Latest news with #internationalrelations
Forbes
14 hours ago
- Politics
- Forbes
When Silence Speaks: The Doctrine Of Communication By Conduct
Majeed Javdani is a Board Member of Mercator Group and an internationally recognized practitioner in law and business. In a world increasingly saturated with instant messages, press releases and diplomatic declarations, it is tempting to assume that international relations are shaped by what is said. Yet, seasoned observers of geopolitical strategy understand a deeper, subtler truth: What is done often speaks more clearly than what is said. This brings us to a principle that sits quietly at the center of international law and diplomacy—communication by conduct. This mode of interaction operates beneath the surface of formal negotiation. It bypasses the volatility of words and ideological assertions, relying instead on actions—restrained, repeated or intentionally withheld—to convey strategic intentions. In environments where language has become too loaded or relationships too adversarial for open dialogue, conduct becomes the lingua franca of diplomacy. The doctrine of communication by conduct is not merely a theoretical construct. It is rooted in the foundational logic of international law itself, specifically in the principle of customary law. Under this doctrine, consistent and general state practice, when coupled with a sense of legal obligation, crystallizes into binding legal norms. This is not just about precedent—it is about how behavior builds legitimacy. States do not need to sign a treaty to show compliance with an international norm; often, they simply need to behave in a way that others interpret as recognition of that norm. This behavioral logic extends into the diplomatic realm. Silence, when paired with inaction or deliberate moderation, is never neutral in global politics. It is often read, rightly or wrongly, as an intentional message. And it is this interpretive space—where conduct becomes legible as policy—that the doctrine operates most powerfully. Unlike strategic ambiguity, which aims to obscure intentions to gain leverage, communication by conduct is inherently about clarity—albeit a clarity achieved through implication, not assertion. It creates space for de-escalation, recalibration and quiet coordination, all without triggering the political costs of formal declarations or public alignment. It enables rival actors to feel each other out without committing to an irreversible path. In this respect, it is less of a diplomatic tool and more of a diplomatic environment—an atmosphere in which policy is shaped through restraint, repetition and refusal. One key reason communication by conduct remains durable in the practice of statecraft is because it transcends language and ideology. It relies not on what a state claims to value, but on what it demonstrably prioritizes. In moments of crisis or strategic recalibration, when explicit engagement may be too risky or politically untenable, conduct becomes the only available channel for credible signaling. The key metric is not volume, but consistency. What matters is whether a pattern of behavior emerges that others can interpret and anticipate. This raises the question of interpretation. After all, conduct, unlike contractual language, does not define itself. It must be read, and all readings are contextual. In this ambiguity lies both the strength and vulnerability of the doctrine. On one hand, it allows states to test strategic shifts in a deniable format; on the other, it opens the door to misinterpretation, escalation or diplomatic paralysis. This interpretive complexity is why communication by conduct must be viewed as a layered process, not a one-off signal. One action may be ambiguous; 10 consistent actions begin to look like a message. And when that consistency aligns with a broader policy trend or institutional adjustment, it becomes increasingly difficult to ignore its strategic meaning. In many ways, the doctrine is a counterbalance to the performance of diplomacy. Whereas formal diplomacy operates in the spotlight—with joint statements, red-carpet visits and sound bites—communication by conduct happens in the shadows. It is quiet, cumulative and often retroactively understood. But this does not make it passive. On the contrary, it requires intention, discipline and a long-term strategic view. It is the diplomacy of the serious. This framework is particularly relevant in an age where the tools of coercion and persuasion are expanding beyond the battlefield and negotiation table. Sanctions, supply chain disruptions, regulatory delays or even the withholding of military or economic support are all actions that speak volumes—whether or not anyone is speaking. And when such conduct is repeated across time, interpreted consistently by observers and unchallenged by the international community, it begins to constitute a normative message. What this means for business leaders, policymakers and international observers is straightforward: Watching what states do is often more instructive than listening to what they say. This does not mean that words are irrelevant. Rather, it means that conduct supplies the evidentiary base that gives meaning to language. A diplomatic statement, no matter how eloquent, must be supported by action to carry weight. Without such alignment, rhetoric becomes noise. This understanding also has practical implications for interpreting strategic risk and opportunity. Investors looking at foreign markets, legal advisors evaluating compliance landscapes and analysts tracking geopolitical trends would all benefit from applying the lens of communication by conduct. When a state begins quietly relaxing enforcement on a domestic regulation, or when it abstains from retaliation in the face of provocation, these are not anomalies—they are signals. Importantly, communication by conduct does not necessarily aim for resolution. It often precedes negotiation, conditions it or exists alongside it. It may mark the beginning of a strategic thaw or simply serve as a stabilizing force in a volatile situation. Either way, it creates room. And in diplomacy, room is everything—room to think, adjust and reposition without losing face or triggering escalation. The challenge, of course, lies in ensuring that such communication is recognized, interpreted accurately and reciprocated in kind. This requires not only diplomatic literacy but also the institutional memory to track patterns, connect signals and identify when conduct begins to cohere into policy. It also requires restraint: the willingness to allow ambiguity when clarity would be counterproductive. In a world where overcommunication often leads to confusion and escalation, conduct reminds us that sometimes the most powerful statements are made without words. For those who know how to read them, these statements are never silent. Forbes Communications Council is an invitation-only community for executives in successful public relations, media strategy, creative and advertising agencies. Do I qualify?
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Korea Says Trump-Kim Ties ‘Not Bad,' Urges US New Approach
(Bloomberg) -- North Korea said relations between its leader Kim Jong Un and US President Donald Trump are 'not bad' but any attempt to resume dialogue between the two countries should start from recognizing the North as a nuclear power. Budapest's Most Historic Site Gets a Controversial Rebuild San Francisco in Talks With Vanderbilt for Downtown Campus Can This Bridge Ease the Troubled US-Canadian Relationship? Trump Administration Sues NYC Over Sanctuary City Policy In a statement carried by the official Korean Central News Agency on Tuesday, Kim Yo Jong — the sister of leader Kim — said the US should start acknowledging the North's 'radically changed' capabilities and that Pyongyang is open to 'any option' to defend its national interest. 'I do not want to deny the fact that the personal relationship between the head of our state and the present US president is not bad,' she said. But Kim added, 'it is worth taking into account the fact that the year 2025 is neither 2018 nor 2019.' Trump and Kim Jong Un met in person three times during the US president's first term, but the discussions didn't persuade Kim to slow the development of his nuclear weapons program. North Korea has since rebuffed the idea of sitting down with the US again and has emerged as a key ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, supporting his war on Ukraine. North Korea possesses a growing arsenal of nuclear weapons, developed in defiance of international sanctions. Its nuclear program includes both atomic bombs and intercontinental ballistic missiles designed to reach the US mainland. Pyongyang justifies its ambitions as a deterrent against perceived threats, especially from the US and South Korea. In a shift from past rhetoric ruling out any engagement, the younger Kim said that the two countries should avoid going in a confrontational direction. 'If so, it would be advisable to seek another way of contact on the basis of such new thinking,' Kim said in the latest statement. Kim Yo Jong has served as the public face of the North's diplomatic messaging, especially when signaling shifts or hardline positions. She is often described as Kim Jong Un's de facto second-in-command on inter-Korean affairs. Last year, North Korea released its first photos of a facility to enrich uranium for atomic bombs, indicating it no longer sees a need to hide a program it once furiously denied when then-President George W. Bush first made the accusation in 2002. Kim Jong Un toured a laboratory making weapons-grade nuclear materials in January again and said the country should strengthen its nuclear shield. 'If the US fails to accept the changed reality and persists in the failed past, the DPRK-US meeting will remain a hope of the US side,' Kim Yo Jong said. Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan Elon Musk's Empire Is Creaking Under the Strain of Elon Musk Confessions of an American Who Helped North Korea's Wild Remote Worker Scheme Cage-Free Eggs Are Booming in the US, Despite Cost and Trump's Efforts ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CTV News
a day ago
- Business
- CTV News
Top takeaways from former prime minister Stephen Harper's speech in Saskatoon
Stephen Harper took the stage at TCU Place in Saskatoon during the Midwestern Legislative Conference on Monday, July 28, 2025. (Laura Woodward / CTV News) Former prime minister Stephen Harper delivered a keynote speech at the Midwestern Legislative Conference on Monday — sharing insights on trade, international relations, and life after politics. Speaking at Saskatoon's TCU Place, Harper addressed a crowd of legislators from 11 U.S. states and four Canadian provinces. Here are the key moments from his speech: The federal government turned to Harper for guidance on U.S. trade relations Harper revealed the federal government recently reached out to him for insight on handling rocky trade relations with the U.S. 'This government did actually ask me a few weeks ago for my advice,' Harper told the crowd. 'My advice was, yes, on the economy, we've got to get something short-term worked out with the Trump administration. But this really is a wake-up call for this country to truly diversify its trade export markets.' CTV News has reached the federal government for comment about contacting Harper. Harper told the conference attendees that Canada is too dependent on the U.S. as a trade partner. 'There is no reason for that. Just because we have that geographic proximity does not justify the degree of dependence that we have on a single market,' Harper said. While he admitted the Liberal government wasn't the outcome he had hoped for, Harper said 'the current government does 'get it' better than their predecessors.' Harper called Vladimir Putin 'a real-life Bond villain' Harper didn't mince words when speaking about Russian President Vladimir Putin. 'Vladimir Putin is a real-life Bond villain, like, he really is,' Harper said, adding that he would never accept a drink from him. While Harper said he has a 'notoriously bad relationship' with Putin, he said the leader is a 'very impressive individual.' 'Vladimir Putin is very smart. He is very smart. He is very hardworking. He's extremely disciplined. He would come into any meeting just fantastically well-briefed. And he is a real psychological expert,' Harper said. 'He was very good at sizing up people's weaknesses and exploiting them, and getting them to think he was on their side when he wasn't. I watched this over and over again with this guy.' Harper said it's important for the U.S. to realize that Putin is their enemy. 'He lives, eats, and breathes to dismantle American power in the world. And the sooner the United States comes around to that full realization and puts its shoulder back to the wheel, we hopefully prevent Ukraine from falling, but certainly stop Putin's adventurism because it's a big threat to everybody.' Harper attended a $1-Billion Indian Wedding While discussing Canada's relationship with India, Harper shared a personal anecdote — his attendance at the extravagant wedding of Anant Ambani and Radhika Merchant. The 2024 celebrations included private performances by the Backstreet Boys, Pitbull, Katy Perry, and Justin Bieber. 'Normally, going to purely social events is not my thing, but I just couldn't pass this one up,' Harper said, noting he knows the Ambani family through business. The wedding reportedly cost about $1 billion and drew a 1,200-person guest list, including celebrities like the Kardashians. 'It was quite something. I'm lowering my daughter's expectations, though, for any kind of wedding,' he said, laughing. Harper reflected on his minimal regrets as the prime minister and shared how he's enjoying life after politics. 'I have a lot less stress. I make a lot more money,' Harper said, eliciting laughter and cheers from the audience.
The Australian
a day ago
- Business
- The Australian
Russia becomes first country to recognise Taliban govt
Afghanistan's government said on Thursday that Russia had become the first country to officially recognise its rule, calling it a "brave decision". The Taliban swept back to power in 2021 after ousting the foreign-backed government and have imposed an austere version of Islamic law. They have keenly sought official international recognition and investment, as the country recovers from four decades of war, including the Soviet invasion from 1979 to 1989. The announcement was made after Afghanistan's Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met with Russia's ambassador to Afghanistan, Dmitry Zhirnov, in Kabul on Thursday. "This brave decision will be an example for others... Now that the process of recognition has started, Russia was ahead of everyone," Muttaqi said in a video of the meeting on X. "Russia is the first country which has officially recognised the Islamic Emirate," Taliban foreign ministry spokesman Zia Ahmad Takal told AFP, using the government's name for their administration. Muttaqi said it was "a new phase of positive relations, mutual respect, and constructive engagement", the foreign ministry posted on X. Russia's foreign ministry added on Telegram: "We believe that the act of official recognition of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan will boost the development of productive bilateral cooperation between our countries in several areas." It highlighted potential "commercial and economic" cooperation in "energy, transportation, agriculture and infrastructure". The ministry said that Moscow hoped to continue helping Kabul "reinforce regional security and fight against the threats of terrorism and drug-trafficking". Moscow has taken recent steps to normalise relations with the Taliban authorities, removing them from a list of "terrorist organisations" in April and accepting a Taliban ambassador in Kabul. In July 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the Taliban "allies in the fight against terrorism". Russia was the first country to open a business representative office in Kabul after the Taliban takeover, and has announced plans to use Afghanistan as a transit hub for gas heading to Southeast Asia. - 'Allies' - Only Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates recognised the Taliban during their first stint in power from 1996 to 2001. This time, multiple other states, including China and Pakistan, have accepted Taliban ambassadors in their capitals, but have not officially recognised the Islamic Emirate since the end of the then-insurgency's two-decade war with US-led NATO troops. There has been limited but growing engagement with the Taliban authorities, particularly from regional neighbours, but also major global players China and Russia. China on Friday said it welcomed Russia's decision. "As a traditional friendly neighbour of Afghanistan, the Chinese side has always believed that Afghanistan should not be excluded from the international community," foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said. However, restrictions on women and girls, barring them from education and squeezing them from public life, have been key sticking points for Western nations. Multiple Afghan women activists were quick to condemn Russia's recognition. The move "legitimizes a regime that bans girls from education, enforces public floggings, and shelters UN-sanctioned terrorists", said Mariam Solaimankhil, former member of Afghanistan's parliament. "The move signals that strategic interests will always outweigh human rights and international law." Senior Taliban figures remain under international sanctions, including by the United Nations. Another former MP in Kabul, Fawzia Koofi, said any recognition of the Taliban "will not bring peace it will legitimize impunity" and "risk endangering not just the people of Afghanistan, but global security". ash-ll-oho/jfx
Russia Today
a day ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
African state revokes privileges for French Embassy
Algeria has withdrawn all privileged access cards granted to staff of the French Embassy at the North African country's ports and airports, in a reciprocal move over what Algiers says are restrictions imposed on its diplomats in France. In a statement on Saturday, the Algerian Foreign Ministry said the country's embassy in Paris is facing 'persistent obstacles' in the delivery and recovery of diplomatic bags. The ministry said it had summoned the French charge d'affaires to protest the French government's 'blatant violation of international obligations.' Algiers said the measure, 'initially limited to the Algerian Embassy in France,' have been extended to consular posts as well, despite prior assurances from the French Foreign Ministry that it would review the measure. The latest dispute adds to mounting tensions between Algeria and France, whose relations have been beset by a series of diplomatic flare-ups in recent months. The two countries have often clashed over post-colonial grievances, migration policy, and France's recent backing for Morocco's stance on the disputed Western Sahara – a territory Algeria has long supported in its push for independence. In May, France announced it would expel Algerian diplomats in response to the former colony's decision to remove more than a dozen French officials, whom it accused Paris of appointing without following established protocols. Earlier in April, both countries expelled 12 diplomats in a tit-for-tat dispute sparked by the arrest of an Algerian official in France, prompting Paris to recall its ambassador. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot recently declared that ties between France and Algeria were now 'totally blocked,' despite earlier efforts by President Emmanuel Macron and his Algerian counterpart, Abdelmadjid Tebboune, to ease tensions. During a phone call in late March, the two leaders pledged to pursue dialogue, and days later Barrot traveled to Algiers for talks on improving mobility and strengthening what Paris described as 'effective and constructive' consular cooperation.
