Face-to-Face Diplomacy: Social Neuroscience and International Relations, written by Marcus Holmes, 2018

Diplomatica ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-144
Author(s):  
Susanna Erlandsson
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Wheeler

The purpose of this chapter is to show the limits of existing IR approaches to the question of how leaders can accurately interpret signals that are aimed at communicating their peaceful intent. The book’s argument is that it requires trust between sender and receiver for accurate signal interpretation and that this trust develops through face-to-face interaction and the process of bonding it makes possible. The five approaches to trust-building that are discussed in the chapter are: (1) ‘leap in the dark’; (2) incrementalist; (3) identity; (4) individualist; and (5) interpersonal. The chapter argues that none of these approaches adequately explains how trust can build between enemies, and hence how signals that are aimed at communicating peaceful intent can be accurately interpreted.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 672-697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deepak Nair

Face-saving is a ubiquitous yet under-theorized phenomenon in International Relations. Prevailing accounts refer to face-saving as a shorthand for status and reputation, as a “cultural” trait found outside Euro-American societies, and as a technique for defusing militarized inter-state crisis, without, however, an explanation of its source and repertoire. In this article, I argue that it is possible to recover face-saving from cultural essentialism, and that face-saving practices geared to avoid embarrassment are micro-level mechanisms that produce international institutions like diplomacy. Drawing on the work of sociologists Erving Goffman and Pierre Bourdieu, I propose a theory of face-saving that accounts for its source, effects, and variation. I evaluate this theory with a study of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a diplomacy that has long espoused a discourse of “saving face” couched in Asian cultural exceptionalism. I combine a political sociology of ASEAN’s ruling regimes with an ethnography of its diplomats based on 13 consecutive months of fieldwork in Jakarta, Indonesia, to substantiate this wider theoretical argument. I demonstrate that, first, ASEAN’s face-saving practices are rooted in the legacies of authoritarianism rather than essentialist “culture,” and, second, that face-saving practices enable performances of sovereign equality, diplomatic kinship, and conflict avoidance among ASEAN’s diplomats. This article grants a distinct conceptual space to face-saving in International Relations, contributes to international practice theory by situating practices in the context of state–society relations, and offers a novel interpretation of what the “ASEAN Way” of doing diplomacy looks like in practice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57
Author(s):  
Irwan Irwan ◽  
Monica Tiara ◽  
Rita Angraini

Purpose of this researsch is to describe the design of the blended learning learning model in the course of International Relations in the Department of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Negeri Padang. Blended Learning is a learning model that combines face-to-face lectures in class with online learning based on technology tools. This research is a qualitative research with descriptive analysis. Data is obtained through literature studies, documentation and asking for the opinions of experts related to the learning model that is appropriately implemented in learning in higher education. The results of this study are in the form of a learning model design with a combination of face-to-face learning with the use of technology in accordance with teaching materials and learning outcomes in the course of International Relations. Thus the pattern of interaction between lecturers and students is not always in the classroom but on various occasions who remain connected using internet technology tools. The blended learning design developed is expected to be coherent with the achievement of International Relations learning that has been compiled while increasing the mastery of technology by students and lecturers. 


Author(s):  
Emmanuelle Blanc

In spite of being criticised as ‘talking shops’ and easily replaced by technological innovations, dialogues – defined as face-to-face interactions in an institutionalised framework – remain a staple of international politics. While prevailing accounts have shown that dialogues help states advance their quest for security and profit, the key role dialogues play in the quest for recognition has been overlooked and remains undertheorised. Emphasising the socio-psychological need for ontological security, this article argues that institutions relentlessly engage in dialogues because it allows them to seek, gain and anchor the recognition of their identity. The significance for international relations is illustrated through the emblematic case of the European Union–US dialogues, specifically the Transatlantic Legislators’ Dialogue. The multi-method qualitative analysis based on original interviews, participant observations, visuals and official documents demonstrates how the European Union exploits these dialogues with its ‘Significant Other’ to seek, gain and anchor the recognition of its complex institutional identity.


1976 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Carey

When Philip Reynolds opened the first issue of the British Journal of International Studies with an examination of the “state of the art” in Great Britain,2 he omitted any mention of the Open University as a source of such studies. In the sense that Reynolds was seeking establishments with full-time students of International Studies, the omission was justified; in the sense that the Open University forms a seat of learning whose students are concerned with the study of International Relations, it was not. Indeed, it is possible that the Open University may have, at any one time, more students reading International Relations than any other single institution in the United Kingdom. These several hundreds of part-time students, pursuing the single course under review, are distributed rather unevenly across the face of Great Britain. They have varying access to library facilities; the greatly varying environment of their own homes in which to work; greatly varying amounts of contact with their tutors, either on a “face-to-face” basis or by letter or telephone. In short, the student for whom this course is designed is different – he represents, perhaps, the “new actor” in academic life in Great Britain. He is ignored at our – the traditional academics, – peril, for whilst we may be concerned with standards of academic excellence there are many in high places who now judge success by such criteria as staff-student ratios, cost effectiveness, and the like.


1992 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Jerger
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document