I am excited to announce that I will be collaborating in the upcoming Public Diplomacy course that the DiploFoundation is offering in the spring of 2022. For more information about the course, check out this DiploFoundation webpage.
 
I did not know about the existence of the DiploFoundation until my ministry of foreign affairs offered one of its courses in late 2012. But what a great institution it is!
 
I already had experience with online education, as I graduated from the Global Master of Arts Program in 2008, offered by the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. However, it was a hybrid format, which allowed me to meet my classmates in three different residencies. For more about my experience, read my blog post, Remembering GMAP: Awesome learning and life experiences.
 
The DiploFoundation offers magnificent advantages for most people interested in diplomacy and other vital subjects, such as internet governance. Here are some of them:

1. FLEXIBILITY. While following a weekly cycle where each week is dedicated to a specific topic, Diplo’s online courses are designed so that you can attend to course tasks asynchronously, i.e., at the time that suits you best, depending on your time zone and lifestyle.
2. INTERACTION. The weekly online live interaction is a great way to connect with the lecturers and classmates. It is a bit chaotic and stimulating time, and it would be best if you were prepared to participate in the online debates fully. With the boom of video conferencing apps, Diplo also offers the opportunity to interact with colleagues using live connections.
3. EDUCATION PROCESS. The DiploFoundation has a collaborative approach to education that encourages participation and dialogue. The hypertext interactions, the pedagogical tool used in the courses, are user-friendly and engaging. Most of your classmates have experience and lots of knowledge, so it is a trove of treasures, and it allows you to share your own best practices.
4. DIVERSITY. The geographical and nationality variety of the lecturers and students makes the DiploFoundation hard to beat. I had classmates from many different countries, most living on other continents, so I had the opportunity to interact and learn from them.  Connecting with persons from diverse backgrounds that otherwise you might never know is formidable, and the Diplo opens the door for you.
5. FOCUS ON THE REAL WORLD. The courses are focused on the real world. For most diplomacy practitioners, it is hard to find time for professional development, and most are looking for learning opportunities that can immediately enhance their performance. Therefore, the courses’ focus on the real world is crucial, and the DiploFoundation does not disappoint. This does not mean that theories are not reviewed. In my Diplo studies, I learned tools that I applied almost immediately. For example, I studied social media apps and opened my Twitter account that I still use today.
6. TOUGH BUT FAIR. Anybody that tells you that the DiploFoundation courses are easy is not telling the truth. You have to engage in the class fully, but it is well worth it.
7. AMAZING LECTURERS. The heart of the DiploFoundation is its people, but mainly their faculty. The courses I took were taught by outstanding lecturers that are practitioners with real-life experiences in their respective fields. And as the DiploFoundation website states, “They act more as a ‘guide on the side’ than ‘the sage on the stage’”. The teachers and researchers are incredible sources of knowledge that students can tap from. Just browse the Diplo website’s People section to learn about the excellent team.

 
Another advantage is that The DiploFoundation also offers the possibility of obtaining a Master´s degree in Contemporary Diplomacy from the University of Malta, which is an excellent opportunity for anybody who does not have the chance to take time off work to get a full-time study degree.
 
Besides the incredible array of courses, the DiploFoundation has excellent research and resources, such as my favorite history of diplomacy and technology or the up-and-coming digital diplomacy and digital foreign policy.
 
In addition, the very active online web debates, conferences offer many opportunities to learn areas that might not be familiar. 
 
For those interested in internet governance and digital policy, the DiploFoundation is a powerhouse and the go-to institution. Besides, they are at the forefront of Artificial Intelligence and Diplomacy studies.
 
After the courses with the DiploFoundation, I had many ideas and questions but did not have enough time to work on them until last year, when I started my blog about Consular and Public Diplomacies. In a way, the courses I took with Diplo motivated me to create this blog. And to complete the full circle, the blog opened the door for me to join the DiploFoundation as a lecture starting in spring 2022!
 
I invite everyone interested in Diplomacy and Internet Governance to check out below the DiploFoundation courses and their research and ongoing activities. And hopefully, I will see you in the Public Diplomacy course that starts in February 2022.
 
Upcoming course (February 2022)
 
Public Diplomacy
 
Humanitarian Diplomacy
                               
Diplomatic Theory and Practice
 
Advanced Diploma in Internet Governance
 
Introduction to Internet Governance
 
Capacity Development
 
Artificial Intelligence: Technology, Governance, and Policy Frameworks
 
Here is an excellent video that clearly explains what entails to study at the DiploFoundation.

 
1. Introduction 

As mentioned in my previous post, “Why we need more diplomatic studies?” a significant development in today´s diplomatic practice is the explosion of novel instruments or tools used to attain a country´s foreign policy goals. However, some scholars have questioned if these “new” ways to do Diplomacy are even real while highlighting the risk that entails calling everything Diplomacy.
 
This blog post will discuss whether these innovative diplomatic tools are really new or imposters, using as examples an analysis of Public Diplomacy and Gatrodiplomacy. The conclusion is that some are original, while others are rebranded instruments, but a thorough examination is required to unmask phonies. Besides, these activities need to be part of a Foreign Policy strategy to be called Diplomacy.
 
When I think about new diplomatic instruments, I always remember the article written by Shaun Riordan titled “Stop Inventing New Diplomacies.”[i] In it, he complains about the tendency to incorporate into the diplomatic realm all sorts of activities, which carries the risk of losing the meaning of Diplomacy.
 
I agree with Riordan that “the conceptual confusion arises from the failure to distinguish between tools that can be used as part of a broader diplomatic strategy and the subject matter of diplomacy.”[ii]
 
Besides, in the article “Would the Real Diplomacy Please Stand Up!”, Katharina E. Höne of the DiploFoundation agrees with Riordan stating that “If everything is diplomacy, then nothing is. An ever-expanding concept eventually becomes meaningless.”[iii]
 
However, Höne declares that “rather than a categorical rejection [of the new diplomacies], the proper response is to sharpen our intellectual tools and get to work [and] in order to tell the imposter from the innovator, we need to look closely at diplomacy as a practice, its relation to the state, and the purposes of these new diplomacies.”[iv]
 
After thinking about this issue for the last couple of months, chiefly because it is the main objective of this blog, I believe there is a need to use these new terminologies, even if the practice has occurred since ancient times and are just rebranded. So, I concurred with Höne that it is required to analyze these diplomatic instruments to separate the new authentic tools from the fake ones.
 
So, let’s get to work!
 
2. Origins of the expansion of diplomatic tools 

Jessica Lilian De Alva Ulloa and Rafael Velázquez Flores explain the expansion of diplomatic tools during the Cold War, where every activity was part of the ideological competition between the Soviet Union and the United States. Diplomatic initiatives in different fields such as sports, education, space, and culture were developed as part of their foreign policy.[v]
 
After the fall of the Soviet Union, “the disappearance of one of the superpowers brought changes to global diplomacy. As a result, new forms of diplomacy appeared, like environmental, migration and refugees, and human rights.”[vi]
 
Besides, in the article “Diplomacies, from public to pubic”, John Brown explains that “a special place in the increased “adjectivization” of diplomacy (pardon the jaw-breaking term, but it does describe what’s going on) can be traced in part to the British scholar Mark Leonard, who in his 2002 book, Public Diplomacy, introduced … terms [such as]: Co-operative Diplomacy; Competitive Diplomacy; Diaspora Diplomacy; Business Diplomacy; and Niche Diplomacy.”[vii]
 
In turn, G.R. Berridge has written that the “rejuvenation of some of the key features of traditional diplomacy has gone unnoticed – partly because it has been masked by the attachment of new labels to old procedures and partly because the novel has a greater fascination than the tried and tested.”[viii]
 
The tendency to adjectivized diplomacies already existed previously. Terms such as gunboat and shuttle diplomacies were part of the diplomatic toolbox of the U.S.[ix] However, it is not just the tools that expanded, particularly in the 21st Century, but Diplomacy itself grew into what some have called “new diplomacy.”
 
3. Expansion of the concept of Diplomacy 

One reason why the explosion of the so-called “new” diplomacies is that Diplomacy itself has expanded outwards.[x]
 
Before creating the first genuinely international organization (IO), the International Telegraph Union, in 1865, there were no diplomatic negotiations outside the States. Now there is an enormous practice of IO diplomacy, not only between member states inside an OI but also amid IOs and states, thus greatly expanding the scope of Diplomacy with these new interactions.
 
Additionally, state and local authorities, NGOs, corporations, individuals, including terrorist, and criminal organizations, have extended their engagement in international affairs. For example, there were only 176 international NGOs in 1909 compared to 48,000 in 2000.[xi] Some of these actors' participation has not been hindered by not forming part of the diplomatic services of their countries, thus do not enjoy the same privileges and immunities as diplomats.[xii]
 
Furthermore, some of these practices have evolved immensely, so whole new departments have been created at many ministries of foreign affairs (MFAs), producing lots of documents, best practices, some with excellent results and other significant failures. Besides, as MFAs have expanded their transparency and accountability, the information usually is publicly available for evaluation and comparison.
 
According to G.R. Berridge, “what we have now is neither and or nor a new diplomacy but, instead, a blend of the two, which has produced a mature diplomacy. It is also one fortified by a respected legal regime.”[xiii]
 
The digital revolution and the enlargement of trade and communications have also allowed the radical growth of international exchanges, commerce, and participation, unsealing new opportunities and threats to the diplomatic craft in general and the country´s foreign policy in particular.
 
As the reader will see in the next section, social media platforms allowed the development of digital public diplomacy in ways that were not possible just a few years ago. Also, the availability of specialized food products from faraway lands allowed governments to implement Gastrodiplomacy efforts that were impossible before.
 
In the next section, I will evaluate Public Diplomacy and Gastrodiplomacy using the proposed framework by Katharina E. Höne, focusing on their purpose, relationship with the State, and who does it.
 
4. Analysis of two diplomatic instruments. 

4.1 Public Diplomacy 

The best example of a relatively new tool, I believe, is Public Diplomacy (PD). The term has taken off worldwide, and many if not most MFAs have included it in their foreign policy toolbox.
 
For many years, connecting with certain groups was a recurrent task for any ambassador or envoy to gather information about the receiving State's conditions. More importantly, it was an opportunity to persuade or influence them to change a policy or a position towards the sending State.
 
The practice by Embassies of engaging foreign audiences outside government officials is not new.[xiv] However, connecting to ordinary people has dramatically changed, becoming a lot more specialized and adopting innovative communication technics to accomplish the intended goals.
 
If radio, TV, and fax magnified the opportunities for diplomats to engage with citizens in the receiving, the digital transformation has unlocked multiple prospects to talk, and more importantly, listening, directly to individuals and targeted groups of the receiving State and the sending one too.
 
The field of study of PD has multiplied,[xv] and I think it is one reason for greater interest in Diplomacy as a whole. For many of us, PD was the entry point for formally study Diplomacy, even if we have practiced it for a long time.
 
Nowadays, several universities and other learning institutions worldwide offer multiple PD courses, from one-day workshops to Master´s degrees. Several specialized journals and magazines[xvi] have appeared in recent years, such as South Korea´s brand new Journal of Public Diplomacy, which has expanded the options for publishing academic articles about the topic.
 
4.1.2 Does PD is a real diplomatic tool or just hype?
 
Using the analytical tool proposed by Katharina E. Höne, let´s dissect PD.
 
Concerning the relationship with the State, it is clear that governments are key sponsors of Public Diplomacy initiatives, which are part of an overall foreign policy strategy. Even if these activities are supported by NGOs, individuals, and other institutions, the core functions are performed by embassies and diplomats.[xvii]
 
So, here it is clear that, for the most part, PD is a new tool of the diplomatic craft. I don´t believe it is a rebranded one because there are huge differences from previous practices, mostly because of the digital revolution.
 
Of course, an in-depth analysis of each of the initiatives that governments label as PD would be needed to really know if it is an imposter or the real deal. Luckily, there is a growing body of research about it, not just in scholarly journals but magazines, blogs, and even government studies.
 
4.2 Gastrodiplomacy 

Another in-vogue tool of diplomacy is winning foreign audiences' hearts and minds thru their stomach, also known as Gastrodiplomacy.
 
It is considered a technique that forms part of Cultural Diplomacy, and it is relatively recent. Only in 2002, The Economist coined the term after Thailand´s efforts to increase the number of Thai restaurants worldwide.[xviii] Since then, many countries, including Peru, South Korea, and Japan, have invested considerable resources in these efforts.
 
To learn more about Mexico´s Gastrodiplomacy efforts, check out my blog “More than Tacos: Mexico´s scrumptious, yet unknown Gastrodiplomacy” and “Ten years later: Mexico´s Traditional Cuisine and Gastrodiplomacy efforts.”
 
Until recently, local ingredients seldomly used outside the country of origin were available internationally, so they were hard or impossible to find in sufficient quantities to start a restaurant. The ever-growing migration of people, combined with an openness to try different dishes and cuisines, and the growth of agricultural exports (and locally-harvested), unlock the door for governmental efforts to promote its image abroad to gain influence and expand commercial opportunities via Gastrodiplomacy.
 
Shaun Riordan has a significant point that “it only makes sense to talk about sporting (or educational, or scientific, or gastronomic) activities if they form part of a broader diplomatic strategy in pursuit of policy objectives. Otherwise it is just sport, education, science or lunch.”[xix]
 
Therefore, we can only describe it as gastronomic diplomacy if it is spearheaded by the government and has a foreign policy objective. Of course, other actors, such as corporations, NGOs, or even individuals like famous chefs, can be part of its implementation through informal collaborations or formal partnerships.
 
4.2.1 Is Gastrodiplomacy a diplomatic imposter?
 
In the case of Gastrodiplomacy, we can undoubtedly say that it is a new tool of the diplomatic craft, made possible by changes in transportation, migration, and people´s openness to try foreign cuisines. However, as already mentioned, if it is not part of a foreign policy effort with specific goals, it cannot be considered a type of diplomatic instrument.
 
The issue's development lags behind Public Diplomacy and other cultural diplomatic instruments like Sports and Science diplomacies. The number of articles, scholarly or not, about the subject is still small. The most significant accomplishment was the publication of a special issue about Gastrodiplomacy in the Public Diplomacy magazine in 2014.
 
Besides, there are no classes, seminars, or workshops that I know off just dedicated to the study and practice of Gastrodiplomacy.
 
Therefore, it is a bit hard to argue that Gastrodiplomacy is not a diplomatic imposter. Still, the facts are that countries across the planet have invested scarce financial and human resources to instrument diplomatic efforts using cuisine, sometimes with excellent results.
 
We might not like it, literally the food or the measures, but they are real and exist as the examples of the Gastronomic Diplomacy efforts by Mexico, Peru, and South Korea demonstrate. And given time and flourishing practitioners and scholars, we might have the first Diplomatic /Cordon Blue Chef school somewhere soon.
 
5. Conclusions.
 
As the new critical theories of International Relations bring new and innovative perspectives to the fields’ scholarship, novel diplomatic instruments are unlocking opportunities for original ways of international engagement.
 
However, some scholars think that it is not an all-out revolution of Diplomacy. For example, Berridge indicates, “What we have witnessed in recent years is not the complete transformation of diplomacy, but rather, the more -occasionally less- intelligent application of new technology and new devices to support tried and tested methods, with the added advantage that this has helped to integrate many poor and weak states into the world diplomatic system.”[xx]
 
In contrast, Höne writes, “If diplomacy is not to become a dinosaur, new diplomacies and their careful debate should be welcomed as part of a much-needed dynamism in the field.”[xxi]
 
Time, analysis, and country´s practices will reveal which diplomatic modes are imposters, which are rebranded efforts, and which are the real deal. For me, the key is for them to have a FP goal. Otherwise, they are not Diplomacy, and we need to invent a different form to call them, but not Diplomacy.
 
I want to conclude this post quoting John Brown:
 
“Below are recent media entries with adjectival modifications (vulgarisations?) of diplomacy — which, perhaps, have contributed to a refinement (dilution?) of the meaning of this unexciting but venerable word. Should one be optimistic/pessimistic about such a development? Let the reader decide.
crisis diplomacy
radical diplomacy
food diplomacy
audio diplomacy 
1.5 track military diplomacy
skateboard diplomacy
koala diplomacy
wife diplomacy Mrs. diplomacy [original link appears to be inactive]
female sports diplomacy
emoji ‪diplomacy
creative diplomacy
poem and prose diplomacy
soap opera diplomacy
side-eye diplomacy
Bulgakov diplomacy.”[xxii]
 
Note: I have not forgotten about Consular Diplomacy, but the post is already quite long; therefore, I analyzed this ”new” diplomatic instrument in the next blog post titled "Consular Diplomacy: Cinderella no more, but not yet a princess".
 

[i] Also see, Brown, John, “Diplomacies, from public to pubic”, Huffington Post, March 23, 2016, and the last chapter of the book Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., 2015, by G.R. Berridge.
[ii] Riordan, Shaun, “Stop Inventing New Diplomacies”, Center on Public Diplomacy Blog, June 21, 2017.
[iii] Höne, Katharina E., “Would the Real Diplomacy Please Stand Up!”, DiploFoundation Blog, June 30, 2017.
[iv] Höne, Katharina E., 2017.
[v] De Alva Ulloa, Jessica Lilian, and Velázquez Flores Rafael, “La diplomacia: concepto, origen, desarrollo histórico y tipos” in Teoría y Práctica de la Diplomacia en México: Aspectos básicos, 2018, pp. 37-39.
[vi] De Alva Ulloa, Jessica Lillian, and Velázquez Flores Rafael, 2018, pp. 39-40.
[vii] Brown, John, “Diplomacies, from public to pubic”, Huffington Post, March 23, 2016.
[viii] Berridge, G.R., “Conclusion: The Counter-Revolution in Diplomatic Practice” in Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., 2015, p. 266.
[ix] Brown, John, 2016.
[x] Cooper, Andrew F., Heine, Jorge, and Thakur, Ramesh, “Introduction: The Challenges of 21st-Century Diplomacy” in The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, 2013, p. 20.
[xi] Cooper, Andrew F., Heine, Jorge, and Thakur, Ramesh, 2013, pp. 7 and 9.
[xii] See Höne, Katharina E., 2017 and Riordan 2017.
[xiii] Berridge, G.R., 2015, p. 268.
[xiv] See the chapter “Public Diplomacy” by Berridge, G.R., in Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., 2015, pp. 198-209.
[xv] See for example this great research about PD articles in peer-reviewed journals, Sevin, Efe, Metzgar, Emily T., and Hayden, Craig, “The Scholarship of Public Diplomacy: Analysis of a Growing Field”, International Journal of Communication Vol. 13, 2019, pp. 4814–4837.
[xvi] Such as the Public Diplomacy Magazine and other publications of the Center on Public Diplomacy, Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, among other
[xvii] Here the focus on the instrumentation of PD campaigns, including the organization of educational and cultural exchanges which are initiatives where individuals participate directly.
[xviii] The Economist, “Food as ambassador, Thailand´s gastrodiplomacy”, February 21, 2002.
[xix] Riordan, Shaun, 2017.
[xx] Berridge, G.R., 2015, p. 268.
[xxi] Höne, Katharina E., 2017.
[xxii] Brown, John, 2016.


DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer, or company.

In my recent post, Why Diplomacy matter? I wrote about the significance of Diplomacy in the third decade of the 21st Century and its potential to help solve humanity's current challenges. Following up on this idea, today I will focus on the reasons why we need more teaching and studying about Diplomacy.
 
Here I argue that Diplomacy needs to be more broadly teach and research because these will:

• Reduce the common mistake of thinking that Diplomacy is the same as Foreign Policy.
• Help better understand its unchanged principles throughout history while adapting to the evolution of society and technology.
• Be needed as Diplomacy undergoes two paradigm shifts due to the explosion of international actors and the digital revolution.

 
Diplomacy is a crucial ingredient in any foreign policy recipe. However, it is not always taught in universities as part of International Relations, International Business, and other related fields. It is like cooking without salt, you can eat the food, but it won´t taste as good as if the dish had some salt.
 
In my own International Relations BA program, there was not a single class dedicated to Diplomacy exclusively. Ironically, most of my classmates wanted to join the Mexican foreign service and become diplomats.
 
After joining the foreign service, I learned Diplomacy as a practitioner. I studied it formally until 2012 when I took the course “Diplomacy in the 21st Century” offered by the DiploFoundation.
 
But, what is Diplomacy? Maybe, that could have been the first question that I made in my first publication of my blog, rather than diving directly into the question of whether Public and Consular Diplomacies were real.
 
There are plenty of different descriptions of Diplomacy. Still, I like the one written by Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, and Ramesh Thakur in the introductory essay of The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy that expressed that “Diplomacy at is essence is the conduct of relationships, using peaceful means, by and among international actors, at least one of whom is usually a government.”[1]
 
I also like Geoff R. Berridge´s[2] definition, which indicates that “Diplomacy is an essentially political activity and, well resourced and skillful, a major ingredient of power. Its chief purpose is to enable states to secure the objectives of their foreign policies without resort to force, propaganda, or law. It achieves this mainly by communication between professional diplomatic agents.”[3]
 
Nowadays, with so many actors involved in international affairs, including individuals, it is logical that the concept of Diplomacy has to expand its conceptual boundaries outwards.[4]
 
Besides, the growing studies of different diplomatic practices outside Europe, as part of the International Relations Global South movement, has also widened the scope of our knowledge in the field.
 
Confusion between Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
 
If Diplomacy is not taught and research, people will have the perennial confusion between Foreign Policy and Diplomacy.

I understand a bit the misunderstanding between the two in today´s world, where most of the conflicts worldwide are being solved via diplomatic negotiations rather than other means, including war. So, the less use of force and other foreign policy instruments, the closer both fields are getting, blurring their distinction, and heightening the possibility of confusing both concepts.
 
But let´s be clear, not all of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs´ activities nor all international actions of a government can be classified as Foreign Policy (FP). To be considered a part of a country´s FP, the activity must be directed to achieve a goal. Otherwise, it could only be an international public policy or something else, but not FP.
 
Here, Shaun Riordan has a significant point that “it only makes sense to talk about sporting (or educational, or scientific, or gastronomic) activities if they form part of a broader diplomatic strategy in pursuit of policy objectives. Otherwise it is just sport, education, science or lunch.”[5]
 
But, what is Foreign Policy anyways?
 
According to Jean-Frédéric Morin and Jonathan Paquin in the excellent book Foreign Policy Analysis: a Toolbox, FP is “a set of actions or rules governing the actions of an independent political authority deployed in the international environment… [or] the underlying vision -in other words, the specific conception that a state has regarding its place in the world, its national interest and the key principles that allow to defend them.”[6]
 
Reducing the confusion between Diplomacy and FP is a perfect reason why diplomacy should be taught and study more widely, not just among internationalists.
 
Old, new, and contemporary Diplomacy unchanged principles.
 
Diplomacy, old, new, and contemporary, has always been based on certain fundamental principles that have not changed and are still relevant today. This is remarkable, as, in most sciences, paradigm shifts are a constant, and schools of thoughts and theories disappear with each new discovery.
 
The unchanged principles of Diplomacy are:

1. The role of envoys. Since the beginning of time, they have always been a crucial part of the diplomatic craft. Even in today´s situation, envoys meet and negotiate via videoconferences or by telephone and WhatsApp.
2. The inviolability and immunity of diplomatic agents and premises have expanded and codified, but the idea of granting extra protections to them has been a staple of Diplomacy since ancient civilizations.
3. The functions of Diplomacy have always been communication, representation, and negotiation, even in the ever-expanding duties of diplomats.
4. The special “aura” granted to diplomats, even after the end of absolute monarchies and the ever-increasing democratization of Diplomacy.
5. The amazing adaptability of Diplomacy. As a human activity, it has to be able to adapt to the ever-changing world, from Greek city-state to nowadays´ digital diplomacy.  

 
Diplomacy´s steadfastness does not mean that it is static. Throughout history has evolved and adapted to new circumstances, including technological revolutions.  
 
As the excellent interactive historical timeline of the relationship between Diplomacy and technology shows, every technological breakthrough, from the first written language to the development of TikTok diplomacy, has generated challenges and opportunities for Diplomacy.

Diplomats, very reluctantly, have adapted to the arrival of the latest gadgets and processes. However, not all MFAs have adjusted at the same pace. There a few trendsetters and quite a significant number of laggers.
 
Even if Diplomacy has been remarkably stable, two trends are creating diplomatic paradigm shifts. One is the expansion of international actors that perform “diplomacy-like” functions, and the other is the digital revolution.
 
To better understand the impact of these transformations on the diplomatic craft, it is necessary to invest more in diplomatic studies' teaching and investigation. Only then will governments be better prepare to adapt their diplomatic institutions and practices to the new reality. Otherwise, there are going to be left behind.
 
Another critical evolution of Diplomacy is the appearance of new tools like Gastrodiplomacy and Consular Diplomacy, among others. These novel instruments have been questioned and will be discussed in the next blog post.
 

[1] Cooper, Andrew F., Heine, Jorge, and Thakur, Ramesh, “Introduction: The Challenges of 21st-Century Diplomacy” in The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, 2013, p. 2.
[2] A prolific author about diplomacy and Senior Fellow of the DiploFoundation. Check out his website here.
[3] Berrigde, G.R., Diplomacy: Theory and Practice, 5th ed., 2015, p. 1.
[4] Cooper, Andrew F., Heine, Jorge, and Thakur, Ramesh, 2013, p. 24.
[5] Riordan, Shaun, “Stop Inventing New Diplomacies”, Center of Public Diplomacy Blog, June 21, 2017.
[6] Morin, Jean-Frédéric and Paquin, Jonathan, Foreign Policy Analysis: a Toolbox, 2018, p. 3.

DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company.

 
I wish you all a healthy 2021!
 
For many years, and with every technological revolution, Diplomacy has always been deemed doomed. Ever since communications and transportation have made the world smaller, diplomats have seen their careers threatened.
 
However, every time Diplomacy and diplomats come back after experiencing a makeover, to remain as relevant, if not more, as before. And it a not-so-Post-COVID-19 planet, it seems as much needed as ever.
 
Most of the problems that humanity faces today cannot be solved by a single country or a group of nations. The challenges are global and require a planetary-wide solution. And Diplomacy is the millennial-tradition that can bring about these solutions. Notwithstanding, it needs the willingness of the population and support from politicians.
 
Even if the number of actors has multiplied and even a single person can make the difference in today´s hyperconnected planet, States, embassies, and diplomats are still essential for moving ahead of the relationships between nations and the international system as a whole.
 
Embassies today provide a vital link for the sending state with borders closed across the world and limited travel options. Today, diplomats are one of the very few persons in the world that can travel with little restrictions. This was particularly important at the onset of the pandemic when millions of people were stranded abroad. Nowadays, with new border closures, they are assisting their nationals stuck overseas again.
 
Embassies and diplomats are also working on setting up zoom meetings and virtual visits while exchanging best-practices in pandemic responses and economic revitalization programs.
 
The essence of Diplomacy, sending envoys to foreign lands to communicate, represent, and negotiate, are still valid in the third decade of the 21st Century as they were at the dawn of human civilization.
 
Diplomats are typically problem-solvers and, in many instances, have managed to bring a solution to issues that affect the lives of millions of people. Just think of the Montreal Protocol that prohibited the use of CFCs that depleted the Earth´s ozone layer.
 
And even in today´s digital world, diplomats are needed to provide on-the-ground knowledge and nuances that cannot be matched by a stream of millions of terabytes of information. They can share an ice-breaker for their leaders that could avert a conflict or open the door for a strategic partnership.
 
Consuls around the Earth are engaging in a new form of Diplomacy, Consular Diplomacy, to engage with different subnational actors that have increased their international footprint.
 
In addition, all ambassadors are public diplomacy officials as they have to engage with foreign audiences, as well as domestic stakeholders. The division between foreign and domestic policies has diluted. However, they continue to be different as governments cannot control the international arena and other States´ actions and inactions.
 
These are a few reasons why Diplomacy and diplomats are essential today for the world, not only for one´s nation.
 
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed on this blog are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of any other authority, agency, organization, employer or company.