One-upmanship and putdowns: the aggressive use of interaction rituals in face-to-face diplomacy

Abstract

When leaders meet in person, they perform a wide range of interaction rituals. They dress for the occasion, greet each other and shake hands, exchange pleasantries and gifts, arrive at the meeting venue and have themselves seated according to protocol, and so on. What do they make of the performance of such rituals? In this paper, I argue that leaders often take advantage of or outright flout what the sociologist Erving Goffman calls the prevailing ‘ceremonial idiom’ of an interaction – that is the intersubjective understanding they share on what rituals to perform and how to perform them – to realize a number of political and personal objectives, with larger international consequences. The ‘ceremonial idiom’ is deliberately transgressed and a counterpart's ‘face’ threatened – overtly but more often subtly – to achieve what are commonly known as ‘one-upmanship’ and ‘putdowns’ in interpersonal contact. Empirically, I demonstrate my argument with over two dozen episodes of face-to-face diplomacy across six categories of interaction rituals: the identity of leaders, gestural, spatial–physical, task-embedded, linguistic, and communication rules. I also outline several directions for future research.

Peace needs constant reproduction: The temporality of the diplomatic system

“…A murder in a diplomatically protected premise on a foreign terrain (Milanovic, 2020) can be regarded as un-peace – that is, it comes in the medium of peace (as it is ‘diplomatic’) but it is rejected as such. A ritual faux pas, symbolized by an empty chair during a planned summit meeting (Ludlow, 1999; Wong, 2021), or conveyances of interpolity dissatisfaction like the declaration of a foreign persona non grata , may likewise be seen as (diplomacy-internal) communications of un-peace despite the fact that they are forms in the medium of peace. The sharpest example may be a war-threatening ultimatum – the ultimatum is still a communication ‘short of war’ (Kennan, 1946), still a diplomatic event, still a peace-mediated signal, in spite of observers negating its peacefulness and thus coding it as un-peace.…”

Up in the air: Ritualized atmospheres and the global Black Lives Matter movement

“…One strand of work focuses on rituals of micro-scale group dynamics, often in diplomatic contexts. Holmes and Wheeler (2020), for example, explore face-to-face ritual dynamics to reveal how personal interactions between diplomats either “hit it off” or “fall flat.” Wong (2016) examines how micro-scale face-to-face diplomatic exchanges communicate intentions non-verbally through gestures and bodily cues (see also Wong, 2021). Similarly, Pacher (2018) examines individual-level rituals in public diplomacy, while Banks (2019) analyses how domestic-level rituals can clash with diplomatic-level norms and practices.…”

“…Both micro- and macro-oriented research point to this need, with some recent work offering suggestive directions albeit without sufficiently addressing it. Some micro-scale work draws upon emotions research to argue that interpersonal dynamics can generate positive or negative valence which can affect diplomatic outcomes (Holmes and Wheeler, 2020; Pacher, 2018; Wong, 2021). Here, emotions in micro-settings are transmitted through ritual behaviors, yet macro-scale resonances are left unexplored.…”

“…Through domestic and transnational organizing across rural towns in the American Midwest to small villages across the United Kingdom to European urban centers to embassies and streets in South Africa and Indonesia, the graphic nature of the video of George Floyd's killing and the primary claims of BLM have spread globally. 2 International Relations (IR) has recently seen significant rising interest in rituals of global politics Baele and Balzacq, 2022;Charrett, 2018;Cronin-Furman and Krystalli, 2020;Davies, 2018;Holmes and Wheeler, 2020;Kampf and Löwenheim, 2012;Knotter, 2020;Koschut, 2014;Kustermans et al, 2022;Mälksoo, 2021;Oren and Solomon, 2015;Pacher, 2018;Salgo, 2017;Wegner, 2021;Wong, 2021). The global BLM movement of 2020 vividly displayed many kinds of ritual practices, from the rhythms and reverberations of protest marches to shared and reiterated discourses and symbolic gestures across countries, to the ritual sharing of video and photographs across social media.…”

“…International Relations (IR) has recently seen significant rising interest in rituals of global politics (Aalberts et al, 2020; Baele and Balzacq, 2022; Charrett, 2018; Cronin-Furman and Krystalli, 2020; Davies, 2018; Holmes and Wheeler, 2020; Kampf and Löwenheim, 2012; Knotter, 2020; Koschut, 2014; Kustermans et al, 2022; Mälksoo, 2021; Oren and Solomon, 2015; Pacher, 2018; Salgo, 2017; Wegner, 2021; Wong, 2021). The global BLM movement of 2020 vividly displayed many kinds of ritual practices, from the rhythms and reverberations of protest marches to shared and reiterated discourses and symbolic gestures across countries, to the ritual sharing of video and photographs across social media.…”