Asian Diplomatic Issues

Is there an Asian perspective or an Asian wrinkle when it comes to diplomacy that we should talk about?

You'll find that Asians are much less direct. In the case of Asians, face is very important, you know? You've got to make sure that when you disagree with someone or when you have to express a different point of view, you try to do it in such a way that he doesn't lose face. Because if he loses face, then he'll be your enemy for the rest of your life. So, it's important to bear that in mind when dealing with Asians. book cover Sometime Westerners don't realize that. Nowadays, as you know, many Asians are now educated in the West and they have learned either the good habits or the bad habits of the West, and they're not equally direct and blunt.

What about negotiations, difficult negotiations? We're seeing a lot of very important negotiations going on in Asia now, for example, in North Korea. Are there lessons that you've learned about reaching agreement in general, negotiating the way you relate to the other party to accomplish something?

The few lessons that I learned from negotiations is number one, the personality matters a great deal. If you have a difficult personality, if you have someone who walks in and says, "My demands ... my country's interests ..." or such-and-such, he's not going to succeed. You have to build up a certain degree of personal rapport, and that's a very important part of the process in negotiations. Because each side, obviously, is going to defend his or her country's national interests. You don't expect them to sacrifice their national interests, but how you defend your national interests matters a great deal.

Secondly, if you want to try and get an agreement, you must always try to get a win/win agreement, because if it's a win/lose agreement -- let's say, if I get everything that my country wanted and you get nothing that your country wanted -- that agreement is not going to last, and it won't succeed. It's important to find ways and means to ensure that the other party also benefits in the negotiations.

I have found from personal experience that most diplomats are quite reasonable people and are willing to try to compromise. The worst case is if you have a diplomat walking in with a huge ego and sometimes his ego leads to him sacrificing his country's interests because he wants to have things his own way, even though a compromise would suit his country's interests better than having his ego determine his actions.

What sort of difference is there in representing your country in another country -- say you were ambassador to Cambodia -- versus being in a multilateral context like the UN? Is it a much tougher job in the UN?

For the record, I was actually the first in Cambodia, not ambassador, but head of mission anyway.

Bilateral diplomacy is very different from multilateral diplomacy. In fact, it's night and day, because in bilateral diplomacy you're dealing with one government and trying to advance your interests, or working with one government and understanding one government. When you go to the United Nations there are 191 member states, you have to get to know 190 of the ambassadors, because the vote of each country counts in the General Assembly. Of course, some countries have more importance than other countries. Certainly you have to get to know the five permanent members, United States, Russia, China, U.K., and France. But in general, you have to make an effort to know far more countries. It's a very different ballgame.

Next page: American Ideals