Gaynor Johnson

Introduction: The Foreign Office and British Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century

Harold Nicolson, in his seminal study of diplomatic theory, warned his reader against using the word ‘diplomacy’ as a synonym for ‘foreign policy’ or for ‘negotiation’. Further travesties of meaning he pointed to include a shorthand way of referring to a relation in the Diplomatic Service, as in ‘my nephew is working for diplomacy’, or in a more elliptic sense, in its adjectival form meaning tactful or discrete. Its proper use, Nicolson reminds us, is to signify ‘the process and machinery by which . . . negotiation is carried out’. It is hoped that the contents of this volume live up to Nicolson’s definition. One of the principal objectives of the project on which it is based is to trace the way in which the decision-making process in British foreign policy evolved during the twentieth century. This has been a comparatively lightly trodden path among historians, and has tended to fall between the stools of diplomatic theory and the much larger realm of international history. That is, the extent to which the operation of the Foreign Office (used here also as a shorthand for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office) and Diplomatic Service reflected the enormous changes that took place in the international arena during this period, many of which had a profound bearing on Britain’s status as a world and imperial power. A second purpose of this volume is to illustrate the connection between diplomacy and the foreign policy of British governments of the twentieth century. Specifically, it aims to look at this process from two points of view: from the position of the policy makers – a group including ministers and civil servants – and from the perspective of those charged with putting foreign policy strategies into operation and interpreting them to other powers. In particular, the role of ambassadorial diplomacy will be considered, both before the Second World War, and after, through a mixture of academic discussion and by first-hand insights by a recently retired ambassador. Nicolson’s definition of diplomacy does much to encourage a distinction between the theoretical application of the word and a separate study of foreign policy. He is quite clear: diplomacy is not the same as foreign policy. Yet while few would dispute this claim, this approach is not entirely helpful.

Britain and the World in the Twentieth Century, Ever Decreasing Circles

were other, competing narratives. Stepney’s commercial sex problem was frequently publicized, and ran counter to representations of Soho. There were also significant voices who challenged the narrative altogether. Mort mistakenly presents the relationship between the Met and the media as one of ‘alliance’ in this period, but there is little evidence to suggest this ‘mutually reinforcing relationship’ (p. 15) was so unproblematic: the police regularly challenged media claims that vice was on the rise. These criticisms notwithstanding, Mort has produced a thought-provoking cultural history of an important decade. I am struck most by the continuities with the nineteenth century that he uncovers: the persistence of an elite culture entangled with commercialized sexuality in the West End, the continuing role of the urban flaneur, the reiterated conversations about women—and sexually transgressive men—in public, the reluctant engagement of government with the processes and policies of sexual reform. Fascinating remnants of much older moral codes and sexual mores lurk at the edges of Mort’s liberalizing post-war metropolis, creating complex narratives of sex and society. ‘There was no consensus about how to disengage from the legacy of Victorian social morality’, Mort writes of the 1950s and 1960s (p. 19). Despite our confident associations with permissiveness and liberality, this certainly remains true today.

Sir Austen Chamberlain, the Marquess of Crewe and Anglo-French Relations, 1924–1928

During the mid-1920s, Britains relationship with France was of crucial importance to understanding the entire rationale behind British policy towards European diplomacy. This article is concerned with the dynamics of the relationship between the francophile British Foreign Secretary, Sir Austen Chamberlain and Britains ambassador to Paris, the Marquess of Crewe. Both men remained in post for sufficient time to influence the tone as well as the direction of Anglo-French relations, and yet in the case of Crewe, nothing to date has been written about his contribution to international diplomacy. This article argues that many of Chamberlains ideas about Anglo-French relations were shaped by the ideas and influence of Crewe, especially on issues concerning French security and disarmament policy. Focus is placed on the later stages of the Ruhr crisis, the implementation of the Geneva Protocol, the Treaty of Locarno and the origins of the Kellogg–Briand Pact.

Preparing for Office: Lord Curzon as Acting Foreign Secretary, January–October 1919

Curzon succeeded Balfour as Foreign Secretary in October 1919. However, during Balfours absence from London during the Paris Peace Conference, Curzon was responsible for a substantial amount of the decision-making on British foreign policy. Curzons period as Acting Foreign Secretary is crucial to understanding his general approach to the job as whole, especially his relationship with the Prime Minister, Lloyd George, and with the Cabinet. It also provides a mind map of Curzons approach to British diplomacy towards Europe and the Empire. The essay is an extension of the authors earlier work on the relationship between Curzon and Lloyd George, and suggests once again that their relationship was more harmonious than has often been portrayed in the past.