Abstract
Amidst the major transformation of the global system after the Cold War, the study of international relations has maintained a predominantly top-down orientation. This apex-centred focus comes out most clearly in the important debates concerning the demise of the Soviet Union and the hegemonic role of the United States of America (USA).1 The same perspective is also evident in the preoccupation in the international relations literature with specific aspects of the post-Cold War settlement, namely German reunification, USA-Japanese and USA-European economic and strategic relations, as well as the questions of leadership in the evolution of regionalism in Europe and the Asia-Pacific.2 Given the marked capacity of the major powers to affect events and structure, this mode of analysis rests on a solid foundation. The rationale of this book, however, is that there is a need to stretch the parameters of scholarly attention away from the restrictive confines of this dominant approach. At the core of this argument is the salience of looking at alternative sources of agency in order to more fully capture the evolving complexity in global affairs. While not suggesting that structural leadership by great powers is no longer the most important source of initiative in the international order of the 1990s, the introduction of a wider lens is deemed crucial if the processes of reform and change — especially those requiring considerable cooperation and collaboration — in a variety of issue areas on the international agenda for the 1990s are to be fully understood. Such a role may be performed by appropriately qualified secondary powers in an appreciably different way than in the past. While readily acknowledging that the term ‘middle powers’ is problematic both in terms of conceptual clarity and operational coherence, this category of countries does appear to have some accentuated space for diplomatic manoeuvre on a segmented basis in the post-Cold War era.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Paul Kennedy, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000 (New York: Random House, 1987)
Joseph S. Nye, Jr, Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (New York: Basic Books, 1990)
John Lewis Gaddis, The United States and the End of the Cold War: Implications, Reconsiderations, Provocations (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992).
See, for example, John J. Mearsheimer, ‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War’, International Security 15:1, Summer 1990, 5–56
Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, Jr, and Stanley Hoffmann, After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989–1991 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993)
C. Fred Bergsten, ‘The World Economy After the Cold War’, Foreign Affairs 69:3, Summer 1990,96–112.
Charles Krauthammer, ‘The Unipolar Moment’, Foreign Affairs 70:1, 1990/91,23–33.
Jonathan Clarke, ‘Leaders and Followers’, Foreign Policy 101 (Winter 1995–96), 37.
]Andrew Fenton Cooper, Richard A. Higgott, and Kim Richard Nossal, ‘Bound to Follow? Leadership and Followership in the Gulf Conflict’, Political Science Quarterly 106:3, Fall 1991, 391–410.
Susan Strange, ‘The Future of the American Empire’, Journal of International Affairs 42:1, Fall 1988, 1–17
Robert Gilpin, The Political Economy of International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987), 345.
Joseph S. Nye, Jr., ‘What New World Order’?, Foreign Affairs, 71:2, Spring 1992, 83–96.
Robert O. Keohane, ‘Multilateralism: An Agenda for Research’, International Journal XLV:4, Autumn 1990, 731–64
Miles Kahler, ‘Multilateralism with Small and Large Numbers’, International Organization 46:3, Summer 1992, 681–708
John Gerard Ruggie, Multilateralism Matters: The Theory and Practice of an Institutional Form (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).
Ernst B. Haas, ‘Collective Conflict Management: Evidence for a New World Order’, in Thomas G. Weiss (ed.), Collective Security in a Changing World (Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1993), 98.
See, for example, Hans W. Maull, ‘Germany and Japan: The New Civilian Powers’, Foreign Affairs 69:5, Winter 1990/91, 91–106.
A Task Force Report to the Trilateral Commission, Global Competition After the Cold War: A Reassessment of Trilateralism (New York, Paris, and Tokyo: The Trilateral Commission, July 1991), 46.
See, for example, Josef Joffe, ‘After Bipolarity: German and European Security’, European Security after the Cold War, Adelphi Paper 284 (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, January 1994), 37–46.
Kent E. Calder, ‘Japanese Foreign Economic Policy Formation: Explaining the Reactive State’, World Politics 40:4, July 1988, 517–41.
Donald Puchala and R.A. Coate, The State of the United Nations, 1988 (Hanover NH: Academic Council on the United Nations System, 1988).
For discussions of the functional principle, see John W. Holmes, The Shaping of Peace: Canada and the Search for World Order, vol. 1 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1979), 29–73
Duncan Cameron, ‘Canada in the World Economic Order’, in Paul Painchaud (ed.), From Mackenzie King to Pierre Trudeau: Forty Years of Canadian Diplomacy, 1945–1985 (Québec: Les Presses de l’Université Laval, 1989), 147.
Gareth Evans and Bruce Grant, Australia’s Foreign Relations in the World of the 1990s (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1991), 323.
Wallace Arthur, The Niche in Competition and Evolution (Chichester: John Wiley, 1987)
Robert E. Linneman and John L. Stanton, Jr, Making Niche Marketing Work (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991).
Janice Gross Stein, ‘Canada 21: A Moment and A Model’, Canadian Foreign Policy 2, Spring 1994, 11.
Carsten Holbraad, Middle Powers in International Politics (London: Macmillan, 1984)
Bernard Wood, The Middle Powers and the General Interest (Ottawa: The North-South Institute, 1988).
Stephen Lewis, interviewed by Jim Wurst, ‘The United Nations after the Gulf War: A Promise Betrayed’, World Policy Journal 8, Summer 1991, 547.
This theme comes out strongly in Helge Ole Bergesen, Hans Henrik Holm and Robert McKinley (eds), The Recalcitrant Rich: A Comparative Analysis of the Northern Responses to the Demands for a New International Order (London: Francis Pinter, 1982).
See Robert W. Cox, ‘Middlepowermanship, Japan, and the Future World Order’, International Journal 44:4, Autumn 1989, 826.
Cox, ‘Multilateralism and World Order’, Review of International Studies 18:2, April 1992, 161–80
Robert O. Keohane, ‘Lilliputians’ Dilemmas: Small States in International Politics’, International Organization 23:2, Spring 1969, 296.
For a fuller discussion of this pattern of behaviour, see Andrew F. Cooper, Richard A. Higgott, and Kim Richard Nossal, Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order (Vancouver: UBC Press, 1993).
Journalistic commentary on this process includes Clyde Haberman, ‘How the Oslo Connection Led to the Mideast Pact’, New York Times, 5 September 1991, 1
Gareth J. Evans, Cooperating for Peace: The Global Agenda for the 1990s and Beyond (St Leonard’s, NSW: Allen and Unwin, 1993)
W.J. Hudson, Australia and the League of Nations (Sydney: Sydney University Press in association with the Australian Institute of International Affairs, 1980).
Bengt Sundelius (ed.), The Committed Neutral: Sweden’s Foreign Policy (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1989).
Cranford Pratt (ed.), Internationalism under Strain: The North-South Policies of Canada, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1989)
Baldev Raj Nayar, ‘Regional Power in a Multipolar World’, in John W. Mellor (ed.), India: A Rising Middle Power (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1979).
David R. Mares, ‘Middle Powers under Regional Hegemony: To Challenge or Acquiesce in Hegemonic Enforcement’, International Studies Quarterly 32:4, December 1988, 453–72.
Colleen Hamilton and John Whaley, Coalitions in the Uruguay Round: The Extent, Pros and Cons of Developing Country Participation (Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, October 1988).
See Richard A. Higgott and Richard Stubbs, ‘Competing Conceptions of Economic Regionalism: APEC versus EAEC in the Asia Pacific’, Review of International Political Economy 2:3, 1995, 549–68.
Susan Strange, ‘States, Firms and Diplomacy’, International Affairs 68:1, January 1992, 1–15.
See, for example, T. Princen, ‘NGOs: Creating a Niche in Environmental Diplomacy’, T. Princen and M. Finger (eds), Environmental NGOs in World Politics: Linking the Local and the Global (London: Routledge, 1994).
See, for example, Jan Aart Scholte, International Relations of Social Change (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1993).
Andrew Moravcsik, ‘Integrating International and Domestic Theories of International Bargaining’, in Peter B. Evans, Harold K. Jacobson and Robert B. Putnam (eds), Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1993), 16.
Laura Neack, ‘Linking State Type with Foreign Policy Behaviour’, in Foreign Policy Analysis: Continuity and Change in Its Second Generation (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995), 227.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1997 Andrew F. Cooper
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Cooper, A.F. (1997). Niche Diplomacy: A Conceptual Overview. In: Cooper, A.F. (eds) Niche Diplomacy. Studies in Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25902-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-25902-1_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-25904-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-25902-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)