Volume 11 (2016)
Issue 1Issue 1 at Brill.com
Radical changes in diplomacy’s global environment challenge traditional categories in diplomacy’s study and practice. The “foreign” and “domestic” divide is blurred beyond easy recognition. Public diplomacy is no longer a separate instrument of diplomacy. The term marginalizes a public dimension that is now central in diplomatic practice. This article examines four boundaries that both separate and connect: (1) a distinction between diplomacy and foreign policy that benefits diplomacy studies and clarifies choices in practice; (2) a framework for diplomacy’s public dimension that connects types of diplomatic actors with process variables; (3) a separation between diplomacy and civil society that distinguishes diplomacy from other relationships between groups; and (4) characteristics of diplomacy and governance that explain how they differ from other political and social categories. Diplomatic and governance actors are categorized in trans-governmental and polylateral networks. Civil society and private sector actors are categorized in cosmopolitan and private governance networks.
By applying the rational choice principal–agent model, this article examines the European Union member states’ principal control of the European External Action Service (EEAS) agent. More specifically, the article applies mechanisms of agency monitoring, control and sanctions that are inherent in the principal–agent model to analyse the establishment and functioning of the eeas. These mechanisms aim to ensure the eeas’s compliance with its mandate, thereby curtailing its ability to pursue own objectives that are independent from the principal. The findings reveal that the eeas is tightly controlled by the eu member states. Moreover the European Commission has tools to exercise horizontal checks vis-à-vis the EEAS. The application of the principal–agent model to control the eeas is not without its limits. The model falls short of conceptualizing the role of the European Parliament, which remains an outlier to this model.
M. Karen Walker
This article presents a rhetorical critique of diplomatic and public discourse that emanated from a joint commitment of the United States and India to pursue full civilian nuclear cooperation. The article argues that four narratives combined to transform the US–India relationship from estrangement to engagement. The narratives of exceptionalism, kinship, sojourning and convergence changed perspectives on the context, social order and substance of the US–India relationship, effectuating India’s movement from outside to inside the nuclear non-proliferation regime, and constituting the United States and India as strategic partners.
This article emphasizes the more-than-human nature of foreign policy formation and diplomatic practice, as found in an examination of nineteenth-century Parliament Select Committee testimony regarding the intersection of everyday bureaucratic practice and the material context of the British Foreign Office. These records indicate both how the changing world of diplomacy at this time (including new states and communication technologies) materially impacted the Foreign Office, as well as the affective atmosphere experienced by its employees, through an excess of paper. Debates over how the new Foreign Office ought to be built reveal concerns about the circulation of paper, bodies, light and air in a drive for efficiency. These historical materialities speak to our understanding of contemporary changes occurring within the world of diplomacy, including the rise of digital technologies and the new skills needed among diplomats, as well as inform our understanding of the exercise of power within assemblages.
Publication date: 27 November 2016
Issue 2-3: Parliamentary Diplomacy Uncovered: European and Global Perspectives
Special issue edited by Stelios Stavridis and Davor JančićIssue 2-3 at Brill.com
Stelios Stavridis and Davor Jančić
This article examines the role of the European Parliament in ensuring democratic participation in European Union external relations and global governance. Although the Lisbon Treaty has reinforced the European Parliament’s foreign affairs prerogatives, many obstacles hinder its influence. This prompts the European Parliament to invest considerable institutional resources not only to counterbalance the Commission and the Council and reduce information asymmetry, but also to enhance its posture on the world stage through value-oriented and region-oriented parliamentary diplomacy. The article argues that by conducting world diplomacy, the European Parliament generates critical mass for its institutional empowerment by a crafty application of its treaty rights, by means of non-legislative instruments, and by establishing bilateral and multilateral diplomatic contacts with parliamentary and executive bodies worldwide. The European Parliament thereby attempts to portray itself as an actor without which decisions cannot be made.
Luigi Gianniti and Nicola Lupo
This contribution argues, counterintuitively, that the most important functions exercised by the European Parliament’s President are the external ones, which are expressly laid down in Rule 22(4) of the European Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. Among these, specific attention is devoted to the President’s ‘diplomatic functions’. This article analyses the presidencies of Jerzy Buzek and Martin Schulz and argues that these ‘diplomatic functions’ have been reinforced because of intensification of the European Union’s international activities as well as the European Parliament’s enhanced post-Lisbon Treaty powers in eu foreign policy. It is also observed that these functions are exercised differently depending on the personal and political preferences of each President. While Jerzy Buzek’s Presidency was oriented more towards the eastern European Union, the two consecutive Presidencies of Martin Schulz veered more towards the European Union’s south.
Sarah Delputte, Cristina Fasone and Fabio Longo
This article focuses on the contribution that the European Parliament’s standing committees, delegations and inter-parliamentary assemblies make as diplomatic actors in the post-Lisbon Treaty period. These three types of bodies and institutions are grouped together, because in practice they work in complementary ways. The committees play a coordinating role, the delegations act as ‘embassies on the move’ and the participation of the European Parliament in inter-parliamentary assemblies represents the clearest institutional sign of the European Parliament’s external action. The article focuses on a case study: the involvement of the European Parliament in the EU’s partnership with the African, Caribbean and Pacific group of countries (ACP) through the Development Committee (DEVE), the competent European Parliament delegation, and the activities within the Joint Parliamentary Assembly. The article aims to analyse whether and how the European Parliament is able to play a distinctive diplomatic role through its standing committees, delegations and inter-parliamentary assemblies.
Informal structures are often key to the perceptions by Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) of their role and also of how the European Parliament is perceived worldwide. Intergroups are one of the most remarkable examples of this: they tend to focus on a specific theme, attract the interest and involvement of individual MEPs, and profit from significant input by external actors such as interest groups or civil-society organizations. The role of intergroups in the international relations of the European Parliament is studied little in the literature and is thus the focus of this article. Through an assessment of their composition, organization and external support, the article discusses the extent to which informal structures such as intergroups contribute to the European Parliament’s international action, particularly on human rights matters.
Valentina Rita Scotti
After the Treaties of Rome in 1957, Turkey started negotiations with the European Communities to define a framework for cooperation. The result was the Ankara Agreement (1965), which established economic cooperation and provided for an EU–Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), conceived as a discussion forum to encourage the democratic transition of Turkey. This article analyses the main phases and obstacles in Turkey’s accession process, focusing on relations between the European Parliament and the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, and on the effectiveness of European Parliament and JPC activities. The analysis particularly considers the respect for the Copenhagen political criteria with regard to minorities’ rights, the Cyprus dispute, and the role of religion in Turkey. The concluding remarks discuss the European Parliament’s role in overcoming the current deadlock in the Turkish accession process.
Franklin De Vrieze
This article analyses the contribution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the South-East European Cooperation Process (SEECP) to regional dialogue among parliamentarians. First, it examines the transformation of the SEECP Parliamentary Dimension into a Parliamentary Assembly (SEECP PA). Second, the article analyses two case studies: the participation of Kosovo in the SEECP PA; and the establishment of a Secretariat for the SEECP PA. These two case studies are selected because they have given rise to intensive political dialogue, thus providing a basis for the conduct of parliamentary diplomacy. They demonstrate the potential contribution of the SEECP Parliamentary Dimension to conflict resolution, while acknowledging the dependence of the Parliamentary Assembly on the political processes handled through intergovernmental diplomacy. The article shows the limited, although positive, impact of the institutionalisation of this Parliamentary Assembly on parliamentary relations in South-East Europe.
This article analyses the history and practice of the involvement of the US Congress in inter-parliamentary cooperation and diplomacy, with a specific case study of its members’ involvement in the Parliamentary Assembly of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO PA), as a leading international parliamentary institution (IPI) in the field of international security. It argues that while members of Congress have participated in the activities of IPIs in the past, they mostly focus on domestic affairs and are therefore less keen on engaging with IPIs. Nevertheless, they do keep in close touch with transatlantic IPIs. This is in line with us foreign policy, which places transatlantic relations at the top of the United States’ strategic interests. The article focuses on Congressional participation in the work of the NATO PA before and during NATO’s enlargement. It shows that Congress and its members can help the NATO PA to play a visible role in transatlantic affairs.
China’s diplomacy has a dual source of influence: China’s written constitution; and its unwritten political rules. Under this framework, China’s parliamentary diplomacy is generally considered an important part of its overall diplomatic policy. With the strengthening of the political position of the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the reforms of its internal system, many forms of parliamentary diplomacy have been created inside the NPC, such as high-level contacts and mechanisms for regular inter-parliamentary exchanges. The NPC has also been actively engaging in multilateral diplomacy, including the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), to enhance its international presence. In this process, the NPC is gradually breaking away from its stereotypical role as a ‘rubber stamp’ and has partially restored its constitutional authority.
Konstantinos Magliveras and Asteris Huliaras
Parliaments in Africa have traditionally been sidelined with regard to security and peace issues. This article compares the Pan-African Parliament, the parliamentary organ of the African Union, with the Great Lakes Parliamentary Forum on Peace, better known as the Amani Forum, which started as an informal regional network and later developed more formal structures. The analysis focuses on the role of these two institutions in conflict prevention. While the Amani Forum provides an excellent example of the potential contribution of parliamentary forums to promoting and restoring peace, the Pan-African Parliament has been unable to operate as an effective parliamentary organ in conflict resolution and prevention. The article examines several factors that can explain the contrasting performances of the two institutions: their formal and informal structures; different membership and organizational structures; the density and quality of intra-institutional ties; as well as differences in geographical and thematic focus.
One of the main functions of international parliamentary institutions (IPIs) consists of conducting parallel diplomatic relations, known as parliamentary diplomacy, especially in the fields of peace-building, crisis management and democracy promotion. The effectiveness of this form of so-called ‘parliamentarization’ of international relations is often called into question, and can only be judged through systematic empirical work. This article aims at contributing to this debate by exploring the parliamentary diplomacy activities performed by one of the most prominent parliamentary actors in Euro–Mediterranean relations: the Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean (PAM). What kinds of tools has PAM adopted to implement its parliamentary diplomacy function? What is the impact of PAM’s parliamentary diplomacy? The article considers the following elements: legal and policy instruments; institutional features; functions performed while in session; activities directly addressing the national level; and parliamentary diplomacy as such. The period encompassed by the analysis ranges from 2006 to 2014.
The European Union is committed to consolidating and supporting democracy worldwide but, despite the increasing interdependence between Asia and Europe, the parliamentary dimension of their relationship remains largely absent. This article reviews the steps taken by the European Parliament to develop and strengthen EU–Asia relations, takes stock of the rare initiatives that have been launched in South and South-East Asia at the regional level, and seeks to explore the reasons why parliamentary diplomacy has not yet taken root. To these ends, the article analyses the respective roles of the executive and legislative branches of government and the current shortcomings in democratic governance in South and South-East Asia. It also discusses the lack of political will on the European side. In conclusion, the article argues that, despite those difficulties, timely and carefully planned development of parliamentary links between Asia and Europe could advance representative democracy in South and South-East Asia.
Publication date: 11 March 2016
Issue 4: ‘Other Diplomacies’ of Non-state Actors: The Case of Canadian-Asian Relations
Special issue edited by Susan J. Henders and Mary M. YoungIssue 4 at Brill.com
Susan J. Henders and Mary M. Young
Mary M. Young and Susan J. Henders
This article examines the diplomatic practices of non-state actors in the history of Canadian–Eastern Asian relations in order to theorize and show empirically how diplomacies make and can transform world orders. Analysing examples of trans-Pacific missionary, commercial and labour interactions from the late eighteenth century to the Second World War, the article points to how the diplomatic practices of non-state actors, often in everyday circumstances, enacted Canadian–Asian relations. They, in turn, constituted and challenged the hierarchical social relations of the European imperial world order that was linked with race, class, gender, civilization and culture — hierarchies that conditioned patterns of thought and action, in that order. The analysis uses and further develops the concept of ‘other diplomacies’, as introduced by Beier and Wylie, to highlight the centrality to world orders of practices that have a diplomatic character, even when the actors involved do not represent states.
China has had an important impact on the political mobilization of other forms of diplomacy in the Canadian province of Quebec. Quebec’s missionaries and Maoists have used cinema for propaganda purposes aimed at forging political opinions towards China. Quebec’s modest non-state actor (NSA) — the Quebec cinema lobby — has developed expertise and links with other institutions or actors — both non-state and state — and has had an impact on international relations. Quebec’s cinema is an important lobby participating in a coalition of NSAs that triggered and monitors the UNESCO Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. This article examines how Quebec’s cinema lobby has evolved, whether it has tried to influence Canadian government policies towards China and, more broadly, asks what the experience of Quebec filmmakers as non-state diplomatic actors suggests about the ways in which ‘other diplomacy’ can influence international relations.
Jean Michel Montsion
China’s recent interest and substantial investments in Canada’s natural resource sector have led some First Nations in British Columbia to undertake diplomatic activities to represent their interests to Chinese officials and investors. This article explores the interplay developing between the diplomatic activities of British Columbia’s First Nations and those of the Canadian state in the area of natural resource promotion. It does so by examining the diplomatic efforts of British Columbia’s First Nations Energy and Mining Council and the Canadian government’s Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement with China. The article argues that this interplay represents a struggle over diplomatic representation, in which British Columbia’s First Nations challenge the Canadian state’s monopoly on the representation of indigenous interests abroad, whereas the Canadian state constantly reframes indigenous perspectives on international affairs as a matter of domestic jurisdiction, in order to re-ground its control over Canadian foreign diplomatic practices.
The historical tension between the powers of states and the rights of individuals sets the context for this look at the evolving role of non-state actors in international relations. Global connectivity has diluted state power, blurred borders and added a new dimension of non-state actor empowerment. The author’s firsthand observations, drawn from a career as a Canadian diplomat, bear witness to the ever-increasing role of non-state actors in foreign policy and international relations. This practitioner’s perspective presents some personal observations on how non-state actors have helped to shape Canada–Asia relations, with brief and selective examples from the author’s work in and on Indonesia, Japan, Myanmar, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The piece also offers some concluding thoughts on the significance of this phenomenon for the broader conduct of international relations and the study of foreign policy.
- Erik Nemeth, Cultural Security: Evaluating the Power of Culture in International Affairs. London: Imperial College Press, 2015.
Publication date: 27 September 2016