DOCSLIB.ORG

Paradiplomacy and Its Constraints in a Quasi-Federal System – a Case Study of Hong Kong SAR and Its Implications to Chinese Foreign Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Paradiplomacy and its Constraints in a Quasi-Federal System – A Case Study of Hong Kong SAR and its Implications to Chinese Foreign Policy Wai-shun Wilson CHAN ([email protected]) Introduction Thank for the Umbrella Movement in 2014, Hong Kong has once again become the focal point of international media. Apart from focusing the tensions among the government, the pro-Beijing camp and the protestors about the pathway and the pace for local democratization, some media reports have linked the movement with the Tiananmen Incident, and serves as a testing case whether “One Country, Two Systems” could be uphold under the new Chinese leadership.1 While most of the academics in Hong Kong tend to evaluate the proposition from changes in domestic politics and the freedom and rights enjoyed by the society, little evaluation is conducted from the perspective of the autonomy enjoyed by Hong Kong in international arena. In fact, both the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the subsequent Basic Law have defined the scope of Hong Kong’s autonomy in conducting external relations ‘with states, regions and relevant international organizations’. It is therefore tempted to suggest that the external autonomy enjoyed by Hong Kong SAR Government serves as the other pillar of “One Country, Two Systems”, giving an unique identity of Hong Kong in global politics which may be different from that possessed by mainland China. Though officially “One Country, Two Systems” practiced in Hong Kong (and Macao) is not recognized by Beijing as a federal arrangement between the Central People’s Government and Hong Kong SAR Government, the internal and external autonomy stipulated in the Basic Law gives Hong Kong similar, to some extent even more, power as a typical federated unit. By reviewing the institutional framework of “One Country, Two Systems” and matching it with the actual practices of the external relations of Hong Kong, this paper aims to reveal the tensions of such quasi-federal arrangement between mainland China and Hong Kong. The paper suggests that the incompatibility of Chinese realist agenda and Hong Kong liberal identity limits the potential of Hong Kong in contributing the rise of China and her internationalization. The remaining of the paper will be structured in three parts. It will first review the academic literature in understanding the role of Hong Kong in Chinese foreign policy, and the related institutional arrangement on Hong Kong external relations. Followed by that, the paper, through reviewing three cases, will discuss how Hong Kong independent international status is constrained by Chinese foreign policy. Such constraints will be addressed again in the concluding section, with the especial focus on how these potentials and constraints are related to the changing perception of Beijing about the international order and the international identity of Hong Kong. Quasi-federalism/Devolution-Max in Chinese Characteristics: The Institutional Characteristics of the Status of Hong Kong 1 [1] ‘Hong Kong Protests: Echoes of Tiananmenm’ BBC News, 2 October 2014. [2] Gideon Rachman, ‘China’s Biggest Political Challegen since Tiananmen in 1989,’ Financial Times, 29 September 2014. [3] Samson Yuen, ‘Hong Kong After the Umbrella Movement: An Uncertain Future for “One Country, Two Systems”,’ China Perspectives, No. 2015/1 (2015), pp.49 – 53. [4] Joshua Keating, ‘Do the Protests in Hong Kong Mean the “One Country, Two Systems” System Is on the Ropes?,” Slate, 29 September 2014. The status and the autonomy enjoyed by Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region under are always in dispute between the pro-democratic camp and the pro-establishment camp and, needless to mention, between local community and Beijing authority. On the other hand, the legal foundation of “One Country, Two Systems” has its domestic and international source which further complicates the status of Hong Kong in international politics. The “domestic” source of “One Country, Two Systems” could always refer to the Chinese constitution revised in 1982, followed by Deng’s announcement of the “One Country, Two Systems” initiative in 1978. According to Article 31, Beijing could ‘establish Special Administrative Region when necessary’ which to be ‘prescribed by law enacted by the National People’s Congress in the light of the specific conditions’2. In fact, devolving power to regional and local level of government is not new to Beijing. Since her first constitution the concept of ethnic minority autonomous regions was stipulated under Article 3 of the 1954 Constitution (Article 4 of the 1982 Constitution) which stated that ‘regional autonomy applies in areas where a minority nationality live in a compact community’ and ‘all national autonomous areas are inseparable parts of the People’s Republic of China’.3 Subsequently, five autonomous regions were established at Inner Mongolia (Mongols), Xinjiang (Uyghur), Guangxi (Zhuang), Ningxia (Hui) and Tibet (Tibetan). According to Haiting Zhuang, there are 155 ethnic autonomous areas among the regional, prefectural and county levels, which allow 44 ethnic minorities in China enjoy a certain degree of self-governing and autonomy.4 Nonetheless, the implementation of self-governing in Hong Kong is not based on ethnic equality, as most of the Hong Kong population are ethnically Han, but rather a strategic move for future unification between mainland China and Taiwan. Indeed, the innovation of ‘One Country, Two Systems’ suggested by Deng was targeted to Taiwan’s population and the Kuomingtang government in Taiwan.5 The subsequent implementation in Hong Kong and Macao is merely the showcase for Taiwan people, which was also an important mission for Hong Kong in contributing Chinese “foreign” policy. Apart from the political and legal source of legitimacy, the status of Hong Kong is different from the rest of the autonomous regions is that the “One Country, Two Systems” in Hong Kong is endorsed, thus partially monitored, by the international community. As a former British Crown Colony, the transferral of sovereignty of Hong Kong requires the consent from both China and United Kingdom. The 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration has laid down the fundamental principles in the future governance of Hong Kong after 1997.6 Such guaranteed features were later translated to various articles in the Basic Law (BL), the so-called “mini- 2 ‘Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (full text after amendment on March 14, 2004)’, Zhongguo Rendawang (www.npc.gov.cn), Accessed at http://www.npc.gov.cn/englishnpc/Constitution/node_2825.htm, on 3 May 2015. 3 ‘Constitution of the People’s Republic of China: adopted on September 20, 1954 by the First National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China, at its first session’ (Peking: Foreign Language Press, 1954), pp.9 – 10. Document assessed at http://www.hkpolitics.net/database/chicon/1954/1954ae.pdf, on 3 May 2015. 4 Haiting Zhang, ‘The Law on the Ethnic Minority Autonomous Regions in China: Legal Norms and Practices,’ Loyola University Chicago International Law Review. Vol. 9, Issue 2 (Spring/Summer 2012), pp.249 – 264. 5 Jeanette Ka-yee Yuen, ‘Commentary: The Myth of Greater China? Hong Kong as a Prototype of Taiwan for Unification,’ Taiwan in Comparative Perspective, Vol. 5(July 2014), pp.134 – 152. 6 ‘Joint Declaration of the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Question of Hong Kong.’ Accessed at http://www.cmab.gov.hk/en/issues/jd2.htm, on 1 May 2015. constitution” of Hong Kong. 7 Though Beijing and Hong Kong official suggest that the obligation of British government ends on 1 July 1997 thus Britain had no rights to intervene Hong Kong affairs8, the local and international community, to some extent, construe the Joint Declaration as bilateral agreement between Beijing and London registered under the international law framework, thus assuming certain moral obligations about the successful implementation of “One Country, Two Systems” in Hong Kong. 9 The current-ceased-to- function Hong Kong Policy Act initiated by the United States, the half-year reports prepared by the Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Office to the UK Parliament, the annual reports prepared by the European External Action Service, together with occasional hearings from the U.S. Congress and European Parliament at special events like the Umbrella Movement last year, show the presence of international community in monitoring the implementation of “One Country, Two Systems”. Such “internationalization” of the status of Hong Kong indeed has huge impact on the potentials as well as constrains towards the paradiplomacy of Hong Kong, which will be revisited in later section of the paper. Aiming to retain most of the characteristics of Hong Kong before the handover, the Basic Law has transferred the de facto international character of Hong Kong enjoyed in the colonial period into the de jure one. While Article 13 of the Basic Law has laid down the responsibility of Beijing in handling foreign affairs related to Hong Kong and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will set up an office, i.e. the Office of the Commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (FMCOPRC), for handling such matter, the article also ‘authorizes the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to conduct relevant external affairs on its own in accordance with this Law’ (BL Article 13). Chapter VII of the Basic Law further stipulates the power and autonomy enjoyed by the HKSARG, its officials and its relations to external parties. The Basic Law framework allow Hong Kong to develop relations with other international entities, conclude international agreements and participate international organizations in appropriate field, under the name ‘Hong Kong, China’ (BL Article 151 and Article 152). Former agreements to which Beijing is not a party but being implemented in Hong Kong continue to be valid (BL Article 153).
Recommended publications
  • American Diplomacy Project: a US Diplomatic Service for the 21St

    American Diplomacy Project: a US Diplomatic Service for the 21St

    AMERICAN DIPLOMACY PROJECT A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century Ambassador Nicholas Burns Ambassador Marc Grossman Ambassador Marcie Ries REPORT NOVEMBER 2020 American Diplomacy Project: A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 79 JFK Street Cambridge, MA 02138 www.belfercenter.org Statements and views expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, Harvard Kennedy School, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Design and layout by Auge+Gray+Drake Collective Works Copyright 2020, President and Fellows of Harvard College Printed in the United States of America FULL PROJECT NAME American Diplomacy Project A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century Ambassador Nicholas Burns Ambassador Marc Grossman Ambassador Marcie Ries REPORT NOVEMBER 2020 Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs | Harvard Kennedy School i ii American Diplomacy Project: A U.S. Diplomatic Service for the 21st Century Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................3 10 Actions to Reimagine American Diplomacy and Reinvent the Foreign Service ........................................................5 Action 1 Redefine the Mission and Mandate of the U.S. Foreign Service ...................................................10 Action 2 Revise the Foreign Service Act ................................. 16 Action 3 Change the Culture ..................................................
  • Diplomacy and the American Civil War: the Impact on Anglo- American Relations

    Diplomacy and the American Civil War: the Impact on Anglo- American Relations

    James Madison University JMU Scholarly Commons Masters Theses, 2020-current The Graduate School 5-8-2020 Diplomacy and the American Civil War: The impact on Anglo- American relations Johnathan Seitz Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/masters202029 Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, Public History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Seitz, Johnathan, "Diplomacy and the American Civil War: The impact on Anglo-American relations" (2020). Masters Theses, 2020-current. 56. https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/masters202029/56 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the The Graduate School at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses, 2020-current by an authorized administrator of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Diplomacy and the American Civil War: The Impact on Anglo-American Relations Johnathan Bryant Seitz A thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty of JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Department of History May 2020 FACULTY COMMITTEE: Committee Chair: Dr. Steven Guerrier Committee Members/ Readers: Dr. David Dillard Dr. John Butt Table of Contents List of Figures..................................................................................................................iii Abstract............................................................................................................................iv Introduction.......................................................................................................................1
  • University of Copenhagen FACULTY of SOCIAL SCIENCES Faculty of Social Sciences UNIVERSITY of COPENHAGEN · DENMARK PHD DISSERTATION 2019 · ISBN 978-87-7209-312-3

    University of Copenhagen FACULTY of SOCIAL SCIENCES Faculty of Social Sciences UNIVERSITY of COPENHAGEN · DENMARK PHD DISSERTATION 2019 · ISBN 978-87-7209-312-3

    Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies Jacobsen, Marc Publication date: 2019 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Jacobsen, M. (2019). Arctic identity interactions: Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies. Download date: 11. okt.. 2021 DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE university of copenhagen FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES faculty of social sciences UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN · DENMARK PHD DISSERTATION 2019 · ISBN 978-87-7209-312-3 MARC JACOBSEN Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies and Denmark’s Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s identity interactions Arctic Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies PhD Dissertation 2019 Marc Jacobsen DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE university of copenhagen FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES faculty of social sciences UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN · DENMARK PHD DISSERTATION 2019 · ISBN 978-87-7209-312-3 MARC JACOBSEN Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies and Denmark’s Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s identity interactions Arctic Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies PhD Dissertation 2019 Marc Jacobsen Arctic identity interactions Reconfiguring dependency in Greenland’s and Denmark’s foreign policies Marc Jacobsen PhD Dissertation Department of Political Science University of Copenhagen September 2019 Main supervisor: Professor Ole Wæver, University of Copenhagen. Co-supervisor: Associate Professor Ulrik Pram Gad, Aalborg University.
  • Legal Regime of Persona Non Grata and the Namru-2 Case

    Legal Regime of Persona Non Grata and the Namru-2 Case

    Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-3240 (Paper) ISSN 2224-3259 (Online) Vol.32, 2014 Legal Regime of Persona Non Grata and the Namru-2 Case Marcel Hendrapati* Law Faculty, Hasanuddin University, Jalan Perintis Kemerdekaan, Kampus Unhas Tamalanrea KM.10, Makassar-90245, Republic of Indonesia * E-mail of the corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract Just like the diplomatic immunity principle, the principle of persona non grata aims to ensure justice for both the state seeking to evict a diplomat (receiving state) and the state whose diplomat is being evicted (sending state). This is because both principles can guarantee the dignity and equality of sovereign states when resolving issues in international relation. Not every statement of persona non grata has to culminate in expulsion because a statement may be issued by the receiving state both after the diplomatic agent has started performing his functions and even before he arrives at the receiving state. If such a statement is followed by the expulsion of the diplomat, it should be based on article 41 of the Vienna Convention, 1961 (infringement on laws of receiving state and/or espionage actions). Also, expulsion may occur due to war and severance of diplomatic relation between two states. Indonesia has had to deal with issues of persona non grata on several occasions both as receiving and sending state. This paper analyses several cases of declaration of persona non grata involving several countries, especially Indonesia in order to give a better understanding of how the declaration of persona non grata plays out between states, and the significance of the Vienna Convention of 1961 on diplomatic relations.
  • Paradiplomacy in South Africa: the Role of Interest and Identity in the International Relations of Kwazulu-Natal Province

    Paradiplomacy in South Africa: the Role of Interest and Identity in the International Relations of Kwazulu-Natal Province

    Paradiplomacy in South Africa: the role of interest and identity in the international relations of KwaZulu-Natal province By Nolubabalo Magam Student No: 214546887 Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in International Relations In the School of Social Science At the University of KwaZulu-Natal Supervisor: Dr Khondlo Mtshali July 2018 Declaration I, Nolubabalo Magam, declare that: The research reported in this thesis, except where otherwise indicated, is my original research. I. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or examination at any other university. II. This thesis does not contain other persons‟ data, pictures, graphs or other information unless specifically acknowledged as being sourced from other persons. III. This thesis does not contain other persons' writing unless specifically acknowledged as being sourced from other researchers. Where other written sources have been quoted, then: IV. Their words have been re-written but the general information attributed to them has been referenced V. Where their exact words have been used, then their writing has been placed in italics and inside quotation marks and referenced. VI. This thesis does not contain text, graphics or tables copied and pasted from the Internet, u unless specifically acknowledged, and the source being detailed in the thesis and in the references sections. Signature: ______________________ i Abstract This study offered an analysis of the importance of international relations activities undertaken by sub-national governments in South Africa, with a specific reference to the province of KwaZulu-Natal. These activities were conceptualised as paradiplomacy. The goal of the study was to advance the notion of paradiplomacy and explore how identity and interest facilitate paradiplomacy.
  • Political Issues of Paradiplomacy: Lessons from the Developed World

    Political Issues of Paradiplomacy: Lessons from the Developed World

    DISCUSSION PAPERS IN DIPLOMACY Political Issues of Paradiplomacy: Lessons from the Developed World André Lecours Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ ISSN 1569-2981 DISCUSSION PAPERS IN DIPLOMACY Editors: Virginie Duthoit & Ellen Huijgh, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ Managing Editor: Jan Melissen, Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’ and Antwerp University Desk top publishing: Desiree Davidse Editorial Board Geoff Berridge, University of Leicester Rik Coolsaet, University of Ghent Erik Goldstein, Boston University Alan Henrikson, Tufts University Donna Lee, Birmingham University Spencer Mawby, University of Nottingham Paul Sharp, University of Minnesota Duluth Copyright Notice © André Lecours, December 2008 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy, or transmission of this publication, or part thereof in excess of one paragraph (other than as a PDF file at the discretion of the Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael’) may be made without the written permission of the author. ABSTRACT Regional governments can be international actors. This phenomenon of regional governments developing international relations, often called ‘paradiplomacy,’ has been most visible in Western industrialized liberal- democracies. In thinking about paradiplomacy in developing and post- communist countries, considering the experience of regions such as Quebec, Catalonia, the Basque Country, Flanders and Wallonia could be instructive for understanding the logic of this activity, highlighting key choices that need to be made, and pointing out potential challenges stemming from the development by sub-state units of international relations. This paper begins by distinguishing between three layers of paradiplomacy and makes the argument that paradiplomacy can be a multifunctional vehicle for the promotion of interests and identity. It then discusses the various choices that have to be made when developing a paradiplomacy, including designing new structures and selecting partners.
  • Ideologies of Diplomacy: Rhetoric, Ritual, and Representation in Early Modern England

    Ideologies of Diplomacy: Rhetoric, Ritual, and Representation in Early Modern England

    • • Ideologies of Diplomacy: Rhetoric, Ritual, and Representation in Early Modern England Jane Yeang Chui Wong Nanyang Technological University Singapore In 2008 John Watkins edited a special issue for the Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, “Toward a New Diplomatic History of Medi- eval and Early Modern Europe,” which initiated a necessary and meaning- ful assessment of diplomatic studies in premodern Europe.1 The call for a more nuanced study of diplomacy in the period brought together a group of scholars with a common interest: their essays test and broaden conven- tional frameworks that generally isolate the study of premodern diplomacy within the confines of diplomatic documentation. In drawing on the multi- disciplinary expertise of the contributors, Watkins’s special issue reevaluates premodern diplomatic studies in a richer and more complex sociocultural landscape that acknowledges and examines the undocumented import of diplomacy- in- the- making. Using interdisciplinary frameworks that take up discussions of gender, semantics, patronage, and race, among others, schol- ars of New Diplomatic History look beyond the immediacy of documentary evidence to explain the variegated processes of creating and understanding diplomatic discourses in the premodern era. This special issue hews closely to Watkins’s cross- disciplinary aim in a number of ways, but it also offers a response in light of developments in the field since then. The proliferation of scholarly works on New Diplomatic History, quite possibly at its most excit- ing and dynamic phase, has introduced some very promising contributions, identifying strategic limitations that were considered but not yet thoroughly problematized before. The current critical impulse for proponents of New Diplomatic History can be traced to a general dissatisfaction with a lapse of innova- tion and how, for many years, its development has remained out of sync with the wider and ever- growing interdisciplinary developments in the study of early modern Europe.
  • Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881

    Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881

    China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 The East India Company’s steamship Nemesis and other British ships engaging Chinese junks in the Second Battle of Chuenpi, 7 January 1841, during the first opium war. (British Library) ABOUT THE ARCHIVE China and the Modern World: Imperial China and the West Part I, 1815–1881 is digitised from the FO 17 series of British Foreign Office Files—Foreign Office: Political and Other Departments: General Correspondence before 1906, China— held at the National Archives, UK, providing a vast and significant primary source for researching every aspect of Chinese-British relations during the nineteenth century, ranging from diplomacy to trade, economics, politics, warfare, emigration, translation and law. This first part includes all content from FO 17 volumes 1–872. Source Library Number of Images The National Archives, UK Approximately 532,000 CONTENT From Lord Amherst’s mission at the start of the nineteenth century, through the trading monopoly of the Canton System, and the Opium Wars of 1839–1842 and 1856–1860, Britain and other foreign powers gradually gained commercial, legal, and territorial rights in China. Imperial China and the West provides correspondence from the Factories of Canton (modern Guangzhou) and from the missionaries and diplomats who entered China in the early nineteenth century, as well as from the envoys and missions sent to China from Britain and the later legation and consulates. The documents comprising this collection include communications to and from the British legation, first at Hong Kong and later at Peking, and British consuls at Shanghai, Amoy (Xiamen), Swatow (Shantou), Hankow (Hankou), Newchwang (Yingkou), Chefoo (Yantai), Formosa (Taiwan), and more.
  • Foreign Diplomatic and Consular Representatives

    Foreign Diplomatic and Consular Representatives

    Policy Redding Police Department 412 RPD Policy Manual Foreign Diplomatic and Consular Representatives 412.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE This policy provides guidelines to ensure that members of the Redding Police Department extend appropriate privileges and immunities to foreign diplomatic and consular representatives in accordance with international law. 412.2 POLICY The Redding Police Department respects international laws related to the special privileges and immunities afforded foreign diplomatic and consular representatives assigned to the United States. All foreign diplomatic and consular representatives shall be treated with respect and courtesy, regardless of any privileges or immunities afforded them. 412.3 CLAIMS OF IMMUNITY If a member comes into contact with a person where law enforcement action may be warranted and the person claims diplomatic or consular privileges and immunities, the member should, without delay: (a) Notify a supervisor. (b) Advise the person that his/her claim will be investigated and he/she may be released in accordance with the law upon confirmation of the person’s status. (c) Request the person’s identification card, either issued by the U.S. Department of State (DOS), Office of the Chief of Protocol, or in the case of persons accredited to the United Nations, by the U.S. Mission to the United Nations. These are the only reliable documents for purposes of determining privileges and immunities. (d) Contact the DOS Diplomatic Security Command Center at 571-345-3146 or toll free at 866-217-2089, or at another current telephone number and inform the center of the circumstances. (e) Verify the immunity status with DOS and follow any instructions regarding further detention, arrest, prosecution and/or release, as indicated by the DOS representative.
  • What Is a Science Diplomat?

    What Is a Science Diplomat?

    The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 15 (2020) 409-423 brill.com/hjd What Is a Science Diplomat? Lorenzo Melchor Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT), Madrid, Spain; former FECYT Science Adviser in the Spanish Embassy in London, United Kingdom [email protected] Received: 22 May 2020; revised: 4 July 2020; accepted: 21 July 2020 Summary The COVID-19 crisis has shown how countries initially responded to a global chal- lenge on their own, instead of relying on a multilateral science diplomacy — based response. Although, science diplomacy has received great attention for the past de- cade, its meaning and the nature of the diverse practitioners involved remain elusive. Science diplomacy is a transboundary field sitting across national borders, policy frameworks and stakeholders of all natures and professional backgrounds. But what is a science diplomat? What science diplomacy roles formally exist? Who can become a science diplomat? What knowledge and skills are required? This practitioner’s essay proposes a typology of science diplomacy practitioners who bring science, technology, innovation, foreign policy and the international political system altogether closer in either institutionalised or non-institutionalised roles, and it also provides guidance for pursuing a career in science diplomacy. These science diplomats may promote na- tional competitiveness but also facilitate multilateral responses to global challenges. Keywords science diplomacy – science diplomat – science counsellor – science attaché – science adviser – science advice – science-policy interface – knowledge diplomacy – COVID-19 © Lorenzo Melchor, 2020 | doi:10.1163/1871191X-bja10026 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0Downloaded license. from Brill.com10/01/2021 11:43:18AM via free access 410 Melchor 1 Introduction1 The COVID-19 outbreak has caused a profound global public health and socio- economic crisis.
  • Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and Immunity William G

    Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and Immunity William G

    Hofstra Law Review Volume 36 | Issue 2 Article 19 2007 Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and Immunity William G. Morris Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Morris, William G. (2007) "Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and Immunity," Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 36: Iss. 2, Article 19. Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol36/iss2/19 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hofstra Law Review by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons at Hofstra Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Morris: Constitutional Solutions to the Problem of Diplomatic Crime and I NOTE CONSTITUTIONAL SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBLEM OF DIPLOMATIC CRIME AND IMMUNITY I. INTRODUCTION No one is above the law. This principle has been a driving force throughout the great ideological experiment known as democracy. From childhood, we are told that people who commit crimes must answer for them. However, the simplistic nature of this notion fails to capture the whole truth of the nuanced system of international law. International law permits certain individuals to escape accountability for their crimes. For centuries, the principle of diplomatic immunity has enabled foreign diplomats to avoid prosecution for violations of the host country's laws. 1 The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, to which the United States is a party, has codified customary international law.2 The Vienna Convention grants diplomats, their families, and diplomatic property numerous protections.
  • The Missing Key to More Effective U.S. Diplomacy: Religious Liberty Lecture Delivered at Benne Center for Religion & Society

    The Missing Key to More Effective U.S. Diplomacy: Religious Liberty Lecture Delivered at Benne Center for Religion & Society

    1 The Missing Key to More Effective U.S. Diplomacy: Religious Liberty Lecture delivered at Benne Center for Religion & Society, Roanoke College, February 9, 2015 Thomas F. Farr* Last week we were treated to the spectacle of Henry Kissinger, who had been Secretary of State during the Vietnam War and is now 91 years old, being heckled as he testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Senator John McCain, who had been tortured as a prisoner of war in Hanoi, reacted with anger, calling the hecklers “low-life scum.” Memories of Vietnam, it seems, remain strong among some elements of the American population. Notwithstanding the hecklers, Mr. Kissinger is generally respected in the foreign policy establishment as the doyen of American “realism.” In 1994 he wrote his magnum opus. Entitled Diplomacy, Kissinger’s book was a survey of diplomatic history from the 16th century to the contemporary age. When he published it he was considered by many the greatest scholar- practitioner of foreign policy in American history. Among the remarkable things about Kissinger’s book, and its status as a contemporary classic, is its treatment of religion. In fact, the book is a veritable “religion-free zone.” Diplomacy is quite long, and it has an appropriately large index. But the word “religion” does not appear in the index. Religious ideas and religious actors make almost no appearance in the text. After a brief treatment of the 17th century wars of religion, Diplomacy simply banishes religion from the world stage, as if it were no longer relevant to the motives and actions of modern men and modern states.