Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Britain Journal American Diplomacy Publication Year within 25 Years Publication Year within 10 Years

1. My British Exequatur, “By Her Majesty’s Command”

Author:
Jonathan B. Rickert
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
In order to join the U.S. foreign service, applicants pass through a gauntlet of written and oral assessments, physical examinations, and security clearance. Once those steps are successfully completed, the Secretary of State sends to the President for approval a list of those to be commissioned as diplomatic and consular officers. The commission is what makes one officially a Foreign Service officer. It’s our only badge of membership, unaccompanied by the diplomatic uniform or other regalia used by some other countries to denote diplomatic status. When I sailed into the port of Southampton in the United Kingdom on the S.S. United States on October 26, 1965, as a newly minted and very junior U.S. diplomatic and consular officer, I was armed with my diplomatic passport and commission, issued by President Johnson and signed by Secretary of State Dean Rusk. Those signatures, of course, were printed on the form, but my name, title, the date, etc. had been entered, elegantly in cursive, apparently by hand. The document, on velum-like paper adorned with an impression seal of the United States, looked to me more like a fancy university diploma than anything else. However, it meant that I was a “real” diplomat and authorized to take on the responsibilities required by my career.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Memoir, and Bureaucracy
Political Geography:
Britain and United States of America

2. A ‘High Iron Railing’: Plans to Implement Partition in the Palestine Mandate and British India

Author:
Lucy Chester
Publication Date:
10-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
When the British Empire withdrew from South Asia in 1947, it carried out a hasty and poorly planned partition. When it withdrew from the Palestine Mandate in 1948, imperial officials chose not to divide Palestine. Prior to the Palestine decision, British officials spent decades examining the practical implications of partitioning the Mandate. During the same period, the British resisted discussing the possibility of partition in South Asia, only to hastily divide India and Pakistan in 1947.1 Despite their radically different approaches, these cases demonstrate three important points about the relationship between infrastructure, power, and partition (defined as territorial division carried out by a third party). First, infrastructure expresses state and colonial power.2 Second, in the case of Mandate Palestine, infrastructure illuminates how imperial priorities limited and ultimately doomed prospects for an Arab-Jewish partition. Detailed planning contributed to Britain’s rejection of partition in Palestine. Third, in South Asia, Britain’s lack of serious planning and failure to understand what partition would involve facilitated a territorial division marred by ethnic cleansing and mass migration—while also creating two proudly independent states.
Topic:
History, Territorial Disputes, Infrastructure, and Colonialism
Political Geography:
Britain, South Asia, Middle East, Palestine, and West Bank