No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
On Diplomacy: A Genealogy of Western Estrangement.
... En su genealogía de la diplomacia Der Derian (1987) sugiere que cualquiera que sea el locus político que consideremos, es a partir del proceso de extrañamiento con el otro, y de la evolución de las condiciones sociales en que este se produce, que surge el comportamiento que se irá conformando históricamente, no sin importantes tensiones, como diplomático. Ese impulso, que precede en siglos al surgimiento del Estado moderno, y que es reconocible todavía, se distingue por gestionar la diferencia entre grupos humanos mediante un conjunto de prácticas, instituciones y discursos -envueltos siempre en la ambigüedad-que afirman simultáneamente, al menos de manera tentativa, una cierta identidad entre las partes -fundamentada en el reconocimiento mutuo de la capacidad de interlocución entre iguales que la propia diplomacia misma viene a su vez a reforzar-y la diferencia insalvable que define los contornos -ya sean jurisdiccionales, territoriales, demográficos, étnicos, culturales, de sexo y género, o de clase-del grupo al que cada parte dice, respectivamente, representar. ...
... Para Der Derian (1987) la antidiplomacia sería -al menos en su elaboración ideal-la aspiración a resolver para siempre la diferencia entre los seres humanos, elevándose sobre ese extrañamiento primordial, mediante el logro, por los medios más dispares, de la unidad definitiva del género humano, agrupado todo él bajo el manto protector de una sola identidad o destino final. ...
... Teniendo en mente estas consideraciones, y a la vista del desplazamiento que la diplomacia parece experimentar, en favor de otras nociones como las que produce la industria de la investigación por la paz y el análisis de la resolución de conflictos, este breve trabajo quiere realizar para terminar un ejercicio de reflexión a partir del proceso de paz en Colombia, a través del examen de aquella otra noción, antidiplomacia, que se presenta como su negación radical (Der Derian 1987;Der Derian 1992). Generalmente atribuida al adversario, la noción de antidiplomacia, al menos tal y como se presenta en el discurso político y en el periodismo, parece servir para caracterizar en términos simples y con connotación negativa, la posición adoptada por otros, presentándola como incompatible con aquellas prácticas, instituciones, discursos y técnicas, que la noción de diplomacia pueda tener, aunque en esa caracterización ninguna de esas nociones se defina con precisión. ...
... Attempts according to Der Derian, J. (1987a) to address the frailty of diplomatic theory are not novel. They are, however, rare. ...
... Third, Nascent scholars argue that the traditional diplomatic institution is in a period of crisis and obsolescence. Der Derian, for example, writes of the =crisis in which diplomacy finds itself' (Der Derian, 1987a) and Riordan of the continuing fragmentation of traditional diplomacy 'where no country, however powerful, will be immune.' The obsolescence accredited to the traditional way of writing and thinking on diplomacy has led nascent scholars, fourth, to focus theoretical efforts on alternate diplomatic actors. ...
Whereas diplomacy in international relations still remain to be the use of negotiations and discussions in the daily interactions of states and non-state actors, the former takes precedence without a minimalist approach to what the former brings to diplomacy in the world system. The imperative of diplomacy has spread from its inception to the contemporary pitting its practicality with what the discipline ought to be. In this scenario, the traditionally big states seem to be cognizant that the 'small states' have a central place for proper global balance of power and to their success. This robust-dynamic nature of diplomacy creates crossroads of a kind in the 21 st Century. In this matrix, this paper would want to interrogate the central idea by; examining changes in diplomacy through to the 21 st Century, assess the systemic vis a vis practical attributes of diplomacy in global power play of the 21 st Century, and finally to establish possible strategies that 'small states' can take in their diplomacy in the 21 st Century. At the end of this discourse, the field of diplomacy will have been enriched by suggestions that diplomacy as a practice and a language among modern states is about what works-this being the reason for its constant change. The study will also underscore that 'small state diplomacy' is bound to re-ignite the Westphalian principle of equality of states in the 21 st Century despite size and other dispositional attributes of states. The exigency/flashpoint of the 21 st Century is its proneness to being an open field for practical purposes due to technology explosion.
... This early definition seems to encompass what later work has been criticised for lacking: the inclusion of nongovernmental or societal actors. These were later discussed by Derian [56]. Discounting the Westphalian notion of diplomacy as limited to states, Derian's [56] discussion was influential in introducing the possibility of non-state actors as diplomatic agents who blur the territorial boundaries of inside/outside or domestic/foreign [57]. ...
... These were later discussed by Derian [56]. Discounting the Westphalian notion of diplomacy as limited to states, Derian's [56] discussion was influential in introducing the possibility of non-state actors as diplomatic agents who blur the territorial boundaries of inside/outside or domestic/foreign [57]. ...
This paper develops a baseline and definition for informal disaster diplomacy in order to fill in an identified gap in the existing research. The process adopted is a review of the concept of informality, the application of informality to diplomacy, and the application of informality to disasters and disaster science. The two applications of informality are then combined to outline an informal disaster diplomacy as a conceptual contribution to studies where processes of conflict, peace, and disasters interact. Adding informality into disaster diplomacy provides originality and significance as it has not hitherto been fully examined in this context. This exploration results in insights into disaster, peace, and conflict research through two main contributions. First, the paper recognises that informal disaster diplomacy has frequently been present in disaster diplomacy analyses, but has rarely been explicitly presented, accepted, described, theorised, or analysed. Second, by explaining the presence of and contributions from informality, the discussion assists in re-balancing much of disaster diplomacy research with depth from conflict research, peace research, international relations, and political science.
... As to D. Derian, unlike I. Duchacek, the component he relies on in his research is not the region as an actor, but the direct activity on the international arena. That is why he defines paradiplomacy as the international activity of any actor other than the state: a region, a transnational corporation, mass media, a non-profit organization and others [8]. ...
... This paper's argument, in brief, is the following. Diplomacy carries the function of ensuring the non-activation of physical force among a plurality of power-constituted polities (Constantinou 1996;Der Derian 1987;Sharp 2009;Youssef 2020: 224). However, it inheres the problem of complexity in the sense that the number of elements in the system is so large that no state can simultaneously enact relations with every other state (Luhmann 1995: 26-27). ...
States enact relations with both important partners and seemingly irrelevant countries. The non-strategic constitutes the larger set; a histogram could visualize them in a long-tailed distribution, with the x-axis denoting the partner countries, and the y-axis showing the interaction density. Investigating the function of this long tail, this paper premises that the international is characterized by complexity, meaning that the number of elements is so large that it is impossible to realize all relations simultaneously. States thus select their diplomatic partners based on power-rationales. The thereby inactive nodes nevertheless pose sources of danger, requiring occasional signals of amity—hence a long tail comes about. A repertoire of cheap and quick but unambiguously sovereign practices (such as Twiplomacy, gifts, or honorary consulates) can be spontaneously activated to fill otherwise neglected inter-state ties. Seemingly trivial gestures thus ensure peace among plural polities under the constraint of systemic complexity.
... Der Derian (1987Derian ( , 1996 and Sharp (2004Sharp ( , 2013 argues that diplomatic culture comprises three concentric circles. The outmost circle represents the world and the broader set of values that humans espouse to share. ...
... The term 'peace' is thus used in a diplomatic sense, denoting the restraint of power among multiple power-centres (Sharp, 2009), and not within a single polity. Since a separateness between politics and diplomacy is seldomly formulated in IR (but see Constantinou, 1996;Der Derian, 1987;Youssef, 2020;Nishikawa-Pacher, 2023), it may be useful to briefly digress on this premise before the section thereafter applies the evolutionary-systemic framework onto state awards. ...
Almost every polity uses state awards as diplomatic tools. Their global spread, however, cannot be explained by dominant theories of International Relations (which focus on military or economic rationales) or of diplomatic practices (which lack criteria for what constitutes a functionally suitable practice). The success of such seemingly non-instrumental tools may be better explained with a combination of Modern Systems Theory with the evolutionary scheme of variation/selection/re-stabilization: the diplomatic system generates a variation of practices, enacts selection through the structural medium of peace, and stabilises the selected variant through legal formalization and global diffusion. Using this framework, this paper finds that state awards found worldwide ubiquity for two reasons: First, they satisfy the diplomatic system’s societal function related to peace and power, that is, the foregrounding of peace-and-amity while invisibilizing power-and-enmity. Second, state awards exhibit a high degree of generalizability, meaning that they are so flexible that any state can use them towards any other states for any reasons at any time. This paper carries implications for understanding seemingly trivial, noninstrumental features of diplomacy, and, more generally, for the value of Modern Systems Theory and evolutionary perspectives in International Relations.
... For a history of diplomacy drawing productively on this bifurcation see James Der Derian (1987). ...
This chapter explores the notion of connectivity as making possible forms of security and mobility in different historical periods. Starting from a reflection on present day liberal forms of mobility and security that rely on the active circulation of various elements, the mainstay of the chapter is an exploration of a sixteenth century Christian travel account mapping the biblical world and the kind of connectivity regarding mobility and security inscribed by this account. Their work unsettles today’s taken-for-granted notion of effortless mobility and connectivity through the description of dangerous travels in the sixteenth century, thus providing a change of perspective that highlights the contingency of contemporary mobility and security.
... Furthermore beside a plethora of books that emerged in the early 1990s on postmodern IR, numerous related articles were also to appear in scholarly journals like International Studies Quarterly , Millennium,7 and Alternatives, all of scf. Kissinger (1994) with Der Derian (1987). 6 It is interesting to note that when Der Derian published the 'sequel' to On Diplomacy in 1992, he was met by more pronounced criticisms, even from those who acknowledged his earlier book as a welcome addition to international relations. ...
... Following the works of Foucault (1980) , genealogy uncovers how discourses pervasive across institutions, genres, and social groups are legitimized and legitimize social norms and political orders. IR scholars have used genealogy to expand our understanding of world politics, for instance, by studying how a governance regime such as anti-whaling has been legitimized ( Epstein 2008 ) or sectors such as diplomacy have been constituted and endowed with power ( Der Derian 1987 ). However, methods within the DA umbrella rely on scholars being trained in this theoretical and methodological tradition (see Meiches 2019 for an example of the extent of expertise needed). ...
Despite the imperative to pay attention to the words we use as a routine dimension of research, the methodological and pedagogical tools illustrating how to work on our own use of language are largely missing within and beyond international relations (IR). To address this gap, we develop a method—the “Reflexive Review”—which adds a linguistic and reflexive dimension to the common practice of a literature review. This method is accessible for researchers who are neither linguistic specialists nor working on language and can be integrated within a standalone research project. First, we review the existing traditions used in IR to investigate language—quantitative text analysis, conceptual analysis, discourse analysis, deconstruction, and problematization—and assess their interest and limits regarding linguistic reflexivity. Second, we introduce four methodological steps for conducting the Reflexive Review, by reviewing literature to: (1) build a list of “priority words” that may need reflexive attention; (2) look for metalinguistic statements to synthesize how the literature has explicitly discussed these words; (3) identify patterns of word use, as collectively shared meanings that coexist and that we should become aware of; and (4) compare the identified uses of language with our own. Third, we demonstrate the Reflexive Review in practice based on a word commonly used in IR: “local.” We identify four patterns of the word use of “local” in IR literature as: a class of actors, a level of analysis, community, and experiences of the everyday. In sum, we demonstrate how a Reflexive Review enables us to implement reflexivity in practice and make more conscious linguistic choices, to support more nuanced, ethical, and rigorous analysis and empirical work.
... Science diplomacy can be understood as a merger of a discursive development that in the late 1990s began moulding aspects of foreign, STI and HE policy into one conceptual fabric, which had been separated before. Until then, corresponding theories and empirical research on and concrete practices of foreign policy had been predominated by state-centrism, defining national security and socio-economic stability as the two priorities in settings that depended on structures of international collaboration, competition and conflict (Adler-Nissen 2015;Der Derian 1987;Sharp 2009). Accordingly, actors were distinguishable along specific functions within the boundaries of and functions for their states (and only sometimes did they go beyond these boundaries). ...
Science diplomacy has caught remarkable attention in public policy and academic research over the last fifteen years. However, the concept is plagued by a huge talk–action discrepancy: its public discourse has reached a problematic state of dazzling self-adulation, while it is unclear if and how the actual policies and associated organizations live up to these expectations. The article reconstructs three structural causes to explain the recent hype about science diplomacy. It further encourages actors to organize evaluations that ask whether and how actions of science diplomacy can be valuable. In this regard, a first set of fundamental principles is proposed for setting up an evaluative framework. In conclusion, the article advises science diplomacy actors from democratic states and institutions, from both academic research and public policy, to stop dreaming about soft power influence on authoritarian states and regimes but rather face new geopolitical realities.
... Nos referimos a aspectos tales como la consecución y el modo de libramiento de la necesaria financiación de la ayuda que se propone, el acceso a las comunidades en situación de sufrimiento y la delimitación espacial del mismo, la rápida construcción de las infraestructuras críticas necesarias para la distribución de la ayuda, el reparto de las responsabilidades en la provisión de la misma, y por último, aunque igualmente complejo, la negociación detallada de las condiciones específicas de la adquisición y distribución de los recursos puestos colectivamente a disposición de la población.Por ello, más allá de los límites que el derecho humanitario establece a su despliegue, el carácter aparentemente técnico del objeto de las negociaciones que dan forma a la diplomacia humanitaria tal y como hoy se entiende y se práctica, apenas puede ocultar su carácter profundamente político. Ello vale tanto para los acuerdos que laboriosamente alcanza y que a menudo los medios de comunicación presentan como triunfos antes incluso del comienzo de su propia implementación, como para explicar los desacuerdos que en ocasiones pueden paralizarla.De ese modo, el enfoque estrictamente técnico, a pesar de su indudable valor, contribuye a seguir ignorando las lecciones que el sistema diplomático mismo, en su larga historia, nos revela acerca de las dificultades que hubo de afrontar, desde la más remota antigüedad, el esfuerzo por encontrar formas de conciliar la co-existencia -en relación estable y pacífica-de modos de vida y culturas diferentes y formas de organización social y política tan diversas que se dirían incompatibles entre sí(Der Derian 1987; Constantinou 1996). Quizás por ello, la llamada diplomacia humanitaria se presenta hoy como realidad surgida apenas hace unas décadas, en la que la compasión por los otros deviene una nueva forma de conocimiento experto, aplicado una y otra vez en los contextos más dispares, tras laboriosas negociaciones entre actores estatales y no estatales muy diversos ha se ser aplicado a la administración de la escasez y la mitigación del sufrimiento en un campo de acción ...
Contribución del autor a la Jornada Nuevos planteamientos en diplomacia: La diplomacia humanitaria, celebrada en Barcelona el 11 de Mayo 2018, organizado por el Master en Estudios Internacionales de la Universidad de Barcelona, en colaboración con IEACH y el Master en Cooperación Internacional Descentralizada: Paz y Desarrollo de la UPV/EHU.
... Por un lado, tal como se ha hecho en este artículo, para exponer las formas plurales de diplomacia que se (re)producen o toman forma en innumerables relaciones diarias y cotidianas. De esta forma, la diplomacia se desliga del Estado y recupera su sentido original; que no es otro que el de mediar las relaciones con los otros ajenos y tratar de adquirir conocimiento de aquello que nos es extraño (Der Derian, 1987). Constantinou (2006) denominó homodiplomacia a estas formas diplomáticas que responden a la necesidad que tenemos los seres humanos de repensar las formas de relación que desarrollamos entre nosotros, y entre nosotros y el entorno que habitamos. ...
The COVID-19 disease has conditioned our ways of being and living. Diplomacy, as a mediation of estrangement and as a pluralistic way of negotiating life, has not been immune to the changes generated by the pandemic. This article broadens the scope of diplomacy and paradiplomacy to introduce the concept of biodiplomacy and reveal the possibilities for analysis that it raises. The analysis of this concept generates multiple intersections and intermediate spaces from government techniques, ways of negotiating life and diplomatic practices. Biodiplomacy is subsequently used to analyse the pluralistic forms of mediation of estrangement and the negotiation of life that are manifested in liminal spaces. The author argues that biodiplomacy can serve to examine the way in which subjects "negotiate their life" and their "life is negotiated" together and in relation to other multiple organisms and beings.
... Instead, "history proceeds as a series of dominations and impositions in knowledge and power, and the task of the genealogist is to unravel history to reveal the multifarious trajectories that have been fostered or closed off in the constitution of subjects, objects, fields of action and domains of knowledge" (Devetak 2001: 184). An identities in IR become articulated through narrative structures that also 'create' the international realm (Ashley 1987(Ashley , 1989Campbell 1992;Der Derian 1987;Shapiro 1988; Walker 1993). Moreover, post-structuralism contends that each paradigm is linked to particular configurations of power situated in time and space and constrained by unique (unrepeatable) political and historical circumstances. ...
Die Doktorarbeit analysiert den Einfluss der Europäischen Union auf andere regionale Organisationen wie den Südostasiatischen Staatenverbund im Bereich der Menschenrechte und geht insbesondere der Frage nach, wie die interregionale Interaktion im Bereich der Menschenrechte zu der Bildung von regionalen Identitäten in Südostasien führt. Die Arbeit trägt in diesem Sinne zu der Forschung über die Diffusion von Ideen und Normen in der internationalen Politik bei. Jedoch relativiert diese Studie die eindimensionale Betrachtung der EU als „normative Macht“ und attraktives Modell des regionalen Regierens, die durch ihre Außenpolitik die „Soft-Macht“ besitzt, ideelle Veränderungen in den Ländern und Regionen des globalen Südens hervorzurufen. Stattdessen knüpft die Dissertation an die Regionalforschung über Südostasien an, welche die relative Autonomie der lokalen und intraregionalen Ideen, Akteure und Machtstrukturen betont. Zwischen diesen beiden konzeptionellen Polen entwickelt diese Arbeit eine Zwischenposition, die verstärkt den Fokus auf die Interaktion zwischen den normativen Machtansprüchen der EU und den intraregionalen Dynamiken im Bereich der Institutionalisierung auf regionaler und nationaler Ebene von Menschenrechten legt.
Der Erfolg der EU-Menschenrechtsbemühungen ist von der Entwicklung regionaler und menschenrechtskonformer Identitäten in Südostasien/ASEAN abhängig. Dieser Prozess kann nur durch die Einbindung der lokalen Akteure und ihre Deutungsmuster sowie durch Berücksichtigung ihrer strategischen Interessen gelingen. Deshalb hat die EU in diesem Kontext weit weniger Einfluss als man in der bisherigen Forschungsarbeit zur EU-Außenpolitik anzuerkennen bereit war. Jedoch zeigt die Forschungsarbeit, dass die kontinuierliche Auseinandersetzung zwischen der EU und ASEAN im Rahmen ihrer interregionalen Dialoge durchaus zu einem Umdenken in Bezug auf die Akzeptanz der Menschenrechte in ASEAN geführt hat. Der Stand der intraregionalen Veränderungsprozesse variiert jedoch zwischen den unterschiedlichen lokalen Akteuren wie auch den einzelnen Staaten. Im Zuge dieser intraregionalen Verhandlungsprozesse ist es einigen staatlichen Akteuren, Staaten und der zunehmend transregionalen Zivilgesellschaft gelungen, auch einige regionale Beschlüsse zu erzwingen oder durchzusetzen, wodurch die Institutionalisierung des Menschenrechtenschutzes im ASEAN-Raum vorangetrieben werden konnte. Die Dynamik steht aber sehr am Anfang und es ist noch ungewiss inwieweit die Gruppe der regionalen Akteuren, die tatsächlich den regionalen Menschenrechtenschutz in ASEAN ausbauen wollen, sich innerhalb der ASEAN-Gemeinschaft konsolidieren und ihre Ideen umsetzen können.
This chapter examines the utilization of digital diplomacy during the Russia–Ukraine War. Commencing on February 24, 2022, the Russia–Ukraine War is a contemporary illustration of international conflicts with extensive digital diplomacy use. Despite Russia’s attempts to disrupt internet-based information flow, Ukraine effectively employed digital diplomacy to disseminate information about the war and its repercussions to the global audience. Social media platforms and digital channels were pivotal in disseminating war-related updates and information. Specific social media companies enforced restrictions on their platforms within Russia. Ukrainian President Zelensky leveraged digital platforms to communicate the situation in his country and seek assistance. The narratives shared by war prisoners through social media contributed to Ukraine’s psychological advantage. This chapter aims to underscore that digital diplomacy signifies the dawn of a new era in international relations, exemplified by the Ukraine–Russia War. This conflict in the OSCE region has been an instructive experience, revealing regional weaknesses and the rise of digital diplomacy methods, along with their possible risks and benefits. The chapter underscores the effectiveness of Russia’s populism-driven digital diplomacy in shaping public perception.
It is only in the last two decades that states have started to focus on the need to use traditional diplomatic means in discussions surrounding cyber-policy. This article explores how these discussions have been progressively ‘diplomatised’. Diplomatisation is proposed in this article as a process which involves external and internal dynamics of institutionalisation and positioning, both of which are essential for the successful creation of a new diplomatic field. Understanding the emergence of cyber-diplomacy is crucial to recognise the successes, frustrations and opportunities associated with the (lack of) regulation when it comes responsible state behaviour in this domain. This article does so based on 40 interviews conducted with diplomats and experts involved in the emergence of cyber-diplomacy. It looks at the idiosyncratic evolution of this field within specific nation states as well as overall developments at the international level, particularly within the context of the United Nations.
This chapter examines sovereignty configuration in the relations between mainland China (China, PRC) and Taiwan (The Republic of China, ROC). Although the issue might seem to be relatively straightforward and represent a ‘mere’ conflict over sovereignty recognition, I show that sovereignty configuration in the given relationship is more nuanced. The key dimension for analysing it is to follow the multi-layered spatial configurations, which will help to uncover how China’s (approach to) sovereignty spreads across or is resisted in different spaces. This case will lead us to see how One Country, Two Systems is proposed and defended as a solution for the China-Taiwan relationship by the PRC but also how One Country, Two Systems and the mode of zonal sovereignty are disputed, negotiated and partly confirmed.
Building on current approaches to gastrodiplomacy and expanding on them, this article will highlight (1) the anthropological and political dimensions of diplomacy and gastronomy, as well as their potential to explore, reflect on, and work on forms of coexistence and relationship with others. For this, it will analyse (2) the role of gastronomy in the affirmation of identities while promoting forms of coexistence and mediation of estrangement. Without contradicting the above but showing the antinomies and paradoxes revealed by the current political and economic system, this work will also try to (3) expose the way in which food has become a source of multiple inequalities within and between communities. Finally, (4) the concept of gastrology will be deepened to explore the potential of gastrodiplomacy as a tool, practice, and political logic through which to ‘mediate estrangement’, act in critical areas, labour the difference and think and make the way we want to live in it.
World history is part of the cosmic story of increasing complexity and emerging powers. This chapter focusses on the industrial revolution and its consequences, arguing that modern Europe is merely a possible manifestation and moment in a process that is best understood as global history of humanity. The key to understanding this transformation lies in harnessing new sources of energy, enabling the huge expansion of humanity and the world economy. While criticising all forms of centrism, I develop the idea of stages: stages may co-exist, overlap, and form various constellations in context-bound ways. In the universal history of humanity, the industrial revolution was bound to happen and change also the meaning of war, which has subsequently become an existential question to humanity as a whole.
El presente trabajo presenta un enfoque teórico-conceptual para el entendimiento de la política exterior argentina en su interrelación con el orden sistémico global. Este acercamiento se orienta a pensar un patrón de inserción internacional que forme parte de un conjunto de políticas públicas orientadas a un desarrollo inclusivo. Para llevar a cabo lo mencionado, en primer lugar, realizaremos un recorrido por los paradigmas de las Relaciones Internacionales, destacando aquellos elementos que contribuyen al esquema teórico propuesto; en segundo lugar, haremos lo propio con los paradigmas de la política exterior argentina; en tercer lugar, teorizaremos y ampliaremos el concepto de interdependencia hegemónica como aporte al entendimiento del orden global y de la política exterior argentina; en cuarto lugar, desagregaremos este concepto en sus dimensiones externas e internas aplicadas al diseño de un patrón de inserción internacional. Finalmente, plantearemos algunas conclusiones y perspectivas de investigación: profundizar esta propuesta teórica planteada y desagregarla en indicadores empíricos para su aplicación al estudio de casos en América Latina y la Argentina.
Disinformation impacts three elements of diplomacy. On the political level, it weakens trust between partners by eroding credibility. In the absence of a common ethical framework, propaganda practices and disinformation further anti-diplomatic behavior. On the multilateral level, disinformation erodes consensus, freedom of expression, and the normative power of states. Finally, disinformation causes the diplomatic corps to abandon its traditional discretion and forces it to discuss matters in public and on social media. This shift from the private to the public makes diplomatic culture uncomfortable. There is no simple solution to the problem of disinformation because it operates with emotions, not facts or arguments. The challenge for diplomats is twofold. They must be able to discern the difference between noise and signals. And they must regain social trust by providing truthful information and consensus narratives.
Diplomasi teorisinin kökeni Antik döneme uzanır. Antik Yunan'da Herodotos ve Platon'un yazılarında theoria, dünyayı yukarıdan gözlemlemek ve yabancıla-rın değerlerini, fikirlerini ve eylemlerini anlamak için tanrılara gönderilen kutsal elçiler anlamında kullanılırdı. Yabancı olanı keşfetme ve izah etme; teorileştirme ve diplomasi arasındaki bağlantıyı gösterir. Sokrates'in theoria terimini varlıkla-rın özünü kavrama, felsefi tartışma yürütme, anlamlandırma ve çıkarımlar yapma olarak kullanması diplomatik teori sürecinde önemli bir aşamaya işaret eder. Bil-me ve izah etme işleviyle birlikte müzakere ve arabuluculuk diplomasi kavramı içinde başlangıçtan itibaren var olmuştur. İlk çağlardan itibaren diplomasi güç ve çıkarların müzakeresi kadar, bilginin, değerlerin ve anlamlandırmaların da müzakeresidir. Klasik dönem ve Orta Çağ'da diplomasiyi teorileştirme çabalarında, diplo-matik işlevleri ve bunları yerine getirmek için gerekli koşulları ve normları ta-nımlamaya çaba harcandı. Bu çabalar içinde toplumlar arasında ve insanlıkla tanrı (lar) arasındaki arabuluculuğu kavramsallaştırma uğraşları da dikkat çeker. Rönesans'la birlikte iletişim ve ikna başta olmak üzere diplomatların nitelikleri üzerinde yoğunlaşıldı. Aynı dönem diplomasinin siyasi birimler arasında müza-kere boyutunu gündeme taşıdı. 17. yüzyılda, ulus-devletler ortaya çıkarken ve Avrupa'da siyaset alanında egemenlik kullanan siyasi aktör sayısı artarken Kardinal Richelieu, savaşta ve barışta kesintiye uğramaması gereken sürekli bir müzakerenin ve dolayısıyla he-nüz tanımı yapılmamış diplomasinin ateşli savunucusudur. 18. ve 19. yüzyıllarda diplomasinin teorileştirilmesinde önemli bir değişim, strateji ile kurulan bağlantıdır.
Bu etkileşim diplomasinin etikle olan ilişkisini baskılarken araçsallığını öne
çıkarmış ve devlet merkezli uluslararası ilişkiler teorilerinin kavramsallaştırma
sürecine kapı aralarken bir boyutuyla da ihmalin nedeni olmuştur.
Avrupa’nın büyük güçleri arasında güç mücadelesinin hâkim olduğu 19. yüzyıl
ile 20. yüzyılın iki dünya savaşına ilaveten Soğuk Savaş’ın önemli bir bölümü
diplomasiyi strateji, devlet idaresi sanatı (statecraft) ve propaganda arasında bıraktı.
Bu dönemlerde devletin varlık nedeni (raison d’etre) diplomasiyi devlete/
hükümete bağımlı kılan temel kavramdır.
Diplomasinin uluslararası ilişkiler disiplininde ihmal edildiği sıklıkla dile getirilir.
Gerçekten de uluslararası ilişkiler disiplininde diplomasi teorisi, az sayıdaki
özgün çalışmanın dışında nispeten marjinal konumdadır ve kuramsal bir
yalnızlık içindedir. Bu önermenin, inşacı ve eleştirel teorilerden ziyade, devlet
merkezli klasik uluslararası ilişkiler teorilerinde doğruluk payının yüksek olması
şaşırtıcı ancak karmaşık bir konudur. Karmaşanın ilk boyutu diplomasinin
uluslararası ilişkileri analiz ederken gerek duyulan özerk bir kuram ve ayrı bir
alan olarak ele alınıp alınmayacağı ile ilişkilidir. Karmaşanın diğer boyutu ise
gerçekte klasik realistlerden ve liberallerden günümüze diplomasinin sözcük ve
eylem olarak sıklıkla başvurulmasındadır. Nitekim realist bakış açısına sahip olduklarından şüphe duyulmayan Morgenthau’nun ve Kissenger’in diplomasiye
yer veren kitapları alanın klasikleri arasında öne çıkar. Bu derece sık kullanıma
karşın diplomasinin ihmali şaşırtıcıdır.
Diplomasinin disiplindeki marjinalliği uluslararası politikanın ve olgularının
aşağıdan yukarı ya da tikelden tümele kavramsallaştırılması ile de ilişkilidir. Geleneksel
uluslararası ilişkiler teorisi, devletleri ya da devletleri oluşturan daha alt
düzeyde aktörleri temel aldığından dünya politikasına aşağıdan bakar. Toplumsal
sözleşme ile yaratılan ve şiddet kullanma tekeli dahil olmak üzere olağanüstü
yetkilerle donatılan ve egemen olan devletler daha geniş bir düzlemde (uluslararası
ortam) etkileşime geçtiklerinde uluslararası davranış ortaya çıkar. Bu
noktada siyasi alanda ikilik başlar. İç siyasi alan, devletin tam egemen olduğu,
kurumlar ve kurallar bir düzen yarattığı için hiyerarşik; dış siyasi alan ise, çok
sayıda egemen bir arada olduğundan ve tek egemenin kontrolünde kurumlar ve
kurallardan bahsedilemeyeceğinden anarşiktir. Mücadele, çatışma, güvenlik ikilemi
ve kendi başının çaresine bakma (self-help) ile betimlenen anarşik ortamda
devletler için iki temel araç savaş ve diplomasidir. Ancak bu iki araç uluslararası
politik sistemi inşa edici değildir; inşa edenlerin, yani devletlerin, aracıdır. Bu
tür bir sistemde, sistemin kendisi ve devletler karşılıklı inşa edici özellikler taşır.
Bu temel çerçevede makalede iki ana akım uluslararası ilişkiler teorisinin realizm
ve liberalizm- farklı tipleriyle birlikte, diplomasiyi nasıl kavramsallaştırdığı
tartışılmakta, ihmalin varlığı, derecesi ve nedenleri araştırılmaktadır.
Makalede realizm ve liberalizm, bünyelerindeki farklı türlerle birlikte ontolojik
varsayımları, epistemolojik birikimleri ve metodolojik duruşlarının diplomasiyle
bağıntısı boyutuyla ele alınmaktadır.
How do managerial bureaucracies emerge? We consider this central question of Chandlerian business history by examining how Tata and Sons governed its steelmaking company TISCO, 1907–1925. Tata had no steelmaking knowledge and was reliant upon American expertise and personnel. This knowledge imbalance skewed power in favour of autocratic American steelmasters who wielded complete operational control. Unable to impose its will on TISCO, Tata was forced to govern through everyday diplomacy. Through everyday diplomacy, Tata introduced accounting routines to establish a hierarchy and render the American steelmasters accountable to the parent company. Every administrative and accounting process suggested by Tata’s diplomat, B.J. Padshah, was resisted by the American steelmasters as an erosion of their absolute power. We contribute to our understanding of how a uniquely Indian type of enterprise, the managing agency, governed their loosely coupled subsidiaries. We extend Foucault’s power/knowledge by introducing everyday diplomacy as the vehicle for establishing organisational discipline.
Social imaginaries carried by the entertainment industry matter for understanding how the general public makes sense of complex social phenomena. Mass culture is a representation of pre-existing ideas on international politics, rooted in space and time, and a constitutive element of the social and political world. Mass entertainment, as well as massively popular forms of popular culture such as video games, are only now entering the field of vision of scholars interested in cultural representations of international relations. This article contributes to this trend by looking at visions of diplomacy present in a global mass entertainment franchise: Hasbro’s My Little Pony . Behind the lighter aspects of a show created for young children lies a fictional universe with elements of diplomacy and international relations. The article insists on the importance of visions of early 21st-century American unipolar order and a liberal view of international politics in the show’s world.
After twenty years without diplomatic representation due to the prolonged hostilities of the
undeclared Anglo-Spanish War (1585-1604) Spain made the first move towards peace by sending
an ambassador, Don Juan de Tassis, Conde de Villamediana, to congratulate King James on his
accession to the throne of England. His arrival in Dover with an entourage of one hundred and
fifty men as “his house” was a sensation according to Relacion muy verdadera del recebimiento y
fiestas. Villamediana’s audience with the king kept being postponed due to a number of
unanticipated circumstances related to the plague so the ambassador and his train had to wander
around the south of England until he was finally received in Winchester in October 1603. The
journey of the Spanish ambassador is considered in this essay as a source of debate about the
need and convenience of sizable retinues as part of embassies. It is moreover suggested that such
a debate may have contributed to define King Lear’s retinue in Shakespeare’s tragedy.
‘The fictitious world of novels, which is only by convention less real than our own,’ provides us with multiple diplomatic images, imaginaries, and imaginations (Constantinou 1996). This world of literary imaginations also reveals the avowed and unavowed fictions that animate our ideas of diplomacy, community, the home, the body, humanity, and more-than-human beings. Through a reading of the imaginative and speculative diplomatic worlds in Nnedi Okorafor's Africanfuturistic Binti trilogy alongside V.Y. Mudimbe's meditations on alterity politics, this text-mediated meditation on dissensual friendships raises questions about diplomacy and hospitality. It maps instances of dissensual friendship that illustrate how some hospitalities (cultures of the home) can be extended or betrayed through ideals of humanity, disciplinary knowledge, and their related idea of Africa.
The chapter considers the role played by the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) within the concept of science diplomacy. It is argued that states still dominate Arctic science diplomacy as an area of regional governance, and non-state actors like IASC are playing only secondary or even utilitarian roles. Nevertheless, it is shown how IASC is consequently developing its potential and trying to respond to the global interests in the region and the increasing demand for scientific knowledge related to the changing Arctic. This study suggests that the non-state actors in the Arctic region are becoming more effective, flexible and often better prepared to respond to specific, sectoral or sub-regional needs, which in times of climate change assure them an important position and promising perspective for the future.
Objetivo/contexto:
El objetivo de esta investigación es rastrear una aproximación a los aportes del enfoque etnográfico en el quehacer diplomático, en tanto ámbito específico como a nivel general en la disciplina de las relaciones internacionales, estableciendo conexiones, planteamientos homólogos, puntos críticos y de inflexión.
Metodología:
El artículo utiliza una metodología cualitativa y con un enfoque etnográfico, que permite tensionar ciertas categorías clásicas y ontológicas de la disciplina internacional, lo que hace posible discutir los alcances, aportes y novedad del método etnográfico, en particular para los estudios diplomáticos. Se basa en la revisión de literatura especializada con autores que han pesquisado la variable cultural en los estudios diplomáticos. Dicho abordaje permite discutir el alcance de premisas básicas de la disciplina de las relaciones internacionales, tales como el interés nacional, la constitución del Estado, la exclusividad estatal del campo diplomático, entre otras categorías clásicas que no dan cuenta del todo de la existencia de procesos y actores emergentes invisibilizados en el debate internacionalista.
Conclusiones:
Se plantea que la disciplina de las relaciones internacionales, al adherir a reflexiones antropológicas, desafía sus debates y categorías más representativas. Dentro de los resultados, se sostiene que los enfoques etnográficos tensionan ciertas categorías y ontologías clásicas de la disciplina internacional, lo que ha sido posible al discutir los alcances, aportes y novedad del método etnográfico, en particular para los estudios diplomáticos.
Originalidad:
Se trata de una investigación inédita en la que se releva un contrapunto entre dos grandes corpus teóricos aparentemente disímiles, la antropología y las relaciones internacionales.
Zusammenfassung
Dieses Kapitel widmet sich der Struktur und der Entwicklung des österreichischen Auswärtigen Dienstes. Dabei wird besonderes Augenmerk auf die Analyse jener Aspekte gelegt, die Veränderungen im Auswärtigen Dienst der Zweiten Republik bewirkt haben, wie die Neuverortung Österreichs im internationalen Staatensystem nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, der Beitritt zur Europäischen Union (EU) und die beginnende Digitalisierung der Außenpolitik.
Diplomatic studies are becoming more open to social ideas, and a growing number of scholars are looking at diplomacy as a social practice. At the same time, diplomacy itself is in greater demand in increasingly complex societies, both international and domestic. This article analyses diplomacy between socially defined actors and complements the ideas of social diplomacy outlined in my book Diplomacy for Professionals and Everyone (Leiden: Brill, 2022). Since the social is essentially interconnectional, interactional and relational, I explore social diplomacy that takes place between purposive social entities, such as individuals, groups, organisations and states, and their aggregations, by focusing on their means of engagement, interaction and relationship-building. Diplomacy has always been regarded as a mission, and social diplomacy can be considered a goodwill mission that involves constructive engagement and dialogical interaction between parties to create a social good, most notably positive relationships.
El objetivo de este artículo es explorar una nueva forma de internacionalización de las Instituciones de Educación Superior (IES) a través del concepto de la “diplomacia del conocimiento”. Para ello, mediante un trabajo teórico-reflexivo estableceremos una relación triádica entre la diplomacia, las IES y el conocimiento. Partiendo de la definición de la ‘diplomacia del conocimiento’ de Jane Knight y vinculándola con los trabajos teóricos de la ‘diplomacia como mediación del extrañamiento’, trataremos de concebir una internacionalización más integral, inclusiva y transversal. Una internacionalización que, por un lado, nos permita mediar los múltiples extrañamientos que se generan en torno a los procesos de internacionalización y, por otro lado, responda a los retos del presente y del futuro de la educación superior. De esta manera, en este artículo de reflexión subrayaremos la transcendencia del conocimiento como pilar de la sociedad y la relevancia de las IES como actores que promueven el desarrollo del conocimiento mediante la cooperación y la colaboración; en definitiva, a través de la diplomacia.
Агент-структурные отношения – ключевая тема для конструктивистской парадигмы. Конструктивизму как методологическому подходу посвящена большая научная литература, причем как за рубежом, так и в России. Однако сами по себе конструктивистские методы анализа обычно не раскрываются, авторы ограничиваются отсылкой к общенаучным методам социальных наук. Вместе с тем сам выбор методов и их аспектов имеет свои особенности именно в конструктивизме. Структуры исследуются главным образом посредством обращения к метаистории и генеалогии. Важным является также учет мировоззрения наблюдателя, зачастую существенно искажающего научный анализ и его результаты. Деятельность агентов рассматривается через нарративы, дискурсы и фрейминг. Благодаря этому возникает возможность не просто описания, а анализа и изучения ключевых конструктивистских тем, в том числе проблемы идентичности как одной из наиболее важных для исследователей этого течения. Плюралистичность конструктивизма не просто допускает, но предполагает его взаимодействие с другими теориями международных отношений, благодаря чему возникает множество смешанных эклектичных форм, например, культурный конструктивизм, культурный реализм, либеральный конструктивизм, конструктивизм как критическая теория и т.д. Тем не менее для ученых важно представлять некую общую схему конструктивистского исследования, допускающую существенные отклонения в зависимости от интересов исследователя, поставленных задач и принятой парадигмы.
Si bien la acción exterior de los gobiernos locales e intermedios se ha generalizado y normado a nivel mundial, persisten fuertes debates teóricos en torno a su estudio. Ello dificulta el correcto análisis comparativo y la formulación de políticas públicas en base a estudios académicos. El objetivo del artículo es revisar comprehensivamente tres de los principales debates de la literatura, con el fin de presentar al lector e investigador ciertos consensos alcanzados, en los casos en que es posible. Los debates son abordados siguiendo la metodología de revisión bibliográfica (investigación documental). Primero, se estudia cómo se debe denominar al fenómeno; segundo, cuáles son sus causas, motivos u objetivos; y, tercero, qué definición se debe adoptar. Como corolario se presenta una propuesta de definición que sintetiza el resultado de cada debate.
Carefully selected and first translated into Polish excerpts from academic works, which shaped the international relations science. The anthology reflects the plurality of theoretical, normative and methodological approaches, characteristic of modern international relations science.
Carefully selected and first translated into Polish excerpts from academic works, which shaped the international relations science. The anthology reflects the plurality of theoretical, normative and methodological approaches, characteristic of modern international relations science.
Diplomacy can be defined as the conduct of international relations by negotiation and dialog or by any other means to promote peaceful relations among states. Besides this widely accepted single definition, and more comprehensively, diplomacy is also a set of practices, institutions, and discourses which is crucial for the basic understanding of the historical evolution of the international system and its evolving functional and normative needs. Departing from some conceptual precisions, this chapter presents a general approach in discussing this topic, including a short note about the historical circumstances in which modern diplomacy was born, an introduction to its more prominent transformations over time, a brief discussion of bilateralism and multilateralism as its basic modalities, and finally some reflections about the relevance of negotiation and other diplomatic methods for the contemporary international relations of cooperation and conflict.
The research question of this article is to what extent have populist governments in Austria, Italy and Poland affected the bureaucratic autonomy of career diplomats? The starting hypothesis is that populist governments have a structural conflict with career diplomacy and are tempted to reduce their power through political capture. The case studies of populist governments are as follows: in Austria, the coalition between the far-right Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) and the Christian-Democratic Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) between and December 2017 and May 2019; in Italy, the coalition between the two populist parties Five Stars Movement (M5S) and the League (La Lega) between June 2018 and September 2019; in Poland, the national-conservative coalition in which the Law and Justice Party (PiS) is dominant since October 2015. The first part explains why there is a structural conflict between populist governments and career diplomats. The second part analyses the case of a successful political capture of career diplomats by a populist government in Poland. The third part contrasts the previous statement by showing the lack of political capture of career diplomats by populist governments in Austria and Italy. Finally, the fourth part demonstrates why in the case of populist governments at power, career diplomats are often seen as an insurance to international partners, that populist governments themselves may have an interest in considering positively.
Disinformation on social media has positioned itself as a strategy of diplomacy to intervene in the decisions of sovereign states through the use of fake news, misleading content, hate speech and deliberate falsehoods, information errors, among others, in order to mobilise their citizens, and thus change both public and state policies and rulers, generate social pressure on socio-economic systems, etc. Having said that, the analysis of this strategy in terms of the process of disinformation propagation has been characterised as biased as it involves multiple actors with different levels of decision-making; hence the aim of this paper is to analyse the propagation of disinformation as a diplomatic strategy in social networks through a systemic approach. The results show a generalist model of causal loops, which provides evidence of how disinformation is disseminated, based on the various elements documented in the literature on this diplomatic strategy. Concluding on the potential nature of disinformation and the role that the state and the social networks themselves should play in preventing and mitigating this phenomenon, which is currently affecting nations across the board and which has become popular through the use of diplomatic agents.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.