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 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:
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:
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.
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Rodrigo Márquez LartigueDiplomat interested in the development of Consular and Public Diplomacies. Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|