What do politically minded visitors to a zoo feel when1
they stand in front of the panda bear’s cage? The previously
cute panda may suddenly strike them as strange — there is an
intuitive knowledge that this panda, constantly eating bamboo4
in front of a cheerful and amazed audience, is deeply charged
with political agency.
Estrangement from the familiar is the start of every7
theory. Unfortunately, it was only recently that political
scientists have embarked on exploring diplomacy
systematically as a conceptual phenomenon, generating one10
unquestionable axiom: that of representation. As with any
axiom, it is unprovable, but it is the taken-for-granted starting
point for all further research: most scholars agree on the basic13
postulate that diplomacy is about people representing polities
(most often a state) vis-à-vis another polity.
One should mention that the notion of political16
representation is a theoretical axiom applicable to all countries,
but let us explore the example given by the panda bear and,
consequently, by China a little further.19
It is often correctly perceived that the speech of an
accredited Chinese ambassador is attributable to the Chinese
government. It is “China” who spoke, not (just) the individual22
person. This is the basis of representation. But what is often
forgotten is how non-human material can represent polities —
they are also diplomats, but mute.25
It may sound ridiculous, if not provocative, to posit
that the panda bear in the zoo is China. But this is merely an
extension of the basic premise of diplomatic theory. Why28
should only human individuals be able to represent a state? In
periods of conflict, flags (material objects) are burnt, walls are
erected, monuments torn down; in times of better political31
mood, heads of states exchange precious gifts with each other,
while embassy buildings in foreign countries enjoy a “sacred”
legal status. Flags, walls, monuments, gifts, and the embassies34
re-present, i.e. “bring into presence,” a country, and actions
toward these objects address the states they represent.
And there are good grounds for sensing a foreign37
policy tool in the giant pandas that now reside in zoos all over
the world. They prominently embody China’s modern public
diplomacy; they are non-human material deliberately deployed40
by the Chinese government to the soil of other states; and they
have, at times, served as the primary means of expressing
inter-state sentiment — during times of both conflict and43
cooperation —, in instances of the so-called “panda
diplomacy”.
Andreas Pacher. The Diplomat. Nov./2017.
Internet: <https://thediplomat.com> (adapted).