Polylateralism: Diplomacy's Third Dimension by Geoffrey Wiseman
COURSE OVERVIEW
Geoffrey Wiseman - “Polylateralism: Diplomacy’s Third Dimension”
- two basis forms of diplomacy that have evolved over the years: bilateral (conduct of relations between two states) and multilateral (conduct of relations between three or more states at permanent or ad hoc international conferences
- ague that polylateralism constitutes diplomacy’s third dimension (conduct of relations between official entities and at least one unofficial nonstate entity)
- define state actors as 192 member states of UN
- definitions from FLorini and Price of transnational actors don’t classify “bad” nonstate actors…keck and sikkink definition doesn’t realize that NGOS are typically divided into two types (advocacy and service)
- transnational connotes interaction, wheareas polylateral diplomacy has advantage of connoting purposive diplomatc interactions and is thus extention of bilateral and multilateral
- rise of global civil society after cold war with 1998 ottawa treaty banning anti-personnel land mines
- during the 1990s, rise in second track diplomacy (methods of diplomacy outside formal governmental system and virtual diplomacy (process of direct global and transnational communication and bargaining between states etc through new technologies)
- use 6 hypothesis to test robustness of the polylateralism concept
- 1) state capacity for diplomatic innovation is generally underestimated…understestimated state resilience and overestimated transnational civil society actors flexibility and innovation…problem is zero-sum thinking because state does not need to go into decline for transnational civil society actors to play a stronger global role…the goal should be to promote a democratic state environment in which both state and trasnational civil society actors flourish
- 2) small and middle-sized state diplomatic institutions are more likely to innovate and cooperate with transnational civil society actors…middle power polylateralism hasn’t quite lived up
Geoffrey Wiseman - “Polylateralism: Diplomacy’s Third Dimension”
- two basis forms of diplomacy that have evolved over the years: bilateral (conduct of relations between two states) and multilateral (conduct of relations between three or more states at permanent or ad hoc international conferences
- ague that polylateralism constitutes diplomacy’s third dimension (conduct of relations between official entities and at least one unofficial nonstate entity)
- define state actors as 192 member states of UN
- definitions from FLorini and Price of transnational actors don’t classify “bad” nonstate actors…keck and sikkink definition doesn’t realize that NGOS are typically divided into two types (advocacy and service)
- transnational connotes interaction, wheareas polylateral diplomacy has advantage of connoting purposive diplomatc interactions and is thus extention of bilateral and multilateral
- rise of global civil society after cold war with 1998 ottawa treaty banning anti-personnel land mines
- during the 1990s, rise in second track diplomacy (methods of diplomacy outside formal governmental system and virtual diplomacy (process of direct global and transnational communication and bargaining between states etc through new technologies)
- use 6 hypothesis to test robustness of the polylateralism concept
- 1) state capacity for diplomatic innovation is generally underestimated…understestimated state resilience and overestimated transnational civil society actors flexibility and innovation…problem is zero-sum thinking because state does not need to go into decline for transnational civil society actors to play a stronger global role…the goal should be to promote a democratic state environment in which both state and trasnational civil society actors flourish
- 2) small and middle-sized state diplomatic institutions are more likely to innovate and cooperate with transnational civil society actors…middle power polylateralism hasn’t quite lived up