{"title":"重新考虑中美。和解:非传统的外交形式","authors":"A. Tagirova","doi":"10.1163/18765610-28020002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Webster’s Third New International Dictionary broadly defines diplomacy as “an art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations for the attainment of mutually satisfactory terms.”1 Since very few existing definitions manage to encompass all forms of diplomatic interactions, the understanding of the term continues to change as the academic scholarship on the issue evolves. Unfortunately, the academic understanding of diplomacy often lags behind the actual practices, leaving scholars forced to “catch up” with modern day developments. Much like historians, students of political science and international relations continue to grapple with the ambiguity of the term and attempt to produce a comprehensive framework within which one can understand and study diplomacy. A majority of scholars agree that they and their colleagues should leave the traditional view on diplomacy as a nation-to-nation exchange in the past. Some even go as far as to declare the “crisis of state-led diplomacy,” in which governmental institutions are under the heavy restraint of both their bureaucratic nature and the necessity to conform with century-long traditions.2 Historical science had to travel a path similar to political science in expanding its understanding of the past and the role of diplomacy in it. Arguably, it was the most important processes of the 20th Century (two world wars, the Cold War, decolonization, the fall of the Soviet Union, and globalization,","PeriodicalId":158942,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking Sino-U.S. Rapprochement: Unconventional Forms of Diplomacy\",\"authors\":\"A. Tagirova\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18765610-28020002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Webster’s Third New International Dictionary broadly defines diplomacy as “an art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations for the attainment of mutually satisfactory terms.”1 Since very few existing definitions manage to encompass all forms of diplomatic interactions, the understanding of the term continues to change as the academic scholarship on the issue evolves. Unfortunately, the academic understanding of diplomacy often lags behind the actual practices, leaving scholars forced to “catch up” with modern day developments. Much like historians, students of political science and international relations continue to grapple with the ambiguity of the term and attempt to produce a comprehensive framework within which one can understand and study diplomacy. A majority of scholars agree that they and their colleagues should leave the traditional view on diplomacy as a nation-to-nation exchange in the past. Some even go as far as to declare the “crisis of state-led diplomacy,” in which governmental institutions are under the heavy restraint of both their bureaucratic nature and the necessity to conform with century-long traditions.2 Historical science had to travel a path similar to political science in expanding its understanding of the past and the role of diplomacy in it. Arguably, it was the most important processes of the 20th Century (two world wars, the Cold War, decolonization, the fall of the Soviet Union, and globalization,\",\"PeriodicalId\":158942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18765610-28020002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of American-East Asian Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18765610-28020002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Rethinking Sino-U.S. Rapprochement: Unconventional Forms of Diplomacy
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary broadly defines diplomacy as “an art and practice of conducting negotiations between nations for the attainment of mutually satisfactory terms.”1 Since very few existing definitions manage to encompass all forms of diplomatic interactions, the understanding of the term continues to change as the academic scholarship on the issue evolves. Unfortunately, the academic understanding of diplomacy often lags behind the actual practices, leaving scholars forced to “catch up” with modern day developments. Much like historians, students of political science and international relations continue to grapple with the ambiguity of the term and attempt to produce a comprehensive framework within which one can understand and study diplomacy. A majority of scholars agree that they and their colleagues should leave the traditional view on diplomacy as a nation-to-nation exchange in the past. Some even go as far as to declare the “crisis of state-led diplomacy,” in which governmental institutions are under the heavy restraint of both their bureaucratic nature and the necessity to conform with century-long traditions.2 Historical science had to travel a path similar to political science in expanding its understanding of the past and the role of diplomacy in it. Arguably, it was the most important processes of the 20th Century (two world wars, the Cold War, decolonization, the fall of the Soviet Union, and globalization,