Join the new world

Kia Ora Kiwis,

The age-old question in Diplomatic Politics (at least in erepublik) is whether it is better to have a single person or board of people control the Foreign Policy of a nation or to have a group of Diplomats under the leadership of a MoFA conduct Diplomacy with individual nations. The arguments against the latter have always been similar: We can't trust people to be active, a nation's objectives would be more clear with the Foreign Policy coming from a single source, and foreign nations can be clear on who to contact to discuss diplomacy.

I, for one, think that the establishment of an organized Diplomatic Office with a handful of Ambassadors would further our Diplomatic goals far more than a single MoFA could. (DISCLAIMER: This is not an attack on our MoFA's, both old and current, because I think they do a stellar job and have one of the hardest roles in the nation). However, before I begin explaining why a Diplomatic Office would be a positive development, allow me to refute the common opposition arguments that I listed above.



1. We Can't Trust Diplomats to Be Active:It is important to understand that this is not a call to eliminate the position(s) of MoFA. Instead, the MoFA would continue his/her role, with a new twist. The MoFA (or one of them, as there are generally more than one per month) would oversee the team of Ambassadors. If someone is not active enough to continue their role as Ambassador, that MoFA can do one of two things: Step in for them (as they will have more available time with all of the extra help), or simply replace them with another candidate. The worst case scenario is that, for certain ambassadorships, the MoFA would be filling the role, which is the same thing that happens now.

2. A Nation's Objectives Would Be More Clear with a Foreign Policy Stemming From a Single Source:This is probably the most legitimate concern: Rouge Ambassadors who may run their own Foreign Policy with respect to their assignments. This, however, again falls on the shoulders of the MoFA(s). At the start of a new Presidency and cabinet, the incoming MoFA will have to lay out their goals to the Ambassadors and continue to stay in contact with them. Ideally, there will be a steady flow of information between Ambassadors and MoFAs, most likely on a Forum or IRC. With this in mind, Ambassadors will be forced to work within a greater scheme so that the Diplomatic Office is moving in the same direction, rather than in a couple of different ones.

3. Foreign Nations will be unsure of Whom to Conduct Diplomacy With: This, too, makes a lot of sense. If a Foreign Nation sees two-three MoFA's and then a handful of Ambassadors, they might be confused as to how to reach eNZ. Alas, this falls on the hands of the Ambassadors themselves- If somebody wants to be an Ambassador to a region, they will have to make clear to that region what their position is. A good Ambassador will establish contacts in the Governments in which he/she conducts Diplomacy with and, within a short amount of time, the system will become comfortable for us and for any Foreign nation.

OK, so there really aren't many faults to this system, so what are the benefits? For one, by assigning Diplomats to individual regions (or perhaps Alliances), eNZ will be capable of being in much greater contact with the outside world. This is nothing against the capabilities of our fine MoFAs, but it makes sense that if we had individuals assigned to smaller parts of the map, more can get accomplished. Another interesting advancement of Ambassadors is the opportunity to open dialogue with nations that we otherwise might not have the chance to talk to. For example, how often do we communicate with eIreland, eRussia, eSouth Africa, or eJapan? We will never know the options we have with such nations if we don't have the opportunity to talk to them.

There are also domestic benefits to opening an Ambassadors office. Being an Ambassador is a great position for someone who doesn't serve in Congress or on the Cabinet, but still wants to be involved in government and still carry power and responsibility. It's also a great stepping-stone for members, young and old, to getting further involved in their nation's management.

Finally, a greater Diplomatic option increases the Foreign Policy spectrum for our nation. This game is very focused on the war aspect, but outside of the main functions of the game (as we well know) there are ways in which to conduct Foreign Policy outside of war. Not only does a Diplomatic Option allow a nation like ours, in one of the corners of the world and perhaps less involved in the heat of wars, to gain a better seat at the international table, but it can help us keep ourselves out of wars we can't afford to fight so that we can focus on the ones we need to win.

I hope that this is something current and future CPs and their cabinets strongly consider.