1

FOREIGN POLICY AND DIPLOMACY Q9. Analyze the relationship between the US Senate’s foreign relation
(With special reference to the US, UK, Russia and China) committee and State department in the US foreign policy exercises.
FOREIGN POLICY Q10. Comment on the Chinese foreign policy principles towards North-East-
I. NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM; concept, Asian region.
nature, objectives and goals, ideology and determinants of foreign policy; Q11. Define ‘foreign policy’. Evaluate the importance of economic, cultural and
and domestic and societal sources of foreign policy. political determinants in its strategic-stand formulation.
II. National interests and foreign policy. Q12. Critically assess the role of a political party in pressure influence with
III. Power and capability analysis in foreign policy. regard to foreign policy decision making process of a nation like Nepal.
IV. ORGANIZATION AND PROCESS OF FOREIGN POLICY MAKING; role of Q13. Is foreign Minister responsible to implement foreign policies? Comment.
legislature, executive, bureaucratic agencies, political parties, main Q14. Define decision-making. Describe the role of the executive organ in the
political actors, pressure/interest groups, public opinion and media. foreign policy making process.
V. Foreign policy makers, their capabilities and influence. Q15. Comment on the importance of National interest in foreign policy.
VI. Major issues of foreign policy. Q16. Point out the main features of ‘Power’ role in the foreign relation policy.
VII. Foreign policy in action. Q17. Comment on the role of domestic issues and conflict in the foreign policy
DIPLOMACY exercise.
VIII. Meaning, nature and characteristics of diplomacy. Q18. How is ‘National Interest’ determined in the interaction process in the
IX. Historical evolution and development of diplomacy. foreign policy implementation? Examine.
X. Comparative analysis of western and eastern diplomatic practices. Q19. How do the pressure- interest groups exercise their influence in the
XI. Nature and characteristics of old and new diplomacy. foreign policy’s opinion-building process of the nation?
XII. Functions, privileges and immunities of diplomats. Q20. Assess the US policy toward Anti-Ballistic system agreement of 1972
XIII. Characteristics of a good diplomat. (ABM).
XIV. Types of diplomacy Q21. Comment on the role of ideology in shaping National Interest strategy.
XV. Political, economical, military and cultural diplomacy. Q22. Point out the effects of geopolitics on the Soviet- US relation.
XVI. Structure, methods and issues of contemporary diplomacy. Q23. Comment on the geopolitical influence upon the UK’s stands on Iraq’s
XVII. Negotiation and bargaining. crises.
XVIII. Future of diplomacy. Q24. Evaluate the Russian approach found the international political
economical development.
Q25. What role has the communist ideology played in the European strategic-
Q1. Evaluate the nature and characteristics of international system as an security area? Evaluate.
external setting for foreign policy making process. Q26. Has Sino-Russia rifts exercised considerable influence upon the
Q2. What is international system? Evaluate its importance in the foreign international security system? Discuss.
policy exercise. Q27. What is ‘Diplomacy’? Analyze critically its nature and characteristics.
Q3. Critically examine the process of globalization in the international system Q28. Illustrate the main characteristics of Western Diplomacy.
and also discuss its impact upon the process of foreign policy making of Russia. Q29. Critically analyze the issues and problems of contemporary diplomacy.
Q4. What is the importance of ‘Ideology’ in the British foreign policy? Q30. Distinguish between the good office and negotiation.
Comment. Q31. Comment on the nature of secret diplomacy.
Q5. Comment upon the media’s role in making of foreign policy. Q32. Narrate critically the major differences between western and eastern
Q6. Discuss the US foreign policy toward the nuclearisation of India and diplomatic exercises.
Pakistan. Q33. Critically examine the nature and character of good diplomat.
Q7. Point out the main features of the Russia foreign policy. Q34. Point out the main characteristics of negotiation.
Q8. Examine the main determinants of the foreign policy ideology of the Q35. Evaluate the main position and nature of strategic diplomacy in the
United Kingdom. international politics.
 2
Q36. Comment on the role of arbitration in the conflict management
diplomacy.
Q37. Discuss the elements of the art of negotiation.
Q38. Point out the main features of ‘good office.’
Q39. Examine the main factors of the US Nuclear diplomacy towards Iraq, Iran
and North Korea.
Q40. Is oil diplomacy affecting international economic politics? Comment.
Q41. Analyze the differences between open and secret diplomacy.
Q42. Evaluate the ‘meditative art’ of diplomatic practice in the current peace
initiatives on the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Q43. What is the impact of ping-pong diplomacy upon the US-China relations?
Q44. Comment on the influence of the September 11 incident on the terrorist
containment diplomacy.
Q45. Discuss the impact of current trends of the international security
environments upon the Chinese diplomacy.
Q46. Distinguish between ‘negotiation’ and ‘good offices’. Is ‘good offices’
essential to provide a solution to dispute? Illustrate your answer with example.
Q47. Evaluate the British style of diplomacy.
Q48. Are ‘calmness’ and ‘patience’ two relevant characteristics of a good
diplomat?
FOREIGN POLICY
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM
1. International relations (IR) or International studies (IS) represents the
study of foreign affairs and global issues among states within the
international system, including the roles of states, inter-governmental
organizations (IGOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs),
international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs), and multinational
corporations (MNCs). It is both an academic and public policy field, and can
be either positive or normative as it both seeks to analyze as well as
formulate the foreign policy of particular states. It is often considered a
branch of political science (especially after 1988 UNESCO nomenclature),
but an important sector of academia prefer to treat it as an
interdisciplinary field of study.
2. Apart from political science, IR draws upon such diverse fields as
economics, history, international law, philosophy, geography, social work,
sociology, anthropology, psychology, and cultural studies. It involves a
diverse range of issues including but not limited to: globalization, state
sovereignty, ecological sustainability, nuclear proliferation, nationalism,
economic development, global finance, terrorism, organized crime, human
security, foreign interventionism and human rights.
3. As stated repeatedly:  The most important actors within the global system
continue to be the central governments of sovereign states.  Each central
government has relationships with other central governments and other
international actors.  These relationships are summarized as that country's
foreign policy.  The dominant model of the global system continues to hold
the view that the world is composed of a system of sovereign states.   My
WEB pages on the History of the State System details that position.  This
WEB page assumes the state-centered point of view.   The sum total and
the product of all foreign policies would result in what we call the global
system.  While I do not agree with this state-centered approach, it does
provide important insights into global politics.
4. For most American students taking this course, it should not come as a
surprise to be told that the United States continues, at this moment in
history, to be the most powerful state on this planet.  The conduct of
American foreign policy is a major determinant shaping the international
system. 
5. Despite the great power exercised by the United States, we are not all
powerful and we are not alone on this planet.  Even United States' power is
limited and even we must operate within a global system.
6. The modern state system has been in existence since 1648.
7. The modern state system includes both major, middling, and small
powers.  All states conduct  their own foreign policies.  One primary
objective of each county's foreign policy is to maintain its own political
independence and security.  
8. Foreign Policy refers to the ways in which the central governments of
sovereign states relate to each other and to the global system in order to
achieve various goals or objectives.
9. American Foreign Policy would refer to the goals and objectives pursued
by the United States and the tools it uses to implement these goals and
objectives with regard to other countries and other international actors. 
Courses on American Foreign Policy within Political Science Departments of
American Colleges and Universities would look at the world from an
American perspective.  The American national government conducts our
foreign policy in defense of our national interests.
10. Comparative Foreign Policy refers to political science courses, which
compare the foreign policies of various countries to point out both
similarities of behavior and divergences.  For example, the foreign policies
of the United States, Russia, Germany, China, and India might be
compared.  Defense of territorial integrity and other national interests are
always a component of a country's foreign policy.  Behaviors common to
 3
the foreign policies of most countries are often generalized into principles
of international politics.
11. International Politics is one of the five major fields of political science.  It
looks at the entire international system.  The United States is just one state
within that system and American foreign policy refers to one strand of
decision-making.  In other worlds, International Politics takes a broader  20. Leadership.  It does matter who is elected President of the United States or
and different perspective than do courses on foreign policy.  who rules China.  Leaders and the elites who support them help to shape
12. Level of Analysis Problem.  The global system is a system of systems.  Its
complexity is so overwhelming, that political scientists have developed
different levels of analysis.  Three levels of analysis are generally
differentiated, namely the 1.  Global Level, 2.  State Level, and the 3.
Individual Level.  The level of analysis problem applies to all aspects of
international politics.
13. If the foreign policy of a given state is under analysis, then we are trying to
explain state-level behavior.  This state-level behavior can be explained in
global terms, state-level terms, and individual terms.  But the unit under
investigation is at the state level.
14. From the point of view of a given country's foreign policy, three categories
of influence may be distinguished:  1)  the global influence that shape
foreign policy; 2) the state or internal influence within the given country
that impact on foreign policy; and 3) the individuals and personalities of
the decision makers and those who have access to them and help them to
shape the policy making process.
Determinants of States' Foreign Policies.
15. The foreign policies of a given state depend on its power, its objectives,
and its leadership.  attention "on variations in states' attributes, such as military capabilities,
16. Power is an elusive concept but widely used in political science. Power may
be defined as the ability to persuade others to do things that they would
not do ordinarily unless pressured to do so. Within domestic politics,
power is usually based on numbers, wealth, and organizational skills. A
small group that is well organized may exercise considerable influence
even without large sums of money.  In international politics, power
depends on both geopolitical factors and idiosyncratic factors.
17. Inequalities of State Power.  The 192 or so states of the world vary greatly
in power.  The may be categories into superpowers (US);  major powers
(EU--Germany, France, United Kingdom; Japan, Russia, China, and India;
middling powers (Israel, Iran, Pakistan, Poland, Spain, Republic of South
Africa, Brazil, Argentina); and minor or small powers (Serbia, Denmark,
Cuba).
18. There are also micro-states and various territories that are not self-
governing or not independent such as client states, dependencies, and
colonies.
19. Since its origins in 1648, the global state system has been dominated by
the great powers and their foreign policies.
Objectives of Foreign Policy.  The objectives of states vary greatly but all states
seek to preserve themselves, maintain their independence, and security.
the foreign policy of countries.  It is probable that a President Al Gore
would not have preemptively attacked Iraq.   On the other hand the
aggressive tendencies of a leader are clearly limited by the power base
available.
21. In making decisions, leaders must take account of two categories of
determinants that impact on their foreign policies.  These are the global or
external and the internal or domestic influences.
Global or External Influences
22. Geopolitics.  The geopolitical location of a state is one of the external
determinants on its foreign policy.  It matters where on the globe a country
is located.  It matters whether the country has natural frontiers:  that is
whether it is protected by oceans, high mountains, or deserts.  It matters
who one's neighbors are and whether a given country is territorially large,
populous, affluent, and well-governed.
23. Relative Position within the Global system. 
Internal or Domestic Influences
24. Internal or Domestic Determinants on States' Foreign Policies focus
level of economic development, and types of government." (Kegley, World
Politics, 11th Ed Rev. (2008), 58.)
25. Military Capabilities.  Size of military.  Equipment.  Training. Leadership. 
Nuclear or non-nuclear capabilities.
26. Economic Capabilities.  Traditional, Transitional, and Modern Societies.  
Industrialization.  Stages of Industrialization:  Wood, Coal, Oil, Nuclear,
Renewable Resources.  Gross national product, Per Capita GNP, GINI Index,
Lorenz Curve of Inequality.  Type of Economy:  Free Market Economics,
Centrally Planned Economies, Socially Steered Market Economies (Soziale
Markwirtschaft)
27. Type of Government.  Constitutional democracies (presidential systems
and parliamentary systems).  Autocratic Systems (authoritarian and
totalitarian).  Military Dictatorships.  Political Party Systems.  Traditional
monarchies (Saudi Arabia).  Modern theocracies (Iran). 
Bases of State Power.Bases of National Power depends on many variables, such
as:
 4
1. Location of the state--coastal or landlocked (c) Foreign policy is not conducted from the start. It is influenced by
2. Size--large or small territory domestic (political parties, bureaucracy etc) and external factors
3. Population--large or small (neighboring countries, donor countries etc.)
4. Natural Resources--oil, iron ore, forests, etc. (d) Policies are formulated by key persons in the government as Head of
5. Technology-developed or under-developed State, head of government and foreign minister.
6. Type of Government--dictatorship or democracy (e) Foreign policy has two parts: formulation and implements of which
7. Type of Economy--market or centrally planned the latter is important.
8. Size and Equipment of Military--nuclear or conventional (f) Some are important aspects in the foreign policy and some are less
9. . Belief systems of Country important.
(g) Foreign policy is linked with cost risk factor.
Idiosyncratic Factors (h) Foreign policy of any nation has to be judged based on its practice
1. Will and Leadership and not what is preached.
2. Morale of Military
3. Degree of Popular Support 4. Determinants of Foreign policy : Basically there are two factors internal
4. Nature of Friends and Allies -Foreign Policy, a course of action or set of and external.
principles adopted by a nation’s government to define its relations with (a) Internal factors
other countries or groups of countries. A country’s foreign policy also sets i. Geography:- Geography of Britain forced it to adopt a policy
forth its positions on a wide range of international issues. A country’s if isolation. Nepal sandwiched between giant India and china
foreign policy may reflect broad national objectives or represent a narrow adopted the policy of equidistance followed by equi-
and specific response to a particular situation. A country can achieve its proximity at present.
foreign policy goals in several ways. It can use diplomacy—that is, peaceful ii. Historical traditions and national ethos:- Being a birthplace
negotiations with other countries. It can employ economic actions such as of Lord Buddha, Nepal believes in the principle of peaceful co
giving money or other aid to another country, or it can restrict trade with existence.
that nation or impose economic sanctions on it. It also can resort to iii. National capacity:- This includes nation’s military power,
military force. technological and economic development.
iv. Public Opinion:- The US president Woodrow Wilson played a
Hartman describes foreign policy as, ‘a systematic statements of deliberately key role in conducting Versailles Treaty and forming League
selected national interests.’ of Nations. But the American people did not like the US
involvement in the global affairs and as a result President
Objective Wilson was defeated in the election.
3. Objectives are country specific, however some which are common are v. Ideology:- Political system of the country and the ideology of
specified as under; the rulers play a key role in the formulation of the national
(a) To maintain territorial integrity policy. The former USSR since 1917 and China since 1949
(b) To promote economic interests. reflected their ideology in their foreign policy.
(c) To provide national security. vi. Political. The country also maintains strong political relations
(d) To preserve national dignity and develop national power. with India and China, usually attempting to balance one
(e) To maintain world order. against the other. However, relations with India are fraught
with trade and border disputes and Indian suspicions that
3. Characteristics: Nepalese and Pakistani rebels use Nepal as a haven to attack
(a) Normally elements of national interests are defensive, diplomacy, India. Relations with Bhutan have been strained since 1992
economy: which are interrelated. over the nationality and possible repatriation of refugees
(b) Foreign policy is determined in the name of a state. from Bhutan.
 5
vii. Economy. Nepal’s most substantive international relations
are perhaps with international economic institutions, such as
the Asian Development Bank, the International Monetary
Fund, the World Bank, and the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation, a multilateral economic development
association. Nepal also has strong bilateral relations with
major providers of economic and military aid, such as France,
Germany, Japan, Switzerland, the United States, and
particularly the United Kingdom, with whom military ties date
to the nineteenth century.
viii. Socio-culture. Nepal's Foreign Policy ... with the mainland
China, would be helpful in enhancing economic and socio-
cultural ties between Nepal and China
ix. Military. The foreign policy of Nepal in the changed global
context needs to be ... Nepalese army and promoting civil-
military relations in this context.
x. Government. Since the national interests are paramount,
foreign policies are designed by the government through
high-level decision making processes. National interests
accomplishment can occur as a result of peaceful
cooperation with other nations, or through exploitation.
Usually, creating foreign policy is the job of the head of
government and the foreign minister (or equivalent). In some
countries the legislature also has considerable oversight. As
an exception, in France and Finland, the head of state is
responsible for foreign policy, while the head of government
mainly deals with internal policy. In the United States, the
head of state (the President) also functions as the head of
government.
xi. Science and technological development. Foreign policy With
globalization, we must pay more attention to scientific
cooperation, environmental protection, trade, intellectual
property, and a host of other issues
xii. Bureaucracy. There are thirty-eight separate government
departments and agencies that assist the president in foreign
policy development and implementation; these are divided
into foreign affairs, defense, intelligence, and economic
categories. The Department of State is the oldest department
of the foreign policy bureaucracy, and is the key player in the
domain of foreign affairs. The Department of Defense has a
strong influence in foreign policy heading all four branches of
the military. The National Security Council exists to provide
the president with advice on all domestic, military, and
foreign policy related to national security, while the CIA has
provided intelligence analysis and information gathering
services as well as covert activities. Presidents require the
support of the bureaucracy to attain success in the
implementation of their foreign policy initiatives.
xiii. Global Environment.Today, more people are living under
democracy than at any `time in history, free-market
economies are expanding on every continent, and
innovations like the Internet have made our communications
immediate and international. But just as common bonds link
the world closer together, so too do common threats
increasingly endanger continued prosperity here at home and
around the world. Climate change, deforestation, overfishing
and other environmental concerns transcend political
divisions and geographic boundaries and present a major
challenge for the next century. They are the consequences of
the enormous pressures placed on the world's resources by
an ever-increasing population, spreading industrialization,
land conversion, urbanization, and rising consumption
xiv. Knowledge. So, domestic politics is the biggest problem of
Nepal's foreign policy today; ..... Wisdom, knowledge and
experience are vital for redressing problems of ...
(b)External Factors:- It constitutes three factor and they are:
i. World organization such ass UN, international
organizations and international laws. World organization such as
UN, international organizations and international laws. Nepal has
traditionally maintained a non-aligned policy and enjoys friendly
relations with neighboring countries, especially India and China.
As a small, landlocked country wedged between two larger and
far stronger powers, Nepal maintains good relations with both
China (People's Republic of China) and India.Constitutionally,
foreign policy is to be guided by “the principles of the United
Nations Charter, nonalignment, Panchsheel [five principles of
peaceful coexistence], international law and the value of world
peace.” In practice, foreign policy has not been directed toward
projecting influence internationally but toward preserving
autonomy and addressing domestic economic and security issues.
ii. World opinion. Nepal's foreign policy evolved in
different periods of history .... maximize foreign aid and
international economic diplomacy ended in total failure.
 6
iii. Neighboring countries. Nepal has traditionally CHINA FOREIGN POLICY
maintained a non-aligned policy and enjoys friendly relations with Foreign relations of the People's Republic of China
neighboring countries, especially India and China. ...
iv. Other countries response. 1. The foreign relations of the People's Republic of China guides the way in
v. Super powers. The nation's top foreign policy challenges which it interacts with foreign nations. As a great power and emerging superpower,
today are the war on terrorism; control of nuclear, China's foreign policy and strategic thinking is highly influential.
chemical, and biological arms; finding peace in the China officially states it "unswervingly pursues an independent foreign policy of
Middle East; promoting U.S. Trade; and strengthening peace. The fundamental goals of this policy are to preserve China's independence,
democracy in the former Soviet Union. The War on sovereignty and territorial integrity, create a favorable international environment
terrorism is clearly the top priority and has reframed U.S. for China's reform and opening up and modernization construction, maintain world
relations with former friends and adversaries. peace and propel common development."
2. Recent Chinese foreign policy makers may be seen to adhere to the realist
rather than the liberal school of international relations theory. Thus, in sharp
Determinants of Nepalese Foreign Policy contrast to the Soviet Union and the United States, China has not been devoted to
(a) Geographical Factors: Nepal is India locked. The nearest Indian sea advancing any higher international ideological interests such as world communism
of port is 5oo miles away and the Chinese sea of port is 5000 miles away. or world democracy since the Cold War; that is, ideology appears to be secondary
(b) Historical Experience: Nepal was never colonized but the Rana’s to advancing its national interest. China is a member of many international
remained loyal to the British. organizations; holding key positions such as a permanent member on the UN
(c) Socio cultural factors: Northern part of Nepal’s culture resembles to Security Council and is a leader in many areas such as non-proliferation,
Tibet, heartland has its own traditions and the terai people have close socio peacekeeping and resolving regional conflicts.
cultural affiliation to the southern neighbor, India. 3. People's Republic of China maintains the Completeness of sovereignty, so
(d) Economic Factor: Nepal being a poor country has to rely largely on the Beijing government does not allow any diplomatic partner state with which it
foreign aid which demands for a special relationship with the donor maintains diplomatic relations to have an official diplomatic relationship with
countries. Taiwan (Republic of China), Government of Tibet in Exile or any East Turkestan
(e) Political system and political Leadership: During the Rana regime, Independence group.
Nepal adopted a close door policy. King Mahendra and King Birendra
adopted different policies under the Panchyat system. King Mahendra Institutions of foreign policy
emphasized for Non aligned movement where as King Birendra emphasized 4. Like most other nations, China's foreign policy is carried out by the Ministry
on declaring Nepal a peace zone. of Foreign Affairs. However, the Foreign Affairs Ministry is subordinate to the
Foreign Affairs Leading Small Group of the Communist Party of China, which decides
Characteristics of Foreign Policy of Nepal on policy-making.
(a) Non aligned. Unlike most other nations, much of Chinese foreign policy is formulated in think
(b) Belief in Panchasheel. tanks sponsored and supervised by, but formally outside of the government. One
(c) Belief in UN. distinctive aspect of Sino-American relations is that much of the foreign policy
(d) Disarmament. discussion takes place between interlocutors who form the think tanks.Because
(e) Peaceful resolution if the conflicts. these discussions are unofficial, they are generally more free and less restricted
(f) Friendliness with other nations and closeness with the neighbors. than discussions between government officials. China is also distinctive for having a
(g) Protesting imperialism, colonialism, neocolonialism and racial separate body of Chinese strategic thought and theory of international.
discrimination.
(h) Advocate of the land locked countries. Recent foreign policy
(i) Lead role in the regional cooperation through SAARC. 1. In recent years, China's leaders have been regular travelers to all parts of
(j) Favoring unconditional economic assistance. the globe, and it has sought a higher profile in the UN through its
 7
permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and other
multilateral organizations.
2. Closer to home China has made efforts to reduce tensions in Asia; its
relations with its Asian neighbors have become stable during the last
decades of the 20th century. It has contributed to stability on the Korean
Peninsula, cultivated a more cooperative relationship with members of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (Brunei, Cambodia ,
Myanmar, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore,
Thailand, Vietnam), and participated in the ASEAN Regional Forum.
3. In 1997, the ASEAN member nations and the People's Republic of China,
South Korea and Japan agreed to hold yearly talks to further strengthen
regional cooperation, the ASEAN Plus Three meetings. In 2005 the
"ASEAN Plus Three" countries together with India, Australia and New
Zealand held the inaugural East Asia Summit (EAS). Relations have
improved with Vietnam since a border war was fought with the one-time
close ally in 1979. A territorial dispute with its Southeast Asian neighbors
over islands in the South China Sea remains unresolved, as does another
dispute in the East China Sea with Japan.
4. China has improved ties with Russia. President Putin and President
Jiang, in large part to serve as a counterbalance to the United States,
signed a Treaty of Friendship and Cooperation in July 2001.The two also
joined with the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan to found the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO) in June 2001. The SCO is designed to promote regional
stability and cooperate to combat terrorism in the region.
5. Relations with India have also improved considerably. After years of
competition, general distrust between the two (mostly over China's close
relationship with Pakistan and India's with the former Soviet Union) and
a border war, relations in the 21st century between the world's two most
populous states have never been more harmonious, as they have started
to collaborate in several economic and strategic areas. Both countries have
doubled their economic trade in the past few years and China is expected
to become India's largest trading partner by 2008. The two countries are
planning to host joint naval exercises. In 2003, China and India held
negotiations for the first time since the Sino-Indian War of 1962 on a
major border dispute: however, the dispute over Aksai Chin and
Arunachal Pradesh is not settled, and plagues Sino-India relations. While
New Delhi has raised objections to Chinese military-aid to arch-rival
Pakistan and neighboring Bangladesh, Beijing similarly objects to India's
growing military collaboration with Japan, Australia and the United States.
6. China has border and maritime disputes, including with Vietnam in the
Gulf of Tonkin and with Japan. Beijing has resolved many of these
disputes. Notably on July 21, 2008 it finally resolved the last remaining
border dispute it had with Russia with Russia ceding a small amount of
territory to China. There is now no border dispute between Russia and
China along their 4300 km border. China also reached a 2000 agreement
with Vietnam to resolve some differences over their maritime border,
though disagreements remain over some islands in the South China Sea.
7. During the late 1990s and early 21st century, Chinese foreign policy
appeared to be focused on improving relations with Russia and Europe to
counterbalance the United States. This strategy was based on the premise
that the United States was a hyperpower whose influence could be
checked through alliances with other powers, such as Russia or the
European Union. This assessment of United States power was
reconsidered after the United States intervention in Kosovo, and as the
20th century drew to a close, the discussion among thinktanks in China
involved how to reorient Chinese foreign policy in a unipolar world. This
discussion also occurred in the context of China's new security concept,
which argued that the post-Cold War era required nations to move away
from thinking in terms of alliances and power blocs and toward thinking in
terms of economic and diplomatic cooperation.
8. China had long been a close ally of North Korea but also found a valuable
trading partner in South Korea and eventually took a role in the early
2000s as a proponent of "six-party talks" (North Korea, South Korea,
Russia, Japan, the United States, and China) to resolve tensions on the
Korean Peninsula. China was instrumental at brokering talks with North
Korea over its nuclear program, and in 2003, there was a concerted effort
by China to improve relations with the ASEAN nations and form a
common East Asian market. These foreign policy efforts have been part of
a general foreign policy initiative known as China's peaceful rise. On
November 15, 2005, Hu Jintao visited Seoul and spoke of the importance
of both countries' contributions for regional peace and cooperation in
economic development.
9. However, China's opposition to the bid of two of its important neighbors -
India and Japan to become permanent members of the United Nations
Security Council has proved to be an irritant in their respective
relationships. Japan, with its large economic and cultural influences in Asia,
is seen by China as its most formidable opponent and partner in regional
diplomacy. The two sides established diplomatic relations in 1972, and
Japanese investment in China was important in the early years of China's
economic reforms and ever since. Having fought two wars against Japan
(1894–95 and 1936–45), China's long-standing concern about the level of
Japan's military strength surfaces periodically, and criticism of Japan's
refusal to present a full version of the atrocities of World War II in its
textbooks is a perennial issue.
 8
10. At a national meeting on diplomatic work in August 2004, China's President
Hu Jintao reiterated that China will continue its "independent foreign
policy of peaceful development," stressing the need for a peaceful and
stable international environment, especially among China's neighbors, that
will foster "mutually beneficial cooperation" and "common development."
This policy line has varied little in intent since the People's Republic was
established in 1949, but the rhetoric has varied in its stridency to reflect
periods of domestic political upheaval.
11. In 2005, there has been talk of the European Union lifting its arms
embargo, however the United States has objected to this.
12. Foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang made a statement about the eight-
point diplomatic philosophy of the People's Republic of China:
1. China will not seek hegemony. China is still a developing country and
has no resources to seek hegemony. Even if China becomes a
developed country, it will not seek hegemony.
2. China will not play power politics and will not interfere with other
countries' internal affairs. China will not impose its own ideology on
other countries.
3. China maintains all countries, big or small, should be treated equally
and respect each other. All affairs should be consulted and resolved by
all countries on the basis of equal participation. No country should
bully others on the basis of strength.
4. China will make judgment on each case in international affairs, each
matter on the merit of the matter itself and it will not have double
standards. China will not have two policies: one for itself and one for
others. China believes that it cannot do unto others what they do not
wish others do unto them.
5. China advocates that all countries handle their relations on the basis
of the United Nations Charter and norms governing international
relations. China advocates stepping up international cooperation and
do not play politics unilaterally. China should not undermine the
dignity and the authority of the U.N. China should not impose and set
its own wishes above the U.N. Charter, international law and norms.
6. China advocates peaceful negotiation and consultation so as to resolve
its international disputes. China does not resort to force, or threat of
force, in resolving international disputes. China maintains a reasonable
national military buildup to defend its own sovereignty and territorial
integrity. It is not made to expand, nor does it seek invasion or
aggression.
7. China is firmly opposed to terrorism and the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction. China is a responsible member of the
international community, and as for international treaties, China
abides by all them in a faithful way. China never plays by a double
standard, selecting and discarding treaties it does not need.
8. China respects the diversity of civilization and the whole world. China
advocates different cultures make exchanges, learn from each other,
and compliment one another with their own strengths. China is
opposed to clashes and confrontations between civilizations, and
China does not link any particular ethnic group or religion with
terrorism.
FOREIGN POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES
1. The foreign policy of the United States is the policy by which the United
States interacts with foreign nations. The U.S. is highly influential in the world. The
global reach of the United States is backed by a $14.3 trillion dollar economy,
approximately a quarter of global GDP, and a defense budget of $711 billion, which
accounts for approximately half of global military spending. The U.S. Secretary of
State is the foreign minister and is the official charged with state-to-state
diplomacy, although the president has ultimate authority over foreign policy.
2. The officially stated goals of the foreign policy of the United States, as
mentioned in the Foreign Policy Agenda of the U.S. Department of State, are "to
create a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world for the benefit of the
American people and the international community."
3. In addition, the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs states
as some of its jurisdictional goals: "export controls, including nonproliferation of
nuclear technology and nuclear hardware; measures to foster commercial
intercourse with foreign nations and to safeguard American business abroad;
International commodity agreements; international education; and protection of
American citizens abroad and expatriation." U.S. foreign policy has been the subject
of much debate, praise and criticism both domestically and abroad.
4. In February and March, Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton made separate overseas trips to announce a "new era" in
U.S. foreign relations with Russia and Europe, using the terms "break" and "reset"
to signal major changes from the policies of the preceding administration. Obama's
granting of his first television interview as president to an Arabic cable network, Al
Arabiya, was seen as an attempt to reach out to Arab leaders.
5. On March 19, Obama continued his outreach to the Muslim world,
releasing a New Year's video message to the people and government of Iran. This
attempt at outreach was rebuffed by the Iranian leadership. In April, Obama gave a
speech in Ankara, Turkey, which was well received by many Arab governments. On
June 4, 2009, Obama delivered a speech at Cairo University in Egypt calling for "a
 9
new beginning" in relations between the Islamic world and the United States and
promoting Middle East peace.
6. On June 26, 2009, in response to the Iranian government's actions
towards protesters following Iran's 2009 presidential election, Obama said: "The
violence perpetrated against them is outrageous. We see it and we condemn it." On
July 7, while in Moscow, he responded to a Vice President Biden comment on a
possible Israeli military strike on Iran by saying: "We have said directly to the Israelis
that it is important to try and resolve this in an international setting in a way that
does not create major conflict in the Middle East."
7. On September 24, 2009, Obama became the first sitting U.S. President to
preside over a meeting of the United Nations Security Council.
CHALLENGES/ISSUES TO OBAMA / US FOREIGN POLICY
Introduction
1. American foreign policy, shaped for decades by an ongoing Cold War with the
former Soviet Union, is today still adjusting to post-Cold War realities. The
dangerous, but relatively simple, bipolar world of two competing nuclear
superpowers has dissolved into a unipolar or multipolar world, depending upon
one's view of U.S. dominance of the international arena.
2. U.S. foreign and national security policy has shifted from containing Soviet
communism to addressing conflicts in smaller, but still dangerous, hotspots
throughout the world. Often in conjunction with international bodies like the
United Nations or NATO, much of American foreign policy now focuses on
peacekeeping efforts in places like the Kosovo, Iraq, or Afghanistan.
3. Debates over many foreign policy and national security issues continue to be
drawn along traditional left-right lines. A leading example is defense spending,
where conservatives call for significant increases and liberals a shifting of resources
to domestic needs. But the left and right are themselves each split between
internationalists, who believe the U.S. should maintain a strong international
presence, and isolationists who believe the U.S. should avoid unnecessary
international entanglements. Indeed, this split has a much longer history in
American foreign policy, extending well back before the Cold War and World War
II, when isolationists opposed U.S. entry until the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
4. American foreign policy, of course, encompasses much more than matters of
war and peace. As the world becomes more intertwined, economically, issues of
globalism, foreign trade, international investment and foreign aid are all
increasingly important. All of these issues are the focus of this section.
1. Super Power. Mr Obama is likely to follow 'Friendship Policy' rather than 'War'
and multi-dimensional approach to raise US Image for Super Power. It needs full
support of most of the countries of the world, which is not very easy to US.
2. Iraq Issue. Mr Obama has redefined US goal in Iraq as 'successful completion of
war' and will withdraw all US troops in phase wise from Iraq till May 2010. During
his presidential transition, President-elect Obama announced that he would retain
the incumbent Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, in his Cabinet. On February 27,
2009, Obama declared that combat operations would end in Iraq within 18 months.
His remarks were made to a group of Marines preparing for deployment to
Afghanistan. Obama said, "Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010,
our combat mission in Iraq will end." The drawdown is scheduled to be completed
by August 2010, decreasing troops levels from 142,000 while leaving a transitional
force of 35,000 to 50,000 in Iraq until the end of 2011. The plan is to transition the
mission of the remaining troops from combat operations to counter-terrorism and
the training, equipping, and advising of Iraqi security forces.
3. Afghanistan Issue. Early in his presidency, Obama moved to bolster U.S.
troop strength in Afghanistan. He announced an increase to U.S. troop levels of
17,000 in February 2009 to "stabilize a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan", an
area he said had not received the "strategic attention, direction and resources it
urgently requires".He replaced the military commander in Afghanistan, General
David D. McKiernan, with former Special Forces commander Lt. Gen. Stanley A.
McChrystal in May 2009, indicating that McChrystal's Special Forces experience
would facilitate the use of counterinsurgency tactics in the war. On December 1,
2009, Obama announced the deployment of an additional 30,000 soldiers to
Afghanistan. He also proposed to begin troop withdrawals 18 months from that
date.
4. War against Terrorism. More attention will be given to 'War of Ideas' to
tally with US traditional concept. There may be a chance of sharing hands with
Liberal Islamic Powers to face Al-Qaeda Propaganda. Terrorism is always threat to
US and she mainly adopts mil approach to fight against Terrorism.
5. Iran's Nuclear Issue. The US is always against WMD development and
Uranium Production in Iran. The US may permit Iran on this matters with it's
supervision only.
6. Middle East Peace Deal. The new vision of US on this aspect is not yet
materialized till date. The US policy to Israel and coming election
will be the vital.
7. Russian Case. The recent issues in Georgia and situation of Russia after
Cold War have raised tension between Russia and Western World. The US interest
 10
is to include Georgia in NATO but she also needs Russian support in Iran Issue and
Darfur Crisis.
8. North Korea. The North Korea is agreed to support US for inspection of it's
nuclear reactors with a view to remove it's name from US terrorist list. The North
Korea is likely to hide it's WMD which will be again a major issue to US.
9. US-China Relation. The supreme economic power of China is vital in the
modern world. The US interests in Tibet and Taiwan may jeopardize the US-China
relation anytime in future. The tackling of this case in balanced ways seems to be
critical in long term.
10. New Strategy of Finance, Climate Change and Energy. The US govt has
provided economic package to it's all finance institutions to manage the economic
crisis which will be again in first priority to Obama Administration. Mr Obama has
committed to find out ways and means to manage Green House Effects by 80 %
more till 2050. He has also shown keen interest to generate the alternate energy
and oil management.
11. Health care reform. Obama called for Congress to pass health care reform,
a key campaign promise and a top legislative goal. He proposed an expansion of
health insurance coverage to cover the uninsured, to cap premium increases, and to
allow people to retain their coverage when they leave or change jobs. His proposal
was to spend $900 billion over 10 years and include a government insurance plan,
also known as the public option, to compete with the corporate insurance sector as
a main component to lowering costs and improving quality of health care. It would
also make it illegal for insurers to drop sick people or deny them coverage for pre-
existing conditions, and require every American carry health coverage. The plan
also includes medical spending cuts and taxes on insurance companies that offer
expensive plans. Barack Obama signs the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act at the White House, March 23, 2010.On July 14, 2009, House Democratic
leaders introduced a 1,017-page plan for overhauling the U.S. health care system,
which Obama wanted Congress to approve by the end of 2009. After much public
debate during the Congressional summer recess of 2009, Obama delivered a speech
to a joint session of Congress on September 9 where he addressed concerns over
his administration's proposals. On November 7, 2009, a health care bill featuring
the public option was passed in the House. On December 24, 2009, the Senate
passed its own bill — without a public option — on a party-line vote of 60–39. On
March 21, 2010, the health care bill passed by the Senate in December was passed
in the House by a vote of 219 to 212. Obama signed the bill into law on March 23,
2010.
Foreign policy powers of the President and Congress
1. Subject to the advice and consent role of the U.S. Senate, the President of
the United States negotiates treaties with foreign nations, but treaties enter into
force only if ratified by two-thirds of the Senate.
2. The President is also Commander in Chief of the United States Armed
Forces, and as such has broad authority over the armed forces; however only
Congress has authority to declare war, and the civilian and military budget is written
by the Congress.
3. The United States Secretary of State is the foreign minister of the United
States and is the primary conductor of state-to-state diplomacy. Both the Secretary
of State and ambassadors are appointed by the President, with the advice and
consent of the Senate. Congress also has power to regulate commerce with foreign
nations.
Overview of history of U.S. foreign policy
1. The Jay Treaty of 1795 aligned the U.S. more with Britain and less with
France, leading to political polarization at home
The major themes regarding the history of U.S. foreign policy from the American
Revolution to the present are isolationism in the nineteenth century and global
hegemony in the twentieth.
2. Despite occasional entanglements with European Powers such as the War
of 1812 and the Spanish-American War in 1898, the foreign policy of the U.S. was
marked by steady expansion in its size during the nineteenth century as well as a
policy of avoiding wars with European powers. The Louisiana Purchase doubled the
nation's geographical space and a war with Mexico in 1848 added the territories of
Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Spain ceded the territory of Florida. The
U.S. bought Alaska from Russia. Around the turn of the twentieth century, it looked
as if the U.S. might become a colonial power similar to Britain or France or Spain
since it acquired the territories of Cuba, the Philippines, and Puerto Rico, but with
the exception of Puerto Rico (which chose by election to remain part of the United
States), the U.S. has not made these territories part of the nation. The Civil War set
an important precedent of national will over states' rights.
3. The twentieth century was marked by serious world wars in which the
United States, along with allied powers, defeated its enemies but at great cost in
terms of lives and treasure. The U.S. rose to become a dominant but noncolonial
mercantile power with broad influence.The latter half of the twentieth century
witnessed the world divided into two camps, one led by the U.S., the other by the
Soviet Union, characterized by ideological struggle.A policy of containment led
to[citation needed] a series of proxy wars with mixed results.In 1989, the Soviet Union
dissolved into separate nations, and as the Cold War ended without armageddon or
World War III, new challenges confront U.S. policymakers.Still U.S. foreign policy is
characterized by a commitment to free trade, protection of American interests, and
a concern for human rights.
4. In the twenty-first century, U.S. influence remains strong but, in relative
terms, is declining in terms of economic output compared to rising nations such as
China, India, Russia, Brazil, and the newly consolidated European Union. Substantial
problems remain, such as climate change, nuclear proliferation, and the specter of
nuclear terrorism. Foreign policy analysts Hachigian and Sutphen in their book The
 11
Next American Century suggest all six powers have similar vested interests in
stability and terrorism prevention and trade; if they can find common ground, then
the next decades may be marked by peaceful growth and prosperity. [7]
Foreign policy law
In the United States, there are three types of treaty-related law:
 Congressional-executive agreements are made by the president or
Congress. When made by Congress, a majority of both houses makes it
binding much like regular legislation. While the constitution does not
expressly state that these agreements are allowed, and while
constitutional scholars such as Laurence Tribe think they're
unconstitutional, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld their validity.
 Executive agreements are made by the president alone.
 Treaties are formal written agreements specified by the Treaty Clause of
the Constitution. The president makes a treaty with foreign powers, but
then the proposed treaty must be ratified by a two-thirds vote in the
Senate. For example, President Wilson proposed the Treaty of Versailles
after World War I after consulting with allied powers, but this treaty was
rejected by the U.S. Senate; as a result, the U.S. subsequently made
separate agreements with different nations. While most international law
has a broader interpretation of the term treaty, the U.S. sense of the term
is more restricted.
FOREIGN POLICY OF RUSSIA
1. The Russian Federation is recognized in international law as successor state
of the former Soviet Union. Russia continues to implement the international
commitments of the USSR, and has assumed the USSR's permanent seat on the UN
Security Council, membership in other international organizations, the rights and
obligations under international treaties and property and debts. Russia has a
multifaceted foreign policy. As of 2009, it maintains diplomatic relations with 191
countries and has 144 embassies. The foreign policy is determined by the President
of Russia and implemented by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
2. As one of five permanent members of the UN Security Council, Russia
plays a major role in maintaining international peace and security. The country
participates in the Quartet on the Middle East and the Six-party talks with North
Korea. Russia is a member of the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations, the
Council of Europe, OSCE and APEC. Russia usually takes a leading role in regional
organizations such as the CIS, EurAsEC, CSTO, and the SCO. Former President
Vladimir Putin had advocated a strategic partnership with close integration in
various dimensions including establishment of four common spaces between Russia
and the EU. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has developed a
friendlier, albeit volatile relationship with NATO. The NATO-Russia Council was
established in 2002 to allow the 26 Allies and Russia to work together as equal
partners to pursue opportunities for joint collaboration.
3. In international affairs, Putin has been publicly and increasingly critical of
the foreign policies of the US and other Western countries. Some commentators
have linked this increase in hostility towards the West with the global rise in oil
prices. In February 2007, at the annual Munich Conference on Security Policy, he
criticized what he calls the United States' monopolistic dominance in global
relations, and pointed out that the United States displayed an "almost uncontained
hyper use of force in international relations". He said the result of it is that "no one
feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that
will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race."
4. Putin called for a "fair and democratic world order that would ensure
security and prosperity not only for a select few, but for all". He proposed certain
initiatives such as establishing international centres for the enrichment of uranium
and prevention of deploying weapons in outer space. In his January 2007 interview
Putin said Russia is in favor of a democratic multipolar world and of strengthening
the systems of international law.
5. While Putin is often characterised as an autocrat by the Western media
and many opposition politicians (most notably, Boris Nemtsov, Mikhail Kasyanov
and Ilya Yashin), his relationship with former American President George W. Bush,
former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, former French President Jacques
Chirac, and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi are reported to be personally
friendly. Putin's relationship with Germany's new Chancellor, Angela Merkel, was
reported to be "cooler" and "more business-like" than his partnership with Gerhard
Schröder. This observation is often attributed to the fact that Merkel was raised in
the former DDR, the country of station of Putin when he was a KGB agent.
6. In the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States, he agreed
to the establishment of coalition military bases in Central Asia before and during
the US-led invasion of Afghanistan. Russian nationalists objected to the
establishment of any US military presence on the territory of the former Soviet
Union, and had expected Putin to keep the US out of the Central Asian republics, or
at the very least extract a commitment from Washington to withdraw from these
bases as soon as the immediate military necessity had passed.
7. During the Iraq crisis of 2003, Putin opposed Washington's move to invade
Iraq without the benefit of a United Nations Security Council resolution explicitly
authorizing the use of military force. After the official end of the war was
announced, American President George W. Bush asked the United Nations to lift
sanctions on Iraq. Putin supported lifting of the sanctions in due course, arguing
 12
that the UN commission first be given a chance to complete its work on the search
for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
UNITED KINGDOM FOREIGN POLICY
1. The diplomatic foreign relations of the United Kingdom are implemented
by the United Kingdom's Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The UK was the
world's foremost power during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Throughout
history it has wielded significant influence upon other nations via the British Empire,
and until the 1950s was considered a superpower. However, the cost of two World
Wars and the process of decolonisation diminished this influence. Nevertheless, the
United Kingdom remains a major power and a permanent member of the United
Nations Security Council, a Member State of the European Union, and a founding
member of the G7, G8, G20, NATO, OECD, WTO, Council of Europe, OSCE, and the
Commonwealth of Nations, which is a legacy of the British Empire.
2. Brown was committed to the Iraq War, but said in a speech in June 2007
that he would "learn the lessons" from the mistakes made in Iraq. Brown said in a
letter published on 17 March 2008 that the United Kingdom will hold an inquiry into
the Iraq war. Brown skipped the opening ceremony of the 2008 Summer Olympics,
on 8 August 2008 in Beijing. He attended the closing ceremony instead, on 24
August 2008.
3. Brown had been under intense pressure from human rights campaigners to
send a message to China, concerning the 2008 Tibetan unrest. His decision not to
attend the opening ceremony was not an act of protest, rather made several weeks
in advance and not intended as a stand on principle.
4. In November 2007 Brown was accused by some senior military figures of
not adhering to the 'military covenant', a convention within British politics stating
that in exchange for them putting their lives at risk for the sake of national security,
the armed forces should in turn be suitably looked after by the government.
5. In a speech in July 2007, Brown personally clarified his position regarding
Britain's relationship with the USA] "We will not allow people to separate us from
the United States of America in dealing with the common challenges that we face
around the world. I think people have got to remember that the relationship
between Britain and America and between a British prime minister and an
American president is built on the things that we share, the same enduring values
about the importance of liberty, opportunity, the dignity of the individual. I will
continue to work, as Tony Blair did, very closely with the American administration."
6. Brown and the Labour party had pledged to allow a referendum on the EU
Treaty of Lisbon. On the morning of 13 December 2007, Foreign Secretary David
Miliband attended for the Prime Minister at the official signing ceremony in Lisbon
of the EU Reform Treaty. Brown's opponents on both sides of the House, and in the
press, suggested that ratification by Parliament was not enough and that a
referendum should also be held. Labour's 2005 manifesto had pledged to give
British public a referendum on the original EU Constitution.
7. Brown argued that the Treaty significantly differed from the Constitution,
and as such did not require a referendum. He also responded with plans for a
lengthy debate on the topic, and stated that he believed the document to be too
complex to be decided by referendum.
NATIONAL INTERESTS AND FOREIGN POLICY.
1. A country's foreign policy, also called the international relations policy, is
strategies chosen by the state to safeguard its national interests and to
achieve its goals in international relations. The approaches are strategically
employed to interact with other countries. In the recent time, due to the
deepening level of globalization and transnational activities, the states will
also have to interact with non-state actors.
2. The aforementioned interaction is evaluated and monitored in attempts to
maximize benefits of multilateral international cooperation. Since the
national interests are paramount, foreign policies are designed by the
government through high-level decision making processes.
3. National interests accomplishment can occur as a result of peaceful
cooperation with other nations, or through exploitation. Usually, creating
foreign policy is the job of the head of government and the foreign
minister (or equivalent).
4. In some countries the legislature also has considerable oversight. As an
exception, in France and Finland, the head of state is responsible for
foreign policy, while the head of government mainly deals with internal
policy. In the United States, the head of state (the President) also functions
as the head of government. According to Graham T. Allison, there are
three models of Foreign Policy decision making process: 1). Rational Actor
model, 2). Organizational Process model, and 3). Bureaucratic Politics
model.
International relations theory
5. The sub-discipline that specializes in the study of foreign relations is known
as foreign policy analysis (FPA). FPA contributes to overall communication between
nations.
 13
National interest
6. The national interest, often referred to by the French term raison d’état, is
a country's goals and ambitions whether economic, military, or cultural. The notion
is an important one in international relations where pursuit of the national interest
is the foundation of the realist school.
7. The national interest of a state is multi-faceted. Primary is the state's
survival and security. Also important is the pursuit of wealth and economic growth
and power. Many states, especially in modern times, regard the preservation of the
nation's culture as of great importance.
History of the concept
 In early human history the national interest was usually viewed as
secondary to that of religion or morality. To engage in a war rulers needed
to justify the action in these contexts. The first thinker to advocate for the
primacy of the national interest is usually considered to be Niccolò
Machiavelli.
 The practice is first seen as being employed by France under the direction
of its Chief Minister Cardinal Richelieu in the Thirty Years' War when it
intervened on the Protestant side, despite its own Catholicism, to block the
increasing power of the Holy Roman Emperor. At Richelieu's prompting,
Jean de Silhon defended the concept of reason of state as "a mean
between what conscience permits and affairs require." The notion of the
national interest soon came to dominate European politics that became
fiercely competitive over the next centuries.
 States could now openly embark on wars purely out of self-interest.
Mercantilism can be seen as the economic justification of the aggressive
pursuit of the national interest.
 A foreign policy geared towards pursuing the national interest is the
foundation of the realist school of international relations. The realist
school reached its greatest heights at the Congress of Vienna with the
practice of the balance of powers, which amounted to balancing the
national interest of several great and lesser powers.
 Metternich was celebrated as the principal artist and theoretician of this
balancing but he was simply doing a more or less clean copy of what his
predecessor Kaunitz had already done by reversing so many of the
traditional Habsburg alliances and building international relations anew on
the basis of national interest instead of religion or tradition.
 These notions became much criticized after the bloody debacle of the First
World War, and some sought to replace the concept of the balance of
power with the idea of collective security, whereby all members of the
League of Nations would "consider an attack upon one as an attack upon
all," thus deterring the use of violence forevermore. The League of Nations
did not work, partially because the United States refused to join and
partially because, in practice, nations did not always find it "in the national
interest" to deter each other from the use of force.
 The events of World War II led to a rebirth of Realist and then Neo-realist
thought, as international relations theorists re-emphasized the role of
power in global governance. Many IR theorists blamed the weakness of the
League of Nations for its idealism (contrasted with Realism) and
ineffectiveness at preventing war, even as they blamed mercantilist beggar
thy neighbor policies for the creation of fascist states in Germany and Italy.
With hegemonic stability theory, the concept of the U.S. national interest
was expanded to include the maintenance of open sea lanes and the
maintenance and expansion of free trade.
Concept today
 Today, the concept of "the national interest" is often associated with
political Realists who wish to differentiate their policies from "idealistic"
policies that seek either to inject morality into foreign policy or promote
solutions that rely on multilateral institutions which might weaken the
independence of the state.
 As considerable disagreement exists in every country over what is or is not
in "the national interest," the term is as often invoked to justify isolationist
and pacifistic policies as to justify interventionist or warlike policies.
POWER AND CAPABILITY ANALYSIS IN FOREIGN POLICY.
Power in international relations
1. Power in international relations is defined in several different ways.
Political scientists, historians, and practitioners of international relations
(diplomats) have used the following concepts of political power:
a) Power as a goal of states or leaders;
b) Power as a measure of influence or control over outcomes, events,
actors and issues;
c) Power as reflecting victory in conflict and the attainment of security;
and,
d) Power as control over resources and capabilities.
2. Modern discourse generally speaks in terms of state power, indicating both
economic and military power. Those states that have significant amounts of
power within the international system are referred to as middle powers,
regional powers, great powers, superpowers, or hyperpowers, although there
is no commonly accepted standard for what defines a powerful state.
Entities other than states can also acquire and wield power in international
relations. Such entities can include multilateral international organizations,
 14
military alliance organizations (e.g. NATO), multinational corporations, non-
governmental organizations, or other institutions such as the Roman Catholic
Church, Wal-Mart, or the Hanseatic League.
Power as a goal
3. Primary usage of "power" as a goal in international relations belongs to
political theorists, such as Niccolò Machiavelli and Hans Morgenthau. Especially
among Classical Realist thinkers, power is an inherent goal of mankind and of
states. Economic growth, military growth, cultural spread etc. can all be considered
as working towards the ultimate goal of international power.
Power as influence
4. Political scientists principally use "power" in terms of an actor's ability to
exercise influence over other actors within the international system. This influence
can be coercive, attractive, cooperative, or competitive. Mechanisms of influence
can include the threat or use of force, economic interaction or pressure, diplomacy,
and cultural exchange.
Spheres, blocs, and alliances
5. Under certain circumstances, states can organize a sphere of influence or a
bloc within which they exercise predominant influence. Historical examples include
the spheres of influence recognized under the Concert of Europe, or the recognition
of spheres during the Cold War following the Yalta Conference. The Warsaw Pact,
the "Free World," and the Non-Aligned Movement were the blocs that arose out of
the Cold War contest. Military alliances like NATO and the Warsaw Pact are another
forum through which influence is exercised. However, "realist" theory often
attempts to stay away from the creation of powerful blocs/spheres that can create
a hegemon within the region. British foreign policy, for example, has always sided
against the hegemonic forces on the continent, i.e. Nazi Germany, Napoleonic
France or Habsburg Austria.
Power as security
6. "Power" is also used when describing states or actors that have achieved
military victories or security for their state in the international system. This general
usage is most commonly found among the writings of historians or popular writers.
For instance, a state that has achieved a string of combat victories in a military
campaign against other states can be described as powerful. An actor that has
succeeded in protecting its security, sovereignty, or strategic interests from
repeated or significant challenge can also be described as powerful.
Power as capability
7. "Power is the capacity to direct the decisions and actions of others. Power
derives from strength and will. Strength comes from the transformation of
resources into capabilities. Will infuses objectives with resolve. Strategy marshals
capabilities and brings them to bear with precision. Statecraft seeks through
strategy to magnify the mass, relevance, impact, and irresistibility of power. It
guides the ways the state deploys and applies its power abroad. These ways
embrace the arts of war, espionage, and diplomacy. The practitioners of these three
arts are the paladins of statecraft." [1] Charles W. Freeman, Jr."Power" is also used
to describe the resources and capabilities of a state. This definition is quantitative
and is most often used by geopoliticians and the military. Capabilities are thought of
in tangible terms—they are measurable, weighable, quantifiable assets. Thomas
Hobbes spoke of power as "present means to obtain some future apparent good."
Hard power can be treated as a potential and is not often enforced on the
international stage.Chinese strategists have such a concept of national power that
can be measured quantitatively using an index known as comprehensive national
power.
Soft versus hard power
8. Some political scientists distinguish between two types of power: soft and
hard. The former is attractive while the latter is coercive. Joseph Nye is the leading
proponent and theorist of soft power.
a) Instruments of soft power include debates on cultural values, dialogues on
ideology, the attempt to influence through good example, and the appeal
to commonly accepted human values. Means of exercising soft power
include diplomacy, dissemination of information, analysis, propaganda,
and cultural programming to achieve political ends.
b) Hard power refers to coercive tactics: the threat or use of armed forces,
economic pressure or sanctions, assassination and subterfuge, or other
forms of intimidation. Hard power is generally associated to the stronger
of nations, as the ability to change the domestic affairs of other nations
through military threats.
Categories of power
9. In the modern geopolitical landscape, a number of terms are used to
describe powers of various types, these include:
Darkest blue countries most often considered to be superpowers, dark blue
countries most often considered to be great powers, pale blue countries most
often considered to be middle powers, and palest blue countries also sometimes
considered to be middle powers.
a) Hyperpower - coined in the 1990s to describe the post-Cold War unrivaled
global power of the United States as the sole remaining superpower. If
such a state is the preponderant power in the international system, it is
described as a hegemon.
b) Superpower - Fox (1944) defined superpower as 'great power plus great
mobility of power' and identified 3 states, the United States, the Soviet
Union and the British Empire[3]. China and the European Union are often
considered potential superpowers.
 15
c) Great power - in historical mentions, the term great power refers to any
nations that have strong political, cultural and economic influence over
nations around it and across the world. China, France, Germany, Japan,
Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States are often considered to
be great powers.
d) Regional power is also used to describe a nation that exercises influence
and power within a region. Being a regional power is not mutually
exclusive with any of the other categories of power. Many countries are
often described as regional powers, among those are South Africa, Israel,
Turkey, and Indonesia.
e) Middle power - a subjective description of second-tier influential states
that could not be described as great powers. Australia, Canada, Spain, Italy,
Poland, Brazil, India, Mexico, and South Korea are commonly considered to
be major middle powers alongside other middle powers. India and Brazil
are also sometimes considered to be potential future great powers.
Other types of power
f) The term energy superpower describes a country that has immense
influence or even direct control over much of the world's energy supplies.
Saudi Arabia and Russia, possibly Canada and Australia are generally
acknowledged as the world's current energy superpowers, given their
abilities to globally influence or even directly control prices to certain
countries.
g) The term cultural/entertainment superpower describes a country in which
has immense influence or even direct control over much of the world's
entertainment or has an immense large cultural influence on much of the
world. Although this is debated on who meets such criteria, many agree
that the United States, United Kingdom and Japan are generally
acknowledged as the entertainment and cultural superpowers, given their
abilities to distribute their entertainment and cultural innovations
worldwide.
Modern Age European powers
10. From 16th century to the early 18th century the three major powers in
Europe were France, Spain and the Ottoman Empire. During the 17th and 18th
century United Kingdom and the Holy Roman Empire (under the Habsburg house)
were added to the group, but Spain and Ottomans progressively lost their status. In
the second half of the same century Russia and the Kingdom of Prussia gained the
major status.
11. During Early Modern European Age a group of states including Sweden, the
Netherlands, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, Portugal, Papacy, Denmark–Norway,
Poland, Kingdom of Bavaria were recognised as having important impact on the
European balance of power.
12. From the late 18th century and during all the 19th century, there was an
informal convention recognising Five Great Powers in Europe: France, Great Britain,
Russia, Austria (later Austro-Hungary) and the Kingdom of Prussia (later the German
Empire). From the late 19th century Italy was added to this group. Also two extra-
European powers, the United States and Japan, were able to gain the same status
from the start of 20th century.
ORGANIZATION AND PROCESS OF FOREIGN POLICY MAKING
1. Foreign Policy, a course of action or set of principles adopted by a nation’s
government to define its relations with other countries or groups of countries. A
country’s foreign policy also sets forth its positions on a wide range of international
issues. A country’s foreign policy may reflect broad national objectives or represent
a narrow and specific response to a particular situation. A country can achieve its
foreign policy goals in several ways. It can use diplomacy—that is, peaceful
negotiations with other countries. It can employ economic actions such as giving
money or other aid to another country, or it can restrict trade with that nation or
impose economic sanctions on it. It also can resort to military force.
2. A country’s foreign policy can be influenced by many variables, including
its historical alliances with other nations, its culture, type of government, size,
geographic location, economic ties, and military power. A country’s foreign policy is
usually aimed at preserving or promoting its economic and political interests abroad
and its position in the world.
3. The analysis of foreign policy has traditionally focused on government
actions, particularly those related to political and military issues. But in recent
decades the focus has changed. Today many nongovernmental groups or
organizations, known as NGOs, play an important role in foreign policy. Groups as
diverse as Amnesty International, a nonpartisan organization that advocates for
human rights, and al-Qaeda, a terrorist organization responsible for the September
11 attacks on the United States in 2001, enlarge the number of foreign policy actors
in the world today.
3. Foreign policy actions are also initiated by organizations representing a
group of governments, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a
multinational defense alliance that includes, among others, the United Kingdom,
France, and the United States. Organizations such as the North American Free Trade
Association (NAFTA), an economic organization of Canada, Mexico, and the United
States, and the United Nations (UN), a global organization of more than 190
nations, also play a role in setting foreign policy. These groups and organizations
 16
have adopted foreign policies on a wider range of issues than in the past, including
human rights, trade, peacekeeping, and arms control. As a result, the array of
foreign policy issues has become increasingly diverse.
 The rest of this article focuses on foreign policy in the United States.
American Foreign Policy.
a) Under the Constitution of the United States, both the Congress of the
United States and the president have the responsibility of setting U.S.
foreign policy.
b) The U.S. Constitution also dictates that some of that power be shared
between the two.
c) In general, the president shapes foreign policy, with the advice of the
secretary of state and the Department of State, but the president also
has numerous other national security officials in the executive branch
to assist in shaping foreign policy.
d) Congress approves the funding needed to carry out that policy.
e) The U.S. Senate must also approve any treaties initiated by the
president by a two-thirds vote.
f) In addition, U.S. Congress can criticize actions the president and
administration have carried out, and U.S. Congress has, from time to
time, imposed restrictions on U.S. foreign policy actions.
g) The dividing line between the power of the president and that of U.S.
Congress to set foreign policy is not always clear.
h) As a result, U.S. Congress and the president have sometimes struggled
for that authority throughout various periods of American history.
i) But since the end of World War II in 1945, the president has been
generally recognized as having the principal authority to create foreign
policy.
j) Both U.S. Congress and the courts have deferred to the president on
foreign policy questions. Political parties, special interests groups, and
public opinion have generally played a secondary role.
Foreign Policy of a Nation and effect of media
1. Foreign policy is the melting pot of a state’s socio-political, economic and
military policies. It varies from one state to another and from one type of state to
another. But what is true for all is, it is the output of the state in the global system.
Foreign policy is the course of action undertaken by a sovereign state in pursuit of
national objectives beyond its domestic jurisdiction. If we look at the definition
given by Palmer and Perkins, it states, “foreign policy is a systematic statement of
deliberately selected nation interests”. According to Hartman, “foreign policy is the
system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behavior of other
states and for adjusting their own activities to the international environment”. Both
the statements clearly indicate that it is securing of national interests in an
international arena.
2. The study of foreign policy should be treated as a science or a discipline.
Their roots are in the unique historical background, economic needs, political
institutions, military institution, intelligence department, peculiar geographical
circumstance and so on. Some of them are permanent, some temporary, some are
clear, others not clear. But they interact with one another owing to interdependent
values.
3. At this point, if we consider the foreign policy of Nepal, we can clearly see
the amalgamation of political, economical and military factors to safeguard our
national interest. Our foreign policy states, the objective of it are as follows
(a) Enhance the dignity of the state in the international arena by
maintaining sovereignty, integrity and independence of the country
(b) Promoting economic interest
(c) Providing national security
(d) Protecting national prestige
(e) Maintaining world order and protecting the interests of the
citizens abroad.
4. Now, if we look at the guiding principles of Nepal’s foreign policy, they are
as follows
(a) Panchasheel, principles in the UN charter, policy of non-
alignment, international law and the value of world peace
(b) Mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity, sovereignty
and independence
(c) Non-interference in each other’s internal affairs
(d) Respect for mutual equality
(e) Non-aggression and the peaceful settlement of disputes
(f) Cooperation for mutual benefit
 17
5. If we analyze the above-mentioned facts, it clearly gives away the political,
economic and military guidelines. It has clearly stated that we are neither going to
attack any countries nor do we tolerate other country’s aggression in our territorial
integrity. We always will cooperate for mutual benefit and will promote economic
interest.
6. Since foreign policy of a nation encompass all aspects of National Security
it is very important to ensure its correct dissemination. A slightest mis-
interpretation can shatter a country's image in international arena and sometime
can result into war. Media being the medium of dissemination has to be very clear
about its aim and this must be ensured. Educating the world about what we believe
and ensuring them that we will abide by it. This is a commitment and should be a
passionate one. Only dissemination will not be effective. This has to be checked and
crosschecked time and again. If it is well received by the other nations, it will start
showing the indications and diplomatic relationship will start shaping accordingly.
But on the other hand, if an impression of us being reluctant towards our policy
goes out internationally, it will have negative impact and other nations will think
that we are not serious on implementation part. A burning example of this is the
failure of updating the websites of foreign ministries after the parliament was
reinstated following Jana-andolan II. This does not give positive signal to the
international community and give them space to question the intentions of the
government. These give space for people to make their own interpretations and
make allegations. Thus it is very important to ensure that whatever comes in media
is correct and the authority giving that information is truly committed to follow it.
Recommendations
7. National Security has priority over everything else and this is the issue,
which is non-negotiable. It is the duty of the state to educate every citizen and also
make it known to other nations. Media being the medium of doing that, it should be
cautioned to deliver the correct message. Following are some recommendations for
ensuring that
(a) Clear national aim and national policy
(b) Basic education of National Interest to media and public
(c) Clearly laid down media policy and non-negotiable factors
(d) Access of media to concerned ministry's spokesperson
(e) Immediate press conference by the concerned in case of any
incident before it is speculated
(f) transparency during the process is very essential
(f) Development of professional ethics and clear punitive actions in
case of its breaching
(g) An advisory committee to facilitate smooth functioning and
monitor any wrong doing
(h) Provision of an advisory committee to do a periodic review of
policies and make timely recommendations
(j) Periodic press conferences to give out any new change in policies
and updates
FOREIGN POLICY IN ACTION.
1. This study will examine the most beneficial and most disastrous foreign
policy actions undertaken by the United States since 1938 as described in Stephen
Ambrose's Rise to Globalism. The most beneficial action was the entrance into
World War II. The most disastrous action was the decision to enter into the Vietnam
War. The criteria are simple and clear with respect to an evaluation of the most
"beneficial" and "disastrous" foreign policy actions taken in this period. What action
resulted in the worst benefit, and what action resulted in the greatest disaster? The
decision which led to the entrance of the United States into World 2.
2. War II resulted in victory over tyrants who would have imposed totalitarian
rule on most of the world, in putting an end to the vestiges of the Depression as the
nation geared up industrially for the war effort, and established the United States as
the number one post-war nation economically and militarily. Certainly no other
action taken since 1938 has produced anything near such a list of benefits.
3. On the other hand, the decision which led to the entrance of the United
States into the Vietnam War split the nation into rageful camps for almost a decade
(some might argue that such a division continues today), cost the United States
over fifty thousand lives and billions of dollars for no purpose, ended one
Presidency (Johnson's) and dominated the national political debate when other
crucial issues required such debate, and did not even result in a enter World War II
a decision based on the vital interests of the nation? The answer is an unequivocal
"yes". Had the United States not entered the war, the nation would have been
isolated in a world controlled by Germany, Japan and Italy. In order to literally
survive as a nation, the United States had no choice but to enter the war. It is ironic
that one of the leaders who praised the United States for its role in liberating
enslaved nations in World War II would within ten years be effectively at war with
the United States. Ho Chi Minh would turn out to be one of the most aggrieved
victims of the abuse of American power which would follow American success in
World War II. We read that "Ho Chi Minh hailed the Americans as the true friends of
the oppressed of the earth" (50) after the United States had liberated Vietnam from
 18
the Japanese. However, Vietnam was one of many nations which would suffer
profoundly as the result of the enmity of the Cold War. The decision of the United
States to enter the Vietnam War was a disaster according to all three standards
established for this study. In the first place, it was a decision which was not well-
though-out at all. In fact, it could be even be said that it was not a decision at al .
sense, diplomacy is the employment of tact to gain strategic advantage or to find
mutually acceptable solutions to a common challenge, one set of tools being the
phrasing of statements in a non-confrontational, or polite manner. The science of
diplomatics, dealing with the study of old documents, also owes its name to the
above, but its present meaning is completely distinct from that of diplomacy.

Diplomats and diplomatic missions

DIPLOMACY
1. The collective term for a group of diplomats from a single country who
MEANING, NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF DIPLOMACY.
reside in another country is a diplomatic mission. Ambassador is the most senior
diplomatic rank; a diplomatic mission headed by an ambassador is known as an
DIPLOMACY
embassy, with the exception of permanent missions at the United Nations, the
1. The term diplomacy has been derived from the Latin noun “diploma”
Organization of American States, or other multilateral organizations, which are also
meaning a double document.
headed by ambassadors. The collective body of all diplomats of particular country is
2. Diplomacy, practices and institutions by which nations conduct their
called that country's diplomatic service. The collective body of all diplomats
relations with one another. Originally, the English term diplomatics referred to the
assigned to a particular country is the diplomatic corps.
care and evaluation of official papers or archives, many of which were treaties. In
the 18th century diplomatic documents increasingly meant those pertaining to
international relations, and the term diplomatic corps was used to signify the body
of ambassadors, envoys, and officials attached to foreign missions. In 1796 the
British philosopher Edmund Burke castigated the French for their “double
diplomacy” during the Napoleonic Wars; since then the term diplomacy has been
associated with international politics and foreign policy. According to Earnet Salow “
Diplomacy is the application of intelligence and tact to conduct official relation
between the governments of Independent state.
 According to Quency Wright “ Diplomacy is the art of negotiation in
order to achieve the maximization of group objectives with a
minimum of cost, within a system of politics in which war is a
possibility.
 According to Childs “Diplomacy is the process by which foreign policy
is carried out.”
 According to Nicholson “ diplomacy is the management of Intl relation
by means of negotiations the method by which these relations are
adjusted and managed by ambassadors and envoys: the businesses or
the art of the diplomats.

Diplomacy is the art and practice of conducting negotiations between

representatives of groups or states. It usually refers to international diplomacy, the
conduct of international relations through the intercession of professional
diplomats with regard to issues of peace-making, trade, war, economics, culture,
environment and human rights. International treaties are usually negotiated by
diplomats prior to endorsement by national politicians. In an informal or social
 19
BRIEF BACKGROUND
1. The beginning of the organized diplomacy can be traced back to the Greek
period 5th century B.C.
2. It was in the early 19th century that diplomacy methods became a generally
observed norm and code.
3. Traditionally diplomacy was explained carefully in terms of national
interest supported by power.
4. It is through diplomacy that states:-
(a) Arrange alliance to maintain the balance power.
(b) Negotiate the level and types of arms being maintained.
(c)Contribute to the development of Intl law.
(d) Maintain regional and international org like SAARC, UN etc.
(e) Co-ordination economic policy design to enhance their welfare and
power or restrict welfare and power of other state.
5. Thus diplomacy deals with various international affairs, conduct of negotiation,
making agreements and the means of promoting national interest
OBJECTIVES OF DIPLOMACY
 Diplomacy aims at protection of national interests which h are mainly
preservative of territorial integrity and sovereignty, economic prosperity
and welfare of the state.
 The objective of diplomacy is to insure that the interests of the state are
safeguarded.
 In other words the objective of diplomacy is to protect the security of
nation by peaceful means. If possible, but by giving every assistance to
military operations if war cannot be avoided.
1.
 Broadly speaking, the functions of a diplomat are representations,
negotiation, diplomat protection public relation information and
administration of embassy.
 A diplomat has to project a very good image of his country. He protects
his country’s nation and property in the country where he is appointed
Vienna convention of 1961 specifies five functions of a diplomat.
(a) To represent his state abroad.
(b) To protect interest of nationals of one’s state according to
international law.
(c) To study the political condition of other states and send
authentic information.
(d) To establish friendly relation between states and the country
to where he is appointed in economic, cultural and scientific
area.
(e) To negotiate with state on different subjects.
BASIC INSTRUMENTS OF DIPLOMACY
1. Diplomacy has two organized instruments:
(a) Foreign office in the capital of respective nation states like the
ministry of external affairs. The diplomats working in these offices
translate theory into practice.
(b) Diplomats fulfill three basic functions, symbolic or ceremonial when
they represent the head of the country at official functions where
appointed legal when they act as the legal representative and agent of
the government while negotiating agreements, contracts or executive
orders of his government and political when they actually participate in
formulation and shaping foreign policy of his country.
USEFULNESS OF DIPLOMACY

MAIN FUNCTIONS OF DIPLOMACY 1. Keeping in view that fulfillment of foreign policy objectives and promotion of
1. According to Kautilya they are:- national interest diplomacy plays a useful role as.
(a) Expression of power (a) Diplomacy provides every opportunity for cooperation in the conduct
(b) Make friends and create division among enemy status of the world business.
(c) Proper implementation of treaties etc. (b) It is the source of authentic materials on diplomatic relation like
diplomatic documents, letters of embassies.
 Thus the art of diplomacy consist in using the right means, at right time (c) It is an inexpensive means of exercising power in international affairs.
with the right emphasis. A diplomat is the eyes, ears of his government (d) A diplomat can participate in conference negotiate agreements or
abroad. draft resolution but if the state so desires it can refuse to ratify them
 This chief function are to execute the policy of his own country, to there by avoiding making commitments.
protect its interest and its nationals, to keep his government informed (e) Diplomats assist head of states and delegation at international
of major development in the rest of the world. conference.
 20
(f) Diplomats are sent on secret missions. new Embassies in 14 countries on the territory of the former Soviet Union. Each of
(g) A successful diplomat therefore is one who is aware of views of these newly independent Eurasian states has emerged with congealing national and
others, not so as to accommodate or compromise with them but so cultural identities, including a rediscovery of native languages long suppressed
as to frustrate them. under Soviet policies.
The fragmentation of Cold War-era nation-states and the growing number of failed
NEW TRENDS OF DIPLOMACY governments challenge U.S. diplomatic missions across the globe. Anti-Americanism
1. Diplomacy has already been descried earlier. The new trends of diplomacy and radical movements directed against the United States are on the rise. Even
are as follows. some traditional allies are no longer reliable. The U.S. military footprint grows
(a) Democratic diplomacy smaller in many regions, raising the importance of maintaining access points with
(b) Multilateral diplomacy countries that are receptive to U.S. policies before a crisis occurs. Combatant
(c) Summit diplomacy commanders rely heavily on the diplomatic work conducted by Embassy country
(d) Coalition diplomacy teams. But a decade after the lifting of the Iron Curtain, the Department of Defense
(e) Commercial diplomacy (DOD) has not adequately adjusted to the security challenges facing the attache
(f) Cultural diplomacy corps and its military-diplomatic mission. This article outlines how transformation of
(g) Shopkeeper diplomacy the military attache corps will substantially improve capabilities.
(h) Warrior diplomacy

POLITICAL, ECONOMICAL, MILITARY AND CULTURAL DIPLOMACY

1. Cultural diplomacy is a part of diplomacy. It alludes to a new way of
making diplomacy by involving new non governmental and non professional actors
in the making of diplomacy. In the frame of globalization, culture plays a major role
in the definition of identity and in the relations between people. Joseph Nye points
out the importance of having a soft power besides a hard power. When classical
diplomacy fails, a better knowledge can help bridging the gap between different
cultures. Cultural diplomacy becomes a subject of academic studies based on
historical essays on the United States, Europe, and the Cold War.
2. Economic diplomacy is concerned with economic policy issues, e.g. work
of delegations at standard setting organizations such as World Trade Organization
(WTO). Economic diplomats also monitor and report on economic policies in foreign
countries and give the home government advice on how to best influence them.
Economic diplomacy employs economic resources, either as rewards or sanctions,
in pursuit of a particular foreign policy objective. This is sometimes called
"economic statecraft.
3. Military diplomacy
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union and concurrent with the war on terror,
military attaches have been fully involved in a wide range of defense-related
activities supporting national policymakers and combatant commanders. The
political map has changed in the last decade, increasing the importance of soldier-
diplomats serving abroad. Since 1945, the international system has expanded from
51 sovereign states to almost 200 today. Ten years ago, the United States opened
OLD AND NEW DIPLOMACY .
1. Diplomacy is a phenomenon which citizens play a greater role in impacting
internal relations.Actually it is a process of communication and negotiation in the
world politics and an important foreign policy instruments used by global actors.
While the convention and machinery of diplomacy have evolved over a long
historical period the introduction of diplomatic system began in the ancient world
but took a recognizable modern form from the fifteen century onwards with the
establishment of the permanent embassy.
2. A traditional diplomatic system was developed thereafter distinguished
from from the ancient and medieval worlds as it constituted a communication
process between recognised modern states and for relation and negotiation on
regular bases,given the distance involved,diplomats were sent a broad for this state
based activity.This mission was institutionalized and eventually
professionalized.This was purely on bilateral bases and undertaken by secrecy
through embassies on a state-to-state basis with the diplomats representing their
countries and able to conduct their business without obstruction or fear. Traditional
diplomacy reached its most developed form and most effective system for ordering
international relations and this is the period know as century of peace.
3. A new form of diplomacy was needed as the successful traditional
diplomacy which promoted stability,order and peace in the nineteen-century
Europe failed to prevent the first world war.The first world war was a watershed in
the history of diplomacy.The perceived failure of diplomacy to prevent this war led
to a 'new diplomacy' as there was a demand it should be open to public scrutiny
and control. The structure of the new diplomacy remained similar to the old
diplomacy to the extent that the states and governments remained the major
 21
actors in the system with well established embassies abroad attached to foreign much less than the increased hostility from other parts. This is also called soft
departments locally. States are no longer the only actors but share the stage with power.
intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations.The state changed from
the night watchman to the welfare state. 4. Many situations in modern diplomacy are also rules based. When for
4. The new diplomacy is being used to address many issues such as human instance two WTO countries have trade disputes, it is in the interest of both to limit
rights(e.g campaign to end South African apartheid and the save Darfur the spill over damage to other areas by following some agreed-upon rules.
campaign),humanitarian assistance,lobar rights,environmental issues, and fair
trade.The changing interest of states as international actors and the growing Diplomatic immunity
number of non-stae actors involved changed nature of the new diplomacy as a
process of negotiation.The outbreak of the second world war revealed the limits ot
1. The sanctity of diplomats has long been observed. This sanctity has come
the' new' diplomacy.
to be known as diplomatic immunity. While there have been a number of cases
Diplomacy was delicate and dangerous during the cold war when international
where diplomats have been killed, this is normally viewed as a great breach of
relation were dominated by a global confrontaion between superpowers and their
honour. Genghis Khan and the Mongols were well known for strongly insisting on
allies and the need to avoid a nuclear war but also to win the cold war.Also the war
the rights of diplomats, and they would often wreak horrific vengeance against any
against terrorism has posed a major challenge to the role of diplomacy in global
state that violated these rights.
politics which framed within a debate about the appropriate relationship between
hard and soft instrument of power.Even the most powerful states are no longer the
2. Diplomatic rights were established in the mid-seventeenth century in
only significant international actors.Bilaterial state-to-state diplomacy has been
Europe and have spread throughout the world. These rights were formalized by the
increasingly supplemented by multilateral form of diplomacy.
1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which protects diplomats
from being persecuted or prosecuted while on a diplomatic mission. If a diplomat
does commit a serious crime while in a host country he may be declared as
persona non grata (unwanted person). Such diplomats are then often tried for the
Diplomatic strategy
crime in their homeland.

1. Real world diplomatic negotiations are very different from intellectual

3. Diplomatic communications are also viewed as sacrosanct, and diplomats
debates in a university where an issue is decided on the merit of the arguments and
have long been allowed to carry documents across borders without being searched.
negotiators make a deal by splitting the difference. Though diplomatic agreements
The mechanism for this is the so-called "diplomatic bag" (or, in some countries, the
can sometimes be reached among liberal democratic nations by appealing to higher
"diplomatic pouch"). While radio and digital communication have become more
principles, most real world diplomacy has traditionally been heavily influenced by
standard for embassies, diplomatic pouches are still quite common and some
hard power.
countries, including the United States, declare entire shipping containers as
diplomatic pouches to bring sensitive material (often building supplies) into a
2. The interaction of strength and diplomacy can be illustrated by a country.
comparison to labor negotiations. If a labor union is not willing to strike, then the
union is not going anywhere because management has absolutely no incentive to
4. In times of hostility, diplomats are often withdrawn for reasons of personal
agree to union demands. On the other hand, if management is not willing to take a
safety, as well as in some cases when the host country is friendly but there is a
strike, then the company will be walked all over by the labor union, and
perceived threat from internal dissidents. Ambassadors and other diplomats are
management will be forced to agree to any demand the union makes. The same
sometimes recalled temporarily by their home countries as a way to express
concept applies to diplomatic negotiations.
displeasure with the host country. In both cases, lower-level employees still remain
to actually do the business of diplomacy.
3. There are also incentives in diplomacy to act reasonably, especially if the
support of other actors is needed. The gain from winning one negotiation can be
Diplomats as a guarantee
 22
1. In the Ottoman Empire, the diplomats of Persia and other states were seen
as a guarantee of good behavior. If a nation broke a treaty or if their
nationals misbehaved the diplomats would be punished. Diplomats were
thus used as an enforcement mechanism on treaties and international law.
To ensure that punishing a diplomat mattered rulers insisted on high-
ranking figures. This tradition is seen by supporters of Iran as a legal basis
of the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis. In imitation of alleged previous
practices supporters of the Iranian Revolution attempted to punish the
United States for its alleged misdeeds by holding their diplomats hostage.
Diplomats as a guarantee were also employed sometimes in pre-modern
Europe and other parts of Asia.
Diplomacy and espionage
1. Diplomacy is closely linked to espionage or gathering of intelligence.
Embassies are bases for both diplomats and spies, and some diplomats are
essentially openly-acknowledged spies. For instance, the job of military attachés
includes learning as much as possible about the military of the nation to which they
are assigned. They do not try to hide this role and, as such, are only invited to
events allowed by their hosts, such as military parades or air shows. There are also
deep-cover spies operating in many embassies.
2. These individuals are given fake positions at the embassy, but their main
task is to illegally gather intelligence, usually by coordinating spy rings of locals or
other spies. For the most part, spies operating out of embassies gather little
intelligence themselves and their identities tend to be known by the opposition. If
discovered, these diplomats can be expelled from an embassy, but for the most
part counter-intelligence agencies prefer to keep these agents in situ and under
close monitoring.
3. The information gathered by spies plays an increasingly important role in
diplomacy. Arms-control treaties would be impossible without the power of
reconnaissance satellites and agents to monitor compliance. Information gleaned
from espionage is useful in almost all forms of diplomacy, everything from trade
agreements to border disputes.
Diplomatic resolution of problems
1. Various processes and procedures have evolved over time for handling
diplomatic issues and disputes.
Arbitration and mediations
2. Nations sometimes resort to international arbitration when faced with a
specific question or point of contention in need of resolution. For most of history,
there were no official or formal procedures for such proceedings. They were
generally accepted to abide by general principles and protocols related to
international law and justice.
Sometimes these took the form of formal arbitrations and mediations. In such cases
a commission of diplomats might be convened to hear all sides of an issue, and to
come some sort of ruling based on international law.
In the modern era, much of this work is often carried out by the International
Court of Justice at the Hague, or other formal commissions, agencies and
tribunals, working under the United Nations. Below are some examples.
 Hay-Herbert Treaty Enacted after the United States and Britain submitted
a dispute to international mediation about the US-Canadian border.
Conferences
3. Other times, resolutions were sought through the convening of
international conferences. In such cases, there are fewer ground rules, and fewer
formal applications of international law. However, participants are expected to
guide themselves through principles of international fairness, logic, and protocol.
Some examples of these formal conferences are:
 Congress of Vienna (1815) – After Napoleon was defeated, there were
many diplomatic questions waiting to be resolved. This included the shape
of the map of Europe, the disposition of political and nationalist claims of
various ethnic groups and nationalities wishing to have some political
autonomy, and the resolution of various claims by various European
powers.
 The Congress of Berlin (June 13 – July 13, 1878) was a meeting of the
European Great Powers' and the Ottoman Empire's leading statesmen in
Berlin in 1878. In the wake of the Russo-Turkish War, 1877–78, the
meeting's aim was to reorganize conditions in the Balkans.
 23
Negotiations
4. Sometimes nations convene official negotiation processes to settle an issue
or dispute between several nations which are parties to a dispute. These are similar
to the conferences mentioned above, as there are technically no established rules
or procedures. However, there are general principles and precedents which help
define a course for such proceedings.
Some examples are
 Camp David accord Convened in 1978 by President Jimmy Carter of the
United States, at Camp David to reach an agreement between Prime
Minister Mechaem Begin of Israel and President Anwar Sadat of Egypt.
After weeks of negotiation, agreement was reached and the accords were
signed, later leading directly to the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty of 1979.
 Treaty of Portsmouth Enacted after President Theodore Roosevelt
brought together the delegates from Russia and Japan, to settle the
Russo-Japanese War. Roosevelt's personal intervention settled the
conflict, and caused him to win the Nobel peace prize.
Diplomatic recognition
1. Diplomatic recognition is an important factor in determining whether a
nation is an independent state. Receiving recognition is often difficult, even for
countries which are fully sovereign. For many decades after its becoming
independent, even many of the closest allies of the Dutch Republic refused to
grant it full recognition. Today there are a number of independent entities without
widespread diplomatic recognition, most notably the Republic of China(ROC) on
Taiwan.
2. Since the 1970s, most nations have stopped officially recognizing the ROC's
existence on Taiwan, at the insistence of the People's Republic of China.
Currently, the United States and other nations maintain informal relations through
de facto embassies, with names such as the American Institute in Taiwan.
Similarly, Taiwan's de facto embassies abroad are known by names such as the
Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office.
3. This was not always the case, with the US maintaining official diplomatic
ties with the ROC, recognizing it as the sole and legitimate government of all of
China until 1979, when these relations were broken off as a condition for
establishing official relations with Communist China.
4. The Palestinian National Authority has its own diplomatic service,
however Palestinian representatives in most Western countries are not accorded
diplomatic immunity, and their missions are referred to as Delegations General.
5. Other unrecognized regions which claim independence include Abkhazia,
Transnistria, Somaliland, South Ossetia, Nagorno Karabakh, and the Turkish
Republic of Northern Cyprus. Lacking the economic and political importance of
Taiwan, these nations tend to be much more diplomatically isolated.
6. Though used as a factor in judging sovereignty, Article 3 of the
Montevideo Convention states, "The political existence of the state is
independent of recognition by other states."
Informal diplomacy
1. Informal diplomacy (sometimes called Track II diplomacy) has been used
for centuries to communicate between powers. Most diplomats work to recruit
figures in other nations who might be able to give informal access to a country's
leadership. In some situations, such as between the United States and the People's
Republic of China a large amount of diplomacy is done through semi-formal
channels using interlocutors such as academic members of thinktanks. This occurs
in situations where governments wish to express intentions or to suggest methods
of resolving a diplomatic situation, but do not wish to express a formal position.
2. Track II diplomacy is a specific kind of informal diplomacy, in which non-
officials (academic scholars, retired civil and military officials, public figures, social
activists) engage in dialogue, with the aim of conflict resolution, or confidence-
building. Sometimes governments may fund such Track II exchanges. Sometimes
the exchanges may have no connection at all with governments, or may even act in
defiance of governments; such exchanges are called Track III.
3. On some occasion a former holder of an official position continues to carry
out an informal diplomatic activity after retirement. In some cases, governments
welcome such activity, for example as a means of establishing an initial contact with
a hostile state of group without being formally committed. In other cases, however,
such informal diplomats seek to promote a political agenda different from that of
the government currently in power. Such informal diplomacy is practiced by former
US Presidents Jimmy Carter and (to a lesser extent) Bill Clinton and by the former
Israeli diplomat and minister Yossi Beilin.
 24
Paradiplomacy
1. Paradiplomacy refers to the international relations conducted by
subnational, regional, local or non-central governments. The most ordinary case of
paradiplomatic relation refer to co-operation between bordering political entities.
However, interest of federal states, provinces, regions etc., may extend over to
different regions or to issues gathering local governments in multilateral fora
worldwide. Some non-central governments may be allowed to negotiate and enter
into agreement with foreign central states.
Small state diplomacy
1. Small state diplomacy is receiving increasing attention in diplomatic studies
and international relations. Small states are particularly affected by developments
which are determined beyond their borders such as climate change, water
security and shifts in the global economy. Diplomacy is the main vehicle by which
small states are able to ensure that their goals are addressed in the global arena.
These factors mean that small states have strong incentives to support international
cooperation. But with limited resources at their disposal, conducting effective
diplomacy poses unique challenges for small states.
NEGOTIATION AND BARGAINING
1. Negotiation is a dialogue intended to resolve disputes, to produce an
agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective
advantage, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is the primary
method of alternative dispute resolution.
2. Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit organizations, government
branches, legal proceedings, among nations and in personal situations such as
marriage, divorce, parenting, and everyday life. The study of the subject is called
negotiation theory. Professional negotiators are often specialized, such as union
negotiators, leverage buyout negotiators, peace negotiators, hostage negotiators,
or may work under other titles, such as diplomats, legislators or brokers.
Negotiation styles
3. Shell identified five styles/responses to negotiation [11]. Individuals can often
have strong dispositions towards numerous styles; the style used during a
negotiation depends on the context and the interests of the other party, among
other factors. In addition, styles can change over time.
1. Accommodating: Individuals who enjoy solving the other party’s problems
and preserving personal relationships. Accommodators are sensitive to the
emotional states, body language, and verbal signals of the other parties.
They can, however, feel taken advantage of in situations when the other
party places little emphasis on the relationship.
2. Avoiding: Individuals who do not like to negotiate and don’t do it unless
warranted. When negotiating, avoiders tend to defer and dodge the
confrontational aspects of negotiating; however, they may be perceived as
tactful and diplomatic.
3. Collaborating: Individuals who enjoy negotiations that involve solving
tough problems in creative ways. Collaborators are good at using
negotiations to understand the concerns and interests of the other parties.
They can, however, create problems by transforming simple situations into
more complex ones.
4. Competing: Individuals who enjoy negotiations because they present an
opportunity to win something. Competitive negotiators have strong
instincts for all aspects of negotiating and are often strategic. Because their
style can dominate the bargaining process, competitive negotiators often
neglect the importance of relationships.
5. Compromising: Individuals who are eager to close the deal by doing what
is fair and equal for all parties involved in the negotiation. Compromisers
can be useful when there is limited time to complete the deal; however,
compromisers often unnecessarily rush the negotiation process and make
concessions too quickly.
Important signals of progress can be the following:
1. Higher-level executives from the other side being included in the
discussions
2. Their questions beginning to focus on specific areas of the deal
3. A softening of their attitudes and position on some of the issues—“Let us
take some time to study this issue”
4. At the negotiation table, increased talk among themselves in their own
language, which may often mean they’re trying to decide something
5. Increased bargaining and use of the lower-level, informal, and other
channels of communication
Team negotiation
1. Due to globalization and growing business trends, negotiation in the form
of teams is becoming widely adopted. Teams can effectively collaborate to break
down a complex negotiation. There is more knowledge and wisdom dispersed in a
team than in a single mind. Writing, listening, and talking, are specific roles team
members must satisfy. The capacity base of a team reduces the amount of blunder,
and increases familiarity in a negotiation.
2. United Kingdom. The behaviors of the British negotiators were remarkably
similar to those of the Americans in all respects. Most British negotiators have a
 25
strong sense of the right way to negotiate and the wrong. Protocol is of great
importance.
Russia. The Russians’ style was quite different from that of any other European
group, and, indeed, was quite similar in many respects to the style of the Japanese.
They used no and you infrequently and used the most silent periods of any group.
Only the Japanese did less facial gazing, and only the Chinese asked a greater
percentage of questions.
negotiators.
3. China (Northern). The behaviors of the negotiators from Northern China
(i.e., in and around Tianjin) were most remarkable in the emphasis on asking
questions (34 percent). Indeed, 70 percent of the statements made by the Chinese
negotiators were classified as information-exchange tactics. Other aspects of their
behavior were quite similar to the Japanese, particularly the use of no and you and
silent periods.
4. United States. Like the Germans and the British, the Americans fell in the
middle of most continua. They did interrupt one another less frequently than all the
others, but that was their sole distinction.
Bargaining or haggling is a type of negotiation in which the buyer and seller of a
good or service dispute the price which will be paid and the exact nature of the
transaction that will take place, and eventually come to an agreement. Bargaining is
an alternative pricing strategy to fixed prices. Optimally, if it costs the retailer
nothing to engage and allow bargaining, he can divine the buyer's willingness to
spend. It allows for capturing more consumer surplus as it allows price
discrimination, a process whereby a seller can charge a higher price to one buyer
who is more eager (by being richer or more desperate). Haggling has largely
disappeared in parts of the world where the cost to haggle exceeds the gain to
retailers for most common retail items. However, for expensive goods sold to
uninformed buyers such as automobiles, bargaining can remain commonplace.
Bargaining is also the 3rd stage of the Kübler-Ross model (commonly known as
the stages of dying).
Dickering refers to the same process, albeit with a slight negative (petty)
connotation.
5. Conflict resolution is a range of methods for alleviating or eliminating
sources of conflict. The term "conflict resolution" is sometimes used
interchangeably with the term dispute resolution or alternative dispute resolution.
Processes of conflict resolution generally include negotiation, mediation, and
diplomacy. The processes of arbitration, litigation, and formal complaint processes
such as ombudsman processes, are usually described with the term dispute
resolution, although some refer to them as "conflict resolution." Processes of
mediation and arbitration are often referred to as alternative dispute resolution.
Good Office
1. Establish office management routines and stick to them.
2. Set up clearly delineated responsibilities.
3. Keep records – and keep your business records updated.
4. Take a walk through your office and have a sit.
5. Schedule the scut work.
6. Delegate and outsource.
7. Make business planning a priority.
Western Diplomacy Since 1945
1. The ability to practice diplomacy is one of the defining elements of a state.
As noted above, diplomacy has been practiced since the first city-states were
formed millennia ago in ancient Greece. For most of human history diplomats
were sent only for specific negotiations, and would return immediately after their
mission concluded. Diplomats were usually relatives of the ruling family or of very
high rank in order to give them legitimacy when they sought to negotiate with the
other state.
2. Western diplomacy since 1945 has been mainly concerned with its
relations with the Communist bloc. In the period of co-operation immediately after
the war, the United Nations was established, war criminals were tried, peace trea
ties were made with Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary, Rumania, and Finland, and the
Marshall Plan—originally designed for all Europe—was initiated. Relations,
however, deteriorated by a process of action and reaction publicly manifested by
Churchill's Fulton speech in the spring of 1947 in which he referred to the Iron
Curtain.
3. The Soviet take-over of European satellites, the Truman Doctrine, the
formation of NATO, the Communi zation of China, the Korean war, and the initiation
of atomic rivalry maintained a condition of Cold War. The death of Stalin in 1953
and the advent of Khrushchev led to more peace ful coexistence. The Korean war
and the Indo-Chinese war were ended.
4. A summit conference was held; the Asian and African countries met in
Bandung, and the United States and the Soviet Union acted together to stop
aggression at Suez. There was some liberalization in Poland, but Hungary was
crushed when it attempted to break away from the Soviet bloc. Disarmament
negotiations made little progress, and stability continued to depend on a balance of
terror. Communism penetrated Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
5.
The Western policy of containment and deterrence by threats of massive
retaliation had not prevented a great decrease in the Western relative power
 26
position, relative economy, and relative reputa tion in the underdeveloped world. A
new policy looking to ward a world secure for all states seems in order.
Eastern Diplomacy
1. One of the earliest realists in international relations theory was the 6th
century BC military strategist Sun Tzu (d. 496 BC), author of The Art of War. He
lived during a time in which rival states were starting to pay less attention to
traditional respects of tutelage to the Zhou Dynasty (c. 1050–256 BC) figurehead
monarchs while each vied for power and total conquest. However, a great deal of
diplomacy in establishing allies, bartering land, and signing peace treaties was
necessary for each warring state. Since the 17th century, there was a series of
treaties upheld by Qing Dynasty China and Czarist Russia, beginning with the
Treaty of Nerchinsk in the year 1689. This was followed up by the Aigun Treaty
and the Convention of Peking in the mid 19th century.
2. As European power spread around the world in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries so too did its diplomatic model and system become adopted
by Asian countries.
3. Diplomatic relations within the Early Modern era of Asia were depicted
as an environment of prestige and Status. It was maintained that one must be of
noble ancestry in order to represent an autonomous state within the international
arena. Therefore the position of diplomat was often revered as an element of the
elitist class within Asia. A state's ability to practice diplomacy has been one of the
underlying defining characteristics of an autonomous state. It is this practice that
has been employed since the conception of the first city-states within the
international spectrum. Diplomats in Asia were originally sent only for the purpose
of negotiation. They would be required to immediately return after their task was
completed. The majority of diplomats initially constituted the relatives of the ruling
family. A high rank was bestowed upon them in order to present a sense of
legitimacy with regards to their presence. Italy, the Ottoman Empire, and China
were the first real states that perpetuated environments of diplomacy. During the
early modern era diplomacy evolved to become a crucial element of international
relations within the Mediterranean and Asia.
Open and close diplomacy
1. The term "diplomacy" refers to the interaction between nation-states.
Traditionally, diplomacy was carried out by government officials--diplomats--who
negotiated treaties, trade policies, and other international agreements. The process
of negotiations ranges from very formal to informal, but it tends to be fairly
adversarial and competitive, relying on distributive or positional bargaining
strategies that assume a win-lose situation. The goal is to maintain power over
weaker nations and a balance of power with nations of equal status. Although
conflict resolution theorists have developed a multi-faceted understanding of
power, diplomacy still focuses on the "power over" approach, believing that power
is a zero sum commodity--the more you have, the less I have. This encourages
positional bargaining, rather than a more integrative or cooperative approach.
2. The Open Door Policy is a concept in foreign affairs. As a theory, the Open
Door Policy originates with British commercial practice, as was reflected in treaties
concluded with Qing Dynasty China after the First Opium War (1839-1842).
Although the Open Door is generally associated with China, it was recognized at the
Berlin Conference of 1885, which declared that no power could levy preferential
duties in the Congo basin.
3. After World War II, China's position as a sovereign state was recognized,
and all special concessions and unequal treaties were abolished, except for the
unequal treaties signed with Russia. However, with the rise to power of the
Communist Party of China, the Open Door Policy was rejected until 1978 when
Deng Xiaoping, under his new capitalist-inclined system that promoted market
forces, committed China to adopting policies which promote foreign trade and
economic investment[1]. Since the late-1970s, the term "Open Door Policy" has also
been used by the People's Republic of China as one justification for its demands
that nations not provide diplomatic recognition to the Republic of China on Taiwan.
4. Although several efforts have been made to alter the adversarial nature of
traditional diplomacy, none has been very successful. The first was the League of
Nations which called for open diplomacy and collective security. Although the plan
was developed by the U.S. President Woodrow Wilson, the United States failed to
support the idea, and the League quickly failed.
The United Nations was a second attempt at collective security and international
cooperation.
5. The UN has certainly been much more successful than the League of
Nations, but it still has not been able to overcome power rivalries (especially during
the Cold War, but, to some extent, even now) and lacks the money to enable it to
completely carry out its mandate. For this reason, and given the general
ineffectiveness of traditional diplomacy, more and more attention is being given to
what has come to be known as "track two" or "citizen" diplomacy--international
negotiations carried out by private citizens, rather than official diplomats. Most
advocates of track two approaches argue that they are not a replacement for track
one, but rather a supplement to them. Often track two approaches can precede
 27
official negotiations, laying the groundwork and establishing a certain level of trust
between people; sometimes they occur simultaneously.
6. Americans have always been uncomfortable with secret diplomacy and its
association with European aristocracies. American leaders have consistently
advocated open deliberations and public accountability. These values are embodied
in the constitutional provisions for making foreign policy. The U.S. Senate must
confirm all high-level diplomatic appointees and ratify, with a two-thirds vote, all
foreign treaties. In addition, the right of free speech presumes that journalists and
historians will investigate and challenge the government's actions. Time and again,
open debate about American diplomacy has forced leaders to change their policies
—as in the case of President Richard Nixon's planned escalation of the Vietnam War
in October 1969. On other occasions, stubborn figures—particularly President
Woodrow Wilson—have watched international agreements disintegrate because
they refused to compromise with domestic critics.
7. This bias toward openness has not prohibited secret diplomacy, especially
in the case of foreign negotiations and military maneuvers. Since Benjamin Franklin,
Silas Deane, and Arthur Lee negotiated the treaty of alliance with France in 1778,
almost every American diplomat sent abroad has relied upon secrecy to influence
foreign counterparts and, when necessary, depart from the letter of U.S.
government instructions. Diplomacy necessitates flexibility and creativity. It also
requires some freedom from day-to-day intrusions by critical on-lookers.
8. The distinction between secret deliberations and open accountability
poses a dilemma. Once diplomats have formulated their agreements in privacy,
they can often manipulate the domestic political agenda. They can depict their
accomplishments—as President George Washington did in the case of the Jay
Treaty (1794)—as the only available alternative. They can assert that a rejection of
their diplomatic work will bring certain disaster. To some extent, President Franklin
Roosevelt followed this tact when he circumvented America's neutrality legislation
between 1939 and 1941. Most significantly, leaders can claim that they are acting in
the face of an emergency that requires patriotic consent in the name of "national
security." Secret diplomacy combined with a call to "rally around the flag" has
silenced dissenters in nearly every American war—including the War of 1812, the
Mexican-American War, the War of 1898, World War I, and the Korean War.
9. Since 1945 the rhetoric of openness has remained strong in America, but
leaders have made far greater use of secret diplomacy than ever before. Three
developments explain this shift in behavior.
a) First, American interests became truly global after 1945. Competing with a
perceived communist menace, U.S. leaders believed that they needed to
employ subversive means of influence in far-away places. The creation of
the Central Intelligence Agency in 1947 and its secret sponsorship of coups
in Iran (1953) and Guatemala (1954) reflect this development.
b) Second, the Cold War motivated the U.S. government to classify large
quantities of scientific research, strategic analysis, and decision making
behind a wall of secrecy. The National Security Council (NSC), formed in
1947, served as a central coordinating body for secret activities in these
areas. Congress did not have any oversight for the NSC, which was
designed to organize America's capabilities for maximum effect in Foreign
Policy.
c) Third, a world with large nuclear arsenals and global subversives required
quick and decisive presidential authority. American leaders argued that the
pace of war after 1945 necessitated more substantial powers for the
executive branch of government. To engage in extended public
deliberation would, in the eyes of many, allow America's adversaries to
achieve their aims before the U.S. could react.
10. This kind of reasoning contributed to the rise of what some scholars have
called the "imperial presidency." The management of the Vietnam War between
1965 and 1975 by presidents Johnson and Nixon is a clear indication of this trend.
Nixon, in particular, felt he needed to act in secrecy, because he could not trust the
American people to make "realistic" decisions. At the dawn of the twenty-first
century, Americans continued to reconcile their democratic values with the growing
pressures for secret diplomacy.
STRUCTURE, METHODS AND ISSUES OF CONTEMPORARY DIPLOMACY
1. the fundamental issues of contemporary diplomacy - its subject and
method. Ours is the time of sweeping transformations which call for
profound comprehension, otherwise the diplomacy of any state might lose
its contacts with reality and, therefore, its efficiency of a foreign policy
instrument. The examples are too recent to be neglected.
2. our contacts with partners, including our Western partners, have
convinced us that an objective process of convergence is underway all over
the world. Limited so far to the realm of ideas it is gradually trickling into
the sphere of practical policies. The Democratic administration that came
to power in the United States under the slogan of changes accelerated the
process. Recently perceived as a confrontational idea and an attempt at
"shaking the foundations" the subject of changes in the global political
landscape is moving to the center of international discussions. The echoes
of the metaphysical idea of the world as a fossilized structure, however,
can still be heard.
3. The recent International Conference "The Modem State and Global
Security" at which President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev spoke provided
 28
ample evidence of the above. The highly impressive attendance and
profound discussions suggest that the modern state is not withering away;
it remains the main installment of harmonization of social and individual
interests at home and serves the central link of international relations
which can still be described as mainly interstate relations despite the
variety of other subjects of international communication.
4. This has put Zbigniew Brzezinski´s recent contribution to the Foreign Affairs
subtitled "Toward a Global Security Web" into the limelight; its author is
essentially in agreement with our thesis of network diplomacy reflected in
the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation.
5. THE SUBJECT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS is radically changing; it can
no longer be described as dynastic and cabinet policies centered at
territorial division of the world and markets and prewar coalitions. Today
diplomacy is dealing with the fundamental issues of nations´ lives ranging
from security in its contemporary, global, interpretation to prosperity and
new jobs.
6. The global challenges and threats have moved to the fore which means
that all states should pool forces to effectively oppose them. Created by
international terrorism, organized trans-border crime, drug trafficking,
illegal migration, global poverty and climate changes rather than
belligerent states they require new instruments, very much different from
the national armies´ numerical strength and fire power.
7. One feels that Mr. Brzezinski was quite right when he wrote that today
neither belligerent fanaticism of the nationalist states prone to territorial
expansion nor the ideologies claiming universality could be described as
the main threats to the world. We have been saying this for reached its
peak in the form of the bipolar world of the Cold War era.
8. Today, we should practice multi-vector network diplomacy conducive to
flexible cooperation among groups of states for the sake of harmonizing
identical interests. Today, we are not engaged — or, at least, should not be
engaged — in the struggle against any state or in the containment policy.
Time has come to apply collective efforts to promote concrete interests of
the international community as a whole or of groups of states.
9. We should be fully aware of the fact that modern conflicts and crises
cannot be resolved by force. This means that all states, no matter how
"difficult" they might look should be involved rather than isolated through
sanctions and other pressure forms. The high degree of interdependence,
a product of globalization Western style, makes violence (either wars or
revolutions in which the previous epochs, the 20th century in the first
place, abounded) a costly solution. We should concentrate at the political
and diplomatic, that is non-destructive, methods.
10. This fully applies to the situation around Iran; its nuclear file has only one
solution, viz. all-round negotiations in the regional context. The use of
force will be catastrophic for the entire region, already overburdened with
conflicts, including the one between Israel and Arabs. Those wishing to
build up pressure should first think out their strategies. There is a real
chance to start negotiations to restore confidence in the exclusively
peaceful nature of the Iranian nuclear program and draw Iran, on an equal
several years now — we do hope that we have been heard at last.
11. The methods employed in international relations are changing accordingly.
There are no hierarchical combinations which footing, into international
economic activities and collective crisis-settlement efforts in the region. It
would be wrong to let the chance slip away by insisting on new anti-Iranian
sanctions.
12. We should always bear in mind that these are the principles formulated by
mankind throughout its long history. The Peace of Westphalia that drew
the line under the religious wars in Europe lent its name to the principles
that take the religious and other axiological differences beyond the
framework of interstate relations. This was a pragmatic solution that
makes the 20th century and the Cold War period in the first place an
aberration to be overcome by all means. This is what we have in mind
when we talk about de-ideologized international relations.
13. Network diplomacy can be described as an answer to new realities up to
and including "the dispersal of global power." Whether the "global security
web" that Brzezinski has suggested will be formalized (through binding
agreements among other things) remains to be seen. In future life might
push us in this direction.
 29
14. So far we should proceed from the fact that network cooperation is
effective because it is flexible and non-formalized; it is effective when the
states´ concrete interests coincide and serve the moving force.
15. The leadership issue is still on the agenda. In fact, a single leader-state
would have been hailed had it busy itself with harmonizing the interests of
all states on the basis of a common denominator and demonstrated
political will and an ability to cope. What is going on in the world looks
much more realistic and much more practical. I have in mind collective
leadership of the leading states, which can be described as truly
representative in geographic and civilizational terms, realized in all sorts of
formal and informal multisided mechanisms such as the UN Security
Council in the first place as well as G-8, G-20, BRIC, SCO and many other
international and regional structures.
16. Is NATO able to develop into a center of network cooperation in the
security sphere? It should first complete its transformation, the vector of
which is sill unclear. Transformation for the sake of "Western unity"
favored by certain forces looks doubtful. There are two aspects of this
problem.
17. First, the future of NATO: it is suggested that the bloc discipline should be
tightened by re-wording Art 5 of the Washington Treaty in binding terms
up to and including expulsion of recalcitrant members. It is for the NATO
members to decide whether this fits the spirit of the time. It should be
said, however, that if harmonization of the interests is replaced with more
rigid discipline NATO´s partners, of which Russia is one, might be affected
by the revived military bloc logic.
18. Second, the future of the historical West: should it preserve itself by
tightening military-political discipline or should it become better adjusted
to the rest of world by being involved in regional and sub-regional levels of
global development? On 27 August 2007, the International Herald Tribune
carried an article by Yukio Hatoyama in which the new prime minister of
Japan treated his country´s involvement in regional integration and
building up regional collective security structures as a priority as well as a
means of preserving its national specifics, an important element of
national life.
19. Regionalization has developed into one of the key trends in international
relations; it seems that United Nations´ efficiency will depend, to a great
extent, on strong regional institutions ready to shoulder responsibility for
their regions in full accord with the UN Charter which will leave it free to
address the global issues in the interests of the world community.
20. WORLD PERCEPTION which serves the cornerstone of national foreign
policy philosophies is extremely important. This explains the gaps between
the states´ ideas about the methods to be applied in every specific case
even though they are drawing closer together when it comes to the
matters of principle. If they fail to meet each other halfway at this level
convergence will stall because of the tenacity of corresponding centuries-
old attitudes. I have in mind intolerance that breeds penchant for the use
of force.
21. The history of religious wars of the Reformation period was a dress
rehearsal of Europe´s 20th century; this confirms what Anna Akhmatova
said about Modigliani: the future sheds its shadow long before it enters. In
many of his works, including Old Mortality, Walter Scott investigated in
detail "intolerance and narrow-minded bigotry" of "those who would turn
the world upside down" for the sake of their convictions. Like all other
apostles of new faiths they badly tolerated those who thought differently
and claimed the dominant role for their faith.
22. When insisting on its exclusiveness the West should not follow the road of
"haughty of heart, and confident, as men who believed that the pale of
salvation was open for them exclusively; while all other Christians,
however slight were the shades of difference of doctrine from their own,
were in fact little better than outcasts or reprobates" as Walter Scott put it.
This is painfully familiar! The French and the Russian revolutions for that
matter were intolerant to the highest degree: "the Revolution... devour in
turn each of her children" for the sake of the "purity of faith." This was our
common tragedy and our shared historical heritage which calls for joint
efforts to be overcome or "rejected." We should not underestimate the
lessons of European history and the settlement that followed the English
Civil War which led the great writer to conclude that decent, sensible and
reasonable people should pool their forces. Europe´s historical experience
 30
bought at a high cost should be transformed into a wide and unbiased idea
of things.
23. Today, when religion is coming to the fore as a factor of international
relations we should go back to our common Christian roots; I do not mean
any specific religion but rather the moral principles which de-
Christianization threw out "together with the bath water." The moral
relativism (better described as nihilism) is one of the causes of the current
global crisis: no normal social functioning is possible if the moral nature of
man and a moral law which guides him are rejected. Unbridled
consumerism is a direct result of an axiological impasse of "sensual
culture" (Pitirim Sorokin´s term). Today, when we all know that there is no
return to the past we should pool our efforts for the sake of sustainable
post-crisis development; we should lay a common moral foundation that
would include the rules of the game binding for all. Time has come to
realize that we should move further than simple coexistence of the Cold
War era.
24. WE SUGGEST that a European security treaty would be a legally binding
document, a set of rules obligatory for all; it should serve a foundation of
mutually advantageous relationships in the Euroatlantic region which call
for collective efforts in the spirit of cooperation. Such treaty can became
an international legal act in the security sphere and a legal framework for
the political obligations already shouldered by the OSCE and the Russia-
NATO Council.
25. In any case, the situation in the Euroatlantic region provides enough
reasons to "harmonize the will of all states" as President Medvedev put it.
26. The context created by the current global financial and economic crisis
calls for concerted efforts. Today, the G-20 and G-8 summits are actively
working on a common agenda. In the conditions when a "responsibility
crisis" in one country spreads worldwide joint efforts are needed to refonn
the global financial architecture and to transform negative
interdependence into positive.
27. IT IS ONLY NOW that Russia which for twenty years had been seeking new
relationships with the West acquired a real chance to overcome the
negative dynamics. Russia´s stakes are as high as those of our Western
partners. President Medvedev has pointed out that Russia´s foreign policy
should be determined by the country´s long-term modernization goals; we
expect reciprocity from our Western partners — ours is a strategic stake.
There is nothing for us to quarrel over. We have common civiliza-tional
roots and common history.
28. In the last three centuries Russia has done a lot for Europe. Under Peter
the Great it became part of balanced European policies; later, twice or
even three times Russia (very much like deus ex machina of the Ancient
Greek tragedies) saved Europe which in its madness drove itself into a
comer or at the brink of a civilizational catastrophe. More than that: Russia
´s great literature of the 19th century had forebodings of such
catastrophes and warned Europe. Dostoevsky in his The Possessed warned
not only those resolved to impose happiness on mankind at home but also
those in the West practicing notorious "political expediency" in other
forms and saying that the aim justifies the means. This is not Russia´s fault
that the 20th century confirmed what Dostoevsky, Spengler, Sorokin and
other thinkers had thought about the historical fate of the West and what
they had predicted for it.
29. In fact, the very terms "European civilization" and "North Atlantic
community" should be extended to include the expanse
between Vancouver and Vladivostok, Russia in the first place. This would
have resolved the problem the historical West faces in the new context;
would have given us all a chance to play a commendable role when dealing
with other global partners. Cooperation of the leading players — Russia,
Europe and the United States — would have served the foundation of the
region´s political unity.
30. We should harmonize our relations and interests; we should draw closer to
one another and encourage cultural and economic interpenetra-tion.
Those who hope to tie Moscow up to positions agreed upon without it
would toil in vain. The crisis of confidence requires concerted efforts at all
levels. One can even expect that the political elites of all states will be
forced to adjust the national interests to the interests of partners and the
world community as a whole.
 31
31. ALL TRAGEDIES of the 19th and 20th centuries were rooted in the crisis of
the European society the traditional foundations of which had been
destroyed by numerous revolutions. The world fell victim to what Zbigniew
Brzezinski called "the centuries-long civil war within the West." Only when
the Cold War and its geopolitical imperatives hit impasse, it became
possible with new technological foundations to create a sustainable and
socially-oriented economic and social model with universal suffrage and
reliance on the fairly numerous middle class.
32. The new world order was ripening inside the old, West-oriented world; the
eternal dialectics of the process explained the larger part of human history
and explains what we can see now; it helps us accept the ideologically
uncommitted verdict of history. Indeed, one common permanent crisis of
global governance was responsible for the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Soviet
Union disintegration, the failure of attempts to use force to resolve current
international complications and the present financial and economic
upheavals traced down to the time when the lessons of the Great
Depression of the turn of the 1930s were forgotten and dismantling of the
financial regulatory mechanisms began in 1982. Today, like many times in
the past, we should readjust the mechanism of global governance to the
new realities so that it would reflect, rather than reject the world´s cultural
and civilizational variety.
33. The old social and cultural order is being replaced with a new, another
convergent stage of world development and international relations before
our eyes. The new picture of the world will include the best elements
created by the West, important for all and tested by time and the current
crisis. Other civilizations will make their own, no less important,
contributions. This will serve the platform of concerted efforts to restore
the manageability of world development.
34. On the whole, the conditions in which international relations will be de-
ideologized and de-militarized and in which they will acquire the principles
of tolerance and pluralism, coexistence of various models of social-
economic and social development and value systems are ripening.
35. Not everyone is prepared to embrace this: some are still looking into the
past and tend to go on playing the zero-sum game in which some of the
players ensured their security and economic interests at the expense of
others. We are still aware of the inertia of the "unipolar momentum" and
everything related to it up to and including the cavalier treatment of
international laws. A European Security Treaty and related negotiations
can become another remedy. It is signally important to achieve an
agreement that will help us overcome the ideological barriers of the Cold
War and explain the world developments in more fundamental and non-
con-frontational categories.
Characteristic of good diplomat and future of diplomacy
Future Diplomats and the Future of Diplomacy
1. There are two points that I'd like to bring to your attention - one talks
about the transformation in information sharing between the diplomats and the
institutional consequenses of this change, the other deals with the characteristics of
a future diplomat/
Information sharing"
2. "The introduction of Intranet-systems has brought about most important
changes for the diplomatic service. Among them:
- direct contacts between all officers, without the need for prior authorization, to
get a message, an inquiry, an information note out or to get it received. The
welcome results are higher motivation, no loss of time and greater sense of
responsibility among younger colleagues;
a) development of an informal reporting style;
b) teamwork: officers can – independently from their geographic location –
work together on a report to the minister, a draft statement, a position
paper. The strict delineation between central authority and missions
abroad is slowly vanishing;
c) ministerial structures and lines of command at missions are being
redefined, flatter authority, more delegation of responsibility are necessary
by-products;
d) introduction of task-oriented structures independent of the physical
location of the diplomats involved: limited and geographically dispersed
experience or academic background in particular areas (e.g. international
law) can more easily be pooled together electronically, thus also creating
incentives for the continuous upkeep of specialisation (particularly
important for smaller services);
e) the introduction of Intranet systems leads to flatter lines of authority and
increased possibilities for team working. Task-oriented organisation will
change the relationship between the ministry and missions abroad;
f) missions ought to be better integrated into the overall structure of the
ministry, including decision making;
 32
g) integrated resource management needs to preserve the standard
functions of missions abroad in relation to their geographic location and
combine these functions with new tasks relating to the available expertise
in individual missions, which can be employed for specific projects."
Characteristics of diplomats:

1. "What then constitutes the ideal ”new age” diplomat? I think a thorough
mixture of traditional and not so traditional characteristics:
a) a pluridisciplinary education;
b) inguistic skills;
c) patience to listen and observe;
d) proficiency in intercultural communication;
e) sensitivity to socio-cultural differences;
f) feeling comfortable with the latest communications technologies
g) ability to perform at ease in public;
h) free of elitism;
i) service orientation;
j) a high level of tolerance;
k) neither a ”softie” nor the ”elbow type”;
l) readiness for life-long learning, mid career training;
m) stress resistance, coolness in crises;
n) management skills;
o) ability to work in teams; collaborator instead of competitor;
p) a keen interest in global issues."