The geography of traditional diplomatic networks and nodes revisited

Herman van der Wusten & Virginie MamadouhAISSR, University of Amsterdam

Overview of sections

• Introduction• Diplomatic networks• Diplomatic nodes• New developments 1: EEAS• New developments 2: New media• A Dutch future in charcoal

Networks – bilateral

• distance decay • ranks

• longevity

Networks – multilateral

• global

• regional

Networks - disturbances & dynamics

• contested recognition • rank change • non-reciprocity/non-residential representations

BASIC MODEL GLOBAL DIPLOMATIC NETWORK - BILATERALS E N D E R S

Most prom. Europe L. America S.E. Asia Africa M. East ………

Most prominent

Europe RE Latin America CE South East Asia IV Africa E R Middle East S

……….

High Repr. - EEAS

• Competences: Commission Mixed Council trade aid CFSP enlargement ESDP

• Personnel: DG Relex Gen.Secr. National diplomats European Parliament

European integration as differentiation in space• Member states’ reciprocal embassies increasingly ceremonial only• Dutch reporting from EU capitals: more numerous, diverse than from

elsewhere and increasingly EU-agenda driven• Important reorientation Polish MFA+posts upon EU accession• More local coordination in capitals outside EU after Lisbon probably

strengthens EU voice• Joint EU positions in multilateral forums varies across policy sectors• Increasing cooperation among member states as regards consular

services• Co-location efforts among member states are made

Space-time compression

• direct instead of indirect communication between capitals

• control freak opportunities

• security headaches

Public diplomacy

• Traditional mass mediaBBC World Service, Voice of America, Radio France Internationale, Al Jazeera,CCTV-4, RT (formerly Russia Today)

• Internetpolitical disinterest in sending countries stimulates new media use – exception US. (Archetti about London based diplomats)

Dutch lessons

A future in charcoal

?