Origins of Diplomacy: Nicolson

Origins of Organized Diplomacy - Nicolson

• Diplomacy involves managing international relations by negotiation.
• Diplomacy differs from foreign policy; the former is executed by professionals, while the latter is government's domain.
• Diplomacy's origin is ancient, preceding recorded history.
• The diplomat's role has changed over time, from simple messengers to skilled orators and trained observers.
• Diplomatic developments in the 15th century led to permanent embassies in Italy.
• The word "diplomacy" comes from the Greek "diploun," referring to folding and sealing documents.
• Greeks contributed systems for consistent diplomatic relations and recognizing the need for rules in international interactions.
• Romans contributed international law, emphasizing treaties' sanctity and the "right" applicable to all.
• Byzantines created the professional diplomat by tasking envoys with gathering information and reporting on foreign countries' conditions.

"Just Greasing the Wheels?" - Adler-Nissen

• Diplomats are traditionally viewed as mediators who build and mend relationships, especially in crises.
• Mediation in diplomacy involves promoting communication and understanding among states, people, and ideas.
• Diplomacy may inadvertently cause crises, fuel wars, and worsen conflicts, despite its aim to resolve them.
• Diplomats inevitably take sides and influence policy, challenging the notion that they are custodians of international society
• Diplomats need to recognize their political role and be accountable for actions, especially in crises.
• A shift from system maintenance to governance occurs in diplomacy, with diplomats building a more connected international order.
• Power dynamics and political implications of diplomatic actions can be obscured with a focus on mediation.
• Diplomacy involves navigating power relations, shaping policy, and constructing a shared international lifeworld.

Negotiation as a Joint Decision-Making Process - Zartman

• Negotiation is a unique decision-making method.
• Negotiation includes minimum two parties that combine differing views into a single decision.
• The goal for all negotiating parties is an outcome better than the status quo with mutual agreement.
• Fixed parties, flexible values, and both parties having power characterize negotiation.
• Often negotiation involves finding a general formula to define discussion items and provide an agreement framework.
• Existing negotiation theories, such as concession/convergence, are critiqued because they often miss real-world negotiation complexity.
• Power plays a key role in allowing parties to change their evaluations on the items at stake.
• Negotiation is shaped by the interaction of the parties, their strategies, and power.
• Seeing negotiation as a formula/detail process betters prescriptive advice and can increase a positive public attitude.

Diplomacy, Bargaining, Negotiation - Jonsson

• Diplomacy can be defined as political entities including states' conduct of peaceful relations.
• Views of diplomacy include diplomacy as foreign policy and diplomacy as a system of representation and communication.
• History of diplomacy stretches from ancient Greece to the modern state, highlighting contributions to the development of diplomatic practices.
• Contemporary issues include new actors, technology's impact, and the changing nature of international relations.
• Negotiation is central to diplomacy, defining it as international relations by way of negotiation.
• Different approaches, research methods, and key findings make up an overview of international negotiation.
• The role of culture, asymmetrical negotiations, side-effects, mediation, context, institution and dynamics are key to international negotiation.

Nicholson’s Definition

• According to Nicolson, diplomacy is diplomacy is not exclusively foreign policy, foreign service, international law, or negotiation
• Diplomacy manages international relations by negotiation.
• Ambassadors/envoys adjust and manage these relations, so it is the business/art of diplomats

Nicholson, Solving a Problem

• Diplomacy's origin is to maintain relations between different groups of humans

Universal and Particular

• Communities consist of commonalities within culture/authority, but are separated by differences
• Diplomats are bridge-builders, translators, and mediators
• The diplomatic community is constituted by shared culture and responsibilities
• Third culture is coined by Neumann

Nicholson, Evolution of the Ambassador

• Cavemen: Armistice and common language required diplomats to be brave
• Classical Greece: Direct democracy required diplomats to be orators
• Classical Rome: Far-flung empires required diplomats to be administrators
• Italian city states: Sovereignty and alliances required diplomats to be gossipers or spies
• French Empire: Standardized rituals required diplomats to be record-keepers or socialites
• American Hegemony: Representative democracy demands that diplomats are political insiders

Nicholson’s Foundations

• Diplomacy is universal and timeless in solving its universal aim; details change over time
• Diplomacy relates states, and individual people or groups complicate the connection of states
• States have interests in common and in conflict
• Diplomats protect national interests, and share professional commitment to peace
• Peace is mostly stability or non-war, not justice or progress
• The major, Western powers matter to diplomacy, with the other places only important when they complicate major power relations

A question of perspective

• Perspectives on what is universal, important and timeless are influenced by education, class, race, gender etc.

“Custodians of International Society”

• Priorities involve order, stability, peace vs justice, and whose interests lie within post-war settlements

Mediator vs Representative

• Nicholson describes diplomats as representative vs moral mediator
• Determine if diplomats perform task for leader or state, have agenda beyond instructions etc.

Integrative vs. distributive

• Mixed motives describe deal making
• Think about power, politics, and who wins and loses

Effecting vs. “greasing”

• Consider if diplomacy truly matters in structural theories like realism, where action is not talking
• Diplomacy just smoothes over inevitability like greasing gears
• Adler-Nissen concludes diplomacy creates a better alternative to force in a way of thinking

Diplomacy versus Politics

• Involves mediation but not taking sides, is it compromise or evasion of responsibility?
• Intervention with diplomacy suggests colonial mindsets, or addressing issues of other countries
• Diplomacy as a technique of steering clear of troublesome topics is possibly playing into hands of bad players

Splitting hairs

• Diplomacy encompasses institutions to manage the relationship of countries
• Negotiation process to settle in talk
• Bargaining describes choices of strategy

Zartman: negotiation as a mode of decision-making

• Decision comes by vote or coalition where "power" comes from numbers as a non-hierarchical, zero-sum exchange
• Judication describes decision made by one on behalf of all and a lack of rationale
• Negotiation assumes all parties has mixed motives and desire a deal of no hierarchy

Types of decision making

• Dictatorships result in judication such as in North Korea
• Coalitions and negotiations result where laws come from in Canada
• Company sales depend on negotiation
• Dinner plans depend on coalition

Process 1: Concession-convergence

• The "folk wisdom" theory was popular in 1950s and 1960s
• Parties reach acceptable compromise by values on two-dimensional continuum, making counter offers
• Influences include how much each party wants to concede
• Process results in best possibility if parties aim to find compromise

Why not “inching”?

• Set of all values not so discrete Ex: Bargain over which values are in play Ex: Making a deal on a car
• This theory isn't so continuous Ex: Bargain over how things can be divided up

Process 2: Zartmna’s formula-details

• People tend to avoid haggle, seem bitrary, convince side settle, not just wanting them walk
• Parties desire outcome be fair and appropriate

Two step process

• Argue definitions fair outcome
• Moral and legal, shoot expected proposals
• Step 2 Translate into terms

What's missing?

• Power
• Strategy
• Prioritization
• Culture
• Perceptions
• Other stuff

Schelling, An Essay on Bargaining

• Bargaining Power: ability to bind oneself is stronger than intelligence, strength, resources
• Commitment Tactics: Limit choice so that others think you won’t back out voluntarily
• Persuasion: Easier to convince truth than lie when making position true
• Threats: Prove incentive for it to occur even if involve harm
• Promises: Ability to binding crucial for agreements
• Communication: Drastically alter outcome
• Limited War: Tacit bargaining crucial limited

Oye, Cooperation under Anarchy

• Theme is why cooperation emerges to states but not always
• Game Theory analyzes cooperation with framework of state hindrance
• Three Dimensions of Cooperation: payoff and interaction
• Payoff Structure: State receives structure of their gains influenced by relative outcomes
• Shadow of Future: States future interactions likely to cooperate avoid jeopardizing interaction
• Number of Players:Likely of cooperation to hard, to increase cost transaction

Morrow, Signaling Difficulties with Linkage in Crisis Bargaining

• Under Anarchy, the states cooperate international crises with no authority
• Introducing an issue for outcome help avoid war
• Misinterpreted as weakness with rejection
• Condition:
• The sender must be not overwhemlling,
• must be advantage first,
• receiver will be more response to offer

Rational choice questions

• Look to the choice rather than chooser
• Make assumptions but what decide will are like-strategic on interests
• Some are rational and bad to difficult which all is possible given them

Expectations of Utility Theory

• Chooser identify options pick like to bring mix best costs
• If all is of valued etc realized
• Ordered, big assumptions

Game Theory of Interactions

• In two choices choices, combine then lead irrational
• Look over preferences given of one’s own and etc

Prisoner’s Dilemma

• Has dominated
• Has decision effects?
• Get out with, the Change, change etc
• Shadow future
• Multiple outcomes

IR Liberals with cooperation

• Institutions breakdown etc for piece and make info that help
• Ex, Shadow and etc

Why make choice?

• Dominated it
• Both help, and have guarantee
• Making the person decide

Commitment

• How would make sure
• gain by control
• Bargaining: Make believable or reputation in market

Game Theory

• The core thing, see sides to look over preferences it
• Situation future, times or means that is the question

What's there:

• Harmony, Deadlock, Stag, Prisoners and then Chicken -Coersive Linkage on Y or another to the X headed
• Some have what of prior is also promise that all will show