Diplomatic Appointments Are Not a Gordian Knot, But a Simple Puzzle

If you take seriously this nearly six-year political-diplomatic saga between President Milanović and Prime Minister Plenković related to the selection of Croatian ambassadors and consuls general, you might think that an average, decent ambassador must be almost a supernatural, mythical being. That they speak perfectly at least three to five languages, understand geopolitics like Henry Kissinger, are Nobel laureates in economics, possess the social intelligence of Pamela Harriman, and are even capable of playing at least three Chopin sonatas for a select diplomatic audience after dinner.

All of these are, of course, mere myths about diplomacy and ambassadors, as well as convenient fabrications in petty political and partly personally motivated rivalries between the Prime Minister and the President. Even in the most efficient and influential world diplomacies, there are no more of these mythical ambassadors. They have never existed in Croatian diplomacy.

Candidates Are Not Hard to Find

For a good or very good (Croatian) ambassador, it is desirable that in addition to English, they speak the language of the country they are going to, that they know the Croatian governance system, and that they have mastered basic political literacy, understand the fundamentals of diplomacy (which are very easy to learn), know and understand the country or multilateral system to which they are appointed (for consuls general, it is important that they can establish good contact with the Croatian diaspora), that they are well-educated and good communicators, and that they have no history of complaints regarding harassment or sexual misconduct, which has been particularly scrutinized in recent years…

And, of course, that they are absolutely loyal to the state they represent. Even in Croatia’s narrow talent pool, it is not particularly difficult to find such candidates, especially in some combination between career diplomats (employees of the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs) and politically appointed ambassadors, which has proven to be the best model. Because politics wants its own, and different destinations require different profiles of ambassadors. Even during times of different political options at the head of the Government and the head of the state – for example, when Ivo Sanader was in the Banski Dvori and Stjepan Mesić at Pantovčak – they managed to reach compromises in appointments. Perhaps not the highest quality, but better than a six-year blockade that makes the state appear unserious and ridiculous. And the times were more sensitive. Namely, Croatia was just on the path to Western integrations – NATO and the EU – which Sanader was pushing, while Mesić was pulling towards the East, non-alignment, and the post-Yugoslav ‘region’.

Today, Milanović’s eastern rhetoric has more symbolic than real effects because (fortunately) it does not define Croatian foreign policy. And it could actually facilitate appointments if there were mutual goodwill. Here are a few principled examples of how simple this can be. It would certainly not be advisable to send someone from Plenković’s close orbit to Moscow, as it is important to establish good communication with the host. The only name that has so far been put forward in public as a candidate for ambassador in Washington is Lara Romano. Currently, I do not know a better candidate for that position. Lara Romano has all the qualities and qualifications for that position: she knows the American and Croatian systems, is exceptionally politically literate, is communicative, and has previous diplomatic experience. She comes from the Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs, but I do not believe anyone better can be found outside the system.

The Absence of Agreement Is Irresponsible

It would be absurd to seek the head of the Croatian representation to the EU outside the circle of professional diplomacy with experience in European affairs. The same applies to NATO. It is important to have experienced and reliable people in several countries where European policy is shaped: in Berlin, Paris, Rome, Warsaw. London is always important, as are several non-European powers, primarily China and India. Recently, the political importance of the ambassadorial position in Israel has been growing – both due to the expected activation of the peace process for the Middle East and due to constant Serbian attempts to use Israel to advance part of their Greater Serbian agenda towards Croatia.

Therefore, it would not be wise to send someone to Tel Aviv who walks around draped in a keffiyeh, does not know a word of Hebrew, nurtures a post-Yugoslav narrative, and knows Israel only from Wikipedia. There are still many positions that are not so crucial, where (career) diplomats can showcase their skills and even political parachutists can remain unnoticed. With just a little goodwill in the Banski Dvori and at Pantovčak, diplomatic appointments are not an insurmountable Gordian knot – but rather a very simple puzzle. The absence of agreement, however, becomes truly irresponsible – for both bards and both hills.