Diplomasi segitiga

Dalam ilmu politik, diplomasi segitiga adalah sebuah kebijakan luar negeri Amerika Serikat, yang dikembangkan pada Perang Vietnam (1955-1975) oleh Henry Kissinger, sebagai alat untuk menjalin hubungan antar negara-negara komunis yang berseteru, Uni Soviet dan Tiongkok. Kebijakan tersebut ditujukan untuk memanfaatkan persaingan antar dua kekuatan Komunis tersebut (setelah perpecahan Tiongkok-Soviet (1956-1966)), sebagai alat untuk memperkuat kepentingan diplomatik dan hegemoni Amerika Serikat.

Selanjutnya diplomasi segitiga juga berkembang di era Détente (1969–1979) selama Perang Dingin, diplomasi ini diinisiasi untuk mencegah kemerosotan otoritas Amerika saat Perang Vietnam karena inefisiensi yang dirasakan dari kebijakan defensif containment yang cetuskan oleh George F. Kennan dan kebijakan ofensif rollback yang dicanangkan oleh Dwight D. Eisenhower. Oleh karena itu, diplomasi segitiga menjadi aspek yang berperan penting dalam pergeseran kebijakan Perang Dingin menuju diskusi kooperatif dan diplomasi, dan dengan demikian menjadi preseden meredanya ketegangan antara kedua negara adidaya melalui keuntungan bersama (terbukti dari perjanjian Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) dan Strategic Arms Reduction (START)).

Referensi

Situs web

• "China, Russia to honor commitments on oil pipeline". China Daily. 2003. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-11/18/content_282626.htm
• "China terms defence minister's India visit a success." The Times of India. 2012. Retrieved from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/china/China-terms-defence-ministers-India-visit-a-success/articleshow/16281724.cms?referral=PM
• "India 'lynchpin' for US strategy in Asia: Panetta." The Express Tribune. 2012. Retrieved from https://tribune.com.pk/story/390176/india-lynchpin-for-us-strategy-in-asia-panetta/
• "Putin: oil pipeline will serve China first". China Daily. 2005. Retrieved from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-09/08/content_476125.htm
• "Triangular Diplomacy". The New York Times. 2001. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/18/opinion/triangular-diplomacy.html
• Kuo, Kendrick (2013). "Nixon's Opening to China: The Misleading Apotheosis of Triangular Diplomacy". E-International Relations Students. Retrieved from https://www.e-ir.info/2013/06/28/nixons-opening-to-china-the-misleading-apotheosis-of-triangular-diplomacy/
• Kuo, Raymond (2017). "Can Trumpian Triangular Diplomacy Work?". The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2017/01/can-trumpian-triangular-diplomacy-work/
• Lukacsova, V. (2009). Kissinger's Triangular Diplomacy. [online] Available at: https://old.bisla.sk/sk/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Lukacsova_Veronika-Bakalarska-praca.pdf
• Mohan, C. Raja (2012). "The New Triangular Diplomacy: India, China and America at Sea". The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2012/11/the-new-triangular-diplomacy-india-china-and-america-on-the-high-seas/3/
• Sempa, Francis (2016). "Is Kissinger's Triangular Diplomacy the answer to Sino Russian Rapprochement?". The Diplomat. Retrieved from https://thediplomat.com/2016/08/is-kissingers-triangular-diplomacy-the-answer-to-sino-russian-rapprochement/
• Thiessen, Marc (2016). "Trump's Taiwan call wasn't a blunder. It was brilliant". The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-taiwan-call-wasnt-a-blunder-it-was-brilliant/2016/12/05/d10169a2-bb00-11e6-ac85-094a21c44abc_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2ced820a3037

Buku

• Aron, R. (1966). Peace and War. New York: Doubleday
• Birchfield, Vicki; Young, Alisdair (2018). Triangular diplomacy among the United States, the European Union, and the Russian Federation: Responses to the Crisis in Ukraine. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG.
• Dunne, T., & Schmidt, B. C. (2014). Realism. In S. Baylis & Owens (Eds.), The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Garthoff, Raymond (1994). Détente and Confrontation. Washington: Brookings.
• Kegley, Charles; Wittkopf, Eugene (2005). World Politics: Trend and Transformation. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
• Kissinger, Henry (1979). The White House Years. Sydney: Hodder and Stoughton.
• Mohan, C. Raja (2012). Samudra Manthan Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Indo-Pacific. Washington D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
• Morales, Gilbert (2005). Critical Perspectives on the Vietnam War. New York: The Rosen Publishing Group.
• Waltz, Kenneth (2008). Realism and International Politics. New York: Routledge.
• Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education

Jurnal

• Hanhimaki, Jussi (2003). "Selling the 'Decent interval': Kissinger, triangular diplomacy, and the end of the Vietnam war, 1971-73". Diplomacy and Statecraft. 14:1, 159-194.
• Keohane, Robert (2012). "Twenty Years of Institutional Liberalism". International Relations. 26(2): 125–138.
• Wohlforth, W., Little, R., & Kaufman, S. (2007). Testing Balance-of-Power Theory in World History. European Journal of International Relations, 13(2), 155-185. doi: 10.1177/1354066107076951

Bacaan tambahan

• Ngoei, W (2017). A wide anticommunist Arc": Britain, ASEAN, and Nixon’s triangular diplomacy. Diplomatic History, 41(5). Within this work, Cold War historian Ngoei employs his specialised analysis of US-SE Asian foreign relations in order to confirm the successes of triangular diplomacy in cementing US hegemony over Indochina. By challenging the predominately Americentric accounts of Cold War foreign policy, Ngoei examines the methods through which ideological prejudice engendered the success of Kissinger’s policies, against the repercussions of this policy under modern American administration.
• Birchfield, V., & Young, A. (2018). Triangular Diplomacy among the United States, the European Union, and the Russian Federation Responses to the Crisis in Ukraine. Cham: Springer International Publishing. By examining the current Ukraine crisis through the prism of triangular diplomacy, Young and Birchfield analyse the developments of the policy during the post-Cold War era, particularly concerning the rise of the EU to international authority. The amalgamation of their methodology and reputability delegates credibility to their account, and positions it as paramount to a study of the modern developments of triangular diplomacy, through their panoramic perspective of transnational relations.
• Doyle, R. (2014). The geopolitical power shift in the Indo-Pacific region : America, Australia, China, and triangular diplomacy in the twenty-first century . Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books. As a trained historian, Doyle analyses the decline in US international authority against the modern developments of triangular diplomacy, as a result of a post-Cold War power shift in the Indo-Pacific geopolitical region. His authoritative methodology manifests a highly credible account on these changes within the nature of triangular diplomacy, and the epochal international policy developing within the Indo-Pacific theatre as a result of the declining authority of the US.
• Hanhimaki, J. (2003). Selling the “Decent interval”: Kissinger, triangular diplomacy, and the end of the Vietnam war, 1971-73. Diplomacy & Statecraft, 14(1), 159–194. As a leading historian on Cold War international relations, Hanhimaki’s comprehensive account of triangular diplomacy allows for a multifaceted insight into Kissinger’s motivations behind the policy. His interdisciplinary methodology, in addition to the credibility gained through publication in the Diplomacy & Statecraft journal, sets Hanhimaki’s work as invaluable to a study of triangular diplomacy, through his fresh insights into Kissinger’s subsequent provocation of Sino-Soviet competition in Indochina.
• Daum, A., Gardner, L., & Mausbach, W. (2003). America, the Vietnam War, and the world : comparative and international perspectives . Washington, D.C: German Historical Institute. In this work, renowned theorists; Daum, Gardner and Mausbach analyse the global repercussions of triangular diplomacy during the Vietnam War, with a salient focus on its socio-political, economic, cultural and intellectual consequences. By analysing the policy against subsequent cold war conflicts, this account resides as a staple within a disciplinary analysis of Vietnam war foreign policy, and thus to a study of triangular diplomacy.

l b s Diplomasi dan diplomat
Peran	Gelar kepala diplomatik Multilateral Duta besar keliling Wakil tetap PBB Wakil residen Bilateral-nasional Duta besar Komisaris tinggi Nunsius Kuasa usaha Kepala perwakilan Wakil kepala perwakilan Bilateral-subnasional Konsul Bilateral-insuler Agen jenderal Residen Komisaris residen Utusan Menurut portofolio (Atase) Atase sains Atase budaya Atase pertanian Atase udara Atase pertahanan Atase kepolisian Atase laut Atase hukum Komisaris perdagangan Kuasa misi Penasihat kuasa investasi Peran lain Menteri luar negeri Kepala Protokol Negara Kurir diplomatik Utusan ratu Klasifikasi Pangkat diplomatik
Kantor	Kedutaan besar de facto Komisariat tinggi Konsulat Korps diplomatik Korps konsuler Legasi Negara pelindung Nunsiatur apostolik Perwakilan diplomatik
Jenis	Diplomasi pertahanan Paradiplomasi Diplomasi budaya Diplomasi elektronik Diplomasi lepas Diplomasi spektrum penuh Diplomasi preventif Diplomasi buku cek Diplomasi koersif Diplomasi komersial Diplomasi gerilya Diplomasi senjata Diplomasi baru Diplomasi publik Diplomasi stadion Diplomasi ziarah Diplomasi jebakan utang Diplomasi segitiga Diplomasi ulang alik Gastrodiplomasi
Topik	Akreditasi diplomatik Kopor diplomatik Kawat diplomatik Korps diplomatik Kredensial diplomatik Sejarah diplomasi Kelemahan diplomatik Kekebalan diplomatik Hukum diplomatik Pangkat diplomatik Jasa diplomatik Seragam diplomatik Korps konsuler Kekebalan konsuler Bantuan konsuler Protokol
Dokumen	Eksekuatur Surat kepercayaan Surat protes
Topik lain	Kota kembar dan saudara Bantuan pembangunan (Lembaga) Delegasi parlementer
Kategori