 |
АвтоАвтоматизацияАрхитектураАстрономияАудитБиологияБухгалтерияВоенное делоГенетикаГеографияГеологияГосударствоДомДругоеЖурналистика и СМИИзобретательствоИностранные языкиИнформатикаИскусствоИсторияКомпьютерыКулинарияКультураЛексикологияЛитератураЛогикаМаркетингМатематикаМашиностроениеМедицинаМенеджментМеталлы и СваркаМеханикаМузыкаНаселениеОбразованиеОхрана безопасности жизниОхрана ТрудаПедагогикаПолитикаПравоПриборостроениеПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРадиоРегилияСвязьСоциологияСпортСтандартизацияСтроительствоТехнологииТорговляТуризмФизикаФизиологияФилософияФинансыХимияХозяйствоЦеннообразованиеЧерчениеЭкологияЭконометрикаЭкономикаЭлектроникаЮриспунденкция
Guerrilla Diplomacy: Rethinking International Relations
By Daryl Copeland
Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2009
First Edition
| As the erstwhile global village goes heteropolar, it is coming to resemble something akin to a patchwork of gated communities surrounded by seething seas of shantytowns. In the environment where competing sources of power and influence collide, tensions will be generated and sparks will fly, which will inevitably make diplomacy ever more complex. While many are quick to recognize this, few can suggest how diplomacy can be brought in line with the demands of the diverse yet deeply interconnected world. In his provocative, thoughtful, and cutting edge Guerrilla Diplomacy, Daryl Copeland provides a very clear and bold blueprint for the reform of diplomatic practice. In his view, the diplomatic world should change if it is to retain its relevance and purpose in the age of globalized relations. | |
| Daryl Copeland served in the Canadian diplomatic service for nearly thirty years, with postings in various countries, and in the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade in Ottawa, working particularly on communications and policy planning. He thus brings a practitioner’s eye to his topic and the passion of an individual who believes that there has to be – and that there is – a better way. | |
| The book starts by analysing the changes that followed the end of the Cold War and then goes on to describe globalisation and the new world order. This first part lays the foundation for later analysis. The second part of the book is concerned with 'drivers for change': global security threats, the link between security and development, and the changing influence of science and technology. This is followed by an intensive look at the foreign ministry, the diplomatic service, and diplomats themselves. As a result, Copeland calls for, a new kind of diplomat, a new approach to diplomacy and reform of the foreign ministry. | |
| The book’s title is striking and thought-provoking. It immediately invokes associations with small groups, ambush, and mobility, ideas not traditionally associated with diplomacy. Copeland describes the term 'guerrilla diplomacy' as a special form of public diplomacy that engages in horizontal rather than hierarchical communication, takes cross-cultural communication seriously, and resembles a grassroots approach to diplomatic practices. 'Guerrilla diplomats use all of the tools of public diplomacy – but combine them with some of the classic qualities of guerrilla warfare: agility, adaptability, improvisation, self-sufficiency, and popular support'. He also offers a new unique set of skills needed in the diplomatic profession of the 21st century: accessibility, flexibility, cultural awareness, and a catalytic and transformational orientation. According to Copeland, this is a much needed adaptation to the changed international atmosphere of the 21st century. | |
| Copeland’s proposed response to what he considers a diplomatic performance gap centers on public diplomacy and its more extreme, perhaps more powerful form, which he labels guerrilla diplomacy. His basic point seems to be that states such as Canada and the United States must make “human-centered development” paramount. To do so, their Foreign Service personnel must connect with a broad range of individuals, not just counterparts in various ministries. Public diplomacy and guerilla diplomacy therefore seek to have contact with societies, to understand them, and to influence them. | |
| Public diplomacy, of course, is not unknown in Washington or elsewhere. What has been said on this subject echoes some of Copeland’s discussion, a discussion that relies on a repetition of catch phrases such as networking and advocacy, branding and maintaining the credibility of the brand, creating networks of communication with individuals in the other society, and most importantly, creating a “genuine dialogue” where one listens as much or even more than one talks, “connecting with a population rather than a state,” and providing intelligence back to one’s own government about the concerns and interests of others. | |
| The author’s perspective on change on the level of the foreign ministry and of the foreign service seems to be somewhat more specific. | |
| First, Copeland points to the need to re-focus the diplomatic service and concentrate on core competencies which lie, according to Copeland, in connecting to people abroad and the national image abroad. He proposes 'to begin a carefully planned and phased withdrawal from day-to-day work on particularistic issues'. By leaving such issues as environmental law or resource regulation to the relevant ministries, the diplomatic service avoids turf battles and can focus on its core competencies. Second, Copeland proposes the creation of virtual desks. Organised by topic or region, these could bring together a wide network of experts – extending far beyond the foreign ministry. Third, Copeland calls for making greater use of the internet and other electronic media. For example, when talking about blogging he states that 'responsive foreign ministries and some senior officials are doing it, and so too should more ambassadors, especially those posted to trouble spots'. | |
| The book’s most valuable contribution lies not in the assertion that we live in the age of globalization and that globalization has altered the way in which international policy is conducted – this is certainly not new; rather it is in its holistic approach and in the intriguing analysis of diplomatic practices and their need for adaptation and reform. Copeland’s description of the qualities of the guerrilla diplomat and the workings of a foreign ministry are wise and insightful. His belief in the possibilities of diplomacy and the primacy of talk over war are well underlined in the examples given and the proposals for change made. Copeland is not afraid to include science and technology in his analysis and to talk about the possibilities the internet and new social media have to offer for advancing diplomacy. | |
| However, there are several points on which I would like to sound a note of caution. First, I remain to be convinced of the almost universal application of methods of guerrilla diplomacy. What Copeland’s analysis really needs is a presentation of guerrilla diplomacy at work, with extensive case studies – or if those are too sensitive (or unavailable), then with extensive fictional illustrations of what guerilla diplomacy might look like on the ground and how the results might feed into policy formulation and implementation, or into building a persuasive brand. They should suggest in some detail – even fictional detail – how guerilla diplomacy is likely to have a meaningful impact on dealing with development and globalization issues. | |
| Second, Copeland’s advice and practical proposals are inspiring and visionary and rooted in his deep reflections on the diplomatic ecosystem. Yet, in a world where many foreign ministries choose not to embrace the possibilities of new communication technologies and social media platforms (after all, only a few governments and foreign services use Facebook, twitter, Youtube, or Second Life), he might be overestimating the possibilities for change within a profession still marked by tradition and conservatism. He also acknowledges that many of his proposals would lead to the end of centralised control over communication and that this is something for which many governments are simply not ready. | |
| With its research base, Guerrilla Diplomacy looks like a textbook, but it is not a standard one. Its tone is conversational, and it is truly enjoyable to read. When choosing this book, do not expect to learn about the basics of diplomacy such as conventional bilateral and multilateral diplomacy or the Geneva Convention on Diplomatic Relations. With its holistic approach, the book is, rather, a tool for navigation through a complex and intertwined system of multiple actors, levels, and problems and a guideline for advancing the role of diplomacy in a changed world. The book poses many challenges to the traditional view on diplomacy. However, even if one does not conform at all with the specific perspective Copeland takes, the book remains a valuable read for its insights into the workings of the “diplomatic ecosystem” and its thought-provoking proposals for adaptation of this system. Definitely, it will be appreciated by undergraduate and graduate students alike. Practitioners may have more than quibbles with Copeland's solutions to the marginalization of diplomacy, but they are unlikely to disagree fundamentally with his diagnosis. |
A. Review as a whole
1) What do you think is the main aim of the review?
2) What paragraphs make the review different from a summary?
3) Which of these adjectives do you think best describe the style of the review: positive, lavish, superfluous, succinct, malicious, judgmental, neutral, categorical, favourable, in-depth…
Поиск по сайту: