The Personnel of the British Foreign Office and Diplomatic Service, 1851–1929

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 310-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T. Nightingale

The connection between public opinion and public policy is slighter in foreign affairs than in any other sphere of politics. In normal times, international relations have little palpable impact upon the life of the people, and are obscured by more vivid domestic issues until war or some sudden crisis throws a high light on their significance. Even since the Great War, although public realization of the importance of foreign affairs has begun to be aroused in the late belligerent countries—in England at any rate—direct contact between popular opinion and government action is still both sporadic and uncertain.What is true of the British nation is almost equally true of its representative assembly. Parliament has but little power over foreign affairs. Some of the most momentous changes in the country's relations with other Powers have, in the present century, been accomplished without reference to the House of Commons, and often without even its knowledge. Like the people themselves, the people's representatives exercise only an inconsiderable control over that branch of public affairs which is at present of more vital concern than any other.Most British foreign secretaries, indeed, regard their actions as matters of exclusively executive concern. A cabinet of twenty ministers, already overworked in their own departments, is not, however, a body which can conduct the country's foreign relations. On his own subject, the Foreign Secretary dominates his ministerial colleagues. Experience shows that he can avoid consultation with all the cabinet save two or three of the principal ministers.

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 59-72
Author(s):  
Carola Tischler ◽  

Research on international relations today is no longer limited to diplomatic contacts but also includes economic and cultural ties. Another factor that should not be neglected is the people themselves; the personalities who shaped politics. This text focuses on those concerned with German-Soviet relations in the 1930s, both at the “centre” in Moscow and at the Soviet plenipotentiary representation in Berlin. This article deals with this range of problems against the background of Soviet-German relations in the 1930s both in the Kremlin and in the Soviet mission in Berlin. The article is based on archival ma- terials discovered and published in the framework of the edition project “Germany and the USSR 1933–1941” pursued under the aegis of the Joint Commission on the Study of Contemporary History in Russian-German Relations. The methodological guidelines are borrowed from the works of Western historiography. The documents under scrutiny shed the light on the functioning of one of the primary foreign-political instruments — the diplomatic corpus of the Soviet Union and Germany. In the documents published in Volume 2, three main areas of the People’s Commissariat for Foreign Relations’ (Narko- mindel) functioning are covered: the personnel responsible for the Soviet-German relations, the inner life of the Soviet mission in Berlin, and the work of the central apparatus in Moscow. On the basis of the interdepartmental correspondence of the Narkomindel staff, their memoranda, and the impressions of the German diplomats, one can get an impression of the level of professionalism of at least some Soviet diplomats. In sum- mary, owing to the publication of such a large amount of documents from the Russian and German archives, historians from different countries can now pursue research on a wide range of problems related to the international relations of the 1930s and early 1940s, which is extraordinarily important for understanding the causes and mechanisms which led to World War Two.


1914 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-212
Author(s):  
Alpheus Henry Snow

Until quite recent times, it would have been unprofitable, in the case of most nations, to inquire what the philosophy of government held by the people was, or what effect it had on the foreign relations of the nation, or on international relations generally. There were few nations in which the people were so enlightened and expressed themselves so fully that it was possible to distinguish and define the particular philosophy of government held by them; and even if it had been possible to do so, it would have been of little use to try to discover what effect this philosophy had on international relations, since the fact was that it had little or no effect. The people of each nation, ignorant of foreign affairs by reason of the difficulties of travel and communication, allowed the executive to control the foreign relations under the advice of a council in the selection of which they had no voice, and representing certain privileged classes of persons who used the power of the nation as means to accomplish such ends as they thought desirable.


Author(s):  
Asle Toje

We do not want to place anyone into the shadow, we also claim our place in the sun.” In a foreign policy debate in the German parliament on December 6. 1897 the German Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Bernhard von Bülow, articulated the foreign policy aspirations of the ascendant Wilhelmine Germany. This proved easier said than done. In 1907, Eyre Crowe of the British Foreign Office penned his famous memorandum where he accounted for “the present state of British relations with France and Germany.” He concluded that Britain should meet imperial Germany with “unvarying courtesy and consideration” while maintaining “the most unbending determination to uphold British rights and interests in every part of the globe.”...


1999 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 107-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHRISTOPHER HILL

They tell us that the Pharoahs built the pyramids. Well, the Pharoahs didn't lift their little fingers. The pyramids were built by thousands of anonymous slaves . . . and it's the same thing for the Second World War. There were masses of books on the subject. But what was the war like for those who lived it, who fought? I want to hear their stories.Writing about international relations is in part a history of writing about the people. The subject sprang from a desire to prevent the horrors of the Great War once again being visited upon the masses and since then some of its main themes have been international cooperation, decolonisation, poverty and development, and more recently issues of gender.


1931 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth W. Colegrove

Viewed from the functional attitude, few aspects of international government offer more difficult problems than the constitutional process for negotiating, ratifying, executing and revising interstate agreements. Defects in the organizations for international cooperation are matched by imperfections in the internal machinery for asserting the will of states in collective undertakings. Certainly the constitutional development of the control of foreign policy has not kept pace with recent progress in international government as typified by the League of Nations and the International Labor Organization. The World War brought a more liberal control of foreign affairs in Germany and Austria. But in most countries, constitutional development in the supervision of the foreign office moves more slowly than in other fields of public law; and in all countries proposed changes in the mechanism of the regulation of international relations meets the powerful resistance of conservatism and national prejudice.


1950 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 682-693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clifton J. Child

In his note on “The Venezuela-British Guiana Boundary Dispute,” (this JOURNAL, Vol. 43 (1949), pp. 523–530), Judge Otto Schoenrich publishes a memorandum by the late Severo Mallet-Prevost which, if it were the only evidence upon which the fairness of the arbitration of 1899 could be judged, would bring the justice of the award seriously into question. Fortunately, however, it is not necessary to rely either upon the recollections of Mr. Mallet-Prevost or upon the construction placed upon these and other facts relating to the boundary dispute by Judge Schoenrich in order to learn the truth of how the Tribunal came to make its award. There are the voluminous files of the British Foreign Office on the arbitration to which reference may be made and there is the verbatim record of the Tribunal, taken down by six shorthand writers, printed day by day as the Tribunal sat, and then issued in 54 parts. There are also the files —often most informative—of contemporary newspapers (for the arbitration took place at the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the watchful eye of the press).


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-111
Author(s):  
Natalia Mudrenko

Swift global transformations in international relations; the emergence of new communications that provide instant dissemination and transfer of information; increase number of international actors - all above mentioned put on the agenda further search for more effective forms and mechanisms for coordinating activities of public authorities in foreign relations for both Ukraine as well as any other country. Research of the regulatory legal mechanism of coordination of the activities of public authorities of Ukraine in foreign relations shows that Ukraine belongs to a group of countries with a "rigid" form of coordination, that is characterized by stringently regulated sphere of foreign relations, broad powers conferred on the center of coordination as well as the mandatory accountability of all authorities to this center. It was also found that the vast majority of regulations are a post factum reaction to certain violations made by the authorities whose international activity was not agreed with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and caused negative consequences for Ukraine's image on the international arena. The above indicates that the current level of coordination of activity of state authorities of Ukraine in the sphere of foreign relations is characterized (by a scale developed by Professor of the University of Lausanne Dietmar Brown) as "negative" administrative coordination.


2020 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-141
Author(s):  
David Hayton

Sir Lewis Namier (1888–1960) was not only a major twentieth-century historian, a pioneer of ‘scientific history’ who gave his name to a particular form of history-writing, but an important public intellectual. He played a significant role in public affairs, as an influential adviser to the British Foreign Office during the First World War and later as an active Zionist. This article offers a new perspective on his life and work by providing, for the first time, as comprehensive a bibliography as is currently possible of his voluminous writings: books, scholarly articles and contributions to periodicals and newspapers, including many hitherto unknown, and some published anonymously. The annotation includes not only bibliographical information but explanations and brief summaries of the content. The introduction gives an account of Namier’s life and an assessment of his significance as a historian and thinker.


1979 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Ceadel

On 9 February 1933 the Oxford Union debated and carried by 275 votes to 153 the motion ‘That this House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country’. After a few days this became a major news story, first in Britain then also in the world press: the British embassies in Madrid and Santiago cabled the Foreign Office in alarm at the appearance of the story in the Spanish and Chilean press. The motion was taken up also by student debating societies all over Britain and overseas: in the United States, for example, any pledge to take no part in war came to be known as the ‘Oxford pledge’ or the ‘Oxford oath’. Since the debate, which took place ten days after Hitler had become chancellor of Germany, appeared to contrast British liberal, pacifist effeteness with fascist martial virility it was seized on in Germany and Italy. The Liberal M.P. Robert Bernays told the house of commons how he had been asked about the debate later in 1933 by a prominent Nazi youth leader: ‘There was an ugly gleam in his eye when he said: “The fact is that you English are soft.”’ And on 7 July 1934 Alfred Zimmern, professor of international relations at Oxford, wrote from Geneva to the former Union president responsible for the debate: ‘I hope you do penance every night and every morning for that ill-starred Resolution. It is still going on sowing dragons’ teeth. If the Germans have to be knocked out a second time it will be partly your fault.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document