scholarly journals DIGITAL DIPLOMACY VERSUS DOWNFALL. AN AGENDA FOR INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN THE GLOBAL AGE

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Wittmann
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Digital Era ◽  
Global Challenges ◽  
Global Age ◽  
Single State ◽  
Digital Diplomacy

There are numerous global challenges facing humanity in this century. Diplomacy has to take these needs into account and contribute with profound expertise to academic and political discussions as well as societal developments. Any single state-related or disciplinary solo effort will not provide adequate answers to how humanity can manage and cope with the global risks of the 21st century. The article deals with the question of digital diplomacy versus downfall by fi rst outlining the global hazards endangering humanity as well as infl uencing world politics and international relations. Thereafter digital diplomacy as a tool to prevent humanity’s downfall is presented. Requirements for diplomats in the global age are highlighted in the following. Furthermore, visionary claims of a global turn in politics are designated and diplomacy’s contribution toward this undertaking are formulated. To close, diplomacy’s most promising way of off ering humanity its profound expertise in the digital era is set forth.

scholarly journals World politics, globalization and the crisis

2013 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-41
Author(s):  
Predrag Simic
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Economic Crisis ◽  
21St Century ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Human Environment ◽  
Early 21St Century ◽  
The World ◽  
Multilateral System ◽  
World Economic ◽  
World Economic Crisis

In the early 21st century, globalization and the world economic crisis changed the balance of powers between the old (declining) and new (emerging) industrial states replacing the unilateral with a multilateral system of international relations and changing the way in which world politics was functioning. Globalization has increased the number of transnational problems (protection of human environment, international traffic and communications, flows of capital, energy, migrations, etc.) that require global governance. However, these trends also indicate that in the 21st century, international relations and world politics will function in a significantly different manner than they did within the bipolar and unipolar order, which characterized the second half of the 20th century.

scholarly journals The Beginning of the Post-modern Geopolitical Epoch and the Peculiarities of the System of Contemporary International Relations in the 21st Century

2019 ◽  
pp. 111-118
Author(s):  
George Zviadadze
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
International System ◽  
World Order ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Order System ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The World ◽  
Characteristic Features

After transformation of unipolarity and reformatting world order system, a question been forwarded on how new system is to be founded on. As it is known classical international relations system developed since Westphalia Agreement of 1648 has been composed mainly by the state as key actors of international politics. The system has been developed two type of regimes: soft bipolarity and balance of power interchanged in several period of time consequently. One of the characteristic features of globalization is a fundamental change of the international system and world order. It differs from the world of post-Cold War period with the stance of different actors of international relations on each other as well as with the forms of sharing power and that of interconnections. In that context there were four phases of the international relations systems: the system of Westphalia, the system of Vienna, the system of Versailles, the system of Yalta-Potsdam and later international relations were transformed into bipolarity one. Since demolishing classical Cold War order and entering into new epoch of anarchic scenario, the states as key actors of the system have been diminishing in favour of so-called “nonstate actors”. However, in the international system of the 21st century, the nationstate still has particular functions. It represents the dominant element of the world politics which can influence the behaviour of the population and non-state actors.

The United Nations in the 21st Century by Karen A. Mingst and Margaret P. Karns, and Alynna J. Lyon

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayesha Masood
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Nations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Human Security ◽  
World Politics ◽  
International Organization ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
The United Nations

The United Nations in the 21st century: Dilemmas in World Politics is a noteworthy book on the world’s leading international organization and international relations which provides a comprehensive introduction of the United Nations (UN), its functions and its role in the promotion of peace and stability. and the book has a lot to offer in terms of the United Nations in the broader context of global politics; reflecting mainly on its history, challenges, and reforms, etc. The book offers an in-depth account concerning the functions of the United Nations i.e. how the UN works and also sheds light on the numerous challenges faced by the organization in the present century. From terrorism to piracy and from evolved threats to human security such as cybercrimes to climate change and global warming, the authors in the book accord due importance to the new players on the international scene.

Women as Objects and Commodities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alina Sajed
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Feminist Theory ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Feminist Literature ◽  
The Core

The engagement between the discipline of international relations (IR) and feminist theory has led to an explosion of concerns about the inherent gendered dimension of a supposedly gender-blind field, and has given rise to a rich and complex array of analyses that attempt to capture the varied aspects of women’s invisibility, marginalization, and objectification within the discipline. The first feminist engagements within IR have pointed not only to the manner in which women are rendered invisible within the field, but also to IR’s inherent masculinity, which masks itself as a neutral and universally valid mode of investigation of world politics. Thus, the initial feminist incursions into IR’s discourse took the form of a conscious attempt both to bridge the gap between IR and feminist theory and to bring gender into IR, or, in other words, to make the field aware that “women are relevant to policy.” In the 1990s, feminist literature undertook incisive analyses of women’s objectification and commodification within the global economy. By the end of the 1990s and into the first decade of the 21st century, the focus turned to an accounting for the agency of diverse women as they are located within complex sociopolitical contexts. The core concern of this inquiry lay with the diversification of feminist methodologies, especially as it related to the experience of women in non-Western societies.

Digital Diplomacy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Holmes
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Communication Technologies ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Information Communication Technologies ◽  
Digital Information ◽  
Information Communication ◽  
Digital Diplomacy

Digital diplomacy has no shortage of synonyms or terminology debates (digital diplomacy has been variously referred to, or described, as “e-Diplomacy,” “cyber Diplomacy,” “net diplomacy,” “#diplomacy,” “diplomacy 2.0,” “public diplomacy 2.0,” “networked diplomacy,” “real-time diplomacy,” “21st-century statecraft,” “diplomacy in the digital age,” “digitalization of diplomacy,” or “digidiplomacy”), yet each term shares a common perspective: the use of digital information communication technologies, such as the Internet, to achieve diplomatic objectives. While foreign ministries have used newly available technologies throughout their history for various purposes—including cable wire, radio transmissions, telephone, television, video conferencing, among others—the advent of the Internet ushered in an explosion both in the use of digital technologies in diplomacy and in scholarly interest in how those technologies may be changing the role of diplomacy in world politics (see Oxford Bibliographies article in International Relations “History of Diplomacy”). Digital diplomacy scholarship has developed through two fairly distinct phases, with different emphases and from two different, and distinct, vantage points. Early work in digital diplomacy attempted to answer broad theoretical questions about the activity itself: What is digital diplomacy? How is it different than traditional diplomacy (see Oxford Bibliographies article in International Relations “Face-to-Face Diplomacy”)? How does digital diplomacy affect traditional diplomacy, if at all? Subsequently, scholars have built upon these theoretical perspectives and asked specific methodological questions and interrogated critical issues of measuring causal effects: How can scholars empirically demonstrate the effect of digital diplomacy? What is the baseline upon which we can judge “successful” or “unsuccessful” digital diplomacy initiatives? What are the practical policy implications, and recommendations, that follow from these empirical perspectives? These two phases of development—theorization and measurement—have developed contemporaneously with two distinct substantive perspectives on the focus of digital diplomacy initiatives: projection and retrieval. Digital diplomacy projection refers to the ways in which states use information communication technologies to transmit information to statespersons, diplomats, or, as in the case of public diplomacy, foreign publics. Digital diplomacy retrieval refers to the ways in which states use these same technologies to gather information from these same actors, such as in the overlap between diplomacy and intelligence gathering. Some digital diplomacy endeavors accomplish both. The future of digital diplomacy study likely involves more refining of theoretical propositions regarding projection and retrieval, as well as development of more sophisticated, and precise, methodological tools to help study projection and retrieval empirically.

The importance of international learning

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 185-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Knopf
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Research Focus ◽  
Shared Learning ◽  
International Learning ◽  
Single State ◽  
Learning Research ◽  
Cross National

A programme of research on learning in international relations began developing in the 1980s. However, learning research has not realised its potential. This article seeks to stimulate new work on learning by analysing why learning is important in international relations and outlining a research focus that reflects this assessment of learning's significance. The research so far has mostly treated learning as a foreign policy phenomenon, but this fails to capture one of the major reasons for interest in learning. Learning matters in part because of long-standing debates about whether it is possible to make progress in reducing the amount of armed conflict in world politics. For such progress to occur, it is likely that some form of learning would have to take place. However, learning by just a single state will often not be sufficient to change the quality of international outcomes. There thus needs to be research specifically on the possibility of shared learning by two or more states, a research focus this article will label ‘international learning’. A few illustrative examples will demonstrate the feasibility of doing research on shared, cross-national learning.

THE CONCEPT OF THE BALANCE OF FORCES IN THE 21ST CENTURY

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1835-1847
Author(s):  
Vladimir Tomashevic ◽  
Hatidza Berisha ◽  
Aleksandar Cirakovic
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Scientific Understanding ◽  
Theoretical Understanding ◽  
Major Powers ◽  
Realistic Theory ◽  
World Power ◽  
History Of ◽  
Balance Of Forces ◽  
Single World

In this paper the authors proceed from defining the concept of balance of forces, theoretical understanding of the balance of forces from the aspect of the scientific understanding of the realistic theory of international relations with concrete examples from the history of international relations. However, the focus of the work is an analysis of the power between a single world power (USA) and major powers (Russia, China) in a possible balance of power.The aim of the paper is to try to point out, through a relatively brief review, the possibility of establishing a balance of forces in the 21st century.

Constructing Identity in “Glocal” Politics

1998 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 81-106
Author(s):  
M. A. Muqtedar Khan
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Socioeconomic Conditions ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
Important Concept ◽  
Construction Of Identity ◽  
The World ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Relationship

This paper seeks to understand the impact of current global politicaland socioeconomic conditions on the construction of identity. I advancean argument based on a two-step logic. First, I challenge the characterizationof current socioeconomic conditions as one of globalization bymarshaling arguments and evidence that strongly suggest that along withglobalization, there are simultaneous processes of localization proliferatingin the world today. I contend that current conditions are indicative ofthings far exceeding the scope of globalization and that they can bedescribed more accurately as ccglocalization.~H’2a ving established thisclaim, I show how the processes of glocalization affect the constructionof Muslim identity.Why do I explore the relationship between glocalization and identityconstruction? Because it is significant. Those conversant with current theoreticaldebates within the discipline of international relations’ are awarethat identity has emerged as a significant explanatory construct in internationalrelations theory in the post-Cold War era.4 In this article, I discussthe emergence of identity as an important concept in world politics.The contemporary field of international relations is defined by threephilosophically distinct research programs? rationalists: constructivists,’and interpretivists.’ The moot issue is essentially a search for the mostimportant variable that can help explain or understand the behavior ofinternational actors and subsequently explain the nature of world politicsin order to minimize war and maximize peace.Rationalists contend that actors are basically rational actors who seekthe maximization of their interests, interests being understood primarilyin material terms and often calculated by utility functions maximizinggiven preferences? Interpretivists include postmodernists, critical theorists,and feminists, all of whom argue that basically the extant worldpolitical praxis or discourses “constitute” international agents and therebydetermine their actions, even as they reproduce world politics by ...

scholarly journals Is Arctic governance research in crisis? A pathological diagnosis

Polar Record ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Knecht ◽  
Paula Laubenstein
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Comparative Research ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Regional Studies ◽  
Regional Politics ◽  
Security Governance ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Global Challenges ◽  
Resource Politics

Abstract The governance of the Arctic as a frontier for international environmental and climate cooperation, resource politics and security governance holds the promise to provide important insights into some of the 21st century’s most enduring and pressing global challenges. This article reviews the state of the art of Arctic governance research (AGR) to assess the potential and limitations of a regional studies community for making sense of Northern politics and contributing to the broader discipline of international relations (IR) research. A bibliometric analysis of 398 articles published in 10 outlets between 2008 and 2019 reveals that AGR faces at least four limitations that undermine understanding and explaining the processes and outcomes of regional politics and inhibit generalisable observations applicable to questions of global governance: academic immaturity, methodological monoculturalism, state-centrism and analytical parochialism. The lack particularly of theoretically driven and comparative research is indicative of a deeper crisis in AGR which, if unaddressed, could further solidify the community’s unjustified reputation as quixotic in orientation and negligible in its contributions to IR research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document