Sports Diplomacy. Michał Marcin Kobierecki

in them, which are common methods of states’ public diplomacy aimed at shaping the desired international image through sport. It makes international sports organizations external stakeholders of states’ public diplomacy, while even though this type of sports diplomacy is not an explicit example of public diplomacy, there is a strong connection between both concepts.

      Concluding Remarks

      This chapter included an attempt to conceptualize the category of sports diplomacy, particularly in its reference to public diplomacy. This led to a proposition of three types of understanding sports diplomacy: (1) as a means of shaping interstate relations, (2) as a means of building international image and prestige of states, and (3) as diplomatic activity of international sports subjects, although the boundaries between them are sometimes blurred, and particular cases of sports diplomacy might have features of more than one type. According to the first approach, sports diplomacy aims to foster traditional diplomatic activities of states, for example, by providing additional channels for communication. It targets state authorities and the general public. Governmental engagement is often expressed in this type of sports diplomacy, although it is not necessary. Its main defining feature is the existence of a particular goal connected with the foreign policy that sports diplomacy is supposed to serve. Sports diplomacy perceived this way is, therefore, an explicit example of public diplomacy pursued with the use of sport, even though certain examples might also be assessed as serving the traditional diplomacy

      Sports diplomacy as a means of building the international image of states involves such activities as supporting sports development in other countries, establishing bilateral sports contacts, hosting sports events, participating in international sport, achieving high level by national teams or sports teams from such country, having globally known athletes and sports investments. All these activities aim to improve the way the foreign public perceives a state. In this context, sport is a soft power resource (high level of sport) and provides circumstances to exploit other resources (e.g., while organizing sports events). Some of them are employed only by big and powerful states, while others, like participation in international sport, are used by small states or those with limited international recognition. This type of sports diplomacy undoubtedly can also be classified as a subcategory of public diplomacy, although some cases may also be assessed as examples of nation branding.

      While considering sports diplomacy as a part of public diplomacy, it remains unclear whether activities undertaken individually by non-state actors such as sports teams or national sports federations and not coordinated by states can also be regarded as sports diplomacy. It has been assumed that if such activities are beneficial for the state’s image, then they should also be classified as sports diplomacy.

      The third type of sports diplomacy, which refers to the diplomatic activities of international sports governing bodies, has been introduced as a result of the modification of approaches presented by other authors. It differs from the previous types, most of all concerning its subject since it refers to sports non-state actors which cannot be attached to any territory. The international sport requires the coordination of activities of many actors, so these subjects have to hold negotiations with numerous players. They also need to recognize national sports organizations, which resemble traditional diplomatic activities connected with international recognition. Finally, they pursue aid programs, which can be assessed as expressions of their public diplomacy.

      Sports diplomacy is usually classified as a subcategory of public diplomacy. A similar approach has been adopted in this book, and public diplomacy serves as the central analytical category. The review of various approaches in defining it pursued throughout this chapter in principle confirmed this approach. Most of the forms of sports diplomacy have their public form, even if they most directly lead to traditional diplomatic contacts. Still, some of the forms of sports diplomacy also exceed the scope of public diplomacy. This is particularly visible in the context of sports diplomacy by ISOs, and to some extent, it refers to nation branding objectives of using sport to shape an image of a country. It can be concluded though, that even despite these observations sports diplomacy, in principle, fits within the realm of public diplomacy, while even in the cases when it exceeds its scope, they remain strongly interconnected.

      NOTES

      1. J. Simon Rofe, “Sport and Diplomacy: A Global Diplomacy Framework,” Diplomacy & Statecraft 27, no. 2 (2016): 214.

      2. Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012), 157.

      3. Hans Morgenthau, Polityka między narodami: Walka o potęgę i pokój [Politics Among Nations: The Strategy for Power and Peace] (Warszawa: Difin, 2010), s. 355.

      4. Hans Morgenthau, “Diplomacy,” in Diplomacy: Theory of Diplomacy, vol. 1, ed. Christer Jönsson and Richard Langhorne (London: SAGE, 2004), 63–64.

      5. Ellen Huijgh, “Public Diplomacy,” in The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, ed. Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp (Los Angeles: SAGE, 2016), 439. See: Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Done at Vienna on April 24, 1963.

      6. Costas M. Constantinou and Paul Sharp, “Theoretical Perspectives in Diplomacy,” in The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, ed. Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp (Los Angeles: SAGE, 2016), 16.

      7. Beata Surmacz, Ewolucja współczesnej dyplomacji: Aktorzy, struktury, funkcje [Evolution of Contemporary Diplomacy: Actors, Structures and Functions], (Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS, 2015), 31–32.

      8. Aaron Beacom, International Diplomacy and the Olympic Movement: The New Mediators (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012), 18.

      9. James Der Derian, “Mediating Estrangement: A Theory for Diplomacy,” Review of International Studies 13 (1987): 93.

      10. Beacom, International Diplomacy, 19.

      11. Harold Nicolson, “Diplomacy Then and Now,” in Diplomacy: Theory of Diplomacy, vol. 3, ed. Christer Jönsson and Richard Langhorne (London: SAGE, 2004), 334–342.

      12. Andrew F. Cooper and Brian Hocking, “Governments, Non-Governmental Organisations and the Re-calibration of Diplomacy,” Global Society 14, no. 3 (2000): 364.

      13. Noé Cornago, Plural Diplomacies: Normative Predicaments and Functional Imperatives (Leiden–Boston: Brill, 2013): 58–59.

      14. Brian Hocking, “Diplomacy and Foreign Policy,” in The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, ed. Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp (Los Angeles: SAGE, 2016), 72.

      15. Rebecca Adler-Nissen, “Diplomatic Agency,” in The SAGE Handbook of Diplomacy, ed. Costas M. Constantinou, Pauline Kerr, and Paul Sharp (Los Angeles: SAGE, 2016), 93.

      16. Surmacz, Ewolucja, 368–369.

      17. Jorge Heine, “From Club to Network Diplomacy,” in The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy, ed. Andrew F. Cooper, Jorge Heine, and Ramesh Thakur (Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2013), 57.

      18. Wolfgang Reinecke, Global Public Policy: Governing without Government? (Washington, DC: Brookings, 1998), 52.

      19. Constantinou and Sharp, “Theoretical Perspectives,” 21.

      20. Huijgh, “Public Diplomacy,” 442.

      21. Geoffrey Wiseman, “‘Polylateralism’: Diplomacy’s Third Dimension,” Public Diplomacy Magazine 1 (2010): 27.

      22. John R. Kelley, “The New Diplomacy: Evolution of a Revolution,” Diplomacy & Statecraft 21, no. 2 (2010): 294.

      23. Steve J. Jackson and Marcelle C. Dawson, “IOC-State-Corporate Nexus: Corporate Diplomacy and the Olympic Coup d’Etat,” South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation 39, nos. 1–2 (2017): 102.

      24. Beata Ociepka, Miękka siła i dyplomacja publiczna Polski [Soft Power and Public Diplomacy of Poland] (Warszawa: Scholar, 2013), 13.

      25. Henryk Przybylski, Historia dyplomacji [History of Diplomacy] (Katowice: GWSH, 2010), 224–225.

      26. Nicholas J. Cull, “Public Diplomacy before Gullion: The Evolution of a Phrase,” in Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy,