What is feminist diplomacy or rather should the question be posed, what ought feminist diplomacy be? What needs feminist diplomacy be? What will feminist diplomacy be and importantly what should feminist be?
These are essential questions to ask as we need inquire as to the epistemology, ontology, hermeneutics and teleology of the question of feminist diplomacy. This of course is not somehow merely a philosophical question but extends to every field of science in that feminist diplomacy is about promoting feminist policy globally and which in turn needs be scientifically based. Feminist diplomacy ought therefore not be confused with discursive illusions of internationalized identity politics.
Feminist diplomacy need furthermore be precisely about promoting the renaissance of the repressed domain of the feminine in international affairs. Diplomacy itself of course in performative terms precisely belongs to the repressed domain of the feminine since diplomacy is essentially the art of speaking soft in pursuing female cunning. It has often been suggested that diplomacy is the opposite of warfare, meaning the opposite of patriarchal warfare specifically. Yet it has also been suggested that there is a continuum of warfare and diplomacy in both forming part of the same policy spectrum in one being a continuation of the other.
As diplomacy is surviving expression of a mostly repressed domain of the feminine as derived from gynocentric court etiquette needs the question be posed how the feminine practice of diplomacy may be complemented by feminist policy?
Diplomacy is engaged with both national concerns and international concerns as diplomacy must promote the national interest for how can national diplomacy promote the international good if it does not first promote the national interest as ethico-politically delimited by values of emancipation, freedom and democracy?
Feminist diplomacy ought in practical terms before all devote itself to what ought be the most fundamental question of feminist concern, namely patriarchal practices of enslavement of females, and in particular patriarchy’s sexual enslavement of females.
The world’s first feminist state is officially known as the Democratic Federation of Northern Syria (DFNS) and is internationally mostly known for the Women Protection Units (YPJ), the women’s corps of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The YPJ has been granted a significant number of Israeli nuclear weapons as beginning as prior to the Zagros War (usually known as the Kirkuk crisis) with the signing of the comprehensive Israeli-Kurdistani defense pact as prior to the Kurdistan Regional Government’s (KRG) symbolic referendum of independence in 2017. Since the Afrin War of 2018 does the YPJ command both the SDF in Syria and the Peshmerga of Iraqi Kurdistan.
The internal, semi-secret and actual name of the DFNS is Femina. As a state is Femina committed to minimal government while promoting universal emancipation. This means that Femina seeks to minimize the functional involvement of government in life, including minimizing government administration with the purpose of ending the scourge of bureaucracy. Minimizing government is simply a matter of practically speaking abolishing patriarchy. The purpose of Femina is thus not projection of patriarchal power but rather the dismantlement of patriarchy itself.
This is important keep in mind when discussing the question of feminist diplomacy as diplomatic police is typically conceived of as monstrous accumulation of power at the expense of others, meaning seeking regional and/or global domination over others, whether over other human peoples, over non-human animal persons or generally controlling environments for the purpose of degrading/destroying those living environments.
Feminist diplomacy is thus concerned with delimiting power in both exercising power and seeking to limit exercise of power. Feminist diplomacy is the pursuit of feminist virtues in emancipation, freedom and democracy in opposing the social construction of diplomatic policy as naive idealism as a tool for cynical realism.
Feminist diplomacy is not a mere women’s lobby as feminist diplomacy is concerned with promotion and furtherance of universal emancipation by ethico-political means of conceptual innovation, social innovation and technological innovation.
Feminist diplomacy is critical of both cynical war and naive pacifism in understanding that warfare is not merely a tactics of deployment of power but feminist warfare is importantly a strategy for social change as e.g. in the SDF’s successful liberation of Raqqa, the former capital of the rapist Islamic State Caliphate (DAESH), something which has brought tremendous social changes in terms of increasing implementation of feminist social revolution of democratic universal emancipation.
Feminist diplomatic policy does not merely conceive of the international good as one of exclusive “human”, ostensibly yet not not actually “universal” interest but furthermore recognizes that universal emancipation (to the inclusion of non-human persons) and global environmental restoration are essential parts of the common good as well.
Feminist diplomatic policy ought therefore not seek the furtherance of human colonialism on Earth as degrading living environments and enslaving non-human persons but rather need seek endeavor to minimize the human footprint on Planet Earth as well as focus on space colonization of strictly uninhabited planets elsewhere.
Feminist diplomatic policy needs be concerned about creating awareness as to fundamentally harmful aspects of ethnocratic patriarchy (and structural oppression generally) such as male enslavement of females and phallocentrically sublimitaed degradation and destruction of environments. Yet, recognizing ills as “bad” is distinctly insufficient as verified conceptual, social and technological innovation needs be but put into motion in not merely producing discourse but actually attaining social progress of effective ethico-political implementation.
Feminist diplomacy is furthermore not mere reproduction of forms of internationalist discourse that are distinctly ineffective in actually attaining social progress. Feminist diplomatic policy is not one of consensus of ethnocratic patriarchies but is committed to ethical courage of democratic realism in the tradition of Rosa Parks and this importantly requires both ethico-political innovation but furthermore scientific training in the art and science of ethico-political courage.
Feminist diplomatic policy is however not enclosed in a phonocentrically carno-phallogocentric conception of sameness but is rather ethico-politically open to opportunities for attaining social change by means of conceptual, social and technological innovation indeed.
Feminist diplomating policy is thus not content with mere description of problem and assigning blame to others as is so immensely popular, yet so extremely ineffectual in most ethico-political endeavors. Policy as so often becomes an obstacle to social change by delimiting the horizon of the future of the discourse of the recent past. Rather is the challenge to ethico-politically open up the future to conceptual, social and technological change indeed.
The Eurolect – Politics of the Para-Christian documentation project