Thucydides or Kissinger? A Critical Review of Smaller State Diplomacy

  • Baldacchino G
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
26Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This paper seeks a safe passage through these two, equally reductionist, propositions. It deliberately focuses first on a comparative case analysis of two, distinct ‘small state-big state’ contests drawn from the 1970s, seeking to infer and tease out the conditions that enable smaller ‘Lilliputian’ states (whether often or rarely) to beat their respective Goliaths. The discussion is then taken forward to examine whether similar tactics can work in relation to contemporary concerns with environmental vulnerability, with a focus on two other, small island states. Before that, the semiotics of ‘the small state’ need to be explored, since they are suggestive of the perceptions and expectations that are harboured by decision makers at home and abroad and which tend towards the self-fulfilling prophecy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Baldacchino, G. (2009). Thucydides or Kissinger? A Critical Review of Smaller State Diplomacy. In The Diplomacies of Small States (pp. 21–40). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230246911_2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free