What happens when ambassadors are summoned by the host country?

(politics.stackexchange.com)

116 points | by azeemba 7 hours ago ago

71 comments

  • Beretta_Vexee 5 hours ago

    There is an element of theatre involved, but it is also a way of sending a very clear signal that the France is not satisfied with the ambassador's behaviour.

    When everything is going well, meetings between the Foreign Office and ambassadors remain private.The fact that the ambassador did not attend the meeting himself but sent a subordinate is a public affront.

    What is strange is that the US ambassador's communication is not really intended for the French or French jews, but is merely a sign of support for Israel.

    There is currently an Israeli media offensive in France followin President Macron's comments on the recognition of a Palestinian state. The Israeli state and its supporters are buying advertising spots on YouTube and Instagram to encourage French Jews to do their ahria with free money.

    There are regular attempts to exploit anti-Semitic crimes or news stories to claim that France is hell on earth for Jews and that Israel is there to save them. But then again, we haven't yet seen Belgian commandos coming to kidnap people in France or Luxembourgers launching rockets.

    The only new thing is that the US ambassador is taking part in this type of operation and behaving like an arsehole with the French Foreign Office.

    • zeroq 4 hours ago

      It is theater and it's more about sending messages to everyone else.

      A state can vocalize it's disapproval directly in a more direct and meaningful way using back channels and political ways, but this is more about giving a clear signal to everyone else.

      It's PR basically.

      • dragonwriter 3 hours ago

        > It is theater and it's more about sending messages to everyone else.

        "More about", I think, ignores the degree to which sending the message publicly to everyone else can be a very important part of sending the message to the obvious direct target.

        > A state can vocalize it's disapproval directly in a more direct and meaningful way using back channels and political ways

        Yeah, but "we are not allowing you to publicly save face by restricting our protest to private back channels" is itself an important way of communicating the severity of the message to the direct target.

        • zeroq 2 hours ago

          Yes, but as a state, if you're not happy you can impose tarrifs, play a dirty game by revoking visas to athletes or Putin's favourite actress, or use any other indirect way to show your disapproval. And use back channels to make sure they know exactly why this is happening. Plenty of ways.

          This is Kabuki theatre, it is to show everyone else that you're dissatisfied.

          • jltsiren an hour ago

            Etiquette, norms, and formal communications are fundamentally about precision. You send only the message you intended, while minimizing the risk of unintended consequences.

            If your actions have real-world consequences, they are guaranteed to send other messages beyond the one you intended. Tariffs, visa revocations, assassinations, wars, and whatever impact other people beyond their direct targets, and those people may change their behavior in unpredictable ways.

    • tln 4 hours ago

      What does this mean "to encourage French Jews to do their ahria with free money"

      Despite Googling, I'm lost on what "ahria" means

      • avar 4 hours ago

        It's a misspelling of "aliyah", which is a term for jews outside of Israel immigrating to Israel.

        They're saying Israel's currently spending advertising money in France hoping to convince French jews to move to Israel.

      • Beretta_Vexee 4 hours ago

        Alyah, Alya, aliyah, Arhia, I don't know how it's supposed to be spelled in English. The wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah

        I haven't looked into the details, but Israel state and other entites promise housing assistance of up to €1,500 per month, Hebrew lessons, tax exemptions, etc. Literally free money.

      • umanwizard 4 hours ago

        Possibly they meant "Aliyah" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah

      • ciconia 4 hours ago

        Maybe "aliah" - immigrating to Israel.

    • fortzi 5 hours ago

      Every French jew that I know has been dealing with direct antisemitism in France, sometimes violent. Your comment seems to downplay that.

      • tptacek 4 hours ago

        I have no idea how universal these observations are and cringe at things like "every X I know in Y sees Z" but I'll add I have friends in similar positions in France and the atmosphere there seems significantly worse than in the US. I don't believe I have any friends friends in Europe that are openly supportive of the current Israeli government.

        Of course, that's not all Kushner said; he also apparently cast support for Palestinian statehood as antisemitic, which is obviously inflammatory. The more grounded in fact concerns about European antisemitism are, the more unfortunate Kushner's statement is.

      • yodsanklai 4 hours ago

        That's sounds like an exaggeration: most jewish people won't deal with any type of discrimination simply because they aren't identifiable as jewish.

        Regardless, antisemitism exists in France and elsewhere. It's just not the case that France doesn't do anything about it. These crimes are punished. Maybe not as severely as one would hope, but by French standards, it's pretty serious.

        But as parent comment mentioned, the current situation has little to do with that.

        • prmoustache 3 hours ago

          > That's sounds like an exaggeration: most jewish people won't deal with any type of discrimination simply because they aren't identifiable as jewish.

          As an identity, yes they still receive a lot of hate.

          As individuals unless they wear distincrive signs like a kipa they will probably receive less hate and discrimination than say...people with red/ginger hair which is still super common. If they are transexuals and gay black redhead jews with rumanian nationality and and live with an asian partner, they are fucked.

        • fencepost 3 hours ago

          And of the ones identifiable as Jewish, the ones where it's just because they wear a yarmulke or something similar probably also don't have problems.

          And then there are going to be the ones festooned with Stars of David, and pushing for every conflict they can possibly get into so they can claim antisemitism. Those? Those I'd believe having problems, but they're not having problems because they're Jewish - they're having problems because they're assholes.

          Is there antisemitism in France? I'm positive there is. Is there anti-Muslim sentiment as well? I'm positive there is. (side note, aren't middle-eastern Muslims generally considered Semites as in descendants of Shem?)

      • maest 4 hours ago

        Counterpoint: all my french Jewish friends have reported no such thing. The group is not large, but relatively diverse, spread across 2-3 almost disjoint circles.

        • liotier 3 hours ago

          French Jew here. Antisemitism exists in France, like everywhere in Europe - we have some history about that going back at least a millennium. But Israel's propaganda interpretation of what antisemitism is and how much of it exists is laughably exaggerated... And it is used as a pretext by the far right to discriminate against Muslims.

      • wredcoll 5 hours ago

        Yay, dueling anecdotes!

      • nsriv 5 hours ago

        Kushner's piece in the WSJ [1] makes the claim that the French government's recognition of Palestine and public statements "haranguing Israel" has uniquely exacerbated this and asserts October 7th is the genesis of this behavior, with no mention of the behavior that Israel is being "harangued" for, which your comment seems to downplay.

        The letter is a clear attempt to bully an ally into US style speech suppression by using someone that has both official position and a personal Presidential imprimatur.

        [1] https://archive.fo/wzVUR

        • bambax 5 hours ago

          This Kushner is a convicted felon and a major crook. He only got where he is because his son married Trump's daughter, and then he got pardoned, and then he gave some money to Trump.

          It's insane that anyone listens to what he has to say. He should just be slapped in the face and sent home.

      • ggm 5 hours ago

        Not to minimise modern French antisemitism, it has deep roots which transcend this immediate political crisis. I am sure you know this. Dreyfus wasn't an origin event, antisemitism had been rife in French culture for ages before. I stop at that point because there is at least some political continuity to turn of the 19th century politics, the downfall of the third Republic aside.

        I see modern day French antisemitism as a bizarre union of right wing echt French, le pen-type and modern era Islamic migration from Francophone former French colonies. Former enemies united in a common hatred.

        • Beretta_Vexee 5 hours ago

          Let's not forget the strange mix of conspiracy theories, extreme right-wing views, and anti-colonialism, like Dieudonné.

          • ggm 5 hours ago

            Absolutely! But my (very implicit) point of substance is that for a US ambassador to declare fatwa NOW rather than at about 2000 points in the past, also not forgetting deep historical American institutional antisemitism, it's just bizarre. It's opportunist political theatre.

            • tptacek 4 hours ago

              I don't think it's bizarre; I think there's been a step function in overt antisemitism in Europe, which is what he's seizing on. That he's an awful and ineffective messenger for that concern shouldn't blind us to the legitimacy of the underlying claim.

              • ggm 3 hours ago

                There has indeed been a step function. Fuelled from Russia and Iran amongst others. For example, Australia has just expelled the Iranian ambassador (the first expulsion of diplomats since WWII) for paying criminals to firebomb synagogues.

                France's problems are a function both of history, and push politics. Some of it is endogenous, some of it is externally driven. I have no doubt the same is true in Germany, Netherlands, the UK. Sure, an underlying mass migration pressure is feeding this, but many of the migrants in france pass through, seeking better times in the UK. The ones who stay, are in the main francophone, and appear to bring with them weaker guard lines against radicalism. Thats a huge bummer.

                He isn't signalling this because of conviction, he's signalling this because his government wants him to, to continue to back the Netenyahu government. I wouldn't cease trade or relations with France or any EU country on these grounds, its a political dispute about recognition of Palestine, not a statement for or against antisemitism.

                You know, and I know, after this evil war ends, Netenyahu is in big domestic trouble. There will probably be another weak, rightist dominated government but the court system will catch up with Bibi. Now .. what does that parallel in the USA?

                • tptacek 3 hours ago

                  Right, nothing I'm saying is in any way intended to validate what the ambassador is doing.

            • fsckboy 4 hours ago

              there has been antisemitism historically all over Christendom and Islamdom (in a similar way to the Jews of Jewdom declaring themselves God's chosen people). Viewed in that context, it's an error to describe American antisemitism as deep, it was always shallower than all the rest. As a result, America has a proportionately very high Jewish population, and with the 20th century decline of "class based" discrimination (generally in the form of WASP-control of social institutions) Jews in the US have flourished and appear at very high rates throughout the knowledge economy meritocracy.

      • aredox 4 hours ago

        Netanyahu is more than happy to visit again and again his friend Orban - who is at the same time plastering all of Hungary with ads railing against Soros.

        Israel doesn't really care about antisemitism. It doesn't even care about "never again". They are openly doing the ethnic cleansing and deportation, and they are very proud that it is their turn to do so now.

    • saubeidl 4 hours ago

      Sounds to me like the ambassador should be kicked out of the country - they are actively conspiring against their host country with a foreign power.

  • marcosdumay 6 hours ago

    Earlier this year, the US recalled their ambassador in Brazil and asked permission for the local government to nearly double the embassy's building size on the same week. (And kept both actions on the long term.)

    Try to understand that.

    • kergonath 5 hours ago

      To be fair, the reason of a lot of actions by American diplomats these days seems to be "because we can".

    • Animats 5 hours ago

      No, the US didn't recall its ambassador to Brazil. The acting US ambassador there was summoned to the foreign ministry of Brazil. The US has some disagreements with Brazil (or, rather, Trump does, because they're putting a former national leader on trial). Here's a view from Rio.[1]

      Recalling an ambassador to their home country (the traditional phrase is "recalled for consultations with their government") in modern times usually means they're being replaced.

      [1] https://www.riotimesonline.com/lulas-brazil-at-a-crossroads-...

      • averageRoyalty 4 hours ago

        > The US has some disagreements with Brazil (or, rather, Trump does, because they're putting a former national leader on trial).

        That seems an odd clarification. Do you not believe a democratically elected leader represents a country? Every country has people who disagree with their leaders views, however this clarification on every statement would get tiring quickly.

        • avar 4 hours ago

          It's because before Bush invaded Iraq it would have been redundant to clarify that Bush said such and such in an official (written) capacity, as opposed to describing what the foreign policy goals of the US were at that moment. The two were synonymous.

          Whereas when Trump was making overtures to annex Canada, it was useful to the rest of the world to explain that that's something the president was talking about that weekend, as opposed to signs that this might be something the US would actually do.

        • shermantanktop 4 hours ago

          Not all leaders do that equally, wouldn’t you agree? Some leaders stay close to the views of the average voter, whereas others are clearly driven by personal motivations. I don’t think it’s controversial to note that Trump is an extreme of the latter case.

        • SpicyLemonZest 3 hours ago

          Democratically elected leaders can represent their country, but they can also do things on their own. When Emmanuel Macron eats at a restaurant we don't typically understand the nation of France to be involved. Trump's dispute with Brazil doesn't serve US interests and isn't permitted by US law, so he's not representing the US when he pursues it, even if he's illegally abusing the powers of his office to do so.

          It's a subtle distinction, of course, and I don't blame anyone outside the US who decides they're not going to bother making it.

        • tracker1 4 hours ago

          It's kind of a common state in US politics today... especially so with those on the political left when a Republican President is in office. That said, it's far amplified in recent years, but I recall similar sentiments as far back as when Reagan was President, and wouldn't be surprised with similar remarks before.

          I've also heard some similar remarks towards Obama and Biden from the right, but not nearly as much as the left with Trump. The US political sphere is increasingly divided and the Overton window is fractured as well.

          • SpicyLemonZest 3 hours ago

            I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. The reason you hear it a lot with regards to Trump is that Trump has said, repeatedly and at great length, that he hates left-leaning Americans and refuses to represent them because they're enemies to be crushed. He announced over the weekend that he's considering a military invasion of Chicago.

            • tptacek an hour ago

              Pointlessly posting National Guard members outside of federal buildings is not in fact a "military invasion" of Chicago. It's stupid! But not much more than that.

  • chasil 6 hours ago

    "(The U.S. ambassador to Switzerland virtually never gets summoned.)"

    After the new 50% tariffs, I doubt this remains true.

    • Scoundreller 6 hours ago

      If they do, we’ll know that Americans have lost interest in Swiss banking.

      • satellite2 6 hours ago

        Or that Washington has lost interest in diplomacy

        • aspenmayer 5 hours ago

          Sabers rattlers saber rattle.

      • mrangle 5 hours ago

        Swiss banking hasn't been legally feasible for Americans since the GWB era, famously and if memory serves. I'm pretty sure that it isn't offered to Americans.

  • whynotminot 6 hours ago

    I always enjoy reading about the theater of international diplomacy. In many ways — humorous and depressing — it’s not that different than the school yard.

    • rossant 6 hours ago

      Zelensky in the oval office last February certainly reminded me the school yard.

      • wredcoll 5 hours ago

        Was that the one where the reporters weren't allowed to criticize trump so they talked about zelensky's clothes instead.

        • myvoiceismypass 5 hours ago

          I believe the vice president did not think Zelensky gave enough thank-yous too at this meeting.

  • Animats 5 hours ago

    It is a formal statement by one country that they don't like what another country is doing.

    It can be serious. Worst case, an ambassador is summoned to receive a declaration of war. That's happened many times in the past, especially when travel delays meant wars took a long time to start. That's rare today.

    This time, it's not that serious. Here's the statement by the foreign ministry of France: [1]

    France learned of the allegations of the US Ambassador, Mr. Charles Kushner, who, in a letter to the President of the Republic, expressed his concern about the rise in anti-Semitism in France and reported an alleged lack of sufficient action by the French authorities to confront it.

    France firmly refutes these allegations. The rise in anti-Semitic acts in France since 7 October 2023 is a reality that we deplore and to which the French authorities are fully committed to combating, as such acts are intolerable.

    The Ambassador’s allegations are unacceptable. They contravene international law, in particular the duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of States as provided for in the 1961 Vienna Convention that governs diplomatic relations. Furthermore, they fall short of the quality of the transatlantic relationship between France and the United States and the trust that should result between allies.

    Ambassador Kushner will be summoned to the Quai d’Orsay on Monday, 25 August.

    Charles Kushner (Jared Kushner's dad, Jared Kushner being Trump's son in law, married to Ivanka Trump) and the US embassy sent their chargé d'affaires (a temporary ambassador while the real one is unavailable) instead. That can be read in several ways. Although it's a mild diplomatic insult to send a substitute, the effect is to calm the situation a bit. It helps that the substitute is a professional diplomat, not a political appointee. Le Figaro says the meeting went reasonably well, but that's what's traditionally said unless a declaration of war results.

    This should go away as an issue unless Trump starts screaming about it on social media.

    [1] https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/country-files/united-state...

    [2] https://www.lefigaro.fr/international/convocation-de-l-ambas...

    • dragonwriter 4 hours ago

      > but that's what's traditionally said unless a declaration of war results.

      I would say "unless some further escalation directly follows"; while a declaration of war would be one case of this, there are others, such as expulsion of the ambassador, ordering the closure of some or all diplomatic facilities (embassy and/or consulates), downgrading diplomatic relations or withdrawing the host nations diplomats, or severing diplomatic relations altogether.

    • myvoiceismypass 5 hours ago

      Forgot it was Kushner - what an evil, shit man! Tax evasion, illegal campaign donations and the cherry on top - tampering with a witness.

      Said witness was his brother-in-law! Kushner hired a prosttitue to entrap him, filmed it and then showed his sister, how gross!

  • specproc 4 hours ago

    Can we take a moment to appreciate how much better an answer that top answer was than if we'd typed it into our LLM of choice.

  • andrewinardeer 5 hours ago

    Australia expelled the Iranian ambassador yesterday. Can anyone give an insights as to what happens during this processes?

    I guess diplomatic relations are severed until an ambassador returns to the host country.

    • Animats 5 hours ago

      It's gone further now. Australia just severed diplomatic relations with Iran.[1]

      [1] https://apnews.com/article/australia-iran-antisemitism-attac...

    • dragonwriter 4 hours ago

      In principle, no, declaring the ambassador persona non grata only directly means that that particular official is no longer welcome and recognized, the state which they represented to that moment may continue to be represented on an interim basis without meaningful interruption (usually through designation of the existing deputy chief of mission as chargé d'affaires) unless the host nation also ordered the closure of the mission or formally severed diplomatic relations.

      The nation whose ambassador was expelled may choose to downgrade relations formally, even if the other side has not, as its own protest, of course.

      On the other hand, expelling an ambassador is a rare event and usually one piece of a fairly extreme diplomatic protest that involves other elements, either simultaneously or in close temporal proximity (fully cutting off relations or even declaring war would not be that unusual as accompanying actions.)

    • rwmj 5 hours ago
  • oaiey 4 hours ago

    US ambassadors are a disgrace right now. They do not behave like guests or communication bridges but actors influencing local politics. But that is not the purpose of the embassy concept.

    As a world we have to return to normal and respectful behavior instead of bullying everywhere. The US under Trump is just one thing: a bully.

    With great power comes great responsibility. That is the standard men (and women) are hold accountable.

  • rwmj 5 hours ago

    These formal diplomatic notes are .. what? A piece of headed notepaper? An email? Some XML message validated with a schema?

    • Animats 4 hours ago

      PDF of the message on a diplomatic letterhead. 8.5x 11", 15 point type, 1 inch margins, seal of the State Department at the top of the first page.[1] The style is formal, but very plain and clear English.

      Wars have started because of badly drafted or mishandled diplomatic notes. The Japanese diplomatic note announcing war was supposed to be delivered just before the attack on Pearl Harbor. The communications between the US and Saddam Hussein before the Kuwait war left Hussein with the incorrect impression that the US would not intervene if he invaded Kuwait.

      [1] https://fam.state.gov/FAM/05FAH01/05FAH010610.html

    • bawolff 4 hours ago

      From what i understand there is a whole ranking system of different types of diplomatic communications based on how serious it is.

    • aspenmayer 4 hours ago

      I’m not sure in these specific cases, but they are frequently referred to as “diplomatic cables.” I don’t have much insight into how they are sent, delivered, or received, but they likely have formal agreements with host nations that specify how these cables are presented. Due to the sensitive nature of the communications, many of these messages are delivered in person, whether on paper or verbally, one diplomat to another. Electronic means of communicating cables are likely classified.

      Animats in a sibling comment has the details. See section i:

      > i. Delivery from the Department to Foreign Embassies in Washington, DC[…]

      Executive Secretariat InfoLink seems to be doing the electronic heavy lifting.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomatic_cable

  • jussaying2 4 hours ago

    If anyone's looking for the ongoing theatre of international diplomacy at a time of heightened tensions, Trump just proposed a 38 year-old novice/campaign operative as the US ambassador to the world's most populous nation.

    https://thewire.in/diplomacy/six-critical-questions-raised-b...

    • tracker1 4 hours ago

      Given his upbringing and birthplace he seems to have a pretty diverse background. Likely a good candidate for an ambassador role in general. He doesn't seem to have a specific background regarding India, but other than that most criticism seems to be political bias of reporters/editors.

  • MichaelZuo 6 hours ago

    Even the term itself is pretty misleading, as the answer notes, the vast majority of purported ‘summons’ are not actually made with the threat in writing that they will be punished if they don’t show up.

    Those real summons are very rare.

  • ChrisArchitect 5 hours ago

    If not to represent their country in a foreign country, what do these ppl think the role of Ambassadors is?

    People haven't watched The West Wing etc and it shows

  • pbiggar 6 hours ago

    Interesting the story that led to this question. France has said that it will recognize Palestine, and so the US ambassador wrote a letter falsely accusing the French of antisemitism for recognizing Palestine.

    • Simon_O_Rourke 4 hours ago

      It's absurdist whataboutery from Kushner, and no doubt the Israeli foreign ministry pulling the strings.

      One does not equate to the other.

      What it does do however is undermine current Israeli domestic policy, which can be neatly summed up as keeping their PM out of prison by focusing on the external enemy.

      • tguvot 30 minutes ago

        trial of israeli pm is ongoing.

  • yrcyrc 6 hours ago

    Virtue signalling, hand wrangling and mostly jostling in international affairs. Nothing of consequence. Just daily business

    • A_Duck 5 hours ago

      Jaw, jaw is better than war, war

      This theatre is the way countries can negotiate and communicate peacefully