This paper provides an assessment of the ability of different InternationalRelations (IR) theories to grasp modern uses of international digital disinformation. More specifically, the paper argues that E. H. Carr's notion of propaganda, John J. Mearsheimer's typology of lies, and Joseph Nye's conceptualization of public diplomacy all offer useful theoretical lenses through which we can advance our understanding of international digital disinformation. Their added value is demonstrated by applying these three theoretical perspectives to three 'proto-type cases' of modern international digital disinformation. The paper concludes that the three theoretical perspectives make new aspects of international digital disinformation intelligible, including the underlying motives for using digital disinformation. However, there still remains a space for a more detailed theoretical account of digital disinformation and its use in modern international relations.

Should diplomacy be public? The answer to this question, as well as the understanding of what 'public diplomacy' means, has evolved over time. Through the lenses of a Quentin Skinner inspired framework, this paper presents the findings from a comprehensive study of four influential historical answers to the question, articulated respectively by Woodrow Wilson, Harold G. Nicolson, Henry A. Kissinger and Joseph S. Nye. Each scholar operates with a distinct conceptualization of 'public' and 'public diplomacy'. These conceptualizations vary in terms of who, what, and how 'the public' is, as well as what it means to manoeuvre 'in public'. Resulting from differing conceptualizations of 'public', the four scholars advocate very different forms of 'public diplomacy', and their respective attitudes to public diplomacy diverge. Beyond demonstrating the broad range of variance in historical conceptions of public diplomacy, the paper presents one main finding: The meaning of 'public' has generally kept expanding since the beginning of the twentieth century, but the notion of public diplomacy has changed from referring to the conduct of 'diplomacy in the open' to a special form of diplomatic activity where diplomats communicate directly to foreign publics. Frequency of different types of use of the word public) Wilson's use of the word 'public'