Positioning the third wave of middle power diplomacy
Institutional elevation, practice limitations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4739341 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Andrew F Cooper (0000-0003-2195-4367, University of Waterloo, corresponding author), Emel Parlar Dal (0000-0001-6508-6069, Marmara University, Marmara, Turkey) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 71 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 516-528 |
| Publication date | 2016-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0020-7020 • E-ISSN: 2052-465X |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020702016686385 |
| OpenAlex | W2586564080 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 27 |
This article argues that middle power diplomacy can be identified as having gone through three distinct waves. The first is connected with the immediate post-1945 global order, with a focus on multilateralism via the United Nations and related bodies. The second moved to ad hoc bursts of activism related to specific issue area niches. The third and current wave, by contrast, is embedded in the informal institutionalization associated with the G20. Just as the BRICS have used the G20 as a catalyst for differentiated activities both around and independent of the G20, the "missing middle" in the G20 (countries increasingly portrayed as middle powers beyond both the BRICS and the G7) have begun to explore the possibility of collective action. MIKTA (Mexico, Indonesia, Turkey, South Korea, and Australia), while possibly a significant advance in global governance, has the potential of hardening the categories of countries identified as middle powers. At the same time, the MIKTA countries face a number of serious constraints in terms of this global reach. Institutional elevation is compromised by practice limitations, most notably the hold of regional imperatives
Collective action · Democracy · Democratization · Development economics · Diplomacy · Economics · Global governance · Institutionalisation · Middle East · Middle power · Multilateralism · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Sociology · European Union Policy and Governance · International Development and Aid · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law
Does transactionalism possess smartness? Reconstructing Türkiye’s approach towards the EU from 2017 to 2025
Profiling Middle Powers in Global Governance and the Turkish Case
Collaboration and competition in Northeast Asia
Beyond Great Powers
Collaborative Platforms and Diversifying Partnerships of South-South Cooperation and Triangular Cooperation
Brokering Peace
Indonesia's Russia‐Ukraine war stance and the Global South
Hedging strategy of Turkey in great power competition
Türkiye’s multi-stakeholder engagement in global governance
Re‐Imagining Middle Powers in an Age of Global Transformation
Status Politics
Between a Rock and a Hard Place
Towards an autonomous European defense? A comparative analysis of French, Polish and German perspectives in the post-Brexit era
Navigating rough seas
Global IR and the middle power concept
Are all middle powers good international citizens? The contrasting case of Vietnam
Human rights and British foreign policy
Branding K-Redd+ and its implications for South Korea's middle power diplomacy
Bolstering middle power standing
Technological hedging and differentiated responses of Southeast Asian countries to U.S.–China technological competition
Middle Power Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific
The makings of a moral superpower
Rising Middle Powers
Back to the past
Rule‐takers, rule‐makers, or rule‐promoters? Turkey and Mexico's role as rising middle powers in global economic governance
The resilience of the US–Turkey alliance
Middle power and power asymmetry
| Unique citing works | 27 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 3,38 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2026 (9) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 26 |