On the normalization of sub-state diplomacy

The Hague Journal of Diplomacy

Volumn 5, Issue 1-2, 2010, Pages 11-36

  Cornago, Noé ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

Author keywords

Constituent units; Diplomacy; Foreign relations; International socialization; Normalization; Paradiplomacy; Sub state

Indexed keywords

EID: 85047685949     PISSN: 18711901     EISSN: 1871191X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/1871191x-05010102     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. See Luigi Di Marzo, Component Units of Federal States and International Agreements (Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijhoff& Nordhoff, 1980);
2. Renaud J. Dehousse, Federalisme et relations internationales (Brussels: Bruylant, 1991);
3. and Manuel Pérez-González (ed.), La acción exterior de los länder, regiones y comunidades autónomas (Oñati: IVAP-HAEE, 1994).
4. Among the most significant works that contributed to give form to this debate, see Ivo D. Duchacek, Daniel Latouche and Garth Stevenson (eds.), Perforated Sovereignties and International Relations: Trans-Sovereign Contacts of Subnational Governments (New York: Greenwood Press, 1988);
5. Hans J. Michelmann and Panayotis Soldatos (eds.), Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990);
6. Brian Hocking (ed.), Foreign Relations and Federal States (London: Leicester University Press, 1993);
7. and Francisco Aldecoa and Michael Keating (eds.), Paradiplomacy in Action: The Foreign Relations of Sub-National Governments (London: Frank Cass, 1999).
8. See Guy Lachapelle and Stéphane Paquin (eds.), Mastering Globalization: New Sub-States' Governance and Strategies (London: Routledge, 2005).
9. Among the most important exceptions, see Brian Hocking, 'Catalytic Diplomacy: Between Newness and Decline', in Jan Melissen (ed.), Innovation in Diplomatic Practice (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1998), pp. 21-42;
10. and Alan K. Henrikson, 'Facing Across Borders: The Diplomacy of Bon Voisinage', International Political Science Review, vol.21, no.2, 2000.
11. See Iver B. Neumann, 'Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy', Millennium, vol.32, no.3, 2002, pp. 627-652.
12. See Stéphane Paquin, Paradiplomatie et relations internationales: Théorie des stratégies internationales des régions face á la mondialisation (Brussels: Peter Lang, 2004).
13. See Ivo D. Duchacek, 'Perforated Sovereignties: Towards a Typology of New Actors in International Relations', and Panayotis Soldatos, 'An Explanatory Framework for the Study of Federated States as Foreign-Policy Actors', both in Michelmann and Soldatos (eds.), Federalism and International Relations: The Role of Subnational Units, pp. 1-33 and 34-53.
14. See Noé Cornago, 'Diplomacy and Paradiplomacy in the Redefinition of International Security: Dimensions of Conflict and Cooperation', in Aldecoa and Keating, Paradiplomacy in Action, p. 40.
15. On the notions of 'constituent diplomacy' and 'multilayered diplomacy', see Johan Kincaid, 'Foreign Relations of Sub-National Units: Constituent Diplomacies in Federal Systems', in Raoul Blindenbacher and Arnold Koller (eds.), Federalism in a Changing World: Learning from Each Other (Montreal QC: McGill-Queens University Press, 2002), pp. 74-96;
16. and Brian Hocking, Localizing Foreign Policy: Non-Central Governments and Multilayered Diplomacy (London: Macmillan, 1993).
17. See Peter Schmitt-Egner 'The Concept of "Region": Theoretical and Methodological Notes on its Reconstruction', Revue d'integration européenne / Journal of European Integration, vol.24, no.3, 2002, pp. 179-200.
18. For a basic introduction to interpretive social sciences, see Mark Bevir and R. Rhodes, 'Interpretive Theory', in David Marsh and Gerry Stoker (eds.), Theory and Methods in Political Science (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), pp. 131-152.
19. The consideration of sub-state diplomacy in the context of diplomatic studies is still marginal and rarely direct. For instance, the lack of specific attention to that reality is noteworthy in the otherwise outstanding title by Christer Jönsson and Richard Langhorne (eds.), Diplomacy (3 volumes) (London: Sage, 2004).
20. On Foucault and international relations, see Kimberly Hutchins, 'Foucault and International Relations Theory', in M. Lloyd and A. Thacker (eds.), The Impact of Foucault on the Social Sciences and Humanities (London: Macmillan, 1997) pp. 102-127;
21. and Andrew W. Neal, 'Michel Foucault', in J. Edkins and N. Vaughan Williams (eds.), Critical Theorists and International Relations (London: Routledge, 2009), pp. 161-170.
22. On the normalization issue, see John D. Caputo and Mark Yount, 'Institutions, Normalization and Power', in J. Caputo and M. Yount (eds.), Foucault and the Critique of Institutions (University Park PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1993) pp. 3-26.
23. On the ways in which the disciplining and normalizing processes described by Foucault are embedded in wider structural conditions operating on a global scale, see Jan Selby, 'Engaging Foucault: Discourse, Liberal Governance and the Limits of Foucaldian IR', International Relations, vol.21, no.2, 2004, pp. 324-345.
24. On these notions, as well as on their validity for understanding innovation and change in the diplomatic milieu, see Harald Müller, 'Arguing, Bargaining and All That: Communicative Action, Rationalist Theory and the Logic of Appropriateness in International Relations', European Journal of International Relations, vol.10, no.3, 2004, pp. 395-435.
25. See Jeffrey T. Checkel, 'International Institutions and Socialization in Europe: Introduction and Framework', International Organization, vol.59, no.4, 2005, p. 803.
26. See Frank Schimmelfennig, 'International Socialization in the New Europe: Rational Action in an Institutional Environment', European Journal of International Relations, vol.6, no.1, 2000, pp. 109-139.
27. For instance, in spite of her careful attention to domestic complexity, Flockhart ignores the importance of sub-state governments in her very innovative work. See Trine Flockhart, 'Complex Socialization: A Framework for the Study of State Socialization', European Journal of International Relations, vol.12, no.1, 2006, pp. 89-118.
28. Evidence of the global spread of sub-state diplomacy can be found in Rudolf Hrbek (ed.), External Relations of Regions in Europe and the World (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2003);
29. Tullo Vigevani, Luiz E. Wan-derley and Marcelo Passini (eds.), A dimensão subnacional e as relações internacionales (Sao Paulo: Cedec/ EDUC-EDUSC, 2004);
30. Sergio Gelfenstein (ed.), La paradiplomacia: Las relaciones internacionales de los gobiernos locales (Mexico: Porrua, 2006);
31. Raoul Blindenbacher and Chandra Pasma (eds.), Dialogues on Foreign Relations in Federal Countries (Montreal: Forum of Federations/IACFS, 2008);
32. and Hans J. Michelmann (ed.), Federalism and Foreign Relations (Ottawa ON: McGill-Queens University Press, 2009).
33. See Stéphane Paquin, 'Les actions extérieures des entités subétatiques: quelle signification pour la politique comparée et les relations internationales', Revue internationale de politique comparée, vol.12, no.2, 2005, pp. 129-142.
34. See David Criekemans, 'Are the Boundaries between Diplomacy and Paradiplomacy Watering Down?', paper presented at the Second Global International Studies Conference/WISC, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 23-26 July 2008.
35. See David Sadler, The Global Region: Production, State Policies and Uneven Development (Oxford: Per-gamon Press, 1992);
36. and Darel E. Paul, Rescaling International Political Economy: Subnational States and the Regulation of the Global Political Economy (New York: Routledge, 2005).
37. See Gertjan Dijkink and Constance Winnips, 'Alternative States: Regions and Post-Fordism Rhetoric on the Internet', Geojournal, vol.48, no.4, 2004, p. 323.
38. For an accurate reflection on the importance of these issues, see Marcelo A. Medeiros, 'Sub-National State Actors and their Role in Regional Governance', in Andrea Ribeiro Hoffmann and Johanna Maria van der Vleuten (eds.), Closing or Widening the Gap?: Legitimacy and Democracy in Regional Integration Organizations (London: Ashgate, 2008), pp. 103-116.
39. First introduced by Björn Hettne, 'Globalization and New Regionalism: The Second Great Transformation', in Björn Hettne, András Inotai and Osvaldo Sunkel (eds.), Globalism and the New Regionalism (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1999), pp. 1-24.
40. Later these notions were also applied by Shaun Breslin and Glenn D. Hook (eds.), Microregionalism and World Order (London: Palgrave, 2002).
41. A critical overview of cross-border issues across the world is offered by Markus Perkmann and Ngai Ling Sum (eds.), Globalization, Regionalization and Cross-Border Regions (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002).
42. Comprehensive accounts of this process can be found in John Loughlin (eds.), Subnational Democracy in the European Union: Challenges and Opportunities (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004); and Michael Keating, Regions and Regionalism in Europe (London: Edward Elgar, 2004).
43. See John McGarry and Michael Keating (eds.), European Integration and the Nationalities Question (London: Routledge, 2006).
44. See Stephan De Boer, 'Canadian Provinces, US States and North American Integration: Bench Warmers of Key Players', Choices, vol.8, no.4, 2002.
45. See Chris Kukucha, 'Domestic Politics and Canadian Foreign Trade Policy: Intrusive Interdependence, The WTO and the NAFTA', Canadian Foreign Policy, vol.10, no.1, 2003.
46. See Michelle Sager, One Voice or Many? Federalism and International Trade (New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2002).
47. See Samuel L. McMillan, 'Subnational Foreign Policy Actors: How and Why Governors Participate in US Foreign Policy', Foreign Policy Analysis, vol.4, no.3, 2008, pp. 227-253.
48. See Jorge Schiavon, La proyección internacional de las entidades federativas en México y el mundo (Mexico: Matías Romero Institute-SRE, 2006).
49. Sub-state multilateralism has been particularly relevant in the context of MERCOSUR. See, for instance, the many initiatives adopted by the North-East Argentina Regional Foreign Trade Commission (CRECENEA), Southern Brazil Commission for Development and Trade (CODESUL) (online at http://www.crecenea. org.ar/html/crecenea-codesul.htm), as well as by the South American Midwest Integration Zone (ZICOSUR) (see online at http://www.zicosur.net/Nueva-ZICOSUR/ ingles/), all accessed on 10 November 2009. On these processes, see Jorge Tapia (ed.), El marco jurídico-institucional de la integración fronteriza subregional (Iquique: Arturo Prat University, 2003).
50. See Eduardo Iglesias et al., Las provincias argentinas en el escenario internacional (Buenos Aires: CARI-UNDP, 2008).
51. See Tullo Vigevani, 'The Legal and Institutional Framework for the International Management of Sub-national Government Players in Brazil', Integration and Trade, vol.21, no.8, 2004, pp. 27-46;
52. and Gilberto M.A. Rodrigues, 'Relações internacionais federativas no Brasil ', Dados, vol.51, 2008, pp. 1015-1034.
53. See Sergio González Miranda, Arica y la triple frontera: Integración y conflicto entre Bolivia, Perú y Chile (Santiago: Aríbalo, 2006).
54. For a contextualized assessment on these early developments in the immediate post-Soviet context, see Neil Melvin, Regional Foreign Policies in the Russian Federation (London: RIIA, 1995).
55. On the proliferation of Russian sub-state diplomacies during the Yeltsin era, see Andrey Makarychev, Islands of Globalization: Regional Russia and the Outside World, ETH Working Paper no.2 (Zurich: ETH, 2000);
56. and Jerome Perovic, Internationalization of Russian Regions and the Consequences for Russian Foreign and Security Policy, EHThWorking Paper no. 3 (Zurich: ETH, 2000).
57. See Renata Dwan and Oleksandr Pavliuk (eds.), Building Security in the New States of Eurasia: Subre-gional Cooperation in the Former Soviet Space (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2000).
58. On the current state of sub-state diplomacy in Russia, see Alexander S. Kuznetsov, 'Paradiplomacy as the Domestic Source of Russian Foreign Policy: An Analysis on the Basis of Theoretical Framework', paper prepared for the 50th annual International Studies Association meeting, New York, 15-18 February 2009.
59. See Peter T.Y. Cheung and James T.H. Tang, 'The External Relations of China's Provinces', in David M. Lampton (ed.), The Making of Chinese Foreign and Security Policy in the Era of Reform, 1978-2000 (Stanford CA: Stanford University Press, 2001), pp. 91-120;
60. and Chen Zhimin, 'Coastal Provinces and China's Foreign Policy-Making', in Yufan Hao and Lin Su (eds.), China's Foreign Policy Making: Societal Forces and Chinese American Policy (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), pp. 187-207.
61. See, for instance, Miguel Santos Neves, 'Macau and Europe: The Challenges of the Paradiplomacy Game', China Perspectives, vol.44, no.6, 2002, pp. 54-66.
62. See Jain Purnendra, Japan's Subnational Governments in International Affairs (London: Routledge, 2005).
63. See Amitah Matton and Happymon Jacob, 'Republic of India', in Hans J. Michelmann (ed.), Federalism and Foreign Relations (Ottawa ON: McGill-Queens University Press, 2009), pp. 169-189.
64. See R. Dossani and S. Vijakumar, 'Indian Federalism and the Conduct of Foreign Policy in Border States', APARC/Stanford Working Papers, 2005.
65. See Rob Jenkins, 'India's States and the Making of Foreign Economic Policy: The Limits of the Constituent Diplomacy Paradigm', Publius: The Journal of Federalism, vol.33, no.4, 2003, pp. 63-82.
66. A reflective balance on these initiatives can be found in Katsuhiro Sasura, Microregionalism and Governance in East Asia (London: Routledge, 2004).
67. On the social and political implications of 'growth triangles', see Aihwa Ong, Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty (Durham NC: Duke University Press, 2006), pp. 88-92.
68. See Christina Murray and Salim A. Nakhjavani, 'Republic of South Africa', in Hans J. Michelmann (ed.), Federalism and Foreign Relations (Ottawa ON: McGill-Queens University Press, 2009), pp. 212-240.
69. See Nico Steyler, 'Cross-Border External Relations of South African Provinces', in R. Hrbek (ed.), External Relations of Regions in Europe and the World (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2003), pp. 247-253.
70. See Andre Lecours, 'Paradiplomacy: Reflections on the Foreign Policy and International Relations of Regions', International Negotiation, vol.7, 2002, pp. 91-114.
71. Some of the most important regional networks are the Assembly of European Regions (AER), http:// www.aer.eu/en/home.html;
72. the International Association of French-Speaking Regions (AIRF), http:// www.regions-francophones.com/;
73. the Latin-American Organization of Intermediate Governments (OLAGI), http://www.olagi.org/sitio.html;
74. and Northern Forum, http://www.northernforum.org. Among the most active-issue thematic international networks are the Network of Local Authorities for Information Soci-ety/it4all, http://www.it4all-regions.org/ it4all/; the Network of Regional Governments for Sustainable Development/nrg4SD, http://www.nrg4sd.net/; the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR), http://www.crpm.org/index.php; and the Association of European Border Regions (AEBR), http://www. aebr.net/. Even the most sceptical observer will be impressed by the intense activity of these networks (all websites were accessed on 10 November 2009).
75. See Harald Stoke, The Foreign Relations of the Federal State (Baltimore MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1931), p. 1.
76. Evidence about it can be found in the chapters on Austria, Belgium, Germany and Spain, in Brian Hocking and David Spence (eds.), Foreign Ministries in the European Union (Basingstoke: Palgrave Mac-millan, 2002).
77. For more on this, see Noé Cornago, 'Paradiplomacy as International Customary Law: Subnational Governments and the Making of New Global Norms', in Klaus-Gerd Giesen and Kees Van der Pijl (eds.), Global Norms for the Twenty-First Century (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2006), pp. 67-81.
78. See Hans J. Michelmann, 'Conclusion', in Hans J. Michelmann (ed.), Foreign Relations in Federal Countries (Kingston ON: McGill-Queens University Press, 2008), p. 352.
79. For the concrete case of Tatarstan, the ambivalences of that game have been aptly examined by Kath-erine E. Graney, 'Projecting Sovereignty in Post-Soviet Russia: Tatarstan in the International Arena', in John McGarry and Michael Keating (eds.), Minority Nationalism and the Changing International Order (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 264-294.
80. In real practice, however, it is not always easy to differentiate symbolic concerns from functional issues. This is something particularly clear in the case of cross-border cooperation where ethno-cultural, socio-economic and environmental issues are frequently mixed. For a reflective overview on this, see James Anderson, Liam O'Dowd and Thomas M. Wilson (eds.), New Borders for a Changing Europe: Cross-Border Cooperation and Governance (London: Frank Cass, 2003).
81. Stéphane Paquin, 'La paradiplomatie identitaire: Le Québec, la Catalogne et la Flandre en relations internationales', Politique et sociétés, vol.23, no.2-3, 2004.
82. Stefan Wolff, 'Paradiplomacy: Scope, Opportunities and Challenges', The Bologna Center Journal of International Affairs, vol.10, 2007, pp. 141.
83. See Ivo D. Duchacek, The Territorial Dimension of Politics Within, Among, and Across Nations (Boulder, CO: Westview), p. 240.
84. See Paul Kingston and Ian S. Spears (eds.), States within States: Incipient Political Entities in the Post-Cold War (London: Palgrave, 2004).
85. See André Lecours, 'Political Issues of Paradiplomacy: Lessons from the Developed World', Discussion Papers on Diplomacy, no.113 (The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations 'Clingendael', 2008), p. 8.
86. See Peter Howard, 'The Growing Role of States in US Foreign Policy: The Case of the State Partnership Program', International Studies Perspectives, vol.5, 2004, pp. 179-206.
87. See Ian Bache and Mathew Flinders (eds.), Multi-Level Governance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004).
88. See Iwona Sagan and Henrik Halkier, 'Introduction: Regional Contestations', in I. Sagan and H. Halkier (eds.), Regionalism Contested: Institutions, Society and Governance (London: Ashgate, 2005), p. 2.
89. For more on this, see Sol Picciotto, 'Regulatory Networks and Multi-Level Global Governance', in O. Dilling, M. Herberg and G. Winter (eds.), Responsible Business: Self-Governance and the Law in Transnational Economic Transactions (Oxford: Hart, 2008), pp. 315-341.
90. See Paul Sharp, 'For Diplomacy: Representation and the Study of International Relations', International Studies Review, 1999, vol.1, p. 33.
91. On both the formative process as well the current exhaustion of classic diplomacy's representational dimensions, see Costas M. Constantinou, On the Way to Diplomacy (Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), pp. 1-30.