The main purpose of this paper is to examine the role of violence in the contemporary diplomacy.
The "pure" diplomacy between two actors can be defined as a nonviolent act of negotiation to maximize their interests. However, the "real" diplomacy in...
The main purpose of this paper is to examine the role of violence in the contemporary diplomacy.
The "pure" diplomacy between two actors can be defined as a nonviolent act of negotiation to maximize their interests. However, the "real" diplomacy in the contemporary world order has to use violent and nonviolent means for its ends. The diplomacy of violence is thus an essential part of the contemporary diplomacy.
The united States has used military forces short of war as An instrument of diplomacy on 215 occasions between 1946 and 1975. In Parallel, the Soviet Union Las employed its military forces in 190 incidents for political purposes during the years of 1944∼1979.
Although the importance of military forces in the contemporary diplomacy has been partially declined in parallel with the changing nature of the world order,'the role of violence in the contemporary diplomacy. which is directly related with the structural weakness of the world order, cannot be easily declined in the near future.