'A Ministry of Foreign Affairs is indispensable for the co-ordination of foreign policy' Discuss.

The application of the MFA’s tasks and duties amongst foreign policy implementation and supporting of the missions abroad, are been assigned into different departments inside the ministry, ‘arranged partly along geographical and functional lines’. Geographical departments are those who are focusing regionally on a certain area of interest, while the functional departments are concerned with other issues such as arms control, drugs, trade and human rights. The debate is standing on which of those 2 approaches is better to adopt when forming or implementing a foreign policy. Contemporary the functional departments tend to be more prestigious than the geographical whereas in the past since the creation of Quai d’Orsay the opposite was happening. That is mainly because the functional departments, can be more in ‘harmony with the concept of Globalisation’ and an example can be the British Foreign and Commonwealth office (Foreign Office). Its functional and multilateral departments are cutting across the geographical divisions, causing a proliferation of these kinds of problems, and are ‘best illustrated in dealing with countries of western Europe and the EU’. Seeking an end to the existence of the geographical departments inside the MFA is a fatal error that one may perform. Equivalent of the functional departments are duplicated in other line ministries as well, and such action, as Berridge argues would waken the case for a separate MFA to exist. After all, functional departments have a specialised expertise on different matters while states continue to be the main actors in the international system, and those states are consisted by a region with economic, political and social significance for the MFA.

In order to gather sufficient information into these functional and geographical lines mentioned above, the MFA’s have other departments as well of minor size but equivalent significance. Those are the ‘Intelligence and research department’, specialising in general background research and information gathering in various ways, including secret intelligence; the Multilateral department that has been created as a tool of communication and co-ordination with the various Non Governmental organisations; the legal department which is there to justify or legally advise, under local and international law the foreign policy passed above and finally the ‘policy and planning’ department, that has as a major objective the forecasting of the international affairs and the course of certain situations, avoiding unprepared ness and criticisms from the international community or other line ministries. ‘Failures to collect and process information thoroughly or to achieve effective liaisons between various arms of government can mean the difference between success and failure’

Another factor under consideration in the implementation of the foreign policy is the size and statuses of the particular MFA developing the policy as well as the socio-political condition that are govern its realm. For example the size of the country, whether is a rich or developing country, whether it is a democratic or monarchic state, also as Hill claims, ‘No doubt foreign policy in these states is a different matter altogether; it may be a lesser priority because of the paradoxical security and lack of power experienced by many developing countries, while decisions will always be subject to the ambitions of individual leaders to make their own mark in world politics’.

G.R. Berridge argues that, ‘despite the MFA’s continuing role in foreign policy advice and implementation, it is rare for it now to have the same authority in the conduct of foreign relations relative to other ministries that it once had’. Indeed in order to produce sustainable and effective foreign policy, the MFA need to co-ordinate the functions of the above departments in a very successful way. The challenge of globalisation and internationalisation has pose a great threat to the MFA, while the concept of ‘direct dial diplomacy’ has been introduced and other line ministries such as the ministry of trade, environment, finance, defence, etc but also organisations such as the central bank and others can directly communicate with their correspondents in other countries. The function of the international department in becoming more commonly acquired from all the other line ministries, sometimes and in some situations, leaving the MFA ‘as a passed-over department with little influence on the policy making process’.  The foreign ministry is tending to loose its privileges as a countries ‘gatekeeper’ while the contemporary international community is seeking to develop a ‘foreign policy community’ with a major example the European Union and it’s ‘Common Foreign Security Policy’.  This CFSP derived from the ‘need for a European reflex in response to external events’ and is responsible to the collective decision making of all the line ministries of member states, leaving a little on the role of the MFA’s. The European’s states ministries of foreign affairs have find a great challenge to adjust the procedures and substance of the European Union, while David Spencer goes as far away as to something approaching an EU Foreign Service. Allen D. argues that ‘Participation in the EU has given particular emphasis to the blurring of the boundaries between domestic and foreign policy’, while the FCO faced this test. However especially the FCO as Allen believes, managed to stay competitive and still so far to play an important role as a variable on the direction of the foreign policy of Britain and its external affairs. Thus the development of the ‘direct dial diplomacy’ and the new challenged posed demanding   better coordination does not mean that the MFA has abandoned ‘the task of promoting consistency and implementation of foreign policy’. Its suggests that ‘co-ordination has become a much more central concern of policy makers as they need to operate in multiple arenas (often simultaneously), engage with a more diverse range of governmental and non-governmental actors, and to ensure that they maintain a coherent position on issues that are at once closely linked and embrace domestic and international constituencies’.

In the ‘battle of promoting their values and emphasising their importance and expertise, the bigger MFAs, are advancing their geographical departments. Furthermore Berridge suggests seven approaches in order the MFA to retain and promote co-ordination ‘beyond its own doors’. Primarily it should insist on retaining the ‘control of all external diplomatic and consular missions and to require that officials from other ministries attached to them report home via the ambassador’. To ensure the placement of senior MFA personnel in key positions on foreign affairs committees; the MFA to exploit its privilege of vetting all international treaties entered into by agencies of the government; the MFA must be given prior notice for any official trip by a senior government member abroad; a fifth solution is to form an interdepartmental committee composed by senior officials with departments with particular interest on areas or issues of foreign policy; a temporary exchange of staff between the MFA and other line ministries may occur and finally the most far reached approach is to house key functions under on roof, under one ministry. Also considered to be the favourite way as Berridge claims is to merge the MFA with the department of trade, or another department but this does not proves that the problem of co-ordinations is been solved and its not been used widely, although the US Agency for International Development  can be argued to be an example of such approach. In a more practical application of the above, the MFA could aid to form such department that would deal with two or more functional issues of an area, combining them with the geographical expertise that their geographical departments’ posses or even the equivalent departments of other line ministries where the knowledge is better on particular schemes. Therefore co-ordination not only would be enhanced but also would have profound results as the foreign policy on such matters would be processed with security and consistency. Supporting this argument, Hocking B. says that, ‘as co-ordination has become more critical to success in policy management, so the FMs have needed to respond to a more complex milieu by sharing the co-ordination function with other departments whose functional responsibilities take them increasingly into the international arena.

There is a clear requirement that the Ministries of Foreign Affairs should seek to develop different strategies, in many cases out of the context of governmental structures that would help the to adopt and change in such ways to reach the adaptation and change of the states and societies into the new challenges of Globalisation. The Global Governance, up to a certain level has passed on the hands on international non-governmental organisations, such as the UN, NATO, and other Economic organisations such as the WTO, OPEC etc. The MFA have to enhance their co-ordination with such organisations, as it is been applied and seen as a major development. At the same time, using the same organisations in the formation of policy and as ‘members of delegations to international conferences, they may undermine negotiating positions either at home or in the conference room’, which danger also points out the potential of the MFA in such instances.

As it has been proven so far, the MFA are tending to responding to the demands of maintaining access rather than focusing on the imperatives of control’ which is important in order the notion of ‘gatekeeper’ to be preserved and protected by the changes on the global environment. This strives for control and better co-ordination will be increasingly challenged by other government departments and line ministries which the MFA have to find ways to overcome. Suggestions have been made by recognised scholars and experts on the areas of the MFAs but this notion of decline is still predominant in the internationals foreign ministries environment.

 However, the fact remains that the MFAs are very flexible organisations, capable of overcoming such challenges that are been posed on them by the concept of globalisation. Enhancing the geographical expertise and cooperation are important but nevertheless only a mere part of the total effort required. Its is not necessary that an MFA is indispensable for the foreign affairs of a state and in fact many states-mainly small or newly developed states- do not have a special ministry for this purpose, leaving the option for succession onto its leaders or special committees undertaking the same tasks of a FM.

As Hocking suggest, the key to success and indispensability is to move towards a ‘virtual’ organisation. An organisation being able to adopt, develop, reconstructing and reinventing itself, in order to regain its proper statue and position as a player in the international affairs, as well as the foreign policy implementation and co-ordination of  post-modern states.      

Bibliography

• Berridge R.G. ‘ Diplomacy: Theory and Practice’ 2nd ed (London: Palgrave, 2002)

• Cardinal Richelieu, ‘The political Testament’ trnsl. H. B. Hill (1965) [written circa 1646; first publ. 1688]

• Herman M., ‘Intelligence power in Peace and War’ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996)

• Hocking B., ‘Foreign Ministries: Change and Adaptation’ (London: Macmillan, 1999)

• Keenan G. F. ‘Memoirs 1925-1950’ (London: Hutchinson, 1968)

• Steiner Z., ‘The Foreign Office and Foreign Policy, 1898-1914’ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969)

• Steiner Z., ‘The times survey of Foreign Ministries of the World’ (London: Times Books, 1982)

• Warman R. ‘The Foreign Office 1916-1918: A study of its role and functions’ (London, New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1986)

---