Popularly conceived, Diplomacy is the advancement, pursuit, and securing of the national interest by way of negotiation, compromise, and law. It is widely, if not universally lauded as a politically and morally sound practice although those who practise it, diplomats, are accorded high status if, in addition to tact and skill, they also exhibit cunning. Indeed, as diplomats increasingly came to be associated with a guileful outlook, Ambrose Bierce defined their work as 'the patriotic art of lying for one's country,' while William Butler Yeats noted of their ilk that they were 'easy men' who told their 'lies by rote.'

Diplomacy, however, frequently fails, sometimes intentionally so. In this context, therefore, it is better understood less exclusively - and more as part of the discourses of power in global politics and the relations between states and other actors which are mutual strangers. Accordingly, this course is concerned, in the main, with how such relationships are mediated, and how and why the failures, which have led to the outbreak of violence occurred.

To provide not only a critical understanding of the theory and practice of Diplomacy, but also to examine the ways in which Diplomacy has frequently concealed the premediated objective of war; a central outcome, therefore, is the de-mythologizing of Diplomacy as the antithesis of war.

2,500 word essay (50%) and 1,500 word take home assignment (50%).

Two first-year courses in Political Science, or with the permission of the lecturer.