Is 'The Diplomat' losing touch with reality?

Season 4's nuclear intrigue and political crises raise questions about diplomatic realism

Netflix's 'The Diplomat' has built its reputation on the messy realities of international relations, political manoeuvring and the personal tensions behind decisions made at the highest levels of government. But Season 4, released on October 15, pushes its fictional crises so far that viewers may question whether the drama has sacrificed diplomatic realism for spectacular twists.

The season's most extraordinary development involves a covert operation to seize a Russian nuclear weapon, triggering a confrontation that threatens relations between the United States and Britain. While espionage and secret operations are hardly alien to international politics, the apparent ease with which the operation unfolds raises questions about authorisation, intelligence coordination and the potentially catastrophic consequences if the operation is discovered.

The prospect of Washington and London, two close NATO allies, being pushed towards a military confrontation over the operation adds another layer of implausibility. Diplomatic disputes between allies are common, but a crisis involving a Russian nuclear weapon would demand extensive coordination among intelligence agencies, military commands and political leaders, rather than relying primarily on a handful of characters making dramatic decisions.

The simultaneous presence of the US president and vice-president at an overseas summit or during a visit to London and the historic Italian city of Lucca also invites scrutiny. There is no constitutional prohibition against the two travelling together, but having both figures in the same place during an escalating national security crisis raises serious questions about security and continuity of government.

The G7 summit's setting in Italy presents another question of diplomatic realism. The US Embassy in Rome and the American delegation working with Italian authorities would ordinarily play important roles in coordinating the American presence. The US ambassador to Britain and her London-based team could continue handling relations with the British government, but portraying them as effectively directing the entire American response in Italy risks blurring the distinction between bilateral diplomacy and local coordination.

The involvement of the president's husband in sensitive diplomatic affairs stretches credibility further. Although a president can seek informal advice from a spouse, the first gentleman has no automatic constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy. Giving him a consequential role without clearly establishing its limits makes the administration's decision-making appear even less conventional.

The mass resignations involving senior officials, including the vice-president, raise further questions about constitutional procedure and the political consequences.

None of these developments is necessarily impossible in isolation. The problem lies in their accumulation, the speed at which they unfold and the apparent lack of institutional resistance. Real governments operate within layers of procedure, competing agencies, legal constraints and political accountability, even when leaders attempt to bypass them.

Season 4 leaves plenty of questions unanswered, and a fifth season, if and when it arrives, could clarify some of the decisions and consequences that currently seem underdeveloped. Until then, the central question remains whether 'The Diplomat' is still exploring the complexities of international politics or increasingly relying on pure fantasy to keep its political thriller moving.