The Institute’s Interdisciplinary Master’s programme (MINT), for which you are responsible, offers seven thematic specialisations as well as a common core and Applied Research Projects (ARPs). All of them offer insights into the generic and specific aspects of new diplomacy, in a number of ways. Why is it important for you to address these issues in the MINT?
First, new diplomacy is useful for diplomats serving their national governments who realise that the ramifications of diplomacy are long and intertwined, encompassing not only war and peace, but also environmental and trade issues, international public health and human rights, mobility and migrations, gender, race, diversity, sports, arts, and culture. Second, “new diplomacy” is a rich and useful term for non-traditional diplomats who take a seat and actively participate in specific political international contexts. These actors, coming from the private sector, civil society, philanthropic foundations, etc., do not have exactly the same status and perhaps do not benefit from the same conditions government representatives have, though they have the necessary legitimacy to make their voices heard and to influence other stakeholders. MINT students, no matter their specialisation, are warmly invited to reflect on the many ways in which they could become diplomats exerting influence whatever their next professional lives will be.
How is diplomacy addressed in the MINT programme?
The MINT addresses diplomacy in a number of different and specific ways. First, in our specialisations: for instance, the way we study global health at the Institute is quite unique and our students come to the Institute because of health diplomacy, which is not taught in many academic institutions around the world. Second, we connect diplomacy with our transversal themes, i.e. democracy, governance, education, sustainability, justice and technology. They are present in the core part of the programme and expose our students to important issues that are transversal by nature. For instance, several classes address AI diplomacy and tech diplomacy. In classes on democracy, we study advocacy, protest movements, etc., not because we assimilate everything to diplomacy, but to distinguish an advocate from a diplomat and to show the extent to which overlaps exist. Finally, we address diplomacy through our guest speakers: some of them are highly experienced diplomats who come to share their invaluable expertise and knowledge with our students.
How have diplomacy and multilateralism evolved in recent years?
International governance and international institutions have changed and will continue to change. This is normal and physiological. What is new is that a plethora of non-state actors has become an integral part of the international system in a number of different contexts. They are present alongside traditional policymakers with specific agendas, defending and protecting the interests of multifarious constituencies. Plenty of labels exist — though they are not necessarily useful — to identify new diplomats and their forms of diplomacy: corporate diplomacy, sports diplomacy, environmental diplomacy, humanitarian diplomacy, the diplomacy of cities, civil society diplomacy. Each of these terms encompasses micro- and macrocosms and a plethora of actors, with different room for manoeuvre, various points of access to decision-making processes, and multiple ways of influencing (or not) those processes. What we teach our students is the importance of identifying all stakeholders, power-relations, the interstices of power, and potential blind spots. We encourage our students to take a sound analytical stance. In their professional lives, they will take on political responsibilities. We teach them to stand by the principles of the Institute: peace, cooperation, dialogue, rejection of violence, mutual respect, and the very diplomatic art of compromise.
In their professional lives, our students will decide whether to embrace or stand against such evolutions. Our duties as teachers stop before these decisions, with one exception: the Applied Research Projects (ARPs).
With the ARPs, students venture into the professional world. This is when and where research meets policy. During their ARPs most students get a very tangible sense of the changes of multilateralism, the interconnectedness of issues: how, for instance, environmental issues impact health, endanger democracies, increase the chances of war, trigger massive migrations, impoverish trade, education, and the whole fabric of societies. ARPs are a perfect transition from a purely academic context to situations where the changes in diplomacy and multilateralism happen in real time, when new actors step in thanks to technological progress or new financial tools, etc.
How do you see diplomats and diplomacy evolving in the future?
Traditional and new diplomats will adapt as they did in the past, hence predictions are hard to make. There is something about diplomacy that is much closer to my heart, and, I believe, close to the spirit of our Institute. In my view, diplomacy is intrinsically connected with a concerted effort to avoid or stop violence. Diplomacy is about dialogue and the ability to talk with everybody. Diplomacy is about international cooperation and peace. Hence, it remains a fundamental aspect of the education of all of the Institute’s students, not just MINT students.
How will the programme meet these evolutions?
We are currently working on the amendment of semester four (the last of the four semesters of the MINT). We intend to offer 30 ECTS, the equivalent of the master thesis, for students who might be more oriented towards a professional career than an academic one. Diplomacy is at the top of our list. The programme is evolving, and that is its nature. Changing does not mean being at the mercy of winds and tides — we have a direction, a remit, and principles that are solidly anchored in a school that is almost one hundred years old.
This article was published in Globe #35, the Graduate Institute Review.
