Trump’s Twiplomacy: A New Diplomatic Norm? Kajsa Hughes Two-year Political Science MA programme in Global Politics and Societal Change Dept. of Global Political Studies Course: Political Science Master’s thesis ST631L (30 credits) Thesis submitted: Summer, 2020 Supervisor: Corina Filipescu Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics Abstract This study examined how Trump frames various countries and their leaders and whether the framing changes from different factors. It also observed whether foreign leaders were following the same path as Trump in their diplomatic communication and interaction on Twitter. This was to contribute more knowledge that connects global politics with social media to see if changes of frames through Twitter caused any global politica l consequences. Theories including realist constructivism and framing theory, along with concepts of social norms, political context, events, and enemy images, were applied to the study. Using directed content analysis, together with longitudinal and comparative elements, the findings showed a separation between Trump’s and the other leaders’ tweets. Almost all tweets were connected to the concepts, and various techniques of framing were identified in tweets from most leaders. However, Trump’s informa l, disdain, and dramatics in his tweets have distanced himself from the rest of the leaders’ posts. Although a couple of leaders’ attempt to be hostile towards Trump and the U.S. in their tweets, they were still formal. It shows that not only is Trump’s Twiplomacy a reflection of American superpower forcefulne ss, but also a unique form that the rest choose to ignore. Keywords: framing, social norms, Trump, Twiplomacy, Twitter, Word count: 21,979 1 Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics Table of Contents 1. Introduction…………………………………………………………...5 1.1 Research Question and Aim……………………………………………..7 1.2 Research Contribution………………………………………………..….9 1.3 Relevance to Political Science and Global Politics…………………….10 1.4 Outline of Thesis……………………………………………………......10 2. Background………………………………………………………….12 2.1 The U.S. as a Superpower and its Negotiating Behavior….…………....12 2.2 Donald J. Trump and His Presidential Behavior……………………….13 3. Literature Review……………………………………………………16 3.1 Digital Diplomacy Literature…………………………………………...16 3.2 Framing Literature……………………………………………………...19 3.3 Explanatory Model for Political Agenda and Power Relations…………20 4. Theoretical Framework……………………………………………...23 4.1 Realist Constructivism as an Approach..……...………………………..23 4.2 Framing Theory………………………………………………………...24 4.3 Conceptual Framework……………………………………………..…..26 4.3.1 Social Norms……………………………………………………………….26 4.3.2 Events………………………………………………………………………27 4.3.3 Politica l Context..……… ……………………………………………...…..28 4.3.4 Enemy Images……………………………………………………………...28 5. Methodology………………………………………………………...30 5.1 Content Analysis…………………………………………………….…30 5.2 Longitudinal and Comparative Elements………………………..……..31 2 Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics 5.3 Data Collection……………………………………………..…………..31 5.3.1 Primary Sources……………………………………………………………32 5.3.2 Additional Material………………………...………………………………33 5.4 Data Analysis and Interpretation………………………………..……...33 6. Findings……………………………………………………………...36 6.1 Overview……………………………………………………………….36 6.2 Trump’s Twitter Findings ……………………………..……………….36 6.2.1 Language…………………………………………………...………………36 6.2.2 Features..……………………………...……………………………………41 6.2.3 Trump’s Framed Groups………………………………...…………………41 6.2.3.1 Friendlies..……………………………………………………………….42 6.2.3.2 Friendlies with Negative Tweets……………………………...…………43 6.2.3.3 Mixed Relationships………………………………..……………………45 6.2.3.4 Non-Friendlies with Positive Tweets……………………………………47 6.2.3.5 Non-Friendlies…………………………..………………………………50 6.3 Findings from Foreign Leaders’ Tweets…………………………..……51 6.3.1 Friendlies…………………………………………………………………...51 6.3.2 Mixed Relationships………………………………………………………..59 6.3.3 Non-Friendlies………………………….…………………………………..63 6.3.4 Leaders without Twitter…………………………………………………….68 7. Analysis……………………………………………………………...70 7.1 Political Context………………………………………………………..70 7.2 Events…………………………………………………………………..71 7.3 Enemy Images…………………...……………………………………...73 7.4 Change in Social Norms?.........................................................................74 7.5 Framing Theory and its Techniques Applied...………………………....75 3 Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics 7.6 Realist Constructivism Revealed in Tweets.............................................80 8. Conclusion…………………………………………………………...82 8.1 Summary…..……………………………………………………………82 8.2 Evaluation…………..…………………………………………………..83 8.3 Interpretation……………………………….……………….………….83 9. Bibliography……………………………………………………....…85 9.1 Literature……………………………………………………………….85 9.2 Tweets………………………………………………………………….98 4 Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics 1. Introduction Communication is the backbone of the postmodern political society, from face-to-face conversations, to international news coverage, to online posts by all types of actors. No matter the means, communication has always contributed to “shaping the character and scope of their society, its economic life, politics and culture.” (Lorimer & Scannell, 1994: 1). Moreover, communication is an important key within global politics to manage relations between countries, as it is recognized as “the established method of influencing the decisions and behaviour of foreign governments and peoples through dialogue, negotiation, and other measures short of war or violenc e ” (Freeman & Marks, 2016). It is the communication between two states to arrange global politica l practices such as diplomacy and foreign policy. This includ es goals, agreements, or adjustments, by using various tactics and strategies to accomplish them (ibid). Such progress between political actors are usually done behind closed doors, later for the results to be revealed to the public through various mediums. Traditionally, diplomacy is based on person-to person communication between diplomats sent by politica l leaders to promote the interests of their nation-states and to make compromises. While it mainly is bilatera l, it can even be done on a multilateral level, in which international political actors and institutions would hold conferences and summits to discuss their interests (Verrekia, 2017: 12). The goal of diplomatic relations is to strengthen nation-states, organizations and institutions, and even to resolve issues without using force or causing resentment, as means to preserve peace. However, there are times in which disputes and coercive threats are involved in diplomatic negotiations, leading to ultimatums, disrupting alliances, and even war. However, diplomacy overall strives for sustainable peace through cooperation and nonviolent resolution between nation-states (Freeman & Marks, 2016). The way to keep peaceful negotiations is through traditional diplomatic language. Researchers such as Simunjak and Caliandro (2019) have outlined the ways such a language and communication of political actors should be kept. These ways include ; being courteous, marked by respect for and consideration of others, constructive and positive, balanced and moderate, vague and open to interpretations, and deliberate, masterful, carefully and prudently drawn up. They additionally address the avoidance of dramatic communication, as well as superior, 5 Kajsa Hughes 19940526-2867 Political Science: Global Politics indifferent, controlling, or offensive behavior towards other actors, including no insults, uncivil wording, naming, and shaming (ibid, 2019: 14). Moreover, mass media, such as television, radio, and news articles has played an informative role for the public by presenting traditional diplomatic communication and behavior as friendly and polite, for example, showing foreign leaders shaking hands or having calm press conferences (Gilboa, 2001). Nowadays, however, factors such as new technologies and influential actors using them have altered such communication on media, affecting diplomatic behavior (Archetti, 2011: 182-183). Media has significantly changed over time, since the start of the Internet, and later on with the change from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0. For instance, with the update of the World Wide Web, its new technological applications have created more participatory and collaborated platforms to produce content, also known as user-generated content (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010: 60-61). This content has led to social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., which are online infrastructures that allow user-generated content to be created and exchanged by individuals. Moreover, the increase of online access through new technologies like portable computers and smartphones has changed the way various populations access entertainment and information. Not only have these new inventions increased the networks and capacities of human knowledge, but they have additionally changed the norm – meaning the accepted standard behavior – of what is private versus public (van Dijck, 2013). van Dijck explains further about the changed norm, stating “patterns of behavior that traditionally existed in offline (physical) sociality are increasingly mixed with social and sociotechnical norms created in an offline environment, taking on a new dimensionality.” (van Dijck, 2013: 19). This new form of online sociality, especially through Twitter – a social media platform for individuals to post micro-blogs – has led to