Do regional powers prioritise their regions? Comparing Brazil, South Africa and Turkey

Mesquita, Rafael; Chien, Jia Huei

doi:10.1080/01436597.2021.1898280

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Efforts to gather comprehensive data for other nations are emerging but remain sparse. For instance, Mesquita and Chien (2021) compiled data on high-level leader visits from Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey (Balci and Pulat, 2024), while Lavallée and Lochard (2022) did the same for French high-level visits abroad.…”

Section: A Short History Of Leader Visit Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, leaders may focus on visiting neighboring countries to enhance their countries' regional influence and to solidify the status of those visited countries as a distinct region Howell, 1975: 1010;Thompson, 1981;Zakhirova, 2012;Mesquita and Chien, 2021;Goldstein, 2008: 170). Such regional powers can become focal points of attraction, influencing the diplomatic visit patterns of smaller states.…”

Section: International Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such regional powers can become focal points of attraction, influencing the diplomatic visit patterns of smaller states. Mesquita andChien (2021: 1558) offer mixed evidence for the hypothesis that regional powers predominantly engage with their own regions in diplomatic interactions. For example, while Turkey's focus on its region appeared to be transient, South Africa demonstrated a more sustained prioritization of its region.…”

Section: International Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of those studies, only Koliev and Lundgren's study investigates the motivations of other countries in visiting the U.S. Studies approaching leader visits as an independent variable are much more diverse. Despite the dominance of the U.S. (Simon and Ostrom, 1989;Brace and Hinckley, 1993;Smith, 1997;Nitsch, 2007;Goldsmith and Horiuchi, 2009;Malis and Smith, 2021;Goldsmith et al, 2021;Eichenauer et al, 2021;Cohen, 2022) and China cases (Fuchs and Klann, 2013;Lin, Yan, and Wang, 2017;Hoshiro, 2020;Chen, 2023;Stone et al, 2022), other countries such as Turkey (Kuşku-Sönmez, 2019;Tepeciklioğlu, Tepeciklioğlu, and Karabıyık, 2023), Brazil, South Africa (Mesquita andChien, 2021), Slovakia (Šandor, Gurňák, andBilka, 2023), Croatia (Peternel, and Grešš, 2021), Russia (Papageorgiou and Vieira, 2023) and Iran (Bazoobandi, Heibach, and Richter, 2023) have been investigated to understand the influence of foreign visits on trade, foreign investment, and legitimacy. Although studies taking leader visits as an independent variable do not provide global visit data of countries in question, they clearly prove the possibility of collecting data for smaller countries.…”

Section: Where To Head?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Determinants of Leader Visits: A Review and Future Directions in Scholarship

Balcı

2024

Türkiye Ortadoğu Çalışmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A recent surge in studies on high-level leader diplomacy has the potential to evolve into a fruitful research field. While the current literature predominantly focuses on the leader visits of two great powers, the U.S. and China, this emerging field requires both broadening and deepening in its scope. We lack data on leader visits from the vast majority of countries, and many existing hypotheses do not adequately explain the determinants in various cases. The more countries that are covered and the more refined our hypotheses become, the more insightful this field will be in understanding interactions among states and international organizations. This article aims to present the current state of the literature on leader visits and suggests potential areas of interest for future research.

show abstract

Section: A Short History Of Leader Visit Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: International Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: International Statusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Where To Head?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Determinants of Leader Visits: A Review and Future Directions in Scholarship

Balcı

2024

Türkiye Ortadoğu Çalışmaları Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For Brazil, we examine the Haiti earthquake and the Colombian conflict; for South Africa, the Somalian famine and the civil war in Congo-Brazzaville. As argued by Mesquita and Chien (2021), scholarship often takes for granted the locations prioritized by regional powers. Our selection of cases will therefore also aim to test the traditional boundaries of what these countries consider to be their perimeters of responsibility whenever confronted with a call to action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Severity, salience, and selectivity: understanding the varying responses to regional crises by Brazil and South Africa

Mesquita

Seabra

2022

Int Polit

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political, military and humanitarian crises endanger regional order. But even though regional powers are expected to act as stabilizers in these cases, their responses to dire demands vary in intensity and loci. Reactions go from zealous engagement to prolonged indifference and reluctance, often leaning on global multilateral institutions as well as regional or ad hoc mechanisms. This study explores the variation in the provision of stability by regional powers via a mixed-methods approach. By contrasting the intensity of regional crises with issue salience at the UN General Assembly, we select crises that drew varying attention from regional powers, despite similar severity. Focusing on Brazil and South Africa as potential regional stabilizers, we compare responses to regional crises that displayed high (Haiti and Somalia) and low (Colombia and Congo-Brazzaville) salience. We find that domestic support, concerns with status and potential competition with other stabilizers tend to play a large part in calibrating regional power responses.

show abstract