Профессиональные аспекты международных отношений (Professional Issues of International Relations)

V.L. Bernshteyn

Professional Issues 
of International 
Relations

| И  ДЕЛО |

Москва | 2019

ИНСТИТУТ БИЗНЕСА И ДЕЛОВОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS STUDIES

УДК 811.111.(075.8)
ББК 81.2Англ-923
         Б51

Рецензенты:

Барышников Н.В. — доктор педагогических наук, профессор (Пятигорский 
государственный университет); 
Янковская Н.Б. — кандидат педагогических наук, доцент (ИБДА РАНХиГС)

Одобрено на заседании кафедры деловых коммуникаций 
и английского языка (Institute of Business Studies) ИБДА РАНХиГС 
(протокол № 5 от 28 июня 2018 года)

Бернштейн, В.Л.

Профессиональные аспекты международных отношений (ProfessionПрофессиональные аспекты международных отношений (Profession
al Issues of International Relations): учебно-методическое пособие по 
al Issues of International Relations): учебно-методическое пособие по 
английскому языку / В.Л. Бернштейн. — М. : Издательский дом «Дело» 
английскому языку / В.Л. Бернштейн. — М. : Издательский дом «Дело» 
РАНХиГС, 2019. — 144 c.
РАНХиГС, 2019. — 144 c.

ISBN 978-5-85006-148-7

Настоящее пособие ставит целью развитие компетенций профессионального межкультурного общения у студентов факультетов международных отношений. Тематика пособия направлена на формирование социальной ответственности и гуманистических черт современного специалиста, 
его умения критического осмысления событий современного мира. 
Пособие предназначено для студентов 3 курса уровней Intermediate, 
Upper intermediate и может быть использовано в процессе как аудиторной, 
так и самостоя тельной работы.

УДК 811.111.(075.8)
ISBN 978-5-85006-148-7  
ББК 81.2Англ-923

© ФГБОУ ВО «Российская академия 
народного хозяйства и государственной службы 
при Президенте Российской Федерации», 2019

Б51

CONTENTS

PART I
Unit 1. Diplomacy and its Role in the World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Unit 2. Diplomats: Political Profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Unit 3. Cooperation: Political Risks and International  . . . . . . . .   
 
Organizations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Unit 4. Intercultural Communication  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Unit 5. Cultural Clashes: Conflicts, Terrorism  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Unit 6. The Enigma of Russia  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

PART II
Unit 7. Global Values: Human Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Unit 8. Globalization: Expectations and Reality . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Unit 9. Diversity in Perception: Role of Religion  . . . . . . . . . . . 97
Unit 10. Some Aspects of Public Relations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .106
Unit 11. Mass Media: Newspapers, their Content 
 
and Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .118
Unit 12. Language of Newspaper Headlines  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .125

Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .132
Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .140

PART I
Unit 1 
Diplomacy and its Role in the World

DIPLOMACY:
—  the art and practice of establishing and 
continuing relations between nations;
—  the skill at dealing with people and getting 
them to agree;
— the ability to tell someone to go to Hell so that 
he will look forward to making the trip.

TEXT 1
THE EMERGENCE AND CONTENT OF THE TERM 
“DIPLOMACY”

It is believed that the word “diplomacy” comes from the Greek word 
díplōma: in this way in Ancient Greece people called double plaques 
with inscriptions written on them, issued to envoys as credentials and 
documents that confi rmed their authority. Literally this word meant 
“double” from the way they were formed. The ambassadors sent to 
negotiations in Ancient Greece received instructions and letters 
confi rming their power and duties, recorded on two folding plaques, 
which they handed in to the city offi  cial (an ancient politician), who was 
in charge of international aff airs. 
In everyday speech, the word “diplomacy” is sometimes used to refer 
to some completely diff erent things. For example, sometimes diplomacy 
is understood as the foreign policy of the state. In other cases, diplomacy 
is understood as negotiations, and sometimes this term refers to the 
totality of procedures through which negotiations are conducted. It is 
also used to refer to foreign missions that are part of the Ministry of 
Foreign Aff airs. In the end, the word “diplomacy” refers to the special 
people’s ability, manifested in the art to gain profi t in the conduct of 
international negotiations, or dexterity in the good sense of the word, and 
in a bad sense — in insidiousness in such matters. These fi ve meanings of 
the word “diplomacy” are especially used in English-speaking countries.
Independently this word began to be used from the end of the 
16 century. The fi rst case of the word “diplomacy” in England dates back 
to 1645. Later, the great German scientist Gottfried Leibniz used the 
word “diplomatic” (in the Latin diplomaticus) in the Codex Juris Gentium 

Diplomaticus issued in 1693. Since then, it began to refer to “relating 
to international relations”. 
In 1716 French diplomat François Calier, who was an ambassador 
of Louis XIV in several states, published a book “On the methods of 
negotiating with sovereigns”, where he used “diplomacy” in the modern 
sense of the word. Calier’s book is still used for training diplomats at 
a number of diplomatic schools. In his book diplomacy is seen as the art 
of negotiating, based on certain moral principles and based on a certain 
theory. Before that, in the times of Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, 
as well as Byzantium and the Middle Ages, the art of lying and deceit 
in international aff airs was brought to perfection. F. Calier contrasted 
this with honest negotiations based on high intelligence. He wrote in 
his book: “Deception is in fact an indicator of the limitations of person’s 
mind and even the most brilliant successes of diplomacy, achieved by 
deception, rests on shaky ground. Successfully conducted honest and 
high-level negotiations will create great advantages for the diplomats 
in the subsequent dialogue that they will conduct” [15].

Task 1. Answer the questions:

1. What is the origin of the word “diplomacy”?
2.  What fi ve meanings of this word are used in English-speaking 
countries?
3. What is Calier’s idea of diplomacy?

TEXT 2
THE ESSENCE AND GOAL OF DIPLOMACY

Whenever there are confl icting interests between human beings, 
solution must be found. There are essentially two ways to arrive 
at solutions: the way of force or the way of negotiations leading to 
compromise. Man’s history is too often marked by attempts to use 
force against an opponent, but it is equally true that solutions based 
exclusively on force prove to be unsatisfactory and short-lived. In most 
cases people realize that compromises arrived at by mutual consent 
serve their interests better than solutions based on the use of force. The 
way to arrive at a compromise between confl icting interests is called 
negotiation; it is diplomacy when negotiations are undertaken between 
states.
In diplomacy peace is conceived not as the mere absence of violence 
in international relations but rather as a state of mutual confi dence. 
Confi dence building between partners in the international world is 

a prerequisite for any agreement, for any compromise, arrived at by 
negotiation.
The ideal diplomat should be honest in order to inspire confi dence. 
If a diplomat fails to get confi dence, he would most probably not achieve 
a compromise with his partner. Never to lie is a general guideline for 
a good negotiator. But, one should, of course, keep in mind that there 
is no need always to tell the whole truth or to reveal one’s intentions 
completely to a partner. What one must avoid is the loss of confi dence 
due to falsehood.
If honesty tops the list of qualities a good international negotiator 
should possess there are other virtues almost as important. Modesty 
and loyalty probably come next. First of all, a negotiator must be loyal 
to those he represents: his country, his government. A good sense of 
modesty and of proportion is the best protection against an opponent 
who knows how to take full advantage of conceit, false pride, and other 
weaknesses, which are only too human.
Patience has often been called the cardinal virtue of a good negotiator. 
Never should one allow the time factor to become decisive. Furthermore, 
one should keep in mind that good results take time. The best results of 
international negotiations took many years before they were achieved.
A good sense of imagination, openness and fl exibility, and, of course, 
a high degree of intelligence — they are indispensable features for a good 
negotiator. Negotiation is a creative activity. Its outcome is very often 
the result of painful work plus a lot of imagination.
Finally, psychology should be mentioned. It is by far the most 
important element in any successful negotiating process. If compromise 
is the ultimate goal of diplomacy, psychology is the only way to achieve 
it. If a lasting compromise is to be found, it must be based on mutual 
consent. Both contracting partners must have secured their proper 
interests. Consequently one has to fi nd out what partners’ interests really 
are and where they can be met consistently with our own aims. A good 
negotiator should put himself in the position of his counterpart. He will 
then be able to judge correctly where concessions can be expected and 
where his own demands can be met by the partner.
Diplomacy defi ned as “the art of negotiation” does not aim at 
victory or surrender, but at compromise by consent. Even if one side is 
negotiating from a position of superior strength, a lasting agreement 
can only be established if it also meets the basic needs of the weaker 
partner. The essence of diplomacy is negotiating, and its ultimate goal 
is the creation and maintenance of peace [7].

Task 1. Answer the questions:

1. How are the essence and goal of diplomacy identifi ed?
2. What does Diplomacy aim at? 
3. What two ways may be used to arrive at solutions in a case of 
a confl ict?
4. How can negotiation be defi ned?
5. What is a general guideline for a good negotiator?
6. How do you assess author’s idea that “there is no need always to tell 
the whole truth”?
7. What is the role of psychology in any successful negotiation?
8. What qualities are indispensable for a good diplomat?
9. What other qualities, in your opinion, should a good negotiator 
possess?

Task 2. Translate these adjectives into Russian and divide them into two 
categories: 

a) those that assist to achieve success in diplomacy;
b) those that prevent a person to become a diplomat.
1. ambitious —  __________________________________________________________________ 
2. awkward —  ____________________________________________________________________
3. blunt — _________________________________________________________________________ 
4. cerebral —______________________________________________________________________
5. clear-headed — _______________________________________________________________
6. concerned — __________________________________________________________________
7. confi dent — ____________________________________________________________________
8. dedicated — ___________________________________________________________________
9. dignifi ed — ____________________________________________________________________ 
10. discontented — _____________________________________________________________ 
11. dispassionate — ____________________________________________________________ 
12. distressed — _________________________________________________________________
13. effi  cient — ___________________________________________________________________
14. embittered — ________________________________________________________________ 
15. emotional — _________________________________________________________________ 
16. intense — ________________________________________________________________________ 
17. gentle — ___________________________________________________________ 
18. generous — _______________________________________________________
19. high-handed — _____________________________________________________________ 
20. hot-tempered — ____________________________________________________________ 
21. moody — _____________________________________________________________________ 
22. open-minded — ____________________________________________________________ 
23. purposeful — ________________________________________________________________ 
24. reserved — ___________________________________________________________________

25. responsible — _______________________________________________________________ 
26. ruthless — ____________________________________________________________________  
27. sensitive — ___________________________________________________________________ 
28. shrewd — _____________________________________________________________________ 
29. shy — __________________________________________________________________________ 
30. thoughtful — ________________________________________________________________  

Task 3. Write a description of your own personality using the adjectives 
from Task 2. Is it possible for you to become a diplomat and achieve success 
in this professional sphere? Use the following expressions:

I think … my personal qualities …
It’s possible / impossible for me … because… 
I am always / seldom … diplomatic …
My temper allows / does not allow me … 
In my opinion another person from our group may become … 

Task 4. Discuss the following Diplomacy functions, methods and means 
of Diplomacy. Provide your examples: 

Diplomacy Functions

 representation

 diplomatic communication and correspondence

 conduct of negotiations

 gaining somebody’s favour

 obtaining information or diplomatic intelligence

 protection of the interests of citizens of their country abroad

Methods and Means of Diplomacy

 offi  cial and other visits and negotiations;

 diplomatic congresses, conferences, meetings;

 preparation and conclusion of bilateral and multilateral 
international treaties and other diplomatic documents;

 participation in the work of international organizations and their 
bodies;

 the daily representation of the state abroad, carried out by its 
embassies and  missions;

 diplomatic correspondence;

 publication of diplomatic documents;

 media coverage of the government’s position on various 
international issues;

 transfer of diplomatic notes;

 breaking diplomatic relations;

 usage of Internet resources, information and communication 
technologies and social networks

TEXT 3
THE ARMED FORCES ARE THE INSTRUMENTS 
OF FOREIGN POLICY, NOT ITS MASTER

No successful and no peaceful foreign policy is possible without 
observance of this rule. No nation can pursue a policy of compromise 
with the military determining the ends and means of foreign policy. The 
armed forces are instruments of war; foreign policy is an instrument of 
peace. It is true that ultimate objectives of the conduct of war and of the 
conduct of foreign policy are identical: BOTH SERVE THE NATIONAL 
INTERESTS. Both, however, diff er fundamentally in their immediate 
objectives, in the means they employ, and in the models of thought they 
bring to bear upon their respective tasks.
The objective of war is simple and unconditional: to break the will of 
the enemy. Its methods are equally simple and unconditional: to bring 
the greatest amount of violence to bear upon the most vulnerable spots 
in the enemy’s armor. The military leader lives in the present and in the 
immediate future. The sole question before him is how to win victories 
as cheaply and quickly as possible and how to avoid defeat.
The objective of foreign policy is relative and conditional: to bend, 
not to break, the will of the other side as far as necessary in order to 
safeguard one’s own vital interests without hurting those of the other 
side. The methods of foreign policy are relative and conditional: not to 
advance by destroying the obstacles in one’s way, to retreat before them, 
to circumvent them, to maneuver around them, to soften and dissolve 
them slowly by means of persuasion, negotiations, and pressure.
To surrender the conduct of foreign aff airs to military is to destroy 
the possibility of compromise and thus surrender the course of peace. 
The military mind knows nothing how to operate between the absolutes 
of victory and defeat. It knows nothing of that patient intricate and 
subtle maneuvering of diplomacy, whose main purpose is to avoid the 
absolutes of victories and defeats and meet the other side on the middle 
ground of negotiated compromise. A foreign policy conducted by military 
men according to the rules of military art can only end in war.
Peace must be the goal of any foreign policy. Foreign policy must be 
conducted in such a way as to make the preservation of peace possible 
and not to make the outbreak of war inevitable. In a society of sovereign 
nations military force is a necessary instrument of foreign policy. Yet 
this instrument of foreign policy should not become the master of