The Study of Modern Diplomacy

Durbek Sayfullaev

Tashkent State University of Oriental Studies, Tashkent, Uzbekistan

Keywords: Leaders and Governments, Diplomacy, Non-Military, “Ambassador”, “Servant”, “Slave”, “Resident

Speaker”, Foreign Affairs Institutions.

Abstract: By the end of the 20th century, under the influence of the globalization process, the problem of international

relations became one of the pressing problems that stood out both in theoretical and practical terms, requiring

in-depth and comprehensive research. In fact, the topic of international relations is the constant focus of

attention of representatives of the social and human sciences. In particular, the historical study of diplomacy,

embodying its integral and important facet, is one of the keys to solving many complex problems in political,

economic and cultural relations between countries at the global and regional levels. Based on this, first of all,

we should dwell on the issue of defining the phenomenon of diplomacy and clarify the discussion around this

concept.

1 INTRODUCTION

Diplomacy, which is the subject of our study, is a very

complex phenomenon, and the process, of action is its

main feature. In most sources, diplomacy is defined

as the activity of the government and its special

bodies to implement the state’s foreign policy and

protect the interests of the state and its citizens abroad

- Popov V.I. (2000).

In the diplomatic dictionary, diplomacy is a non-

military means of implementing the state’s foreign

policy, a set of practical measures, methods and ways

used taking into account the specific conditions and

the nature of the tasks being solved; defined as the

official activities of state leaders and governments,

ministers of foreign affairs, foreign affairs

institutions, diplomatic missions abroad in the

implementation of the goals and tasks of the state

foreign policy, protection of the rights and interests of

the state, its institutions and citizens abroad - M.

Nauka (1984).

The question of the origin of the word “diplomat”

has also been solved in science, which clearly

expresses its meaning: it comes from the Greek word

“diploma”, which means official documents

(credentials). In ancient Greece, these documents

were presented to ambassadors as their letters of

attorney and authorized them to act on behalf of the

ruler.

https://orcid.org/0009-0000-9763-6942

Historians of diplomacy believe that the concept of

“ambassador” appears for the first time in the writings

of Julius Caesar (102-44 BC) “On the Gallic War”.

The Celtic word “ambassador” originally meant

“servant”, or “slave”. It is known that a military

commander or a ruler used to send his trusted people

to the other side with a name and said, “I am sending

you my servant.” Printers, heralds and ambassadors

delivered the names of their rulers to other countries.

The word “ambassador” has been used in European

countries since the middle of the 16th century to mean

a permanent representative of the state. Before that,

diplomatic representatives in Italy were called

“resident speakers” - Akhtamzyan A. (2001).

The above-mentioned examples represent the

situation of this concept in a narrow sense (within the

scope of foreign policy). According to experts, the

concept of “diplomacy” in a broad sense represents

the process of communication and representation,

which establishes mutual relations and relations

between not only states but also various entities and

individuals - Strezhneva M.V, & et. al. (2016).

2 THE MAIN RESULTS AND

FINDINGS

In general, the concept of “diplomacy”, which

embodies a special professional activity, was

Sayfullaev, D.

The Study of Modern Diplomacy.

DOI: 10.5220/0012942800003882

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 2nd Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR-2 2023), pages 1021-1028

ISBN: 978-989-758-723-8

1021

recorded in history in the English-language sources

related to chamber studies and state administration in

1645 - Nechaeva Yu. (2011). Since 1693,

“diplomatic” has entered international relations as a

concept reflecting issues of relations between

sovereign countries in Leibniz’s Code of

International Diplomatic Law, since this period,

under the influence of changes in international

relations, the meaning of the term “diplomacy” has

been enriched - Durdyeva A. (2017). The term in its

current sense was first used by the French diplomat

Francois Kahler, who was the ambassador of Louis

XIV - Popov V.I. (2000).

Although the term “diplomat” is used to denote a

person holding a document authorizing him to act on

behalf of his sovereign, the diploma as a double-

folded piece of paper or a double-sided writing board

with text has existed since ancient times. According

to historians, the concepts of “diplomacy” and

“diplomat” were widely used in relations between

states only in the 18th century. But this does not mean

that the concepts of “diplomacy” and “diplomat”

appeared long after the concept of “foreign policy”.

Diplomacy, used as a means of foreign policy

between states and governments in various historical

periods, is recognized as an ancient phenomenon in

connection with wars. The oldest known contract

dates back to the 13th century BC. In 1278 BC, the

Egyptian pharaoh Ramses II made a peace treaty with

the Hittite ruler Hattushil III after a long and

devastating war. According to legends, its text was

engraved on silver pieces, and both in form and

structure, this treaty became a model for other

countries. It has an introduction (i.e. preamble) in

which the purpose of the contract is stated. In

addition, the agreement contains a number of

decisions - the obligations of the parties and the

covenant of loyalty to the commitments - which can

be seen in the following lines: “All the thousand gods

and goddesses inscribed on the silver pieces of the

land of the Hittites, as well as all the thousand gods

and goddesses of Egypt, undertake the obligations of

state ambassadorship. They are witnesses of my

words” - Selyaninov O.P. (1998).

In this regard, political scientist M. Kyrgyzboev,

relying on German-language sources, cites the

following facts: “Human civilization is 56 centuries

long, of which only three centuries passed peacefully.

In history, it is recorded that 8 thousand peace

agreements were concluded (probably

approximately), and most of them were concluded for

“eternal periods”. But their average validity period

did not exceed 10 years”.

It should be noted that diplomatic actions as an

action aimed at preventing wars arose long before the

concept of “diplomat”. As experts have noted,

diplomacy is one of the methods of implementing the

state's foreign policy, a set of non-military practical

measures. Diplomacy is carried out directly by

diplomats in the form of official activities of heads of

state, governments, and foreign relations agencies of

states, and to achieve the goals and objectives of

foreign policy, as well as to protect the interests of

their country and its citizens abroad. Today, when

defining diplomacy, it is always emphasized that it is

a set of forces and tools of governmental and non-

governmental institutions and institutions that

regulate international relations without the use of

force. In the last hundred years, diplomacy has made

it possible to maintain a balance in the system of

international relations in order to prevent one country

from trying to occupy a dominant position and chaos

and leadership among all countries. As Der Derian

points out, modern diplomacy has emerged as a

collective and emotional reflection of states’ ultimate

goal of self-preservation in a hostile environment.

The views of the British theoretician scientist G.

Nicholson, who made a significant contribution to the

study of the phenomenon of diplomacy, are expressed

in the Oxford Dictionary. It is emphasized that

“diplomacy is conducting international relations

through negotiations; the manner in which

negotiations are conducted by ambassadors and

representatives is the task or art of a diplomat”.

One of the leading experts in the field of

international law Sh. Martens said: “Diplomacy is the

science of foreign relations or foreign affairs of the

state, and in a narrower sense, it is the science or art

of negotiation”. The famous British diplomat E. Satou

believes: “Diplomacy is the use of reason and

decency to conduct official relations between the

governments of independent countries, in short, it is

the conduct of business between countries by

peaceful means.”

Accordingly, the theory of modern diplomacy

structurally and functionally includes consideration

of the following issues: 1) the establishment of

diplomatic relations and the creation of diplomatic

missions; 2) organizing the work of the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs to manage diplomatic missions and

the diplomatic corps; 3) organization and structure of

diplomatic missions; 4) protocol and procedures; 5)

diplomatic privileges and immunities; 6) consular

service; 7) multilateral diplomacy and international

organizations; 8) international law and relevant

practice; 9) organization and holding of conferences;

10) cooperation with mass media; 11) humanitarian

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

1022

and cultural cooperation; 12) organization of

information-analytical work and its directions.

So, diplomacy is a complex method of implementing

the state's foreign policy, as well as a multilateral

mechanism that allows the state to have guaranteed

and equal participation in international relations

based on international law and appropriate order.

Diplomacy is often studied as a process, a

historical phenomenon, along with the factors

influencing it in different historical periods. Foreign

policy is one such important factor and encompasses

diplomacy. Therefore, without studying it, it will not

be possible to understand diplomacy as a subject of

research and a concrete phenomenon of social

relations.

In addition, diplomacy is integral to the methods

and tools developed in foreign policy, existing

concepts, orientations, and research conducted within

schools. In addition to classic concepts such as

realism, neorealism, and institutionalism, non-

classical theories such as neo-Marxism, the French

sociological school, and constructivism are also

considered. At the same time, diplomacy has travelled

a long historical path of development, reflecting

scientific-analytical approaches and methods based

on information media, public speaking, and

jurisprudence.

The category “foreign policy’ cannot be imagined

without the system of international relations, because

the system of international relations is formed within

the framework of the foreign policy of the states that

are considered its main participants. Foreign policy is

a tool that ensures the realization of the relations of a

certain country with other countries, needs and

interests in the international arena.

Based on the above-mentioned points, we should

pay special attention to the gradual development of

the theory of international relations. In particular,

despite the fact that international relations have

existed for a long time, this expression appeared

relatively recently. According to the sources, the

concept of “international relations”, which refers to

political relations at the core, was introduced into the

scientific and political sphere by the English

philosopher J. Entered by Bentham.

According to some experts, the concept of

“international relations” in the modern interpretation

means a set of economic, political, ideological, legal,

diplomatic, military, cultural and other types of

relations between states and (in a broad sense)

peoples in the international framework.

The structure of international relations means a set

of mechanisms driving international relations or some

of their parts - the “internal structure”, “location”, and

“order” of the members of the world community, for

example, “the balance of forces between the main

subjects of the international community”, “rules of

behaviour between them”, “means of establishing

international relations”, “international institutions as

mechanisms of international cooperation” are

understood.

“The structure of international relations” can also

be understood as a clear ratio of forces that affect (or

do not affect) decision-making that affects the

stability of the entire system of international relations.

According to its content, the concept of “structure of

international relations” means various elements of

this structure, including subjects, institutions,

characteristics and forms of relations, location and

ratio. At a certain historical stage, this structure

represents the appropriate form of international

relations. Such an approach to the definition of the

“structure of international relations” corresponds to

the concept of “international relations” itself, which

is a form of interaction between members of different

societies as a set of behaviour, regardless of whether

it is directed by the state or not.

Just as the state of the market in the economy is

determined by the influence of several large firms, the

modern structure of international relations also

depends on the ratio of large countries and the

corresponding forces that they coordinate. Changes in

the balance of these forces can lead to a

transformation of the structure of the international

system. However, in reality, the very nature of this

system remains unchanged, since the number of great

powers whose interests do not coincide is limited.

Thus, the state of the structure of international

relations shows its stability and change, cooperation

or conflict relations. The laws of operation and

change of the system of international relations are

expressed in this way.

The theoretical study of international relations

began after the end of the First World War. Experts

point to the opening of the Department of

International Relations at the University of Wales as

the reason for the beginning of this process. The

second wave of the development of the theory of

international relations coincided with the end of the

30s of the 20th centuries. As well-known

representatives of this wave, E. X. Carr and Hans

Morgenthau can be cited. In the theory of

international relations, which emerged between the

two world wars and developed somewhat, the

principle of collective security is given priority as the

main rule of international politics.

If we dwell on the main concepts underlying the

theory of international relations, it is necessary to note

The Study of Modern Diplomacy

1023

realism first. The theory of realism or political

realism, based on the works of Thucydides,

Machiavelli and Hobbes, has dominated international

relations since its inception. At the same time, several

directions of realism were formed, among which the

theories of “statism”, “survival” and “independence

and maturity” should be highlighted.

If statism (in contrast to the liberal theory that

gives priority to non-state organizations, interstate

political structures and international organizations in

international relations) is based on the belief that

national states take the lead in international processes,

then the theory of “survival’ is that the international

political system is governed by anarchy, therefore,

international politics gives priority to national

interests. emphasizes that it is based on the struggle

between donor countries. Realists who are supporters

of the third approach emphasize that in order to

survive in international relations, it is impossible to

rely on any partner, therefore, it is necessary for each

country to work on itself, conduct an independent

policy and protect its national interests. Generally

speaking, realists assert that competition exists in

international relations and that each state as an

autonomous rational entity must fight for its security,

interests, and sovereignty (including through

diplomatic means) based on its own national interests.

Kenneth Waltz is the ideological leader of the

neo-realism (or structural realism) direction, a

modern theory formed on the basis of realism (his

ideas were first expressed in the work “The Theory of

International Politics”). Structural realism proposed

by Waltz means structure, firstly, the system of

international relations based on anarchy, and

secondly, the distribution of their opportunities in

relations between states. K. Waltz questions the

realist approach to state power based solely on

military power and instead proposes the concept of

state power as a combination of different (social,

cultural, economic, and political) domains.

Liberalism is one of the major and important

directions in the theory of international relations,

representatives of this direction say that the nature of

the state is determined not by its capabilities, but by

its priority interests. Liberalism, in contrast to realism

(which considers the state as a unitary actor), notes

that the state must rely on pluralistic actions in its

activities. Therefore, the political regime and

economic system of this or that country are taken into

account in foreign relations based on its priority

interests. Liberalism is not limited to the security of

the state but implies the implementation of relations

through structures, organizations and individuals

engaged in business. Consequently, liberalism

recognizes international relations not as an anarchic

system, but as a more complex structure.

For example, a country’s film industry can spread its

culture to the world. This situation shows the

potential and power of culture in international

relations. Another tenet of this theory is the

recognition that mutual benefit can only be achieved

through cooperation and interaction. At the same

time, the above-mentioned postulates are also the

main factor of stability.

The neoliberal concept expresses the main ideas

of liberalism, while at the same time, it develops

organically with the process of globalization and

recognizes that it penetrates into all aspects of the

socio-economic life of countries. In this process, it is

emphasized that the role of transnational corporations

will increase, and the interests of the state will fall to

the second level. The concept of post liberalism

related to this theory gives priority to international

organizations in international relations and further

lowers the position of state interests.

A relatively new direction in the theory of

international relations is the concept of

constructivism, which was formed as a result of the

fall of the Berlin Wall and the decline of the idea of

communism in Western Europe. It arose on the basis

of debates about scientific methods in the study of

international relations and the role of theory in the

formation of international forces. Constructivism is a

theory that questions the ideas of neorealists and

neoliberals.

Constructivism recognizes that international (foreign)

policy is formed on the basis of uncontested ideas,

collective values, culture and social identifications.

Supporters of this direction prove that the reality

happening in the international sphere is based on

social values that give a new meaning to the material

world (close to the idea of socialism). At the same

time, constructivists recognize anarchy as a

permanent consistency in the system of international

relations and emphasize that it is not permanent and

has subjective reasons. They prioritize social norms

over national security in interstate relations.

The theory of Marxism and neo-Marxism

emphasizes economic and material aspects in the

system of international relations, without denying the

concept of “state” of realists and liberals. Marxists

recognize the international system as an integrated

capitalist system focused on the accumulation of large

amounts of funds (capital). In general, the mistake

and shortcoming of the proponents of this theory is

their one-sided approach.

Therefore, although the theory of international

relations as a science was formed in the new and most

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

1024

recent historical periods, it developed the concepts of

studying the processes in international relations,

including the theory and practice of diplomacy, from

different perspectives. Up to now, in the theory of

international relations, there are mainly two

directions, that is, realism and liberalism.

It can be said that diplomacy is a tool and a

component of foreign policy. Foreign policy,

according to its tasks, is somewhat broader and

multifaceted and is part of international relations.

Foreign policy implemented by diplomatic means, in

turn, is the art of managing state affairs in the system

of international relations. The foreign policy of the

state represents the main goals and tasks of its activity

in international relations. In this sense, diplomacy

emerges as one of the main means of achieving these

tasks and goals.

Diplomacy is divided into economic, multilateral,

parliamentary, regional, military, economic

diplomacy, public diplomacy, etc. In fact, diplomacy

cannot be studied without separating it from practice

and without analysing the goals and tasks, principles

and priorities of foreign policy. Only if there is a

certain result in diplomatic activity, the mechanism,

organizational and legal foundations of diplomacy

can be of interest for research.

Diplomacy is interesting in terms of the

effectiveness of foreign policy, and the achievement

of military-political, economic, cultural and other

goals and tasks of the state in the system of

international relations. Among these goals and tasks,

ensuring security and internal socio-economic growth

emerges as the main tasks.

Most scholars of diplomacy and foreign policy

come from this approach. For example, G. A.

Khidoyatov, commenting on the difference between

the concepts of “diplomacy” and “foreign policy”,

also emphasized that diplomacy is a political tool for

the implementation of foreign policy. Therefore, the

official activity of state leaders, governments and

special foreign relations agencies that implement the

tasks and goals of the state’s foreign policy is called

“diplomacy”. Also, the activity of protecting the

rights and interests of the state abroad is a separate

area of state activity. “Many international disasters

have been accompanied by poorly executed or

unscrupulous diplomacy. At the same time, many

achievements in world politics and international

relations have been achieved through outstanding

diplomats and high-level diplomacy”.

At any historical stage, the tasks of diplomacy are

directed to the implementation of the foreign policy

strategy for the protection and promotion of foreign

political interests. Strategy is created based on

guiding ideas, goals, principles and long-term

interests. Interests arise as a reaction to the situation

formed in the system of international relations and

can be short-term or long-term.

In this context, when we talk about strategy, we mean

the long-term benefits and values that must be

realized for the desired result in the future, the

possibilities and prospects of their implementation,

risks and hidden difficulties, and the family tree

(hierarchy) of goals.

National interests, in fact, consist of a set of

specific political and economic priorities, goals and

means of their implementation. National interests are

mainly determined by the geopolitical status of the

state in the region and in the world in general, the ratio

(balance) of forces in the system of international

relations and in the region, and its needs in the field

of socio-economic development.

“Diplomacy” emerges as a basic concept

determined by the priority of the goals and essence of

foreign political activity, based on the term “national

interests” applied to its tasks and the essence of

diplomatic activity in general. From this point of

view, diplomacy is not only a peaceful means of

ensuring and protecting national interests but also

their main representative in the international arena.

National interests have the highest priority even in

relation to legal norms. For example, according to the

doctrine of “political realism” by J. Kenan and G.

Morgenthau, “the iron law of international politics is

that legal obligations must override national

interests”.

If we consider that diplomacy is a task, that is, an

activity related to the function of implementing or

managing bilateral or multilateral relations, the

protection and promotion of national interests is its

main content. At the national level, as a rule, this task

is entrusted to the ministries of foreign affairs, and it

is carried out by professional diplomats working both

inside the country and abroad (employees of

embassies and permanent missions registered in

international organizations and special institutions).

But now, together with professional diplomats,

representatives of other state and non-state

organizations authorized by the country’s

government to conduct negotiations can perform this

task. At the international level, the management

function is carried out by international organizations,

which are mainly part of the UN system.

Analysis of recent studies and scientific

publications shows that emerging scientific theories

are causing serious debates due to their inability to

adequately explain existing problems and reality.

This situation can be explained by the emergence of

The Study of Modern Diplomacy

1025

a number of competing views and scientific concepts

that claim to explain and predict the changes that have

taken place in the past decades and their impact on

diplomacy, and the scientific debate between them is

intensifying.

At the same time, it is necessary to note that the

following principles prevail in international relations:

the state is the main moving force (participant) of

international relations; the emergence of new actors

(non-governmental organizations, transnational

corporations, etc.) in the international arena;

recognition of the role of international law in almost

all paradigms; the increasing role of the economy;

recognition that today's world is becoming more

globalized, although it is understood and evaluated

differently in all paradigms.

Based on the above principles (tendencies), it is

necessary to talk about the bi- and multi-polar world,

which is the basis of the current conflicting

international relations and is changing the world

today. The end of the 20th century and the beginning

of the 21st century, reflecting such processes, are

distinguished by the incomparable geopolitical

significance and scale of changes in the world. These

are unprecedented changes, which require not only

deep thinking but also a reassessment of views and

mechanisms of mutual relations formed between

countries; creating the need to develop completely

new approaches to the study of modern international

relations.

Russian researcher S. Karaganov said, “The

relatively orderly and stable period of

confrontation, which intensified after the end of

the Second World War, has come to an end. The

end of the Cold War did not actually mean the

beginning of a new order. At the present time, it

seems that the situation on earth does not require

a war of all against all, but the wave of fierce

competition is growing”. Also, according to the

researcher, “the balance of power in international

politics is changing and rapid redistribution is taking

place. The rules of the second half of the 20th century,

which the ideologues of the “unipolar state” wanted

to de facto abolish - the inevitable respect for

independence and territorial integrity, the overt non-

interference in internal affairs, the respect for the

interests and security spheres of the largest powers,

really no longer work”.

The above-mentioned expert stated that the

following macro-principles (changes) indicate a

transition to a new bipolar system. “There are new

macro-principles emerging through the chaos,

albeit less clearly, that seem likely to shape the

future of the world”.

The first of these is the emergence of a new

bipolar system. Now two centres of world economy

and politics are emerging. Realizing that its hopes of

consolidating a unipolar world were fading, the US

began to limit China’s progress (mainly through

economic and political means) and create a structure

centred on itself. It should be noted that currently

China is becoming one of the leading countries in the

world in terms of economic power and is likely to

become the first in the next decade. In the near future,

in terms of GDP per capita and military potential, it

may not overtake the United States, but it may close

the gap between them.

Some experts believe that the use of a bipolar

system model in assessing the emerging system of

international relations is completely wrong. For

example, F. Fukuyama's idea of “the end of history”

did not justify itself. Because liberal-democratic

values have spread to a certain extent, but they were

immediately discredited by their sponsors and they

are not expected to win in the near future, so the

international system cannot be established in a proper

way. S. Huntington’s concept of “clash of

civilizations” has not been confirmed on a global

scale. Clashes of civilizations, however important, are

neither the only nor the driving factor of the

international system.

Experts predicted the first decade of the 20th

century as the final stage of a “post-bipolar” transition

that would culminate in a multipolar world. However,

the change of the international political system has

not come to an end, the increasing confrontation

between the USA and Russia is causing new conflicts

and destabilization of international relations.

The impact of the SCO on changes in the world order

is gradually increasing. In particular, the accession of

India and Pakistan to the SCO in 2016, and the

prospects for membership of a number of other

countries are being considered, causing geopolitical

changes. While China plays the role of economic

leadership in this organization, other powerful

participants such as Russia, India, and Iran are able to

balance its influence. This new centre for economic

cooperation and security is becoming a kind of

gesture for the West, which is trying to unite, but this

does not mean that it is the polar opposite -

cooperation and competition are dialectically

combined.

Z. Brzezinski points to the unsurpassed status of the

United States today in world politics and economics,

asserting that it has indeed “become the first and only

truly secular state”. Today’s world is experiencing a

political renaissance almost everywhere - millions of

people are busy searching for a bright future. In

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

1026

addition, there is a redistribution of power in the

world, and several new contenders for a dominant

position in world politics are emerging in the East.

Therefore, today’s world is less inclined to submit

(even militarily) to a single state like the United States

of America, which is powerful and politically

influential.

In this situation, Huntington said, “The United

States, together with Great Britain and France, will

retain their position as great powers that make key

decisions in the field of politics and security.”

According to G. Kissenger, “the new model of the

global economic order largely results from the nature

of American Chinese relations in recent years.” He

also emphasizes that “making Russia an integral part

of the international system is the main task of the

current international order.”

Currently, the following principles influencing

the development of diplomacy are gaining strength:

geopolitical confrontation, manifested in differences

in approaches to conflicts between Western countries

and Russia; use of force or threat of force, as well as

a display of force; increased mistrust among major

players; the emergence of new hotbeds of tension

with elements of military conflicts; creation of “fake

states” by terrorists and their becoming independent

centres of influence; the emergence of

geoinformation competition in some regions of the

world, including Central Asia. Recently, with the help

of modern information technologies, some countries

are trying to use international non-governmental

organizations for their own interests. Such

organizations have become an effective tool in

promoting and protecting the interests of a number of

countries. They are effectively using the internet and

social media. Currently, there are about 50,000

websites, chats, forums, blog user groups, video-

sharing sites, and social networks related to terrorist

activities.

Modern science does not have the same view of

the essence and main manifestations of this

phenomenon. It is more about a set of changes that

are taking place in both parallel and interrelated

movements that are having a profound effect on the

global economy and politics. The emergence and

constant discussion of the concepts of new world

order, “bipolar” and “multipolar world” in scientific

and political circles indicate that it is impossible to

form an opinion in advance about the modern system

of international relations, especially after the collapse

of the socialist camp.

I. Mavlanov, taking into account the above-

mentioned points, the principles of integration, which

are one of the components of the globalization

process observed in almost all regions of the world

and emphasized by various theoretical schools; When

talking about the methods and means of solving the

problems that arise, almost all theoretical schools

note that they place high hopes on diplomacy.

Therefore, due to changes in the system of

international relations, the tasks of diplomacy in

foreign policy are increasing. It is known that the state

has additional tools and methods to fulfil its foreign

policy tasks. For example, the ministries

(departments) of foreign affairs and defence are

instruments of state foreign policy. They have similar

tasks in the field of foreign policy. The mission of the

Foreign Ministry is to establish contacts with a view

to resolving the problem through negotiations, while

the mission of the Ministry of Defence is to resolve a

foreign political issue through the use of weapons or

the threat of using them. As can be seen clearly, the

activities of these ministries differ according to the

content of their tasks. But according to the form, the

activities of both ministries consist of processes

subject to certain, but mutually different rules.

Diplomacy is the only (albeit extremely unique)

peaceful instrument of state foreign policy. On the

other hand, war is a particularly powerful tool of

foreign policy.

“The foreign policy of the state is carried out

within the framework of the international system that

interacts with the foreign policy of other countries

and their allies and is influenced by international

organizations. The foreign policy behaviour of the

state is related not only to internal factors, but also to

the state of the international system, which, on the one

hand, limits foreign policy, and on the other hand,

allows certain foreign political actions.”

Thus, the tasks of diplomatic activity aimed at

fulfilling the foreign political tasks of the state by

peaceful means are formed on the basis of certain

strategic foreign political tasks and are directed to the

realization of urgent national interests. At the same

time, national interests are aligned with the processes

taking place in the system of international relations.

When studying the historical experience and

modern processes of Uzbek diplomacy, it is necessary

to take into account the so-called “oriental diplomacy

theory”. Diplomatic relations did not develop only in

the West, therefore, the principles of their

development, the theory and the methodology of their

implementation are not observed only in those

countries. The diplomacy of Eastern countries has its

own characteristics. Some countries that were

isolated from the outside world (Japan, China) or

under colonial conditions (India, some African

countries) were forced to respond with cunning,

The Study of Modern Diplomacy

1027

tyranny, and even aggression. For a long time,

Eastern diplomacy had to work with a powerful

adversary and proceed with extreme caution, with the

end in mind, sometimes deliberately dragging out

negotiations in order to extract more from the partner.

At the same time, in the diplomacy of the Eastern

countries, figuratively speaking, the “spirit of the

Eastern market” is felt. Researchers suggest that this

phrase does not have a general theoretical meaning,

but rather serves to describe the behaviour of some

diplomats and, of course, some countries that do not

necessarily belong to the East. Although the modern

diplomacy of the Eastern countries has its own

characteristics, these characteristics are specific to

each country and do not necessarily correspond to the

above definition.

When speaking about the Central Asian region,

the diplomacy of the states in this region had its own

aspects and aspects. Here, as a rule, diplomatic

etiquette (etiquette) and customs, differ from

European traditions, some peculiarities of diplomatic

behaviour aimed at the peaceful resolution of

conflicts and concessions at any cost are visible. We

can cite a vivid example from history that shows the

subtleties of Eastern diplomacy.

A problem appeared during the preparations for

the first meeting of the first Russian ambassador who

visited Bukhara Emirate with the Emir of Bukhara.

According to local tradition, the emir should have

greeted the ambassador sitting on his throne,

surrounded by courtiers, with a serious look.

According to the diplomatic protocol adopted in

Europe, the rule of greeting the standing ambassador

with a smile followed. Bukhara and Russian

diplomats thought a lot and finally found a way out of

such a delicate situation. A Russian officer entered

the Kabul palace with an open Koran in his hand. In

this situation, of course, it was natural for Amir to

stand before the Bible. The Amiri of Bukhara did the

same. As a result, everyone was satisfied with the

event.

3 CONCLUSION

At the same time, it is taken into account that the

countries of Central Asia have never been the same

ethnically, linguistically, and even religiously. In this

area, many diplomatic tasks were solved through

dynastic marriages, as well as by subtly managing the

internal and external political interests of rivals.

Historical experience in international relations and

current intense processes require states to frequently

change their foreign policy strategies and directions

and adapt to the conditions. This situation, in turn, is

the reason for the improvement of the methods and

tools of diplomacy. Therefore, the above-mentioned

situations require the study of modern diplomacy and

the drawing of relevant conclusions based on this, and

ultimately the development of proposals aimed at its

improvement.

REFERENCES

Popov V.I. Modern diplomacy: theory and practice: Course

of lectures. Part 1: Diplomacy - science and art / YES

MFA of the Russian Federation. – M.: Scientific book,

2000. – 576 p.

Diplomatic Dictionary / Rep. ed. A. A. Gromyko. T. 1. –

M.: Nauka, 1984. – P. 327.

Akhtamzyan A. A. Evolution of the basic concepts and

terms of diplomacy // Russian diplomacy: history and

modernity. – M.: ROSSPEN, 2001. – P. 387–397.

Strezhneva M.V., Rudenkova D.E. European Union:

architecture of foreign policy. – M.: IMEMO RAS,

2016. – P. 119.

Cameralist (German cameralist, French cameralistique,

Latin camera – treasury, organization) is a special cycle

of administrative and economic sciences taught in

European universities in the Middle Ages (XVI-XVIII).

Chamberlistics got its name from the chamber

organizations founded by medieval European princes,

dukes and kings who were considered the owners of

large farms. In the framework of chamber studies,

managers of large zamindars were trained in

universities and special chamber schools. //bse.sci-

lib.com/article058245.html

Nechaeva Yu. V. Origin of diplomacy // Diplomatic

Bulletin of Transnistria. – 2011. – No. 6. – P. 45.

Durdyeva A. A. Diplomatic structures and instruments of

diplomacy of the European Union and member states:

correlation and relationship. dis. ...cand. watered Sci. –

M., 2017.

Popov V.I. Modern diplomacy: theory and practice: Course

of lectures. Part 1: Diplomacy - science and art / YES

MFA of the Russian Federation. – M.: Scientific book,

2000. – P. 13.

Selyaninov O.P. Notebooks on the diplomatic service of

states. – M.: MGIMO, 1998. – P. 10.

Kyrgyzboev M. Political science: a guide for students of

higher educational institutions. - T.: New age

generation, 2013. - p. 486.

PAMIR-2 2023 - The Second Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR

1028