Gripengate: when the worlds of secret and public diplomacy collide

Secret diplomacy may at first glance appear to be the antinomy of public diplomacy. Diplomats have traditionally been discouraged from participation in the domestic or foreign politics of the state in which they exercise their functions, and their official communications are, according to Articles 12 and 13 of the Havana Convention (1928), to be channelled through the host Foreign Ministry. By consequence, diplomatic studies scholars have tended to view public diplomacy as “foreign propaganda conducted or orchestrated by diplomats,” an activity which is manifestly “not diplomacy” (Berridge 2002: 17 & 125). Since the 1990s, however, scholars have observed the impact of new communication technologies on diplomatic conduct, and the necessity of multiple stakeholders from across and outside of government being able to share in the co-creation and co-delivery of policy. Thus, diplomacy is now seen as an integrated field, drawing upon a range of techniques and strategies including public diplomacy (Sofer 1998; Hocking 2006; Kelley 2010).