Importance of public diplomacy for states foreign policy implementation and image formation continued to grow over past few decades. New communication technologies provided new means for more successful public diplomacy implementation. The aim of this article is to examine the role of twiplomacy in states foreign policy implementation. Twiplomacy is quite new phenomenon, but its significance is undeniable. A lot of states leaders, governmental institutions, diplomatic missions and diplomats have accounts in Twitter and use it for promoting foreign policy goals and developing positive image of state. Social networks are used to implement states’ public diplomacy, because they provide opportunity to reach mainstream audiences, to develop dialogue amongst politicians and wider audiences and influence people opinion on important issues.
The paper reflects on the conception of the phenomenon of fear employed in the international relations theory. A critique of understanding of fear as a rational incentive of conventional international relations theories paves the way for the notion of fear as an emotion. It is argued that the behaviour of states in international politics should be explained via their psychological and emotional aspects. The paper proposes to connect the arising of and experiencing fear with collective memory and the imagery entrenched in nations’ subconscious. It also proposes to distinguish the two levels of arising of and experiencing the emotion of fear, namely the attempt to consciously arouse fear and its nonconscious experience. On the first level, mnemonic-emotive agents consciously activate collective emotions via the nation’s collective memory. On the second, once the contents/imagery of the society’s subconscious are activated, the aroused emotions are nonconsciously experienced by the society. The paper offers a case study from the Lithuanian foreign policy: its relations with Russia. Discourse analysis of Lithuania-Russia relations, where President Dalia Grybauskaitė plays an active and important role in discourse formation, suggests that the formation of Lithuanian foreign policy, with regard to Russia, is affected by the emotion of fear.
The development of nuclear power in Belarus is an important issue addressed by Lithuanian foreign policy due to a mixture of geographic, political and nuclear safety concerns. Despite the pronounced relevance, the topic has received very limited academic attention. The paper attempts to fill this gap by identifying key objectives of Lithuanian foreign policy towards Ostrovets NPP and strategy for attaining them. The research is based on the analysis of high-level meetings and statements of six Lithuanian decision makers and a wide range of official documents. The paper argues that despite the apparent focus on nuclear safety of Ostrovets NPP, Lithuanian foreign policy aims to prevent its construction or at least to prolong the process. In order to do this, Lithuanian pressures Belarus via European Union and other international organizations and platforms by highlighting the nuclear safety issues of the plant, Belarusian non-compliance with Espoo and Aarhus conventions and presenting it as matter of international concern.
Iran nuclear negotiations, which resulted in an agreement in Vienna on the 14 July 2015 after signing The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, and its aftermath is one of the key topics of inquiry in recent decade. The density of the debate is primarily emanating from concerns related to the security questions of the Middle East and to the sensitivity of Israeli security situation. Moreover, it arises from the complexity of the whole negotiation process. Such issues like Supreme Leader’s Ali Khamene’i’s fatwa designating sinfulness to the nuclear capacity, his after-deal speech, calling for the enmity between Iran and the United States, Iran’s declared aim to implement global justice and other cases are not customary acts of the state and the study of Iranian foreign policy is not substantive using customary instruments of analysis of International Relations. The article refers to the problem of knowledge production on Iran, and suggests that it mainly resulted from the lack of exchange between International Relations and Middle Eastern studies. This article aims to point at the authority of the ideas in Iran’s foreign policy that Islam or Islamic ideologies like Khumaynism produce. Therefore the article focuses on the main narratives of the First Supreme Leader Ruhullah Khumayni’s concept of justice in order to, first, explain the key points in Iran’s position during negotiations and its aftermath and, second, to introduce the study of the concept of justice as a productive source of information and an approach for further analysis of Iranian foreign policy.
The article provides an explanation of how energy resources become instruments in Russia’s foreign policy towards countries-consumers at the same time indicating elements determining the efficiency of energy instruments to reach Russia’s foreign policy goals. The article argues that Russia expanded its state power in energy sector through direct and indirect mobilisation. There are two types of energy instruments - sway and compel. The effectiveness of energy instruments depends on barriers country-consumer has. Instruments may have positive targeted and foreseen as well untargeted and unforeseen negative consequences for Russia and countries-consumers in Post-Soviet space especially focusing on Belarus and Ukraine.
Boeckh, K., 2014. Allies are forever (until they are no more): Yugoslavia’s multivectoral foreignpolicy. In: Keil, S. and Stahl, B. eds. The foreignpolicies of post-Yugoslav states: from Yugoslavia to Europe. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 18-43.
Bojinović, A., 2005. Geographical proximity and historical context as a basis of active foreignpolicy strategy of small European states: the case of Austria and Slovenia regarding the western Balkans. Politics in Central Europe, 1(1): 8
Strategic partnership between states is a reciprocal exchange built on mutual commitment. The significance of the United States to Lithuania is unquestionable. However, why should the U.S. care about Lithuania? The emphasis on the U.S. interests and policies allows ignoring the question about Lithuania’s engagement and input into the partnership. Therefore, this article asks how does Lithuania contribute to the strategic partnership with the U.S.? To be precise, does Lithuania support and pledge its allegiance to the U.S. when this support goes beyond the limits of direct responsibilities of strategic partner, or even enters into a conflict with other important responsibilities or interests of the state?
 Joyce P. Kaufman, ”The US perspective on NATO under Trump: lessons of the past and prospects for the future”, International Affairs, 93:2 (2017), p. 265.
 Anders Fogh Rasmussen, The will to lead: America’s indispensable role in the global fight for freedom, New York, Broadside, 2016, p. IX.
 Christian Nunlist, The legacy of Obama’s ForeignPolicy, CSS ETH Zurich, March 2016, No. 188, p. 3, available at http
Groups, Corporations, Governments and Others Get what They Want . New York: Routledge.
McNair, Brian. 2000. Journalism and Democracy: a Millennial Audit. Journalism Studies 1 (2). 197-211
Morin, Jean Frédéric and Jonathan Paquin. 2018. ForeignPolicy Analysis: A Toolbox . Cham: Palgrave MacMillan.
Mussolff, Andreas. 2004. Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan
Oswald, Steve, Herman, Thierry and Jérôme Jacquin. (eds.) 2018. Argumentation and Language – Linguistic
Averre, D. (2009), “Competing Rationalities: Russia, the EU and the ‘Shared
Neighbourhood’,” Europe-Asia Studies, vol. 61, no. 10, pp. 1689–1713.
Bressand, A. (2011), ‘Between Kant and Machiavelli: EU foreignpolicy priorities in the
2010s,’ International Affairs, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 59–85.
Brooks, S. G. & Wohlforth, W. C. (2010), World Out of Balance: International Relations
and the Challenge of American