Let me take you back to a time when I was an unsuspecting young lad. Picture this: a sunny day, a gathering of wise but grumpy elders, and me, completely clueless about the intricate art of marital diplomacy. You see, I had no idea that family meetings could be more intricate than an episode of “Game of Thrones.”
When I was a young boy, I attended a marital arbitration process between my cousin and her husband. She prosecuted her case among the elders from both sides, stating that the husband had neither eaten her food nor bought her any clothes for the past year. And instead, he spent more time in bars drinking. I was shocked because her dress at the hearing was new, and she came with it from her marital home. I had correctly assumed that her husband had bought her the dress. The elders from the husband’s place murmured in protest. Is this what you brought us here to discuss? Ooh, Ooh, in embarrassment. I was confused, and inadvertently, I said aloud, “but he bought you what you are wearing,” telling my cousin. The elders from both sides were not amused. I was kicked out of the meeting as they all walked out. Efforts by the husband to apologise to his elders were fruitless. He had broken the cardinal rule of manhood. No amount of diplomacy could help him. Nonetheless, a few weeks later, my cousin returned to her marriage.
Years later, I learned that they were not talking about the dress. I learned that culturally, issues relating to intimate matters are not publicly prosecuted, especially if it is a failure by a man. The husband should have informed his elders that they were on a diplomatic mission. A euphemism for a chance to apologise. This kind of mission is not undertaken without the role of a go-between, a person familiar with both sides of the protagonists. The role of a go-between is to “steal a chance,” in which case he will ensure that the guests have the first opportunity to state what brought them to their in-laws. With the chance, the tone and body language of the presentation would have been conciliatory and revealing that they had come to strengthen their relationships despite the minor differences. Elders will admonish their son for bringing their dignity to disrepute, praising their in-laws. A strategy of turning the discussion into a cultural policy-making rather than an outright reconciliation process. By the time the visitors are done, the hosts focus their debate on the future and well-being of society.
These cultural processes that seem time-consuming are at the centre of international diplomacy. They embody the essence of patience, respect, and strategic communication, often overlooked in modern, fast-paced negotiations. Just as the go-between in the marital arbitration sought to mediate and soften the conversation, diplomats in international settings use intermediaries, backchannels, and informal discussions to pave the way for more formal agreements. The process emphasises the importance of understanding cultural nuances and the art of negotiation, where indirect communication and symbolic gestures play pivotal roles in achieving long-lasting peace and cooperation. Through such practices, the fabric of societal relations is preserved and strengthened, fostering a sense of unity and mutual respect that transcends borders and conflicts.
Diplomacy theories are often shaped through observations in settings such as settling marital differences. These everyday scenarios provide rich, practical insights into the mechanics of diplomacy that can be applied globally. The delicate art of balancing grievances, the strategic use of intermediaries, and the emphasis on face-saving measures are all crucial elements that inform diplomatic theory.
In both contexts, the goal is to navigate complex human emotions and relationships while striving for a resolution that maintains respect and dignity for all parties involved. The marital arbitration process showcases how cultural traditions and norms influence negotiation strategies and outcomes. These cultural insights are invaluable for diplomats operating across diverse societies with differing values and expectations.
In studying such intimate and culturally embedded processes, diplomats can better understand the soft power dynamics at play. They learn to appreciate the subtleties of indirect communication and the importance of symbolic gestures, which are often more potent than confrontation. This understanding can lead to more effective and harmonious international relations, where the focus shifts from mere conflict resolution to fostering enduring partnerships and mutual respect.
As Secretary of State and National Security Advisor, Henry Kissinger distinguished himself as a master in the history of US diplomacy. A profound understanding of cultural nuances and the intricate dance of indirect communication often informed his strategies. Kissinger knew that diplomacy was not merely about the overt exchanges at negotiation tables but also about the subtle, behind-the-scenes manoeuvres that paved the way for successful outcomes. For example, during the Vietnam War, he orchestrated secret talks with North Vietnamese officials, understanding that a public forum would hinder progress. By using discreet channels, he could explore compromises and build trust away from the glare of media scrutiny.
Several diplomatic treaties and accords gave rise to peace and tranquillity worldwide. For example, the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 ended the Thirty Years’ War in Europe. In 1978, a landmark peace agreement between Egypt and Israel was reached, mediated by the US, and it continues to be in force. The Good Friday Agreement, signed on April 10, 1998, ended the violent conflict in Northern Ireland known as “The Troubles.” The Dayton Accords, signed in December 1995, brought an end to the Bosnian War, one of the most brutal conflicts in Europe since World War II. Although the recent White House diplomatic debacle drove my motivation to write this article, there are indications that a broader peace accord may be arrived at if King Charles’ mission to the US is successful.
In this light, it is essential to consider the unique potential of cultural diplomacy in addressing conflicts across Africa. The African Union, with its deep understanding of the continent’s diverse cultures and traditions, is uniquely positioned to employ quiet, culturally sensitive diplomacy to foster peace. Rather than imposing sanctions, which often exacerbate tensions and hinder economic development, the emphasis should be on dialogue and reconciliation embedded in cultural practices.
Traditional conflict resolution methods, such as community-led peace talks and restorative justice practices seen in various African societies, can serve as powerful tools in diplomacy. These methods focus on healing relationships and addressing the root causes of conflict rather than merely punishing the parties involved. By engaging respected community leaders and elders who understand the cultural context, the African Union can facilitate discussions prioritising mutual respect and long-term solutions.
Furthermore, integrating cultural diplomacy with modern diplomatic strategies can create a more holistic approach to peacebuilding. For instance, leveraging arts, music, and storytelling to convey messages of unity and reconciliation can resonate deeply with people, fostering a sense of shared identity and purpose. The African Union’s role in promoting such initiatives can help create an environment where peace and cooperation are valued over conflict and division.
The intricate process of cultural diplomacy, as illustrated by traditional marital arbitration, offers invaluable lessons for international relations. Understanding and respecting cultural nuances, employing indirect communication, and using symbolic gestures can lead to more effective and lasting resolutions. By integrating these traditional methods with modern diplomatic strategies, organisations like the African Union can foster peace and unity across diverse societies, promoting long-term stability and cooperation over conflict and division.
