True Emotion? Investigating How EU Foreign Policy Reacts to an International Norm Violation

Abstract

Within the international system, the European Union’s public diplomacy is increasingly marked by the subtle yet potent influence of emotional communication – or rather, emotional diplomacy. This thesis specifically investigated the role of emotions in diplomatic rhetoric of EU foreign policy when faced with an international norm violation (INV). Using the Russian invasion of Ukraine as a case study, this thesis aimed to answer the following research question: how does the EU use emotional reactions in its public diplomacy when responding to an international norm violation? Emotional diplomacy, conceptualized through a constructivist lens, is the theoretical understanding applied to the emotional reactions observed in this thesis’ results, recognizing emotions as socially constructed facets of expression and language which reflect the underlying beliefs and values of actors. A novel fine-grained emotional content analysis tool, the EmoRoBERTa model, was used to evaluate emotion scores from 336 EU foreign policy statements from February 24, 2021 to March 7, 2024, for the following eight emotions: approval, annoyance, disapproval, optimism, disappointment, anger, disgust, and fear. Using GGPlots with LOESS smoothing developed in Python, the emotional reactions were categorized as affective, where the emotion spiked or dipped but then returned to its baseline; strategic, where the emotion spiked or dipped and then this level was maintained over time; or neither, where the reaction was inconclusive. Disapproval was the only affective reaction, showing a clear increase on the invasion date before returning to its baseline. Optimism, annoyance, anger, and disgust were identified as strategic reactions, suggesting that the EU sustained emotional displays of these emotions to achieve specific diplomatic goals. Approval, disappointment, and fear could not be categorized, indicating that these emotions were influenced by factors beyond the initial INV. The thesis further explores the patterns of these reactions, distinguishing between the use of positive and negative emotions through identifying patterns in further statistical testing, including OLS regressions and interaction effect models for each emotion. All emotions were found to have statistically significant constant coefficients, implying their inherent baselines within EU foreign policy. The results moreover indicate that negative stimuli, such as the INV, can elevate negative emotions while diminishing positive ones, causing disruptions to the emotions’ trends that existed prior to the invasion. From the nuances between the types of emotions used, along with their observed reactions, this thesis discussed the ‘politics of emotion’, finding that when the EU displays an affective response, it does so because it feels obligated to; when the EU displays a strategic response, this is because it feels entitled to display that emotion; and when a response cannot be categorized, this entails deference, with the EU deferring the ‘right’ to display the emotion, perhaps onto another actor. This nuanced understanding of emotional dynamics offers the conceptualization of the EU as not only a normative power, but an emotional one, capable of using emotions to convey legitimacy, leadership, and influence within the international system.

A master thesis from Aalborg University

True Emotion? Investigating How EU Foreign Policy Reacts to an International Norm Violation