Suchergebnisse

Introduction. The article presents the results of studying the problem of interaction between science and diplomacy, the analysis of scientific diplomacy in domestic and foreign practice. The purpose of the article is to analyze scientific diplomacy as a phenomenon within the framework of he state's foreign policy and as a form of public diplomacy. Methods. The methodological basis of the study was general scientific methods, such as analysis, synthesis and generalization; empirical level methods: observation, comparison, grouping; special research methods. Results and Discussion. The article sets forth the interpretation of the concept of scientific diplomacy by various authors, reviewed its «classical» areas, conducted a retrospective analysis of scientific diplomacy in Russia. The article highlights and describes the features characteristic of the domestic practice of using scientific diplomacy at the present stage of development. In particular, the author gives the examples of joint projects implementation, carries out an analysis of information on the joint publications of Russian and foreign scientists stimulating international cooperation in science and technology, which is one of the goals of science diplomacy. Conclusion. The author has given recommendations for improving the mechanism for implementing and widely introducing into national practice the basics of scientific diplomacy for the purpose of strengthening international cooperation and the national goals of the state.

In the system of political relations, more attention is paid to environmental diplomacy. The article considers the issues of the formation of environmental diplomacy in Uzbekistan. It Focuses on the environmental problems of local end global importance which exist in territory of Central Asia.

The presence of culture abroad is linking to the level of care and attention inside the country. thus, it is an effective tool for countries to achieve tangible and intangible benefits from abroad.

"April 1990"--P. 5. ; Shipping list no.: 90-286-P. ; Caption title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Governments set rules; businesses operate by following these rules. This idealized notion of political economy is more inaccurate today than ever before. Business leaders, including technology entrepreneurs, must participate in rulemaking due to deregulation and liberalization, prominent global risks (such as climate change and migration) that do not respect national borders, and digital technology that is spewing new issues requiring new rules. Business leaders are expected to be corporate diplomats. Corporate diplomacy is not about turning businessmen into part-time politicians or statesmen. Rather, it involves corporations taking part in creating, enforcing, and changing the rules of the game that govern the conduct of business. It goes well beyond delegating external communications and lobbying to a public relations agency or a law firm. Precise understanding of corporate diplomacy would help businesses compete more effectively in the global economy. This column clarifies corporate diplomacy, its benefits and challenges.

In a world changing with globalization, governments have to use soft power to be able to take place in international politics. Public diplomacy, which is the field of soft power application; is the transformation of negative perceptions into positive perceptions, the establishment and execution of inter-communal relations and the creation of the country's image. By using public diplomacy, which is the soft power key, governments reach their goals, stay on the agenda in international politics and influence other countries. Public diplomacy uses the many fields of activity to deliver the messages that it wants to convey. Sports organizations, concerts, festivals, international congresses and international cultural and artistic activities have the feature of being an important field of activity in this sense. Sports organizations, among these activities, have become a field used in the transfer of many political messages over the past century and will continue to exist today.

The Cold War is considered as the period of political and military tension between Soviet Union and the Unites States of America regarding the World War 2. The word Cold War was used for this condition because there was no directly battle or fighting between these two super powers of the world. US Diplomacy can be defined as the abilities and potentials of the country to discuss on the international level between groups of nations or nations. Moreover, it can be defined as the political contract between two national governments. Diplomacy is considered as the most important thing that should be achieved by the governments. Furthermore, diplomacy is also considered as the feedback loop through which foreign standards and policies are continuously changed. The paper will discuss the role and position of President Ronald Reagan on the Cold War and United States of America

The United States presently finds itself standing at a remarkable historical juncture. As the world's only "remaining superpower," it enjoys the benefit of military superiority, economic prosperity, and vast cultural influence. Yet despite its seeming superiority to other nations -or, perhaps, in spite of it- the future is not necessarily secured for the United States. While Americans may be able to take American power for granted, there is a general sense that the United States is either at or near the apex of its influence; that, as Samuel Huntington has argued, while the U.S. will remain strong, its strength will decline relative to that of other civilizations.

Two broad traditions of scholarship can be distinguished in the vast literature on the diplomacy of conflict. The diplomatic communication tradition takes the difficulty of credible communication between adversaries as its central problem and analyzes the conditions for informative costly, costless, and inadvertent signals as well as the effects on conflict processes of these different forms of communication. A body of empirical work, focused particularly on public coercive diplomacy and alliances, also belongs to this approach. The other tradition is the rhetorical-argumentative, which focuses on rhetorical style, justificatory argument, and the effects of modes of discourse. These traditions have offered very different insights and, in some areas, complement and reinforce each other.

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Polar Geography on 11 December 2015, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/1088937X.2015.1086445 . ; This article investigates China's bilateral diplomacy in the Arctic towards the USA, Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Norway, Russia, and Iceland. In seeking to identify (1) the most important bilateral issues, (2) whether China's diplomacy towards some of Arctic states has been more successful than others, and (3) the long-term goals of China's Arctic diplomacy and presence, the article utilizes insights from theories of diplomacy in IR as well as the particular historical experiences of the PRC. It concludes with identifying how Beijing's utmost concern when it comes to foreign policy still centers on promoting economic benefits and creating a global presence conducive to economic growth. Yet, while economic factors undoubtedly preoccupy Chinese decision-making in the Arctic, Chinese representatives currently speak less about economic development than about their environmental concerns. Chinese footprints in the Arctic have been adequately established primarily in the scientific research field, while commerce and multi-lateral governance are secondary. Further, it is also apparent that China has been developing contracts with the smaller Arctic powers of Denmark and Iceland (and earlier also attempted to do so with Norway) to facilitate collaborations in both Arctic research as well as economic development. With the bigger Arctic powers, such as the USA and Russia, China appears to prioritize other, more pressing bilateral issues than those pertaining solely to the Arctic.

Good governance is a crucial element of the global struggle for sustainable development and peace. The United Nations Millennium Declaration of 8 September 2000 stipulates that success in meeting the key objectives of the current century depends, inter alia, on good governance within each country and at the international level. The article analyzes the specific contribution of multilateral diplomacy in promoting good governance as an attribute of democracy, as well as its correlation with global solidarity and partnership. The catalytic role of multilateral diplomacy in this field is closely connected with the very essence of universal values to which good governance is expected to give tangibility at national and global levels. The author shares the legitimate appeals made by the United Nations in favour of good governance, solidarity and global partnerships and comes to the conclusion that by their active advancement multilateral diplomacy can become more instrumental in meeting the central challenge of the contemporary world to ensure that the irreversible process of globalization becomes a positive force for all humankind. One of the most important documents of the 21st century is the United Nations Millennium Declaration adopted by consensus by the UN Millennium Summit, in New York, on 8 September 2000. The Declaration contains a set of fundamental values which are considered to be essential to international relations in the current century. These include: freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, respect for nature and shared responsibility. In order to translate these values into action, the UN Summit has identified a number of key objectives to which special significance is assigned. The key objectives belong to topical fields, such as peace, security, disarmement, development, poverty eradication, protecting common environment, human rights, democracy and good governance. The largest diplomatic gathering in human history, the UN Summit came to the conclusion that success in meeting the objectives in the ...

Can stories succeed where traditional forms of diplomacy have faltered? This study examined whether a primetime drama could impact American viewers' knowledge, attitudes, and behavior with respect to U.S. foreign policy and funding by surveying 173 viewers of an episode of Law & Order: SVU ("Witness"). Additionally, this study sought to uncover which theoretical construct — involvement with a specific character or involvement with the narrative more generally (transportation) — best predicted impact. The fictional character in question was Nardelie, a woman forced to flee the Democratic Republic of the Congo after repeated rape by militias vying for "conflict minerals," so named because control of these valuable minerals has triggered numerous conflicts. Separate regression analyses suggested a positive relationship between impact of the storyline and both theoretical constructs. However, when both constructs were entered into a single regression, involvement with Nardelie was the stronger predictor of knowledge (e.g., conflict minerals, sexual violence, and asylum issues) and current or future behavior (i.e., discussing global health) while transportation was the stronger predictor of attitudes (i.e., support for aid). This suggests that, while correlated, these constructs do not completely overlap. Implications of these results and the use of entertainment education in public diplomacy are discussed.

The concept of African diplomacy portrays a distinct style of diplomacy which is current. This is due to the fact that the majority of African states attained their independence over the past five decades. Africa is the second largest continent in the world, it has an array of states and consists of fifty-four (54) countries. The level of political maturity in the continent also covers a wide range as this is defined in terms of when independence was attained and period of existence. Furthermore, the economic conditions in the continent indicate a distinct divide between the poorest of the poor to the middle powers in terms of Gross National Product (GNP) per capita income, another indicator of this level of political maturity is the level of industrialisation and lastly the continent is significantly culturally diverse. Moreover, African states remain cognisant of the pluralities that characterise the continent. Notably, slavery and colonialism have immeasurably affected every fabric of African life (Akinyemi 1982). The practice of diplomacy has been utilised by African states to carry out their foreign policies over the years. It is, however, apparent that in the practice of diplomacy in Africa there are limited successes by states and regional organisations in achieving their foreign policy objectives (Akokpari 2016). It is important to note that the failures in African diplomacy are not only attributed to external actors alone but also visible in intra-African diplomacy. Diplomacy in Africa has experienced some of its failures due to a convergence of factors such as: the quality of diplomacy and mediators; the ubiquity of conflicts; the continent's lack of international influence; Africa's dependence on external actors and; subsequent lack of assertiveness and the inability to stand up to errant leaders within the region whose actions threaten good governance and regional security (Akokpari 2016). Akokpari (2016) indicates that diplomatic skills in Africa are usually tested during periods of conflicts and ...

Why do some countries send big delegations to multilateral negotiations, whereas others send very small ones? This article looks at both the causes of variation in state delegations to multilateral conferences but also at the consequences of such variation at both micro- and macrolevel. It tests the arguments derived from liberal theory of international regimes, using the case of the NPT Review Process. The results suggest that economic and security interests drive states' participation in the multilateral settings; normative concerns about global public goods matter less. The article also argues that while countries which are more abundantly present in the negotiations do not tend to get more from international organisations; countries which have been less present during the negotiations tended to be more interested in alternative forum shopping in the form of 'nuclear ban treaty' negotiations.

Grand societal challenges require collective action within and across national borders. Effective action is expected from Europe and it requires targeted inter-governmental and diplomatic efforts and the mobilization of appropriate scientific knowledge. Science Diplomacy is a promising mechanism to address these grand societal challenges. We understand science diplomacy generally as collaborations between stakeholders from science, policy and diplomacy, which involve various governmental or diplomatic organizations as well as non-governmental scientific organizations. The complexity arising from the existing variety of mechanisms and stakeholders precludes a clear-cut definition of who should 'do' science diplomacy in what way. And many stakeholders that could be labelled 'science diplomacy organization' would not do so themselves. This presents challenges for organizing the governance of science diplomacy. We suggest here that governing mechanisms for science diplomacy in Europe must observe four premises to be effective. These premises include (a) grand societal challenges require both diplomatic efforts and science-based knowledge, (b) science-based knowledge production is diverse and evolving, (c) diplomacy means reconciling a variety of interests, and (d) Science Diplomacy requires combined science and diplomacy literacy. These premises set the stage for the development of governance mechanisms for Science Diplomacy. Taken seriously, they lead to governance practices that do not pre-define what Science Diplomacy is, but give interested stakeholders the guidance they need to develop effective Science Diplomacy mechanisms themselves. This will be presented in a later policy recommendation brief.