Skip to main content
Support
Event

The Asian Diplomatic Process

Kishan S. Rana, Public Policy Scholar, The Wilson Center; former Indian Ambassador; and Professor Emeritus, Foreign Service Institute (New Delhi)

Date & Time

Wednesday
Aug. 3, 2005
3:30pm – 5:00pm ET

Overview

In recent years, observers of international relations have noted the imprint globalization has left on the nation state. Kishan S. Rana, who served for 35 years in India's diplomatic corps, argues that globalizing forces are also beginning to amplify the importance of networks and accountability in nations' diplomatic processes. While at the Wilson Center this summer, Rana is completing a comparative study on the diplomatic process in China, India, Japan, Singapore, and Thailand, with emphases on foreign ministries and networks. On August 3, he shared his ideas at a workshop hosted by the Center's Asia Program.

According to Rana, the structure of diplomacy's institutions influences the diplomatic process. Many nations have what he terms a base level unit—a lead government agency dedicated to diplomatic affairs—though each unit differs in its size and in the proportion of diplomats based at embassies, permanent missions, and consulates. Ratios of embassies abroad to foreign embassies at home—a figure Rana identifies as an index of diplomatic intensity—can indicate a country's level of global engagement, with an index above one signifying considerable engagement. He acknowledged, however, that such figures can be misleading; the only one of his five subject countries to yield an index below one is Singapore, a highly engaged and diplomatically innovative nation.

Methods and performance in the Asian diplomatic process are undergoing a transformation to adapt to emerging global patterns of information-sharing and transparency. For example, China is actively involved in investigating diplomatic "best practices" abroad. Additionally, globalization has spawned demands for accountability. Foreign ministries in Asia—particularly India and Japan—have agreed to release public performance reports that highlight achievements and outcomes. Yet Rana argued that challenges remain. Unlike the European Union, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has no mechanism for transmitting methods of diplomacy among nations. And India's performance achievements reports could be hamstrung by a lack of strategic objectives.

Rana, while conceding the absence of a distinctly "Asian" diplomatic process, identified a people-driven approach to diplomacy that transcends the manifold differences in Asian foreign ministries. However, even as globalization transforms diplomatic processes, each country retains unique diplomatic traditions and styles as it faces issues of efficiency, meritocracy, outsourcing, and non-state actor involvement in diplomatic decision-making.

Drafted by Michael Kugelman, Asia Program Assistant
Robert M. Hathaway, Director, Asia Program
Ph: (202) 691-4020

Tagged

Hosted By

Indo-Pacific Program

The Indo-Pacific Program promotes policy debate and intellectual discussions on US interests in the Asia-Pacific as well as political, economic, security, and social issues relating to the world’s most populous and economically dynamic region.   Read more

Thank you for your interest in this event. Please send any feedback or questions to our Events staff.