Explaining Expulsions of U.S. Diplomatic Personnel from Latin America, 1991–2016

Jordan, Anthony J.; Tuman, John P.

doi:10.1111/lamp.12149

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These studies highlight the role of diplomats in bilateral relations (Lebovic and Saunders, 2016; Neumann, 2012), as well as the role of differing levels of delegation of IO staff in impacting cooperative outcomes (Hawkins et al., 2006; Parizek, 2017; Vaubel et al., 2007). In these accounts, individual diplomats can have discrete influence on policy outcomes (Gertz, 2018; Jordan and Tuman, 2018; Lindsey, 2017), and professional diplomatic technocrats face different incentives than do political actors (Johnson, 2013; Poulsen and Aisbett, 2016). Such lenses have already been applied to the UN, showing how, for example, changes in the appointment process of the Secretary General have influenced policy outcomes (Wiseman, 2015).…”

Section: Introduction1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Delegating diplomacy: rhetoric across agents in the United Nations General Assembly

Gray

Baturo

2021

International Review of Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When political principals send agents to international organizations, those agents are often assumed to speak in a single voice. Yet, various types of country representatives appear on the international stage, including permanent representatives as well as more overtly “political” government officials. We argue that permanent delegates at the United Nations face career incentives that align them with the bureaucracy, setting them apart from political delegates. To that end, they tend to speak more homogeneously than do other types of speakers, while also using relatively more technical, diplomatic rhetoric. In addition, career incentives will make them more reluctant to criticize the United Nations. In other words, permanent representatives speak more like bureaucratic agents than like political principals. We apply text analytics to study differences across agents’ rhetoric at the United Nations General Assembly. We demonstrate marked distinctions between the speech of different types of agents, contradictory to conventional assumptions, with implications for our understandings of the interplay between public administration and agency at international organizations. Points for practitioners Delegations to international organizations do not “speak with one voice.” This article illustrates that permanent representatives to the United Nations display more characteristics of bureaucratic culture than do other delegates from the same country. For practitioners, it is important to realize that the manner in which certain classes of international actors “conduct business” can differ markedly. These differences in tone—even among delegates from the same principal—can impact the process of negotiation and debate.

show abstract

Section: Introduction1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Delegating diplomacy: rhetoric across agents in the United Nations General Assembly

Gray

Baturo

2021

International Review of Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Leaders in the United Nations General Assembly: Revitalization or politicization?

Baturo,

Gray

2024

Rev Int Organ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do leaders address the world in service of international cooperation, and do their messages enhance or detract from the global agenda? Leaders increasingly appear at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), a deliberative forum meant for diplomacy, not politics. At the same time, the UNGA has long undergone revitalization efforts, and leaders’ contributions could potentially ensure more meaningful cooperation. Building on theories of leader communication, we argue that, in contrast to other country representatives, heads of state have more leeway to deviate from the assembly’s priorities; as politicians, they have incentives to discuss their own, more particularistic, topics. Drawing from novel data on leaders’ speeches in the UNGA, we use text analytics to show that leaders tend to depart from the policy agenda of the session. Furthermore, national political leaders speak more plainly, centering speech on themselves and departing from the general conventions of diplomatic debate. This suggests that, while leaders’ attendance potentially generates more publicity and visibility for the UNGA, their contributions may also undermine the general debate. Our findings shed light on the ways in which leaders can politicize mulitlateral cooperation, and we give evidence for the role of individuals in the vitality of international organizations.

show abstract

Déléguer la diplomatie : la rhétorique des représentants à l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies

Gray¹,

Baturo²

2021

Revue Internationale Des Sciences Administratives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lorsque des dirigeants politiques mandatent des représentants auprès d’organisations internationales, ces derniers sont souvent censés parler d’une seule et même voix. Or, plusieurs types de représentants de pays interviennent sur la scène internationale, notamment des représentants permanents, mais aussi des délégués plus ouvertement “politiques’’. Nous avançons que les représentants permanents auprès des Nations unies ont des perspectives de carrière qui les rapprochent des fonctionnaires et qui les différencie des délégués politiques. En ce sens, ils parlent généralement d’une manière plus homogène que d’autres types d’orateurs et utilisent une rhétorique diplomatique relativement plus technique. En outre, compte tenu de leurs motivations professionnelles, ils sont plus réticents à critiquer l’ONU. En bref, les représentants permanents parlent plus comme des fonctionnaires que comme des politiques. Nous utilisons l’analyse de texte pour étudier les différences dans la rhétorique des représentants à l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies. Nous mettons en évidence des distinctions marquées entre les discours de différents types de représentants. Ces conclusions, en contradiction avec les hypothèses traditionnelles, ont des conséquences sur notre compréhension des interactions entre administration publique et représentation au sein des organisations internationales. Remarques à l’intention des praticiens Les délégations auprès des organisations internationales ne parlent pas ‘‘d’une seule et même voix’’. Dans cet article, nous montrons que les représentants permanents auprès des Nations unies ont plus de caractéristiques propres aux fonctionnaires que d’autres représentants d’un même pays. Pour les praticiens, il est important de comprendre que la manière dont certaines catégories d’intervenants internationaux exercent leurs fonctions peut être très distincte. Ces différences de ton —même parmi les représentants d’un même État— peuvent influer sur le processus de négociation et les débats.

show abstract

Explaining Expulsions of U.S. Diplomatic Personnel from Latin America, 1991–2016

Cited by 3 publications

References 43 publications

Delegating diplomacy: rhetoric across agents in the United Nations General Assembly

Delegating diplomacy: rhetoric across agents in the United Nations General Assembly

Leaders in the United Nations General Assembly: Revitalization or politicization?

Déléguer la diplomatie : la rhétorique des représentants à l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About