Transregional Statecraft Framework: Historical Networks and Contemporary Diplomacy Dynamics

Thesis Abstract

This study examines how historical networks shape contemporary diplomacy within a transregional statecraft framework, addressing the gap between long-term interstate linkages and present-day diplomatic outcomes across Eurasia, the Middle East, and Africa. The central problem is that conventional diplomacy analyses often treat contemporary state interactions in isolation from centuries-scale networked processes, thereby understating the influence of archival ties, dynastic connexions, trade corridors, and cross-border institutions on modern policy choices. The aim is to develop a robust theoretical framework that integrates transregional historical networks with current diplomatic dynamics to explain variance in policy alignment, alliance formation, and conflict resolution initiatives. Specific objectives are to (i) map the transregional historical networks that persist in shaping state behavior since the 18th century, (ii) identify mechanisms through which historical ties translate into contemporary diplomatic leverage, (iii) model the impact of these networks on alliance portfolios using a mixed-methods approach, (iv) assess how modernization, regionalization, and globalization modulate these effects, and (v) derive policy implications for multilateral diplomacy and conflict prevention. The study adopts a mixed-methods research design combining qualitative historical-network analysis with quantitative modeling. The population includes state actors and archipelagic, transregional networks involved in diplomacy from 1800 to 2020, with a purposive sample of 12 core states exhibiting enduring historical linkages and 8 regional ad hoc coalitions. Data collection employs archival document analysis from national archives and international organization records (UN, WTO, OAS, AU), complemented by elite interviews with 25–30 senior diplomats and policy analysts conducted in a semi-structured format. For the quantitative component, network metrics (degree centrality, betweenness, eigenvector centrality) and dyadic alliance indicators are derived from longitudinal diplomatic data, while policy outcomes are captured via a Diplomacy Effectiveness Index constructed from treaty ratifications, sanctions outcomes, and mediation success rates across 1990–2020. Qualitative data are analyzed through thematic analysis to identify recurrent mechanisms (institutional memory, symbolic diplomacy, nexus of economic and strategic interest) and via process-tracing to establish causal sequences. Quantitative data are analyzed with panel regression and moderated moderation models to test the influence of historical network strength on contemporary diplomacy while controlling for GDP, regime type, and regional proximity. A social network analysis (SNA) framework is applied to visualize and quantify transregional linkages, with robustness checks including alternative model specifications and falsification tests. The theoretical underpinning draws on realism, constructivism, and historical sociology, with explicit integration of the Transregional Statecraft framework, plus Neofunctionalism to explain spillovers across regions. Expected findings indicate that robust historical ties increase diplomatic leverage, evidenced by higher alliance formation rates, more rapid mediation success, and greater resilience of coalitions against shocks. The strength of historical networks is anticipated to have diminishing marginal effects in highly globalized eras but remains significant for mid-range states and regional powers when moderated by economic interdependence and shared security concerns. The study also expects to reveal asymmetries some states leverage historical networks to constrain rivals, while others leverage them to project soft power via cultural and economic diplomacy. The contribution to knowledge lies in integrating long-run historical-network patterns with contemporary diplomacy models, producing a transferable Transregional Statecraft framework capable of guiding empirical analysis across cases and enabling more precise policy recommendations for multilateral diplomacy, alliance management, and conflict prevention. The research also advances methodological innovation by combining SNA with process-tracing and panel econometrics in a coherent mixed-methods design tailored to historical-diplomatic inquiry. The conclusion envisages that recognizing transregional historical networks enriches explanatory power regarding alliance formation, mediation success, and policy compatibility across regions. Policy recommendations include institutionalizing memory archives for diplomacy, fostering cross-regional diplomatic exchanges to exploit shared historical narratives, and designing multilateral mediation strategies that leverage enduring linkages. Limitations acknowledged include potential archival gaps and survivor bias in elite interviews. Future research directions call for expanding the historical window, incorporating non-state actors’ networks, and testing the framework in other global spaces such as the Americas and the Indo-Pacific.