Foreign Affairs
English
Submit an article
Back to Issue: No.5, 2025

Strategies of asymmetric diplomacy of small states in a multipolar world

Łukasz Kozera

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the need to understand the role of small states in the transformation of the international system in the context of the transition to multipolarity. The aim of the study was to analyse the theoretical foundations and practical mechanisms of asymmetric diplomacy of small states in the context of the transformation of the global order, to identify the key factors of its effectiveness and to justify the optimal approaches to its implementation. Methodologically, the work was based on institutional analysis with elements of comparative and conceptual modelling. The study identified four types of asymmetric diplomacy: humanitarian, expert, subversive and neutral, each of which is based on the resources and strategic positioning of small states. The empirical material covered cases from Qatar, Norway, Switzerland, Singapore, Iceland, Estonia, Ireland, Costa Rica, and Finland. The study analysed examples of information influence, mediation, climate diplomacy, institutional participation and educational partnerships as foreign policy tools. Norway uses humanitarian diplomacy and mediation, relying on its reputation as a neutral peacemaker, and is actively involved in peace processes (Colombia, Sri Lanka), combining state initiatives with the work of non-governmental organisations. Qatar implements a subversive strategy through media influence and economic diplomacy, mediating conflicts in the Middle East and using financial resources to build geopolitical authority. Singapore's main tool is expert diplomacy in the fields of technology, fintech and climate, creating international platforms (Shangri-La Dialogue, Singapore FinTech Festival) and positioning itself as a neutral technocratic mediator between the West and Asia. The conclusion found that small states are capable of implementing influential foreign policy through niche expertise and institutional positioning. The practical significance of the work lies in the development of a conceptual framework for the formation of foreign policy strategies of small states in a complex global environment

Keywords

humanitarian diplomacy; climate diplomacy; geopolitical pressure; neutrality; mediation

References

  1. Adachi, Y. (2024). Competition vs. cooperation in multilateral mediation: Exploring the transition in Egypt and Qatar’s mediation tactics in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (Master’s thesis, Central European University, Vienna, Austria). doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35296.49927.
  2. Aizenberh, T. (2024). Artificial intelligence technologies in international management. University Economic Bulletin, 19(1), 34-43. doi: 10.69587/ueb/1.2024.34.
  3. Albreki, A.S.S.M. (2025). The impact of public diplomacy on soft power strategy: Moderating role of media and communication. (Doctoral thesis, University of Cordoba, Cordoba, Spain).
  4. Al-Khulaifi, K. (2024). The smart power of small states: An in-depth study of Qatar. (Doctoral thesis, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia). doi: 10.25911/2S5E-6F48.
  5. Al-Mohannadi, A.M.M. (2024). Mediation as a peaceful means of conflict resolution: The experience of the State of Qatar. (Master’s thesis, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar).
  6. Al-Obaidan, A.J.Y. (2022). Soft power shaping the foreign policy of small states: A comparative study between Qatar and Singapore. (Doctoral dissertation, Qatar University, Doha, Qatar).
  7. APEC. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.apec.org/.
  8. ASEAN. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://agreement.asean.org/home.html.
  9. Barkho, L. (2019). Editorial policies and news discourse – how Al Jazeera’s implicit guidelines shape its coverage of Middle East conflicts. Journalism, 22(6), 1357-1374. doi: 10.1177/1464884919841797.
  10. Bary, I. (2022). Low-leverage states in international mediation: A comparative case study of Norway and Qatar. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom).
  11. Bykova, A. (2024). What the Arctic means to NATO. In F. Güçyetmez & J.R. Dmello (Eds.), Arctic 8 policy: Reassessing international relations (pp. 15-44). London: Transnational Press London.
  12. Charles, J. (2024). Rethinking diplomacy: How small states can leverage new media for the conduct of diplomacy in the digital age. (Master’s thesis, University of Malta, Msida, Malta).
  13. Cities Alliance. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.citiesalliance.org/.
  14. Climate Action Data Trust. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://climateactiondata.org/.
  15. Darma, S., Fithria, A., Ainy, R.N., & Amalia, D. (2025). Integrating ESG into regional government financial reporting: Insights from Jakarta’s smart city initiatives. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1524, article number 012010. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1524/1/012010.
  16. de Goede, S.W. (2021). Application of mediation in international disputes resolution: Reconsidering mediation for the growing complexity and diversity of international disputes. (Master’s thesis, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea).
  17. Echendu, A.J. (2022). Adapting the Singapore model to Nigeria’s urban management: Possibilities and challenges. Region, 9(1), 115-133. doi: 10.18335/region.v9i1.359.
  18. Education Finland. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.educationfinland.fi/.
  19. Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA). (2025). Neutrality. Retrieved from https://www.eda.admin.ch/eda/en/fdfa/foreign-policy/international-law/neutrality.html. 
  20. Fiala, M. (2019). Lilliputians and the amorphous giant: Small states’ opportunities facing the hybrid threat. (Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, USA).
  21. Gehrmann, A. (2022). Emerging smart power in the Gulf Region – Qatar’s foreign policy nexus. (Master’s thesis, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands).
  22. Gold, J. (2019). How Estonia uses cybersecurity to strengthen its position in NATO. Retrieved from https://icds.ee/en/how-estonia-uses-cybersecurity-to-strengthen-its-position-in-nato/.
  23. International Institute for Strategic Studies. (n.d.). IISS Shangri-La dialogue. Retrieved from https://www.iiss.org/events/iiss-shangri-la-dialogue/.
  24. Lakshminarayanan, R. (2021). The multipolar world and small states: Emerging perspectives in India-Kuwait strategic partnerships. Asian Journal of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 15(2), 289-308. doi: 10.1080/25765949.2021.1940016.
  25. Long, T., & Long, T.S. (2022). A small state’s guide to influence in world politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
  26. Milton, S., Elkahlout, G., & Tariq, S. (2025). Qatar’s evolving role in conflict mediation. Mediterranean Politics, 30(1), 53-77. doi: 10.1080/13629395.2023.2266665.
  27. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Estonia. (n.d.). Cybersecurity cooperation – regional activities. Retrieved from https://vm.ee/en/activity/digital-and-cyber-diplomacy/cybersecurity-cooperation.
  28. Mohamed, A. (2025). Qatari peace mediation and humanitarian aid in Sudan: Lessons from the war in Darfur 2003-2022. Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 20(1), 86-99. doi: 10.1177/15423166241312874.
  29. Murphy, S. (2019). Ireland and NATO: Challenges and opportunities. Retrieved from https://ams.hi.is/en/publication/81/.
  30. NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://ccdcoe.org/.
  31. Norwegian Centre for Conflict Resolution (NOREF). (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.devex.com/organizations/norwegian-centre-for-conflict-resolution-noref-151296.
  32. Norwegian Refugee Council. (n.d.). NORDEM: Expert deployment for human rights, democracy, and peace. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.no/expert-deployment/nordem2.
  33. Oztuna, A. (2024). An analytical study of the evolving role of third-party mediators in international conflicts: A comparative examination of diplomatic interventions. International Journal of Scientific Research in Humanities, Legal Studies and International Relations, 8(1), 155-172. doi: 10.48028/iiprds/ijsrhlir.v8.i1.11.
  34. Pajo, J. (2018). Minor players in a major game – the success of Sweden and Norway as mediators. (Master’s thesis, Vytautas Magnus University, Kaunas, Lithuania).
  35. Pedi, R., & Wivel, A. (2022). What future for small states after unipolarity? Strategic opportunities and challenges in the post-American world order. In N. Græger, B. Heurlin, O. Wæver, & A. Wivel (Eds.), Polarity in international relations (127-147). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-05505-8_7.
  36. Qatar Centre for Peace and Democracy. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://qatarcpd.com/.
  37. Ramjit, D.M. (2025). Global diplomacy in a multipolar era. Law, Economics and Society, 1(1), 107-114. doi: 10.30560/les.v1n1p107.
  38. Ruhe, C. (2020). Impeding fatal violence through third-party diplomacy: The effect of mediation on conflict intensity. Journal of Peace Research, 58(4), 687-701. doi: 10.1177/0022343320930072.
  39. Sahlberg, P. (2021). Finnish lessons 3.0: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teachers College Press.
  40. Samha, H. (2023). Soft power as small state’s foreign policy strategy: The cases of Qatar and Singapore. (Master’s thesis, Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan).
  41. Sharofiddinov, O. (2024). Qatar’s mediation diplomacy: Its role in Middle East conflict resolution. Modern Science and Research, 3(10), 515-522.
  42. Singapore FinTech Festival. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.fintechfestival.sg/.
  43. Solís, L.G. (2022). Costa Rica – the demilitarisation of politics: An exceptional story. In K. Kruijt & K. Koonings (Eds.), Latin American military and politics in the twenty-first century: A cross-national analysis (pp. 76-88). London: Routledge.
  44. Stănescu, M. (2024). A small state’s security strategy in a changing world – Republic of Moldova case study. Scientific Bulletin, 29(2), 307-316. doi: 10.2478/bsaft-2024-0031.
  45. Stensland, F.L. (2023). What role did Norway really play in the Oslo process? A case study in small-state mediation. Israel Studies Review, 38(2), 30-47. doi: 10.3167/isr.2023.380204.
  46. Tempestini, M. (2024). Game theory and diplomatic effectiveness: A pathway to resolving international conflicts. (Master’s thesis, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, Venice, Italy).
  47. Thune, H. (Ed.). (2015). Dialogue and conflict resolution: Potential and limits. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.
  48. Torvanger, A., Maltais, A., & Marginean, I. (2021). Green bonds in Sweden and Norway: What are the success factors? Journal of Cleaner Production, 324, article number 129177. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129177.
  49. Turunen, S. (2020). Humanitarian diplomatic practices. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 15(4), 459-487. doi: 10.1163/1871191X-BJA10008.
  50. UNFCCC. (n.d.a). Conference of the Parties (COP). Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/process/bodies/supreme-bodies/conference-of-the-parties-cop.
  51. UNFCCC. (n.d.b). What is REDD+? Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/topics/land-use/workstreams/redd/what-is-redd.
  52. UNFCCC. (n.d.c). What is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change? Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/what-is-the-united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change.
  53. United Nations Development Programme. (n.d.). Small island developing states. Retrieved from https://www.undp.org/latin-america/small-island-developing-states.
  54. Womack, B. (2016). Asymmetry and international relationships. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Suggested citation

Kozera, Ł. (2025). Strategies of asymmetric diplomacy of small states in a multipolar world . Foreign Affairs, 35(5), 18-28. https://doi.org/10.59214/ua.fa/5.2025.18
English
Submit an article