Opinion
Diplomatic language is intentionally measured. That restraint can protect negotiations, but it can also make public communication difficult to interpret.
Journalism should explain the difference between consultation, agreement, intention and implementation. A memorandum may begin a process without completing it. A ministerial statement may signal policy without creating a legal obligation. A summit photograph may demonstrate access, but not necessarily influence.
Better explanation would reduce two common errors: treating every formal statement as a breakthrough and treating every absence of detail as evidence of failure. The public deserves reporting that is neither promotional nor reflexively cynical.
Diplomacy will remain complex. Its public explanation does not have to remain obscure.