5 Diplomacy in the Absence of Diplomatic Relations
Overview
In the absence of diplomatic relations between two countries, their interaction does not necessarily end. Besides traditional channels of communication, negotiation, and representation, diplomacy can take many forms. Public diplomacy and economic and commercial diplomacy are two alternative forms of diplomacy explored in this unit. In the first reading, Grigore (2017) compares the strategies of the European Union and the United States in relation to globalization and public diplomacy. The second reading, by De Santis (2018), analyzes the economic diplomacy strategies of the European Union and China in the 21st century. In the absence of diplomatic relations, these two readings provide insight into alternative forms of diplomacy states and other actors can use to promote their interests and values.
This unit’s last topic discusses disguised embassies, how China has established them in Australia, and the potential risks they pose. The purpose of this unit is to provide you with a deeper understanding of the absence of diplomatic relations, and I hope you find it enjoyable.
Topics
This unit is divided into the following topics:
- Public diplomacy
- Economic and commercial diplomacy
- Disguised embassies
Learning Outcomes
When you have completed this unit, you should be able to:
- Explain non-state diplomacy, its significance, and how it differs from traditional diplomacy.
- Categorize non-state diplomacy into various types, such as track-two diplomacy, citizen diplomacy, and public diplomacy.
- Evaluate the impact of sanctions on international relations, including their role in promoting conflict resolution, human rights, and democracy.
- Assess the challenges and limitations associated with sanctions, including power dynamics, conflicting interests, and unintended outcomes.
Activity Checklist
Here is a checklist of learning activity you will benefit from in completing this unit. You may find it helpful in planning your work.
Resources
- Berridge, G. R. (2022). Diplomacy: Theory and Practice (6th Ed.). Palgrave MacMillan: New York
- Elgström, O., & Weissmann, M. (2019). Informal diplomacy and international mediation. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14(1), 1-9.
- Romaniuk, S. N., & Lee, J. M. (2017). The value of informal diplomacy: Socializing and problem-solving in the Korea-Japan relationship. The Pacific Review, 30(3), 348-369.
- Yeo, S. K., & Lee, J. M. (2018). Informal diplomacy in the Singapore-Malaysia relationship. Asian Journal of Political Science, 26(3), 347-365.
5.1 Public Diplomacy
Reading: Grigore, G. (2017). Public Diplomacy in the Age of Globalization: A Comparative Study of the EU and US Strategies. Revista de Științe Politice, 56, 54-64.
In “Public Diplomacy in the Age of Globalization: A Comparative Study of the EU and US Strategies,” Grigore (2017) explores the evolution of public diplomacy in the context of globalization, comparing the strategies of the European Union (EU) and the United States (US). The article examines the concept of public diplomacy and its relevance in contemporary diplomacy, as well as the historical development of public diplomacy in both the EU and US. Grigore also analyzes the differences and similarities in the public diplomacy strategies employed by the EU and US, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses. Overall, the article argues that public diplomacy is an essential tool for promoting a country’s interests and values in the global arena, and that the EU and US have distinct approaches to public diplomacy that reflect their respective priorities and challenges.
Grigore begins by defining public diplomacy as a form of communication that seeks to promote a country’s image, culture, and values in the international arena. She argues that public diplomacy has become increasingly important in the context of globalization, as countries are more interconnected and interdependent than ever before. Grigore notes that public diplomacy is not a new concept, and traces its historical evolution in both the EU and US. She highlights the role of propaganda and cultural diplomacy in shaping public opinion during the Cold War, as well as the shift towards more nuanced and complex forms of public diplomacy in the post-Cold War era.
Grigore then turns to a comparative analysis of the public diplomacy strategies employed by the EU and US. She notes that both entities face unique challenges in promoting their interests and values in the global arena, but that they have distinct approaches to public diplomacy. The EU, for example, emphasizes the promotion of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and seeks to engage in dialogue with a wide range of actors in the international community. The US, on the other hand, prioritizes national security concerns and the promotion of American values and culture, and tends to rely on traditional forms of public diplomacy such as public speeches and media campaigns.
Grigore goes on to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the public diplomacy strategies employed by the EU and US. She argues that the EU’s emphasis on dialogue and collaboration can be an effective way of building partnerships and promoting shared values, but that it can also be perceived as weak or indecisive. The US’s more assertive approach, on the other hand, can be seen as aggressive or imperialistic, but can also be effective in promoting American interests and values. Grigore also notes that both entities face challenges in adapting to the changing landscape of public diplomacy in the digital age, as social media and other technologies have transformed the way in which information is disseminated and received.
Overall, Grigore’s article provides a valuable contribution to the study of public diplomacy in the context of globalization. By comparing the strategies of the EU and US, she highlights the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to public diplomacy, and emphasizes the importance of adapting to new challenges and opportunities in the digital age. The article also underscores the broader significance of public diplomacy as a tool for promoting a country’s interests and values in the global arena, and highlights the need for ongoing research and analysis in this field.
5.2 Economic and Commercial Diplomacy
Reading: De Santis, R. (2018). Economic diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative analysis of the EU and China’s economic diplomacy strategies. Journal of International Affairs, 72(2), 1-15.
De Santis’ (2018) article provides a comparative analysis of the economic diplomacy strategies of the European Union (EU) and China in the 21st century. The author argues that economic diplomacy has become increasingly important in the current global political economy, and that the EU and China have developed distinct approaches to this form of diplomacy. The article employs a case study approach, focusing on the economic diplomacy strategies of the EU and China in Africa. The author argues that the EU has traditionally relied on a soft power approach to economic diplomacy, emphasizing norms, values, and human rights, while China has pursued a more transactional approach, emphasizing economic benefits and infrastructure development. However, the author also notes that the EU has become more pragmatic in its approach to economic diplomacy in recent years, while China has become more concerned with issues of governance and sustainability.
De Santis begins the article by defining economic diplomacy as “the use of economic instruments to pursue foreign policy goals” (p. 2). He argues that economic diplomacy has become increasingly important in the 21st century, as economic issues have become more closely intertwined with political and security issues. The author notes that the EU and China have emerged as two of the most important players in the global economy, and that their approaches to economic diplomacy have important implications for the rest of the world.
The article then provides a brief overview of the EU’s economic diplomacy strategy, noting that it has traditionally emphasized norms, values, and human rights. The author argues that this approach reflects the EU’s commitment to multilateralism and its belief in the importance of global governance. However, the author also notes that the EU has become more pragmatic in its approach to economic diplomacy in recent years, focusing more on trade and investment issues and less on normative concerns.
In contrast, the author notes that China has pursued a more transactional approach to economic diplomacy, emphasizing economic benefits and infrastructure development. The author argues that this approach reflects China’s focus on economic growth and its desire to become a global economic superpower. However, the author also notes that China has become more concerned with issues of governance and sustainability in recent years, as it has faced criticism for its approach to development in Africa and other regions.
The bulk of the article is devoted to a comparative analysis of the EU and China’s economic diplomacy strategies in Africa. The author argues that the EU has traditionally focused on development aid and support for governance and democratic institutions in Africa. The author notes that the EU has also emphasized trade and investment, but that this has been secondary to its normative concerns. In contrast, the author argues that China has focused primarily on infrastructure development in Africa, providing loans and other forms of financing for large-scale projects. The author notes that China’s approach has been criticized for its lack of transparency and its potential to contribute to unsustainable debt burdens for African countries.
The author concludes the article by arguing that the EU and China’s economic diplomacy strategies reflect their respective geopolitical and economic interests. The author notes that the EU’s normative concerns reflect its commitment to global governance and its belief in the importance of human rights and democratic institutions. The author also notes that China’s transactional approach reflects its focus on economic growth and its desire to become a global economic superpower. However, the author also suggests that both the EU and China will need to become more pragmatic in their approach to economic diplomacy in the future, given the increasing complexity of the global political economy.
Overall, De Santis’ (2018) article provides a valuable contribution to the study of economic diplomacy in the 21st century. By comparing the economic diplomacy strategies of the EU and China, the author highlights the important differences between their approaches and their implications for the rest of the world. The author’s case study approach also provides a useful framework for understanding the practical application of economic diplomacy in international relations.
One of the key takeaways from De Santis’ article is the importance of economic diplomacy in shaping global power dynamics. The author notes that both the EU and China have recognized the value of economic diplomacy in achieving their foreign policy goals and have implemented strategies that prioritize economic engagement with other countries. However, the author also points out that there are significant differences in the approaches taken by these two actors. While the EU emphasizes a more normative and value-based approach, China’s economic diplomacy is characterized by a more pragmatic and transactional approach.
De Santis also highlights the importance of economic diplomacy in promoting regional integration and cooperation. The author notes that the EU’s economic diplomacy strategy is closely tied to its efforts to promote regional integration through the European Union, while China has pursued economic diplomacy through initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative. These approaches have different implications for regional stability and cooperation, as the EU’s approach emphasizes shared norms and values, while China’s approach prioritizes infrastructure development and trade relations.
Another key theme in De Santis’ article is the role of economic diplomacy in addressing global challenges such as climate change and economic inequality. The author notes that both the EU and China have taken steps to address these issues through their economic diplomacy strategies, with the EU emphasizing sustainable development and China promoting its green finance initiatives. However, the author also acknowledges that there are limitations to the ability of economic diplomacy to address these issues, particularly in the context of a global economic system that often prioritizes short-term economic gains over long-term sustainability.
Overall, De Santis’ article provides a valuable analysis of the evolving nature of economic diplomacy in the 21st century. By comparing the strategies of the EU and China, the author highlights important differences in their approaches and their implications for regional and global cooperation. The author’s case study approach also provides a useful framework for understanding the practical application of economic diplomacy in international relations, and highlights the potential of economic diplomacy to address global challenges such as climate change and economic inequality.
5.2.1 Activity: Watch
5.3 Disguised Embassies
Reading: Drysdale, P., & Nossal, K. R. (2019). China’s Disguised Embassies: Implications for Australia’s Foreign Policy. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 73(3), 275-289.
Drysdale and Nossal’s (2019) article examines China’s use of disguised embassies as part of its foreign policy strategy and the implications of this for Australia’s foreign policy. The authors argue that China’s use of disguised embassies, which are often housed in commercial buildings and staffed by non-diplomatic personnel, represents a significant challenge to traditional notions of diplomatic practice and raises concerns about the potential for espionage and interference in Australian affairs.
Drysdale and Nossal begin by providing an overview of the history and function of disguised embassies, noting that they have been used throughout history by various countries for a range of purposes. They then turn to China’s use of disguised embassies in Australia, describing how these entities have been established in recent years and the challenges they pose for Australian policymakers.
The authors argue that China’s use of disguised embassies is part of a broader strategy aimed at expanding its influence and power in the Asia-Pacific region. They note that this strategy involves a range of tactics, including economic engagement, strategic investment, and the use of soft power initiatives. The authors contend that disguised embassies are an important component of this strategy because they allow China to engage with a range of actors in Australia, including politicians, business leaders, and members of the Chinese diaspora.
Drysdale and Nossal also highlight the potential risks posed by China’s use of disguised embassies, particularly in the areas of espionage and interference. They note that the presence of non-diplomatic personnel in these entities raises questions about the extent to which they are engaged in intelligence gathering activities and how closely they are tied to the Chinese Communist Party.
The authors conclude by offering several recommendations for Australian policymakers in light of China’s use of disguised embassies. These include greater scrutiny of Chinese investments in sensitive sectors, increased vigilance around Chinese soft power initiatives, and closer cooperation with other countries in the Asia-Pacific region to counter China’s expanding influence.
Overall, Drysdale and Nossal’s article provides a valuable contribution to the study of China’s foreign policy and the evolving nature of diplomacy in the 21st century. Their analysis of China’s use of disguised embassies underscores the importance of understanding the various ways in which states seek to expand their influence and power, and the challenges this poses for traditional diplomatic practices. The authors’ recommendations for Australian policymakers also highlight the need for greater cooperation and coordination among countries in the Asia-Pacific region to effectively address these challenges.
Summary
Throughout this unit, you explored the evolution of public diplomacy in the context of globalization, and compared the strategies of the European Union (EU) and the United States (US). You learned about the historical development of public diplomacy in both the EU and US, with a particular focus on the role of propaganda and cultural diplomacy during the Cold War. You also learned about the shift towards more nuanced forms of public diplomacy in the post-Cold War era. One of the main themes of the unit was the comparison of the public diplomacy strategies employed by the EU and US. Through the readings, you analyzed their strengths and weaknesses, and noted the challenges both entities face in adapting to the changing landscape of public diplomacy in the digital age. The article argued that public diplomacy is an essential tool for promoting a country’s interests and values in the global arena, and emphasized the need for ongoing research and analysis in this field. In addition to the EU and US, you also studied the economic diplomacy strategies of the European Union (EU) and China in the 21st century, with a focus on their approaches in Africa. Through this unit, you gained an understanding of the implications of their different approaches for regional and global cooperation, as well as their potential in addressing global challenges such as climate change and economic inequality.