"Diplomacy"
Is coercive diplomacy a viable means to achieve political objectives?
Coercive diplomacy is one of the most intriguing and common practices of conducting inter-state relations and embodies the essence of the art of diplomacy: achieving political objectives and fostering a state’s national interest without waging a war. The present essay will first offer a theoretical framework on the notion of coercive diplomacy.
China and the United States: an Analysis of the Diplomacy Implemented by Richard Nixon and George W. Bush
This essay evaluates and compares the diplomatic relations of the United States and China during the Administrations of Presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush. Using interest-based negotiation as the theoretical framework, the essay discusses the divergent diplomatic strategies enacted by the two presidents.
To what extent was diplomacy professionalised in the French system?
“When I entered the service,” wrote Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, “there was no such thing at all.” Within the six centuries of the French diplomatic system diplomacy evolved from its ad-hoc, temporary status in political society into foreign services that practiced within a distinct profession.
‘Regional organisations are the most useful “friends” of the UN Secretary-General when he is engaged in mediation’. Discuss.
Since the creation of the United Nations in 1945, over 100 major conflicts around the world have left some 20 million dead’[1]. In An Agenda for Peace, Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali set out visions for preventive diplomacy and strategies to strengthen the United Nations’ (UN) capacity to maintain the peace. The collapse of Cold War bipolarity has seen a surge in demand for UN involvement. The UN has cast its net wide, beyond narrow conceptions of collective security, into human rights, environmental politics and human security. The response from the Security Council, General Assembly and member states to An Agenda for Peace was cautiously optimistic; the rhetoric, asserts Chesterman, ‘was euphoric, utopian, and short’.
‘There is no significant difference between the theories of negotiation of Guicciardini and Richelieu’. Discuss.
Nearly half a century separate Cardinal Richelieu and Francesco Guicciardini but the parallels between the two men betray the similarities in their understanding of power politics and theories of negotiation. Richelieu may have operated outside the Renaissance and Guicciardini from its Florentine apex, but both were influenced by the developing political theories of early modern Europe and the realist raison d’ état of Machiavelli; Guicciardini counted Machiavelli as a friend, and Richelieu was his intellectual descendent – the first politician to prosecute state national interest above notions of medieval universal Christian morality.
The Rational Decision-Making Model and Leadership Behaviour in International Crises
It is the purpose of this essay to study how appropriate the rational decision-making model is for examining the decisions and behaviour of a leader in an international crisis. The predominant focus of this study will be on the basic principles and assumptions of the rational actor models and game theories which are encompassed under the term rational choice theory.









Comments