Twitter is not an appropriate medium for international relations

The Canadian government has reaffirmed its confidence in the use of Twitter as a means of international diplomacy, even as Saudi Arabia continues to ramp up its expressions of outrage and its more concrete retaliations in response to Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland's tweeted criticism of the Kingdom's approach to human and civil rights.

The Saudi shenanigans were kickstarted by a single tweet last week, although it was merely a public expression of government views and values, and should not have come as a surprise to Saudi Arabia. Arguably, it was the message, not the medium, that so offended the insecure and oppressive Saudi government. Also arguably, the Saudi response, in withdrawing and ejecting the two countries' respective amabassadors by tweet, was an even more egregious use of the platform, equivalent to firing an employee or breaking up with a partner by Twitter (which apparently also happens).

The affair has served to highlight, though, the potential pitfalls of "Twitter diplomacy" (or "hashtag diplomacy" or the rather awkward label "Twiplomacy"). According to many international relations commentators (and according to me), Twitter is just an inappropriate medium for high-level foreign affairs, and encourages the kind of ill-considered spur-of-the-moment shoot-from-the-hip exchanges we have seen so often from Twitter addict Donald Trump, by far the worst offender in this regard. The tone and childish content of some of his exchanges with North Korea and Iran just beggar belief, especially given the geopolitical import of the communications. But there are many other examples of where Twitter diplomacy, and it's relentlessly public nature, has been all but disastrous.

Proponents maintain that there is something to be said for straight talking and immediacy. But it is at best a blunt tool, and lacks the facility for nuance and precision that international relations require and deserve. Matters of international moment often need detailed discussions in private, preferably face to face. Furthermore, to me, it just seems vaguely disrespectful.

Be that as it may, for reasons that I still don't really understand, Twitter has become ubiquitous in foreign relations circles, with 131 foreign ministries and 107 foreign ministers maintaining active Twitter accounts. Major policy initiatives are first brought to light through 280 word (and often much shorter) tweets. Whole departments have been set up to monitor Twitter 24/7 for anything that might affect governments, politicians and companies, and that might need immediate responses. It's kind of ridiculous.

We may live in an age of short attention spans - and Twitter is only making that worse - but surely we can still deal with an old-fashioned press release, carefully researched, worded and edited, and analyzed for its potential political, economic and social implications. I'm no Luddite or technophobe, but I still maintain that Twitter is not the right place for high-level political discourse.