Search

Begin New Search Topic Diplomacy

1. The Ukraine War Prospect: How Peace Plans Might Work and Why They Will Fail

Author:
Carl Conetta
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Project on Defense Alternatives
Abstract:
During 2025 multiple contending Ukraine peace and cease-fire proposals were put forward by the Trump administration and America’s European partners. This article examines how the leading official proposals fell short. And it presents two, simpler proposals better aligned with battlefield realities. The article also explores the evolution of US, Ukrainian, Russian, and West European public opinion on the war. The Russia-Ukraine war has been a disaster – not only for the two principal combatants, who together have suffered 300,000 deaths, but for the entire world. This fact drives the imperative to end this conflict forthwith via negotiated compromise. Yet, as the article shows, none of the official proposals embrace this imperative. Instead, all exhibit efforts to win advantage for one side or the other. They are instances of diplo-fare – war by means of diplomacy. As such, their aim may be rejection not agreement, with an eye toward painting one’s opponent as intransigent and, in this way, build support for continuing the fight – or, in the case of President Trump’s preference, establish a pretext for US withdrawal. The simplest proposals may be the most practicable but these must reflect current battlefield realities rather than attempting to “correct” or “re-balance” them. This principle guides the independent cease-fire options suggested in this article. Otherwise, the article explores the possibility that Europe’s so-called Coalition of the Willing will respond to any serious fracture of Kyiv’s effort – a distinct possibility – by establishing a new nuclearized Europe-vs-Russia “central front” inside Ukraine. (With an Appendix summarizing the official November and December peace proposal texts.)
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, European Union, Negotiation, Armed Conflict, Russia-Ukraine War, and NATO
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America

2. Pakistan Steps In: Sudan and the Transformation of Regional Security

Author:
Areig Elhag
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
A $1.5 billion Pakistani arms deal with Sudan signals a regional shift from diplomacy toward military escalation, which may prolong the war in Sudan. At a moment that should have seen renewed momentum toward a political settlement in Sudan, reports suggest that Pakistan, with Saudi mediation, is nearing completion of a $1.5 billion arms deal with the war-torn country. Far from being a routine arms transaction, the deal encompasses Karakoram-8 aircraft, more than 200 drones, and air defense systems. It also potentially includes JF-17 multirole fighter jets, produced jointly by Pakistan Aeronautical Complex and China’s Chengdu Aircraft Corporation. This development points to a deeper regional shift away from sponsoring dialogue and toward a military resolution to the Sudanese conflict.
Topic:
Civil War, Diplomacy, Regional Security, and Arms Sales
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Africa, and Sudan

3. Prospects for Syria-Israel Relations

Author:
David Schenker
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Abstract:
Israel may believe the tense status quo is sustainable, but Washington is frustrated about the potential implications for Arab normalization, Turkish military friction, and near-term economic plans.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Normalization, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, and Syria

4. The Recognition of The Palestinian Statehood and itsImplication to International Diplomacy

Author:
Pippie Hugues
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Nkafu Policy Institute
Abstract:
The recognition of Palestinian statehood has re‑emerged as a pivotal issue in internationaldiplomacy, reshaping alliances and testing the limits of symbolic acts in global politics. While 147UN member states now recognize Palestine, this acknowledgment remains contested, particularlyby Israel and its closest allies. The debate underscores the tension between symbolism andsubstance: recognition strengthens legitimacy but does not automatically deliver stability or peace. For Africa, the Palestinian case resonates with unresolved sovereignty disputes such as WesternSahara and Somaliland. It highlights the importance of collective positions, effective mediation,and reforms in global governance systems. The African Union and subregional blocs havehistorically intervened in contested sovereignties, but their capacity remains constrained by limitedresources and weak enforcement mechanisms. This brief argues that recognition must be paired with tangible reforms, inclusive dialogue, andinstitutional strengthening. For African states, the lesson is clear: declarations alone areinsufficient. By leveraging recognition diplomatically, advocating for UN Security Council reform, and enhancing AU mediation frameworks, Africa can transform symbolic acts into meaningfulsteps toward peace, stability, and equitable global governance.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Geopolitics, Equity, and Recognition
Political Geography:
Middle East and Palestine

5. Restraint and Diplomacy in Arctic Policy: Cooperation Amid U.S.-Russia-China Tensions

Author:
Pavel Devyatkin
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
In recent years, the Arctic has become the site of both great-power cooperation and competition. While the 2025 Alaska summit between Presidents Putin and Trump reflected a thaw in U.S.–Russia relations, U.S. interest in acquiring Greenland has cast doubt on continued U.S. cooperation with both Russia and China in the region. This brief details how a combination of restraint and proactive diplomacy in the Arctic — built upon shared interests and a recognition of competitive coexistence — will best serve the United States. The second Trump administration has called for American Arctic dominance, viewing the region as an energy source and as an opportunity to monopolize resources and to establish its Western Hemisphere force posture. Russia views the Arctic through a similar lens of resources and sovereignty, as it ramps up its military presence while intensifying efforts to extract natural resources. China’s influence in the region has steadily increased, as it collaborates with Russia, while advancing scientific research, sustainable development, and multilateral climate cooperation. The United States has come to see increasing Russia–China collaboration in the Arctic as a threat to U.S. national interests. But rather than responding to this deepening relationship through unilateralism, the U.S. should recognize that competitive coexistence and trilateral cooperation are more beneficial. This approach avoids zero-sum confrontation and minimizes accidental escalation while maintaining U.S. force projection, maximizing resource extraction, and promoting scientific collaboration. Toward this end, this brief recommends that the Trump administration: Establish trilateral maritime safety and search-and-rescue, SAR, operations, a system that exchanges real-time information, conducts joint training exercises, and invests in port and coast guard infrastructure. Such cooperation would lower shipping costs, improve safety, and encourage economic development — goals shared by the United States, Russia, and China. Institutionalize direct, reliable U.S.–Russia–China communication channels, including a dedicated Arctic hotline for incident reporting and a security digital platform for real-time vessel tracking. Such transparency minimizes the chances of miscalculation, particularly with nuclear assets in the region. Revitalize the Arctic Council to enable communication among the three major powers, the eight Arctic states, and Indigenous representatives. Initiate a trilateral arms control framework, using reductions in Arctic military exercises as a springboard for broader arms control and security arrangements.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Strategic Competition, and Great Powers
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Asia, North America, Arctic, and United States of America

6. Turkey–Israel Relations: Strategic Context and Policy Considerations

Author:
Gabi Siboni and Erez Winner
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS)
Abstract:
Between Ankara’s regional ambition, ideological and religious zeal, and economic vulnerability—implications for Israel’s security and diplomacy
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Economy, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

7. Parliamentary Diplomacy and Normative Contestation after Coups d’État in West Africa

Author:
Nádia Teresa dos Santos Loureiro
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development
Institution:
Centre for Strategic Research and Analysis (CESRAN)
Abstract:
This article examines how international parliamentary organisations (IPOs) engage with situations of constitutional rupture following coups d’état in West Africa, focusing on political transitions in Mali, Burkina Faso and Guinea (Conakry) between 2020 and 2023. It addresses how parliamentary actors, lacking coercive authority, engage in contexts marked by military takeovers, suspended constitutional frameworks and contested political legitimacy. Drawing on a constructivist and post-Westphalian perspective, the article conceptualises parliamentary diplomacy operating through discursive practices and symbolic positioning. Empirically, the analysis examines the responses of the Pan-African Parliament (PAP) and the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) based on qualitative documentary analysis of resolutions, statements and institutional reports. The findings show that, despite significant political and structural constraints, IPOs contribute to articulating expectations of legitimate governance by problematising the marginalisation of parliaments and reaffirming representative institutions as expressions of popular sovereignty
Topic:
Diplomacy, Sovereignty, Legitimacy, Coup, and Parliamentary Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Africa, West Africa, Mali, Guinea, and Burkina Faso

8. Duterte’s Populist Foreign Policy as Illiberal Defiance: Consequences and Prospects

Author:
Aries A. Arugay
Publication Date:
04-2026
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
Barely two months into his presidency of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte attended the 2016 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Vientiane, Laos. The former mayor of Davao City had just swept the presidential election to become the first executive from outside of the Manila-based political establishment. Rather than reading a scripted speech, he launched into an impromptu tirade about colonial atrocities by the United States. Duterte went on to defend his violent war on drugs and rebut the criticisms of his equally violent purge of suspected criminals.1 The world was shocked by the bad manners exhibited by Duterte, especially his insult to then U.S. president Barack Obama.2 This was the beginning of the shift in Philippine foreign policy toward a more populist, illiberal, and revisionist posture—one that would last until Duterte’s presidency ended in 2022. This essay advances two core arguments about how Duterte’s right-wing populism shaped Philippine foreign policy. First, Duterte’s foreign policy was not motivated by an ideology, so much as by a performance anchored in symbolic defiance, personalized diplomacy, and selective norm rejection.3 Second, Duterte’s populist revisionism ultimately collided with entrenched structural constraints, including the country’s enduring security dependence on the United States, institutional resistance within the bureaucracy, and the democratic political succession that brought the nonpopulist President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. to power. Taken together, these constraints exposed the limits of populist foreign policy in a small and militarily vulnerable state situated on the front lines of the U.S.-China rivalry. Since Duterte was elected, there has been widespread recognition that populism’s impact goes beyond national borders. In Europe, for instance, populists tended not to touch traditional foreign policy and security issues until the 2015 refugee crisis. The wave of populism that followed was marked by a contempt for the cosmopolitan European outlook that had long underpinned support for the European Union, liberal migration policies, and Europe’s reliance on the United States for its security.4 Populists on both the left and right are often skeptical of multilateral institutions because they restrain state power. Venezuela’s former president Hugo Chávez, for example, attempted to form alternative regional institutions in the Americas to counter U.S. hegemony.5 The revisionist impulse inherent in populism inclines its leaders toward foreign policy adventurism, even though abrupt shifts are uncommon given the durability of national strategic interests. Populist leaders also often exhibit a high risk tolerance—especially personalist leaders in command of highly concentrated state power.6 Moreover, they often see foreign policy as a means of weakening their political opponents and consolidating power at home. They also crave international recognition, which they pursue through “megaphone diplomacy” that foregrounds their personality and charisma.7 The burden of managing foreign relations is bearable for the populist up to the point that strategic reality intervenes, imposing itself in ways that leave scant room for performance. Populist politics, therefore, are unable to resist the water’s edge. This essay proceeds by tracing the right-wing populist currents in Philippine foreign policy under Duterte through three major international issues: disputes with China in the South China Sea, the attempted abrogation of the Visiting Forces Agreement with the United States, and the country’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Court (ICC). Respectively, each of these issues foregrounds one of the foundations of Philippine foreign policy that Duterte attempted to undermine: international law, the Philippines’ alliance with the United States, and human rights. The essay goes on to analyze how these foreign policy stances resonated with the revisionist orientations of countries that Duterte sought inspiration from—namely China and Russia. These revisionist narratives were reinforced in the Philippines through domestic disinformation networks that learned strategies from Russia and China.8 Finally, the essay highlights the implications of Duterte’s populist policies under the Marcos Jr. administration and examines the prospects of their revival in the future.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Populism, and Illiberalism
Political Geography:
Asia and Philippines

9. An Unbowed Petro Successfully Plays the Diplomat

Author:
Juan Antonio Martínez-Sánchez
Publication Date:
02-2026
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s positive meeting with Trump stands to benefit not only his coalition, but also the region writ large.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Donald Trump, Regional Politics, and Gustavo Petro
Political Geography:
Colombia, South America, North America, and United States of America

10. Diplomacy Meets Paradiplomacy: Unpacking Central Government Responses through Evidence from Turkey’s Paradiplomac

Author:
Esra Kaya Erdoğan and Emrah Atar
Publication Date:
01-2026
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
This study examines the central government’s response to the paradiplomacy of sub-state actors through an analysis of the Turkish case, using a qualitative approach. As part of this research, a total of twelve face-to-face or virtual interviews were conducted with the representatives from the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Marmara Municipalities Union, and academics between June 2023 and November 2023. It views paradiplomacy as an outcome of the ongoing trend to localize diplomacy and aims to identify varying central government responses to paradiplomacy. These responses are analyzed using a three-fold categorization: positive, negative and mixed. The characteristics of each category explored in the context of the Turkish case. The study suggests that, despite the central government’s opportunistic approach to paradiplomacy, its response has shown a cyclical tendency. The central government’s stance on paradiplomacy is therefore complex and politically driven. It fluctuates along a broad spectrum, ranging from direct support to outright exclusion. This reflects the shifting political dynamics in Turkey.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Government, Governance, Municipalities, and Sub-state Diplomacy
Political Geography:
Turkey and Middle East