Populism in international relations: champion diplomacy

Abstract This article examines how populism reconfigures diplomacy. We contend that populist leaders practice a new form of diplomacy, i.e., champion diplomacy, which poses significant problems for negotiating and implementing international agreements. Portraying themselves as championing the causes of the people in its supposed struggle against the elites, champion diplomats sideline career diplomats, use simple and often coarse language, and prefer direct public diplomatic encounters, often on social media, over more traditional diplomatic channels. This complicates getting to the negotiation table, makes it more difficult to come up with meaningful agreements, and causes problems for implementing them. Our empirical research of two cases, US nuclear diplomacy towards North Korea and the Abraham Accords between Israel as well as the United Arab Emirates, Bahrein, Morocco and Sudan provides strong evidence for our claims. Our findings have important implications for diplomacy and international order more generally. With populist practices increasingly diffusing in diplomatic conduct, even beyond non-populist leaders, concluding workable agreements among states becomes more and more difficult.