Talk:Diplomatic mission

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject International relations This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states.
If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

May be useful to explain why the difference re the UK and Commonwealth countries in more detail. I would, if I knew. Basically, it could do to add far more to this. -Penta 14:08, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It's explained quite well under High Commissioner. 81.156.163.79 01:10, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Extrateritorial and local laws

Embassies are not -as described in the article- extraterritorial. It is property of a foreign government under special protection of the vienna convention. The term "extraterritorial" is only used for territories overseas that are part of the homecountry/nation. e.g. french guinea etc. [quote]"Contrary to popular belief, however, diplomatic mission and consular post properties are not extensions of the sending state's territory. Both in fact and in law, diplomatic premises are within the territory of the receiving state."[/quote] source:http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/membassy.htm

They are also not "exempt from local law". They are exempt from some local law, but have to obey certain other local laws: e.g if an embassy owns a "landmark building" (e.g. like a historic building in georgetown , washington d.c.)it still has to obey certain regulations by local authorities. e.g.: they can't destroy a 200 year old historic building in georgetown and build a skyscraper on the site in washington d.c. or elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.65.165 (talk) 14:58, August 27, 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Wretched service hours, etc.

I'd like to see some detail on exactly why embassies are so wretched involving service hours, contact, overall friendliness, use of technology, etc. Many are only open for four hours a day if that. Mithridates 00:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

→ Monopoly Jpatokal 02:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wartime

I know the info below to be correct (in some cases), and it is pertinent; I don't have the sources or expertise to word it correctly. If someone could insert this I would appreciate it.

A common outcome of a formal war declaration is that neither side is permitted to have people in the hostile country; the workaround to this is one country friendly to the nation(s) allows their mission to host the ambassador of another nation; for example an American ambassador to Germany in World War II would be a Swiss ambassador with American nationality.

I know there is at least one example of this on Wikipedia already; I just don't recall where. Thanks. Daemon8666 19:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

First you need to open diplomatic ties, then you send a letter of credence. Jpatokal 02:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't know of any law which states that the embassies of two states in conflict with each other need to be 'closed down' - historically embassies have usually been evacuated before it is necessary to moot this point, and diplomats are accorded protection according to the Treaty of Vienna. States are then obliged to protect the (vacant) embassies belonging to their enemy.
The example above is wrong - while Switzerland was the protecting power for many allied and axis states in WW2, you cannot say the Swiss ambassador had the role of 'American ambassador'. No Swiss ambassador was invested with the authority to represent the US. Kransky 09:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Creating an embassy

How are embassies created? The article doesn't cover this, and I don't know where to find out. -- 12.5.49.27 20:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vatican diplomacy?

The article claims the Vatican is the oldest continuous diplomacy in the world. I realize the cardinals DO vote for the pope, but I can't help feeling as if it still is a bit of a stretch to consider the Vatican a diplomacy, especially since it's not as if anyone can run for the office of the Pope. -- 71.108.43.58 02:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Huh? Are you perhaps confusing diplomacy with democracy? But it's a fairly meaningless statement (what is "a diplomacy"?) so I've taken it out. Jpatokal 13:49, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Closing of embassies?

If a host nation wishes to protest another nation, can they close down said embassy?

  • It would be far more common to close down one's own embassy in the other country as a protest. Forcibly closing a foreign embassy in your country could probably be considered to an act of war.--Pharos 10:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  • According to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations the embassy (and its premises) are to be considered the soverign territory of the sending state, the receiving state therefore have no judicial means of closing down an embassy of another nation. However, the receiving state may choose to break off diplomatic relations meaning that the abovementioned Vienna Convention is void. The sending state would thereby be forced to downgrade its representation from an embassy to a representative office or consulate, which in effect would mean the closure of the embassy. Sir Tanx 11:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
it is incorrect to say an embassy is on the soil outside that of the host nation (forget Homer Simpson's America-Australia routine). Countries can express displeasure by recalling its ambassador, and let somebody else serve as charge d'affaires (ad interim). Kransky 09:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Chancery

Hmm-m -- it appears that the word chancery is sometimes used to describe the building [1], and sometimes to describe the internal divisions of the embassy staff [2]. Somebody who knows their stuff should make this a little clearer in the article... Jpatokal 04:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Embassy- the meaning

I find that the whole piece of writing is fairly useless if you want to find out what an EMBASSY really is. This piece may have lightly skimmed the point but what is an EMBASSY? Why are embassies built in other countries? Once again i emphasise my meaning, what is an EMBASSY? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anitalittleone2 (talk • contribs) 08:16, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] From the Straight Dope

The Straight Dope tackled diplomatic missions recently and their article contradicts a few points in this article.

From the wikipedia article:

“ they are exempt from local law and in almost all respects treated as being part of the territory of the home country. They are also only required to pay taxes equal to their respective countries' guidelines. ”

from the Straight Dope:

“ What causes the confusion is the general rule that diplomatic missions are inviolable. That means the receiving state's police can't enter an embassy without the sending state's consent. It doesn't mean the receiving state's laws don't apply there. For example, embassies must comply with local building and fire codes. ”

Given the Straight Dope article was better sourced, it seems it's the more credible source. hateless 23:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't really see a huge difference. While embassies may technically have to comply with fire codes etc, in practice there's no way to shut them down if they don't. This is the same as the infamous parking ticket problem: illegal parking by diplomats is still illegal, there's just no way for the host country to enforce the law. Jpatokal 16:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no infamous parking ticket problem: if you're are parking illegaly and you don't pay your fine more than three times, you are loosing your diplomatic license plate. see:http://www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov/hc_docs/HC_11_06.pdf

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.109.65.165 (talk) 10:23, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Embassies

Today is the first day I see the embassy (or diplomatic mission, doesn't matter) article on Wikipedia, and I was just wondering if there's a reason why there isn't an article on any of the embassies? Is it because they are too many of them (of course there needn't be a article about every embassy mind you), because there is a consensus that there aren't any embassies important enough to deserve an article or simply because no one has bothered writing about them? --BiT (talk) 22:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of embassy articles, see Category:Diplomatic missions by country. However, there are way too many to list here, and none are diplomatically noteworthy enough to single out here. Jpatokal (talk) 06:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
See Embassy of Australia in Paris, Consulate General of the United States in Ho Chi Minh City, Embassy of Mexico in Berlin etc. Kransky (talk) 10:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)