Talk:chargé d'affaires

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

ad interim

The common (and correct) title of a temporary chief of mission is 'ad interim' and not 'per interim.' Diplomatic notes and cables dispatched when the Ambassador/regular chief of mission is out of country are signed by the Chargé d'Affaires ai.

Comparison to Ambassadors

The statement "Essentially, chargés d’affaires do not differ from ambassadors, envoys or ministers resident" is probably technically correct in diplomatic practice. However, in common reference it always seems that a less-favorable nation's diplomatic envoy is termed 'chargés d’affaires', while those to say France or Belgium are always called ambassadors.

Again, they may be technically the same, but in most journalistic references, I think my observation holds true. I would site Burma as a recent example.

--76.24.83.220 (talk) 14:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the two definitions: 1) representative of head of government, rather than head of state; and 2) temporary head of mission (instead of Ambassador), cover this well. In the case of Burma, it is probably because the sending state has recalled their ambassador (or not appointed one) to convey displeasure.--Gregalton (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lower case title

Is there a reason to use {{lower case title}} here? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

This needs a guide. –H T D 17:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need senatorial confirmation?

Do U.S. charges require senatorial confirmation? If the senate refused to confirm a presidential nominee for an ambassadorship, could the president get around this by simply appointing the failed nominee as charge' on an indefinite basis and refuse to nominate someone else as ambassador? If so, can this be added to the article? Thank you.HistoryBuff14 (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]