Even if beastly iconography has been pervasive in international politics, the study of diplomacy has traditionally focused solely on man as a political animal. Animals in diplomacy have been treated as a curiosity. This article stakes a claim for a more serious engagement with beastly diplomacy, arguing that animals matter through their ontic status; by representing states; as diplomatic subjects; and as objects of diplomacy. The article places particular emphasis on how animals are a special kind of diplomatic gift, with a variety of meanings and functions. Taking animals seriously implies a rethinking of both the process and the outcomes of diplomacy.
Fudge‘A Left-Handed Blow’ p. 7; and Chris Philo and Chris Wilbert ‘Animal Spaces Beastly Places: An Introduction’ in Chris Philo and Chris Wilbert (eds.) Animal Spaces Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human–Animal Relations (London: Routledge 2000) p. 2.
Kersty Hobson‘Political Animals? On Animals as Subjects in an Enlarged Political Geography’Political Geographyvol. 26 no. 3 (2007) pp. 250-267; and Kathryn Gillespie and Rosemary-Claire Collard Critical Animal Geographies: Politics Intersections and Hierarchies in a Multispecies World (Abingdon: Routledge 2015).
Erika Cudworth and Stephen HobdenPosthuman International Relations: Complexity Ecologism and Global Politics (London: Zed Books2011); Erika Cudworth and Stephen Hobden ‘Complexity Ecologism and Posthuman Politics’ Review of International Studies vol. 39 no. 3 (2012) pp. 643-664; Erika Cudworth and Stephen Hobden ‘Civilization and the Domination of the Animal’ Millennium vol. 42 no. 3 (2014) pp. 746-766; Rafi Youatt ‘Interspecies Relations International Relations: Rethinking Anthropocentric Politics’ Millennium vol. 43 no. 1 (2014) pp. 207-223; and Antoine Bousquet ‘Prolegomena to Post-Anthropocentric International Relations: Biosphere and Technosphere in the Age of Global Complexity’ in Emilian Kavalski (ed.) World Politics at the Edge of Chaos: Reflections on Complexity and Global Life (New York: suny Press 2015) pp. 189-207.
Nick Vaughan-Williams‘“We Are Not Animals!” Humanitarian Border Security and Zoopolitical Spaces in Europe’Political Geographyvol. 45 (2015) pp. 1-10; and Kathryn Denning ‘Regarding the Zoo: On the Deployment of a Metaphor’ International Journal of Heritage Studies vol. 14 no. 1 (2008) pp. 60-73.
BediniThe Pope’s Elephant p. 125. The rhinoceros had already been a diplomatic gift twice first given from the Sultan of Cambay as a reciprocal gift to Alfonso de Albuquerque the governor of Portuguese India and then as a gift of submission from Albuquerque to King Manuel i. It became immortalized when Albrecht Dürer made a woodcut of it.
Edward Keene‘A Case Study of the Construction of International Hierarchy: British Treaty-Making against the Slave Trade in the Early Nineteenth Century’International Organizationvol. 61 no. 2 (2007) pp. 311-339.
See Cushing and Markwell‘Platypus Diplomacy’; and Natalie Lawrence, ‘The Prime Minister and the Platypus: A Paradox Goes to War’Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciencesvol. 43 no. 1 (2012) pp. 290-297.
Linda J. Lowenstine‘Long Distance Pathology, or Will the Mountain Gorilla Fit in the Diplomatic Pouch?’ in Proceedings of the American Association of Zoo Veterinarians(South Padre Island tx: American Association of Zoo Veterinarians Press 1990) pp. 178-185.