Search

Begin New Search Topic Diplomacy Publication Year within 5 Years

11. From Tunis to Baghdad: Can platform-based politics take root?

Author:
Carrie Schenkel and James Storen
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
The organization of political parties has served multiple distinct roles in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). In many cases, regimes use them to create a light veneer of democratic legitimacy for authoritarianism; in other cases, parties exist to represent one identity group or are centered around a singular individual. In rare cases, but with a few successful examples, parties exist to represent an ideology. Rarer still, but key to the future democratic success of the region, are true platform-based parties. Vacuums of political leadership have developed due to the limited role parties play in shaping governance, representation, and public policy. In a rapidly changing region, the opportunity for effective, issues-based parties has never been more evident. Iran’s proxies in the region have been significantly weakened and the “Axis of Resistance” dismantled, presenting openings for new political leadership to emerge. Political parties are not yet poised to meet the moment. In much of the region, long histories of implicit and explicit bans and one-party dominance have left political parties weak, unpopular, and ineffective. Extended periods of suppression and restriction—such as Jordan’s thirty-year party ban, Iraq’s decades of one-party rule under Saddam Hussein, and Tunisia’s twenty-three years of party bans during the Ben Ali era—have resulted in political parties that lack both organizational capacity and broad public appeal. Rather, they are fragmented, ideologically vague, and centered around individuals rather than coherent platforms. The proliferation of political parties—more than 220 are currently registered in Tunisia, for example—has further undermined any sense of clear policy platforms and the ability to differentiate one party from another. Rather than reforming or uniting under existing frameworks, disillusioned members frequently break away to form new parties, stymieing coalition-building and the development of rooted, comprehensive party ideologies. Disillusionment with traditional parties has led citizens to favor actors perceived as more directly serving their interests, such as Hezbollah—which positions itself as a resistance force against Israel—or Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated parties, which have gained trust through their provision of essential social services in Egypt, Jordan, and elsewhere. In an era defined by youth-led movements, digital activism, and persistent calls for democratization, these parties stand at a crossroads. Whether they act as agents of change or instruments of entrenched power remains a central question, shaping not only the future of governance within individual nations but also the trajectory of regional stability and development.
Topic:
Civil Society, Corruption, Diplomacy, Politics, Elections, and Democratic Transitions
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, North Africa, and Lebanon

12. Why democracies stick together: The theory and empirics behind alliance formation

Author:
Markus Jaeger
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Atlantic Council
Abstract:
Domestic regime type affects both inter-state conflict and alliance formation. Democratic peace theory posits that democracies do not go to war with one another, while democratic alliance theory suggests that they rarely, if ever, join nondemocratic alliances (or alliances led by nondemocratic powers). Empirical evidence strongly supports both theories. The Atlantic Council’s Freedom and Prosperity Indexes further reinforces the hypothesis that economically prosperous democracies tend to align with one another, whereas authoritarian states gravitate toward similarly nondemocratic and less prosperous partners. If these theories hold, they carry significant implications for Western and especially US foreign policy. First, global democratization would reduce the number of potential conflicts, at least among an increasing number of democracies. Second, it would expand the pool of democratic alliance partners, while at the same limiting the alliance options available to nondemocratic powers. This strategic logic underscores the importance of upholding democratic norms abroad and promoting democratization in nondemocratic states. However, advocating for democratization of nondemocratic great powers will be perceived as both a geopolitical and domestic political challenge aimed at weakening their international position and threatening their governments’ domestic grip on power. Efforts to democratize nondemocratic great-power like Russia and China therefore provoke intense countermeasures. If such a strategy is deemed to be too high risk or too difficult to pursue successfully, a less provocative, “peripheral” strategy may focus on fostering democracy and economic development in authoritarian regimes’ weaker, less prosperous partners, thereby depriving them of potential allies.
Topic:
NATO, Diplomacy, Politics, Democracy, and Alliance
Political Geography:
Russia, China, and Asia

13. Introducing Hafiz Pashayev’s An Ambassador’s Manifesto

Author:
Damjan Krnjević Mišković
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
There is a word in the Azerbaijani language—ağsaqqal—which means something like a wise and respected elder of the community from whom one traditionally seeks advice. Hafiz Pashayev is widely acknowledged as the ağsaqqal of the country’s diplomatic service. And the book we are here to celebrate is an important element in explaining this status he deservedly enjoys. Now, before Hafiz m. came to be widely regarded as the ağsaqqal of Azerbaijani diplomacy, he became a founder (fondatore) of “new modes and orders,” as a Florentine political philosopher of the highest rank memorably put it centuries ago [NM, D I:pr.1]. In fact, Hafiz m. founded two such new modes and orders: Azerbaijan’s diplomatic presence in Washington in November 1992, and, here in Baku, the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy in March 2006, which in January 2014 was granted a charter and thus officially transformed, following the founder’s original intention, into ADA University. We are here this evening to discuss his memoir of this first founding, titled An Ambassador’s Manifesto. A memoir of the second—or at least on the pedagogical and state‑building logic informing this second founding—is yet to come.
Topic:
Diplomacy and Memoir
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Azerbaijan

14. A Proposal for a Trans-Caspian Development Bank

Author:
Carlos Roa, Charles Yockey, and Ibrahim Mammadov
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
Diplomacy is not alchemy. Just as lead cannot be magically turned into gold, grand visions require practical tools to become reality. The Middle Corridor—a trade and transport route stretching from Central Asia across the Caspian Sea to the South Caucasus and onward to Türkiye and the European continent—is one such vision. The corridor has captured the imagination of policymakers and strategists, who seek to reorient global trade flows, diversify energy routes, and diminish dependencies on geopolitical chokepoints like the Suez Canal. Yet, for all its potential, the Middle Corridor still remains more of an ambition than a reality, constrained by insufficient infrastructure, fragmented political coordination, and—perhaps most importantly, a lack of cohesive financial strategy. For the Middle Corridor to succeed as a vital artery of international commerce, it requires more than bilateral agreements and fragmented investments. The project requires a dedicated institution capable of bridging its diverse stakeholders, financing transformative projects, and aligning growth with the twenty‑first century’s imperatives like digital innovation and climate adaptation. A Trans‑Caspian Development Bank (TCDB) could provide precisely the kind of focused and flexible framework needed to turn the Middle Corridor into a thriving economic corridor. By pooling resources and expertise from member states, private investors, and international partners, the TCDB would fill the critical gap between lofty ambitions and actionable progress.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Geopolitics, Trade, and Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs)
Political Geography:
Central Asia and South Caucasus

15. Assessing the Achievements of COP29

Author:
Elnur Soltanov
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
Azerbaijan became the first country from the Silk Road region to host an annual session of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change—in this case, the 29th session. Hence, COP29. This took place in Baku between 11 and 22 November 2024 and had something like 76,000 registered participants. And Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry has a document that says that COP29 “was attended by representatives of 196 countries and nearly 200 international, regional, and other organizations. More than 80 heads of state and government participated at the World Leaders’ Climate Action Summit organized within the framework of COP29 on 12-13 November 2024.” So, evidently, this was hard to pull-off successfully.
Topic:
Climate Change, Diplomacy, and Conference of the Parties (COP)
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Azerbaijan

16. Training Diplomats in Azerbaijan: Past Successes and Future Plans

Author:
Fariz Ismailzade
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of Azerbaijan as one of 15 newly independent republics in 1991, the development of a sovereign and professional diplomatic service became of utmost importance and urgency. Doing so, it was understood, was a necessary attribute and instrument for pursuing a country’s foreign policy agenda, which at minimum should aim to strengthen sovereignty, minimize external risks, develop bilateral and multilateral relations, and properly position a given country on the global map of nations. Yet apart from Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine, Azerbaijan and the remaining 11 former Soviet republics had limited experience with a truly professional and competent diplomatic service. The Soviet Union granted little authority to the ‘ethnic republics’ and provided them with no autonomy in foreign relations. Consequently, the offices of the republic-level Ministries of Foreign Affairs remained quite small and primarily handled protocol responsibilities for foreign dignitaries and guests traveling from Moscow to those parts of the country. The one in Baku, for instance, was established in 1944 as the People’s Commissariat of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Training, and Post-Soviet Space
Political Geography:
Eurasia and Azerbaijan

17. Minilateral Mechanisms for Peacemaking in a Multipolar World: Friends, Contact Groups, Troikas, Quads, and Quints

Author:
Teresa Whitfield
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
International Peace Institute (IPI)
Abstract:
Informal “minilateral” coalitions of the willing and interested have long been a feature of peacemaking. Groups of states identified as “friends” of the mediator or a particular peace process and contact groups bringing together interested powers date back to concert diplomacy traditions and proliferated at the end of the Cold War as conflict resolution activity surged. The incidence of such informal mechanisms grew exponentially between 1990 and 2009. This report assesses how these mechanisms have evolved in the years since 2010 and investigates their place in parallel to the UN’s efforts to mediate internationalized internal conflicts in Libya, Syria, and Yemen; peace processes in the Philippines, Colombia, and Mozambique taking place in relatively benign regional settings, as well as the anomalous case of Venezuela, where efforts toward a peaceful resolution of the political crisis were mired in international divisions; the geopolitically contested contexts of Myanmar and Afghanistan; and the democratic transition and descent into war in Sudan. The report concludes that groups have the potential to build internal coherence among their members, as well as to elevate public messaging and facilitate information sharing, but they can also become a forum for competition between their members. In this context, the report offers lessons to help those considering whether a group is appropriate. The “right” group structure will depend on the context, and the adage of “form follows function” is critically important. It is key to set realistic expectations and, in some cases, accept that the “right” structure will be no group at all. Successful groups and partnerships all point to the importance of skilled individual mediators committed to working with each other, whether within a group or without an established mechanism. Finally, some contexts may defy attempts to design or deliver a coherent international peace architecture. In these cases, more modest goals related to specific or localized gains and incremental support to conflict parties and other affected communities should be pursued.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, and Peacemaking
Political Geography:
Global Focus

18. What to expect from the UK-EU Summit

Author:
Jannike Wachowiak, Joël Reland, and Anand Menon
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
UK in a Changing Europe, King's College London
Abstract:
The first leader level post-Brexit UK-EU summit will take place on Monday 19 May. The government has stated its desire to strengthen the ‘strategic alliance’ between the UK and the EU, to deepen relations on security and to tear down barriers to trade. Not all of this will be achieved. However, the meeting will mark a significant first step towards building on existing agreements and a test of whether the two sides are committed to matching increasingly warm words with actions. This insight paper explains the key areas to keep an eye out for during the summit and the potential impact they might have on the future of UK-EU relations.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Trade
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

19. The Future of the 'Special Relationship'

Author:
Kim Darroch and Evie Aspinall
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Mile End Institute, Queen Mary University of London
Abstract:
Since Winston Churchill first coined the term in 1946, successive American Presidents and Prime Ministers have hailed the ‘Special Relationship’ between the United Kingdom and the United States. For over 80 years, the exceptionally close political, diplomatic, economic, military and intelligence relationship between the two countries has endured changes of government, the end of the Cold War, the ‘War on Terror’, and globalisation. In the week that Donald Trump returned to the White House, the former British Ambassador to the United States, Kim Darroch, the Director of the British Foreign Policy Group, Evie Aspinall, and Dr James Ellison explored the future of Anglo-American relations. With tariffs looming and Elon Musk waging war on the Starmer government, they asked how should Britain handle this relationship - and explored the challenges it will face over the coming years.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Politics, Bilateral Relations, Tariffs, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, North America, and United States of America

20. A New Triangle: The Interplay Between China and EU-India Relations

Author:
Philippe Le Corre
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Asia Society
Abstract:
China has shaped the U.S.-India relationship for decades.1 Today, another significant triangle is emerging: the China-EU-India relationship. Indian and European leaders are strengthening ties. Both view China as a formidable economic and security rival while regarding the United States as a key security partner (and, for Europe, a long-standing ally). What is the current state of EU-China and EU-India relations? As India’s influence and economic appeal grow, could it become a viable alternative to China for European business leaders and policymakers? How is Brussels incorporating India into its strategies to address a potential crisis in Asia or the broader Indo-Pacific? Twenty-five years ago, the European Union viewed China as a top priority for business, cultural exchanges, and diplomacy. Following the introduction of Beijing’s open-door policy in 1978 and with strong encouragement from Chinese authorities, European companies flocked to China. Initially, many Europeans used Hong Kong as an intermediary for business, but by the mid-1990s, Guangdong Province and Shanghai became key gateways to the Chinese market, particularly for Germany and France.2 Trade and investment surged, especially after China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, which was widely supported by European political and business elites. Today, China remains the EU’s largest trading partner, with substantial European investments across the mainland. In contrast, India was long viewed as a potential partner, but only a few EU member states took steps to forge a strategic partnership with New Delhi. European investments in India were — and still are — limited, with many corporations citing challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, market access barriers, and bureaucratic red tape, which make it difficult to operate in most Indian states. However, the mood has begun to shift. On the EU side, the European Commission’s 2019 China strategy characterized Beijing as “a partner, a competitor, and a systemic rival.” The COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted direct links between Europe and China from 2020 to 2022, caused significant strain. This was followed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, an event many on the continent perceive as having Beijing’s tacit support. Additional factors, including an increasingly authoritarian regime at home and a more assertive China abroad, have contributed to European perceptions,3 as explained at length by the Center for China Analysis’s latest Global Public Opinion on China project.4 This, in turn, has affected the EU-China relationship, which has been gradually downgraded from the “honeymoon” period of 1995–2015. On the other hand, the strengthening EU-India relationship is a relatively recent development, driven by several factors that have emerged in the wake of the pandemic. These include the rise of the ambitious Bharatiya Janata Party under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who first took office in 2014 and is now serving his third term, as well as a broader diversity of partnerships between the EU and India. Other factors influencing EU-India relations include the growing assertiveness of the People’s Republic of China and the United States’ shift away from multilateralism during President Donald Trump’s first term (2017–2021). Since January 2025, the increasing probability of a break in the transatlantic alliance under the new Trump administration is leading the EU to look for new partners, including in the Indo-Pacific region. In addition, India’s robust GDP growth — 6.6% in 2025 and a projected 6.7% in 2026 — has attracted European businesses.5 In a global environment defined by multipolarity, could the previously low-profile EU-India relationship evolve into a closer partnership? With EU-China relations facing significant challenges, might India emerge as a viable alternative Asian partner for Europe? The current EU-India relationship is described as “strategic.” In reality, it is partial and uneven, and there are major differences in the nature of relations between India and individual EU member states. Meanwhile, how does Beijing view its competitor in the Global South as it seeks to win over Europe’s support? This paper explores the dynamics of the interaction among these three powers in the rapidly changing geopolitical context. It examines India’s political and economic challenges in the context of the EU-China relationship, how the EU-India relationship is evolving, and whether an EU-India partnership could take center stage if tensions with China escalate. European countries have kept strong ties with the Global South, and some see a strong India as a potential bridge for fostering cooperation in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Economics, Bilateral Relations, and European Union
Political Geography:
China, Europe, India, and Asia