Foreign Policy in digital era with the following case study of UK & Iran Relation

Introduction of Foreign Policy in digital era with the following case study of United Kingdom and Iran Relation Assignment

The digital age has changed drastically due to technological innovation. The changes had a positive impact on the domestic governance and the international relationship. The way the politics have exercised has changed when the world community was introduced to the digital era. This particular study emphasises foreign politics. Digital technologies have consequences in the digital transformation. Twitter Diplomacy is most demanding among the politicians and public (Adesina, 2017). The practice of Digital Domestic Diplomacy will accelerate in the coming years for good causes. The intense competition for the audiences of social media will frame the online discussions and the uncertainty of the online spectators. In order to cope up with this, governments would face pressures to support the policies and safeguard the competition from any negative actions. Digital diplomacy is not a new phenomenon and is based on the current concepts of diplomacy and empirical developments namely as public diplomacy. Diplomacy can be regarded as change management by indicating digital diplomacy as one of the latest diplomacy. It is necessary to comprehend that digital diplomacy will be an accepted reality. The use of digital diplomacy will bring about the various circumstances which are not taken into account theoretically. The theoretical emphasis has been given to the public diplomacy and soft power aspects. Digital diplomacy can be termed as the utilisation of social media by the nation to attain the goals of the foreign policy. Digital diplomacy can be termed as the conduct of diplomacy with the use of networked technologies. It is also the impact of Information and Communication Technology ranging from email to smart devices.

New Assignment Help is your one-stop destination for impeccable academic support. Our assignment writing help in the UKcaters to diverse subjects and topics, guaranteeing thorough assistance for every student. Explore our Free Assignment Sample to kick-start your assignments with confidence.

Diplomacy is regarded to be based on their relationships and it is essential to focus on the responsibilities of technologies while securing governance globally. Digital dimension is essential while recognising the threats and propounding effective answers to the various problems. The incorporation of technologies in various forms such as “e diplomacy”, “digital diplomacy”, “cyber diplomacy” and “diplomacy”. The organisations failed to satisfy the global and national needs and the process is necessary for each and nation. Digital diplomacy is just not an application of social media for diplomatic function but it will remain an innovative tool for fulfilling the particular diplomatic functions.

The main purpose of digital diplomacy can be articulated as i) practice of new public diplomacy by engaging the foreigh populations and establish contacts with foreign publics ii) handle the country reputation and image branding iii)reflecting a commitment by holding the online sessions and getting along the limitations of diplomacy by developing soft power tools and interacting with foreign publics. Diplomacy is democratised and the technology supports the people to play a great role and enhances the field of work by an increasing amount and it transforms the rules each and every day.

The Internet offers a new venue for the age-old tactic of persuasion in both internal and international politics. In order to fully utilise the new medium, it is essential to be there, participate in discussions, and have a substantial level of connection (Danziger. and Schreiber 2021). A connection is necessary. People who regularly have an Internet connection at their homes or places of employment are essentially given global citizenship. Even locally, individuals who are not are disadvantaged. Connection primarily depends on personal preference and financial means where there are reliable national telecoms suppliers. Where they do not, the proliferation of mobile phones in many emerging nations promises to enfranchise the biggest number of people the fastest. This is already changing quickly and will do so in the future. It will significantly increase these civilizations’ population growth and the push for change, much like radio did.

A presence gives one the ability to act. Both the US Presidential elections and British internal politics have shown the growing significance of having a presence online. The services provided by ministers and foreign ministries are changed by the Internet, just as domestic agencies and private businesses are changing. The modifications merit a more thorough examination than what the space permits. However, there are three practical considerations that are worth noting.

First off, despite being stark, the changes are not significant. That is to say, rather than doing something entirely new, diplomats continue to carry out the same things in a different way. Email offers a global, immediate method of contact, and more and more web-based tools are available for handling all facets of diplomatic activity. Increased demand for remote access to government services via laptop or handheld device over the Internet is a result of the need for quicker and more flexible working.

Thirdly, international ministries and embassies are making their services digitally accessible, much like all other public services. Today, it is possible to apply for passports, visas, and support for trade and investment online (Duncombe, 2017). Some elements of the process still require physical documentation and a physical presence, however this is being minimised whenever possible. With the introduction of common or compatible software, as well as work sharing, outsourcing, and relocating to the most affordable suitable area and labour force, the allocation of labour inside governments to provide such services can also be rationalised. Thirdly, international ministries and embassies are making their services digitally accessible, much like all other public services (Digital diplomacy, 2022). Today, it is possible to apply for passports, visas, and support for trade and investment online. Some elements of the process still require physical documentation and a physical presence, however this is being minimised whenever possible. With the introduction of common or compatible software, as well as work sharing, outsourcing, and relocating to the most affordable suitable area and labour force, the allocation of labour inside governments to provide such services can also be rationalised.

Thus, social media are altering the environment in which diplomacy takes place. However, despite its complexity, interpersonal relationships are still seen as the foundation of diplomacy. Studies on diplomacy’s practices and the conflicting functions of agency and structure in its heritage and culture have increased recently as the field has undergone a renaissance as an academic discipline. These studies also explore the crucial importance of political leadership in achieving diplomatic breakthroughs. Important neuroscience discoveries offer clues as to how to comprehend this “mind-body and ideational-materialist gap.” However, rather than examining the new technology that facilitates diplomacy; these evaluations focus on the psychological and interpersonal components of diplomacy.

By investigating how Twitter posts of Iran prior to the 2015 nuclear deal helped Iran signal its intention to execute the jobs favourable outcome, an intention that was crucial to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action’s successful implementation, this article aims to close a space in the literature of digital diplomacy ( JCPOA). Previous research on the nuclear problem has demonstrated how opportunities for reconciliation were blocked by peace and strategic concerns on both sides. The diplomatic networks will further move into digital platforms namely Twitter with the help of analytical lenses and network related diplomacy studies. The diplomatic embassies have attracted the attention of digital networks. There is a difference between the embassy and Twitter networks (Wright and Guerrina, 2020). New communication technologies comprehend diplomacy. Communication is the necessary fact for diplomacy and without the existence of communication diplomacy will not exist. Network diplomacy will be based on communication to develop and maintain the collaboration between the political leaders. Technology has provided necessary weapons to comprehend the intention of a country.

In the opinion of Manor and Segev (2020), digital diplomacy is basically based on the rapid use of online media platforms by a nation to attain the goals and objectives of foreign policies to communicate with each other. Digital diplomacy is the practice of diplomacy by the digital and network technologies such as Internet, mobile devices and social media channels. The various policy goals for the digital diplomacy are

• Knowledge: To tackle the departmental and total government knowledge so that it is sustained, shared and used optimised for pursuing national
• Public diplomacy: Keeping in touch with audiences as they move online while utilising emerging media tools to target key audiences with essential messages, listen to what they have to say, and influence prominent online influencers.
• Information: This entails gathering the voluminous flow of information, using it to better inform policy decisions, and anticipating and addressing new social and political movements.
• Diplomatic interaction and response: Establishing direct, private channels of communication with people travelling abroad and enabling controllable communications in emergency situations
• Emergency management: To use connected technologies to their full potential in times of crisis.
• Technology development for maintaining open and free access to the internet. Promoting democracy and freedom of speech are linked goals of this.
• External resources: developing digital tools to access and use outside knowledge to accomplish domestic objectives.
• Policy planning: In reaction to the globalization of the bureaucracy, to enable efficient oversight, coordination, and planning of foreign policy across government.

Another essential element of diplomacy is negotiation. There are an increasing number of issues that diplomats are continuously negotiating : from the laws of the sea to immigrants and refugees, from between research and cultural cooperation to trade, tourism, and technological upgrading, from the surroundings to increase agricultural production, from security to security and cooperation in europe, from drug security to enhanced health care services, from investigation to intellectual cooperation, from economic hardship to economic progress, from children to women’s rights (Adler. and Eggeling, 2022). It might be challenging for countries to deploy personnel to follow these negotiations because frequently numerous of them take place concurrently. This is especially true for tiny nations, who have limited financial resources, particularly in terms of manpower, and cannot afford to cover all of the expenses related to travel.

The world leaders and the diplomats utilise social media and Twitter to interact with each other and seek influence. The diplomats believe on the Internet to recognise information and communicate with the other members through email and negotiate the draft texts in various electronic formats. It has benefitted the aspects of social media such as blogs, Facebook. It has made the communication smooth and swift and much more precise. The Internet had played a crucial role globally and it enabled everyone to have proper access to information. This has made the division of labour more competitive.

Diplomacy has thus always had to adjust to the unique communication formats of its context. The ability to gather and disseminate information to large audiences at previously unheard-of rates has opened up new ways for policymakers and government agencies to add more information and set policy objectives outside of the traditional channels in an universe where everyone is becoming more connected (Hedling and Bremberg, 2021). While traditional diplomatic methods continue to dominate both domestic and foreign policy, more and more countries are turning to technology as a new means of communication, information collection, and the promotion of moral principles both and internationally . The purpose of digital diplomacy is to quickly dispel false information. Several foreign ministries have started to adopt diplomacy as well.

An Office of Digital Diplomacy under the UK FCO engages in a variety of e-diplomacy activities. Swedish foreign minister Carl Bildt, who quickly attained the title of “best connected Twitter leader,” has been particularly active in promoting digital diplomacy (Collins et al., 2019). While the foreign affairs ministries of Poland and Japan make substantial use of social media networks, France stated in 2008 that its soft power relies on digital technologies. Additionally, Germany used ICT platforms to crowd source public opinion and fresh concepts that were incorporated into its 2014 assessment of its foreign policy. With one of the most active digital diplomacy divisions in the world, Israel has matched its muscular tradIsrael’s aggressive traditional diplomacy has been matched by one of the world’s busiest digital diplomacy teams, which has worked hard to sway the results of the Iran-UK nuclear talks.itional diplomacy.check information from reliable sources, and offer enough information.

What is the Digital Diplomacy and what is relevant in foreign policy

“Digital Diplomacy” is the wider utilisation of technology specially the Internet and other information and communication technologies that are based on innovation of various business activities for ensuring the success and intervention of business efficiency over competitors. Digital diplomacy was first evolved in 2001. Digital diplomacy is the up gradation of use of ICTs and social media platforms in the implementation of international diplomacy (Gabor, 2020). Ensuring amicable relationships between nations is the main objective of diplomacy. This could comprise negotiating trade arrangements, discussing issues that both countries face, establishing new regulations into practice, and resolving disputes. Diplomacy aims on several specific purposes that ensures better relation and connectivity between different countries; it will deliver better opportunities and facilities to own country and inspire cooperation with other countries that may assure better import and export activities and maintain peace within the country that may support flourishing of the economy and get better access of skills, resources and technologies.

As stated by Al-Muftah et al.(2018), Digital diplomacy is applied to the impact of digital technology based on diplomacy in three realms such a changing digital geopolitical and geo-economics environment in accordance with diplomatic activities such as power redistribution, interdependence, sovereignty; emerging various topics in aspect of digital agenda such as cyber security, e-commerce, privacy protection; implementation of new tools for completion of diplomatic activities such as big data analytical tools, AI, Social Media and so on. A phrase used to illustrate the ethical and chronological consequences of digital technology is “the digitization of diplomacy.” It conveys the concept that digitalization is a lengthy process that stretches far beyond use of trimming technologies. Digital technologies have an influence on four components of diplomacy: the audiences for foreign relations, the frameworks for diplomacy, the practitioners of diplomacy, and the action of diplomacy. Four fields are mentioned when the phrase “Digital Diplomacy” is used (Parlimen, 2022). Norms, values, and beliefs are the major topics of the first field, which is normative. The second subject of research is cognitive since modifying attitude results through implementing new beliefs and expectations. The third field, defined as administrative, is associated with consumption habits and established procedures. The fourth area is conceptual and is related to how people conceptualize their experience utilizing analogies and conceptions.

The application of digital forms of communication for diplomatic purposes is referred to as digital diplomacy. Digital platforms are used to conduct interstate relationships in a strategic manner. These may include interaction between representatives of foreign entities who engage in embassies, governmental institutions, or other military, industrial, or political institutions. Digital diplomacy relates to a diplomatic direction and guidance out within the public, with the internet operating as an open discussion. Because of this, it is also a term used to refer to public diplomacy. In this sense, the phrase “digital diplomacy” can be utilized to refer to the application of digital platforms for both interpersonal and public diplomacy, also defined as the negotiating process between countries and international public perceptions (Duncombe, 2018). The accomplishment of diplomatic agendas through the utilization of the Internet and various social media networks ensures better political and financial development of a country.

As mentioned by Ittefaq (2019), the implementation of information and communication technologies, like the Internet, to promote diplomatic objectives will help to make better relationships between different countries for accessing help and guidance for successful import and export. Social media is not a tool that is conveniently used in the domain of foreign policy; rather, it is a necessary and vital communication tool. Because of this, using digital diplomacy as a weapon for diplomacy is neither an additional nor a substitute. Social networks are the most pragmatic and targeted interventions given because digital communication already is an inherent component of it. In the areas of public diplomacy, effective communication, and the campaign against disinformation, they also serve as a powerful component. As more and more world leaders follow one another on Twitter, they established a virtual diplomacy network that allows them to interact with one another professionally and through confidential direct messages.

Researchers and practitioners alike have proposed different, yet comparable, definitions, descriptions, and explanations of digital diplomacy. As a result, the idea lacks a collectively accepted definition or conceptual framework. Consequently, it may be harmless to assume that existing research into digital diplomacy’s substance and functionality has only begun to graze the exterior. It explains why there currently no acceptable fundamental framework for evaluating the efficiency of social media for international diplomacy in the research.

Many observers argue that the present growth of digital actions in foreign ministries constitutes is the uprising in the approach diplomacy is practiced. This revolution has, in some aspects, seemed overdue. States are only now emerging understanding of just how digital technology has the power to transform all elements of interstate relationships, despite the fact that it previously transformed how businesses conduct business, people interact with one another, and countries carry out internal governance (Duncombe, 2019). Particularly, the use of digital diplomacy has been associated with modifying techniques through which diplomats participate in “information management”, “public diplomacy”, “strategic planning”, “international negotiations”, or “disaster response”. Despite these substantial developments and the possibilities that digital diplomacy offers, little is recognized about how it works conceptually. Digital problem-solving for issues of foreign policy is referred to as digital diplomacy. It is conventional diplomacy executed through a variety of channels. People can engage in new and intriguing ways of observing, sharing, participating, and critiquing through the web (Manor and Pamment, 2019).

As noted by Cerf (2020), it emphasises the fundamental collaborative component of diplomacy, both online and offline, which the digital in no way undermines. Digital diplomacy is considered as the “strategy of managing change via digital technologies and digital collaborations.” The cultivation of good relations between both states in addition to the collection of data and monitoring on situations and advancements within the local population for the transmitting administration using legitimate methods are two of the key goals of diplomacy. Information can be gathered from a variety of sources, but it is essential to identify, evaluate, and comprehend emerging massive problems and their significance for peace and advancement as well as for security and other benefits for the worldwide context (Pipchenko, 2020).

In consequence, governments have evolved to rely on their international bodies to provide their broad perspective on events around the world in addition to conducting foreign policy in a manner that best suits the strategic interests. Digital diplomacy is thought to be an important instrument for promoting a nation’s foreign policy as it enables for communicating directly and engaging with foreign publics.

It is unsustainable to outsource digital diplomacy to social networking sites exclusively. With developments in big data and the widespread adoption of wearable computing devices such as smart watches and Glasses, the meaning of “digital” is already broadening. Humanitarian organisations use tools such as crisis mapping to better anticipate and react to accidental and man-made disasters. Crisis mapping illustrates current insights on market trends from social media and correspondence in crisis situations.

According to Bjola (2019), digital diplomacy has increased the ability of interaction with foreign publics and inspire them to involve actively in transmitting monologue to dialogue. It is a new tool that has been implemented in the conduct of Public Diplomacy. Digital diplomacy has gained huge popularity and rapid growth due to the combined effect of ICTs and other Social media platforms that may help foreign countries to achieve the goals of policies incorporated by the nation and make efficient practice of public diplomacy that may support better political and financial stability throughout the country.

Digital Diplomacy has numerous benefits and limitations that may impact on the present condition of the country. As the benefits of digital diplomacy, the interrelations between two countries get enhanced through utilisation of innovative partnership strategies for better implications of social media platforms. Digital diplomacy does not take the role of traditional diplomacy, but it can strengthen the state’s engagement in international relations more quickly and effectively. For the execution of foreign policy, it is now considered as a significant factor. The use of digital diplomacy assures compliance in accomplishing foreign policy goals by growing international alignment, and making an impression on individuals who have never attended a diplomatic mission. Direct public engagement and the engagement of non-state parties push countries to embrace social media and digital diplomacy as a way of safeguarding legitimacy and establishing or reinforcing connections in the evolving world (Rashica, 2018).

Digital diplomacy allows governments to communicate with a larger audience that might improve the likelihood of successfully ensuring the globalization of chosen strategies and policies. More and more world leaders, including politicians and diplomats, are using social media, blogs, and websites to connect with people all over the world. Diplomats can use social media to observe events, obtain information, and discover influential individuals. Aside from the conventional audience, they provide possibilities for persuasion. In the process of developing policies and sharing ideas, they can be advantageous. Digital technology is extremely beneficial for gathering and processing data on diplomatic activities as well as better communications in crisis situations (Jezierska, 2022). They make it possible for governments to evaluate how happenings in other countries around the world may impact their country. As a consequence of ongoing technological advancements, the expenses involved with adopting emerging technologies are rapidly diminishing. International experience demonstrates that people who participate in digital diplomacy techniques can gain considerable benefits. Furthermore, investment is not always essential for digital diplomacy. On the contrary, it routinely focuses on reducing expenses.

As mentioned by Zaharna (2019), Digital diplomacy has several drawbacks thatimpact on the interaction process and also impact on implementations of strategies and legislations that increase risks of crisis situations within a country. Terrorists and xenophobic groups may use digital communication for gathering information about various activities of a country and create a wider network base using social media for threatening the country’s citizens. As digital diplomacy is evolving day by day the disagreements among people are rising accordingly, which may impact on the effectiveness of government interventions and activities. Social media has an extremely poor level of interpersonal communication culture; as a consequence, many leaders and diplomats endure insults as well as threatening and aggressive communications, which results in a significant number of misunderstandings. There is a tonne of information of questionable origin available on the internet too that may misguide and manipulate the society. The culture of anonymity, that enables anyone to appear to be someone else and hurt particular individuals, is another challenge for digital diplomacy. Due to the broadcasting of contradictory or even misleading facts, the ideology of anonymity may lead to complicated situations. It might be challenging for leaders to handle the detect maliciousness if there is widespread misinformation on the internet. Many digital optimists have become digital pessimists as a result of the increasing pervasiveness of the digital world and the worry over upcoming attacks on important institutions. The risk of hacking has existed since the development of the internet. Trump is regarded as the highest risk of digital diplomacy for the very excellent purpose that countless heads of state, governments, and diplomats have fallen victim to it, rarely placing their reputations in trouble.

International relations are just one segment of society that has been influenced by the Internet revolution. This revolution is also transforming negotiation as a shield of foreign legislations. By improving the interests under its jurisdiction, diplomacy aims to improve the state, country, or organisation it embodies in the perspective of foreigners. According to that definition, diplomacy in foreign policy only refers to a particular sequence of tasks: the negotiation of treaties, the issuance of official reports, and the advocacy of governmental ideas and interests, which may also include diplomatic activity.

As notified by Morozov (2022), the evolution of interrelation between two countries is strongly affected by negotiation. Without utilisation of armed force, diplomacy delivered as the centre in which the biased security of various states can be engaged. The implementation of foreign policy goals with a focus on communication takes place using diplomacy. Foreign policy goals are maintained using diplomacy, mostly by implementing plans into practice in addition to formulating decisions. Non-negotiable discussion is essential for keeping global ethical guidelines. Commonly believed to boost the probability of interstate cooperation are overlapping interests. Convergence is triggered by developments in the national interest or by endless opportunities to recognize such adjustments.

Recently, foreign public opinion is playing a bigger role in shaping the international public and influencing the route of global relations. Issues that were originally believed to be domestic in character increasingly play an important role on the international agenda. Foreign and domestic publics alike do not always share a well-informed perspective or a persistent viewpoint on issues related to international and international relations. Additionally, there are rarely clear-cut correlations between public opinion and policies. Individuals’ activities and their expressed opinions do, however, influence the political climate in which politicians pursue specific goals. Therefore, nation-state decisions depend heavily on how international publics understand and feel about just a specific country.

As stated by Manor and Crilley (2018), the objectives of a country’s foreign policy constantly fluctuate as a result of the increasing effect of external and internal factors. The authenticity and effectiveness of traditional international communication patterns are now being put into doubt due to the transforming structure of the world’s largest political and economic climate, the development of communications and media technologies, the emergence of new members in current affairs, and, most significantly, the dynamic interactions of these factors. Especially in the modern age of globalization and communication, regulating the information flow in such circumstances falls within the realm of diplomacy. Digital diplomacy helps to maintain proper inclusivity and diversity while incorporating any new rules and legislations in the contrast of foreign policy improvement that may impact on the political and economical stability of the country. By incorporating digital communication and interaction methods in the process of making and implementing new policy will be appropriate for assuring the efficient practice of various activities that may assure better access of resources for assuring efficient import and export and establish a better relation with other countries. Country must be concern about following proper concern and justifications while incorporating any new rules or legislations that may influence the proper continuation of different activities in the country. The government should make better implications of new legislations in accordance with current trends of the country. With using developed technology and various social media tools the interaction between different countries may boost up better communication that will support financial and political stability. With improvement of government intervention it will be able to incorporate effective rules and regulations based on the requirements of statutory requirement of the country.

Specific of the UK- Iran Case

“Digital diplomacy” refers to the use of digital communication channels for diplomatic purposes. Strategic interstate relationships are carried out using digital channels (Collins and Bekenova, 2019). These could involve interactions between diplomats, government officials, or representatives of other military, commercial, or political institutions. In relation to public guidance and direction for diplomacy, digital diplomacy uses the internet as a forum for open discourse. As a result, public diplomacy is also referred to by this phrase. In this sense, the term "digital diplomacy" can be used to describe the use of digital platforms for both interpersonal and public diplomacy, which is also known as the process of negotiating between governments and the perceptions of the global public (Duncombe, 2018).

When high-level negotiations take place on social media, changes in representational patterns are transmitted. If we are aware of these dynamics, we can recognise political opportunities for change. Particularly potent dynamics include those of representation, recognition, and social media. However, this connection is largely ignored, which hinders research on post-modern diplomacy (Manor and Bjola, 2021). Such conversations should be regarded seriously since Twitter offers another forum for communication between nations when in-person diplomatic engagements aren't possible. Twitter sheds light on how Iran understands the UK and US how it seeks to be recognised through specific representations. These depictions are crucial for comprehending how the conflict between Iran and the US, which appeared to be unsolvable, was ultimately resolved and led to a successful nuclear deal.

Twitter diplomacy is unconstrained by the usual rules of politeness and formality. Government representatives can express their opinions on important topics and events in the public eye through social media platforms like Twitter without using traditional diplomatic channels or technical language (Malasenkova and Lavrov, 2019). Additionally, it makes it simpler for citizens to communicate with elected leaders. The limits of conventional diplomacy, which rely on a top-down bureaucratic approach to negotiation and information dissemination, are indeed overcome by twiplomacy.The foreign services of several nations utilise Twitter to interact directly with the public and give discussions of foreign policy a more interactive feel. In this way, discussions of foreign policy have become more transparent thanks to Twitter diplomacy. As the Vietnam War became the first conflict to be broadcast on television in the 1970s, American foreign policy gradually transformed as a result of the public's exposure to the horrors of war and the ensuing growth of large-scale peace initiatives (Grajewski, 2022). The era of the "bare diplomat" denotes a shift in the way that policy is deployed and articulated in international relations away from the ozone chamber and toward greater openness and transparency.

Integrity, democracy, and public involvement are fostered via digital diplomacy. Public diplomacy and nation branding are related in certain respects because through communication, ambassadors and representatives of the government can influence how people see their respective nations. With the help of nation-branding, a nation's reputation and image can be improved for a worldwide audience, and a presence of digital can be branded to project a favourable image (Khan et al., 2021). To further the advancement of diplomacy, diplomats spread information, voice viewpoints, and even express emotions. Diplomats aim to influence the people, educate them, forge connections, and promote benevolence in the host via tweeting messages.

According to Adesina (2017), digital diplomacy is the "strategy of managing change through digital technology and digital cooperation." Two of the main objectives of diplomacy are the promotion of friendly ties between the two states as well as the gathering of information and monitoring of events and developments within the local people for the conveying administration via legal means. A variety of sources can be used to obtain information, but it is crucial to recognise, assess, and comprehend growing major challenges and their importance for world peace and growth, as well as for security and other advantages. In order to conduct their business, foreign ministries have relied on the expertise of their staff, their system of embassies and consulates, the confidentiality of diplomatic correspondence, and their access to global decision-makers.

Social media creates dynamic interaction opportunities, offering a special platform that has improved the role of traditional diplomacy. On social media, diplomats and government officials are becoming more visible, furthering national interests. The use of social media, particularly Twitter, for propaganda has changed how diplomats are perceived as public relations experts in a global setting. The emphasis now is on measuring such digital communication. Diplomats are at the vanguard of public diplomacy on social media. Modern public diplomacy is rapid, participatory, and direct thanks to social media. Researchers have identified six communication strategies for digital diplomacy: networking, sentiment-driven communication, interactive communication, personalised communication, and information-rich communication.

The foreign services of several nations utilise Twitter to interact directly with the public and give discussions of foreign policy a more interactive feel (Beznosov, 2021). In this way, discussions of foreign policy have become more transparent thanks to Twitter diplomacy. As the Vietnam War became the first conflict to be broadcast on television in the 1970s, American foreign policy gradually transformed as a result of the public's exposure to the horrors of war and the ensuing growth of large-scale peace initiatives. The era of the "bare diplomat" denotes a shift in the way that policy is deployed and articulated in international relations away from the ozone chamber and toward greater openness and transparency (Gilboa, 2016).

The politicians, government , and representatives are using Twitter to involve themselves with the discussions through digital media solutions. For the time-tested strategy of persuasion in both domestic and foreign politics, the Internet offers a new platform. Being present, participating in debates, and having a strong level of connection are all necessary for making the most of the new medium (Danziger. and Schreiber 2021). There must be a link. People who routinely have Internet service at their residences or places of work effectively acquire global citizenship. Anyone who is not disadvantaged, even locally. In areas with dependable national telecoms suppliers, connection is mostly determined by personal preference and financial capability. The widespread use of mobile phones in many developing countries promises to give the greatest amount of people access to the political process the quickest where they do not already (Cerf, 2020).

According to the view of Jezierska (2022),. Therefore, diplomacy has always had to adapt to the particular communication modes of its environment. In a world where everyone is becoming more connected, new opportunities have emerged for lawmakers and governmental organizations to add more information and formulate policy objectives outside of the conventional channels (Hedling and Bremberg, 2021). While conventional diplomatic techniques continue to dominate both internal and foreign policy, more and more nations are using technology as a new means of communication, information gathering, and the promotion of moral ideas both within and outside of their borders. Digital diplomacy seeks to swiftly debunk erroneous information. Diplomacy has also begun to be used by a number of foreign ministries.

In the opinion of Bjola (2019), in the upcoming years, the application of digital domestic diplomacy will increase for beneficial reasons. Online conversations and the uncertainties of online viewers will be framed by the fierce rivalry for social media audiences. Governments would be under pressure to uphold the policies and protect the competition from any unfavourable acts in order to deal with this. Digital diplomacy is not a recent phenomenon and is founded on existing diplomatic theories as well as practical advancements like public diplomacy. By citing digital diplomacy as one of the most recent forms of diplomacy, diplomacy may be seen as a form of change management. It is important to realise that digital diplomacy will soon be a common practice.

Tam (2018) contends that interpersonal techniques to relationship management have been successful in building connections among foreign diplomats and the local populace through the creation of engagement and partnerships through online networks.

In the view of Ittefaq (2019), Eighty-six percent of the 193 “United Nations (UN)” governments possess a presence on the social media platform such as Twitter, according to a Twiplomacy research, which is a yearly global survey of the existence and tasks of leaders of state and government, foreign ministers, and their institutional activities on Twitter. Political figures, government officials, and diplomats frequently utilise Twitter to actively connect with information through favourites (likes), responses (comments), and retweets (shares). Twitter, which is typically used for information dissemination, also adds value by giving users the chance to interact with one another and advance government goals through two-way dialogue. Additionally, it has been discovered that dialogic communication has a major impact on an organisation's public participation. The “UK Foreign office” encourages the personal engagement of ambassadors in the “twiplomatioc” network which is assisting to maintain Twitter lists. It utilises Twitter to facilitate the successful evacuation of the citizens (Duncombe, 2019).

Iran utilises Twitter as the tool of foreign policy and it has abandoned the lame people in 2009. The officials do not prefer to make use of Twitter to the citizens across Iran, but they introduce social media networks for communicating with the authorities of government. It emphasises on levelling accusations which consist of various allegations. UK courts determined in the middle of 2019 that the procedure of the government for approving arms export permits to parties to the Yemen conflict was illegal, concluding that it was not rigorous enough in assessing the possibility that UK weapons would be used in violation of “international humanitarian law”. Nearly 6,000 UK contractors and more than 75 RAF troops have been integrated with Saudi forces alone, with a total of over £5 billion in UK defence exports to coalition governments since the intervention started (Threats to UK crisis, 2019). Due to the Labour opposition's support for changing UK arms export laws, this led to a rather uncommon domestic political rift on regional strategy.

Although the derogatory term "retreat" out of the Gulf is overstated, indeed Britain's regional position deteriorated both after Suez and later the withdrawal from "East of Suez." Trade became a more noticeable aspect of bilateral relations starting in the 1960s, demonstrating the significance of trade policy to Britain and opportunity afforded by rich states of the Gulf (Vadrot et al., 2021). The UK has placed a high priority on its diplomatic, business, and security ties with the Gulf Arab States since 2010. This increased regional focus, supported by enduring political, economic, and security links, shows that British officials saw the Gulf as a source of opportunity and confirmation of the "Global Britain" image. The goals of Britain are both purely economic and geared toward increasing regional security. With exceptions— lawful ruling limiting the export of UK arms related to the Yemen conflict and ongoing, offers simple national anxiety about prolonged elective conflicts, especially the Britain's military association in Iraq, Libya, and Syria—strategy Britain's for the Gulf and the wider Middle East has so far been pursued with comparatively few constraints from the house of representatives or visibility in civil society. The officials of Iran in 2019 have revealed a flick of the British tanker which went into Strait of Humor. The incidents have received the title of Gulf Crisis according to the new agencies. It should be said that the crisis began before the detainment of Iran of the flagged vessel of Britain. UK forces have captured the “Adrian Danya 1'' which is an Iranian tanker after suspecting EU sanctions on Syria.

Adrian Darya 1 was known as Grace 1 and it was kept by the maritime forces of Gibraltar. Great Britain has made allegations against the Iranian Vessel. It was suspected that they sold oil to Syria. The tanker was full of 2 billion oil which was set free on August 15 after Tehran gave enough evidence that it would not dump the cargo in Syria. Iranian Guard cops set free the emperor. The tanker was in captivity for three months but the conflict is still not resolved. The current conflicts in the Gulf region have spread tensions all over the region (Threats to UK crisis, 2019).

Diplomacy has a different impact on digital technology on an international basis. The organisations often evaluate digital technology as a weapon to make sure that the information about the public is appropriate enough and they are readily available (Manor and Pamment, 2019).

Later, the “British-flagged Stena Impero'' was captured by Iranian authorities in the Strait of Hormuz as reprisal for the detention of an Iranian tanker. A passage separating the Gulf from the Indian Ocean was being traversed by the ship. The government has revealed that they are interested in confronting Iran and avoiding the life of British flagged ships in the Gulf. the decision to enhance the ship security at the largest and which is essentially a threat to British ships to enter Iranian water. There are nearly 30 large UK ships which include oil and gas tankers which are transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

The Department of Transport has revealed that it has given adequate security to the UK ships in the highly threatening domains. The threat level affirms that they would not enter Iranian waters. A British footage has shown that a BP owned tanker was compelled to shift between the three boats and the ships.

Iran and the UK are at odds over the United Kingdom's (UK) attempt to impose EU sanctions against Syria. The Grace I, which is a tanker belonging to Iran , was impounded off the coast of Gibraltar on July 4 by officials from the “British Overseas Territory” of Gibraltar with the assistance of British marines on the grounds that it was allegedly breaking an EU oil embargo on Syria. In the days that followed, the IRGC Navy attempted to capture a UK-owned tanker in the Gulf, the British Heritage, according to Iranian officials who described the seizure as an act of piracy. However, the force was reportedly forced off by a British destroyer. The tanker war is a moment of international tension in the end of revolutionary Iran's war.

The underlying contrasts between the UK and Iran's stances on the security of the Persian Gulf and Middle Eastern conflicts provided serious obstacles to the bilateral relationship, notwithstanding the marked improvement in relations between the two countries under Rouhani. The UK has criticised Iran for its backing of “Bashar al-Assad” in Syria, its deployment of proxy forces throughout the Levant, and its “domestic ballistic missile programme”. Iran has responded by criticising Britain for its naval presence in the area, applying different standards to human rights, and selling weapons there. Following remarks by Theresa May and Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson critical of Iran's regional strategy, the UK government's efforts to build deeper ties with the Persian Gulf which was under further scrutiny (Sadiki and Saleh, 2020). The UK was also accused of "playing the Iran card" by generating apprehension about Iran in order to persuade Arab monarchies to reach various kinds of arrangements such as military, commercial and business as restitution for unprecedented challenges from Brexit.

Iran has responsibilities over navigational actions in the Strait of Hormuz as a nation bordering the waterway. This obligation takes the shape of a restriction against impeding or delaying transit passage that is being used as a shipping route across international borders. Iran cannot prevent foreign ships from other nations from transiting through its territory through the Strait of Hormuz. The UK believes that the seizure of the Stena Impero Tanker is unlawful because it violates its obligations as a country bordering the strait because there is a prohibition against suspension and discrimination (Malasenkova and Lavrov, 2019). As a result, Britain perceived Iran's activities as an effort to retaliate against it in response to the Grace I Ship's imprisonment.

In late 2016 responses to and critiques of foreign laws of Britain in the Middle East that aired in the media of Iran were consistent with long-held views about the UK's role in the Persian Gulf. Iranian criticisms of the UK typically draw attention to the inherent tension between inflating the nation's might overseas and confining the overarching goals of British foreign policy to affiliating with the US or sustaining the connections with its customers in the “Persian Gulf”. As an extension of Tehran's objection to the existence of external forces in the “Persian Gulf”, Iran has regularly condemned foreign policy of the British in the region for fostering an arms race and reducing incentives for collaboration among neighbours.

Because Iran surrounds the “Strait of Hormuz”, Iran has the legal right to impose sanctions on foreign ships that enter or exit the Strait of Hormuz against their will. As was allegedly carried out by Iran on July 19, 2019, on the British-flagged “Stena Impero Tanker”, which included more than 20 crew members who were nationals of India, the Philippines, Latvia, and Russia. The business owns the oil tanker Stena Impero. The UK's open registration procedure allowed Swedish Stena Bulk to register there. The UK, the Stena Impero Tanker's Flag State, is in charge of the ship owing to the existence of this public registration system. The “Stena Impero Tanker”entered the “Strait of Hormuz” on the path shown in the figure above, and Iranian authorities later apprehended it. When Iran ultimately intercepted the Stena Impero tanker in the middle of its journey, it was en route from the “Gulf of Oman to the Tanker Terminal of the Al Jubail port in Abu Dhabi, Saudi Arabia”, to load oil. A mistaken deviation from the shipping path specified in the TSS (Traffic Separation Scheme) is one of the claimed offences the Stena Impero Ship committed, which led to an accident with a fishing vessel.

Following Britain's declaration that the Iranian regime was "probably certainly" to blame for the June strikes on two oil tankers, relations between Iran and the UK have deteriorated further. After authorities in Gibraltar, with the help of British Royal Marines, seized an Iranian oil vessel, tensions rose (Rashica, 2018). A senior Iranian official demanded that the tanker Grace 1 be released on Thursday, calling the seizure a "utterly pointless and non-constructive escalation by the UK."

The Strait of Hormuz which is the gateway to enter the Gulf and it is narrow which is just 39 kms where Iranian and Omani territorial waters connect in the middle. The shipping transport is directed through the two lanes which are heading in two opposite routes (Allagui and Akdenizli, 2019).

The study makes reference to a digital platform that grew visible and appealed to both governmental executives and ordinary people over the past ten years, given that diplomacy has gone through a lot of changes related to the development in the digital sphere. Analysis of the tweets made by the conflict's participants on Twitter gives us a better understanding of how each side views the situation and interacts with one another.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt's post states that funding for British national security is essential. The British Navy will be more powerful and stronger during the fight with Iran, according to the Secretary of State. He said the UK has a great opportunity to "demonstrate their trust in the world." The “Stena Impero” was not visible outside the premises of Bandar Abbas as per the Marine Traffic.com from where it was detained since 19th July (Sadiki and Saleh, 2020). The Iranian authorities are not responding with any comments. The company of the ship was not sure of the reason for the delay and it was anchored at the port for two days. There was no explanation about the detainment of the ships. The seizure of the Stena Impero has uplifted tensions in the total region. The other attacks in May and June on the other vessels along the gulf waters Iran has denied their responsibility.

The seizures were not accepted by the UK as it is beyond the law. There should be freedom of navigation and every ship should be provided with the permission of travelling all across the globe. Jeremy Hunt also stated that the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs should be responsible for resolving the situation quickly. Hunt also suggested by tweeting that it is a serious concern and it must be addressed properly (Tonkiss, 2018). Reuters also said that they are not looking forward to any kind of military options and viewing it in a diplomatic way to solve the situation. The UK government told CNN on Friday that there would be a COBRA meeting which is regarded as the emergency response if there is any international crisis.

The Stena Imperos seizure is another incident which gave rise to the new maritime episode which involves Iran. The US Navy has smashed an Iranian drone which was applying electronic jamming (El, 2020). The USS Boxer took defensive action against the unnamed aerial vehicle while it moved towards the US naval vessel. Jonathan Hoffman who is the spokesperson revealed that USS boxer stated that it should be “planned inbound transit of the Strait of Hormuz”

On the next day Jeremy Hunt again tweeted that the post published by The telegraph where he focussed to examine the Royal Navy. Hunt exclaimed that it is the best possible way to reflect “British power overseas” and safety in maritime space. On July 13th the secretary stated that he had a conversation with Iranian counterpart Javed Zarif (Stansfield et al., 2018). It is regarded as a constructive call and they reached an agreement. The maritime forces of the UK were focussed about destination and oil tanker. They have put a stop to oil tankers which were approaching the Syria coast due to pre-sanctioned terms on Syria. Jeremy Hunt ensured Foreign minister of Iran and made sure that an effective release only when the tanker will not provide oil to Syria.

Social networks are the most practical and focused treatments because digital communication is already a part of them. They also play an important role in the fields of public diplomacy, efficient communication, and the fight against misinformation (Perez and Victor, 2019). As more and more global leaders follow one another through Twitter, a virtual diplomatic network has been created that enables them to communicate with one another on a professional level and through private direct messages.

Digital diplomacy has been defined, described, and explained in a variety of ways by researchers and practitioners alike. The term lacks a generally acknowledged definition or conceptual foundation as a result. As a result, it may be safe to say that current study into the essence and functionality of digital diplomacy has just just begun.The sole outsourcing of digital diplomacy to social networking platforms is untenable. The definition of "digital" is already expanding because of advances in big data and the growing use of wearable computing devices like smart watches and glasses. Crisis mapping is one method that humanitarian organisations use to better prepare for and respond to natural and man-made disasters. In times of crisis, crisis mapping highlights recent market insights from social media and communication.Thus, social media are altering the environment in which diplomacy takes place (Chhabra, 2020). However, despite its complexity, interpersonal relationships are still seen as the foundation of diplomacy.By emphasising cyberspace as the primary utilisation of modern world affairs, a rising corpus of work helps people comprehend how powerful technology can be.

Although it can not replace conventional diplomacy, digital diplomacy can increase a state's participation in international affairs more rapidly and successfully. It is currently thought to be a key determinant in how foreign policy is carried out. Using digital diplomacy to increase global alignment and make an impression on those who have never been to a diplomatic post ensures compliance in achieving foreign policy objectives. Countries are compelled to use social media and digital diplomacy as a means of preserving legitimacy and building or strengthening links in the ever-changing globe by direct public involvement and the participation of non-state actors.

Since diplomacy is the "art of communication,"11 Twitter provides another forum for interstate communication. However, the traditional view of diplomacy, which holds that it takes place through official channels of exchange and unofficial face-to-face social interactions, is challenged by technology (Khan et al., 2021). As a means of communication with their colleagues, diplomats are relying more and more on Twitter. These discussions take place in front of a worldwide audience, adding a special level of scrutiny to this mode of communication.

Even with such interdisciplinary techniques, there hasn't yet been a thorough investigation of how we might apply this information in circumstances when establishing personal, face-to-face interaction at the "highest level" of diplomacy is challenging. Twitter is a good tool for communication in these situations (King and Vaiman, 2019). Focusing solely on the individual ignores the new instruments that might be used in everyday diplomacy to potentially infer another's intentions through representation. For the practice of diplomacy, interpersonal interaction is crucial. By fostering interpersonal trust, communication in face-to-face diplomacy can help resolve diplomatic problems. Manoeuvres for peace or even threats to take armed action can look more genuine if there is mutual confidence between the opponents.

Thus, direct communication in international politics is a crucial signalling technique. We can never truly understand what another person is thinking. However, by the impressions we form from interpersonal interactions, we might infer what other people might be thinking or experiencing. When two people come together, a link is made thanks to mirror neurons, which reflect or mimic "what is happening in each partner's head." This replication enables one to understand what another person could be thinking or experiencing in response to an incident or when speaking about a certain subject. 50 Mirror neurons also enable one person to judge whether or not another person is thinking or feeling in the same way as they are.

One may see how social media projections of state identity might impact recognition and, in turn, legitimate political prospects for change from this brief study of Iranian Twitter tweets. Iranian Twitter posts that show dissatisfaction at negotiating hurdles frequently use dominant images of the UK as, for example, a hypocritical bully, although these have been moderated by favourable representational conceptual frameworks of Iran. Iranian Twitter tweets show political prospects for change by attempting to transcend beyond engrained forms of (mis)recognition by focusing on positive parts of Iranian identity rather than continually reverting to negative UK depictions.

Nowadays, social media plays a crucial role in diplomacy. Information communication technology is an essential tool of international relations, from "digital diplomacy" as the new public diplomacy to cyberspace as the new front line of conflict. When it comes to complex negotiations, like those carried out as part of the “JCPOA agreement”, “Twitter” can help define the parameters of discourse. Twitter has the power to influence the fight for recognition and, in doing so, legitimise potential political change. Representatives from the state post things that reflect and frame their state's identity and the way they want it to be seen by others.

Analysis of the Uk- Iran Case

Iranian authorities uploaded a video of the captured foreign tanker in the “Strait of Hormuz” on July 20, 2019. According to the media sources, the events under consideration are regarded as the Gulf Crisis. It should be recognized that the conflict started before Iran seized the ship flying the British flag. The Iranian tanker Adrian Darya-1 was detained by UK authorities on July 4 on suspicion of disobeying EU restrictions against Syria. The British naval commandos of Gibraltar seized Adrian Darya-1, previously designated as Grace-1 (Malasenkova and Lavrov, 2019). Britain believed that the Iranian ship was funding terrorism to Syria in neglecting the sanctions of Western governments against Iran. Iran supplied assurances that it would not discharge the tanker’s 2.1 million barrels of crude oil in Syria, and the tanker was released on August 15 as a consequence.

The British naval commandos of Gibraltar seized Adrian Darya-1, previously designated as Grace-1. Britain believed that the Iranian ship was funding terrorism to Syria in violation of the Western governments’ sanctions against Iran. Iran produced documentation that it wouldn’t discharge the tanker’s 2.1 million barrels of oil in Syria, as well as the tanker was liberated on August 15 as a response.

Later, in retribution for the Iranian tanker’s imprisonment, the State authority of Iran seized the “British-flagged Stena Impero” in the “Strait of Hormuz”. In order to go from the Gulf to the Indian Ocean, the ship used to pass through a tiny strait. International waters have been the area of the detention. Iran claimed they were unable to engage the employees because there was no response to their calls. There is no evidence of the accusation, as according to British officials and the shipping companies (ÖZBEK, 2022). A Royal Navy frigate was deployed to rescue the tanker, yet before the frigate would reach, the “Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps” moved “Stena Impero” to the port of “Bandar Abbas”.

The Gulf States recommended convening an international forum to resolve the disagreement and set standards for offshore defences. The meeting was intended to predict coastal threats and ensure maritime safety, according to the initiative’s proponents.

The “British-flagged Stena Impero” was released by the Iranian Guard Corps on September 27. After enduring more than two months of being seized, it evacuated the dock. Though the conflict continued too that may impact on the interrelationship between both of the countries. According to the analysts, the Gulf issue includes more than a disagreement about neglecting the maritime law. Only one item was removed from the ideology whenever the ship was delivered. Iran is being compelled to comply by the conditions of the nuclear agreement by Western countries, particularly the USA. Tensions in the region have intensified as a result of recent conflicts in the Gulf. The controversial and heavily guarded nuclear facility will commence using centrifuges to develop nuclear weapons, according to Iranian officials.

In addition to media organisations, the representatives of the disputing parties also expressed their perspectives on the situation. According to Danziger and Schreiber (2021), Twitter functioned as the most practicable channel for the officials to make their statements as it offered rapid response.

The conflict between UK and Iran has been analysed by twitter diplomacy by individuals that may influence the connection between the two countries. Recently the concept of diplomacy has evolved due to advancement of digital technology and various social media platforms. Digital diplomacy helps to connect with leaders of different countries of the world. With the integration of digital media in diplomacy, the country has gained high publicity and exclusivity by popular personalities and people of the country according to any specific topic or concern. As referred to by Aggestam et al. (2022), evaluating twit of representatives of different countries should be analysed with better insights in accordance with the topic so both parties involved in the conflict will treat the issue with equal importance and provide equal recognition to various concepts based on the various issues of the conflict.

Scholars have examined tweets from the beginning of the crisis to its completion, from July 4th, when the tanker of the Iran was seized, till September 27th, whenever the Iranian Guard Corps liberated a vessel carrying the British flag. The study is based on comments that were made by Jeremy Hunt, state secretary for international and potential conflicts, and Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Iranian counterpart.

The Foreign Secretary of “State for Foreign Affairs’’ Jeremy Hunt, has stated delight in the actions of the Maritime Forces of the UK on July 4, on that day the circumstances based on various considerations commenced and the tanker of the Iran was detained by the “British Royal Marine Forces’’ of “Gibraltar’’. He claims that the interception of the Iranian tanker was a massive step in restricting the sanctions targeting Syria. According to Jeremy Hunt, the initiative is important in the campaign against Asad’s “murderous tyranny”. He also highlighted the comments made by Gibraltar’s chief minister, Fabian Picardo, wherein he thanked the UK for its support and highlighted his concerns about regional confrontation.

Jeremy Hunt stated that the British government should increase the power of the defence authority of the British navy. British National defence should make more investment on the defence of the country so they can be able to handle different conflicts within the country and also handle different issues that may influence the financial and political stability of the country thus the future condition of the workplace may be disrupted. He has discussed that the UK has a great opportunity for assuring the confidence of the country to handle various issues throughout the world. Jeremy said “The most recent incident concerning Iranian boats in the Gulf highlights why we have to strengthen our defence budget. Our Navy has been overused, and this ought to be immediately remedied. By putting our money where our mouth is, we should express our confidence in the world.” On 11th July Jeremy retweeted on his previous tweet in which he has put attention on investing into Royal Navy thus Jeremy can make investment on the process of demonstrating power of the British at the international level for securing the capability of the defence management authority of the United Kingdom that represent his concern about the future implications of British government for ensuring the efficiency for tackling various issues within the country.

On July 13, the British Secretary of State issued a statement following his meeting with Javad Zarif, the Iranian counterpart. Jeremy Hunt (@Jeremy Hunt) made reference to it as a “constructive call.” He maintains they both concurred on the rationale for the detention. Concerns regarding the location of the oil tanker were expressed by the UK Maritime Forces. Due to Syria’s current restrictions, they stopped it from nearing the Syrian coast. If Iran could establish that the tanker would not deliver oil to Syria, Jeremy Hunt informed the Iranian foreign secretary that the tanker would’ve been easily removed. Javad Zarif pledged that Iran will not try to exacerbate the situation in his own favour.

Additionally, Jeremy Hunt and his colleague discussed the captivity of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, the citizens of the UK and Iran who has been kidnapped in Iran since April 3rd, 2016. The parties acknowledged which solution required to be established again for the matter of maintaining dual nationals. On July 15, @Jeremy Hunt and EU representatives met for just a critical conversation about the nuclear deal’s compliance including its terms. Iranian involvement in the arrangement was the main focus of the discussions. The Secretary emphasised that there would be “no partial compliance,” indicating the UK’s strict position on the issue. He also stated that, quite apart from the tensions surrounding the arrest of the Iranian tanker, the JCPOA compliance ought to not be overlooked by power and authority. The JCPOA was originally established by the 5+1 group, which comprises the US, Russia, PRC, UK, France, and Germany. Jeremy Hunt makes reference to the fact that Russia and China, who already have responsibilities in Iran, in addition to Europe supported the Plan. It should be noted that until Iran captured the British-flagged ship on July 19, de-escalating the crisis was the Secretary’s primary concern. With Fabian Picardo, Jeremy Hunt talked about possibilities for the release of Grace-1. They acknowledged that although sanctions should be maintained, the EU should be prepared to look for an answer to the region’s troubles. The kidnapping of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe was yet another topic of conversation between Jeremy Hunt and his opponent. The parties acknowledged that now the problem of holding dual citizens must be resolved. It should be emphasised that until Iran captured the Britain vessel on July 19, the Secretary’s top priority was de-escalating the crisis (Franklin and Canter, 2019). With Fabian Picardo, Jeremy Hunt talked about the potential for the release of Grace-1. They acknowledged that while sanctions should be upheld, the EU must be willing to look for a solution to the region’s problems. Jeremy Hunt expressed his serious concern on the day Iranian authorities in reprisal captured the “Stena Impero” in the “Strait of Hormuz”. The Secretary emphasised the value of concerted action and emphasised that partners throughout the world are engaged in fixing problems. Jeremy Hunt encouraged the global community to gather together within defence of the independence of transit.

The seizure of the Iranian Grace-1 was a “constitutional detention,” as according to Jeremy Hunt, who claimed on July 20 that now the activities of Iranian officials had endangered maritime safety. The Secretary voiced alarm that Iran has selected to pursue “a dangerous path of illegal behaviour.” The tone of Jeremy Hunt’s statement transformed, and now he emphasises “ensuring the safety” of British shipping over attempting to resolve the “Grace-1 issue.” Jeremy Hunt’s sample shows several tweets on the same topic that day. The incarceration of Stena Impero, in the words of the British officer, “clearly violates international law.” Subsequently, Jeremy Hunt detailed his discussion with the “Iranian Foreign Affairs” leader, who similarly expressed conflict issues regarding various aspects and assured the UK that Iran still had plans to address the dispute. British shipping must and shall be protected, the Secretary asserted, demonstrating the government’s steely determination to safeguard the vessel. Jeremy did not make any tweet addressing the Gulf conflict over the course of the whole month. In response to Iran having two British-Austrian women as captives, the “Secretary of the State for Foreign Affairs” posted on 11th September encouraged the globe to “prevent Iran’s hostage-taking.” The releasing of “Grace-1” and “Stena Impero” on 15th August and 27th September, respectively, elicited no response from a British official (@Jeremy Hunt), that is relevant.

A review of the Iranian position demonstrated that the @IRIMFA EN account of the Iranian Foreign Ministry was the only one that responded to the issue on 4th July on Twitter. It portrays Javad Zarif, the British minister affairs of the Iranian Islamic Republic, as stating throughout a telephonic conversation with his British predecessor, Jeremy Hunt, that Iran would continue to export oil and that provocations from those other states would not force Iran to discontinue. The tweet also encouraged the UK authorities to stop “the illegal detention of the Iranian oil tanker.” It is important to remember that the Iranian government did not react to the episode on Twitter until 10 days after it occurred, during that same telephone conversation. The UK’s preceding actions were made reference to as “the piracy in the Strait of Gibraltar” by Javad Zarif (@JZarif) on July 20, the day the clip of the seized British tanker was publicly revealed (Perez-Pena and Victor, 2019). He maintained that because international maritime standards had been violated, Iran’s initiatives in detaining the foreign tanker were required. According to the official line, Iran is responsible for providing the preponderance of the security in the “Persian Gulf” and the “Strait of Hormuz”, and that anyone who breaks the law would’ve been held accountable.

Consequently, Twitter is a platform that enables quick reactions to certain breaking news and the expression of views by government representatives. Javad Zarif is anxious to make a comparison between the conflict and the phenomenon of economic issues committed by the United States in addition to speaking about the conditions in the Strait of Gibraltar. Expressions like “a worldwide scourge,” “turning his venom towards the UK,” “dragging it into a quagmire,” and “thwart such ploys” all represent the Minister’s perspective on the US and its operations in the international sphere. Twitter has revolutionized diplomatic vocabulary in some aspects. These tweets only represent a modest fraction of a fashion that is abundantly captured in the authorized Twitter accounts of Iran. The latest craze encompasses condemning the US for economic sabotage and meddling in other governments’ domestic matters whilst still manipulating the US’s alliances against the US’s competitors. The restrictions made by Western nations towards Iran cannot be defined as restrictions, as according Javad Zarif, who really contends that this fact is apparent. While these practical steps violate the law, he maintains that sanctions should be employed to “enforce the law”. The day after, on 21st July, Javad Zarif manages to keep his anti-American attitude by providing a hyperlink to a Guardian editorial in which the journalist informs that the UK “stumbled into an American trap,” that is the same perspective the British Minister expressed on the day before.

Based on the analysis of digital diplomacy, leaders of different countries have to interact with each other that may influence the financial and political stability of the country. The main advantages of utilisation of digital diplomacy will foster the improvement of the tactics for analysing and evaluating the influence of seizing of the British tanker by the Iran authority. With the help of digital diplomacy the leaders of UK and Iran engaged in different public diplomacy based on high involvement of citizens in various activities undertaken by the state and the country. With the utilisation of digital diplomacy the political leaders gain deep insights about current affairs within the nation and throughout the world. Usage of digital technology while managing and evaluating the opinion of diplomats of the UK and different parts of the world so they can exchange their own perspective about any specific issue with others and get their responses regarding the issues. Digital diplomacy concept helps to reconnect with diplomats to manage the national image of the country, make a reputation throughout the world and make better relationships among citizens of the country thus they can handle various risks associated with the issue.

As mentioned by Duncombe (2019), digital diplomacy may help to demonstrate commitment in statement and response to criticism regarding the issues by arranging question answer sessions on a regular basis that may ensure constant interaction among people throughout the country. Digital diplomacy plays the most significant role for tackling various obstacles of traditional diplomacy such as assuring soft power resources and conversing with foreign people in enemy states that may influence the political stability of their own country. It may also help to handle controversy within the country that may impact on the current condition of the country. Digital diplomacy enables nations to handle various issues with proper efficiency and capability that may help to collect feedback from people of the country for creating a common interpretation of various events occurring within the country. Due to advancements in digital diplomacy diplomats get the capability for interacting with people of the country and interacting with people outside of the state thus the purpose of being extrinsic beyond the boundary of staying state centric. Digital diplomacy will assure better collaboration with actors of different states.

As notified by Duncombe (2019), diplomacy also obtains various issues that may impact on international organisational activities and reduce overall efficiency of organisations that may influence future performance of the organisation. International organisations use digital technology as the tool for ensuring public information regarding public activities which is accurate, widely accessible and free of manipulation so organisations can continue their efficient operation in the competitive market that may help to gain better efficiency that may influence their future sustainability and performance. Digital diplomacy is considered as the vehicle of driving organisational purpose for flourishing in the highly competitive field, thus they can perform their best and gain better competency. According to Duncombe (2019), social media plays the most significant role to perform in an efficient way by maintaining overall productivity so the power of the management authority will be raised. Twitter represents the opinion of different leaders about any conflict or issue throughout the organisation that may influence overall proficiency of the nation that may impact various organisational activities.

As mentioned by Danziger and Schreiber (2021), Twitter has redesigned the international interconnection between the UK and Iran that may impact various conflicts and other issues occurring in both countries. According to Constance Duncombe, Twitter has become a platform for exchange of dialogue between different States and delivered different sources of reliable information so the international initiatives undertaken by various countries will be impacted through effective communication and interaction with people of the country and popular leaders of the country. As the influence of Twitter diplomacy individuals can show their response regarding any issue that represents their own perspective regarding the issue and reduce productivity thus the operational supremacy will be reduced. Twitter diplomacy offers various possibilities for ensuring stable political and economical conditions within the country. As mentioned by Franklin and Canter (2019), twitter plays the role of being efficient for developing trust among people of different parts of the world and promoting exchange of dialogue when traditional diplomacy will get hampered due to any context of various conflicts and other issues. Twitter reflects the exchange of information among leaders and the government and how they interact with each other based on their own perspective in accordance with the same political and regional context. Social media platforms are not the way of face to face communication that may allow leaders to influence the situation and also assure the possibility of getting a positive insight regarding issues and conflict that may affect the future implications undertaken by the nation.

In recent times digital diplomacy is evolving in a constant process that has radically transformed the method of promoting the way for handling power throughout the nation. With the help of digital diplomacy leaders will be capable of interacting with millions of people in less time and effort thus initiatives undertaken by leaders will be impacted. Leaders can communicate with people and associates outside of the nation that may also help to gain insights about their perspective, criticism regarding the conflict and recommendations offered by experts to mitigate the issues and complete various activities more independently that may ensure success of the nation amid a wide range of people and community. Due to the improvement and evolution of digital technology, diplomats have the ability to increase the communication rate that may be affected by domestic governance and the area of international relationship with leaders and diplomats of different countries that may influence the way of interaction based on a constant and continuous process. Digital diplomacy has a crucial impact on implications and implementation of Foreign policies on different international activities. As noted by Duncombe (2019), digital diplomacy focused on growing digital technologies in diplomatic initiatives taken by the UK government. Digital diplomacy has a crucial impact on the UK Iran conflict due to seizing of British tankers by the Iran government authority that may impact on various rules and regulations incorporated by foreign authority.

As referred to by Haris (2019), twitter diplomacy is considered as the most popular tool for tackling various conflicts within the nation that may reduce the possibilities of potential risks that can impact on future initiatives thus various initiatives undertaken by the government will get hampered. According to suggestions given by experts, the UK government should utilise wealth and resources for powering up their military sources. Thus the country will be able to handle the threats given by other countries to the UK, thus for the safety and security of citizens and also for maintaining a stable political condition throughout the nation. Twitter diplomacy made a significant impact on increasing the popularity of the tanker seizing issue that occurred in the maritime space when foreign tankers neglected the legislations made by Iran. Iran has imprisoned the tanker due to breaking maritime law thus diplomats of Foreign and other countries make criticism about the Iranian authority which impact on the interrelationship between the UK and Iran. At that time leaders used to tweet their own views about the incident that had a significant impact on the handling of various issues undertaken by foreign Ministry. Due to the incident the interconnection between the UK and Iran is adverse, which may impact on international exchange, import and export and other different aspects. Most importantly, the UK has to face various difficulties implementing different initiatives for enhancing the popularity of different sectors and the internationalisation of different organisational activities occurring with Iran. Due to efficiency in digitalization of various initiatives undertaken by the country that may influence the overall performance of the country. Experts have analysed the tweets based on the circumstances of the capturing of foreign tankers by Iran authority that may influence the overall efficiency and capability of the foreign ministry.

As mentioned by Franklin and Canter (2019), tweets of ministers of different countries evaluating international affairs and conflict of the seizing of foreign tankers by the Iran authority. With evaluating the tweets different leaders of different nations will get better insights about the opinion of different parties involved in the different initiatives undertaken by the UK authority thus various implications undertaken by foreign management authority will be capable to tackle various issues given by other countries that stiffen the political and financial growth of the country for tackling various issues. With evaluating international affairs undertaken by the government will be able to tackle issues based on conflict issues thus the efficiency in conflict management will be reduced. Twitter diplomacy plays the most crucial role for tackling different interests regarding official standards for handling issues based on various issues regarding the issue of seizing the Foreign tanker throughout the country and also assure the aspect of how the country will be able to tackle the issue. As mentioned by Danziger and Schreiber (2021), by twitter diplomacy leaders will be able to recognize their personal perspectives about how to recognise the issue based on different context and implications of various rules and legislations. Twitter diplomacy will represent the opinion and suggestion of leaders of different countries. It may give guidance and instruction to the government about how to tackle the issues and also how to make initiatives about managing the issues with better efficiency and expertise. By getting instruction the Foreign ministry authority will be capable of powering up risk management defence for handling various risks given by other countries to the UK. It has a major impact on how to recognise the issue and what initiatives can be undertaken for tackling the issue and maintaining a stable political and financial condition within the country.

According to Anyanova (2022), the practice of political leaders in various activities occurring within the country has radically modified with utilising digital technology that saves huge time, effort and investment. Iran and the UK are at conflict over the UK’s attempts to impose EU sanctions against Syria. On 4th July, authorities from the British International Territory of Gibraltar, accompanied by foreign soldiers, detained the Iranian tanker “Grace I” from off the coast of Gibraltar on allegations of having broken an EU restriction on the oil export to Syria. In the days immediately following, the IRGC Navy intended to intercept the Foreign Heritage, a tanker owned by the UK, in the Gulf after Iranian officials emphasised the seizure as an alleged piracy act. Eventually, the squad was apparently driven by a foreign warship.

As noted by Grajewski (2022), the Stena Impero, a tanker carrying the British flag, was taken into police custody by the IRGC Navy on 19th July near the Hormuz Strait. The IRGC Navy gave various arguments for the seizure, such as that the tanker had breached Iranian maritime zones, was contaminating the Gulf, had interfered with an Iranian vessel, or was striking in retribution for abduction of “Grace I”.

On 22nd July, the British Secretary “Jeremy Hunt” outlined the federal actions to the “Stena Impero” capture as driving official relationships with Iran to negotiate the disagreement diplomatically while simultaneously deploying any further maritime tanker to the Gulf to help protected British merchant vessels. According to Secretary Hunt, the UK has made perfectly clear in the community that it will be perfect with retrieving of “Grace I” when there were adequate assurances the oil just wouldn’t pass to any organisations controlled by the EU. Senior American executives, especially President Donald Trump, publicly endorsed the UK position. The United Kingdom is accountable for the maintenance of their ships, as according to Secretary of State Pompeo.

Gibraltar court published the order for the ship under the different username Adrian Darya 1 to be discharged on August 15, apparently in accordance with Iran’s alleged commitment not to transport the oil shipment to Syria. In order to comply with American sanctions targeting Syria and the IRGC, which the U.S. government claimed were monetarily engaged in the tankers and its cargo, Gibraltar judges denied a request from the U.S. Justice Department to confiscate the ship. The ship allegedly transport its oil to “Syria” despite the current issue, and as a consequence, the United States forced additional restrictions on individuals and organisations correlated to the ship and to the “IRGC-linked network” that the “Department of Treasury” recognized as supplementary that and subsequent of oil shipments by Iran (Shepard and Pratson, 2020). The Stena Impero was released by Iran on 22nd September of 2019. Separate from the controversy in between UK and Iran on the “Grace I” and the “Stena Impero”, Iran apprehended an Iraqi vessel on 5 th August, 2019, for allegedly trafficking Iranian diesel fuel for “Persian Gulf Arab states”.

Conclusion

While digital diplomacy does not take the role of conventional diplomacy, it can strengthen the state's efforts in international relations more rapidly and successfully. It is now crucial to the implementation of foreign policy. The use of digital diplomacy greatly aids in achieving foreign policy objectives, increasing global alignment, and having an impact on those who have never visited an embassy. Direct public connection and the presence of non-state actors force nations to adopt digital and social media diplomacy as a means of preserving their legitimacy and fostering new or strengthened relations in a changing global environment.Machiavelli was a failure as a diplomat and diplomatic during his own time, a middle-of-the-road individual who got himself into difficulty. No matter how clever his plans were, none of his brilliant strategies were successful. Because it was affected by ambitions and intrigues in the 16th century, a brilliant plan was not always the best course of action, which is why he was viewed as a failure.

There wasn't a focal point for Machiavelli to set his course of action. He would be incredibly successful if he used Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media platform since he would appeal to the public's viewpoint, especially through followers, retweets, or likes. They make it possible for governments to consider how developments in other countries may have an impact on their own. For instance, embassies can set up WhatsApp groups in times of emergency that contain the embassy, consular officer, press secretary, staff members who gather data online, diplomats from the headquarters, and staff members who answer citizens' online concerns. This team has the capacity to act as a crisis management cell, facilitating the gathering of real-time data, decision-making, and information distribution. Digital technologies enable the freedom of opinion of objections to certain issues, as well as the minimization of authoritarianism, whereas individuals that live under dictatorial states that aim to limit their ability to communicate both domestically and internationally can avoid this kind of limitation.

Connections, knowledge of norms in other cultures, and taking notes on regulations and best practices are all encouraged by the globalisation of information. However, less positive occurrences have also been significantly impacted by modern communication technologies. They are also used by xenophobic and terrorist organisations to mobilise and find adherents. Digital diplomacy opponents warn against "Trojan Horse" independence from the social media and the internet. The internet expands the number of perspectives and purposes involved in formulating foreign policies, complicating decision-making at the global level and eroding the country's sole control over it. With varying interests, objectives, and values, different state and regime players create various security scenarios. The revolution in social media is altering how individuals communicate and perceive the world. Governments and embassies may now interact with the public more easily, and everyone is now more conscious of the consequences of a single remark or tweet, both good and bad. A Twitter comment, video, or photograph can gain traction quickly. Lack of expertise on how to use modern communication tools, the computer, and social media can have disastrous effects, lead to serious conflicts, and even result in the dismissal of politicians. Foreign ministries had to educate their ambassadors on how to employ digital communication tools in order to mitigate the risks of the digital era and prevent further harm.

It is essential that the UK government must have to be concerned about various issues impacting the political and financial stability of the country as the influence of digital diplomacy. The government has to understand about various threats given by other countries thus the stable condition of the country will be influenced that can also impact on lifestyle and wellbeing of the community within the UK. The propensity in Great Britain was to emphasize internal conflicts. The nation’s security was a main element of the discussion. The defence of British ships in the maritime sector, as according to Jeremy Hunt, one of most prominent representatives of the Foreign Relations Secrecy, was indeed the primary concern of the state. The expansion of the British Navy was given the highest priority by him, stating, “We should strengthen the military budget on the means of solid dominance, like the Royal Marines. It is clear from the most recent incident concerning Iranian boats in the Gulf that we have to strengthen our military spending”.

When the Iranian tanker was seized, the Secretary congratulated the Royal Maritime Forces, tweeting, “Congratulations to Gibraltar and @RoyalMarines for this daring move to enforce Syria restrictions.” The way the rhetoric was perceived could have something to do with Twitter’s rising popularity amid British citizens who follow prominent figures and their statements on social media. International affairs are, obviously, also a primary concern that the British government has to accomplish for tackling various issues. Jeremy Hunt highlighted his hopes for a settlement to the conflict throughout their essential phone conversations with Javad Zarif.

Iran, however, exploits Twitter as a weapon for international relations, and since 2009, the government has blocked Twitter accessibility for average citizens. Officials employ this social network to interact with other governments’ officials, especially those from the USA, instead of with the Iranian citizens in general. Their terminology, which is slightly informal, commonly known as e of accusations or, in some situations, replies to allegations. The frequency of tweets both from countries commenting on the detained vessels is yet another finding from study. There are more twitter posts by @Jeremy Hunt more about the British government capturing an Iranian tanker than on a British warship being arrested in the Hormuz Strait. It emphasizes that the parties to the conflict have an obligation to defend their viewpoints and decisions being made during the disagreement. As a result, Twitter diplomacy emerged into a significant instrument for preserving a country’s reputation worldwide. It has been seen from all of the tweets included that official government accounts on Twitter also work to exploit Twitter to its full potential by using hashtags and mentioning other countries’ politicians and government servants. As a result, it greatly simplifies their endeavours to attract public attention to the scenario.

The report has discussed digital diplomacy, which is a major concern of different governments of different countries about implementing various initiatives, restrictions and legislations for handling potential risks threatened to the country. Digital diplomacy plays the most crucial role for signifying the impact of the seizing of British tankers for violating the transport law of Iran. It has evaluated the role of digital diplomacy for implications of foreign rules and regulations that may assist to handle various difficulties by managing a wider range of activities for handling different political and legal issues. Digital diplomacy help to interact with leaders of different nation to understand their response and also collect suggestion from them about how to handle the issues by managing the risks given to the country that may stiffen the developing financial condition of EU through restricting the import and export and impacting on the interrelation between the UK and Iran that will create huge difficulties in upcoming future for tackling the issues. Further the study has analysed the incident of seizing the British tanker by the Iranian authority that has been criticised by political leaders of different countries.

References

Adesina, O.S., 2017. Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Social Sciences, 3(1), p.1297175.

Adler-Nissen, R. and Eggeling, K.A., 2022. Blended diplomacy: The entanglement and contestation of digital technologies in everyday diplomatic practice. European Journal of International Relations, 28(3), pp.640-666.

Aggestam, K., Rosamond, A.B. and Hedling, E., 2022. Feminist digital diplomacy and foreign policy change in Sweden. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 18(4), pp.314-324.

Allagui, I. and Akdenizli, B., 2019. The Gulf Information War| The Gulf Information War and the role of media and communication technologies: Editorial introduction. International Journal of Communication, 13, p.14.

Al-Muftah, H., Weerakkody, V., Rana, N.P., Sivarajah, U. and Irani, Z., 2018. Factors influencing e-diplomacy implementation: Exploring causal relationships using interpretive structural modelling. Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), pp.502-514.

Anyanova, E., 2022. Piracy in Modern International Law.

Bai, X., 2021. Tanker freight rates and economic policy uncertainty: A wavelet-based copula approach. Energy, 235, p.121383.

Beznosov, M., 2021. Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. ?????? ???????????? ????????????, 5(2), pp.117-123.

Bjola, C., 2019, July. Trends and counter-trends in digital diplomacy. In New Realities in Foreign Affairs (pp. 51-62). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. kg.

Cerf, V.G., 2020. On digital diplomacy. Communications of the ACM, 63(10), pp.5-5.

Chhabra, R.A.D.H.I.K.A., 2020. Twitter diplomacy: a brief analysis. Observer Research Foundation-ORF, Issue Brief, 335, pp.1-12.

Collins, N. and Bekenova, K., 2019. Digital diplomacy: Success at your fingertips. Place branding and public diplomacy, 15(1), pp.1-11.

Danziger, R. and Schreiber, M., 2021. Digital diplomacy: Face management in MFA Twitter accounts. Policy & Internet, 13(4), pp.586-605.

Digital diplomacy (2022) Web archive - internet archive, Web Archive - Internet Archive. Available at: https://webarchive.unesco.org/#!/ (Accessed: December 15, 2022).

Duncombe, C., 2017. Twitter and transformative diplomacy: social media and Iran–US relations. International Affairs, 93(3), pp.545-562

Duncombe, C., 2018. Twitter and the challenges of digital diplomacy. SAIS Review of International Affairs, 38(2), pp.91-100.

Duncombe, C., 2019. Digital diplomacy: Emotion and identity in the public realm. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 14(1-2), pp.102-116.

El-Fakir, J., 2020. Retaliatory or Lawful?: How Iran's Seizure of the Stena Impero in the Strait of Hormuz Violated International Law. Colum. J. Transnat'l L., 59, p.425.

Franklin, B. and Canter, L., 2019. Digital journalism studies: The key concepts. Routledge.

Gabor, A., 2020. Digital Diplomacy. Available at SSRN 3696765.

Gilboa, E., 2016. Digital diplomacy. The SAGE handbook of diplomacy, pp.540-551.

Grajewski, N., 2022. UK–Iran Relations and Brexit. In Post-Brexit Europe and UK (pp. 101-130). Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore.

Haris, A., 2019. Economic Sanctions. IELR, 35, p.312.

Hedling, E. and Bremberg, N., 2021. Practice approaches to the digital transformations of diplomacy: toward a new research agenda. International Studies Review, 23(4), pp.1595-1618.

Ittefaq, M., 2019. Digital diplomacy via social networks: A cross-national analysis of governmental usage of Facebook and Twitter for digital engagement. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 18(1), pp.49-69.

Jezierska, K., 2022. Incredibly loud and extremely silent: Feminist foreign policy on Twitter. Cooperation and Conflict, 57(1), pp.84-107.

Khan, M.L., Ittefaq, M., Pantoja, Y.I.M., Raziq, M.M. and Malik, A., 2021. Public engagement model to analyze digital diplomacy on Twitter: A social media analytics framework. International Journal of Communication, 15, p.29.

King, K.A. and Vaiman, V., 2019. Enabling effective talent management through a macro-contingent approach: A framework for research and practice. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 22(3), pp.194-206.

Malasenkova, A.A. and Lavrov, I.R., 2019. Twitter Diplomacy as a Tool for Promoting Foreign Policy: UK–Iran Case Study. Journal of Governance and Politics, (2), pp.1-1.

Manor, I. and Bjola, C., 2021. Public diplomacy in the age of ‘post-reality’. Public diplomacy and the politics of uncertainty, pp.111-143.

Manor, I. and Crilley, R., 2018. Visually framing the Gaza War of 2014: The Israel ministry of foreign affairs on Twitter. Media, War & Conflict, 11(4), pp.369-391.

Manor, I. and Pamment, J., 2019. Towards prestige mobility? Diplomatic prestige and digital diplomacy. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 32(2), pp.93-131.

Manor, I. and Segev, E., 2020. Social Media Mobility: Leveraging Twitter Networks in Online Diplomacy. Global Policy, 11(2), pp.233-244.

Morozov, V., 2022. Digital Diplomacy as a New Trend of International Relations. Available at SSRN 4240948.

Oloo Ong’ong’a, D., 2021. Systematic literature review: Online digital platforms utilization by the ministry of foreign affairs in adopting digital diplomacy. Humanities, 9(1), pp.8-18.

Oxford Analytica, 2019. Court ruling opens door for UK-Iran tanker settlement. Emerald Expert Briefings, (oxan-es).

ÖZBEK, L., 2022. A study on the estimation of COVID-19 case with the adaptive kalman filter (AKF) in USA, Germany, United Kingdom, Italy, France, Russia, Brazil, India, Tu?rkiye, Spain, Peru, Colombia, South Africa, Argentina, Iran, Pakistan. Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 40(2), pp.323-343.

Parlimen.gov, 2022. DIPLOMACY AND FOREIGN RELATIONS [Online] Available at: https://www.parlimen.gov.my/images/webuser/artikel/ro/halisah/Diplomacy%20and%20Foreign%20Relations%20by%20Halisah%20Ashari.pdf Accessed on: 16th December, 2022.

Perez-Pena, R. and Victor, D., 2019. Iran Allows UK Tanker To Depart. The New York Times, pp.A15-L.

Pipchenko, N., 2020. Digital diplomacy: how international actors transform their foreign policy activity. Ukraine Analytica, (02 (20)), pp.19-25.

Rashica, V., 2018. The benefits and risks of digital diplomacy. Seeu Review, 13(1), pp.75-89.

Sadiki, L. and Saleh, L., 2020. The GCC in crisis: explorations of ‘Normlessness’ in gulf regionalism. The International Spectator, 55(2), pp.1-16.

Shepard, J.U. and Pratson, L.F., 2020. Maritime piracy in the Strait of Hormuz and implications of energy export security. Energy Policy, 140, p.111379.

Spry, D., 2018. Facebook diplomacy: A data-driven, user-focused approach to Facebook use by diplomatic missions. Media International Australia, 168(1), pp.62-80.

Stansfield, G., Stokes, D. and Kelly, S., 2018. UK Strategy in the Gulf and Middle East after American Retrenchment. Insight Turkey, 20(4), pp.231-248.

Tam, L., 2019. Interpersonal approaches to relationship building: diplomat as a human agent of public diplomacy. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy, 15(2), pp.134-142.

Threats to UK crisis (2019) Threat level raised to 'critical' for UK ships in Iranian waters, BBC News. BBC. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48956547 (Accessed: December 22, 2022).

Tonkiss, K., 2018. The narrative assemblage of civil society interventions into refugee and asylum policy debates in the UK. Voluntary Sector Review, 9(2), pp.119-135.

Twitter Diplomacy (2022) Twitter diplomacy as a tool for promoting foreign policy: UK – iran case study, JOURNAL OF GOVERNANCE AND POLITICS. Available at: https://sgpjournal.mgimo.ru/2019/2019-5/twitter-diplomacy-uk-iran-case (Accessed: December 22, 2022).

Vadrot, A., Langlet, A., Tessnow-von Wysocki, I., Tolochko, P., Brogat, E. and Ruiz-Rodríguez, S.C., 2021. Marine biodiversity negotiations during COVID-19: A new role for digital diplomacy?. Global Environmental Politics, 21(3), pp.169-186.

Wright, K.A. and Guerrina, R., 2020. Imagining the European Union: gender and digital diplomacy in European external relations. Political studies review, 18(3), pp.393-409.

Zaharna, R.S., 2019, July. Digital diplomacy as diplomatic sites: Emotion, identity & do-it-yourself politics. In New realities in foreign affairs (pp. 105-114). Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG.