This study of the Somali conflict resolution process is based on the available body of knowledge about the nature of the conflict and diplomatic initiatives aimed at finding a peaceful resolution to the conflict. It provides a brief analysis of the nature and scope of the conflict with a particular focus on key features of the conflict and on the actors and issues driving the conflict since the fall of General Mohammed Siad Barre’s military regime in 1991 and the subsequent collapse of the Somali state. The study concludes that although the nature of the conflict is acute and exceedingly complex, it is not impossible to resolve. In this regard a number of recommendations are provided in the concluding chapter. The paradox of the Somali conflict resolution processes is the consistent focus on state-building approach by mediation processes despite the failure rate of such an approach. The study argues that the mediation processes should focus on a peace-making approach to the Somali conflict resolution process. State-building should only be considered an integral part of peace-building once the resolution phase has been accomplished. This means that the international community should adopt a long-term approach when mediating the intractable Somali conflict and that such an approach should comply with the basic principles of mediation, chief amongst which is the requirement of utiliting a neutral mediator. AFRIKAANS : Hierdie studie van die Somali konflikresolusieproses is gebasseer op die beskikbare korpus van literatuur oor die aard van die konflik en die diplomatieke inisiatiewe gefokus op die soeke na ‘n vreedsame oplossing daarvan. Dit verskaf ‘n ontleding van die aard en omvang van die konflik met spesifieke aandag aan die kerneienskappe van die konflik en die akteurs en vraagstukke onderliggend aan die konflik sedert die val van Generaal Mohammed Siad Barre se militêre regime in 1991 en die daaropvolgende ineenstorting van die Somali-staat. Die studie kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat alhoewel die aard van die konflik akuut en uiters kompleks is, dit nie onmoontlik is om ‘n oplossing te vind nie. In hierdie verband word ‘n aantal voorstelle in die slothoofstuk gemaak. Die paradoks van die Somali konflikresoulusieproses is die deurlopende fokus op ‘n staat-bou proses in bemiddelingsprosesse ten spyte van die bewese mislukking van so ‘n benadering. Die studie argumenteer dat die bemiddelingsproses op die bou van vrede behoort te konsentreer. Staat-bou behoort slegs as integrale deel van die bou van vrede beskou te word in die stadium wat die konflikresolusieproses afgehandel is. Dit beteken dat die internasionale gemeenskap ‘n langtermyn benadering moet volg in bemiddeling van die konflik en dat so ‘n bendering moet voldoen aan die basiese vereistes van bemiddeling waarvan die belangrikste die vereiste van ‘n neutrale bemiddelaar is. / Dissertation (MDiplomatic Studies)--University of Pretoria, 2010. / Political Sciences / unrestricted

A classification of the negotiating tactics used by Russian diplomats has been a facet of Soviet diplomatic behavior which has been relatively ignored. A survey of Western writings on Soviet negotiating behavior indicates that Russian diplomats employ a wide range of bargaining tactics in attempts to gain concessions from Western negotiators. These various bargaining methods have been classified in this paper as to the type of maneuver they represent. There are four discernible Soviet negotiating maneuvers. The first maneuver is comprised of tactics designed to turn a conference or part thereof into a forum for Russian propaganda. Of all the tactics employed those related to propaganda are found most frequently in negotiations primarily because of the relative ease with which they can be utilized. While some propaganda tactics are straightforward, such as slogans and epithets, others are subtle such as the use of general rather than specific terms. The second Russian maneuver contains a large number of tactics designed to obstruct negotiations. A common aspect of Soviet diplomatic behavior has been the skillful use of delaying tactics so that negotiations either drag on or collapse. The Russians use obstructionist tactics frequently to prevent a decision on a proposal which they believe will be inimical to Soviet interests. They also use it to stall for time so that a new policy can be formulated as well as to make the West concede points in order to end Russian delays. The third Soviet maneuver is comprised of offensive tactics designed to obtain as many concessions as possible from the West before an agreement is reached on a particular proposal. Because there are a relatively large number of offensive tactics, for purposes of discussion in this paper, they have been sub-divided into three groups: overt, subtle and those which exploit the inclinations of Western diplomats. The fourth and last group of maneuvers is comprised of Russian duplicity tactics. According to Western observers, the Russians have utilized a number of tactics designed to deceive Western negotiators. The most prominent duplicity tactic has been the feigning of agreements. During the Second World War the Russians entered into many verbal and written agreements largely to demonstrate to the Western allies their co-operative spirit so that lend lease supplies and any post-war territorial gains promised by the West would not be jeopardized. Before the end of the war the Russians stalled on implementing most agreements but as soon as the war finished and lend lease supplies stopped, Soviet violations of agreements and treaties occurred frequently. However, since Khrushchev enunciated the doctrine of peaceful coexistence in 1956, the Russians have used duplicity tactics less frequently although they have demonstrated as recently as the Cuban missile incident in 1962, that if the stakes are high enough they will resort to deception to gain an advantage. According to Western observers, the Russian diplomat is more a specialized messenger or a mechanical mouthpiece than a diplomat in the traditional sense. The Western diplomat can comment extemporaneously on proposals and can advise his government on policy whereas his Soviet counterpart cannot. When Western descriptions of their own diplomats are compared with their descriptions of Soviet diplomats it becomes apparent that many Western observers have black and white conceptions with respect to the differences between Russian and Western behavior. Many Westerners see their diplomats as honest, polite, and cooperative whereas they see the Russian diplomat as insincere, rude and intransigent. Negotiations with the Soviet Union since 1945 have left a number of impressions upon Westerners and some of these impressions have crystallized into a number of strongly held beliefs as to how the West should negotiate with the Russians. These four beliefs concern firmness (temporized by prudence), an anti-conciliatory attitude (because the Soviets supposedly look upon conciliation as appeasement), a stress on specific, written agreements, and a belief that relations between states must be based on trust. However, it is suggested that trust is not a reliable ground upon which to base agreements between states. Basing agreements on mutual self-interest rather than trust might offer greater opportunities for East-West settlements. Moreover, a new Western conciliatory attitude combined with shrewdness in the light of Sino-Soviet difficulties might help to improve East-West relations. Historical examples of Soviet negotiating behavior lend support to the beliefs of those Western observers who claim that the Russians use negotiations for more than just a method of resolving disputes and accommodating interests. Indeed, Soviet diplomatic behavior seems to have been generally consistent with Communist ideological beliefs on the role of diplomacy as another method for furthering international communism against "bourgeois" interests. Western diplomats who have negotiated with the Soviets describe Russian tactics fairly specifically, but rarely do they mention any use of their own tactics. The implication is that many Westerners may have a narrow view of the negotiating process. That is, they see the Russians using tactics but not themselves. This dichotomy is incorrect because Westerners utilize negotiating tactics such as those related to propaganda and offensive maneuvers. Two types of maneuvers which the West has not utilized are duplicity and obstruction, neither of which are really related to the bargaining process. When overt acknowledgment of Western tactics occurs, East-West bargaining should not be as difficult, frustrating or disappointing as Westerners claim it now is. All Soviet actions will not be construed as vile once Westerners accept many Soviet tactics as a legitimate part of the bargaining process. Westerners should also consider that the Soviets are probably wary of Western negotiating tactics. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

Écriture, histoire et identité entretiennent des rapports étroits entre le milieu du IXe siècle et le milieu du XIIe siècle à Saint-Sauveur de Redon, Saint-Magloire de Léhon, Dol et Alet/Saint-Malo. À partir de l’exemple de ces deux abbayes et de ces deux sièges épiscopaux, il s’agit de déceler les enjeux entre la production de textes et les processus idéologiques et culturels du moment. Plus largement, cette étude s’enracine dans la réflexion sur la fonction du passé et sur ses usages, en particulier dans le cadre de la formation des identités des communautés monastiques et des sièges épiscopaux. À la lumière des acquis historiographiques récents sur les pratiques de l’écriture, on se propose d’étudier l’ensemble des productions textuelles, qu’elles soient hagiographiques, historiographiques ou diplomatiques. L’analyse de la mise en texte des moments fondateurs de l’histoire des communautés monastiques et des sièges épiscopaux dans un premier temps et leur mise en perspective dans un second temps montre que ce sont à des moments charnières, au cours desquels se redéfinissent les pouvoirs ecclésiastiques et laïques, en particulier dans la seconde moitié du IXe siècle et de la fin du XIe siècle jusqu’au milieu du XIIe siècle, que les unes et les autres se sont attachés à mettre par écrit la mémoire de leur passé en élaborant des stratégies discursives afin de légitimer ou délégitimer des situations contemporaines / From the middle of the ninth century to the middle of the twelfth century, at Saint-Sauveur de Redon, Saint-Magloire de Léhon, Dol and Alet/Saint-Malo, there appears to be a close link between writing, history and identity. Basing our analysis on the exemples of those two abbeys and those two episcopal sees, we shall see how the writing of texts interact with the ideological and cultural framework of the time. On a broader level, this study is rooted in the historical revision on the fonction and uses of the past and how, in particular, it may come to shape the identities of the monastic communities and the episcopal sees. We shall focus on the whole textual production, be it hagiographic, historiographic or diplomatic, in the light of the recent developments in hagiographic studies as regards the practice of writing. The analysis of how the founding events in the history of the monastic communities and the episcopal sees were recorded into words and then put into perspective has revealed that it was at the key moments when the ecclesiastical and secular powers were redefined – especially in the second half of the ninth century and from the end of the eleventh century to the middle of the twelfth century – that they all took to writing down the memory of their past, elaborating discursive strategies that would legitimize or delegitimize contemporary events

The first part of the thesis is focused on professional etiquette in a diplomatic environment, i.e. diplomatic protocol. The second part describes rules of the professional etiquette in an international consulting company.

Magister Legum - LLM

No description available.

International relations is constructed of ideas and concepts that have won legitimacy through the passage of time. Diplomacy is an ancient practices that has evolved and has become a practice that states have accepted as legitimate. The arrival of the digital world and the new Information Communications Technologies (ICTs) in the diplomatic world has made it possible to adopt trends like engaging in social media applications like Twitter to practice diplomacy. This creates the need to better understand the use of social media platforms as a tool of diplomacy. The growing engagement of Heads of States and Governments in communicating messages on Twitter, the so-called Twidiplomacy, is changing from what was considered a mere “trend” to a “common practice” in the conduct of diplomatic practice. As authorities share their culture through their behaviour and it is further shared and emulated through the use of Twitter by other authorities, these actions create new collective identities and shared knowledge in the diplomatic practice. These trends may lead to new patterns of diplomatic behaviour that may transform the diplomatic practice. Abdullakkutty (2018:11) contends that as an extension of innovative digital diplomacy “the use of social media is so extended that it can easily realise the diplomatic functions of negotiation, representation and communication”. Using a case study of tweets by a few Heads of States and Governments tweeting on similar major diplomatic incidents, this study researches these trends in innovative diplomacy leading to Twidiplomacy and how these are affecting the traditional roles of diplomacy, namely: negotiation, representation and communication. / Mini Dissertation (MDips)--University of Pretoria, 2020. / Political Sciences / MA (Diplomatic Studies) / Unrestricted

No description available.

This article publishes a new text by Giannozzo Manetti and places it into the political, diplomatic, and biographical context from which it emerged. Manetti’s “Panegyric to King Alfonso” was written for the occasion of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III’s visit to Naples in the spring of 1452. This article and the accompanying first edition of Manetti’s treatise add new insights into the events of mid-Quattrocento Italy that led to Manetti’s voluntary exile from Florence, in addition to a new chapter in the narrative of patrician resistance to the consolidation of political power in Florence under Cosimo de’ Medici and his allies.

.