Guerrilla diplomacy

Last updated

Guerrilla diplomacy is a method of diplomacy that is identified as an alternative approach to the established common frameworks of international relations, being primarily articulated by Daryl Copeland [1] in response to the foreign policy outcomes of the War on Terror. In a sense, the responses to the major events of the late 20th century and the early 21st century which has brought major changes to the International Order is identified as in need of a new paradigm of diplomatic thinking in order to adapt to the needs of modern diplomacy.

Contents

Examples cited of what may be identified as guerrilla diplomacy include: various activities undertaken by Sergio Vieira de Mello on behalf of the United Nations in Cambodia, former Yugoslavia and East Timor, 1991–2002; Ambassador Ken Taylor's actions during the Iran hostage crisis of 1979; Swedish Diplomat Raoul Wallenberg's efforts to save lives during World War II, and Canadian Fisheries Minister Brian Tobin's public display, from a barge in the East River opposite UN headquarters, of undersized fishing nets seized from a Spanish trawler during the "cod war" between the United Kingdom and Iceland, in 1994. In 2018, it was effectively applied in the United Kingdom in the Windrush scandal to guide the strategy employed by Guy Hewitt and fellow Caribbean Community high commissioners in London to transform the Windrush issue into a national concern in Britain and bring about a major policy u-turn. [2] [3]

Background

Within the book Guerrilla Diplomacy: Rethinking International Relations, a comparison to the principles that underlies Guerrilla Warfare was used, identifying some of the traits that Copeland listed as being also of utility within the context of international relations and cross-cultural diplomatic outreach, namely that of 'agility, adaptability, improvisation, self-sufficiency, and popular support’. [4]

The book have been favourably reviewed by Professor Nicholas Cull as "essential to navigating the diplomatic rapids of the twenty-first century", and its analysis as a "milestone" in "diplomacy's current revolution" by Simon Anholt, among other notable figures offering praise for the framework proposed in this context. [5]

GD responded to the marginalisation of dialogue, negotiation, and collaboration as tools of international relations and arises due to a belief that more resolute diplomatic approaches have been sidelined as a result of the militarisation of international policy which has been carried forward from the Cold War to the Global War on Terror.[ citation needed ] It was designed in response to the challenges of globalisation, and is at home in that transformed operating environment. The principle of creating and sustaining an atmosphere of confidence, trust and respect has been identified as a necessity in order to address those perceived flaws of the current policy approaches in particular.

Discussion

Guerrilla diplomacy operates using methods distinct from those employed in traditional diplomacy and moves contemporary thinking on public diplomacy and soft power towards new frontiers.[ citation needed ] GD takes full account of the challenges to development and security that are embedded in globalisation, and is designed to address the range of global issues, ranging from pandemic disease to climate change to resource scarcity, which are rooted in science and driven by technology. Copeland discusses the importance of this connection between science and diplomacy in his article for the journal Science & Diplomacy, entitled “Bridging the Chasm: Why Science and Technology Must Become Priorities for Diplomacy and International Policy.” [6] It is based on meaningful exchange in two directions, in that messages are transmitted outwards, to interlocutors in the field, and are also fed back into the policy development process. At its best, therefore, GD results in altered behaviour and outcomes in both receiving and sending states.[ citation needed ]

Guerrilla diplomacy highlights the importance of abstract thinking, advanced problem-solving skills and rapid-adaptive cognition. It pushes diplomatic practice into more distant, less state-centric places, from shanty towns to conflict zones. The effectiveness of GD turns on the collection of tactical and strategic intelligence, on the development of alternative networks, and on the production of demonstrable results by boring deep into the interstices of power and navigating pathways inaccessible to others. Success at these endeavours may involve relying on technology, and especially the new media as a force multiplier, on taking a less formal approach to representation, and, perhaps most importantly, on thinking creatively, listening carefully and analysing rigorously.

The guerrilla diplomat is cross-culturally literate and capable, swimming with ease in the sea of the people rather than flopping around like a fish out of water when outside the embassy walls. Ever inventive and prepared to improvise in order to achieve objectives, the guerrilla diplomat’s ears will be to the ground, and eyes on the horizon — or tree line, or rooftops, or whatever is required to get the job done. Yet the guerrilla diplomat's play-book will be informed more by an appreciation of the unconventional and an irregular interpretation of the principles of public relations than by any reading of the doctrine of people’s war.

Comfort with risk, an affinity for outreach and a serious interest in people — in what they do and how they think about the world — are integral to the GD territory. The guerrilla diplomat will suffocate if confined to organisational silos and drown if buried under layers of bureaucratic overburden. Standard operating procedures, awaiting instructions and doing things “by the book” may at times be necessary, but will rarely be sufficient in resolving the complex problems which characterise the sorts of fast-paced, high-risk environments best suited to GD.[ citation needed ]

In political communications generally, and for guerrilla diplomacy in particular, the how is at least as important as the what. The guerrilla diplomat is resilient, maximizing self-reliance while minimising need for the usual investment in plant, infrastructure and logistical support. Cautious introverts and ambitious careerists need not apply. Nor the reckless or insensitive: guerrilla diplomats have the street smarts to avoid alienating either their hosts — or their home government colleagues. [ citation needed ]

Key Concepts

ACTE — a de-territorialized world order model designed to replace the Cold War-era. First, Second and Third World formulation by capturing the essential elements of the globalisation age. The new model may be applied to individuals, groups, neighbourhoods, cities, countries and/or regions. It consists of the:

A or advancing world, which controls the wealth and whose economic and political advantage is growing;

C or contingent world, whose prospects are uncertain and will be determined by future developments, which could tip in either direction;

T or tertiary world, characterized by endemic poverty and whose relative position is subservient or dependent;

E or excluded world, which is for the most part outside of globalization’s matrix.[ citation needed ]

Diplomatic ecosystem — an organic, multi-tiered, interdependent diplomatic whole consisting of the foreign ministry and foreign service; individual diplomats; departments and agencies of government with international policy responsibilities or content; and non-state actors.

Geodiplomatics — a systematic, non-violent and communications-based approach to the effective management of the world’s strategic nexuses.

Global political economy of knowledge — a collaborative, heuristic and virtual store of the world's information and expertise, accessible principally through the new media, which pervades, supports and reinforces critical productive, transnational and power relationships, including the digital divide, on the ground.

Guerrilla diplomacy — a cross-cultural, enabled, and grassroots approach to diplomatic practice characterized by autonomy, agility, adaptability and resilience; a premium on intelligence gathering and analysis; access to global political economy of knowledge; the ability to act with souplesse.

Heteropolarity - an emerging world system in which competing states or groups of states derive their relative power and influence from dissimilar sources - social, economic, political, military, cultural. The disparate vectors which empower these heterogeneous poles are difficult to compare or measure; stability in the age of globalization will therefore depend largely upon the diplomatic functions of knowledge-driven problem solving and complex balancing.

Representational footprint — the physical evidence, or lack thereof, of diplomatic presence and infrastructure.

Souplesse — the ability to connect with the global political economy of knowledge for the remedial application of scientific and technological capacity in order to engage specific threats and challenges, typically in support of security and development.[ citation needed ]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diplomat</span> Person appointed by a state to conduct diplomacy with another state or international organization

A diplomat is a person appointed by a state, intergovernmental, or nongovernmental institution to conduct diplomacy with one or more other states or international organizations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International relations</span> Study of relationships between two or more states

International relations (IR) are the interactions among sovereign states. The scientific study of those interactions is also referred to as international studies, international politics, or international affairs. In a broader sense, the study of IR, in addition to multilateral relations, concerns all activities among states—such as war, diplomacy, trade, and foreign policy—as well as relations with and among other international actors, such as intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs), international legal bodies, and multinational corporations (MNCs). There are several schools of thought within IR, of which the most prominent are realism, liberalism, and constructivism.

In politics, hard power is the use of military and economic means to influence the behavior or interests of other political bodies. This form of political power is often aggressive (coercion), and is most immediately effective when imposed by one political body upon another of less military and/or economic power. Hard power contrasts with soft power, which comes from diplomacy, culture and history.

International relations theory is the study of international relations (IR) from a theoretical perspective. It seeks to explain behaviors and outcomes in international politics. The four most prominent schools of thought are realism, liberalism, constructivism, and rational choice. Whereas realism and liberalism make broad and specific predictions about international relations, constructivism and rational choice are methodological approaches that focus on certain types of social explanation for phenomena.

Diplomatic history deals with the history of international relations between states. Diplomatic history can be different from international relations in that the former can concern itself with the foreign policy of one state while the latter deals with relations between two or more states. Diplomatic history tends to be more concerned with the history of diplomacy, but international relations concern more with current events and creating a model intended to shed explanatory light on international politics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign policy</span> Governments strategy in relating with other nations

Foreign policy, also known as external policy, is the set of strategies and actions a state employs in its interactions with other states, unions, and international entities. It encompasses a wide range of objectives, including defense and security, economic benefits, and humanitarian assistance. The formulation of foreign policy is influenced by various factors such as domestic considerations, the behavior of other states, and geopolitical strategies. Historically, the practice of foreign policy has evolved from managing short-term crises to addressing long-term international relations, with diplomatic corps playing a crucial role in its development.

In international relations, public diplomacy broadly speaking, is any of the various government-sponsored efforts aimed at communicating directly with foreign publics to establish a dialogue designed to inform and influence with the aim of building support for the state's strategic objectives. These also include propaganda. As the international order has changed over the twentieth century, so has the practice of public diplomacy. Its practitioners use a variety of instruments and methods ranging from personal contact and media interviews to the internet and educational exchanges.

In diplomacy, an attaché is a person who is assigned to the diplomatic or administrative staff of a higher placed person or another service or agency. Although a loanword from French, in English the word is not modified according to gender.

Nation branding aims to measure, build and manage the reputation of countries. In the book Diplomacy in a Globalizing World: Theories and Practices, the authors define nation branding as "the application of corporate marketing concepts and techniques to countries, in the interests of enhancing their reputation in international relations." Many nations try to make brands in order to build relationships between different actors that are not restricted to nations. It extends to public and private sectors in a nation and helps with nationalism. States also want to participate in multilateral projects. Some approaches applied, such as an increasing importance on the symbolic value of products, have led countries to emphasize their distinctive characteristics. The branding and image of a nation-state "and the successful transference of this image to its exports - is just as important as what they actually produce and sell." This is also referred to as country-of-origin effect.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Cox (academic)</span> British academic

Michael E. Cox is a British academic and international relations scholar. He is currently Emeritus Professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics (LSE) and Director of LSE IDEAS. He also teaches for the TRIUM Global Executive MBA Program, an alliance of NYU Stern and the London School of Economics and HEC School of Management.

In international relations, the term smart power refers to the combination of hard power and soft power strategies. It is defined by the Center for Strategic and International Studies as "an approach that underscores the necessity of a strong military, but also invests heavily in alliances, partnerships, and institutions of all levels to expand one's influence and establish legitimacy of one's action."

Daryl Copeland is a Canadian analyst, author, speaker and educator specializing in diplomacy, international policy, public management and global issues. Copeland's institutional affiliations include the University of Toronto's Munk Centre for International Studies as a senior fellow, and the USC Center on Public Diplomacy as a research fellow.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diplomacy</span> Practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or states

Diplomacy comprises spoken or written communication by representatives of state, intergovernmental, or non-governmental institutions intended to influence events in the international system.

Science diplomacy recalls that scientific exchanges and cross-border collaboration inform the shape of international relations. It is a global phenomenon and process by which nations, international organizations and non-state actors represent themselves and their interests in the international arena. Science diplomacy includes a number of formal or informal technical, research-based, academic or engineering exchanges. It can be seen as a subfield of international relations and typically involves at some level interactions between researchers and officials involved in diplomacy. Science diplomacy aims to address common problems. However, especially in times of international tensions and wars, it is unclear if and how the actual policies and associated organizations can meet the expectations placed on science diplomacy.

Nabil Ayad is an academic in the field of diplomacy and international governance. He is currently a member of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and an Associate Member of the London Diplomatic Association.

Dashdorj Bayarkhuu is a Mongolian research professor, columnist and writer and former ambassador of Mongolia to Egypt. Prior to his nomination to the ambassadorial position, Bayarkhuu worked in media, defense, diplomatic and educational sectors. After his tenure as ambassador in Cairo, Bayarkhuu returned to academic field as a Visiting Professor of International Politics and Contracted Researcher. He joined the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia as Deputy Director, Policy Planning & Co-ordination Department in 2015–2016.

Katarzyna Emanuela Pisarska is a Polish social entrepreneur, civic activist and academic, specializing in diplomacy and foreign policy.

Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy is the current diplomatic and foreign policy doctrine of the People's Republic of China. It is a part of the larger Xi Jinping Thought, which is derived from the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party Xi Jinping. According to Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi, Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy is "the fundamental guideline for China's diplomatic work is an epoch-making milestone in the diplomatic theory of New China." The main point of Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy is to orient as much of diplomacy as possible to the bilateral level, while still supporting the formal architecture of the international system. In terms of China's foreign policy, Xi Jinping's "Major Country Diplomacy" doctrine has replaced the earlier Deng Xiaoping era slogan of "keep a low profile and build up power" and has legitimized a more active role for China on the world stage, particularly with regards to reform of the international order, engaging in open ideological competition with the West, and assuming a greater responsibility for global affairs in accordance with China's rising power and status.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wolf warrior diplomacy</span> 21st-century Chinese diplomatic tactic

Wolf warrior diplomacy is a confrontational form of public diplomacy adopted by Chinese diplomats in the late 2010s. The term was coined by Western media from the title of the Chinese action film Wolf Warrior 2 (2017). This approach is in contrast to the prior diplomatic practices of Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin, and Hu Jintao, taoguang yanghui, or "hide one's talent and bide one's time", which had emphasized the use of cooperative rhetoric and the avoidance of controversy.

Data diplomacy can be defined in two different ways: use of data as a means and tool to conduct national diplomacy, or the use of diplomatic actions and skills of various stakeholders to enable and facilitate data access, understanding, and use. Data can help and influence many aspects of the diplomatic process, such as information gathering, negotiations, consular services, humanitarian response and foreign policy development. The second kind of data diplomacy challenges traditional models of diplomacy and can be conducted without tracks and diplomats. Drivers of change in diplomacy are also emerging from industry, academia and directly from the public.

References

  1. ↑ Copeland, Daryl (2010-04-06). "Guerrilla Diplomacy for the 21st Century: Rethinking International Relations in a World of Insecurity". E-International Relations. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  2. ↑ "Winning the Windrush Battle". Chatham House. Retrieved 2018-06-11.
  3. ↑ "Windrush Scandal". CNN. Retrieved 2018-04-17.
  4. ↑ Copeland, Daryl (2009). Guerrilla diplomacy : rethinking international relations. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers. p. 207. ISBN   978-1-58826-679-8. OCLC   299692981.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link)
  5. ↑ "Lynne Rienner Publishers | Guerrilla Diplomacy Rethinking International Relations". www.rienner.com. Retrieved 2023-01-20.
  6. ↑ Copeland, Daryl (July 29, 2015). "Bridging the Chasm: Why Science and Technology Must Become Priorities for Diplomacy and International Policy". Science and Diplomacy.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.