[MUSIC] Well, I suppose the most interesting and becoming more and more interesting is non-state. I mean, under the terms of the various Vienna Conventions of the 1960s, the state is identified as the only one that could accredit official diplomats. So now if we're looking at that sort of non-state centric diplomacy, business diplomacy, perhaps is an interesting area, which is not perhaps new as we might think. I mean, if you go back to the 1700s in the East India Company and these sort of things, the Hudson Bay Company, clearly they are involved in nonstandard, non-state centric diplomacy and interaction. And even signing of treaties as well. So, non-governmental and non-state centric bodies involved in diplomacy, I think is of more and more interest. I suppose the UN climate change conferences and, I was about to say, jamborees. I don't want that to necessarily sound negative. But where you're having states, international organizations, pressure groups. The Arctic Council might be another one where indigenous peoples are also involved in the negotiations as well. This is clearly an area that is expanding, that was quite difficult to identify let's say 40, 50 years ago, but is becoming increasingly important. >> Well, I think I see it everywhere, which is why I like studying. My specific sort of case studies have been both of what we might think of as conventional diplomacy, state-to-state foreign ministry type, Ferrero Rocher candies and red carpets. But equally, I like to look for diplomacy in areas where we don't traditionally describe it as diplomacy. So intelligence cooperation, military relations, the enmeshing of computer networks and databases. I think of those as diplomatic equally as ambassadors shaking hands and doing that kind of a thing. We have this term, protocol, in traditional diplomacy, which is this sort of rituals and performance of getting how you interact. A very rigid set of rules in which kind of ambassadors and heads of state meet. And it seems to look at all the places where you see the term protocol pop-up. So for instance, in Internet networking, where, again, a protocol is what enables computers to link up. And so, I think we can think very broadly about the ways in which things come to be connected together and transformed in that by process. >> I think it tends to work better if the person who's involved in the diplomatic practice is representing the consortium law, representing a multilateral organization for instance. I very much admire what Brahmi is now doing for instance on behalf on the United Nation, even though it has not been very successful at all. But the efforts he made in Afghanistan, the efforts he made in Syria, could not have even be made by somebody like John Kerry for instance. The American Secretary of State, whom I do admire, I think that his patience is profound. And he's certainly much smarter than most American politicians. But Brahimi is able to go in there with all kinds of bona fides, which somebody representing a great power can't. So I myself prefer to work with either multilateral groupings or with people of experience of multilateral groupings. [MUSIC]