In the diplomacy literature, both practitioners of and theorists regarding diplomacy provide several definitions of diplomacy that are state-centric, omitting non-state actors. However, any definition of diplomacy has to be inclusive because non-state actors also participate in diplomacy. There are also misconceptions about the differences between diplomacy, foreign policy, and international relations (IR).
Therefore, this essay provides a comprehensive definition of diplomacy and explains the differences between diplomacy, foreign policy, and IR. The diplomacy literature is reviewed in order to achieve these aims.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Defining Diplomacy
3. Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, and International Relations
4. Who Formulates Foreign Policy?
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper aims to provide a comprehensive and inclusive definition of diplomacy by critically reviewing existing literature and addressing common misconceptions. It seeks to clarify the functional distinctions between diplomacy, foreign policy, and international relations while examining the role of both state and non-state actors in modern diplomatic practice.
- Critical analysis of state-centric versus inclusive definitions of diplomacy.
- Distinguishing between the instruments of statecraft: diplomacy, foreign policy, and international relations.
- The evolving role of non-state actors in contemporary transnational diplomacy.
- Examination of the institutional process behind the formulation and implementation of foreign policy.
- The significance of professional training in bridging the gap between diplomatic theory and practice.
Excerpt from the Book
Defining Diplomacy
This paper presents fifteen different definitions of diplomacy that are state-centric and partially consistent with the conduct of diplomacy. Der Derian (2001) defines diplomacy as a ‘communication between strangers.’ Watson (1982) argues that diplomacy is a ‘dialogue between states,’ whereas Bull (1995) argues that diplomacy is a ‘communication that facilitates international society, the diplomatic profession being the custodian of the idea of international society.’
Viotti and Kauppi (2001) describe diplomacy as the ‘management of international relations by communications to include negotiations, leading to a bargain or agreement.’ Nicholson (1969) states that diplomacy is the ‘management of international relations by negotiation, the method by which these relations are adjusted and managed by ambassadors and envoys–the business or art of the diplomat.’ Satow (1979) contends that diplomacy is an ‘application of tact and intelligence to the conduct of official relations between governments of independent states.’
According to Nichols (2009), diplomacy is ‘the art of saying “nice doggie” until you can find a rock.’ Siddique and Alam (2009, pp. 3–4) assert that diplomacy is ‘honorable spying,’ as well as ‘lying’ (‘an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country’). White (2001) claims that diplomacy is a ‘process of communications and negotiation between states and other international actors.’ Berridge (1995, p. 1) argues that ‘diplomacy is the conduct of international relations by negotiation rather than by force, propaganda, or recourse to law, and by other peaceful means.’ However, Griffiths and O’Callaghan (2002, p. 79) maintain that diplomacy is the ‘conduct and content of foreign affairs as a whole.’
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: This chapter highlights the limitations of traditional state-centric definitions of diplomacy and outlines the necessity of including non-state actors in the modern discourse.
Defining Diplomacy: This chapter evaluates fifteen different definitions of diplomacy provided by various theorists, identifying their common weaknesses and the need for a more coherent, inclusive approach.
Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, and International Relations: This chapter clarifies the functional differences between these instruments of statecraft, emphasizing that diplomacy serves as the 'engine room' for implementing foreign policy within international relations.
Who Formulates Foreign Policy?: This chapter analyzes the roles of various state actors in the formulation of foreign policy and discusses the practical distinction between political decision-making and diplomatic execution.
Keywords
Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, International Relations, Statecraft, Non-state Actors, Transnational Diplomacy, Negotiation, Ambassadors, Political Science, Communication, Global Organizations, State-centric, Sovereignty, Diplomatic Practice, Diplomacy Studies.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this work?
The work provides an in-depth analysis of the term "diplomacy," arguing that conventional definitions are outdated and fail to account for the role of non-state actors in the 21st century.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The central themes include the redefinition of diplomacy, the functional differences between foreign policy and diplomacy, and the changing landscape of international actors.
What is the core objective of the research?
The primary goal is to establish a comprehensive definition of diplomacy that remains accurate and applicable in a modern, interconnected world.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author utilizes a qualitative literature review, synthesizing diverse historical and contemporary definitions of diplomacy to identify flaws and propose a more holistic understanding.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The text reviews various definitions, analyzes the roles of state and non-state actors, and differentiates between diplomacy, foreign policy, and international relations as distinct instruments of statecraft.
Which keywords best characterize this publication?
Key terms include Diplomacy, Statecraft, Foreign Policy, International Relations, and Non-state Actors.
Why does the author argue that state-centric definitions of diplomacy are flawed?
The author argues that they ignore the active role played by non-state entities like multinational corporations, NGOs, and private citizens in modern international affairs.
How does the author distinguish between foreign policy and diplomacy?
The author defines foreign policy as "what a country does" and diplomacy as the method or "how it does it."
What is the role of professional training in diplomacy?
The author asserts that because diplomacy relies heavily on communication and the ability to excel in diplomatic circles, professional training is essential to bridge the gap between abstract theory and practical application.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Tethloach Ruey (Autor:in), 2017, Understanding diplomacy. Definition and differences to foreign policy and international relations, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/373969
