Information in the world of diplomacy is a tradeable resource. It doesn't matter which diplomat you talk to, once a conversation with any substance has taken place it becomes a tradeable commodity. If it regarded as a matter of importance it will be recorded on return the office and dispatched to the home government by secure means. It is known as a record of conversation.
Arbib appears naive about the devious workings of the world of diplomacy. Barrowclough writes, "He has insisted there's nothing unusual about politicians talking to the Americans: it's all part of the Australia-US alliance".
For instance if the Americans received information of significance from Arbib that they thought could be of interest to China they might initiate an exchange, maybe over dinner, where they might indicate they had something of interest to convey (trade). They would initiate or steer the conversation toward an issue they sought clarification or information on. The conversation might then move inconclusively with both parties, perhaps the Ambassadors, agreeing to meet the next day for coffee and at that point, if all went well, there would be a subtle and discrete exchange information.
Advertisement
Diplomats exchange or trade information with a range of contacts including foreign correspondents and local journalists, the latter, if any good, will provide useful information on the strengths and weaknesses of politicians. It would be interesting to know who provided background on Arbib. Diplomats and foreign correspondents are engaged in gathering information on all aspects of the country or countries they are reporting on. They therefore have much in common.
A professional diplomat will advise senior officers and colleagues of contacts made over a period (day/week) and the substance of conversations that took place. He or she will do a note for file on the main points in the conversation.
When I was in South Africa I could eat well in Johannesburg on the basis of providing background on events unfolding in Soweto, because I went there once or twice a week and in return I received information on Rhodesia, which we were not allowed to travel to and on conversations with cabinet ministers. But as in all things you had to trust your source.
A protected source is also someone that over a period of time the embassy has learnt to trust in terms of the information provided. They will have verified the veracity of key pieces of information from other sources. Cross referencing information is an important and ongoing process.
In view of the dynamics of the diplomatic market place there is no such thing as a benign or friendly country. Arbib should have been aware of this but clearly he was not.
Recently there has been talk of public and private diplomacy. Public diplomacy is said to consist of pleasant platitudes and private diplomacy is said to be where the tough talking is done, perhaps; one can imagine the US putting the hard word on members of the Gulf Co-operation Council to agree to a Saudi intervention in Bahrain as they seek to shore up the status quo in the Gulf.
Advertisement
Equally, however, private diplomacy can consist of weak talk and poor compromises. Australia rarely engaged in tough talk with the Indonesians over East Timor, which meant the intervention, when it came, was a shock. I have seen Ambassadorial hands tremble when required to make contentious representations.
Ambassadors like to be liked. Public diplomacy on issues such as human rights, climate change and corruption is far more effective than a knee rub behind closed doors. It is on the public record, which as WikiLeaks has shown is good for democracy.
Arbib is unlikely to have betrayed his country, Australia does not deal in those sorts of secrets, but he has betrayed himself and perhaps his party.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
5 posts so far.