Populism in international relations: champion diplomacy

Ehud Eiran et al.

Journal of International Relations and Development2025https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00344-xarticle
ABDC C
Weight
0.44

What the paper says

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.

3 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00344-x

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ehud2025,
  title        = {{Populism in international relations: champion diplomacy}},
  author       = {Ehud Eiran et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of International Relations and Development},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/s41268-025-00344-x},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Populism in international relations: champion diplomacy

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.44

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.32 × 0.4 = 0.13
M · momentum0.57 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.