Conferences at the top level are always courteous. Name-calling is left to the foreign ministers.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Press conferences aren't the best thing to do, but it's part of the job.
The interparliamentary conference should, in my opinion, direct its particular attention to the preparation of the next Hague Conference, the diplomatic conference, the conference of governments.
There is one criticism which cannot be leveled at interparliamentary conferences but which is applicable to a great extent to peace congresses: the meetings waste time.
The world of high-stakes international diplomacy can be rough and tumble, but it's more often than not a procession of suits and summits, protocol sessions and photo ops.
I would have thought it possible to choose delegates for these larger conferences who, even if they could not speak the principal languages, could at least understand them or could have friends seated beside them who could keep them informed on essential points.
I don't really rate press conferences. It's not as though I leave the room fist-pumping my way down the corridor after a good one.
I don't actually go to that many conferences. I do that a couple of times a year. Normally, I am not recognized; people don't throw their panties at me. I'm a perfectly normal person sitting in my den just doing my job.
There is an intimacy and trust that is needed between leaders, between their assistants and advisers. Usually, you have the real substance behind closed doors; and the press conferences, you have niceties, nice photo ops.
Ceremonies are different in every country, but true politeness is everywhere the same.
I'm simply saying that there are advantages in sending a skilled diplomat who can always say, 'I'll get back to you on that, Mr. Minister'.
No opposing quotes found.