international relation and diplomacy

international relation and diplomacy

Exploring the Dynamics of International Relations and Diplomacy

1. Introduction to International Relations and Diplomacy

As long as there are human societies, international relations and diplomacy will exist. The present world society has never experienced such a tremendous growth of international relations and such a deep involvement of the states in the most diverse systems and activities, stretching beyond national frontiers, realms, and continents. This growth of world society was the result of two revolutions: the Industrial and the Technological. Daniel Deudney and Robert Jackson describe the impact of the first as economic and military. The economic impact was a consequence of the Industrial Revolution, and the military impact was due to an innovation in weaponry. Adam Watson is of the opinion that there were four revolutions; the Industrial, the Technological, the Political, and the Cultural-Communications. He added that the impact of the Political Revolution led to the rise of democracy in the industrialized world. The Cultural-Communications Revolution facilitated the establishment of a “global village.” Today, investments, goods, services, technology, industries, jobs, and products are commodities largely traded and consumed across a seascape of different polities by people who are citizens of different nations and are shareholders, both in the humanistic and connotative meaning of that term. Furthermore, this society of nation-states has witnessed the emergence of international and non-governmental organizations, as well as the increasing variety and complexity in inter-polity transactions and in linkages within and between countries.

International relations and diplomacy describe the study and practice of various kinds of interactions that occur between independent and sovereign human groupings called states. Since the state (sorepublicae) is considered the most important political unit in the comity of modern nations, both of the older terms of this socio-political field are often used interchangeably to describe what is essentially the world of independent, equal, distinguishable, and territorially demarcated nation-states. The term international relations was originally coined by the American clergyman, gentleman philosopher, and political essayist, Reverend Joel Hawes in 1814. Hawes’ description of the concept referred solely to relations among the United States and the other countries in the entire world. However, diplomacy existed from the dawn of human civilization, nearly 9,000 years ago.

2. Theoretical Frameworks in International Relations

Regional trends toward functionalism, in contravention to more realpolitik realism, who remain committed to statist and ideological political objectives. The economic and social theorizing of the international’s transformational Chicago-style behavioralists sustained most in the collapse of all ideological complaints, to emerge as dominant and duly acknowledge aspects of ruling-status-quo interests, but to advocate liberal reform of these inner politics. As a result of growing substantialism, Reaganite diplomatic outlines merging aspects of the pure and applied branches of this ‘Normative-Realist-Neorealism in international relations are at variance in declaring and causally testing the extent of state self-interest. Peacenik strategic policy opportunism and the dolchstosslegende, ignoring the absolute power might of the state, differentiates between Meinecke and William James, though these two shared a war-repressing imperialism.

Realists emphasize state power as security (military security) and as a way of welfare (economic security) and view the international environment as anarchic and unequal, with security dilemma impelling states to seek relative power dominance. In contrast to liberal interpretations, realists emphasize that the international contest is a balance of power struggle and that justice is found in the claims of the mighty. At the intra-state level, cooperation may occur under conditions of absolute gains and where mutual interests in intensifying economic interdependence replace relative gains and where there is a convergence of economic development and political interests.

3. Key Actors and Institutions in Global Diplomacy

Key institutions to manage these affairs have also changed. Indeed, such changes and their acceptable solutions have been warned by almost all generations since ancient history. The main claim about today’s international developments is that political, cultural, and security relations have expanded beyond the boundaries of state relations. As diplomats manage these affairs, and as such processes develop, the job is occupied by the President, Prime Minister, or Foreign Minister, as well as managers, financial advisers, and public representatives of state organizations. Due to the high rate of globalization of information and communication technology and land, as well as the economic and political role of non-state actors, the current concept of international relations perceives diplomacy as a complex and multi-dimensional mechanism. Diplomacy, in the current study of international relations, is described as a complex and multi-functional socio-technological system.

As discussed in the previous chapter, the role and importance of international relations and diplomacy in contemporary affairs and trends have also led to diversification of participants and activities involved. There are different actors in diplomacy, from state to non-state levels, and at the global, regional, and sub-regional levels. Although this chapter mainly discusses the state level, it also refers to the other actors. For an individual country, essential relations are also with non-state actors. The contemporary world is complex in its network and interconnectedness, which is more complex than simple equal state-to-state relations. “Classic” 20th-century diplomacy and the diplomats were often described as slow-paced, with some awkward and pretentious events, close to stagnation. They were description-filled old stories about a gathering of elderly gentlemen exchanging papers, dinners, and arguments. The nomenclature used somewhat obsolete names such as Apostolic Nuncia, Consul, and Ambassador, which were generally corrected.

3.1 Introduction

4. Diplomatic Strategies and Negotiation Techniques

When applying diplomacy in their states’ interests, practitioners face a set of common challenges, including the following: understanding the dynamic at work; being ready to act in cooperation with others; and adopting suitable negotiating techniques. It is strongly advised, in both domestic and international settings, that practitioners consider the range of available negotiating techniques before acting. By doing so, they will be better able to apply those techniques effectively.

Diplomacy is utilized in a great variety of settings, some of which are described in this chapter. Practitioners will make use of negotiation techniques in relation to all of these. It is wise to familiarize oneself with them, to be prepared for negotiations, and to be ready to react using the right techniques as situations change. The art of negotiation is central to the application of diplomacy and international relations. While it may follow dramaturgical principles, the diplomatic conference is nonetheless a core part of international relations, through which strategy and state policy objectives are determined. Given the importance of negotiation, understanding the dynamics at play during the process and being aware of the techniques available are invaluable.

5. Emerging Trends and Challenges in International Relations

But the question of international relations theory development is not only relevant for the academic. Since the end of the Cold War and especially the terrorist attack on the United States in September 2001, the official diplomatic process has hung its hat on a list of serious, transition-related international challenges. Some of the most apparent are not new to the international relations experience. These include ethno-nationalist disputes in Euro-Asia, the Balkans, the Caucasus, sub-Saharan Africa, and elsewhere; the management of these issues was a staple of the Cold War negotiations between the US and the USSR, epitomized by their attention to ensuring a non-aligned post-war Austria, by the creation of the Berlin Wall, and by the post-Repression Monroe Doctrine in support of domestic control in Latin America.

One of the most critical insights that international relations research has generated in the past four decades is that diplomacy is an improvisational, discontinuous phenomenon that stems from constant change and innovation, much of which comes in response to international crisis conditions. In the crisis context of diplomacy, a trend may be here today but gone tomorrow. But if trends as well as events are crucial to the understanding and prediction of specific diplomatic behavior, they do raise a number of important dilemmas for the theory builder in the search for generalization.