Search

Begin New Search Journal The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations Publication Year within 10 Years

31. Sino-American Preventive Diplomacy During the Cold War

Author:
Bertrand G. Ramcharan
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
From the advent to power of the Chinese Communist Party on October 1, 1949 to the historic visits of Henry Kissinger and President Nixon in 1971-72, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the United States of America (USA) were bitter enemies during the Cold War. China and the U.S. fought a war in Korea from 1950 to 1953, and the two countries nearly came to war again on five different occasions: over Vietnam in 1954 and 1965, and over Taiwan in 1954-55, 1958-59 and 1962. However, the two sides were wary to come to blows again and each side engaged in efforts to help avoid this. However, the dangers of miscalculations, recklessness, or accidents were ever present. During the Korean War there was much talk in American circles about using nuclear weapons. A concerned British Prime Minister, Clement Atlee, after consulting his French counterpart, went to see President Truman to help reduce the risks of this happening. The full records on this have never been published, but there is an authoritative account on the outcome from a senior American official.1 In 1959, President Eisenhower, concerned about the danger of continuing PRC provocations over Taiwan, sent a message to Chairman to Premier Mao via Premier Khruschev. The minutes of Premier Khruschev’s discussion with Chairman Mao make for fascinating reading.2 Another situation involving the use of preventive diplomacy occurred during the Polish crisis of 1956 when the CCP made strong representations to the CPSU against the escalation of military forces against the Polish demonstrators. There were thus seven situations (two with Korea, three with Taiwan, one with Vietnam, and one with the USSR) that attracted preventive diplomacy and a notable range of methods of preventive diplomacy applied. Among these one can mention the following: overt and covert communications from one side to the other; diplomatic messages; ambassadorial talks; and third party intercessions. This study will be approached from the perspective of the concept of preventive diplomacy while having regard to the concept of historical analogy.
Topic:
Cold War, Diplomacy, History, and Korean War
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

32. Russia and USA: Rhetoric and Reality

Author:
Dmitry V. Shlapentokh
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
Moralization is an essential part of any geo-political game, and that is especially the case with countries such as the United States and Russia. Presently, Washington has become especially prone to playing the morality card. At least, that is the case with Hillary Clinton supporters who stated that the ugliness of Donald Trump is clearly manifested by his desire to overlook the noble principles on which American foreign policy has rested since the founding fathers designed it. Consequently, Trump’s desire to befriend Vladimir Putin, the authoritarian Russian President, is a clear departure from his basic principles. Moscow also likes to assure that Russia always follows high moral principles in its foreign policy design. Still, Kremlin residents mostly limited moralizing to an internal audience, whereas people in Washington made the moralization publicly known to an international audience, urbis and orbis, so to speak. A closer look at the Soviet/Russia and the U.S. relationship could reveal that it is not high principles, whatever they might be in the context of the prevailing ideological shibboleth, but rather it is pragmatism that defines their relationship. The image of both countries has followed the pragmatic model. This implies that the U.S. and Russia could well cooperate in the future despite hostile rhetoric that dominated discourse in Moscow and Washington – a rhetoric that might not disappear completely in the future.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, and History
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, Soviet Union, North America, and United States of America

33. Asia Inquiry: A Continental Analysis

Author:
Takashi Inoguchi
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
The AsiaBarometer Survey was launched in 2002, with the aim of gauging quality of life among ordinary people in Asia. Asia as a region includes East, Southeast, South and Central Asia. As a geographical entity, Asia is extremely diverse and complex. Today, it is considered one of the most dynamic regions in the world. Yet systematically collected empirical data about the daily life of ordinary people has been scant and spotty.1 The United Nations Development Program issues annually one of the most useful statistical data collections of the developing world. The missing piece is how ordinary people perceive daily life activities like health, money, leisure, sleep, work, transport, satisfaction with different life aspects, their life priorities, etc., are not well documented and, therefore, are not well researched scientifically
Topic:
Demographics and Survey
Political Geography:
Asia

34. Beijing’s Policy Towards President Tsai Ying-wen and the Future of Cross-Strait Relations

Author:
Jean-Pierre Cabestan
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
ions through the lens of both asymmetry and (re-)balancing. Beijing-Taipei relations have become more and more asymmetrical. While this structural asymmetry has allowed the former to exert all sorts of pressures on the latter (economic, ideological and military), this very asymmetry has not prevented the latter from keeping some room of maneuver vis-à-vis the former.1 Balancing against China and bandwagoning with the United States has, since 1950, been Taiwan’s security and survival strategy even if after the U.S. de-recognition of the ROC in 1978, Taipei and Washington have not been linked by a formal alliance but a much more narrow and vague security arrangement, the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). However, in this paper, I will argue that under the Tsai Administration, Taiwan’s balancing strategy has remained rather “soft,” because of the island’s hard economic dependence upon China. At the same time, Taiwan cannot ignore the U.S. Administration’s “rebalancing” strategy in Asia and the consequences it has on U.S.-China relations and the region. Using this double approach, I will first present Beijing’s new Taiwan policy. Then, I will explore its root-causes and main drivers. Finally, I will venture to speculate on the chances of success of China’s strategy towards the Tsai Administration, particularly after the new U.S. President Donald Trump comes into office and in view of the telephone call that he accepted to have with Ms. Tsai in early December 2016. My tentative conclusion is that for many domestic and international reasons—the KMT’s inability to reform, Taiwan’s consolidated identity and the U.S.’s likely continuing, and perhaps stronger strategic support and overall “rebalancing” under Trump—Beijing will probably not reach its major objectives, at least in 2020. As a result, Taiwan will be able to continue to go its own way; the political gap between both sides will keep widening; and the relations across the Taiwan Strait will probably remain a mixture of political and perhaps military tensions as well as dense exchanges and inevitable interactions.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, and Asia

35. Sustainable Development as a Path to Peacebuilding: Finding Common Ground to Counter the Extremist Narrative

Author:
Austin Schiano, Juan E. Chebly, and Federico Ruiz
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
I deologically terrorist organizations have taken an increased prominence in the public consciousness. These organizations draw from a global support base, including young and increasingly educated populations. These organizations often take shape in the scope of a larger sentiment, and are able to rise to prominence through an ability to engage alienated individuals who are often on the margins of society. For many around the world, this issue has become an inescapable and harsh reality. It is time that we evaluate what is causing the growth of these networks, and consider sustainable development solutions to combat them. It is this paper’s attempt to highlight some examples of sustainable development solutions that successfully counter violent extremism, and to provide recommendations based on these successful examples. The answer to many of these problems can be having a bottom-up approach to building stronger communities. Inclusion and participation in public policy can empower citizens of all ages to become agents of human development and kick-start a virtuous cycle of peace that effectively eradicates extremism. It is the responsibility of public institutions to recognize best practices and support them to their best capacity with adequate policy and regulation. It is clear that we must first understand terrorism and its various foundations, before we can meaningfully fight against it.
Topic:
Development, Violent Extremism, Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, and Peace
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, United Nations, and Syria

36. Promoting Water Security in Central Asia through International Research Partnerships

Author:
Katherine E. Himes
Publication Date:
04-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations
Institution:
School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
Abstract:
Science forms an important nexus with diplomacy and international relations. First, science in diplomacy supports foreign policy objectives. Second, diplomacy for science utilizes international relations to facilitate and advance cross-border scientific and engineering relationships and programs. Third, science for diplomacy leverages scientific and technical cooperation to bolster relations between and among countries. The term science diplomacy captures these three relationships.
Topic:
Security, Diplomacy, Science and Technology, Water, and Partnerships
Political Geography:
Central Asia and Asia