Recent Development that illustrates the importance of Public Diplomacy in Contemporary World Politics

End of the Cold War: Creating Bonds and reshaping the Image.

Two superpower rivalries during the Cold War created mutual aggressions between the nations and divided the international state system into blocs. Propaganda became highly popular in shaping an image for both sides. Thus, since the end of the Cold War, with the collapse of the Soviet Union it has become important to remove the previously “built-in” and mainly negative images from the publics of each conflicting sides. Even though it is considered that the United States of America has greatly reduced its spending on propaganda after the Cold War, as in “emasculating the USIA <(United State Information Agency)> and paring the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe down to almost residual proportions” (Leonard, 2002, p-2), the U.S. is still investing a great amount of attention into shaping or reshaping its image abroad. In order to remove aggressions and create mutual understanding, in pursuit of its own national interest, ofcourse! the U.S. has made an effective use of Public Diplomacy.

As the main aim of Public Diplomacy is to influence the governments of the opposing states indirectly through the publics of these governments, it is possible to see how much the U.S is investing in Public Diplomacy by the amount of funding it provides for scholarships, exchange programs, visits and etc. For example, the exchange program, FLEX (Future Leaders Exchange) Program, sponsored by the Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, that was established in 1992,

http://exchanges.state.gov/youth/programs/flex.html illustrates some of the main aspects of Public Diplomacy and in particular, Relationship Building. First of all, as Steven Curtis was mentioning at the lecture, even the name of this program reinforces Steven’s point that this exchange programs are mainly aimed for Long-term benefits as it is anticipated that these exchange students will become influential individuals with a positive attitude towards the country. Consequently, “it is important not just to develop relationship, but to ensure that the experiences which people take away are positive and that there is a follow-up afterwards”. (Leonard, 2002, P-18). If you have noticed from the information on the website, these exchange programs usually require that the students take active role in sharing their experience after the end of study programs. The program also entails in itself, that the image of the country not always or necessarily brings in itself an “Ideal and Flawless” state, but instead it allows to see the state from a different perspective with all of its “warts and all”, which complexify individuals understanding of the country. Thus, these programs enables the “students to leave with a much more sophisticated ideas of … strengths and weaknesses”. (Leonard,2002, p-18)

As a result, as this program does, Public Diplomacy impacts in the following ways:

o Increases people’s familiarity with one’s country

o Increases people’s appreciation of ones country

o Engages people from one’s country

o Influences people (Leonard, 2002, p-8-10)

Thus, after the Cold War, Public Diplomacy has been important in developing understanding and cooperation between the U.S and the former Soviet Union countries in particular.

Bibliography:

Leonard, M., (2002) Public Diplomacy available at http://fpc.org.uk/fsblob/35.pdf

Public diplomacy: propaganda/public relations

Public diplomacy. It is often difficult to define. It is one state trying to get the public to agree on a certain issue, or inform them about it. But at some point, in informing the public, they try to convince them. This has been seen a lot recently with the public opinion becoming very important and influential. Politicians have to get the public onto their side. As well as diplomats. It is about improving the image of your country.

An example of public diplomacy is Barack Obama's speech on nuclear weapons in Prague in April 2009. It is about going to another country and making it known where the U.S. stands in relation to nuclear weapons. The fact that Obama said he would like to see his grandchildren or great-grandchildren live in a world free from nuclear weapons raised the United States' image because it encouraged people that the U.S. has a goal which the people side with, and gave them a positive view of the U.S. And the fact that it was held in Prague, he was addressing people not only in the Czech Republic, not only in Europe but people all over the world. Public diplomacy rests on getting the public to follow one's ideas, acts, or such. This speech got a lot of support from the public and from people everywhere.

This is the link where you can see Obama's speech:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7984353.stm

Public diplomacy has a strong relation to soft power. As Joseph Nye says, 'soft power the ability to get what you want through attraction rather than coercion or payments.'

Propaganda might seem like a strong word for public diplomacy, but it is correct to a certain point. Public relations is yet another accurate word because you are trying to establish a bridge of communication between the public and the state. But it could be said that in the end, public diplomacy is selling an image. As Berridge says," 'Public diplomacy' is what we call our propaganda; 'propaganda' is what the other side does."

Public Diplomacy

Public diplomacy can be seen as a strategy of building bridges of ideas, images and cultural practices by altering the concept of predictive perceptions of the public in foreign country. In the world of new technology ideas, governments through various agencies, groups and individuals engage the foreign public to question their understanding and grievances towards a particular country. During his visit to Egypt, President Barak Obama directly addressed the students of Cairo University as part of his public diplomacy to the Muslim world. This approach was designed to show the consistency of America’s values and mutual respect to the public but also, to create a war of ideas that undermine those who are hostile to United States America.
In Ghana, President Barak Obama used public diplomacy to promote Americas’ democracy and values by encouraging the young people follow the right path.
The concept of public diplomacy is becoming influential to post conflict states. In sub Saharan Africa, there are a growing number of countries such as Angola, Uganda, Nigeria and Kenya rebranding their images through government sponsored organisations and media (CNN) to inform, engage and influence the public in foreign countries – with the expectation of developing their economies through inward investments and tourism. Nigerian goverment set up a department to over see that campaign and make sure that Ctizens in foreign countries took different views of the perceptions they had about the country.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/documentaries/2009/10/091021_rebranding_nigeria.shtml

Public diplomacy

Public diplomacy is often interrelated with soft power which relies on an ability to attract. It could be argued that public diplomacy it is one of the tools of soft power. The main goal of public diplomacy is to create a positive image of a particular country or an actor. Many governments have realised that it is crucial to apply technology in the social networking possibilities to the world of diplomacy and public diplomacy in particular. Not only governments but other entities are trying to adapt to the new environment by creating a world of “virtual diplomacy”. New technology is absolutely necessary for successfully accomplishing this goal. It is an enabler of a new approach to conduction of public diplomacy: the Internet. We can see that many embassies are setting up their own YouTube channels and translating their web pages to different foreign languages. This is all in order to promote their country or interests and attract visitors from various backgrounds. It is essential to keep information up to date and react quickly to the changing environment when using tools such as videos, blogs or chats. Public diplomacy is also about educational exchanges; it is in the country’s interest to bring foreigners to direct contact with its culture and make it popular. The youth remains one of the main targets when addressing the audience. It enables them to express their opinions peacefully and hopefully not to use violence as a form of expression. The Internet is becoming a blog of civil society and one of the strongest tools of public diplomacy. It should promote an open discussion rather than dictation.

Public Diplomacy

In international relations Public Diplomacy is as the conduct of foreign policy by engagement with foreign public and it focuses on the ways in which a country( or multi-lateral organization such as the United Nations) communicate with citizens of other societies.Television, film,music, sports, video games and other social/cultural activities are seen by public diplomacy advocates as enormously important avenues for otherwise diverse citizens to understand each other and integral to the international cultural understanding. Also it involves shaping the message that a country wishes to present abroad while analysing and understanding the ways that the message is interpreted by diverse societies and developing the tools of listening and conversation as well as the tools of persuasions. When U.S. astronauts landed on the moon for the first time, it was the voice of America, the radio service of USIA, that carried Neil Armstrong's words to millions here on earth.Public Diplomacy seeks to to promote the national interest of countries through understanding , informing and influencing foreign audiences.Central to Public Diplomacy is the transformation flow of information and ideas and it seeks to promote the national interest and the national security through understanding, informing, and influencing foreign public and broadening dialogue between its citizens and institutions and their counterparts abroad.

Public Diplomacy has been an important tool of the American foreign policy in influencing public opinion during the cold war with the former Soviet Union and since the attack of September11, 2001, the term has come back into limelight as the US government works to improve its reputation abroad, particularly in the Middle East and the the general Islamic World.
American government, aside from using the media like the voice of America, it also use other kinds of interactions with the public in other countries, like arranging students exchange programs, hosting seminars, and meeting with foreign business and academic leaders are all considered public diplomacy.The term Public Diplomacy originated as a euphemism for propaganda and the term had been hijacked to give propaganda cosmetic surgery and to facilitate a successful campaign in American bureaucratic politics but nothing new has been introduced to identify a new activity.

The Ministry of foreign affairs is a player and coordinator in these propaganda and it does this providing embassies with printed and other publicity materials for distribution, dealing with foreign correspondence in the capital, putting up direct propaganda by ways of multi-language version websites and even foreign ministers' personal blogs, and perhaps funding associated broadcasting organisations, like the British Council (Britain), whose audiences are, in the main, the next generation of decision-makers and opinion-leaders.
A former British ambassador in Washington and then permanent under-secretary in the foreign office, sir John Kerr, commented on his views in the house of commons while expressing his support of more public diplomacy said while embassies existed to talk privately to governments, they also exist to talk to people and populations at large, and that is probably the modern ambassador's principal function, to be on television, to be on the radio, to accept all platform...public diplomacy.

Do you think the ‘old’ diplomacy has any contemporary relevance?

In the old days there was indeed great contemporary relevance. There is always a link between new diplomacy and old diplomacy. There are obvious diplomacy where all the people read it on newspapers watch it on televisions there are also secret diplomacy and it still exists. In my opinion this issue outlines once again that there is a link between old diplomacy and new diplomacy. Old model of diplomacy has its success and failures. In my opinion old model of diplomacy is reflecting views of conservatism. Basically diplomats were making negotiations on the basis of national interest and global interest. When it comes to policy formulation or decision making process ambassadors impacts on it are limited. The word secrecy refering to negotiations being done behind the curtains hidden basically. Secrecy is born with Diplomacy. Essential negotiations usually take place in EU and UN centers which mainly discuss and come to decision about global world and global problems and its solutions furthermore interests of both state actors. Bilateral negotiations and agreements are a key concepts in diplomatic sphere.

In nowadays old diplomacy still has its traditional views and impacts on new diplomacy. In my opinion old diplomacy does have contemporary relevance because every country has its own principals and culture and the way of understanding. A classical example year 2002 where George.W.Bush and T.Blair had hidden secrecy agreement diplomacy in U.S.A they had discussions about middle east and other aspects however afterwards no officials were present they had discussions and talks in private. Therefore important decisions were made about invasion of Iraq 2003.

Ghana High Commission visit

Ghana High Commission visit

On Friday the 12th of March 2010, we (students of The New Diplomacy module) were very lucky to have been able to take a trip over to the Ghana High Commission based in Sloan Square.

We were graced with the presence of His Excellence Professor Kwaku Danso-Buafo, the High Commissioner himself who gave us his time to address regarding the role of the High Commissioner within a contemporary world. The main themes identified from his speech were: Ghana's mission to conduct diplomacy with an Afro-centric approach. He then went on to identify the Ghana Commissioner's primary objectives which included protecting the interest of Ghana, to ensure they establish a just and equitable international order and to adhere to the principles of treaties and promote the interest of the organisation it is a member of. His Excellency also mentioned organisations Ghana was part of which included the UN, The African Union, The Common Wealth, Economic Community of West African States.

It is then that His Excellency mentioned that the it is important to have both bilateral and multi-lateral relations in the international realm in order to pursue Ghana's state interest.

We were then very lucky yo hav Mr Ramses Cleland who is the Head of Politics and Economy at the High Commission. Mr Ramses spoke of the beginning's of diplomatic practise and mentioned the Vienna Convention as being one of the starting points of modern diplomatic practise. However, African countries were deprived of diplomatic practice, so in the 50's and 60's as African countries began to gain independence they concentrated on taking an Afro-centric approach. Ghana established 30 missions in the 1960's and acquired a reputation for progressiveness. It had to focus on a development agenda, the need to correct some of the injustices against African countries and to look for an approach to redress the balance.

Ghana were able to develop relationships through historical ties. Africa is at a disadvantage especially in terms of trade, Ghana try to address these issues through allies and friendships in other countries e.g the UK government and through multi-lateral organisations such as the Commonwealth which is very useful.

We also addressed by Mr George Fynn regarding trade and investment in Ghana and Zuwera Ibrahim regarding the influence of technology has influenced the work of the High Commission.

Altogether, this trip was very very well facilitated, structured as well as very informative. No doubt every student took away a lot from this visit.

The contemporary relevance of old diplomacy nowadays

The old diplomacy does indeed have great contemporary relevance. The ‘old’ diplomacy cannot be separated from the ‘new’ diplomacy. It has simply evolved through time and adapted to today’s technological advancement and globalisation. This can be confirmed by the fact that secret diplomacy still exists. Even though it is said to be more open to the public nowadays is not. Issues and matters are discussed publicly, but then they are discussed in private as well and to that information no one has any access but the two parties involved. For example, the private meeting that took place in the Bush family ranch between Bush and Blair in 2002 in the United States. No officials were present, and thus till now no one truly knows what was discussed. And it is at this meeting which important decisions were made concerning Iraq and the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8380139.stm

Diplomats are meant to represent and promote their country. This was done in the past by inviting other diplomats to lavish dinner receptions and making sure they enjoyed their time. As we saw in last week’s video, the documentary on the Foreign Office, this is still applied nowadays. It is important to build a good relationship and 'break the ice'. Food is a very important tool when it comes to talking about important matters and making decisions. It lightens the mood and decisions can be made more easily. As mentioned in the video, when you eat, it is said to signify that you are being honest. Thus, within a relaxed atmosphere more decisions are made.