[Radix] Disaster Diplomacy Updates

[Ilan Kelman]

Regarding some disaster diplomacy http://www.disasterdiplomacy.org updates, three publications are below, plus see also:

1. Can disaster diplomacy work to address climate change? AlertNet Blog http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/61843/2009/11/2-104021-1.htm

2. South Korea sends North Korea swine flu vaccines. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8419775.stm "It marks the first government-level assistance from the South to the poor communist North in nearly two years".

As always, commentaries, discussion, questions, and answers are always welcome, through this email list or on the disaster diplomacy website.

Ilan

---------------

Gaillard, J.-C., I. Kelman, and M.F. Orillos. 2009. "US-Philippines Military Relations After the Mt Pinatubo Eruption in 1991: A Disaster Diplomacy Perspective". European Journal of East Asian Studies, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 301-330.

This paper explores the impact of the 1991 Mt Pinatubo eruption on the US-Republic of the Philippines military relations through the lens of disaster diplomacy. Disaster diplomacy focuses on how and
why disaster-related activities (e.g. mitigation, prevention and response) do and do not yield diplomatic gains, looking mainly at disaster-related activities affecting diplomacy rather than the reverse. Disaster diplomacy
'pathways', identified in previous studies, help to explain how the Filipino and US governments approached the negotiations for renewing the lease of the US military facilities in the Philippines in the context of two bases being
damaged by a volcanic eruption. The paper further addresses six underpinning questions of disaster diplomacy for this case study. These questions assist in answering this paper's central research question: how much did the 1991 eruption of Mt Pinatubo influence US-Philippines military cooperation due to the concurrent diplomatic talks between the two governments regarding the lease renewal for the US bases in the Philippines? The answer is that disaster-related activities due to the Mt Pinatubo eruption had a short-term impact on US-Philippines diplomacy. This impact was seen in the context of significant connections already existing, through the long-standing
US-Philippines military links. Over the long-term, non-disaster factors had a more significant impact on US-Philippines military diplomacy than Mt Pinatubo, adding to the list of case studies for which disaster diplomacy's impact was limited.

---------------

Ganapti, E., I. Kelman, and T. Koukis. 2010. "Analyzing Greek-Turkish Disaster-Related Cooperation: A Disaster Diplomacy Perspective". Cooperation and Conflict, in press.

This paper contributes to the disaster diplomacy literature by examining the conditions under which disasters can lead to long-term disaster-related collaboration (e.g., in disaster response, recovery or risk reduction) both at the governmental and non-governmental levels amongst states in conflict. In particular, the paper focuses on the role of the 1999 earthquakes in enhancing such collaboration between Greece and Turkey over the last decade. While acknowledging the diversity and complexity of disaster diplomacy situations, the paper suggests that disasters can lead to long-term disaster-related cooperation amongst states in conflict when: (1) one party providing disaster relief to another party is followed by a similar reciprocal gesture (i.e. tit-for-tat diplomacy); (2) there is a realization and acceptance that neighbors should come to each other's assistance in times of disasters; and, (3) there is an enabling broader context (e.g., a rapprochement process) conducive to sustaining the long-term cooperation.

---------------

Kelman, I. 2010.  "Tying Disaster Diplomacy in Knots".  Overton, G.T. (ed.), Chapter in Foreign Policy in an Interconnected World, Hauppauge, New York, U.S.A.

Disaster diplomacy (http://www.disasterdiplomacy.org) examines how and why disaster-related activities, such as preparedness before a disaster or response after a disaster, do and do not reduce conflict and induce cooperation. The wide variety of case studies has led to efforts to create typologies for them in order to seek a predictive model indicating the circumstances under which various forms of disaster diplomacy will and will not manifest. The most common outcome is that, for influencing diplomacy, disaster-related factors are dwarfed by non-disaster factors. That is, the main observation is that disaster diplomacy rarely succeeds, leading to the main prediction that disaster diplomacy is unlikely to have many successes.

A key element in the general failure of disaster diplomacy so far, and the challenge of robust predictions beyond the overarching conclusion of the general failure, is the number and diversity of the influences on disasters, on diplomacy, and on their interconnectedness. In particular, disaster diplomacy prior to a disaster tends to fail because the parties dealing with disaster risk reduction prefer to separate their work from diplomacy. That is, they wish to reduce interconnectedness. In contrast, disaster diplomacy following a disaster tends to fail due to too many disaster-related and diplomacy-related players with multiple relationships at multiple levels. That is, too much interconnectedness exists to permit the development and maintenance of strict links between disaster-related activities and diplomacy.

Overall, hope seems to be misplaced in disaster diplomacy to resolve either disaster or diplomacy challenges. Even so, optimism is still feasible for disaster-related activities providing a useful connection point to pursue long-term reduction of enmity. Foreign policy in an interconnected world‏ means that disaster diplomacy might rarely be at the top of the foreign policy or disaster risk reduction agendas, but the extensive interconnectedness nonetheless leads to opportunities for positive disaster diplomacy results.
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you’re up to on Facebook.
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9691816
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ecie.org/pipermail/radix/attachments/20091218/1e88f0a4/attachment.htm