# Precedent for a country refusing a particular ambassador?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [July 10, 2019, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841 "2019-07-10T16:09:28Z")
**Posts on this page:** 7
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Chad\_Sudan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chad_Sudan)
#### Post date: [July 10, 2019, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/1 "2019-07-10T16:09:28Z")
British Ambassador to the US Kim Darroch sent the UK Foreign Office classified assessments of Donald Trump. These assessments, which were unflattering to Trump, were recently leaked. Trump announced that the US would refuse to deal with Darroch in the future. (And Darroch just resigned.)
Brits are struggling to recall a precedent for this situation in UK-US relations. Today’s Guardian says that according to Simon McDonald, head of the Foreign Office, “the last time there was a problem like this was in 1856, when the Americans objected to the British ambassador recruiting Americans to fight in the Crimean War.”
Is there any comparable precedent for _any_ country refusing a particular person as ambassador from another country?
---
### Author:  [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)
#### Post date: [July 10, 2019, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/2 "2019-07-10T16:31:42Z")
Sure. See Wikipedia’s entry on [people declared persona non grata](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_declared_persona_non_grata). Not all of the people listed there were ambassadors, but over a dozen were.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [July 10, 2019, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/3 "2019-07-10T16:47:45Z")
> [@Chad\_Sudan](#):
>
> Is there any comparable precedent for _any_ country refusing a particular person as ambassador from another country?
It isn’t common, but it happens. But an ambassador resigning due to political circumstances generally is completely different than a country refusing one’s credentials.
> **[Brazil president refuses Indonesia ambassador credentials](https://www.rappler.com/world/asia-pacific/84583-brazil-president-refuses-indonesia-ambassador-credentials/)**
>
> The move is over Indonesia's execution of Brazilian citizen in January, and ahead of the looming execution of a second one
> **[Israel refuses to share New Zealand ambassador with Palestinian Authority](https://www.haaretz.com/2014-09-08/ty-article/.premium/foreign-ministry-snubs-new-zealands-new-envoy/0000017f-e13b-d804-ad7f-f1fbeea70000)**
>
> Israel’s objections led the new ambassador to cancel his planned trip to Israel, and are threatening to create a diplomatic crisis with the Commonwealth country.
Article 4 of the Vienna Conventions on diplomatic relations makes clear that a country sending an ambassador cannot “force” that person into the receiving country:
> [@](#):
>
> I. The sending State must make certain that the agrement of the receiving State has been given for the person it proposes to accredit as head of the mission to that State.
> 2. The receiving State is not obliged to give reasons to the sending State for a refusal of agrement.
---
### Author:  [@elbows](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elbows)
#### Post date: [July 10, 2019, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/4 "2019-07-10T18:42:33Z")
I remember being overseas once when such an incident happened. If I recall correctly, they didn’t actually do anything scandalous, and their dubious past/ethics had not stood in their way to getting the position in their own country, (Pakistan, maybe?) the host country however, (Australia, maybe?), declines them entry. Basically sending them back, in a ‘Try again!’, sort of fashion.
(Apologies if I’ve got the nations wrong it was over a decade ago now! )
---
### Author:  [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)
#### Post date: [July 11, 2019, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/5 "2019-07-11T06:43:01Z")
The Vatican has done this several times. It was reported the Obama administration had **three** [potential ambassadors rejected](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/apr/14/vatican-vetoes-obama-nominees-abortion) (one of them was Caroline Kennedy). [France](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/12/france-drops-bid-to-appoint-gay-vatican-ambassador-laurent-stefanini-reports) got the silent treatment over its choice of a gay man a few years ago. There aren’t as many good sources for this, but [supposedly](https://www.thetablet.co.uk/news/7948/lebanon-s-choice-as-new-holy-see-ambassador-not-given-vatican-approval-) a proposed ambassador from Lebanon was rejected for being a freemason.
---
### Author:  [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)
#### Post date: [July 12, 2019, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/6 "2019-07-12T01:02:48Z")
Couple of ways this could play out:
1. A particular person is mooted as ambassador. The host nation indicates that the appointment would be problematic, so the appointment is not made.
2. A particular person is appointed as ambassador, but the host nation refuses to accept their credentials. Don’t know how often this happens, if ever. I have a vague recollection, which could be quite wrong, that some time before World War I Austria refused to accept the credentials of a new US ambassador, who was Jewish, and indicated that the US should appoint an ambassador who wasn’t Jewish. The US refused and the post was left vacant.
3. An ambassador is appointed and accepted, but at a subsequent point is declared persona non grata. This is nearly always over an issue between the two countries concerned, rather than about the characteristics or actions of the ambassador personally.
4. An ambassador is appointed and accepted but, although he remains accredited, the host nation refuses to deal with him because a high official of the host nation gets in a snit about a view the ambassador took in his reports to his own government. This is unbelievably childish, petty and incoherent and only an overgrown toddler would engage in behaviour like this, so it’s fairly rare.
---
### Author:  [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)
#### Post date: [July 12, 2019, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/precedent-for-a-country-refusing-a-particular-ambassador/836841/7 "2019-07-12T06:17:03Z")
There are plenty of precedents for a host government to make/declare an ambassador unwelcome, formally or informally, personally or politically. What’s unprecedented in this case is that it’s happened with a key ally, as a result of a more or less overt shabby political manoeuvre in the UK.
I wonder how long it will take Trump’s people to realise that whoever in the UK hopes to benefit from this was playing on Trump’s weaknesses, and what the implications of that might be.