Reputation crisis management and the state: Theorising containment as diplomatic mode

Abstract

This article theorises containment as a diplomatic response mode for states when faced with potentially harmful attacks on their international identity and reputation. Despite widespread agreement in International Relations (IR) scholarship that identities matter in the context of state security, studies of crisis management have paid little attention to ontological security crises. Scholarly literature on public diplomacy has concerned itself mainly with proactive nation branding and reputation building; work on stigma management has privileged the study of how ‘transgressive’ states respond to identity attacks by recognising, rejecting or countering criticism. Our contribution is two-fold. First, we make the case that states do not perform as uniform entities when faced with ontological security crises – government representatives, bureaucratic officials and diplomats have varying roles and action repertoires available to them. Second, we argue that containment is a key but undertheorised part of the diplomatic toolkit in crisis management. Unpacking containment as a crisis management response mode, we combine insights from IR scholarship on emotions and diplomacy with insights on therapeutic practices from social psychology. We substantiate our argument with a case study of how Norwegian government representatives, bureaucratic officials and diplomats responded to escalating international criticism against Norway’s Child Welfare Services following a wave of transnational protests in 2016. A key finding is that whereas the dominant response mode of government ministers and bureaucratic officials was to reject the criticism, diplomats mainly worked to contain the situation, trying to prevent it from escalating further and resulting in long-term damage to bilateral relations.

Verden i endring, diplomati i fatning

“…Samtidig er Hauge opptatt av UD og diplomatenes saeregne rolle som representanter for langsiktige norske utenrikspolitiske interesser. Som offisielle representanter for Norge må diplomatene vaere beredt på holde egne vurderinger og følelser tilbake, og innta den rollen som er tilgjengelig for dem i møte med en bestemt situasjon eller oppgave (Haugevik & Neumann, 2021). Diplomati handler i kjernen om å kommunisere, forhandle og overtale (Hamilton & Langhorne, 2013, s. 232), og om å søke fredelige utfall så langt det er mulig -enten det er i møte med transnasjonale barnevernsaktivister, kinesisk «fryseboksdiplomati» eller Putins Russland.…”

Ontological security, cyber technology, and states’ responses

“…While ontological security is more of a process than “a state of being” and while identities are not fixed but repeatedly reconstituted over time, scholars point to critical situations where actors take measures to placate ontological insecurity (Browning, 2018a: 340; Ejdus, 2018; 884; Haugevik and Neumann, 2021: 714). In this section, I consider and illustrate five specific strategies states use in response to ontological insecurities that are related to cyber technologies.…”

“…While measures of avoidance can overlap with other kinds of responses (e.g. using narratives), the key point is that they do not aim to resolve the challenge but rather provide the actors with the means to deny the challenge and prevent the experiencing of it (see also Haugevik and Neumann, 2021: 714–716).…”

“…Second, ontological security scholarship provides useful tools to analyze how states address these challenges. A few scholars have focused on how actors respond to ontological insecurity (Browning, 2018a: 338–340; Browning and Joenniemi, 2013: 496–497; Ejdus, 2018: 893; Flockhart, 2016: 815–816; Haugevik and Neumann, 2021: 713). Elaborating on these studies and on the specific mechanisms identified, I consider five strategies states use to respond to ontological insecurities related to cyber technologies.…”

Economic consequences of keeping peace in Afghanistan through Indonesian soft power approach

“…Diplomacy is often associated with processes, activities, and negotiations carried out peacefully by a country to establish relations with other countries. Diplomacy is also a containment for countries when facing attacks that can potentially endanger international identity and reputation (Haugevik & Neumann, 2021). The relevance of diplomacy in supporting national interests in international forums has not yet been fully developed.…”