Écrivains et diplomates: livre français

Écrivains et diplomates

L'invention d'une tradition. XIXS^e-XXI^esiècles

Sous la direction deLaurence Badel

etGilles Ferragu

etStanislas Jeannesson

etRenaud Meltz

Année : 2012

Pages : 416

Collection : Recherches

Éditeur : Armand Colin

ISBN : 9782200275426

ISBN version en ligne : 9782200284954

Site internet : http://www.armand-colin.com/collections-term/11364/4

Présentation

« Comment peut-on être ambassadeur de France et poète ? », s’indignaient les surréalistes, en apostrophant Paul Claudel. C’était en 1925. Que reste-t-il de cette alliance à l’heure du numérique, qui renouvelle l’écriture classique du diplomate ? 

Dédié à la conjugaison des deux activités, cet ouvrage met en lumière l’ancienneté, le renouvellement et la diversité des pratiques de l’écrivain entré en diplomatie et du diplomate entré en littérature. 

Interrogeant les identités multiples d’hommes destinés à intervenir dans et sur le monde, analysant les conditions matérielles de l’exercice de leur métier, ainsi que leurs modes d’expression privilégiés, il examine aussi la validité d’un « modèle » français qui serait né avec Chateaubriand. Il s’interroge enfin sur l’invention d’une tradition, formalisée dans l’entre-deux-guerres, mais qui ne trouve sa consécration véritable qu’après 1945, à travers la fortune de l’expression unificatrice et duale d’« écrivain diplomate ». Actes d’un colloque international qui s’est tenu à La Courneuve et à Paris, en mai 2011, augmentés d’articles originaux, ce livre, au confluent de l’histoire littéraire, de l’histoire sociale et de l’histoire des relations internationales rassemble vingt-quatre contributions d’universitaires et de diplomates français et étrangers, ainsi que des échanges entre historiens et diplomates en activité. L’ouvrage est préfacé par Maurizio Serra, délégué permanent de l’Italie auprès de l’Unesco et écrivain.

Sommaire

Pages de début

Remerciements

Frédéric Baleine du Laurens

Maurizio Serra

Préface

Pierre Sellal

L’écrivain diplomate entre littérature et politique

Laurence Badel, Gilles Ferragu,Stanislas Jeannesson, Renaud Meltz

Introduction

Partie I - L’invention de l’écrivain diplomate

Lucien Bély

1 - L’écrivain diplomate des Temps modernes, entre nécessité politique et pratique culturelle

Yves Bruley

2 - Le diplomate français au xix ^e siècle, entre belles-lettres et littérature

Stanislas Jeannesson

3 - Les écrivains diplomates, acteurs ou instruments d’une diplomatie culturelle ? Le cas du Quai d’Orsay au premier xx ^e siècle

Renaud Meltz

4 - Âge d’or ou naissance d’une tradition ? Les écrivains diplomates français dans l’entre-deux-guerres

Gilles Ferragu

5 - Chimère ou caméléon ? Les non-conformistes

Johanna Edelbloude

6 - Écrivains etdiplomates : des outsidersdans la Carrière ? Lecture sociologique des logiques de nomination

Partie II - Diplomatie et écritures

Michel Murât

7 - Le style diplomatique

Matthieu Osmont

8 - Le diplomate et l’écriture : le cas des ambassadeurs français en Allemagne depuis André François-Poncet

Isabelle Dasque

9 - Écriture et usages de l’Histoire chez les diplomates de la Troisième République

Michael Auwers, Nevra Biltekin

10 - La diplomatie en mémoires. Étude sur les mémoires de diplomates belges et suédois du xx ^e siècle

Yvan Daniel

11 - Paul Claudel témoin du tournant global : « Le présent comporte toujours la réserve du futur »

Nicolas Chapuis

Témoignage - Du secret des chancelleries à l’agora des réseaux : les nouveaux enjeux de l’écriture diplomatique

Christophe Farnaud

Page 212 à 224

Témoignage - Le diplomate à l’ère numérique

Partie III - Un modèle français ?

Christophe Poupault

12 - La commémoration romaine de Chateaubriand en 1934 ou l’instrumentalisation de l’écrivain diplomate au service de l’amitié franco-italienne

Stanislav Sretenović

13 - Les écrivains et poètes serbes dans la diplomatie du royaume des Serbes, Croates et Slovènes/Yougoslavie, 1918-1941 : un enjeu historiographique

Federico Niglia

14 - Les diplomates et l’écriture dans la tradition italienne, de l’Unité à nos jours

Pauline Milani, Matthieu Gillabert

15 - Gens de plume à l’ambassade : les réticences de la diplomatie culturelle suisse face au modèle français

Wayne H. Bowen

16 - Les écrivains diplomates espagnols, de l’époque napoléonienne au régime franquiste

Jean-Marc Delaunay

17 - Les diplomates écrivains latino-américains, une fécondité biséculaire

Annexe

Partie IV - Figures

Jacques-Olivier Boudon

18 - Chateaubriand, modèle du diplomate romantique

Lorraine de Meaux

19 - Les écrivains diplomates russes et le récit impérial au xix ^esiècle

Julien Gueslin

20 - « Entre deux mondes ». Oscar Milosz, croisades politiques et dilemmes d’un homme de lettres (1916-1925)

Christophe Le Dréau

21 - Harold Nicolson et Duff Cooper : dandys anglais, écrivains diplomates et paneuropéens

Kerwin Spire

22 - Romain Gary, écrivain diplomate

Yljjet Alicka, Joëlle Bourgois,Stéphane Gompertz, Patrick Imhaus,Henri Lopès,Daniel Rondeau,Modérateurs Gilles Ferragu, Modérateurs Renaud Meltz

Table ronde : les convergences du diplomate et de l’écrivain

Laurence Badel

Conclusion

Le verbe et le corps : anthropologie du diplomate écrivain

Pages de fin

Pesquisa sobre a historiografia das RI no Brasil - respostas PRAlmeida

Pesquisa sobre o estudo da história para as relações internacionais no Brasil

Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Respostas a questionário submetido online.

Feito em 18/05/2018

Este formulário é parte de um projeto de Pesquisa conjunto dos professores xxxx (...). O objetivo é levantar percepções e críticas sobre o nexo História e Relações Internacionais no Brasil. As respostas servirão para estudos, publicações e proposições que privilegiem o avanço da discussão sobre o ensino e a pesquisa em História para a área de Relações Internacionais no país.

Nome e filiação Institucional: *

Sua resposta: PRA: Paulo Roberto de Almeida, Diretor do Instituto de Pesquisa de Relações Internacionais, IPRI-Funag, vinculado ao Ministério das Relações Exteriores; professor de Economia Política nos programas de mestrado e doutorado em Direito do Centro Universitário de Brasília (Uniceub).

Concorda que suas respostas sejam utilizadas para as finalidades desta pesquisa? *

Sim PRA

Quais as principais inspirações intelectuais na sua formação? *

Sua resposta: PRA: Adquirir uma base sólida em sociologia e em economia, com vistas a influir no processo de transformação estrutural, nos campos político e econômico, no Brasil, e desenvolver uma carreira vinculada a atividades acadêmicas, no plano da pesquisa e da docência. Circunstâncias especiais orientaram-me para a carreira diplomática, na qual continuei a desenvolver, paralelamente, atividades acadêmicas, de pesquisa e produção de material vinculado à area internacional, tanto na vertente da história, quando da ciência política, e especialmente em relações econômicas internacionais, com ampla produção de artigos e livros nessas áreas.

De qual geração de historiadores de relações internacionais no Brasil você se considera?

1a Geração(Aquela que inaugurou os estudos no Brasil, mas que teve sua formação fora do Brasil); PRA

2a Geração (Aquela formada nos estudos no Brasil pela 1a Geração)

Nova Geração

Descreva brevemente o seu método de trabalho como historiador das RI.  *

Sua resposta: PRA: Na verdade, não me considero um "historiador" de RI, sendo formado em sociologia e em economia, com doutoramento em sociologia histórica, mas no terreno do desenvolvimento econômico e dos regimes políticos. Gradualmente, por sólidas leituras em história – ainda que não formado metodologicamente nessa disciplina – inclinei-me para os estudos de sociologia das relações internacionais com profundo embasamento na história (política e econômica). Meu método combina pesquisa em arquivos, mas não de forma extensiva, documentação primária da época, literatura secundária, sobre os temas cobertos em meus estudos, geralmente numa perspectiva histórica e comparada, com amplo apoio em indicadores econômicos seriais.

História das Relações Internacionais e História da Política Externa. O que se faz no Brasil, na sua opinião?  *

Sua resposta: PRA: Tradicionalmente, sempre foi história diplomática – ou seja, baseada principalmente na atuação da chancelaria –, posteriormente voltada para as relações exteriores do país – compreendendo, portanto, fatores econômicos, políticos e sociais, externos ao âmbito exclusivo da diplomacia oficial – e complementada, mais recentemente, por uma visão mais ampla da política externa brasileira nos contextos regional e internacional. Mais raros são os estudos e pesquisas que visam colocar o Brasil no contexto global, ou seja, ver a trajetória das relações internacionais do país tal como inserido numa história global, que guarda alguma relação, mas não é a mesma coisa, com os estudos de "sistema-mundo", ou de economia mundial.

Como você avalia o diálogo com os historiadores-internacionalistas vizinhos? *

FracoPRA

Razoável

Bom

Muito Bom

Como você avalia o diálogo com os historiadores-internacionalistas do Sul-Global (África e Ásia especialmente)? *

Fraco

Razoável

Bom PRA

Muito Bom

Qual a sua opinião sobre a formação de algum tipo de institucionalidade de Historiadores das Relações Internacionais da América do Sul como meio para a integração regional?

Sua resposta: PRA: Pode ser positivo, e de certa forma já existe na área de história econômica, por exemplo, mas para a América Latina como um todo, não restrito à América do Sul. Poderia ser positiva uma iniciativa nesse sentido, uma vez que existem conexões reais entre os povos e Estados da região, em vista dos fluxos econômicos e humanos desenvolvidos ao longo de uma longa trajetória histórica.

Como avalia a conformação de um Forum Específico de Historiadores das Relações Internacionais dos BRICS para o avanço de uma História Global das Relações Internacionais ?

Irrelevante: PRA

Pouco relevante

Relevante

Muito Relevante

Qual a sua avaliação sobre a importância das teorias para o estudo da História das Relações Internacionais? *

Sua resposta; PRA: Sou menos propenso a estudar a história das relações internacionais do Brasil no plano teórico, ainda que aceite que possa existir, implicitamente a esses estudos, algumas concepções teóricas sobre a organização e o desenvolvimento de algumas tendências fortes nesse terreno. Podem ser interessantes, mas não as considero relevantes para um estudo caracterizadamente histórico.

Qual sua opinião sobre o ensino de história para os cursos de relações internacionais no Brasil e as pesquisas da área na pós graduação? *

Sua resposta: PRA: Não apenas necessário, como absolutamente indispensável para o estudo e uma compreensão objetiva, fundamentada em bases sólidas, da política externa e das relações internacionais do Brasil. Não se pode apreender objetivamente características atuais das relações internacionais e da política externa do Brasil atualmente, sem levar em conta fases pregressas, antecedentes dos processos atuais.

Quais rumos você acredita que a História das Relações Internacionais deve seguir para continuar como um campo relevante de estudo das RI? *

Sua resposta: PRA: Sólida base empírica – ou seja, estudos econômicos e políticos amplamente amparados em pesquisa primária, com interpretação dos dados em seu contexto próprio – e visão integrada dos processos abordados. Não tomar documentos produzidos por governos como evidências reais, ou fieis, dos problemas estudados, não tomar o discurso dos atores como representativos dos processos subjacentes às questões abordadas, tentar sempre enquadrar esses estudos num contexto mais amplo, que por vezes não está suficientemente refletido na literatura disponível ou nos documentos compulsados. Finalmente, desenvolver uma metodologia séria para esses estudos, sair do amadorismo característico dos primeiros anos, afastar modismos ou vieses de qualquer tipo – ideológicos, geralmente – e exigir pesquisa primária e leituras paralelas ao objeto principal de pesquisa.

Envie-me uma cópia das minhas respostas.

Guidelines para empresas multinacionais - Raymond Saner

Um especialista da Suíça participa de uma publicação importante da OCDE:

OECD Responsible Business Conduct/Guidelines

Investment Trends and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (The Guidelines) and the United Nations Guiding Principles (UNGPs)

R. Saner (2018), Investment Trends and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (The Guidelines) and the United Nations Guiding Principles (UNGPs)

The UNGPs and the OECD Guidelines are the two most authoritative guidance documents for implementation of Responsible Business Conduct. While the UNGPs focus on business and human rights, the OECD Guidelines go further and have a broader scope. In addition to human rights, the OECD Guidelines also cover employment and industrial relations, the environment, fighting corruption, consumer interests, science and technology, competition and taxation.

Read more...

Recent Development of the National Contact Points of signatory countries to the OECD RBC Guidelines

CSEND Policy Brief, Nr. 16, April 2015

Raymond Saner, Girolamo Viciglione and Lichia Yiu

The regulation of business conduct is a controversial topic and it has been at the centre of attention of the OECD for several decades. A first version of the guidelines dates back to 1976 and has been reviewed five times since then in order to improve its effectiveness in dealing with responsible business conduct by adapting the guidelines to economical and non- structural changes over time. This short article narrates the gradual improvement of the OECD guidelines.

.Read more..

Analysis of NCP’s responses to Alleged Breaches of OECD Guidelines by MNEs

Raymond Saner, Girolamo Viciglione, Lichia Yiu and Mario Filadoro, 2015

The data shown in this presentation has been retrieved from the OECD online database, which contains all the officially reported cases of violations of the OECD guidelines to multinational enterprises.

Read more...

Title of the book : “40 Years of the OECD Guidelines”; sous la direction de Nicola Bonucci et Catherine Kessedjian, Editions A. PEDONE – PARIS – 2018; I.S.B.N. 978-2-233-00868-8

http://www.csend.org/programmes-a-services/oecd-responsible-business-conduct-guidelines
http://www.csend.org/images/articles/files/20180510-OECD%20RBC%20GL%2040%20Years%20RS.PDF   

R. Saner (2018): Investment Trends and OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises (The Guidelines) and the United Nations Guiding Principles (UNGPs)

The UNGPs and the OECD Guidelines are the two most authoritative guidance documents for implementation of Responsible Business Conduct. While the UNGPs focus on business and human rights, the OECD Guidelines go further and have a broader scope. In addition to human rights, the OECD Guidelines also cover employment and industrial relations, the environment, fighting corruption, consumer interests, science and technology, competition and taxation.

Modern Growth performance - Alexander Plekhanov

Um paper imprescindível para detectar os fatores do desempenho econômico dos países, os bem sucedidos e os retardatários.
Fiz um resumo do essencial e coloquei na minha página de Academia.edu:
Link: http://www.academia.edu/36685377/Modern_Growth_Performance_Modern_growth_in_perspective_relative_performance_since_the_global_financial_crisis

Modern Growth in Perspective: Relative Performance Since the Global Financial Crisis

EBRD Working Paper No. 214

39 Pages Posted: 14 May 2018  

Alexander Plekhanov

European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD)

Date Written: May 10, 2018

Abstract

This paper evaluates the growth performance of more than 200 economies. It identifies instances of relatively strong economic performance after the 2008-09 global financial crisis, and asks if determinants of sustained strong (and weak) performance have changed in recent years. It finds that investment matters more for growth post-crisis; that the negative impact of debt-based financial development predates the crisis; and that economic openness and democracy now play a greater role in ensuring “average” growth outcomes. 

Keywords: economic growth, reversals, populism, synthetic controls

JEL Classification: O47, E65

Suggested Citation:

Plekhanov, Alexander, Modern Growth in Perspective: Relative Performance Since the Global Financial Crisis (May 10, 2018). EBRD Working Paper No. 214. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3178069

Nixon e Kissinger: dois cinicos ambiciosos - book review Robert Dallek

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/13/books/review/Lawrence-t.html?

The Odd Couple

By MARK ATWOOD LAWRENCE

The New York Times Sunday Book Review, May 13, 2007

Visionaries or cynics? Peacemakers or warmongers? Few individuals in recent times have provoked as much controversy as Richard Nixon and his partner in foreign affairs, Henry Kissinger. Admirers laud the two men for dramatically easing the cold war and sensibly recognizing the limits of American power to shape the world. Critics castigate them as Machiavellians who undertook reckless policies in the third world, often throwing American power behind brutal tyrants in elusive quests for international stability.

Robert Dallek argues for another possibility: the two men were visionaries and cynics at the same time. On first consideration, this is an unremarkable conclusion. And yet “Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power” makes a valuable contribution to the study of American policy making during the turbulent years from 1969 through 1974. Partly, it does this by transcending the stale polemics that have surrounded the study of Nixon and Kissinger. But its more significant, if not wholly convincing, achievement is to connect the unevenness of their policy-making performance with the ups and downs of their peculiar personalities. “The careers of both Nixon and Kissinger,” Dallek asserts, “reflect the extent to which great accomplishments and public wrongdoing can spring from inner lives.”

This isn’t the first time Dallek, a prolific biographer of American presidents, has challenged simplistic characterizations of public men by delving into their private behavior. In 2003, his best-selling study, “An Unfinished Life: John F. Kennedy, 1917-1963,” drew on long-secret medical records to describe Kennedy’s epic struggles against a variety of ailments. “Nixon and Kissinger” contains no such spectacular revelations. Indeed, Dallek’s extensive use of recently declassified material — millions of pages of national security documents, 2,800 hours of Nixon’s secret tape recordings and 20,000 pages of transcriptions of Kissinger’s phone calls — seems to have turned up nothing to revise the broad contours of either man’s life. Rather, Dallek exploits this new material mainly for the quotations and fresh details that enable him to paint rich portraits of his two subjects.

Associated Press 

Superficially, Nixon and Kissinger, who served first as Nixon’s national security adviser and then as his secretary of state, had precious little in common. The president, son of a California grocer, identified with the hopes and grievances of middle America and bristled with resentment against East Coast sophisticates. Kissinger, a German-born Jew, rose to prominence as a pathbreaking scholar of international politics at Harvard and reveled in his acceptance among the political and intellectual elite.

But fundamentally, Dallek shows, the two were remarkably alike. Both wanted desperately to leave a deep imprint on history. Both were ruthless pragmatists who disregarded decorum, principle and sometimes the law to get what they wanted. And both were insecure loners who distrusted, deceived and abused just about everyone, including each other. For these troubled men, Dallek writes, politics offered “a form of vocational therapy” — an arena where they could exercise control and find approval.

Shared neuroses led to jealousy and hostility. Kissinger privately assailed Nixon as “that madman” and “the meatball mind.” Nixon returned the favor, demeaning Kissinger as his “Jew boy” and calling him “psychopathic.” He fretted incessantly that Kissinger was getting too much credit for the administration’s accomplishments and repeatedly considered firing him. Still, Dallek writes, their common characteristics did even more to bond the two men, who formed “one of or possibly the most significant White House collaboration in U.S. history.”

Under some circumstances, Dallek suggests, their blend of ideological flexibility and monumental egotism produced bold foreign policy advances, most notably the opening of relations with Communist China in 1971-72. And he praises Nixon and Kissinger even more exuberantly for initiating détente with the Soviet Union. Agreements negotiated with Moscow, he argues, helped end the cold war by lowering Soviet hostility to the outside world and opening the country to Western influences, which ate away at Communist rule from the inside. Kissinger’s efforts to make peace in the Middle East after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war similarly laid the groundwork for a later breakthrough, in this case the landmark 1978 accord between Egypt and Israel.

Associated Press 

On other occasions, Dallek writes, Nixon and Kissinger’s cynicism and unreasonable fear of defeat interacted to produce some of the administration’s ugliest moments. Above all, the two men needlessly prolonged and expanded the Vietnam War in a disastrous attempt to stave off a Communist victory at a moment when most Americans and most of the world wanted the fighting to end. In Chile, Nixon and Kissinger conspired to overthrow the Socialist government of Salvador Allende — and to bring the murderous regime of Augusto Pinochet to power — even though they could not identify any specific way in which Allende threatened the United States. Their fear that a leftist government in Chile might inspire radicals throughout Latin America was, Dallek charges, “nothing more than paranoia.”

What’s more, Dallek presents a devastating account of irresponsibility and dysfunction within the White House as the Watergate scandal unfolded. Desperate to save their careers, Nixon and Kissinger schemed to manipulate foreign policy to distract attention from the deepening domestic crisis. When these efforts failed, an increasingly unbalanced and alcohol-fogged Nixon abandoned foreign affairs almost entirely, leaving Kissinger in charge as a sort of unelected “co-president.” At the start of the 1973 Middle East war, Kissinger delayed informing Nixon for two and a half hours because of uncertainty about the politically embattled president’s ability to cope with urgent decisions.

Dallek’s attention to personalities makes “Nixon and Kissinger” remarkably engaging for a 700-page study of policy making. But this emphasis also underlies its chief weakness: the implication that the foreign policy devised by Nixon and Kissinger lacked intellectual coherence. Curiously, Dallek fails to describe at any length the rapidly shifting geostrategic landscape that confronted the Nixon administration as it entered office in 1969 — above all, the relative decline of American power due to the Vietnam War and the Soviet Union’s attainment of nuclear parity with the United States. Nor does he adequately explore Nixon’s or Kissinger’s innovative response to this new situation. Champions of realpolitik, the two men deliberately favored cool-headed calculation of national interests over ideological consistency. Without this essential background, their decisions seem haphazard rather than parts of a strategy to shore up United States influence by cultivating a new partner in China, easing the cost of the arms race with Moscow, bolstering pro-American leaders in the third world and avoiding defeat in Vietnam.

The narrow focus on character also obscures the full extent of the two men’s failures as policy makers. To be sure, their compulsive secretiveness and paranoia contributed to the downfall of the Nixon administration, precisely as Dallek suggests. But the two failed in a more profound sense as well. Their policies, rooted in the cold calculation of American interests, generated a powerful backlash from both liberals, angered by the brutalization of the third world, and conservatives, who objected to the coddling of Communists. The liberals helped elect Jimmy Carter in 1976, the conservatives Ronald Reagan in 1980 — presidents who, despite their many differences, shared a deep hostility to the lack of moral principle at the heart of Nixon-era foreign policy. The ideas of Nixon and Kissinger, not just their characters, have languished in disrepute ever since.