| Abstract: | How can small states influence the conflict management activities of regional or ganisations? The conventional wisdom in the literature of International Relations holds that small states lack the ability to shape the preferences of other actors. In recent years, some small-state scholars have challenged this view. They argue that some small states make bold initiatives and succeed in influencing institutions like the European Union. These studies are, however, mostly single-country case studies, focusing almost exclusively on European small states in the European Union. They do not, therefore, reveal what is unique to that case, and what can be generalised to small states in other parts of the world. Moreover, these studies have not examined adequately international-level factors such as the role of the dominant power in the regional organisations, in helping or hindering the initia tives of the small states.
This study aims to fill that gap. It seeks to understand the national and interna tional-level factors that determine the abilities of small states to influence the con flict management activities of regional organisations. The study also seeks to expand our understanding of small-state diplomacy by examining non-European small states. It analyses seven case studies involving six small states in five regional organisations, located in four different parts of the world. To my knowledge, it is one of the first scholarly attempts to understand the factors-both at national and international levels-that determine the abilities of small states to exert influ ence in regional organisations. In doing so, I hope to make a contribution to the study of diplomacy in general, and the diplomacies of small states in particular.
The thesis examines the seven case studies with the help of a theoretical frame work that identifies five factors as necessary for small states to be able to exert in fluence in conflict management activities of regional organisations. The factors are: small states' credibility, norm entrepreneurship, diplomatic resilience, the in-
xiii
stitutional mechanisms within the regional organisation, and the role of the re gional power. The empirical analysis of the case studies shows that all five factors are necessary for small states to exert influence. Yet it also shows that each of the five factors has varying degrees of impact on the abilities of small states to exert influence. There is evidence from the case studies to suggest that the role of re gional power is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for determining whether small states can exert influence in regional organisations. Second, small states could influence the shaping of a regional power's preferences if the farmer's diplomacy is sufficiently resilient. Small states derive their diplomatic resilience from the strength of the foreign policy bureaucracy, the persuasive power of dip lomats, and niche diplomacy. Third, small states exert influence by pursuing norm entrepreneurship in regional organisations: seeking to generate new and in novative ideas to solve common problems. Fourth, small states' ability to influ ence depends on whether the institutional mechanisms within the regional organisation allow sufficient space for these states to manoeuvre. Finally, small states can exert influence if they have credibility derived from a non-threatening foreign policy posture and from persistent activism and expertise in a given issue.
Thus, small states can exert influence in regional organisations if their diplomacy is sufficiently resilient. The findings of this study reveal that with the right poli cies, small states can increase their diplomatic resilience. For size alone does not determine destiny; persuasive diplomacy does |
