Introduction

Abstract

The need to maintain embassies as essential outposts of diplomatic recognition and representation has been questioned by many observers. Critics deem them increasingly irrelevant in a globalized context of multiple, more adaptable actors, whereas their advocates hold on to the ongoing role of the nation-state in structures of global governance. Both sides agree that change is necessary, although they disagree on its goals and how far it should go. This Introduction sets out the main arguments present in the debate, laying the foundation for the articles that follow which explore how embassies, diplomats and diplomatic representation have all been adapted and transformed by the changing political context of the global era.

Whither European diplomacy? Long-term trends and the impact of the Lisbon Treaty

“…Despite sporting one of the biggest diplomatic services in the world, France has cut the number of diplomats by 39% between 1980 and 2017 (Vaïsse, 2018: 41) although with intermittent variations in this overall trend (Morisse-Schillbach, 2005: 114). Almost half of reductions occurred over a 10-year period between 2007and 2017(Saint-Geours and Kessler, 2018, thus starting before the 2008 financial crisis. Diplomatic officials with a permanent contract, in particular, decreased from 8732 in 2007 to 5759 a decade later.…”

“…Maier, 2000), this perspective points to the limitations of traditional embassies, citing financial constraints, advances in IT and communications, as well as vulnerability to irregular warfare (cf. Scott-Smith, 2017). Many scholars have also stressed the importance of digital changes for public diplomacy (Copeland, 2015;Cornut and Dale, 2019).…”