Search results

Positive Diplomacy draws on the author's experience from his distinguished diplomatic career in the Foreign Service and his lectures at the Diplomatic Academy of London for those contemplating, or at the outset of, a diplomatic career. Its focus is eminently practical. It concentrates on how junior diplomats can assist in making and carrying out foreign policy. It analyses what diplomats have to deal with and the skills they need to operate effectively as individuals and as members of a diplomatic service

"Diplomacy and War" published on by Oxford University Press.

Modern digital media have enabled the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, to talk to foreign parliaments while his country is at war. Zelensky's virtual communications are not aimed at enhancing Ukraine's international image, as in traditional forms of public diplomacy; rather, they seek to obtain military assistance and reach a mutually beneficial outcome for his country. These, however, are activities of media diplomacy, a concept that scholars have abandoned over the last two decades in favour of public diplomacy. Through a critical review, this study examines the division between these concepts and other related concepts and analyses the role of the media in international communications, including those in times of war. The widespread use of technology and social media, as well as the specific diplomatic communications that have allowed Zelensky to talk to the world, have led to the conclusion that the current concepts of media diplomacy, public diplomacy, and digital diplomacy are not appropriate in the current circumstances. Therefore, a new concept is proposed: digital media diplomacy.

Informing and influencing foreign opinion on US policies and actions, winning the war of ideas, and broadcasting strategy to win media wars; 4 articles. Contents: Public diplomacy comes of age, by Christopher Ross; Deeds speak louder than words, by Lamis Andoni; Winning the war of ideas, by Anthony J. Blinken; A broadcasting strategy to win media wars, by Edward Kaufman.

Does the us president seek a war to end all war in the Middle East? Apocalyptic thinking is hardly a novelty when it comes to the United States, or to diplomacy. A look back at the 17th century, and the evolution of international thinking since, reminds us how durable such thinking can be.

Summary
In late 2011 and early 2012, the People's Republic of China drew on its most unique diplomatic tool: the giant panda. Although this phenomenon is widely covered by the global media, the practice of panda diplomacy is only barely discussed in diplomatic or international relations studies. This article uses the most recent revival of this diplomatic practice for a closer analysis and locates it as a special version of animal diplomacy within the frame of public diplomacy. It first argues that panda diplomacy is — besides all the efforts to promote and support animal conservation and biological research — a political undertaking, which is symbolically used by the Chinese government to win hearts and minds in selected foreign countries. Second, it highlights an important aspect of some Chinese public diplomacy initiatives, namely China's ability to integrate international partners in its attempts to shape its global image.

AbstractParliamentarians have for decades been present and active in the international arena. 'Parliamentary diplomacy', however, has only quite recently become the common term used to describe the wide range of international activities undertaken by members of parliament in order to increase mutual understanding between countries, to improve scrutiny of government, to represent their people better, and to increase the democratic legitimacy of inter-governmental institutions. It is perhaps a sign of the times that this term has now been coined. The increased blurring of boundaries between national and foreign affairs means that parliamentarians must consider issues put before them with a global mindset. Correspondingly, the significance of international parliamentary contacts is growing, and it is unlikely to cease to do so in the coming years.

Abstract
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent emergence of "Zoom diplomacy," scholarship on digital diplomacy has shifted attention from the nexus between social media and foreign policy to exploring the use of digital technologies in diplomatic encounters. While these studies have generated important insights on the affordances and limitations of digital diplomacy, we know much less about the impact of digitalization on the gendered hierarchies and power dynamics that characterize diplomatic practices. In what ways does digitalization of diplomacy shape these hierarchical and gendered practices of diplomacy? In taking stock of recent empirical findings on digital diplomacy, the analysis reviews the varied effects of digitalization on women's diplomatic agency. Focusing on peace diplomacy, it suggests that digitalization of diplomacy produces ambivalent agency where digitalization opens up some opportunities for disrupting gendered diplomatic practices, but within patriarchal gender structures. The analysis highlights the ways in which digital diplomatic agency and competence are shaped by gendered material and normative structures, suggesting that on the borders of what is conventionally regarded as diplomacy, digitalization may be reinforcing diplomacy as a masculine practice.

Diplomacy is no longer restricted to a single vocation nor implemented exclusively through interaction amongst official representatives. In exploring the challenges that these transformations produce, this work surveys firstly, thegenealogyof diplomacy as a profession, tracing how it changed from a civic duty into a vocation requiring training and the acquisition of specific knowledge and skills. Secondly, using the lens of thesociologyof professions, the development of diplomacy as a distinctive profession is examined, including its importance for the consolidation of the power of modern nation-states. Thirdly, it examines how the landscape of professional diplomacy is being diversified and enriched by a series of non-state actors, with their corresponding professionals, transforming thephenomenologyof contemporary diplomacy. Rather than seeing this pluralization of diplomatic actors in negative terms as thedeprofessionalization of diplomacy, we frame these trends astransprofessionalization, that is, as a productive development that reflects the expanded diplomatic space and the intensified pace of global interconnections and networks, and the new possibilities they unleash for practising diplomacy in different milieus.