Globalization and diplomacy

1. Introduction

Globalization as it is known today may be considered the most fundamentally impactful event of the 21^st century. It has resulted into very unique, clearly noticeable changes in the conduct of trade, migration, information and communication sharing, mobility and international security. There have been some arguments that the impact of globalization has weakened the place and role of the state in international political arena, given many actors who have emerged in this process. In this assay, I seek to examine how the changes brought about by the present wave of globalization have affected conduct of diplomacy and diplomatic relations among states. While it is true that several actors are today playing some roles previously reserved for the state, the field of diplomacy seems to have been protected from non-state actors as government representatives still remain the official diplomatic channels. By looking at effort such as the Arab League in trying negotiate peace between the Sudan Armed forces under Gen. Abdel Fatar Al-Burhan and the rebel Rapid Support Forces (RSF) under the renegade Gen. Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo, the Gulf Cooperation Council’s role in the negotiating the Yemen political crisis and the Economic Community of West African States’ (ECOWAS) role in the 2017 Gambia political turmoil, a new form of regionalized diplomacy emerges. The case of the Syrian insurgency has also resulted into emergence of a shift from bilateral to multilateral diplomacy. The changes brought about by globalization have had some impact on the conduct of diplomacy as it’s traditionally known, mainly with regards to the rapid flow of information and communication which have transformed how diplomacy is practiced today. But at a fundamental level, globalization has had little effect on diplomacy but rather the changes are in the methods used, which have changed because of globalization.

2. Globalization definition

Globalization is the process of integration and interaction among the different peoples, organizations and countries around the world (James & Steger, 2014, pp.419-426). The term globalization is used to describe the increasing interconnectedness and interdependence of people and their cultures, economies and policies around the world. This interdependence has been made possible because of increased cross-border exchanges of goods and services, sharing of technology, investment flows as well as exchanges among people and information (Albrwo & King, 1990, pp.29-34).

Globalization as known today around the world, has been accelerated by the increased convergence of economic and cultural systems. It’s this convergence that has necessitated and even promoted more integration, interdependence and interaction among the countries and peoples of the world. As more regions and countries become closely intertwined economically, politically and culturally, the more globalization becomes entrenched around the world. Globalization involves technology and data as well as economic resources of capital. The expansion of markets at the global level has driven the liberalization of economic activities through the exchange of goods and funds (Wolf, 2014, pp.22-25).

The removal of cross-border trade barriers has increased the feasibility and formation of global markets.[1] The technological advances in the field of transportation, such as the invention of the steam ship, steam engine locomotives, the jet engine, container ships, and the advances in telecommunications capabilities like the telegraph, mobile phone, the internet and the smart phone, have been key drivers of globalization because these have increased the interconnectedness and there interdependence of economies and cultures world over (Stever, 1972, pp.1-3).

2.1 Recent drivers of Globalization

Some of the technological advances in recent years that have played a fundamental role in the expansion of globalization include the following:

Internet; The invention of the world wide web has accelerated the capacity of sharing and flow of knowledge and information, access to and exchange of ideas and cultures among different people in different countries. It has helped to close the ‘digital divide’ between the more developed and less developed countries.

IoT and AI: The invention of ‘internet of things’ has enabled a collective connection of networked devices and the technology which facilitates communication between devices as well as between the devices and the cloud. The recent advances in ‘Artificial Intelligence’ has only helped to further accelerate this connectivity. These technologies have eased tracking of good in transit, making cross-border trade much easier and more feasible.

Communication technology; The introduction of the third, fourth and fifth generation networks (3G, 4G, and 5G) has exponentially increased the responsiveness and reliability of wireless and mobile networks, thereby connecting more and more areas that would otherwise remain isolated from the rest of the world.

Transportation; Further developments speed rail and aircraft technologies have facilitated increased mobility of people and goods. Also, advances in shipping logistical technologies has increased the efficiency of movement of materials and parts as well as finished goods around the world.

Blockchain; This technology has been key in the development of databases and data storage at a decentralized level, which supports the supply chain tracking of materials. It facilitates people and organizations to securely access data such as banking transfers healthcare and education. Blockchain, for instance, provides transparent central ledgers which record and vet all transactions in a timely and accurate manner, thereby eliminating fraudulent activities.

3. Importance of Globalization

Globalization has been established as a necessary invention and its importance has increased with further entrenchment of interaction and integration. Globalization is important because it changes and eases the interaction between people, businesses and countries (Bakari, 2013). It enhances the economic interactions among nations, expands trade, enables supply chains globally and increases access to and availability of natural resources as well as labor exchanges.

The changes in the financial and trade exchanges also facilitates exchanges of cultural resources and removes or minimizes the barriers of political economies, physical boundaries, geographical constraints (Robertson, 1992). Fewer restrictions mean more flexibility for people to move and more opportunities created in trade and business. This further expands markets, thereby spurring innovation and exchanges of technology and expertise.

4. Origins and evolution of Globalization

The concept of globalization seems to have come into prominence in recent decades, but the process of interconnecting the world started way back (Gunder, 1998). From ancient times, human beings have gone to distant places for settlement, production and trade. Improvements in transportation and technology has only accelerated their desire for expansive discovery. However, it was in the 19^th century that globalization as we know it today started to take off. After centuries of European colonial exploration and trade, the initial attempts at modern globalization started with the invention of rail engine, steam ships and the telegraph, as well as other inventions that increased economic interdependence and cooperation among nations (Kolb, 2018).

This initial explosion of globalization however, faced resistance as it was unregulated and was largely seen as unfair and as a result, it dwindled and broke down upon the outbreak of the First and Second World Wars, with the post-war protectionism and the great depression in-between them. The end of the Second World War marked the beginning of efforts by the United States to set ground rules that would help revive international trade and engagement (Bradford, Grieco & Hufbauer, 2005). This sparked the start of the second and most recent phase of globalization, which continues to evolve to this day, albeit with numerous disruptions and constraints.

5. Globalization and Internationalism

Whereas globalization is mainly an interaction and integration of economic processes with associated cultural and social aspects, international disputes and diplomacy also form large parts of globalization both historically and in modern times. And given the fact that globalization by its very sense, involves interaction among nations, and given the upheavals that defined the pre-war efforts at globalization and how they broke down, diplomacy becomes an essential tool for entrenching those interactions for the mutual benefit of all concerned.

5.1 Diplomacy

Diplomacy is the art and science of practicing and maintaining peaceful relations and the established methods of influencing the decisions and behavior of sovereign nations and their peoples through negotiations and dialogue (Bartson, 2006, p.1). Diplomacy often depicts the efforts by representatives of different groups of people and nations to have negotiated agreements on issues like trade, conflicts, collective security, technological exchanges and the environment. Nations use diplomacy in the conduct of their affairs as a way of promoting their economic, political, technological and cultural relations as well as safeguarding their national interests while preserving peaceful relations at the same time.

The core purpose of diplomacy is to promote and maintain peaceful relations among nations. This may include carrying out negotiations on trade deals, discussing collective problems, putting new policies into implementation and resolving disputes. Failure or ineffective diplomatic relations can result into very grave consequences such as trade embargos, boycotts, violent confrontations and even fully fledged war (Jervis, 2002). Additionally, lack of diplomatic relations or failure thereof, may defeat efforts for necessary diplomatic negotiations and conversations, which consequently result to unilateral action that threatens health of the planet for example, if nations fail to talk to each other for collective remedial and preventive action.

6. Diplomacy in a globalized world

As seen above, diplomacy is a key driver of globalization because it streamlines the interactions and mutually beneficial engagements between and among nations.

Diplomacy can be said to be as old as humanity itself, and as such, no one can claim to know its evolution dates. Diplomacy has existed from the very initial human-to-human contact, because at a fundamental level, it’s all about human interactions. Diplomacy may also be seen as the skill, activity or profession of managing these international interactions, mainly under the stewardship of a country’s representative or diplomat.

Modern globalization is on the other hand, considered to have been spurred by the end of the Cold War, which tore down barriers of separation and opened up global systems to increasingly greater interdependence, driven by technological advancements and economic liberalization (Campbell, 2015, p.20). However, as pointed out above, this post-Cold War phase is just the latest among many stages of globalization. Therefore, it could be argued that just as much as diplomacy, globalization has been in existence but it’s only the post-Cold War phase which has attracted scholarly attention because it has seemed by far more advanced than the phases that preceded it (Nanyonga, 2019, pp.146-149).

6.1 Relationship between Diplomacy and Globalization

Globalization and diplomacy are both aspects of international relations, which are very crucial in the disciples of international relations and global politics. The two concepts are mutually reinforcing in the global affairs. As diplomacy plays the role of facilitating interconnectedness and interdependence, with the diplomats as agents whose role has increasingly become important in the a rapidly globalizing world (Borcan, 2012, p.32), globalization plays the role of facilitating the main purpose of diplomacy, which is to promote peaceful and friendly coexistence and maintain cooperation among nations. It’s also important to note the evolving passage of international foreign policy from geo-politics to global-politic, which requires international institutions and instruments to adapt, respect and enhance themselves, in order to guarantee rule of law in all countries under the responsibility of an international regime Borvan, 2012, pp. 14-16).

There is a very small difference between global politics and geo-politics because they share a relationship of interdependence, where geopolitics may be seen as a branch of global politics. Geo-politics solely focuses on understanding how different countries in the same geographical region relate with each other and how the politics of each of those countries affects the particular region. Global politics on the other hand studies the relations between countries (states) or issues of collective concern like the environmental treaties to tackle climate change, which require cooperation at international level, of other issues for example the 2008 Sub-prime Mortgage scheme crisis in the US, which resulted into a global financial crisis, requiring all major powers to work together to resolve.

Here, diplomacy played an important role in bringing all nations together to address a challenge with potentially global repercussions, which resulted from unregulated business practices in one country (US), but was affecting the whole world. Rather than resorting to the blame game, pointing fingers at the US for plunging the world into a financial crisis, nations came together in diplomatic engagements to find solutions for the crisis. This a clear demonstration of the intersection between globalization and diplomacy. It’s therefore clear that geopolitics is an important branch of global politics since it’s profoundly affected by international relations.

Global politics also plays out in the arena of ‘soft power’, where a country is able to use the attractiveness of its cultural lifestyles and political systems to entice others nations to its will. American fashion industry for example as portrayed in Hollywood films has popularized Western dressing all over the world, creating market for their garment industry. Another example of ‘soft power’ is China’s recent policy of establishing Chinese language centers in many countries especially in Africa and donating Chinese Cable Television kits to schools and poor communities, intended to create appeal for the Chinese language and expose African people to Chinese lifestyles. Advancements in information and communications technologies has made the application of ‘soft power’ (a form of cultural diplomacy) even easier as a result of globalization.

Here we see that world politics largely shifting from a geopolitical outlook (where focus was mainly on the geography of the region as a key determinant of a country’s diplomacy), to global politics with more diverse intersection between politics and international relations at a global scale. Global politics can therefore be said to have been greatly enhanced because of the increasing interconnectedness between diplomacy and globalization. For example, before the 1980s, China mostly focused on geopolitics of the South Asia region, but now it’s has expanded to the global scale. China’s efforts to become a global technological power, has been hampered by diplomatic freezes/boycots of its major technological brands like Huawei and Tiktok in the US, Canada and Europe, bringing into focus the interception between globalization and diplomacy in the world today.

Geopolitics however, remains important and is widely practiced around the world. For example, the decision during the Trump administration in the US, to build a wall separating its borders from Mexico supposedly to control the flow of illegal immigrants and narcotics, and the decision by Kenya to build a wall along its border with Somalia, were policies embedded in geopolitics. Geopolitics also continues to be played out in the Shia and Sunni rivalries between Iran and Saudi Arabia respectively, with Iran commanding influence in Shia majority countries like Syria, Iraq, Bahrain, Lebanon and Yemen, and Saudi Arabia leading the Sunni sect axis with countries like Jordan, Egypt, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. These three scenarios fall in the geopolitics category because the politics within the geographical locations of the US-Latin region, Horn of Africa and Middle East respectively, that have pushed those countries to make such political decisions.

In upholding the rule of law on international level, information and communication technology as well as cultural diplomacy come into play (Held, 2005, p.9). Because of globalization, the way a country treats its citizens is no longer treated exclusively as an internal matter, because since technology has increasingly connected the world, the behavior of one country towards its citizens can easily be copied by another country (Beetham, 1998, pp.61-62). Because of globalization, diplomatic pressure can very easily and quickly be imposed on countries that are seen to be mistreating their populations.

For example, the Military Junta in Myanmar (Burma) have been put on international travel bans and their diplomatic privileges withdrawn in many countries around the world because of the state-sponsored brutality and ethnic cleansing meted on the Rohingya moslems in Rakine state. Because of technology-enabled globalization, the behavior of leaders is now influenced by numerous external forces such as international organizations (for example the UN, EU, AU), civil society organizational (for example Human Rights Watch) and donor countries and organizations, for example World Bank, IMF, OECD (Risse, 1999).

In the analysis of how globalization relates with diplomacy, it’s important to note that although not always, in some cases, the various differences among these two concepts can end up supplementing each other, for example in cases where unilateralism can have global catastrophic impacts (a case in point was the diplomatic efforts under the UN’s World Health Organization to coordinate the distribution of COVID vaccines where countries were focusing on stockpiling for their own home populations, leaving the rest with nothing).

In other cases however, the differences between globalization and diplomacy are glaringly clear. For example the increasing super-power contestations between China and the US, being played out all over the world as a result of globalization positioning China as the ‘world’s factory’ and elevating its economy to the second biggest in the world.

Globalization does not have specifically defined hierarchical forms of command and control, making it an ‘all inclusive concept’, with its pluralism marked by various actors. The world of diplomacy on the other hand, is marked by a strong command and control hierarchy, with diplomatic actors (diplomats) being answerable to the government of their home country. Diplomats are instructed what to say and how to say it, and can only relay what they are told.

Actors in the globalization arena all have equal rights with no chain of command or hierarchy. Additionally, whereas actors in the diplomatic space require a certain level of formal education and experience, it’s not a requirement for globalization. Client across the other side of the world do not need to have a certain qualification to in order to place their orders, and have no guidelines for saying or doing what they want at any given time.

In diplomatic dealings, actors prefer to concentrate on what is achievable rather than what may be construed as right (Maley, 2008, pp.1-2). The results achieved are commonly determined by the sense of cautiousness and pragmatism with a clear understanding of the limitation within which specific action can be taken, and discretion and patience is emphasized rather than emotions and openness (Maley, 2008, p.2). In practice however, the effects of globalization and on diplomacy and it functions can be considered different from each other.

On the one hand, diplomacy is viewed as a discrete process which is dominated by a selection of very highly placed ‘insiders’ and other excluded as ‘outsiders’. Therefore the skills of diplomacy entail specific knowledge acquired by designated professionals and passed down to other through a clearly defined tutorial guide. Globalization on the other hand differs from diplomacy in this regard in that it’s a open and transparent way of navigating the international space based on inclusivity of every and all concepts that make up its agenda.

Globalization has somehow weakened the sovereignty and narrowed the national boundaries, which begs the question as to whether diplomatic engagement as a concept has also changed in lieu of the changes brought about by globalization, and whether its still necessary in today’s globalized world.

6.2 Effects of globalization on diplomacy

The concept of globalization has had and continues to have an immense effect on the entire international relations regime. It therefore wouldn’t be inconceivable that these far-reaching effects would spread into the diplomacy space. It’s now acknowledged that globalization has changed the way diplomacy is conducted since both globalization and diplomacy are dynamic concepts. It should be noted however that globalization has only changed the way diplomacy is conducted, and not the nature of its fundamental aspects.

With or without globalization, diplomacy has been and will always be about developing and maintaining relations and using them to secure and promote national interests. Globalization has change the conduct of diplomacy in that traditionally, the function of diplomacy was based on sovereignty of nations, but with the sovereignty of nations having been watered down due to globalization, the methodologies through which diplomacy is conducted have had to change.

Globalization eases and quickens information sharing and inclusion of non-state actors in diplomatic endeavors, which even when it’s unofficially done, still presents as a change from the traditional diplomacy. Therefore whereas globalization has not completely altered the nature of diplomacy, it has nevertheless changed one of the pillars of upon which diplomacy is based, that is the deploying authority. Whereas traditional diplomacy required sovereign states at sending parties for diplomats, today because of globalization, organizations like the EU, UN, AU and others can deploy diplomats.

Before the advent of globalizations, states monopolized their sovereignty, whether in the economy, politics, communications or coercive force. Today however, globalization has striped states of that monopoly, making way for non-state actors like NGOs, journalists, members of the civil society, and others to get more involved in diplomatic missions. Nevertheless, states still attach value on statements issued through ‘official’ diplomatic channels irrespective of the presence of non-state actors, which serves to re-emphasize the fact that diplomacy fundamentally remains the same even in the era of globalization.

 

In diplomacy, it’s acknowledged that information is important, the reliability and accuracy of that information is the most crucial for any diplomatic mission to be successful. In this contemporary phase of globalization, with rapid and unprecedented technological change occurring every time, communication has been revolutionized, requiring diplomats to be cautious and fast thinkers. The era of diplomats communicating through mailbags and waiting for a month to get a response are long gone. The days when diplomats would plan trips and spend months on the way are gone. In today’s globalized world, information is sent and received instantly, and diplomatic missions are shorter and quicker. In that regard therefore, globalization has changed diplomatic engagement as compared to traditional diplomacy.

At a multilateral level where diplomacy prevails, power that was initially shared among a few major powers has gradually been better distributed to include the less developed/less powerful nations as a result of globalization (Daalder & Lindsay, 2003, p.16), which has increased the democratization of diplomacy, empowering numerous international actors by providing each of them with a voice to air their opinions, and getting them involved in the decision process, thus enhancing justice for the collective. For example, UN, AU, EU peacekeeping and peace enforcement in various parts of the world is a demonstration of multilateral democratized diplomacy.

These organizations are a representation of multilateral diplomacy since they deal and negotiation for or on behalf of more than two countries, and they act as a voice for each of these countries, thus being democratized. UN peacekeeping missions in Sudan’s Darfur region (UNMIS), South Sudan (UNIMISS) the African Union mission in Somalia (AMISOM) for example, were deployed in the interest of other neighboring countries which the instability would affect. Engaging the voices of all those countries all together is a kind of democracy in diplomacy, and its brought about by the interdependence of the world through globalization where it is not about a state anymore but the entire global community.

With the acceleration of the current phase of globalization, diplomacy has somehow shifted from bilateral to multilateral engagements because with globalization, there have emerged global threats that require collective global rather than unilateral action. Whereas bilateral diplomacy is aimed at branding a state’s image and creating empathy for the respective state’s policies, multilateral diplomacy focuses on the maintenance of international order and thereby bringing stability to the global arena. Because of the interdependence, the world now prioritzes multilateral over bilateral diplomacy.

Multilateral diplomacy is evident in the way numerous countries in et European Union and NATO such as France, Turkey, Germany and others including China, have come up to reach a negotiated end of the Russia-Ukraine war, the efforts by Russia, Turkey, Iran, and the USA to bring peace to Syria, among others. Because of interdependence and interconnectedness, the world cannot rely on bilateral diplomacy to create peace where it has been broken. The insurgency in Syria for example, can spread instability in these other countries, not only geographical or political but economically and other spheres. Thus, the need for multilateral efforts to restore peace in Syria.

As a result of globalization, diplomacy has increasingly become regionalized, where international concerns are approached at a regional level. Nevertheless, bilateral diplomacy has remained crucial to explain and coordinate domestic policies (Henrikson, 2005, p.7). A case in point is the regionalized Arab Gulf diplomacy applied in the Yemen political crisis resolution process through the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) as the sole international institution powerful to represent a relevant actors for negotiations of any kind as compared to other western international institutions whose influence had proved unheard (Neumann 2012).

Another example of regionalized diplomacy is where the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) as a regional body negotiated the peaceful handover of power the then president Yahya Jammeh of Gambia to the current president Adama Barrow. ECOWAS further made diplomatic agreements on the way forward and maintenance of post-election peace and stability in 2017, a move that identifies with regionalized diplomacy. All this was as a result of the economic interdependence and interconnectedness that has come as a result of globalization that has evolved in the ECOWAS region just like all other parts of the world.

Even in such scenarios as discussed above, it is no doubt that the activities and format followed through is bound to keep traditional etiquettes of diplomacy, since the role of these regional state actors is neither new nor necessarily something that undermines the position of traditional diplomacy. Accordingly, even with regional diplomacy, the core roots of traditional state to state diplomacy will always be maintained. As discussed earlier, indeed technology like other forms of globalization has changed the method of traditional diplomacy, but it is unlikely to replace the primary endeavor and root of traditional diplomacy which is getting to know the ‘other.’ This entails building relationships and cultivating them for national interests.

Considering the unreliability of the non-state actors who might not have interests of the state at heart, perhaps that’s why even with the advent of globalization (for example communications technologies), the states still consider the official communication from the official diplomats. This has somehow retained the nature of traditional diplomacy. There are numerous ways through which globalization has affected diplomacy around the world, but those discussed above have been focused on state diplomacy. It is clear that increased globalization has in some ways altered the conduct of diplomacy, but it has not fundamentally changed diplomacy as it has long been known in its traditional sense.

7. Conclusion

The ability to practice diplomacy is one of the defining elements of a state, and it is no doubt that diplomacy has been practiced since the formation of the first city-states or humanity itself as already discussed. Originally diplomats were sent only for specific negotiations and would return immediately after concluding their missions. However, today, with globalization that comes with interdependence, interconnectedness and easy sending and receiving of information, permanent diplomatic residences and embassies have been established. In the past, diplomats were usually close relatives or trusted acquaintances of the ruling family or very high ranking officials to give them legitimacy when they sought to negotiate with other states. This has not changed much since a diplomat must still be seen to command the trust of the deploying state.

The current phase of globalization has created unprecedented progress of information sharing, communication, and technology which has resulted into wider interconnectedness of the global political economic and cultural aspects of states thereby making the means of movement of people and products easier, quicker and cheaper. As a result, non-state actors have emerged on the scene of global governance and diplomacy in both national and international levels. The non-state, like non-governmental organizations, multinational corporations, journalists, among other actors, have acquired a considerable amount of influence by bringing to light global concerns and shortfalls of state actors. This development is responsible for the recent evolution of the alteration of the methodology of diplomacy.

It can there be safely argued that the old-fashioned nature of diplomacy is remains largely intact, and that globalization has only changed its methodology. If diplomacy was limited to only sharing information, then the argument would surely surface that globalization has changed diplomacy. It should be pointed out however, that the concept of diplomacy goes beyond the sharing of information. The basics of the old-fashioned diplomacy go beyond sharing of information, they require direct engagement through negotiations and other peaceful means. Such direct engagements intact even in the current era, since globalization has only changed the methodology and conduct of diplomacy but not its fundamental principles as discussed above.

References

Albrow, M. & King, E. (1990). Globalization, Knowledge and Society.  London: Sage.

Bakari, M.E. (2013). Globalization and Sustainable Development: False Twins?. New Global Studies. 7(3), 23-56.

Barston, R.P. (2006). Modern Diplomacy, Pearson Education, p. 1

Beetham, D. (1998). ‘Human Rights as a Model for Cosmopolitan Democracy.’ In: Archibugi, D. and D. Held and M. Koehler (eds.). Re-Imagining Political Community: Studies in Cosmopolitan Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Borcan, A. (2012). Diplomacy and Cosmopolitanism in a Globalized World. Journal of International & Global Studies, 4(1), 32-40.

Bradford, S.C., Grieco, E.P.L. & Hufbauer, G.C. (2005). The United States and the World Economy: Foreign Economic Policy for the Next Decade. Washington: Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Campbell, F. (2015). ‘Has Globalization Changed the Nature of Diplomacy?’ Proc. of Ethical Standards in Public Life, St.

Daalder, I.H. & Lindsay, J.M. (2003). The globalization of politics: American foreign policy for a new century. The Brookings Review, 21(1), 12-17.

Goffman, D. (2009). Negotiating with the Renaissance State: The Ottoman Empire and the New Diplomacy. In: The Early Modern Ottomans: Remapping the Empire. Eds. Virginia Aksan and Daniel Goffman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 61-74.

Gunder, F.A. (1998). ReOrient: Global economy in the Asian age. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Held, D. (2005). ‘Globalization, international law and human rights.’ Available at https://opencommons.uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=hri_papers.

Henrikson, A.K. (2005). The Future of Diplomacy: Five Projective Visions. Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’.

Kolb, M. (2018). What is Globalization? And how has the global economy shaped the United States?, Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE).

James, P. & Steger, M.B. (2014). A genealogy of globalization: The career of a concept. Globalization, 11(4), 417-34

Jervis, R. (2002). Mutual Assured Destruction.  Foreign Policy (133), 40-42.

Maley, W. (2008). Global governance and diplomacy: worlds apart? Springer.

Nanyonga, S. (August, 2019). How Globalization has Changed Diplomacy. RAIS Conference Proceedings – The 14th International RAIS Conference on Social Sciences and Humanities, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3459656

Neumann, I.B. (2012). At home with the diplomats: Inside a European foreign ministry. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

 

Risse, T. (1999). International Norms and Domestic Change. Politics and Society, 27(4), 529-559.

 

Robertson, R. (1992). Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture. (Reprint. ed.). London: Sage.

Stever, H.G. (1972). Science, Systems, and Society. Journal of Cybernetics, 2(3), 1–3.

Wolf, M. (2014). Shaping Globalization, Finance & Development. International Monetary Fund, 51(3): 22–25

[1] See ‘Following the Money: US Finance in the World Economy’ at NAP.edu