scholarly journals SMART POWER AS THE FACTOR IN THE SINO-U.S. RELATIONS

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2(71)) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Cheng Guo ◽  
Yin Qun

This research work analyzes the characteristics of American public diplomacy from the perspectives of smart power theory, comparing China and the United States’ smart power strategy. The article revealed that globalization and the process of technological evolution have led profound changes in the contempopary world politics and international relations, the smart power factors such as culture, science, technology, and information have become increasingly prominent in political science. These factors have not only created the fundamental theory of smart power, but also affected the form and definition of diplomacy. The research methodology is based on a complex combination of scientific methods, mainly comparative, analytical, systematic. The obtained conclusions can be referred that smart power as a key factor, has become a new theoretical perspective for understanding changes in contempopary international relations and foreign policy. It has naturally become the theoretical support for public diplomacy, meanwhile public diplomacy itself is also an important content and strategic path for smart power construction.

Author(s):  
Maryna Okladna ◽  
Kseniia Naumova ◽  
Violetta Myrhorod

Problem setting. Problems of international relations and foreign policy have always been in the center of public attention of analysts, politicians and journalists. Although secret diplomacy is a highly controversial phenomenon in terms of public morality, it is an effective means of pursuing defense policy, military cooperation and establishing international relations for peace. In practice, secret diplomacy has various forms of implementation, such as holding “closed” conferences, signing secret multilateral agreements, providing covert instructions, and others. Any form of implementation must take into account the fact that the ultimate goal is to achieve the maximum national interest with a minimum of controversy and resentment from others. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Among Ukrainian scholars, D. Kostyuk and D. Kurillo, S. Pik and others. Anthony John Wanis-ST., a professor of the American University’s School of International Service in Washington, D.C., made a significant contribution to the study of secret diplomacy. John, Cornelius Biola, a professor at Oxford University, and Aaron Klieman, a professor at Tel Aviv University. Target of research is to define the concept of secret diplomacy, analyze the main ways of its implementation, as well as explore the features of their functioning in international relations. Article’s main body. The research is devoted to the definition of “secret diplomacy” and analysis of the main ways of its implementation. Peculiarities of the functioning of forms of secret diplomacy in international relations have been studied. Forms of secret diplomacy include “closed” conferences, secret bilateral and tripartite agreements, the provision of secret instructions by states to diplomats, correspondence through closed channels, and non-public diplomacy. The definition of “secret diplomacy” is proposed. Examples of the application of secret diplomacy in practice have been studied. “Secret” conferences are a very effective way to reach agreement on some common issues, they are difficult because of both the organization and the stage: the more participants in the negotiations, the more difficult it is to maintain secrecy and control information leaks. Details of such negotiations are often leaked to the media, causing serious harm to participants. The signing of secret bilateral and tripartite agreements allows countries to significantly expand the range of issues under discussion, including all issues, from cooperation in various sectors of the economy, military cooperation to joint action in the international arena. The practice of giving secret instructions to diplomats is often used: when sending a diplomatic mission, the state provides its members with a number of mandatory secret instructions, as well as coordinates its work during negotiations. Closed channel correspondence, the biggest advantage of which is the small number of people who take part in it, which in turn allows the sender and recipient to keep all correspondence secret, preventing the essence of correspondence from being revealed to third parties. Non-public diplomacy consists of negotiations officially authorized by the leadership of states, which take place between the parties to the conflict in secret from other parties. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Despite the disadvantages, covert diplomacy can create an enabling environment for constructive negotiations by isolating foreign policy figures from public speaking, giving them the highest level of security, informality, autonomy and the ability to “save face” in public. It is not a universal way to solve all problems, but, in our opinion, it is an effective method of resolving protracted conflicts that negatively affect world politics.


2019 ◽  
pp. 163-170
Author(s):  
Vadim Volovoj

Decision of the Russian Federation to support the regime of Bashar Assad in its fight with terrorists and opposition became a crucial event in the world politics with the long-term consequences for global international relations, for the future of the Middle East and for Russia itself. One of the most important questions in this context is why Kremlin decided to interfere and what are the political and military lessons of its campaign in Syria? It can be said that the main political goal of Vladimir Putin was to make the United States take Russia into account as a serious (if not equal) player in the international arena, and he reached that goal, making his state a key factor in the Middle East. There was a doubt if Russian army is able to act effectively abroad and change Syrian situation at low cost. It proved that it is efficient enough, showing the advantages of Russian weaponry, and got valuable experience in many spheres. At the same time, the end of the Kremlin game in Syria is not clear, but this can be an inevitable price of its revived imperial ambitions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
M Evren Eken

This article is about weaponisation of emotions through visual culture. It interrogates how geopolitics trickles down to everyday life and becomes personal through the embodiment of screen actors. While International Relations is attempting to move beyond the limits of existing disciplinary methods and methodologies to better grasp the emotional depths of world politics, this article delves into the ‘method’ in performance arts to understand how visual culture diffuses emotional narratives of the state to the population and affectively enables people to experience the international from the perspective of the United States. In this sense, focusing on ‘method acting’ which revolutionised performance arts in the United States from the 1950s, the article examines the mundane encounters in visual culture through which screen/state actors emotionally situate the audience to make them viscerally experience geopolitics, personally feel like a state/warrior and embody a commitment to the war effort at an emotional level.


1986 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oye Ogunbadejo

By any standard, no other third-world leader in recent times has earned as much notoriety for foreign adventurist policies as Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. The Libyan President has on different occasions embarked on a militant course of confrontation with the United States in defence of his controversial definition of territorial air space over the Gulf of Sidra. Gulf of Sidra. During the 1982 war between Britain and Argentina, Qaddafi shipped more than $100 million worth of weapons, including 120 Soviet-made SAM-7 missiles, to Buenos Aires.1 His name has since been linked with bombing and shooting incidents in Britain, which eventually led the Government there to sever Anglo-Libyan diplomatic links in April 1984;2 with arms supplies to Nicaragua, the Irish Republican Army, and several secessionist movements in Africa; with coup plots in a number of countries, including Pakistan;3 and he has openly assaulted some of his neighbours, notably the Sudan and Chad.4 Then, in December 1985, the Libyan President was linked to the daring attacks by P.L.O. gunmen on the Israeli Airline's check-in counters at the Vienna and Rome airports, in which at least 16 people lost their lives and 120 were injured.5


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 286-291
Author(s):  
Alexey Vitalievich Danilov

The article covers the period of implemetation of the leading US universities and the Foreign Policy Association as elements of US public diplomacy wchich their impact in economic, political and cultural influence all over the world. The author methodically and consistently cites analytical, historical facts proving an indirect and direct impact on the foreign policy of countries. The relevance of the article is due to the high significance and influence of non-state actors on world politics nowdays. The author points out that the political course of the leadership of the United States from the second half of the 20th century was focused on more active inclusion of the country in international politics and the rejection of isolationism, which was primarily reflected in the departure from the postulates of the Monroe Doctrine and the entry of the United States into the First World War. This, in turn, had a great influence on the development of public diplomacy in the United States as a tool to promote the interests of the country, the creation of the necessary information support for foreign policy actions of the state, as well as a favorable image of the United States in other countries. Thus it required the active involvement of the leading US universities in US public diplomacy, as well as the creation of new non-state institutions.


Author(s):  
E. S. Zinovieva

The article studies the processes of Internet governance at the international level in the context of the position and interests of Russia in this area. The theory of global governance was used as a theoretical and methodological framework of the study. Initially, Internet governance was carried out on the state level, with coordination carried out in the interests of the United States created the Internet. At the present stage states and other actors in world politics has to be integrated into the existing system of Internet governance, resulting in development of multi-level or multi-directional diplomacy, formation of the so-called "hybrid" organizations and new models of cooperation. There are new formats of regulation of international relations formed under the influence of scientific and technological progress. Russia's position on Internet governance is based on the goal to ensure equal consideration of interests of all states in the governance of the Internet.


2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-411
Author(s):  
Marina Kostic

The subject of this article is the relation between hegemony and the world order in which hegemony (understood as leadership of a certain country or group of countries through the consent of others), and not a mere change of balance of power, represents a key for the change of the world order (understood as establishing a new leadership and rules in the world). This means that changes in the distribution of power do not necessarily mean the change of the existing world order, i.e. leadership and rules of conduct in international relations, but that this requires counter-hegemony too, which can be described as the collapse of the foundations on which the existing consent for leadership and the world order is based upon and creation of the foundations of a new world order. This means a criticism of the existing liberal-democratic paradigm, its crisis and establishing of a new paradigm of international relations, as well as the attitude towards the domestic affairs of the countries. Just as the engagement of the United States after the World War II and then after the Cold War represented the establishment and expansion of American hegemony, the activities of Russia and China today can be best understood and seen through the concept of counter-hegemony. It includes three elements: the desire for reform of those international institutions that still maintain US hegemony and/or the creation of new ones in which there is no US participation; working with elements of civil society such as non-governmental organizations, scientific and other expert organizations, the media and churches; as well as the prevalence of different principles regulating international relations (multipolarity and noninterference in domestic affairs instead of global leadership and interventionism under the guise of responsibility to protect and democracy promotion). We approach this issue within the framework of neo-Marxist, precisely neGramscian, theoretical perspective on international relations, and use literature review and content analysis as research methods.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-200
Author(s):  
Evgeny Nikolayevich Grachikov

In 1987, the first All-China Conference of international scholars took place in Shanghai, which is associated with the beginning of the process of creating the Chinese School of International Relations. Over these decades, a vast array of scientific literature has accumulated, exploring the interaction China with other countries and world community. The article is devoted to the study of analytical approaches prevailing in the Chinese academic environment in the study of foreign policy and world politics of the PRC, and specifically, in relation to the United States. Deng Xiaoping’s “reform and openness” policy contributed to the revival of the discipline of “international relations” and the intensification of international research in academic institutions and universities in China. A deep and systemic influence on these processes was exerted by several factors: uncritical borrowing of western international political knowledge, full-scale training of Chinese scholars in Western, mainly American, universities, and the translation into Chinese of most theoretical works of Western scientists. Methodological tools which include the analytical approaches used by Chinese scientists are taken from publications on realism, liberalism and constructivism. In realism, the emphasis is done on the balance of power, which is investigated in the framework of foreign policy analysis. The interdependence of China and the United States, primarily economic, the subject of study from the point of view of neoliberalism. The socialization and involvement of China in the world community and the liberal world order led by the United States are constructivist studies of bilateral relations. Yan Xuetong’s “theory of moral realism”, Qin Yaqing’s “theory of relations”, the Shanghai school’s “international symbiosis”, and Tan Shiping’s “social evolution of world politics” did not go beyond these paradigms, but are already used as their own innovative methods in a study of China’s relations with external actors. The article pays special attention to the dual identity of the Chinese state, as a developing country and a global power, which is publicly voiced by its representatives. This duality imposes regulatory restrictions on the use of analytical tools and, of course, affects the results of research.


Author(s):  
Nancy Snow

Public diplomacy is a subfield of political science and international relations that involves study of the process and practice by which nation-states and other international actors engage global publics to serve their interests. It developed during the Cold War as an outgrowth of the rise of mass media and public opinion drivers in foreign policy management. The United States, in a bipolar ideological struggle with the Soviet Union, recognized that gaining public support for policy goals among foreign populations worked better at times through direct engagement than traditional, often closed-door, government-to-government contact. Public diplomacy is still not a defined academic field with an underlying theory, although its proximity to the originator of soft power, Joseph Nye, places it closer to the neoliberal school that emphasizes multilateral pluralistic approaches in international relations. The term is a normative replacement for the more pejorative-laden propaganda, centralizes the role of the civilian in international relations to elevate public engagement above the level of manipulation associated with government or corporate propaganda. Building mutual understanding among the actors involved is the value commonly associated with public diplomacy outcomes of an exchange or cultural nature, along with information activities that prioritize the foreign policy goals and national interests of a particular state. In the mid-20th century, public diplomacy’s emphasis was less scholarly and more practical—to influence foreign opinion in competition with nation-state rivals. In the post-Cold War period, the United States in particular pursued market democracy expansion in the newly industrializing countries of the East. Soft power, the negative and positive attraction that flows from an international actor’s culture and behavior, became the favored term associated with public diplomacy. After 9/11, messaging and making a case for one’s agenda to win the hearts and minds of a Muslim-majority public became predominant against the backdrop of a U.S.-led global war on terrorism and two active interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Public diplomacy was utilized in one-way communication campaigns such as the Shared Values Initiative of the U.S. Department of State, which backfired when its target-country audiences rejected the embedded messages as self-serving propaganda. In the 21st century, global civil society and its enemies are on the level of any diplomat or culture minister in matters of public diplomacy. Narrative competition in a digital and networked era is much deeper, broader, and adversarial while the mainstream news media, which formerly set how and what we think about, no longer holds dominance over national and international narratives. Interstate competition has shifted to competition from nonstate actors who use social media as a form of information and influence warfare in international relations. As disparate scholars and practitioners continue to acknowledge public diplomacy approaches, the research agenda will remain case-driven, corporate-centric (with the infusion of public relations), less theoretical, and more global than its Anglo-American roots.


Author(s):  
Matthew Kroenig

This chapter reviews the central arguments of the book and its findings about a democratic advantage in international politics. It then discusses the implications for international relations theory and for U.S. foreign policy. This book advances international relations theory by providing a novel theoretical explanation that traces the origins of power in world politics to domestic political institutions. It makes a “hard power” case for democracy. The chapter then lays out a competitive strategy for the United States in this new era of great power rivalry. It urges the United States to strengthen its democratic form of governance domestically. Washington should also ensure it maintains an innovative economy, a robust financial sector, strong alliances, and a favorable military balance of power in Europe and Asia. Internationally, the chapter urges the United States to revitalize, adapt, and defend the rules-based international system. The chapter concludes with a challenge to Russia and China. If these countries wish to be true leading global powers, then they must adopt democratic forms of government.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document