Thursday 18 March 2010

Public diplomacy

The spread of democracy, information and communication technology under the phenomenon of globalization has created a new diplomatic environment, where public opinion shapes the decisions of tomorrow. Governments make a lot of effort to win the support of public opinion abroad. To achieve a political change, economic goal, etc.you must have foreign public on your side. To do so, governments use wide range of policies and communication tools to respond to the world. As we are a 'global willage', this is not a difficult task. There is often a problem on how particular country sees itself and how others see it. This may lead to many tensions and conflicts in the international arena. Outdated images of a country may put it at a disadvantage in the global marketplace. Mark Leonard in 'British Public Diplomacy in the Age of Schisms', 2005, gives a great example of the British government in the early 90s which has worked to create a new atmosphere of trust with its European partners and the developing world by changing the country's negative image abroad. From a nation of bad food, strikes, class-ridden society,racist and imperialist country, the marketing team has reconfigured Britain as a multicultural paradise, importing and exporting people and ideas. Beef wars with Europe gave way to support for the Euro or memories of support of Apartheid were banished after inviting Mandela to address the House of Commons. To conclude, the biggest public diplomacy goal is: advocacy- the presentation of a country and its policies in ways that are convincing and catchy to international audience, which leads to creating a climate of trust and respect, giving a way to achieving political and economic goals.

Below are some examples of recent events that illustrate the importance of public diplomacy:
1 . War on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan
The U.S in order to win 'war on terror' it has to win the battle for public diplomacy. The more citizens of other countries understand about America, the more they like their system and support foreign policy decisions. State's office of public diplomacy communicates with people in world's trouble spots to pass a message that America remains deeply commited to the democratic values: freedom of thought, market, opportunity..But this has proven to be inadequate, especially in the Arab and Muslim world. Barack Obama knows, that without Iraqis and Afghan's support for his intervention, there won't be any change. He has to win their hearts and minds, if not, the case of Somalia and Vietnam will be repeated.

2. The recent events in China show, how public diplomacy can do a miracle.
Through the use of public diplomacy, China is back on the world's stage. Just to mention Beijing Olimpics in 2008 which has brought China back its audience (media messages). They have worked hard for the past couple of years to build relations with publics around the world, create an image of a fast growing economy (Canton Fair), a safe and unique country (through music, video games, student exchange programs). But not only this..they have changed policies towards North Korea, co-opeared in the 'six party talks' to persuade Kim Jong II to begin dismantling his nuclear facilities , as well as distanced themeselves from Sudan and have taken a higher profile in the UN-led effort to bring peace in Darfur. These and other strategic moves had a powerful influence on foreign publics, and in turn governments. Public diplomacy has worked on China's benefit, making it number two world super power.

3. Public diplomacy can be also achieved throught the use of blogs, internet forums and social networking.
The use of media during the 2008-2009 Israel-Gaza conflict clearly shows how they can influence a public discourse, e.g. of a pro-Israel blog 'Israel Politik' created by the Israeli Consultate in New York. All to get a backing for the bombing of Gaza.
www.israelpolitik.org
www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk



3. Under the public diplomacy we may find a set of different tools to influence the public

2 comments:

  1. interesting! I've read an article on the Israeli website you've suggested where Israel affirms that the USA-Israel relations is not in decline, then i've looked at what the Guardian said about it and on an article written on the 17th of march states completely the opposite, saying that this is "The most serious crisis in US-Israeli relations in 35 years". (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/17/crisis-us-israeli-relations-barack-obama).
    then I ask my self, who should I trust? the government which is probably carrying out public diplomacy propaganda (as it did at the time of the Jenin massacre), or an independet journalist?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quite rightly u should trust the independent journalist. Barak Obama is commited to maintaining strategic relations with Israel. He made it clear during his election campaign as well. But now although he is still commited, he is making clear to the Isreal the policies that US government do not support.

    George Bush spent most part of his Presidency supporting Israel even when American public opinion was not in favour of certain Isreali policies. But during the last part of his second term presidency, Bush tried hard to find a solution to Israel-Palestaine conflict. But was too little too late.

    Barak Obama is not waiting till his last days and that is problems in US Israeli relations. But it may be in the interest of Israel to declare there is no problem in relation with US.

    ReplyDelete