1914] on The Foundations of Diplomacy 3 



art sometimes more histrionic than plastic. But I do not ask your 

 attention for any consideration of this art in itself, or of the methods 

 of its application. I propose to deal rather with the bases of diplo- 

 matic art, the condition on which alone it can become effective. 

 This is essentially a matter of " useful knowledge." To me it seems 

 that the foundations of successful and effective diplomacy in a 

 democratic State can only be found in national education. 



Let me illustrate this point. The two supremely successful 

 diplomatists of the second half of the nineteenth century, Cavour 

 and Bismarck, were, it is true, men of rare knowledge and ability, 

 men possessing, in virtue of their knowledge, an intuitive insight 

 into, and the power to anticipate, events. Such men are rare at all 

 times, but they would have been powerless had not certain conditions 

 of national knowledge and national will rendered their success 

 possible. The existence of these or analogous conditions is a sine 

 qua 7ion of successful diplomacy. 



What are these conditions ? An instructed public opinion, and 

 a public will clearly directed towards definite objects. How is public 

 opinion to be instructed and the public will directed ? By the 

 universities, by the Press, or by public speakers ? These agencies 

 are effective provided they be in their turn informed and inspired 

 by an exalted purpose. In some foreign countries, notably in 

 Germany, and to some extent in France, the universities or cognate 

 institutions provide special opportuities for the study of "political 

 science " in the abstract. Professors of Staatsivissenschaft discourse 

 to students, some of whom are grown men, upon the history of 

 States, the application of political maxims, and the development of 

 such institutions as limited monarchies and constitutions out of the 

 older forms of monarchical or feudal organization. Those who 

 receive this instruction may possess, at the end of their studies, a 

 general knowledge of the principles involved in statecraft, but they 

 are not therefore necessarily fitted to be judges of the rightness or 

 the wrongness of contemporary diplomatic action. For this some- 

 thing more is required. 



But why, it may be asked, cannot these matters be left to the 

 management of responsible ministers and of trained diplomatists ? 

 Have not they made it the business of their lives to become 

 " experts " ? The answer is that the changes which have taken 

 place in the forms of pubhc life, especially in Western Europe, have 

 gradually shifted power and the ultimate responsibihty from the 

 Crown and the upper classes on to the masses of the community. 

 Where the power is, there also should the knowledge be. Diplomacy, 

 or the management of foreign affairs, was originally a prerogative of 

 the Crown. Even now ambassadors and ministers are the direct 

 personal representatives of their Sovereign, even though their 

 pohtical instructions be received from the ruler's principal Foreign 

 Secretary of State for the time being. 



B 2 



