China's diplomacy from policy to the principle of

e707004304

China's diplomacy: from strategy to the principles of

(Outline) the outset it: I only have a superficial knowledge of economics and constitutional science background is entirely for diplomatic issues are illiterate. However, it has a lot of constitutional issues and, while there are a number of recent controversy, I can not help but have the urge to express their views. Therefore, this discussion of diplomatic issues, but as a citizen, from the position of public intellectuals, to a layman's common sense of it, even during basic conceptual content misuse,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Shangqi patronizing the reader understanding. First, the principle of diplomacy and foreign policy between countries constitute cooperation and the international community exchange system. In this system, a small country can rely on short-term exchange of benefits and adequate living space. But a big country, wishing to exert its influence, who wish to achieve steady long-term interests of its own, For his strength and position of the corresponding regional and international respect, who wishes to become a worried international community and justice and promoters, must pursue a long-term based on the principle of diplomacy.Power diplomacy is not - at least not entirely - the strength of the contest, but a legitimacy in the international community for the fight. If countries are fully convinced that the strength of the decisive role, then, do not need diplomacy, just the threat to each other for power, direct recourse to the threat of strength after failed - such as sanctions, but most important is the use of force - can be. But in a quite civilized international community, diplomatic arises, because, it is believed, in the international community, there is a certain The strength of the people are often obscured behind the strength of the legitimacy of the use of basis. Because in the real struggle between the forces of legitimacy are often mixed together, and give people the impression of strength is always more profound shock, rather than on the legitimacy of the investigation. Therefore, the foreign research dollars question is: What kind of things can give a country's diplomatic aspirations to legitimacy. International law and practice can give a government's legitimacy demands and behavior, and, often able to give it legitimacy. However, sometimes, due to international law and practice itself is illegitimate, therefore, legitimacy, and in some cases, does not guarantee legitimacy. Many of the United Nations resolutions, though legitimate, but it is improper. On the contrary, there are many legitimate acts of national and individual, but not in line with existing international legal system. Fundamentally, the legitimacy of the concept from the world beyond the reality, from the people's sense of justice, from the moral, from the pursuit of its vision is universal and have the greatest appeal force, that the demands from the people for their implication in the value of the generally recognized. These are the principles of foreign content, simply, this so-called principle is in line with the people of a common sense of morality, the value of universal sense of justice goals. The value of the objective, to themselves, to their own nationals, diplomatic rivals (including allies, partners, third party and the enemy), to show the international community in general, a vision. Simply, in modern civilized society, a country's foreign To succeed, the value of the target first need to obtain their national identity. The goals of these values in the diplomatic situation for professionals in business, but also for their choice of a border demarcation, although not very clear, but with a strong binding. About the universal value, the more extensive the range. Other hand, this value of the objective being to get its international status of a country's fundamental factor. A State can rely on the strength and force to obtain a temporary position of strength, but if the support of worthless identity, its status is fragile and short-lived. The value of the common goals can be allies together. There can appeal the value of a cost to the world that the direction of civilization and justice. For the enemy, the value itself is the most powerful weapons. We can say that the U.S. overthrow of the Saddam regime, not the Fourth Infantry Division and the First Marine Expeditionary Force, but the U.S. sense of the value of freedom and democracy held in force, or from another angle can be More precisely, Saddam is not dead to their lack of force, but the death of its moral value of self-destruction, this moral value not only to lose the sympathy and support from the international community - although there are a number of countries for their own cynical personal gain at the expense of the moral values and to the arrogance of the tyranny of Saddam Hussein - and lose the legitimacy of Saddam's ruthless abandon the Iraqi people quickly. Similarly, the United States in the Iraq war formed the These voluntary alliances, the most striking is that by the victims of the totalitarian countries of Eastern Europe. In modern international relations, the principle is the decisive role. Today, highly developed in the media, diplomacy, largely as a stage performance, received by the audience - its people, allies of the people, look on the international community, even an enemy of the people - the recognition is essential. A kind of inspiring values and vision, enabling a country's diplomatic aspirations with an irresistible moral force. Unfortunately, in foreign affairs and research professionals engaged in diplomacy, still immersed in Europe since the 18th century to Machiavellianism as the fundamental strength of traditional diplomacy, diplomacy is often easy to overlook the value of underlying factors. In fact, since the latter half of 20th century diplomacy, with a clear ideological nature. Occurred during the Cold War and the many hot war - the Chinese civil war, the Korean War, Indo-China war, the Angolan civil war, Afghanistan war, and so on - all implies profound value orientation. Completely crossed the enemy is ideology. Sort of dangerous enemies, but also to meet, at least not opposed to the strength of their own value based on the degree. The two opposing fluctuations between the value, to a large extent determines the physical meaning of the two sides on the battlefield on the advance and retreat. The collapse of the Soviet empire, in the final analysis, but is a value, a vision, a moral concept, an ideal result of the collapse of it. Often the difference between the U.S. diplomatic idealism and realism, the two ideas. However, fundamentally speaking, this difference showed more sway on a strategy, rather than differences in principle. America, as the only one not to resort to race, territory and not to resort to an ideal and good condensed from the nation-state polity, based on the principle of its foreign-based ever. It is this style of diplomacy, with the rising status of the United States and to dominate international affairs, to overturn the European diplomacy Markey Machiavelli tradition, the entire world's diplomatic shift to value, moral, political system as a standard to distinguish the enemy , that turned the principle of diplomacy. How to determine the principles of diplomatic activity from the point of view, only with clear and accepted principles, to be able to ensure the continuity of foreign policy fundamentally. For the outside world is concerned, it means that foreign policy predictability. So the question is: how to find the principle of a country's foreign? A fundamental sense, an extension of foreign but domestic. The principle of diplomacy regime is a natural extension of the structural principle, but the structural properties of a system of government. A system of government will or explicitly or implicitly embodies a set of basic values, ethics, hopes and ideals. The intrinsic value of government, constitutes the principle of diplomacy. Human through continuous trial and error, has become a mature experience and knowledge about the system of government. In short, only the free constitutional government can establish a long-term stability for the country's institutional framework. If a system of government itself is unstable, then the principle of diplomacy can not be stable. From this perspective, foreign scholars and policy makers must have a broad perspective, regimes must be greatly concerned about the issue. But the Chinese Foreign scholars often ignore the problem. In the analysis, when a dispute between Europe and America, tend to exaggerate the strategic interests of both sides of conflict, while ignoring the underlying values of both regimes of homogeneity, ie, the homogeneity of its principles, which often draw wrong conclusions . Similarly, in Yugoslavia, Iraq war, many people ignore the political system because of problems, and come to completely inconsistent with the conclusions of the developments. Ignore the principle of diplomacy is a temporary patchwork pragmatism, to the neglect of the principle of diplomacy is just groping in the dark like.

How to determine the principles of strategy is relatively stable. Under the principle of the strategy (strategy) is variable, but a successful foreign policy, the principle axis always fluctuate. Course, the strategy is changing, is a dynamic process. Therefore, the key issue is to find a can be found, modified policy framework. Strategy requires the support of elite consensus. Modern diplomacy is the most typical of public affairs, rather than the planned number of those in power in the chamber in the conspiracy. Strategy is a knowledge discovery process: consideration based on the principles of the regime, through open debate, and gradually reached an elite consensus. It first needs to allow for debate on public affairs, the institutional framework, allowing each willing to express opinions, and both are able to express their views, many views of the overall balance, will form a widely accepted consensus. National interests is not a ready-made things, but one is to be found, the exploration process. If the lack of conducive institutional framework for public debate, a country that is impossible to correctly determine its national interests. No one person or a special interest group claims that since