Letter: Embassy bombings

Reg Simmerson
Monday 10 August 1998 19:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: The bombings of US embassies in Africa have drawn attention to these useless, dangerous, expensive and potentially embarrassing institutions.

They are useless because, using modern methods of communication, governments can (and frequently do) communicate with each other directly, only informing their embassies afterwards to bring them up to date.

Such methods are quicker, cheaper, carry less danger of misunderstanding and can be made more confidential than sending messages via embassies.

They are also dangerous because our embassies abroad cause dangers of breaches of security. They provide easy targets for terrorists and hostage- takers. Enraged mobs may also be tempted to vent their spleen upon them, creating international incidents.

Also there is danger from foreign embassies in London which can be used as bases for spies, assassins, saboteurs, terrorists etc and can even be used as prisons for people who have been kidnapped from our streets! Diplomatic immunity means that our police have no right to search their premises.

The expense of maintaining our embassies is colossal. There are so many embassies and our diplomats are treated so generously (even their children are sent to private schools at our expense) that the total is huge. It is also unnecessary.

Then there is the dilemma of when to "recognise" a foreign government. To maintain an embassy in a foreign country and to accept its embassy here is sometimes to show a degree of approval of that government. If embassies did not exist then such dilemmas would be eliminated as "recognition" would be an unnecessary and outdated concept.

Of course there could be offices for the issuing of visas etc, but these need not have diplomatic immunity and could be staffed mainly by local residents.

REG SIMMERSON

London

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in