Search

Begin New Search Content Type Journal Article Publication Year within 10 Years Publication Year within 3 Years

2001. American Leadership and a Global Offensive Against COVID

Author:
John Blaney and Christopher Datta
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
While the U.S. has made major advances against COVID, it is imperative that much more be done as quickly as possible to end a disease that threatens our health, our economy and our leadership in the world. We need to go on the offense world-wide and become the world’s arsenal for vaccines. Without such an offensive, it is only a matter of time before the virus mutates into a form that is resistant to our current vaccines. As we have seen repeatedly, no matter where it starts, a new variant always finds its way into communities everywhere. Only the United States is uniquely positioned to lead the world out of this crisis.
Topic:
Leadership, Crisis Management, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

2002. Transforming Cambodia’s “Killing Fields” into Farm Fields: American Diplomacy and Combatting Genocide

Author:
Kenneth M. Quinn
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
This year marks the 30th anniversary of the Paris Peace Agreement on Cambodia. That accord closed the door on years of war, during which the Khmer Rouge “Killing Fields” caused the deaths of up to two million persons (out of a population of seven million) and brought the 1,000-year- old civilization to the point of obliteration. When I landed in Phnom Penh in 1996 to begin my term as U.S. Ambassador, the country was in the fifth year of implementing that 1991 agreement. Looking back on this improbable diplomatic success offers a chance to assess the effectiveness of American diplomacy in the 1990s, and how, despite one extremely unfortunate regression, Indochina and Southeast Asia were irrevocably changed by that accord.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Genocide, and History
Political Geography:
Cambodia and Southeast Asia

2003. Colin Powell’s Legacy

Author:
W. Robert Pearson
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Colin Powell touched our national life and our personal lives in more ways than we realized during his time with us. His passing has brought into sharp focus the difference between the America he believed in and the America we face today. The son of immigrants, his drive to overcome, his respect for all who labor, his belief in the power of the community, and his ability to see what mattered all made him who he was and made us believe in what he believed. The odd thing was that we all thought that world was not only the normal world but also the world that would remain normal—because we lived in America, because we were Americans, because we believed we had a national destiny that was still unfulfilled, that our country was a force for good on the planet and that Americans would always strive to keep it so. The legacy first framed by our Founding Fathers and brought into being over succeeding generations was the vision we inhabited and believed.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Legacy, and Colin Powell
Political Geography:
United States of America

2004. Celebrating American Diplomacy

Author:
Chris Van Hollen
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
There’s no question that this program’s theme, what diplomacy does for Americans, is on the front of everyone’s minds especially given the current challenges in Afghanistan and the fast-paced events around the world. In recent weeks in Afghanistan, our diplomats have been on the front lines working overtime to orchestrate the safe evacuation of Americans and many of our closest Afghan partners. Even though the last American soldier has left Afghanistan, America’s diplomats are still working around the clock in capitals around the world to bring people to safety. I believe we have an obligation to ensure the safety and help those Afghans who for years have worked closely in support of our common mission. Our nation’s diplomats display extraordinary courage each and every day, often putting themselves in harm’s way for the rest of us.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Afghanistan and United States of America

2005. Multilateral Training and Work at Foreign Ministries

Author:
Kishan S. Rana
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: The author was India’s Permanent Representative to the UN Environment Program and to UN Habitat at Nairobi, 1984-86. In foreign ministries, as in all organizations, training has risen to the top of the institutional agenda.[1] ‘Life-long training’ has taken root. In the past, most foreign ministries believed that diplomats needed training on entering the profession, and thereafter learnt on the job. In the past 20 years, at least 30 foreign ministries have established training institutes, including the British Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, which had managed without one for over two centuries.[2] Thanks to increased work demands (new issues on the international agenda, the range of official and non-official partners involved, and concepts like public and diaspora diplomacy), the pace of work, especially multilateral, is more frenetic, complexified. Another question comes up: is multilateral work a speciality, or is it just a different diplomatic setting, compared with work in a bilateral embassy or consulate? For most countries, around 85 to 90% out of the diplomatic staff based abroad (as distinct from those in the foreign ministry), engage in bilateral work, also working in embassies and consulates, i.e. handling relations with individual foreign states. The balance are to be found in ‘multilateral missions’, accredited to international or regional organisations. But this is an oversimplification. At around 20 capitals, find the headquarters of multilateral and regional organizations, and the diplomatic missions at such places double as permanent missions accredited to that entity; examples: Addis Ababa (AU), Brussels (EU, NATO), Jakarta (ASEAN), Manilla (ADB), Nairobi (UNEP, Habitat) Paris (OECD, UNESCO), Rome (FAO), Vienna (IAEA, UNIDO). At the headquarters, multilateral and regional affairs may occupy around 10 to 15%. In this essay, we will subsume regional work with multilateral affairs. Other questions come up. How should diplomats be trained for multilateral work? Who should be selected for this work? What are the contemporary trends? We look also at senior management at the US State Department, and professionalization, related to multilateral work. These issues are interconnected.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Multilateralism, Training, and State Department
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

2006. “Reformed Multilateralism” at the United Nations

Author:
Asoke Mukerji
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: The author was the Indian Ambassador to the UN 2013-2015. Calls for “reformed multilateralism”[1] at the UN’s 75th anniversary session in September 2020 stressed the need for equal participation by member-states in UN decision-making. Five years earlier, when adopting Agenda 2030, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) acknowledged the inter-linkage between peace, security, and development.[2] With its universal scope, Agenda 2030 on Sustainable Development has become the central focus of the United Nations (UN) for the foreseeable future. Agenda 2030 requires a paradigm shift in the approach of UN member-states to global issues and underscores the imperative for an inclusive human-centric approach through the participation of multiple stakeholders in UN activities. This would enable the UN to pool resources through partnerships to meet the major challenges in all its three “pillars” – political, human rights, and socio-economic development.
Topic:
Development, Human Rights, Politics, United Nations, Reform, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2007. Making Change Happen Within the United Nations

Author:
Catherine Bertini
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: The author was Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Programme 1992-2002 and United Nations Under Secretary General for Management 2003-2005. President Biden’s nomination of Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield as US Ambassador to the United Nations promises to bring effective leadership, professionalism, and immense knowledge to the role. She is one of only a few American diplomats who have had leadership postings dealing with important UN operations at every level—in countries where she served as a foreign service officer, in Geneva, and in Washington DC. In New York, the ambassador will need to summon all her skills and experience to lead the American team at the US mission to the UN. Along with the USUN ambassador and the Secretary of State, US multilateral efforts are led by the Assistant Secretaries of the Bureau of International Organizations and the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration and the Permanent Representatives to the UN in Geneva, Rome, Vienna, and Nairobi. The president should nominate people for these positions who have in-depth knowledge of the system and related issues, solid judgment, and strong interpersonal skills. The diplomats must be strategic, prepared, creative, goal oriented, and personally engaging. Process oriented micro-managers will not accomplish much.
Topic:
Diplomacy, United Nations, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

2008. Multilateralism and the Superpower

Author:
Jeremy Greenstock
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: The author served as UK Ambassador to the UN 1998-2003. The UN, with its network of institutions and agencies, is the only truly global organisation. It is a great experiment, not in global governance, because the political direction of the UN lies firmly in the hands of sovereign nations, but in providing both norms and tools for managing the international arena 1. Its system is flawed and may well be unimprovable. But what it tries to do, and does, is indispensable for the avoidance of catastrophic war and for the development of a sustainable world. The UN as an institution is also, not unlike the American Constitution, an adversary of raw power. Born in an era of war and empire, its charter and principles provide shelter and help for weaker nations, and set limitations on the capacity of the strongest countries to throw their weight around selfishly—the generator of empires and wars. It came into being at the instigation of the great powers, and so they know —or they used to know—what they were creating and why. The United States was at the centre of it, seeing it as a great step towards the ending of the era of imperialism. The UN is not just about what happens in the Security Council. The work of the Secretariat, the funds, agencies and programmes, and indeed of several of the intergovernmental institutions such as ECOSOC, is primarily dedicated to every aspect of international development. They act on the premise that if a large part of the world is racked by poverty and disease, the more fortunate part will not have a stable environment in which to enjoy their relative success. The history of regional conflict over the last 75 years bears this out. As the UK’s Permanent Representative between 1998 and 2003, with a permanent place on the Security Council, I made a point of setting my inevitable focus on the Council’s work in the context of this wider UN purpose. The maintenance of international peace and security is an essential component of sustainable development, not just an end in itself.
Topic:
Security, United Nations, Governance, Sustainable Development Goals, Multilateralism, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

2009. Promoting Peace and Prosperity Through the United Nations

Author:
Thomas R. Pickering
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Editor’s note: The author was U.S. Ambassador to the UN 1989-1992. Franklin Roosevelt knew a good thing when he saw it. In 1943, in the midst of a military campaign for American survival in the Pacific and clawing our way back against Nazi Germany in the Atlantic, Roosevelt put bright people to work to shape what would come next. International cooperation under the League of Nations had twice failed – the U.S. resolved to stay out and the League’s weakness led to World War II. To fix it, Roosevelt took the name for the victory coalition of that great crusade – the United Nations – and fashioned an international organization to promote peace and prosperity through cooperation. Isolationist opposition in the U.S. endured, but many leaders of both parties had the vision and perspicacity to know that friends and allies working together made sense in achieving both objectives. Failure dogged the pursuit, but in Korea, the Gulf, Afghanistan, and the Balkans the organization made a real difference in war and peace. Americans have now been through four years of disdain and disparagement about the United Nations and the Trump administration’s failure to understand or make good use of it. Chinese and Russian opposition did not help. The Biden team comes to power with the challenge – how can we use more effectively Roosevelt’s vision to promote peace and prosperity on the planet?
Topic:
Diplomacy, United Nations, History, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

2010. Cold War Conflicts over a Khmer Temple

Author:
John Burgess
Publication Date:
02-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
American Diplomacy
Institution:
American Diplomacy
Abstract:
Judges at the International Court of Justice in the Hague typically rule on dry and technical issues such as rights of passage through foreign air space or obligations under international conventions. But in October 1959, they were asked to determine ownership of a ruined, thousand-year-old stone temple standing on the windy summit of a cliff in Southeast Asia. The case known as Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) transfixed the two countries during the three years of litigation that followed but also drew close attention from the region’s American diplomats. While declaring themselves neutral in the dispute, the Americans were eager to see it resolved. To them it was a troublesome distraction from the main job in the region, shoring up South Vietnam, where an insurgency that would become the Vietnam War was already underway. American claims of neutrality faced an awkward complication a year into the proceedings. One of the biggest living names in American diplomacy, former Secretary of State Dean Acheson, signed on as hired counsel for Cambodia. His presence in the court’s ornate hearing hall in the Hague led many people to conclude that the U.S. was backing Cambodia.
Topic:
Cold War, Diplomacy, and Disputes
Political Geography:
Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Southeast Asia, and United States of America