2. Summary
This article critically evaluates the importance of negotiations and expansive discourse in framing apologies, especially in a political and diplomatic context. Focusing on two relevant Sino-American issues, viz. the 1999 bombing at the Belgrade Chinese embassy by US aircraft and the 2001 airplane collision between a Chinese fighter jet and an American spy plane, the author evaluates pragmatism in diplomatic apologies, with specific reference to the US apology to China during these two events.
Methodology and Objectives
This study was based on off-the-record interviews that were conducted in late 2001 with four anonymous US State Department officials who were involved in public negotiations of the US apologies. The author writes that his aim in carrying out these interviews was threefold. Firstly, he wished to clarify the intricacies of international diplomatic apologies. Secondly, he intended to “probe” the opinions of official diplomats on such apologies. Finally, he aimed that this study would contribute to a greater understanding of the characteristics of diplomatic apologies and the pragmatics involved therewith.
Observations
Through this study, the author puts forth the fact that most political apologies are framed in such a way that both the nations’ real political goals are achieved. For carrying out an act of apology, “the stage must be set by a process of negotiation and reconciliation” (Thompson 2005). Mirroring this idea, the author describes the kind of negotiations that take place before an official apology is placed in a political context. Based on the data collected through the interviews, the author writes that America’s apologies to China for the two crises were “ambiguous” and careless. The...
... middle of paper ...
...n Monographs 51, no. 3: 227-242, accessed August 10, 2011, http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/13165_Chapter1.pdf.
Gopen, George, and Judith Swan. “The Science of Scientific Writing.” American Scientist, November, 1990. Accessed August 10, 2011. https://www.americanscientist.org/issues/issue.aspx?id=877&y=0&no=&content=true&page=4&css=print.
Strongman, L. 2011. ‘What on earth?’: Understanding ambiguity toleration in business communication. PRism 8(1): 1-14, accessed August 10, 2011, http://www.prismjournal.org/fileadmin/8_1/Strongman.pdf.
Thompson, Janna. 2005. “Apology, justice and respect: a critical defence of political apology.” Paper presented at the Australian Association for Professional and Applied Ethics 12th Annual Conference, Adelaide, September 28–30. Accessed August 10, 2011. http://www.unisa.edu.au/hawkeinstitute/gig/aapae05/documents/thompson.pdf.
Barry successfully conveys the many traits that scientists will endure in their work, and the qualities essential in order to be successful by using three effective rhetorical devices-- exemplification, powerful diction, and insightful figurative language. He uses his experience with the flu epidemic and rhetorical strategies to prove his claim that there is much more to science
Mingst, K. A. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 79). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, President George W. Bush reached out to the world to back the U.S. in a war to eradicate terrorism. One of the more surprising participants in this coalition, China, had until that point been at odds with U.S. policy but seemed to find sufficient common ground with the U.S. to support the war. In recent months however, China has not been lauded for unprecedented cooperation with its “strategic competitor” but has instead been criticized for using the war on terror as carte blanche to step up its “Strike Hard” campaign in the Uigher Xinjiang Autonomous Region in the northwest, resulting in unprecedented numbers of executions of political prisoners, a suspension of free religious worship, and a general decline in respect for human rights. The western media has claimed that Beijing had been waiting for a chance to crack down on Uigher separatists and is now behaving as an opportunist to pursue these goals while the U.S. is in no position to decry its behavior. However, this opportunism argument only explains some of the recent actions in Xinjiang; in this paper I will seek to show that Beijing’s increased policing of Xinjiang serves primarily to demonstrate to the international community that it will not be excluded from Central Asia.
Shiraev, Eric B., and Vladislav M. Zubok. International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Accept a period of reflection where the incident is considered and a means of reparation is decided upon.
Stewart, M. (2011). The space between the steps: reckoning in an area of reconciliation. Contemporary Justice Review, 14(1), 43-63. Retrieved from http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all?content=10.1080/10282580.2011.541076
Nathan, Andrew J. "U.S.-China Relations Since 1949." U.S.-China Relations Since 1949 | Asia for Educators | Columbia University. Columbia University, 2009. Web. 26 May 2014.
This theory has been subject to many articles and studies in the communication and social departments. Indeed, studying this theory can help us understanding human relations in interpersonal communication. Each of us has been one day confronted to uncertainty, whereas in initial encounters, or moving to a new a new place, or beginning a new work.
Ravenal, E. C. (1971). The Nixon Doctrine and Our Asian Commitments. Foreign Affairs, 49(2), 201-217. Retrieved July 2, 2011 from EBSCOhost
The Instability of China–US Relations", The Chinese Journal of International Politics 3, no. 3 (2010): 263-292, http://cjip.oxfordjournals.org/content/3/3/263.
... be ended by one of the countries giving in, either in dropping the demand of an apology or admitting to their wrongdoing
Any negotiation challenges the parties involved in a variety of ways, but parties with conflicting interests face important additional difficulties when attempting to negotiate an agreement across culture lines. Not only will the difficulties arising from the known similarities and differences of opinion be more pronounced, but also unsuspected factors could easily enter the picture and condition perceptions of the situation. In cross-cultural negotiations, a reasonable second acknowledgment should be that the hidden factors that are always at work are more likely to interfere with reaching an agreement. It is especially important that this acknowledgment be understood to apply not only to the dynamics of interactions across the table, but those of individuals on the same side of the table. [At times, it may be tempting to attribute the outcomes of negotiations to a single variable (such as the culture or the relative power of a country).] The term culture has taken on many different meanings but basically it reflects the shared values. Culture affects negotiations in different ways. In this paper, we are going to discuss the American and Jap...
In The First Resort of King, Richard Arndt argues cultural diplomacy has been a norm “for humans intent upon civilization” since the Bronze Age, when diplomacy has evolved in parallel with language to facilitate cooperation between large groups defined by customs, therefore, in its earliest form, diplomacy meant relations not between nation-state, but between cultures (1). However, over the course of history, the concept of cultural diplomacy changed. Today, cultural diplomacy is typically viewed as a foreign policy tool, utilized by governments in order to advance specific kinds of interests. This is true according to Yang and Liu, who define public diplomacy as a diplomatic activity organised and conducted by a state government and directed
The study of international relations takes a wide range of theoretical approaches. Some emerge from within the discipline itself others have been imported, in whole or in part, from disciplines such as economics or sociology. Indeed, few social scientific theories have not been applied to the study of relations amongst nations. Many theories of international relations are internally and externally contested, and few scholars believe only in one or another. In spite of this diversity, several major schools of thought are discernable, differentiated principally by the variables they emphasize on military power, material interests, or ideological beliefs. International Relations thinking have evolved in stages that are marked by specific debates between groups of scholars. The first major debate is between utopian liberalism and realism, the second debate is on method, between traditional approaches and behavioralism. The third debate is between neorealism/neoliberalism and neo-Marxism, and an emerging fourth debate is between established traditions and post-positivist alternatives (Jackson, 2007).
Diplomacy has a variety of definitions which depending on the user perspectives on the term “diplomacy”. In the context of international relations, diplomacy is the negotiator’s ability in conducting negotiations between the representatives of nation states in a peaceful manner. The essential of negotiation is to resolve a conflict without offending others. According to Iragorri (2003), an effective negotiation is being able to achieve mutual agreement by peaceful means. The process of a negotiation in diplomacy goes through five important stages that is preparation, discussion, proposing, bargaining and settling process (refer to Figure 1 in Appendix 1).