system lulls one into thinking that others use similar methods; in crisis it may be dangerous for one to assume that others act in the same way as oneself.”51 Strategic Moral Diplomacy’s core idea—that of examining the perspective of the Other before the consideration of one’s own standpoint52 - remains central in addressing these concerns of mutual recognition in the context of a modern and sustainable diplomatic practice.
VII. CONCLUSIONS: PRAGMATIC LESSONS FOR
THE NEW DIPLOMAT
VVConclusively, Frost’s Constitutive Theory explains the workings of a hierarchical normative framework behind the existence of international laws and rituals, representing the interests of the international community. On the other hand, Strategic Moral Diplomacy depicts the reality of political pragmatism, whereby political conflicts are usually the result of equally legitimate and conflicting norms. Though neither theory perfectly portrays the realities of diplomatic affairs, a clear understanding of the underlying normative framework of international relations expressed through a synthesis of both theories, coupled with the ability to perceive its shifting nature, is crucial for the contemporary diplomat—for knowledge of these conceptual formulas, reflected wholly in reality, allows for the practicing policymaker or diplomat to actively engage in, shape or reshape new norms and paradigms of international relations. Furthermore, a pragmatic understanding of Strategic Moral Diplomacy allows for the diplomat to safely engage the Other’s ideas in a situation of crisis management, and forms the bedrock of a much required new and sustainable diplomatic regime of mediating differences.
8851. Rana, Kishan S. 21st Century Diplomacy, A practitioner’s guide (Continuum, 2011), p. 168.
8852. Boyd-Judson, Strategic Moral Diplomacy: Understanding the Enemy’s Moral Universe, p. 27.
45