ones of the nine previous recommendations were not taken seriously enough? How could it go so terribly wrong? Oh, and I’m the head of the Estonian Diplomatic School. Thank you so much.

Wolfgang Ischinger: Well, that’s a great question. I’m not sure I have a simple answer to that. But what I would say is, you know, quite frankly, we were, we, I say we to make it simple. I was part of the senior German diplomatic service only until about 2008, which is when I left to run the Munich Security Conference. And I was present at the NATO summit in Bucharest, which took important decisions regarding the security architecture, et cetera. So yes, we collectively failed to see the writing on the wall. I remember sitting in the audience in Munich in February of 2007, when President Putin spoke at the Munich Security Conference for the first and only time so far. And he made a, he presented a very tough speech, actually, which most of us, the leaders, but also the diplomats in the room, didn’t take seriously enough. I think most people in the room at the time thought, oh, he needs to let off a little steam and, you know, make a tough, tough speech, and then tomorrow morning life will go on. So that was underestimated. By the way, and that’s also an important point, we in Berlin were not the only ones that didn’t see the writing on the wall. In 2009, a year after the little war in Georgia, Joe Biden, the current President of the United States, arrived in Munich at the Munich Security Conference to kick off and to start a new round of U.S.-Russian discussions and negotiations, including on the very important issue of New START. And we all thought at the time, in 2009, 10, 11, 12, 13, that things could be handled. We did not understand that there was a larger strategy evolving on the Russian side. So I think it was not simply a German omission, but of course we were the country and we have been and we continue to be the one country that had, and on this I would agree with you, that had to make the starkest, the most dramatic, the most complete 180-degree departure from past policies and practices, including, of course, first and foremost, in our energy relationships, et cetera. So I would say that the toughest lesson for German diplomacy, for German foreign policy, has been that we had to throw overboard a huge number of principles which, ever since I joined the Foreign Service in 1975, we had considered to be sacred principles of German foreign policy. I’ll give you one wonderful example, which was held in highest esteem until two and a half years ago, until February of 2022, by major elements of the German diplomatic and foreign policy establishment, namely the idea that Germany, with its own particular horrible history in the 20th century, would never wish to export a single weapon to an area of conflict. And we kept that principle working until 2021. Now fast-forward situation today, Germany is by a large margin the single biggest weapons deliverer to a country at war, Ukraine. That shows you, you know, how completely we’ve come full circle. So we’ve had to learn a tough lesson, in particular on energy, and our economy is suffering, continues to suffer for that. So in other words, I don’t have a very simple conclusion to draw. What I would say, however, is that I find it interesting that most large companies that I know – and I’ve been working with advising companies in Germany and beyond quite a bit recently on geostrategic issues – most companies have a risk manager, somebody who on the board or, you know, in the higher echelons of that company is responsible for assessing risks. My government does not have a risk manager. Our current policy is that every single minister, whether it’s the economics minister or the foreign minister, is his own risk manager. Well if you are the one who takes decisions and is supposed at the same time to be your own risk manager, that’s not a great idea. The risk manager should be, you know, should be a unique position who raises his hand and says, look, have we considered sufficiently whether 60% of our gas imports should actually come from Russia? Is that a good idea or maybe not such a good idea? That question was never raised in our government because we didn’t have that kind of a risk manager, which is why I think that going forward governments should have that kind of an arrangement that can be, in the case of the United States, that can be a function carried out by the National Security Council, for example, or by some congressional body. We don’t have a sufficiently energetic and clear-headed body yet, but we’re working on it. I could go on and on about this, but it’s of course a very relevant question. Do we have five more minutes? Yes, please.

Audience: Hello. Didier Le Boeum, the head of the French Diplomatic Academy. Being French and German, we know that everything can be overcome between former enemies and best partners. On the current situation, first of all, thank you very much for your quite inspiring lessons. I should have started by that. What would be your key advice for Ukrainian and Russian leaders, or people even, to try and prepare, as you said, diplomacy is a matter of future, not the past. How would you – what would be the critical points they should focus on for the future?

Wolfgang Ischinger: Okay. Great question also. That, of course, goes a little bit beyond the diplomatic training programs, but I’d love to try to answer your question. I think I can sum up my answer to you best by quoting the title of the last book written by my friend Bill Burns. The title was Backchannel. In this kind of situation where both Russia and Ukraine find it, for obvious reasons, practically impossible to have a meaningful conversation, a meaningful publicly seen conversation, I think the way to go is to do this through the backchannel, to do this in a non-publicly visible way. We have had examples of this, and some of these processes are ongoing. Take the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian discussions about exchanges of prisoners of war. We had similar discussions and exchanges on the Black Sea wheat transport arrangements with the help of Turkey and the United Nations, etc. So I think that hopefully arrangements can be made, including between Russia and Ukraine directly, to have informal, maybe intelligence, at the intelligence level, discussions about how one could move forward. Point one. Point two, if I may add that, when I tried to put myself in the shoes of the people in the Kremlin, and I suggested that it’s always important to try to put yourself in the shoes of the other people, I don’t detect a willingness by the leadership in the Kremlin, an interest in negotiating about the future of Ukraine with either Olaf Scholz, or for that matter with Emmanuel Macron, or with the incoming EU Commission or EU High Representative. I think in the Kremlin they believe that we are all vassals of the United States, and that is why I believe it will require some degree of U.S.-Russian understanding of what the goalposts of a future arrangement could be in order for meaningful negotiations to take place at some point. In other words, I believe that Russia and the United States will have, in my view, will have to have to play a pivotal role in creating the conditions for negotiations. Mind you, I’m not suggesting that anything should happen over the heads of those directly involved, over the heads of Ukraine, and certainly nothing will happen against the express will of the Kremlin anyway. One last point I’d like to offer to you here, because I see there are also some Chinese-looking people in the room. I think there is an interesting historic phenomenon that’s happening to us here. Remember, in 1812, at the Congress of Vienna, China was not present. They weren’t even invited. In 1871, when the German Reich was presented at Versailles after the Franco-Russian War, China was not there. In 1919, again in Versailles, after World War I, China was there, but only as an observer, not as an active player. And in 1945, when the United Nations were created, the China that we are dealing with today was not there. Taiwan was represented then, and of course, as you know, China took over from Taiwan only in the early 70s, as far as UN membership is concerned. So China has been – I think one can sum it up by saying that China has been mostly, if not totally, absent from conflicts in and around Europe for the last couple of hundred years. And I believe that that is now changing. That is a remarkable development. When Wang Yi, Chinese foreign minister, presented his ten points a couple of years ago, I’m not the only one who thought that the Chinese don’t do that just for fun. Why would they come up with ten points about Ukraine if they are not serious about the future of this situation? So I think that if and when a negotiating format emerges, I think we may assume that China may not wish to be a direct participant, but China will be involved, maybe from behind the scenes, maybe indirectly, maybe in some kind of contact group. I don’t know. But China will play a role in the Ukrainian conflict resolution effort, and it’s equally easy to predict that if and when a larger solution is going to be explored for the Middle East, including Iran, Israel, et cetera, et cetera, China will also wish not to be absent any longer. So I think that is, you know, a really important historic development, which we need to take into account if we think about the future of our European diplomacy. So how do we deal with China in this particular situation? Are there any more questions? I thought I had seen one more hand somewhere. Yes, please.

Audience: Thank you, sir. I’m from China Diplomatic Academy. So I will just have a very quick comment about the speech. You mentioned in the speech that China posed a threat, especially the Chinese electricity vehicle to Europe. But as far as we know, recently in EU, they discussed, imposed the tariffs to the vehicle, the electricity vehicle car from China. And even in Europe, there are different opinions. As far as we know, that only 10 countries say yes to this proposal, and five of them say no and veto. And 12 countries abstain from the voting. So this says something, right? And also, as we know, that most of the countries in the world do not think that Chinese electricity car vehicle imposed the threat to their countries. So in all, we don’t think that Chinese electricity car imposed threat to the world. Thank you.

Wolfgang Ischinger: Well, thank you very much for your comment. Personally, I don’t much disagree with you, but of course, there are different views in our automobile industry and elsewhere. I can only say I hope that conflicts like this can be resolved through the processes that are ongoing and that we don’t need to go into trade war-like confrontational responses against each other. I hope we have more important business with China than this. That would be my response.

Audience: You mentioned, and I think that’s one of the most important challenges we’re going to confront in the immediate future, is disinformation. I would like you to comment on that, on the view of offering solutions. Do you have any comment on what do you think, what are your views on how can we confront this threat that most of our countries are facing now and will increasingly face in the immediate future?

Wolfgang Ischinger: Well, thank you very much for that question. Of course, this phenomenon of disinformation is not just a challenge to diplomatic life, to diplomatic efforts, to diplomacy. It’s a societal, it’s a general political challenge. But I will limit myself to the question of what can we as diplomatic institutions do, what should we do in order to deal with these rising and ever more important challenges. Well, I think one service that we can provide is to offer, you know, to offer kind of a free fact-checking service. I’ll give you an example. In my own country, the myth that the Soviet Union was promised that NATO would never be enlarged beyond Germany in 1990, the myth continues to be quite popular. It is, of course, being fueled by all sorts of Russian and pseudo-Russian information sources. It’s been extremely difficult for the political classes and the media in Germany, mainstream media, to deal with this. So what I personally think is that it would be helpful if a reporter who has to write about or to speak about this kind of thing, if he had access to it. And of course, we are beginning to do that. Our governments collectively, individually, are working on that. But I think this should be a priority task for governments, for information agencies in governments, not in terms of censoring and not in terms of influencing, but in terms of presenting the facts. In my particular case of Germany in 1990 promising to the Soviet Union that there would never be a NATO membership for any of the Eastern partners, well, the best way of countering the Russian claim is to simply print out the full text of the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997. I happened to be among the negotiators of that particular text, and I can practically – I could, if you challenged me, I could quote from memory most of the articles in this not very long text, which we negotiated over a period of six or seven months. Your current ambassador in China, Burns, was part of the negotiating team on the American side, and the Russian chief negotiator was Vice Foreign Minister Afanasyevsky, who later on served as the Russian ambassador in Paris, and I think also in Belgium. He continued to serve, by the way, under Putin, because the accusation has often been, ah, this NATO-Russia Founding Act, where Russia accepted NATO enlargement, that was a ruse by the West, because Yeltsin was always drunk, and he didn’t know what he was doing, etc., etc. No, no, no, no, no. Vice Foreign Minister Afanasyevsky, yes, signed this agreement on behalf of the Yeltsin government, but he continued to serve as an ambassador under Putin. So the simple text of a written agreement, written, signed, and approved, and ratified, where Russia accepted NATO enlargement in principle and in detail, and where, you know, as our counter-concession, we, namely NATO, agreed that we would never deploy nuclear weapons in any of the future new NATO states, and that we would not deploy large combat forces in any of the new NATO states. And I think even though a number of NATO members have since said this NATO-Russia Founding Agreement is no longer valid because Russia has violated all the elements of it, the principle of this agreement, I think still holds, and NATO has never officially canceled it. So we can continue to say to our Russian friends, look, regardless of what was said and discussed in 1990, your country has officially agreed to this document, which allowed, with all the details and the counter-concessions, NATO enlargement to go forward, full stop, end of debate, end of debate. And this is the kind of thing that I believe we need to do much more of. We need to produce an entire library of accessible facts, facts, facts, facts, provable facts that can be used by the media, that can be used by the citizen, and I don’t care which institution is being charged with furnishing these facts. Maybe it should be an institution free of government, free of government influence in order to make sure that we have a transparent process and that it’s not a kind of a government influencing effort. But this is part and parcel of what I would call an ever-increasing task for diplomats to engage in public diplomacy. When I was a young diplomat half a century ago, public diplomacy was being discussed as an emerging task becoming more important. Yes, indeed. Today it’s probably among the highest priorities, and I’m not sure that all of our diplomatic institutions are geared to make it possible for our diplomatic officers serving in embassies or consulates outside to actually take the message to the public, which of course involves a risk. You express one wrong sentence and you’re being hammered by the local press, and then the people in your back office at home say, well, this particular consul or this particular ambassador is probably incapable of doing a good job, so your job may be at risk. There’s risk involved, but I think this needs to be done, and our diplomatic officers need to be protected by their back offices, even if they do take a risk in speaking out more in public and helping to explain what the facts are, what the facts are against this wave of disinformation that’s been hammering us. Thank you very, very much. I’ve been speaking for too long already. Thank you so much.

Moderator:

W

Wolfgang Ischinger

Speech speed

106 words per minute

Speech length

5098 words

Speech time

2877 seconds

Know who you are and whom you represent

Explanation

Ischinger emphasizes the importance of diplomats understanding their identity and who they represent. This self-awareness is crucial as it determines the tools and means available to a diplomat in their work.

Evidence

He contrasts representing Montenegro versus the United States to illustrate how different countries have different resources at their disposal.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Think ahead about the future

Explanation

Ischinger stresses that diplomacy is primarily about shaping the future rather than dwelling on the past. This forward-thinking approach helps in overcoming past conflicts and facilitates better negotiations.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Learn to listen and understand

Explanation

Ischinger highlights the importance of listening skills in diplomacy. He argues that understanding not just what is said, but also what is left unsaid, is crucial for effective diplomacy.

Evidence

He mentions that while diplomatic training often focuses on speaking skills, listening is equally, if not more, important.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Agreed with

Audience

Agreed on

Importance of listening skills in diplomacy

Try to understand your adversary’s position

Explanation

Ischinger advises diplomats to put themselves in their adversary’s shoes. This involves understanding the other party’s mission, red lines, and what they need to achieve as a minimum in negotiations.

Evidence

He warns against going for a total defeat of the adversary, as it may lead to more difficult negotiations in the future.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Become experts on hybrid challenges and disinformation

Explanation

Ischinger emphasizes the need for diplomats to become proficient in dealing with hybrid challenges and disinformation. This includes understanding and using social media at both personal and institutional levels.

Evidence

He mentions the increasing number of books being written on this subject, indicating its growing importance.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Agreed with

Audience

Agreed on

Need to address disinformation challenges

Define your mission based on available leverage

Explanation

Ischinger advises diplomats to align their strategy with the leverage they have. He suggests that the ambition of the strategy should correlate with the available tools and resources.

Evidence

He contrasts scenarios with little leverage versus those with significant economic pressure or incentives.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Offer solutions, not just identify problems

Explanation

Ischinger recommends that diplomats, especially young ones, should not only identify challenges but also propose solutions. This approach is more valuable to superiors and demonstrates problem-solving skills.

Evidence

He cites Henry Kissinger’s advice to provide multiple solution options rather than just one.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Accept calculated risks

Explanation

Ischinger argues that diplomacy inherently involves some degree of risk. He advises against being overly risk-averse, as it can hinder effective diplomacy.

Evidence

He states that the most risk-free approach is to do nothing, but this is not a recipe for success in diplomacy.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Maintain an optimistic outlook

Explanation

Ischinger stresses the importance of optimism in diplomacy. He argues that diplomats should believe in the possibility of resolving problems, as this is what the public and political leaders expect.

Evidence

He uses the analogy of a movie title ‘No Place for Old Men’ to emphasize that there’s no place for pessimism in diplomacy.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Build and maintain trust

Explanation

Ischinger emphasizes trust as the most crucial asset in diplomacy. He explains that while trust can be lost quickly, rebuilding it is a long and difficult process.

Evidence

He describes trust as the ‘currency of diplomacy’ and essential for getting signatures on agreements or treaties.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Failure to anticipate Russia’s actions in Ukraine

Explanation

Ischinger acknowledges that Western diplomats, including Germans, failed to recognize the signs of Russia’s changing strategy towards Ukraine. This failure led to a dramatic shift in German foreign policy principles.

Evidence

He cites examples such as Putin’s 2007 Munich Security Conference speech and the 2008 war in Georgia as warning signs that were not taken seriously enough.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

Need for dedicated risk assessment in government

Explanation

Ischinger suggests that governments should have dedicated risk managers, similar to large companies. This would help in assessing potential risks in policy decisions more effectively.

Evidence

He points out that in the German government, each minister acts as their own risk manager, which he considers not ideal.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

Importance of backchannel communications in conflicts

Explanation

Ischinger emphasizes the significance of informal, non-public communications in conflict situations. He suggests that this approach could be beneficial in the current Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Evidence

He cites examples of ongoing backchannel communications such as prisoner exchanges and Black Sea wheat transport arrangements.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

China’s emerging role in European conflicts

Explanation

Ischinger highlights the historical shift in China’s involvement in European conflicts. He predicts that China will play a more significant role in future conflict resolution efforts in Europe and the Middle East.

Evidence

He cites China’s ten-point plan for Ukraine and contrasts it with China’s historical absence from European conflicts.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

Addressing disinformation through fact-checking

Explanation

Ischinger proposes that diplomatic institutions should offer fact-checking services to counter disinformation. He suggests creating accessible libraries of provable facts for media and public use.

Evidence

He uses the example of the myth about NATO’s promise not to expand eastward, which can be countered with the text of the 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

Agreed with

Audience

Agreed on

Need to address disinformation challenges

Balancing public diplomacy and risk management

Explanation

Ischinger discusses the increasing importance of public diplomacy and the need for diplomatic officers to engage more with the public. He acknowledges the risks involved but emphasizes the necessity of this approach.

Evidence

He contrasts the current situation with his early career when public diplomacy was just emerging as a priority.

Major Discussion Point

Challenges in Modern Diplomacy

Hope for resolving trade conflicts without confrontation

Explanation

Ischinger expresses hope that trade conflicts, such as those involving Chinese electric vehicles, can be resolved through ongoing processes rather than confrontational responses. He emphasizes the importance of maintaining broader cooperation with China.

Major Discussion Point

International Relations and Trade

A

Audience

Speech speed

126 words per minute

Speech length

630 words

Speech time

298 seconds

Listening is a critical skill for diplomats

Explanation

An audience member reinforces Ischinger’s point about the importance of listening in diplomacy. They suggest that learning to listen should be prioritized in diplomatic training.

Evidence

The speaker mentions teaching diplomacy and plans to include Ischinger’s lessons in their curriculum.

Major Discussion Point

Lessons in Diplomatic Competence

Agreed with

Wolfgang Ischinger

Agreed on

Importance of listening skills in diplomacy

Debate over Chinese electric vehicles in Europe

Explanation

An audience member from the China Diplomatic Academy challenges the notion that Chinese electric vehicles pose a threat to Europe. They point out the divided opinions within the EU on imposing tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

Evidence

The speaker cites voting patterns in the EU, mentioning that only 10 countries supported the proposal, 5 vetoed it, and 12 abstained.

Major Discussion Point

International Relations and Trade

Agreements

Agreement Points

Importance of listening skills in diplomacy

Wolfgang Ischinger

Audience

Learn to listen and understand

Listening is a critical skill for diplomats

Both Ischinger and an audience member emphasized the critical importance of listening skills in diplomacy, suggesting it should be a top priority in diplomatic training.

Need to address disinformation challenges

Wolfgang Ischinger

Audience

Become experts on hybrid challenges and disinformation

Addressing disinformation through fact-checking

Ischinger and an audience member agreed on the importance of addressing disinformation, with Ischinger proposing fact-checking services as a potential solution.

Similar Viewpoints

Ischinger emphasized the importance of building trust and understanding the other party’s perspective as crucial elements of effective diplomacy.

Wolfgang Ischinger

Build and maintain trust

Try to understand your adversary’s position

Unexpected Consensus

China’s role in European conflicts

Wolfgang Ischinger

China’s emerging role in European conflicts

Ischinger’s acknowledgment of China’s increasing involvement in European conflicts and potential future role in conflict resolution efforts represents an unexpected shift in diplomatic perspective, given China’s historical absence from such matters.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main areas of agreement centered around the importance of listening skills in diplomacy, the need to address disinformation, and the recognition of evolving diplomatic challenges such as China’s emerging role in European affairs.

Consensus level

The level of consensus was moderate, primarily due to the limited number of speakers. The implications suggest a growing recognition of the need for adaptability in diplomatic practices, particularly in areas of communication skills, information management, and understanding shifting geopolitical dynamics.

Disagreements

Disagreement Points

Threat posed by Chinese electric vehicles to Europe

Wolfgang Ischinger

Audience member from China Diplomatic Academy

You mentioned in the speech that China posed a threat, especially the Chinese electricity vehicle to Europe.

Personally, I don’t much disagree with you, but of course, there are different views in our automobile industry and elsewhere.

While Ischinger mentioned Chinese electric vehicles as a potential threat to Europe, the audience member from China Diplomatic Academy challenged this view, citing divided opinions within the EU on imposing tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The main area of disagreement was related to the perception of Chinese electric vehicles as a threat to Europe. There was also a slight difference in emphasis on the importance of listening skills in diplomacy.

Disagreement level

The level of disagreement among the speakers was relatively low. Most of the discussion involved Ischinger presenting his views on diplomatic competencies, with audience members largely agreeing or seeking clarification. The one notable disagreement regarding Chinese electric vehicles did not significantly impact the overall discussion on diplomatic competencies. This low level of disagreement suggests a general consensus on the importance of the diplomatic skills and approaches discussed, which could facilitate their adoption in diplomatic training and practice.

Partial Agreements

Partial Agreements

Both Ischinger and the audience member agreed on the importance of listening skills in diplomacy. However, while Ischinger listed it as one of several important skills, the audience member suggested it should be prioritized as the top skill in diplomatic training.

Wolfgang Ischinger

Audience member

Learn to listen and understand

Listening is a critical skill for diplomats

Similar Viewpoints

Ischinger emphasized the importance of building trust and understanding the other party’s perspective as crucial elements of effective diplomacy.

Wolfgang Ischinger

Build and maintain trust

Try to understand your adversary’s position

Takeaways

Key Takeaways

Ten key lessons for diplomatic competence were presented, including knowing who you represent, thinking ahead, learning to listen, understanding adversaries, addressing hybrid challenges, defining missions based on leverage, offering solutions, accepting calculated risks, maintaining optimism, and building trust.

The importance of listening skills in diplomacy was heavily emphasized.

There was a failure to anticipate Russia’s actions in Ukraine, highlighting the need for better risk assessment in government.

Backchannel communications are crucial in managing conflicts like the one in Ukraine.

China is emerging as an important player in European conflicts and future negotiations.

Addressing disinformation through fact-checking and public diplomacy is a growing challenge for modern diplomats.

Resolutions and Action Items

Diplomats should focus on developing listening skills and understanding adversaries’ positions.

Governments should consider implementing dedicated risk assessment roles or processes.

Diplomatic institutions should provide accessible fact-checking services to counter disinformation.

Diplomats need to engage more in public diplomacy while balancing risks.

Unresolved Issues

How to effectively resolve the ongoing conflict in Ukraine

The specific role China might play in future European conflict negotiations

The best approach to address the challenge of Chinese electric vehicles in the European market

How to structure and implement fact-checking services to counter disinformation effectively

Suggested Compromises

Using backchannel communications between Russia and Ukraine to make progress on resolving the conflict

Involving China in future negotiation formats for European conflicts, possibly in an indirect or behind-the-scenes role

Resolving trade conflicts like the Chinese electric vehicle issue through existing processes rather than confrontational measures

Thought Provoking Comments

Trust is the currency of diplomacy. In the absence of trust you will not get anyone’s signature on any document if you want people to sign a treaty or an agreement or an MOU or whatever is on the agenda.

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Reason

This insight emphasizes the fundamental importance of trust in diplomatic relations, framing it as the essential foundation for any meaningful agreements or progress.

Impact

This comment served as a powerful conclusion to Ischinger’s list of lessons, emphasizing the human element in diplomacy beyond just tactics and strategies. It likely resonated strongly with the audience of diplomats and students.

Learning to listen. Learning how to listen. And learning what to listen for. Sometimes it’s the blank space between the words.

Speaker

Audience member (teacher of diplomacy)

Reason

This comment expanded on Ischinger’s point about listening, adding nuance about the importance of not just hearing words, but understanding context and subtext in diplomatic communications.

Impact

It reinforced and deepened Ischinger’s point, leading him to elaborate further on the importance of understanding cultural and historical context when listening in diplomacy.

Your chancellors, consecutive chancellors, for decades were building, building, building trust. And you know what I’m referring to, it all failed. Which ones of the nine previous recommendations were not taken seriously enough? How could it go so terribly wrong?

Speaker

Audience member (head of Estonian Diplomatic School)

Reason

This question challenged the effectiveness of trust-building in light of recent geopolitical events, particularly regarding Germany’s relations with Russia.

Impact

It shifted the discussion from theoretical principles to real-world application, prompting Ischinger to reflect on the failures of German and Western diplomacy regarding Russia.

China will play a role in the Ukrainian conflict resolution effort, and it’s equally easy to predict that if and when a larger solution is going to be explored for the Middle East, including Iran, Israel, et cetera, et cetera, China will also wish not to be absent any longer.

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Reason

This insight highlights the changing dynamics of global diplomacy, particularly the rising influence of China in regions and conflicts where it was historically not involved.

Impact

It broadened the scope of the discussion beyond just Western diplomacy, introducing the complexities of a multipolar world and China’s growing global role.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by moving it from general principles of diplomacy to specific, real-world challenges. They highlighted the complexities of modern diplomacy, including the limits of trust-building, the importance of nuanced communication, and the changing global power dynamics. The discussion evolved from a lecture format to a more interactive exchange, with audience questions pushing for deeper analysis of recent diplomatic failures and future challenges.

Follow-up Questions

How can governments effectively implement a risk management function to avoid strategic policy failures?

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Explanation

Ischinger highlighted the lack of a dedicated risk manager in the German government as a potential factor in policy missteps, suggesting this as an area for improvement in governmental structures.

What specific steps can be taken to establish and maintain effective backchannel communications between conflicting parties like Russia and Ukraine?

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Explanation

Ischinger emphasized the importance of backchannel diplomacy in resolving conflicts, indicating a need for further exploration of these methods.

How can diplomatic institutions create and maintain a ‘fact-checking service’ to counter disinformation without being perceived as engaging in government influence?

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Explanation

Ischinger suggested this as a potential solution to combat disinformation, but noted the challenges in implementation and maintaining credibility.

How can you explain ‘lack of listening’ of Putin’s message in 2007 by Western decision makers?

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Explanation

Ischinger mentioned listening as one of 10 points. There is gap between mentioning listening as 10 points and failure to listen to Putin’s message in 2007. What was the reason for this gap?

How can China’s increasing involvement in European and global conflicts be effectively managed and integrated into diplomatic processes?

Speaker

Wolfgang Ischinger

Explanation

Ischinger highlighted China’s growing role in international conflicts as a significant shift, implying a need for new diplomatic approaches.

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed.

Opening Remarks (50th IFDT)

Session at a Glance

Summary

This transcript covers the opening of the 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training in Montenegro. The event brought together representatives from 40 countries to discuss the importance of diplomatic training and competencies in today’s complex global landscape.

Deputy Prime Minister Ervin Ibrahimovic welcomed participants, emphasizing Montenegro’s role as a meeting place for knowledge and experiences. He stressed the paramount importance of diplomacy in maintaining global peace and the need for diplomats to be skilled negotiators and bridge-builders between nations.

Emil Brix, Director of the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna, highlighted the forum’s growth from a small Western-focused meeting to a global affair, reflecting the changing world order. He expressed support for Montenegro’s EU aspirations and the importance of adapting diplomatic education to current challenges.

Barbara Bodine, co-chair of the IFDT, underscored the critical role of diplomacy in addressing complex global issues like climate change and pandemics. She emphasized the need for well-trained, motivated diplomats to navigate these challenges and the indispensable nature of diplomacy for the future of societies and governments.

Ekaterina Paniklova from UNDP Montenegro congratulated the forum on its 50th anniversary and linked the event to recent global initiatives like the Summit for the Future. She highlighted the evolving nature of diplomacy and the need for diplomats to possess adaptive leadership skills and proficiency in leveraging technology.

The speakers collectively emphasized the importance of diplomatic training in addressing global challenges, the need for collaboration between nations, and the role of diplomacy in shaping a peaceful and prosperous future.

Keypoints

Major discussion points:

– The 50th anniversary of the International Forum on Diplomatic Training (IFDT)

– The importance of diplomacy and diplomatic training in addressing global challenges

– Montenegro’s role as host and its aspirations to join the EU

– The evolution and growth of the IFDT over the past 50 years

– The need for diplomats to develop new skills and competencies for the modern world

Overall purpose/goal:

The purpose of this discussion was to open the 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training, highlighting the importance of diplomatic training in today’s complex global environment and celebrating the growth and achievements of the IFDT over the past five decades.

Tone:

The overall tone was formal yet warm and celebratory. Speakers expressed pride in the IFDT’s accomplishments and gratitude towards the host country, Montenegro. There was an underlying sense of urgency regarding the need for skilled diplomacy in addressing global challenges, but the tone remained optimistic about the future of diplomacy and diplomatic training. The tone remained consistent throughout the discussion, with each speaker building upon the themes introduced by previous speakers.

Speakers

– Moderator: No specific role or title mentioned

– Ervin Ibrahimovic: Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Montenegro

– Emil Brix: Director of the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna

– Barbara Bodine: Director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, IFDT co-chair

– Ekaterina Paniklova: Resident Representative of UNDP office in Montenegro

Additional speakers:

– None identified

Full session report

The 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training (IFDT) in Montenegro marked a significant milestone in diplomatic education and international cooperation. This event brought together representatives from 40 countries to discuss the importance of diplomatic training in today’s complex global landscape.

Deputy Prime Minister Ervin Ibrahimović warmly welcomed participants, emphasizing Montenegro’s role as a meeting place for knowledge and experiences. He stressed the importance of diplomacy in maintaining global peace and highlighted Montenegro’s aspirations to become the next EU member. Ibrahimović also mentioned the Summer School for Young Diplomats, underscoring Montenegro’s commitment to nurturing future diplomatic talent.

Emil Brix, Director of the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna, provided historical context for the IFDT. He noted its growth from a small Western-focused meeting to a global affair, reflecting the changing world order. Brix highlighted new members from Kuwait, the Dominican Republic, and the Oriental School in Paris, demonstrating the forum’s expanding reach. He expressed Austria’s support for Montenegro’s EU candidacy, emphasizing the significance of holding the meeting in a Western Balkan country for the first time.

Barbara Bodine, co-chair of the IFDT and Director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University, underscored the indispensable nature of diplomacy for the future of societies and governments. She shared her personal journey to Montenegro and first impressions of the Balkans, adding a touch of warmth to her remarks. Bodine emphasized that well-trained and motivated diplomats are crucial for navigating complex global challenges that cannot be addressed bilaterally, such as climate change and pandemics.

Ekaterina Paniklova, Resident Representative of UNDP Montenegro, congratulated the forum on its 50th anniversary and linked the event to recent global initiatives like the Summit for the Future and the pact for the future. She highlighted the evolving nature of diplomacy and the need for diplomats to possess adaptive leadership skills, cross-cultural communication proficiency, and the ability to leverage technology effectively. Paniklova emphasized the importance of engaging with younger generations of diplomats, noting their unique perspectives on technology and communication.

All speakers expressed gratitude towards Montenegro for hosting the event and reiterated the crucial role of diplomatic academies in preparing diplomats and fostering international cooperation. They collectively emphasized the need for diplomatic education to adapt to current challenges and the fragmented nature of international relations.

In conclusion, the 50th IFDT in Montenegro served as a platform for reaffirming the critical role of diplomacy in today’s world while highlighting the need for continuous adaptation and skill development. The event showcased a shared commitment to enhancing diplomatic competencies and fostering global dialogue in the face of complex challenges, setting a positive tone for future collaboration and innovation in the field of diplomatic training.

Session Transcript

Moderator: Your Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the official opening of the 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training. It is a distinct pleasure and honor for all of us in Montenegro to be the hosts of the Jubilee Gathering of the Directors of Diplomatic Academies and Institutes around the globe. I believe that Montenegro is a country of rich culture and history, and exceptional natural beauties will serve as an additional inspiration for discussion, exchanging views and experiences over these two days. I invite now Mr. Ibrahimović, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Montenegro, to address the audience. Dear Minister, please take the floor.

Ervin Ibrahimovic: Thank you. Your Excellencies, distinguished ambassadors, dear Ms. Paniklova, dear friend, dear ladies and gentlemen, with distinct pleasure on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Montenegro, I am facing over 50 representatives of 40 different countries. Your huge outcome underscores the importance of this event and is a testimony to our joint commitment to honing skills, competencies and abilities of diplomats in the face of numerous challenges. Montenegro is proud to be the host of the Jubilee 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training Gathering Directors of Diplomatic Academies around the globe. With this, we further testify to our hospitality of football and openness. During this Jubilee, this reinforces our role as a meeting place of knowledges and experiences. The role of diplomacy is paramount for keeping peace around the globe. In this dynamic environment, diplomats are expected to be more than mere representatives of their nations. They are there to build bridges between nations. They are skilled negotiators and strategists that surpass their national borders. So the topic of today’s event, elevating diplomatic success, unleashing the power of competencies, is particularly important. Emerging problems become ever more complex, so building the skills of diplomats becomes key for successful diplomacy. To a certain degree, everyone is a diplomat. Whenever we travel or cooperate with someone from abroad, we represent our country. Nevertheless, professional diplomats require specific skills, skills to build bonds among people and nations, building trust, representing the interests of our nations, and deep understanding of global context. Our task is to recognize, cherish, and develop such talents. Diplomatic Academy has a key role in preparing the diplomats for the pending tasks. They offer tools to understand context, recognize challenges, and seek solutions. In this dynamic and changing world, the training is not only gaining knowledge to do our job, but an opportunity for continuous professional development. Against this backdrop, the cooperation between countries and among countries that share their experiences and knowledge is paramount. Diplomatic Academies serve as an important link in this process. They serve as a platform for exchanges. Through joint training, seminars, and projects, they enable diplomats to develop their skills and to hone their competencies. This cherishes bilateral and multilateral relations towards our common goal of preserving peace and stability. Montenegro, as a country that aspires to be the first next member of EU, this is one of the key processes or cornerstone for our future accession. One of the cooperation programs that we are particularly proud of is the Summer School for Young Diplomats, Gábor Vukovic. For the past 17 years, it’s been gathering young diplomats from all parts of the world. It is a place of future leaders where they learn about the topical issues in the area of diplomacy. But one of the main values is the opportunity to build bridges of future cooperation. Montenegro is a country of rich history and cultural heritage. At the border and frontier between the West and the East, the meeting place of different cultures, rich in natural beauties. We hope you will use this opportunity to learn about Montenegro and return at your own convenience. I wish to thank Ambassador Briggs and Ambassador Barton for their trust and the colleagues from the Secretariat for preparation of this event, particularly the UN Institute for Training and Development and Diplo-Foundation that have provided their support and our traditional partner, UNDP. Obviously, all of you as well who came to Montenegro on this occasion. I wish you fruitful work and thank you for your attention.

Moderator: Thank you. It is a pleasure now to give the floor to the Director of the Diplomatic Academy in Vienna, Mr. Brix.

Emil Brix: Mr. Minister, Excellencies, dear colleagues, 50 is a very special number. 50 means that we, you, did something right. And when I think about how this network started in 1973 with an informal meeting of someone from Georgetown in Washington and someone from the institution in Vienna, it was meant to be simply let’s have a few Western countries talk about diplomacy in a stable situation of the Cold War. Totally different. And when I look now at the number of people attending here, it has become a global affair and very necessarily so. So having such a network in the fragmented world order that we have, with nobody knowing who is really calling the shots. Well, maybe some people know who is calling the shots. I’m looking at Mr. Ischinger. He knows who’s calling the shots, probably. Or Federica Mogherini. She may know who’s calling the shots. So we need to adapt our diplomatic education to what is going on here. And we are thankful that for the first time, this meeting can take place in a country of the Western Balkans. And we are happily supporting that this country hosts this because within Europe, there’s also so much dynamics. Sometimes, as we know, the dynamics is a terrible one when we look into Ukraine. But in the Western Balkans, there is a lot of positive dynamism as well. And when there is a country where you can prove that, that’s Montenegro. And as an Austrian, I support personally, and my country supports, the front-runner status of Montenegro. And you teach to join the European Union by 2028, which is a very ambitious objective. But you have friends who support your endeavors. So thank you for having us all here in Montenegro for this occasion. As I said, it’s growing. And Barbara and me, we try to coordinate a little bit this growth. There are a few new members here for the first time. Colleagues from Kuwait, and colleagues also from the Dominican Republic are new here and also a colleague from the Oriental School in Paris, if I understand it rightly. So it’s a slowly growing undertaking. Let us hope that what we do here, gaining more competencies is really helpful. And for doing so, I again promise that we will help Diplomatic Academy of Montenegro wherever we can. To my friends in Montenegro, it’s not far to Vienna. There are daily direct connections to Vienna. And if we can do something, we will do it. But here now, I wish us all simply a very interesting, successful, and hopefully informative also about this country. Meeting the 50th meeting of the IFDT. Welcome from my side.

Moderator: It’s a pleasure to have with us the director of the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and the IFDT co-chair, Ms. Bodine.

Barbara Bodine: Thank you all. And thank you, Mr. Minister. Pleasure. And to be hosted in this beautiful country. I got in last night to Dubrovnik. And while it was probably not the closest airport, it did afford me an opportunity to take a windchill tour of a little bit of the Balkans my first time here. And it was absolutely beautiful. I want to underscore what my colleague Emil has said, is that this is a milestone meeting. And I think it’s appropriate that it be in Montenegro, in a country that is emerging, growing, engaging, and about to join the EU. Because it did start 50 years ago, as Emil said, with a very small group of people sitting in Vienna, thinking it would be nice to get together every once in a while and just chat about how do we train and prepare our diplomats. It was a good idea. But it was a very small group and a very narrow group. And our membership now, we have 40 here today. Our membership is, I think, well over 60. And it goes from the smallest Pacific Island states to some of the largest countries in the world. I’ve been coming to these now for 10 years. And one other delight is the number of members who do come routinely and regularly, now becomes kind of an alumni or a friendship society. What is critical about the IFDT is that it recognizes the critical role of diplomacy in the world. We all know, too tragically, that wars are easy to start. They’re very hard to end. We know that trade disputes are very easy to start. And they’re very hard to end. And almost any problem, you can get started trying to figure out how do you bring it back in a way that brings not just peace, but brings stability and justice and prosperity to the people who are affected. How do you protect states from some of the worst ravages in our current world? And now we’re up against some enemies who we can’t even sit down at the table and talk to them. We have climate change. We have a number of, we have pandemics. So we’re facing threats to our survival, our stability, our prosperity, our very existence that we cannot talk to. But we need to be able to talk about. And we need to understand that maybe once upon a time, two governments could sit down and work out their differences and hopefully avoid or end a conflict. Now we know that we all need to sit down together and talk about how do we deal with threats to our very existence that cannot be done bilaterally, cannot be done by one government, cannot be done even by government in some cases. And so the complexity of the world demands that we have the best and the brightest, the best trained, the best educated, and the best motivated diplomats. I have been asked by my students, you know, well, what will happen to diplomacy in the future? And I said, well, we will either go one of two ways. Either we will continue to spiral into some of the conflicts and chaos that we seem to be collecting right now, in which case we will definitely need diplomats. Or we can be Pollyannic and peace will break out and we will all cooperate on climate change and pandemics and kleptocracy and everything. And it will be a wonderful world. And we will still need diplomats because human nature being what it is, there will still be disputes if not conflicts. So putting the effort, putting the commitment, putting the political will behind the need to recruit, to train, to educate, to advance solid diplomats. is one of the most critical jobs in the world today. We tend to be the smallest ministries in our governments, we tend to be less funded, just airplanes cost more. But we are irreplaceable and indispensable to borrow from a former Secretary of State. She referred to us as an indispensable nation, and I would with all due respect to her say it is not any one nation that is indispensable, but I would say that diplomacy and diplomats are indispensable to the future of our societies, our governments, and our future. So being a part of this organization, having the honor to be one of the two co-chairs, and having the opportunity to travel the world once a year and meet my colleagues is one of the best parts of my job. Because this is the 50th anniversary, I will say that also my dean has asked me to convey the school’s very deep commitment and very strong encouragement to the forum and to Georgetown University’s involvement in the IFDT going forward. So thank you all very much, I look forward to this week, I look forward to being able to talk with my colleagues, and much more importantly, I look forward to being able to learn from my colleagues this week. So thank you all.

Moderator: Thank you, last but not least, our longstanding partner in diplomatic training, in particular in organizing the School for Young Diplomats, Gavro Vukovic, UNDP, office in Montenegro would like to ask Ms. Paniklova, resident representative, to take the floor.

Ekaterina Paniklova: Good morning, Dobro jutro, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs Ibrahimovic, Your Excellencies, Distinguished Directors of Diplomatic Academies, ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of United Nations Development Program in Montenegro, let me convey our best wishes, congratulations on your gathering, and congratulate all of you with your 50th anniversary, although 50 is still young, I think this is a very nice chapter in the forum’s life, considering the number of members, the number of prominent leaders coming in this very difficult and interesting times that we live in. And I also want to thank our very long-term partner, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Montenegro, for being such a gracious and generous host and creating this opportunity and space to meet not only professionals and experts, but very prominent leaders coming to Montenegro. It’s also very significant that this event is taking place just a few weeks after the summit of the future, which took place on 22nd of September in New York, and was leaders of our nations accepted, adopted one of the first probably in the history of humankind pact for the future, which includes a global digital compact and a declaration for future generations. And it gives us signs and milestones of what we are looking at in today’s very challenging world. It was not an easy conversation, we understood from our colleagues in New York, but those diplomats that worked, your colleagues in the ministries and permanent missions made it happen. And it again talks to the importance of diplomacy. Over years, we saw and we know that diplomacy demands more than just experience or traditional skills. It requires real strategic mastery of competencies that can adapt to the new global realities. We often, as humankind, find ourselves at critical crossroads where traditional methods of crafting states or crafting future roadmaps for our lives are facing global challenges, climate change, digital transformation, economic inequality, shifting geopolitics, and we can continue the list on and on. And whenever we have this, this is basically for the nations, for the states to effectively address these issues. Diplomats are always on the front line, and they need to be not only just knowledgeable, but they need to be agile and they need to be equipped with adaptive leadership skills, cross-cultural communication skills, proficiency in leveraging data technology, and much more. And I speak – and I think that today’s conference, the title, Elevating Diplomatic Success, Unleashing the Power of Competence, speak for itself, very forward-looking motto of the conversation. For us, obviously, Diplomatic Academies, with whom UNDP has been working in many countries of the world, and particularly here in Montenegro, is not just a lecture or learning from best practices, it’s also a laboratory where a transformation begins, where diplomats are learning about the world from the global point of view and trying to translate global agenda to regional, to local, to their own country, to the last – not last, but the only person known in the world that actually is looking into the freedom of choice of human life. In this moment, I want to really go back to June, July, when we had a summer school of young diplomats coming to Montenegro. There were around representatives of 46 countries, many diplomats from your countries. And when they were gathering, we had the first opening event. For them, they wanted to learn about the world, but we wanted to learn from them, because they are looking at the world from a completely different point of view. They didn’t know how to play in the streets during summer, just knocking at the door or shouting, can you come out and play? They learned, they grew up with technology, they are typing faster than us, they are working with AI, they are looking at social media. This is a completely new generation. So here I think whenever we are working with diplomacy, our plea as United Nations Development Program is also to not only to teach, to train young people, but also to listen to them, to see their aspirations and needs as they are evolving according to the, of course, human life, development of human life, but they are also giving interesting spaces for us to expand and put our expertise forward. In closing, I want to again express our deepest gratitude for the partnership with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for the International Forum of Diplomacy. Thank you for bringing it to Montenegro. This is a very nice event for us to see such a number of prominent leaders and experts and we hope that it will give another opportunity and space for Montenegro to host even more, where we will be happy to help and contribute. I wish the conference best of success and I hope that you will enjoy the beauty of Montenegro, which is, in my humble opinion, one of the most beautiful countries in the world. With all respect to all, but you will see yourselves today, tomorrow and the day after. Thank you very much. Hvala puno.

E

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Speech speed

112 words per minute

Speech length

589 words

Speech time

313 seconds

Diplomats need specific skills to build bonds and represent national interests

Explanation

Ibrahimovic emphasizes that professional diplomats require specialized skills to effectively represent their nations and build relationships. These skills include the ability to create connections between people and countries, establish trust, and deeply understand global contexts.

Evidence

He mentions that diplomats are expected to be more than mere representatives, acting as bridge-builders between nations and skilled negotiators.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 1: The importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Agreed with

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Diplomatic academies are key in preparing diplomats and fostering exchanges

Explanation

Ibrahimovic highlights the crucial role of diplomatic academies in equipping diplomats with necessary tools and skills. These institutions provide platforms for exchanges and enable diplomats to develop their competencies through joint training, seminars, and projects.

Evidence

He mentions the Summer School for Young Diplomats, Gábor Vukovic, as an example of a successful cooperation program that has been gathering young diplomats from around the world for 17 years.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 2: The role of diplomatic academies and international cooperation

Agreed with

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Role of diplomatic academies in fostering international cooperation

Montenegro is proud to host the 50th IFDT gathering

Explanation

Ibrahimovic expresses Montenegro’s pride in hosting the Jubilee 50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training. He sees this as an opportunity to showcase Montenegro’s hospitality and openness, as well as its role as a meeting place for knowledge and experiences.

Evidence

He mentions that over 50 representatives from 40 different countries are attending the event.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 3: Montenegro’s role and aspirations

Montenegro aspires to be the next EU member

Explanation

Ibrahimovic states Montenegro’s ambition to become the next member of the European Union. He views diplomatic cooperation and exchanges as crucial processes for their future accession to the EU.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 3: Montenegro’s role and aspirations

Emerging problems are becoming more complex

Explanation

Ibrahimovic points out that the challenges faced by diplomats are becoming increasingly complex. This complexity necessitates the continuous development of diplomatic skills and competencies to address these evolving issues effectively.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 4: The evolving nature of global challenges

Agreed with

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Evolving nature of global challenges

E

Emil Brix

Speech speed

119 words per minute

Speech length

448 words

Speech time

225 seconds

Diplomatic education must adapt to the fragmented world order

Explanation

Brix emphasizes the need for diplomatic education to evolve in response to the current fragmented world order. He suggests that the complexity of global affairs requires a more adaptive approach to diplomatic training.

Evidence

He mentions the transformation of the IFDT from a small Western-focused group during the Cold War to a global network addressing contemporary challenges.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 1: The importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Importance of diplomatic training and competencies

The IFDT network has grown to become a global affair

Explanation

Brix highlights the significant growth of the IFDT network since its inception in 1973. He emphasizes how it has evolved from a small, informal meeting of Western countries to a global forum addressing diplomacy in a complex world order.

Evidence

He mentions the presence of new members from Kuwait, the Dominican Republic, and the Oriental School in Paris at the current meeting.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 2: The role of diplomatic academies and international cooperation

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Role of diplomatic academies in fostering international cooperation

Austria supports Montenegro’s EU candidacy

Explanation

Brix expresses Austria’s support for Montenegro’s aspirations to join the European Union. He acknowledges Montenegro’s progress and the positive dynamics in the Western Balkans region.

Evidence

He mentions Montenegro’s goal to join the EU by 2028 and describes it as an ambitious objective.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 3: Montenegro’s role and aspirations

B

Barbara Bodine

Speech speed

135 words per minute

Speech length

848 words

Speech time

374 seconds

Best trained and motivated diplomats are crucial for addressing complex global challenges

Explanation

Bodine emphasizes the critical need for highly skilled, well-educated, and motivated diplomats to address the complex challenges facing the world. She argues that diplomacy is indispensable for dealing with various global issues and conflicts.

Evidence

She mentions challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and threats that cannot be addressed bilaterally or by governments alone.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 1: The importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Importance of diplomatic training and competencies

IFDT recognizes the critical role of diplomacy in the world

Explanation

Bodine highlights that the IFDT acknowledges the crucial role of diplomacy in maintaining global peace and stability. She emphasizes the forum’s commitment to preparing diplomats for the complex tasks they face in the modern world.

Evidence

She mentions the growth of IFDT membership from a small group to over 60 members, representing countries of various sizes and from different regions.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 2: The role of diplomatic academies and international cooperation

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Role of diplomatic academies in fostering international cooperation

The world faces threats that cannot be addressed bilaterally

Explanation

Bodine points out that many current global challenges cannot be resolved through traditional bilateral negotiations. She emphasizes the need for multilateral cooperation and engagement with non-state actors to address these complex issues effectively.

Evidence

She cites examples such as climate change and pandemics as threats that require collective action beyond individual governments.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 4: The evolving nature of global challenges

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Ekaterina Paniklova

Agreed on

Evolving nature of global challenges

E

Ekaterina Paniklova

Speech speed

140 words per minute

Speech length

846 words

Speech time

361 seconds

Diplomats require adaptive leadership skills and cross-cultural communication proficiency

Explanation

Paniklova emphasizes that modern diplomacy demands more than traditional skills. She argues that diplomats need to master adaptive competencies to navigate new global realities and effectively address complex challenges.

Evidence

She mentions skills such as adaptive leadership, cross-cultural communication, and proficiency in leveraging data technology as essential for modern diplomats.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 1: The importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Agreed on

Importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Diplomatic academies serve as laboratories for transformation

Explanation

Paniklova describes diplomatic academies as more than just places for lectures or learning best practices. She views them as transformative spaces where diplomats learn to understand global issues and translate global agendas to regional and local contexts.

Evidence

She references the summer school for young diplomats in Montenegro, which brought together representatives from 46 countries.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 2: The role of diplomatic academies and international cooperation

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Agreed on

Role of diplomatic academies in fostering international cooperation

Montenegro’s beauty and hospitality are highlighted

Explanation

Paniklova praises Montenegro’s natural beauty and hospitality. She expresses gratitude to the country for hosting the event and creating an opportunity for prominent leaders and experts to gather.

Evidence

She describes Montenegro as ‘one of the most beautiful countries in the world’ and encourages participants to enjoy its beauty during their stay.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 3: Montenegro’s role and aspirations

Diplomacy must adapt to new global realities like climate change and digital transformation

Explanation

Paniklova emphasizes that diplomacy needs to evolve to address new global challenges. She argues that traditional methods of statecraft are insufficient for dealing with issues such as climate change, digital transformation, and economic inequality.

Evidence

She references the recent Summit of the Future in New York, where leaders adopted a pact for the future including a global digital compact and a declaration for future generations.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 4: The evolving nature of global challenges

Agreed with

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Barbara Bodine

Agreed on

Evolving nature of global challenges

The importance of engaging with younger generations of diplomats

Explanation

Paniklova stresses the need to not only teach young diplomats but also learn from them. She highlights that younger generations have different perspectives and skills, particularly in technology and social media, which are valuable in modern diplomacy.

Evidence

She mentions the summer school for young diplomats, where participants from 46 countries brought new perspectives on technology and communication.

Major Discussion Point

Major Discussion Point 4: The evolving nature of global challenges

Agreements

Agreement Points

Importance of diplomatic training and competencies

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Diplomats need specific skills to build bonds and represent national interests

Diplomatic education must adapt to the fragmented world order

Best trained and motivated diplomats are crucial for addressing complex global challenges

Diplomats require adaptive leadership skills and cross-cultural communication proficiency

All speakers emphasized the critical need for well-trained diplomats with specialized skills to address complex global challenges in a rapidly changing world.

Role of diplomatic academies in fostering international cooperation

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Diplomatic academies are key in preparing diplomats and fostering exchanges

The IFDT network has grown to become a global affair

IFDT recognizes the critical role of diplomacy in the world

Diplomatic academies serve as laboratories for transformation

Speakers agreed on the crucial role of diplomatic academies and forums like IFDT in preparing diplomats and fostering international cooperation through exchanges and training programs.

Evolving nature of global challenges

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Barbara Bodine

Ekaterina Paniklova

Emerging problems are becoming more complex

The world faces threats that cannot be addressed bilaterally

Diplomacy must adapt to new global realities like climate change and digital transformation

Speakers concurred that global challenges are becoming increasingly complex, requiring multilateral approaches and adaptation of diplomatic practices.

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers expressed support for Montenegro’s aspirations to join the European Union, highlighting the country’s progress and the importance of this goal.

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Montenegro aspires to be the next EU member

Austria supports Montenegro’s EU candidacy

Both speakers emphasized Montenegro’s role as a gracious host and its natural beauty, showcasing the country’s hospitality and attractiveness for international events.

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Ekaterina Paniklova

Montenegro is proud to host the 50th IFDT gathering

Montenegro’s beauty and hospitality are highlighted

Unexpected Consensus

Importance of engaging with younger generations of diplomats

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Ekaterina Paniklova

Diplomatic academies are key in preparing diplomats and fostering exchanges

The importance of engaging with younger generations of diplomats

While most speakers focused on traditional diplomatic training, Paniklova unexpectedly emphasized the need to learn from younger diplomats, particularly regarding their perspectives on technology and communication. This aligns with Ibrahimovic’s mention of the Summer School for Young Diplomats, suggesting a shared recognition of the value of engaging with emerging diplomatic talent.

Overall Assessment

Summary

The speakers demonstrated strong agreement on the importance of diplomatic training, the role of diplomatic academies, and the need to adapt to evolving global challenges. There was also consensus on Montenegro’s role as a host and its EU aspirations.

Consensus level

High level of consensus among speakers, implying a shared vision for the future of diplomatic training and international cooperation. This agreement suggests a collective commitment to enhancing diplomatic competencies and fostering global dialogue in the face of complex challenges.

Disagreements

Overall Assessment

Summary

There were no significant areas of disagreement identified among the speakers.

Disagreement level

The level of disagreement was minimal to non-existent. All speakers generally agreed on the importance of diplomatic training, the role of diplomatic academies, and the need for adapting to global challenges. This consensus suggests a unified approach to addressing the challenges in modern diplomacy and diplomatic training.

Partial Agreements

Similar Viewpoints

Both speakers expressed support for Montenegro’s aspirations to join the European Union, highlighting the country’s progress and the importance of this goal.

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Emil Brix

Montenegro aspires to be the next EU member

Austria supports Montenegro’s EU candidacy

Both speakers emphasized Montenegro’s role as a gracious host and its natural beauty, showcasing the country’s hospitality and attractiveness for international events.

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Ekaterina Paniklova

Montenegro is proud to host the 50th IFDT gathering

Montenegro’s beauty and hospitality are highlighted

Takeaways

Key Takeaways

The importance of diplomatic training and competencies is paramount in addressing complex global challenges

Diplomatic academies play a crucial role in preparing diplomats and fostering international cooperation

Montenegro’s hosting of the 50th IFDT gathering highlights its aspirations for EU membership and role in international diplomacy

The nature of global challenges is evolving, requiring diplomats to adapt and develop new skills

Engaging with younger generations of diplomats is essential for the future of diplomacy

Resolutions and Action Items

Continue to support and expand the IFDT network to foster global cooperation in diplomatic training

Adapt diplomatic education to address emerging global challenges and new realities

Support Montenegro’s efforts to join the European Union

Unresolved Issues

Specific strategies for addressing complex global threats like climate change and pandemics

How to effectively integrate new technologies and digital competencies into diplomatic training

Ways to increase funding and resources for diplomatic academies and training programs

Suggested Compromises

None identified

Thought Provoking Comments

To a certain degree, everyone is a diplomat. Whenever we travel or cooperate with someone from abroad, we represent our country.

Speaker

Ervin Ibrahimovic

Reason

This comment broadens the concept of diplomacy beyond professional diplomats, suggesting that all citizens have a role in international relations.

Impact

It set a tone of inclusivity and highlighted the importance of cultural understanding for all, not just professional diplomats.

So we need to adapt our diplomatic education to what is going on here. And we are thankful that for the first time, this meeting can take place in a country of the Western Balkans.

Speaker

Emil Brix

Reason

This comment emphasizes the need for diplomatic training to evolve with global changes and recognizes the significance of holding the meeting in Montenegro.

Impact

It shifted the focus to the importance of adapting diplomatic education and highlighted the role of emerging nations in international diplomacy.

We know that trade disputes are very easy to start. And they’re very hard to end. And almost any problem, you can get started trying to figure out how do you bring it back in a way that brings not just peace, but brings stability and justice and prosperity to the people who are affected.

Speaker

Barbara Bodine

Reason

This comment provides a nuanced view of diplomatic challenges, emphasizing the complexity of resolving conflicts and the broader goals of diplomacy beyond just ending disputes.

Impact

It deepened the conversation by highlighting the multifaceted nature of diplomatic work and its impact on people’s lives.

And now we’re up against some enemies who we can’t even sit down at the table and talk to them. We have climate change. We have a number of, we have pandemics. So we’re facing threats to our survival, our stability, our prosperity, our very existence that we cannot talk to. But we need to be able to talk about.

Speaker

Barbara Bodine

Reason

This comment introduces the concept of global challenges that transcend traditional diplomatic frameworks, highlighting the need for new approaches.

Impact

It expanded the scope of the discussion to include non-traditional diplomatic challenges and the need for innovative solutions.

Diplomats are always on the front line, and they need to be not only just knowledgeable, but they need to be agile and they need to be equipped with adaptive leadership skills, cross-cultural communication skills, proficiency in leveraging data technology, and much more.

Speaker

Ekaterina Paniklova

Reason

This comment outlines the evolving skill set required for modern diplomats, emphasizing the need for adaptability and technological proficiency.

Impact

It shifted the conversation towards the specific competencies needed in modern diplomacy and the role of diplomatic academies in developing these skills.

Overall Assessment

These key comments shaped the discussion by broadening the concept of diplomacy, emphasizing the need for adaptation in diplomatic education, highlighting the complexity of modern global challenges, and outlining the evolving skill set required for diplomats. The conversation progressed from general observations about the importance of diplomacy to specific discussions about the competencies needed in the face of emerging global issues. This evolution reflected a shared recognition of the changing nature of international relations and the need for diplomatic training to keep pace with these changes.

Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed.

50th International Forum on Diplomatic Training (IFDT)

The 50th IFDT will be a valuable opportunity to engage in discussion on contemporary trends in diplomatic training, exchange ideas and familiarize oneself with the best practices in the field.

Additionally, it will serve as platform to foster relationships and establish the groundwork for future cooperation while providing a chance to experience and learn about Montenegro

50th IFDT will be held from October 8th to October11th, 2024.

Ello’s new AI tool lets kids create their own stories

Ello, an AI reading companion designed to help children struggling with reading, has introduced a new feature called ‘Storytime’. This feature enables kids to create their own stories by choosing from a range of settings, characters, and plots. Story options are tailored to the child’s reading level and current lessons, helping them practise essential reading skills.

Ello’s AI, represented by a bright blue elephant, listens to children as they read aloud and helps correct mispronunciations. The tool uses phonics-based strategies to adapt stories based on the child’s responses, ensuring personalised and engaging experiences. It also offers two reading modes: one where the child and Ello take turns reading and another, more supportive mode for younger readers.

The Storytime feature distinguishes itself from other AI-assisted story creation tools by focusing on reading development. The technology has been tested with teachers and children, and includes safeguards to ensure age-appropriate content. Future versions of the product may allow even more creative input from children, while maintaining helpful structure to avoid overwhelming them.

Ello’s subscription costs $14.99 per month, with discounted pricing for low-income families. The company also partners with schools to offer its services for free, and has recently made its collection of decodable children’s books available online at no cost.