CRITICAL REVIEW ON THE REPORT ON THE
NATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATION
By The Honourable Joseph R. Biden, Jr
President of the Senate, United States of America
The purpose of the report is to present a comprehensive interagency strategy for public diplomacy and strategic communications. The report recommends that in order for communication and engagement to be effective it is critical to understand the attitudes, opinions, grievances and concerns of the people, not just the elites around the world, in order to convey credible, consistent messages, to develop plans and to better understand how the Administration’s actions are perceived. The report emphasises the need to clarify what the term ‘strategic communication’ means and how to guide and coordinate communication efforts. It further outlines positions, processes and interagency working groups that have been created to improve the ability to better synchronize words, deeds, and better coordinate communications and engagement programmes and activities, and emphasises the need to ensure an appropriate balance between civilian and military efforts. Furthermore the report recommends that strategic communications should focus on articulating what the United States stands for, not just what it is against and gives as an example, that the efforts to communicate and engage with Muslim communities around the world must be defined by the focus on mutual respect and mutual interest. It recommends that United States should not be focused solely on one-way communication and emphasises “engagement” as a way of connecting with, listening to, and building long-term relationships with key stakeholders.
The report outlines the different segments of the communications community, which include the Public Affairs (PA), Public Diplomacy (PD), Military Information Operations (IO) and Defense Support to Public Diplomacy (DSPD). It further recommends that planning, development and execution of engagement programmes and activities need to be better coordinated, integrated and driven by research, information, and intelligence, and advised that Public Diplomacy should be shaped by information, research, and analysis about key audiences. The report points out that although the United States Government carries out deliberate communication and engagement worldwide, the priorities for communication and engagement efforts are the same as overall national security priorities. It emphasises that communication and engagement, like other elements of national power, should be designed to support policy goals as well as to achieve specific effects to ensure foreign audiences recognize areas of mutual interest with the United States and believe the United plays a constructive role in global affairs; so that the United States may be seen as a respectful partner in efforts to meet complex global challenges. The report further recommends that Communication and engagement with foreign audiences should emphasise mutual respect and mutual interest. Moreover the report advises that the United States should articulate a positive vision, identifying what it is for, whenever possible and engage foreign audiences on positive terms, while at the same time countering violent extremism (CVE). Efforts should focus more directly on discrediting, denigrating and delegitimizing al-Qa’ida and violent extremist ideology. In addition, the report recommends the need to balance and optimize investment across the communications community, and advises that resource decisions and applications must be shaped by national priorities and be consistent with existing role and mission and the capacity of each stakeholder to effectively execute validated tasks and programs. It emphasises that accountability, assessment, and reporting are critical aspects of the newly established planning process to ensure all major deliberate communication and engagement efforts are coordinated and effective.
The report announces the formation of the interagency working group to evaluate military communication and engagement programs, as well as activities and investments to identify those that may be more appropriately funded or implemented by civilian departments and agencies, especially outside theatres of conflict. In addition, it outlines the recommended roles and responsibilities of National Security Staff in the various departments and agencies concerned with Security and Public and Cultural Diplomacy. It also recommends the development of the capacity to measure success and emphasise accountability. To conclude, the report rejects the need to establish a new independent not-for-profit organisation, responsible for providing independent assessment and strategic guidance on strategic communication and public diplomacy, as recommended by the Task Force on Strategic Communication of the Defense Board. It however, emphasises that ability to establish public-private partnership is a critical issue.
It can be concluded that this report is aimed at improving communications and engagement with foreign audiences for an improved Public and Cultural Diplomacy exercise for the United States. The recommendations of the report highlight some of the pitfalls in the current strategy, and offers an alternative and improved way of doing things in order for the United States Public and Cultural Diplomacy to be more effective. The report acknowledges the importance of understanding the grassroots in the populations they engage with and not just the elites in order to convey credible, consistent messages and to engage with the foreign audiences in a two-way communication, for mutual respect and mutual interest, as well as to have a balance between civilian and military efforts. It also specifies new roles and responsibilities of concerned staff and personnel.
‘OLYMPIC MISSILES’ AND BRITAIN’S GREAT CAMPAIGN
In preparation for the 2012 London Olympic and Paralympic Games, British Prime Minister, David Cameron launched the ‘GREAT’ Campaign in 2011, which is designed to use the platform of the 2012 Games to showcase Britain’s capabilities to promote and enhance the UK’s reputation abroad and to maximise the economic potential of the Games. (FCO, 2012)
“In 2012 there will be only one place to be. With the Olympic and Paralympic Games coming to London next summer, the greatest show on earth is about to arrive in one of the world’s greatest cities.” (David Cameron, 2012)
The Campaign invites the world to take a fresh look at everything Britain has to offer and centres on areas of British excellence focusing on reasons to invest in and visit the UK including, “We want to send out a clear message that Britain is one of the very best places in the world to visit, live, work, study, invest and do business”. Britain is braced to seize this opportunity to extend it cultural diplomacy to the world by showing that Britain is an ‘open, connected, dynamic and creative country that combines history and tradition with modernity and innovation’. (FCO,2012)
However, in a somewhat strange twist of events, the Olympic site is also being prepared as a battle ground to counter ‘anticipated’ terrorist attacks with surface-air-missiles planned to be stationed on top of flats, typhoon jets and helicopters scheduled to patrol the skies as 23,000-strong force of security guards, including soldiers, bolsters up to 12,000 police officers a day.
It would be interesting to see the impact of the combination of soft power and hard power on the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
Last line of defence: Starstreak short-range missiles
BIBILIOGRAPHY
- Daily Mail, 2012: The High Rise Homes turned into Olympic Missile base: Surface –to-air weapons will be stationed on roof as last line of defence. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137105/London-2012-Olympics-Missile-base-stationed-roof-high-rise-homes.html
- Department for Culture, Media and Sport : prime Minister Launches plans to generate long term economic growth from Olympic legacy :http://www.culture.gov.uk/news/news_stories/8451.aspx
- FCO, 2012. The GREAT Campaign, http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/what-we-do/public-diplomacy/great-campaign
SPORTS DIPLOMACY – SOUTH AFRICA
When the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) awarded South Africa the rights to host the 2010 World Cup, South Africa seized the opportunity as a Public and Cultural Diplomacy opportunity to re-brand South Africa. However, being the first time that an African country would host the World Cup, international media raised their doubts about the capability of South Africa to successfully host a global event of this magnitude against a background of high crime rates which had in previous years prevented tourists from visiting South Africa. South Africa, nevertheless, embarked on a rebuilding and rebranding exercise with a budget of approximately R40 billion to improve its infrastructure, including stadiums and transportation links in preparation for the World Cup. The country also utilized the build up to the FIFA World Cup as a golden opportunity to portray itself in a positive light and to rekindle the declining racial relations of its multi-racial population, whose race barriers had been replaced by socio-economic divides. (Telegraph, 2010)
According to Laverty, 2010, In 2009, one year ahead of the FIFA World Cup, South Africa launched the “Brand South Africa 2010 Campaign”, which was divided in four main segments, starting with ‘Football Fridays’, which encouraged both private and public sector employees to go to work in casual clothes every Friday, donning the green and yellow colours of the South African Football team. ‘Fly the Flag for Football’ encouraged all South Africans to fly their national flag or its colours as a symbol of unity from key rings to t-shirts to car flags, designed in the four colours of the South African Flag. South Africa’s ‘Diski Dance’ was promoted as a creative way to welcome visitors to the country and posted on YouTube and other social media. Schools and business houses were encouraged to play the ‘South African National Anthem’ as way for everyone to learn to sing the National Anthem in preparation for a big sing-out to the world during the kick-off of the 2010 FIFA World Cup. (Laverty, 2010)
By investing in a sporting event the magnitude of the FIFA World Cup as part of its public and cultural diplomacy exercise, South Africa was able to promote the country’s passion for an international game and to portray South Africa as a hospitable nation and host to the world. With world media broadcasting positive images and stories around the globe, this yielded positive effects on the international community and the rest of the world, which can be argued boosted South Africa’s soft power. Through the 2010 Campaign, Brand South Africa created a united and hospitable host population thereby portraying a positive view of the country, which formed part of the positive memories that many visitors took away from the 2010 World Cup which refuted paternalistic and pessimistic views held prior and in the lead up to the FIFA World Cup.
Bibliography:
- 1. Laverty, A, 2010. ‘Brand South Africa: A Public Diplomacy Case Study’, 19 November 2010 http://theafricanfile.com/public-diplomacy/brand-south-africa-a-pubic-diplomacy-case-study/ Accessed ( 27 April 2012)
- Telegraph, 2010 ‘World Cup 2010: South Africa President Jacob Zuma: World Cup Vital for Country’s Future’. The Telegraph, 7 June 2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/south-africa/7809683/World-Cup-2010-South-Africa-president-Jacob-Zuma-World-Cup-vital-for-countrys-future.html Accessed 15 April 2012)
- Wandermelon, 2010 ‘World Cup Links, Tickets and Travel to South Africa and other important stuff for Goal-Oriented Travellers’ http://wandermelon.com/2010/05/21/world-cup-links-tickets-and-travel-to-south-africa-and-other-important-stuff-for-goal-oriented-travelers/
As a nonprofit organization, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) challenges particular government decisions and provides ‘policy solutions’ for a variety of institutions. This particular report however, provides the basic understanding of how useful and important the interaction between countries and foreign audiences is in the process of securing national interests, external threats and winning hearts and minds around the world. It was written in 2007 (shortly before the US elections) and provided solutions to boost America’s reputation by using PD tools.
In the Introductory chapter of ‘How America Can Become a Smart Power ’Richard L. Armitage and Joseph S. Nye identified the fundamental importance of achieving and maintaining a good reputation.
Using soft power in an ever interconnected globalised world is of great importance as this will, firstly, bring tremendous support from foreign audiences and governments regarding foreign policy and other national interests and secondly “bring acceptance for unpopular ventures”. This can be achieved by attracting people without using coercion use, but using instead the power to convince foreign audiences by exporting positive American values; not exclusively exporting the culture (e.g. Hollywood movies ) but through other channels such as “political values and ideas enshrined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, U.S. economic and educational systems, personal contacts and exchanges, and our somewhat reluctant participation and leadership in institutions that help shape the global agenda”.
However, since the ‘war on terror’, America “has been exporting fear and anger” rather than democratic principles and the value of human rights as prior 9/11, especially in the Middle Eastern regions and Muslims living outside alike.
The lies of George Bush (regarding Saddam Hussein’s possession of WMD in Iraq), the abuses, torture and ‘undemocratic’ detentions without a trial for prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, tremendously influenced the perception by outsiders and arguably led the Americans ‘spread of freedom and Democracy’ to appear to be a propaganda tool to pursue other (hidden) interests. In addition these incidents “undermine America’s ability to carry forth a message of principled optimism and hope”.
This report therefore highly recommended two priorities; the end to Guantanamo Bay (although legally and practically very challenging). Secondly, America should not overreact to any terrorist provocations as it would (according to the report) fulfill the agenda of most terrorist; also called the “jujitsu effect” whereby such groups “entice” a powerful country to respond in such a way that it will hurt itself (e.g. economically – as seen with the rising defence spending).
Criticism
However, it is important to note that (although the use of soft power is of great importance) external incidents, such as the massacre of 16 innocent Afghan children,- women and- men by a US soldier(http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/11/us-soldier-kills-afghan-civilians), and burning of Korans also conducted by US soldiers in a military base in Afghanistan, can result in negative outcomes such as anti ‘Western interference’ mass demonstrations, attract new members for terrorist organisations, fuelling hatred against the West. (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/02/koran-burned-parwan/)
The respected Koran is a holy book which is in many regions a way of life and the core principles have been used for centuries as guidance of living. These incidents can hardly be reversed by the use of soft power, especially when anti-western hatred among ‘Muslims’ already exist.
(Report – pp. 5 – 15 http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/071106_csissmartpowerreport.pdf)
In the immediate aftermath of the horrendous attacks of September 11th 2001 on New York and Washington DC, the news that fifthteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia came as a tremendous blow to the image of Saudi Arabia and the perception of the oil rich, strategically allied Kingdom, in the United States (Rabasa, 2004, p.109).
What followed was a frenzied diplomatic offensive aimed at limiting the damage done to the image of Saudi Arabia. Days after the attacks, the Kingdom hired the PR firm Burston-Marsteller to “place newspaper ads all over the country condemning the attacks and dissociating Saudi Arabia from them” (Salon.com). This was the first stage of a concerted effort undertaken by the Saudi embassy to publically disassociate their country from the attacks.
Following ads taken in prominent American papers, the long standing Ambassador of Saudi Arabia in Washington DC, Prince Bandar bin Sultan Abdul Aziz Al Saud undertook a swift tour of major American and foreign news channels, including CNN and the BBC to publically denounce terrorism and defend his country (Salon.com).
These two strategies of using both the print media and the broadcast media to disassociate Saudi Arabia from the attacks represented the Kingdom’s public diplomatic offensive.
Culturally, the Saudis went to great lengths to highlight the long standing fraternal ties between the American and Saudi people by hiring the communications firm Qorvis to spin a strategy aimed at damage control (Washington Post). This cultural offensive was reinforced by as many as four, prime time, 30 second television adverts which underscored that the Kingdom was an ally against terrorism (Fox News).
The objective of the Saudi diplomatic reaction was to soften the obvious damage done to the reputation of the Kingdom by the fact that three quarters of those who perpertrated 9/11 were originally Saudi citizens. The need to keep American ‘on-side’ as it were stems from the deep security-economic ties between Washington and Riyadh which see each other as crucial strategic allies in pursuit of security for the Kingdom and easy access to needed oil resources for the Americans. Indeed, Saudi investment in the US totals approximate $700 billion, a staggering amount (Council of Foreign Relations). Thus, the need to retain its close ties to Washington forced the hand of Riyadh which had huge potential losses in economic and security issues should ties between itself and the Americans breakdown, thus the mass media campaign to underscore diplomatic and cultural affinity between the two states.
References
Books
Rabasa, A. The Muslim World After 9/11 (RAND corp, 2004)
Academic Papers
(No Cited Author) Council of Foreign Relations, Strengthning the US-Saudi Relationship (May 2002)
Web
C. Under, The Great Escape (Salon.com March 2004)
http://www.salon.com/2004/03/11/unger_1./
S. Horwitz, FBI searches Saudi PR Firm (Washington Post December 2004)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49849-2004Dec8.html
S. Shapiro, Saudi Arabia Launches PR campaign in US (Fox News Dec 2009)
The purpose of this short work is to assess how Britain is utilising public diplomacy in the case of the Falkland Islands.
The dispute between Britain and Argentina over the Falkland Island’s has a firm historical foundation. The general disagreement over the sovereignty of the islands resulted in the outbreak of war in 1982 (Parsons, 2000, p. 4). However, although Britain successfully recaptured the Islands, the most recent history of the disagreement has been personified by increasing tension; in particular willingness on the part of the Argentinean’s to diplomatically reassert their claim over the territory.
In dealing with the developments outlined above, the British government has undertaken a number of different responses. In evaluating these responses, it is impossible to ignore the extent to which the British government has bolstered the military defences of the Islands in recent months, which has led to accusations of intimidation (Penn, 2012; [online]). Nonetheless, it remains credible to argue that the main focus of attention for the British government has centred on ensuring an effective public diplomacy with regards to the sovereign future of the Islands. Above all, this diplomacy has essentially centred on a reassertion of British control over the territories. Therefore, at a basic level, the traditional argument of historical sovereignty has been propelled by the present British government. However, in utilising modes of public diplomacy, the British government has also sought to highlight the vital importance of supporting the wishes of the Islanders themselves. As such, the issue of self-determination as enshrined in Article One of the United Nations Charter has been used as a way of supporting the British claim (Laver, 2001, p. 100). Therefore, it is clearly possible to see the degree to which the efforts of British diplomacy have focused on a proactive diplomatic policy, backed up by an increased military presence.
However, although diplomatic efforts have been key in the ongoing dispute, it is nevertheless the case that diplomacy has rarely involved bi-lateral discussions. Indeed, British diplomacy has centred on strategically attacking the Argentinean’s through methods such as the banning of military exports (BBC, 2012 [online]). Therefore, the focus of both Argentine and British diplomacy has revolved around attaining support for their respective positions within the international community. In doing so, Britain has sought to garner the support of traditional allies like the United States, whereas the Argentine government has focused its diplomatic attention on achieving support for their cause from other Latin American countries. In addition, the Argentineans have also attempted to argue their case at the United Nations, with similar responses undertaken by the British.
As such, it is clearly credible to argue that the public diplomacy undertaken by the British has focused on a prevailing wish to highlight the continuation of British support for the Islands, in addition to supporting British sovereignty of the Islands through reference to international legal frameworks.
Bibliography
BBC News. (2012) ‘Falkland Islands tensions: UK bans exports to Argentine military’, BBC News, [online], date accessed, 03/05/12; available at; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17858361.
Laver, R.C. (2001) The Falklands/Malvinas case: breaking the deadlock in the Anglo-Argentine sovereignty dispute. London: Martinus.
Parsons, M. (2000) The Falkland’s War. London: Sutton.
Penn, S. (2012) ‘The Malvinas/Falklands: diplomacy interrupted’, Guardian Online, [online], date accessed, 02/05/12; available at; http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/23/sean-penn-falklands-malvinas-diplomacy-interrupted.
Critical Review and Analysis of American Diplomacy and Islam Report
On 27 February 2003, the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations convened in order to hear expert testimonies on the subject of American public diplomacy and Islam. Chairman Richard Lugar initiated the proceedings noting his belief that American public diplomacy is a powerful tool in advancing objectives such as strengthening diplomatic capabilities and building democratic institutions. In particular, the Chairman noted the increase in examples of “virulent anti-American hatred in the Islamic world” highlighted since the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Public opinion in allied countries has also increasingly questioned “American motives” and blamed the US for a range of international problems. He notes, “Many foreign governments are constrained by their ability to support American foreign policy if their own people oppose U.S. foreign policy.” A particular concern that emerges as a theme throughout the hearing is a lack of resources, for example, it is noted that only 7 cents of every $1 spent by the U.S. government on the military is directed to public diplomacy.
Senator Joseph Biden then put forward his testimony, re-emphasising the major points made by the Chairman in addition to putting forward a number of public opinion poll graphs for the public record. He states that three major reasons contribute to the decrease in goodwill towards America following the immediate outpour of support following 9/11. These include a lack of humility, the embarrassment of foreign leaders as a result of US policies, and a lack in successful public diplomacy. Following these opening statements the Committee turned to the witnesses, beginning with the Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Charlotte Beers. Ms Beers presented her belief that public diplomacy should be focused more on informing other peoples of the world as oppose to engaging, a contrasting view to other witnesses at the Hearing. Beers states that State Department personnel are tasked with presenting, explaining and advocating American policies, highlighting this emphasis.
The second witness, Kenneth Tomlinson, Chairman of the Board of Broadcasting Governors also took a similar position to Ms Beer stating that “We should not be ashamed of public advocacy on behalf of freedom and democracy in the United States of America.” In particular, Tomlinson noted his view that Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech to the United Nations justifying intervention in Iraq was heard by millions of people in the Arab world including “most notably” the people of Iraq. This also highlights the perhaps short-sighted perception that simply, having the message heard will result in successful public diplomacy which in hindsight is not the case, as per the Powell example.
The final three witnesses provided more nuanced views of what American public diplomacy should be. Andrew Kohut, Director of the Pew Research Centre presented results of polling carried out regarding foreign opinions of the USacross 44 countries.Dislike of America was concentrated in Muslim countries of the Middle East with unfavourable ratings across six such countries at 60-70%. Whilst this would not have been surprising news to the committee, Kohut did note that opinions about the United States are “complicated and contradictory” especially in terms of large majorities all over the world, including in the Middle East, polling favourably in terms of admiration of US technological achievements. On the other hand, in contrast to Tomlinson’s comments surrounding the success of Radio Sawa in using pop music to draw in Arab youth; Pew data shows that popular culture is mostly shunned in Muslim publics.
Kenton W. Keith, Senior Vice President of Meridian International and Dr R.S. Zaharna of the American University both presented completely contrasting views to the previous witnesses highlighting engagement as the centre-piece of public diplomacy. Keith states that “no previous foreign affairs crisis has been so deeply rooted in cultural misunderstanding;” similarly Dr Zaharna outlined her belief that until such misunderstandings are reconciled, the US should refrain reduce the release of information advocated my Under Secretary Beers. Additionally, public diplomacy should be based more on relationship building with foreign publics, i.e. not simply asserting the American message but understanding how it is perceived. The Doctor’s testimony drew considerable debate from Senator Biden who questioned why countries that aggravate Muslims more through immigration policy, etc. such as France, are viewed more favourably than America. Kohut responded stating that American power draws certain resentment, ultimately highlighting the extremely complex and nuanced nature that US public diplomacy essentially must follow.
Summary
This paper provides an overview critical analysis of the report “Al-Jazeera News Network: Opportunity or challenge for US foreign policy in the Middle East?” It seeks to identify the author’s thesis and purpose in the report and will analyze the structure of the passage by identifying all main ideas explored in the report. It will seek to establish the author’s viewpoint through the way they have led their argument in the report and come to a judgement as to which side of the argument the report favours.
Critical Analysis
The report begins in providing summary, which establishes the issue that there is drawn criticism from U.S observers of the way Al-Jazeera, as a news station, is programmed and managed. It claims that Al-Jazeera news has a “perceived lack of objectivity in covering conflicts” because, as a representative of the Arab world, its viewers enjoy the anti-American slant the news network seeks to take due to its prevalent resentment of U.S. policy in the Middle East, thus, the report suggests this is an act committed merely to please its viewers.
The following section is descriptive in the sense that it provides a coherent overview of the origins of Al-Jazeera. It then moves onto pointing out the key ways in which Al-Jazeera news allows harsh opinions to be expressed without any hesitance: “it allowed its commentators and guests more latitude in expressing their opinions”. It then uses the claims that Al-Jazeera attempts to be liberal like the western news channels such as the CNN and BBC that indicates Al-Jazeera might have copied the format of these western networks but is disparate inits viewpoint. In addition, it argues that networks, such as CNN and BBC, “paid insufficient attention to topics of interest to Arab audiences,” which suggests that Al-Jazeera news is more or less representative of the Middle East. This is construed in the way their viewpoints concern the Arab audiences which BBC and CNN significantly lack in doing.
The paragraph on programming presents Al-Jazeera in a negative light by implying that the network “encourages confrontation by pitting guests with opposite viewpoints against one another in debate.” The report then ends with the sentence why it ought to be seen in a negative light: it argues that Al-Jazeera sees this “approach… [as] informative and entertaining.” Nevertheless, from this it can be recognised which side of the argument the author favours through the way he or she makes presumptions about the network. This is portrayed by their argument that during the Iraq war Al-Jazeera covered excruciating footage, such as exploding bombs. The part, titled objectivity, argues how Al-Jazeera has broken taboos of self-censorship and delivered one-sided news as its Chief Executive officer fundamentally portrayed coverage in favour of Saddam Hussein’s regime during that period.
The section on Al-Jazeera and Qatar justifies as to why the station is able to report the news freely despite its neighbouring Arab states being reluctant of open media. Regardless of Qatar being financially wealthy with a “per capita income of over $25,000 for a population of 800,000 people” which shows its economy stability, the country is argued to be less progressive in terms of its social and political capability. This is shown in the report where it is suggested that Qatar would “increase its regional and global influence” through having a free media – which is supposedly key if a state intends to progress.
Asian Time is used as a source in the report and argues that “Al-Jazeera soft-peddles its domestic critique” one can infer the author argues this preferably in comparison with the station’s foreign critique. It is also established in there port that though Qatar may have a friendly relationship with the U.S.military, Al-Jazeera as a representative of Qatar chooses to hide that and concentrates more on the West and the Middle East rivalry in order to please its Arab viewers.
The section on Al-Jazeera and Iraq supports the argument that Al-Jazeera news has a tendency to show “short snippets which contain flashes of provocative pictures, usually of human suffering” to gain viewer empathy whilst backing up the point with evidence that during the Iraq war Al-Jazeera reporters were able to have continual access to war environment, in Iraq and Afghanistan, than any other news networks such as the CNN.
Again in the paragraph, titled Afghanistan and the War on Terrorism, the author progresses in labelling Al-Jazeera for having much notoriety. An example presented in the report is Al-Jazeera being called “a mouthpiece for Al-Qaeda” due to its open interviews and footage with Osama Bin Laden. It then continues to question Al-Jazeera’s considerable access to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Thus, we can infer from the author’s thesis that they strongly support the claim that the station was “collaborating with Al Qaeda”.
Finally the report ends on the section titled “Policy Options or Congress “which collectively suggests ways in which the U.S intends to promote a more balanced media in the Arab world however it argues that the Arabs are against this action, as it will be cast as merely an act of “propaganda effort of the U.S government” and the Arab station will not be hesitant to discontinue its news in the way that it is in the present day.
Full Report avaiable at: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl31889.pdf
“Traditional Diplomacy, the engagement of foreign governments, will always be critical. But it must be bolstered by a comprehensive effort to engage publics” (Lord, 2008: 9).
The report begins with Lord stressing of the importance of new strategies, stronger institutions and innovative methods the U.S. needs, in order to keep up with the constant change the globe is undergoing. Many governments are more than ever attentive and in recognition of the need to strengthen civilian institutions of diplomacy in order to respond to security challenges of our age. The report therefore argues that the U.S. government needs a corresponding public diplomacy strategy that includes all agencies who are participating in this type of engagement
Lord discusses the pros and cons of a new agency called USA World Trust. The report indicates this organization would, amongst other activities, create exchange programs to bring foreign university professors, journalists, NGO representatives and government officials to the U.S.; it would send American experts to other countries on speaking tours; it would understand foreign opinion through focus groups; and it would encourage a rise in translations of American books into foreign languages (Lord, 2008: 18-23). Lord suggests and recommends several solutions by examine America’s ability to engage, persuade and attract the cooperation of foreign publics. This would require education, engagement and empowerment of U.S. citizen to undertake such public diplomacy missions. The core mission of this report out to evaluate calls for a new independent, public-private organisation to strengthen America’s relation with foreign societies. Furthermore, it advocates key changes within current government agencies to strengthen U.S. public diplomacy.
Those are all valuable public diplomacy missions however; the problematic with this report is that all of those activities are already carried out by American diplomats around the world. They have been typical tools in the official U.S. government work for decades, a fact that this report fails to recognize. If any governments want a successful public diplomacy effort, they need to devote more attention to the support and development of public diplomacy specialists in the Foreign Service, the so-called “PD cone”.
On the other hand Mitchell Polman states in the CPD Blog, that he is“firmly convinced that the proposed Trust would help unleash the creative spirits of Americans and foreigners alike to come up with innovative ways to build ties between the American people and the rest of the world”.
As Lord argues, “to communicate effectively in this new environment, America needs to reform in ways that strengthen the voice of governments, empower our own people and engage the like-minded around the world with the use of new media and technologies” (2008: 11) which are certainly potential options and the only possible way forward of managing the domain effectively by involving U.S. citizen, which are already on the case but just require much needed funding.
References:
- Kristin Lord (2008), “Voices of America: U.S. Public Diplomacy for the 21st Century, Washington DC: Brookings, November 2008, Available at: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2008/11_public_diplomacy_lord/11_public_diplomacy_lord.pdf (Accessed: April 2012)
- Polman, Mitchell (2009), THE USA-WORLD TRUST IS AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME, the CDP Blog, Jan. 2009 http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/index.php/newswire/cpdblog_detail/the_usa_world_trust_is_an_idea_whose_time_has_come/ (Accessed: 28.04.12)
The Catholic church is famous for its humanitarian work, particularly to developing countries and negotiating with oppressive regimes to desist from oppressing its people. At the same time, they are by far the most successful in their tools of public diplomacy in the sense that they use their missionaries to propagate education, freedom of speech, religious freedom and sometimes help with negotiating an end to conflict. A most recent success story is evident in the outcome of Pope Benedict’s request to the Castro’s. During his recent visit to Cuba, Pope Benedict appealed to the president to declare “Good Friday” as a bank holiday, to give the hard-working citizens of the communist country some time to rest. And to the amazement of many, John Castro honoured the request of the Pope,and for the first time since 1960 when religious holidays were abolished in the communist country, “Good Friday” was declared a bank holiday (BBC News 2012).
Not only does the church speak out against oppressive regimes, it has also being known for speaking out against super powers like the United States and their hard approach to international politics, examples includes the invasion of Iraq and the 50 years Cuban trade embargo amongst others. This public diplomacy approach has not only earned them more followers but has also given them more diplomatic allies, particularly establishing diplomatic ties with communism China (New York Times 2006). With the above stated, clearly the world government has one or two things to learn from the public diplomacy approach of the Catholic Church.
It has to be said that, like states, the Catholic church, whilst attracting more people to its folks (the Anglican Bishops and priests), have recognised the need for “rebranding its image”. This is mainly due to the scandal that have rocked this holy institution, and having recognised that in other to retain its role as “instrument of peace”, it has to put its house in order (Thurburn 2012).
To conclude, whilst opinions might vary regarding the Catholic Church’s’ style of PCD, as stated in the preceding paragraphs, it works and brings about needed result. Therefore, government might need to get the church involved in their PCD, just like they are willing to involve non-state actors in a bid to accomplish their PCD goals.
Bibliography
BBC News online, (31st March, 2012). Cuba Declares Good Friday after Pope visit. Available on: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17574712. [Accessed: 24th April, 2012].
The New York Times, (6th May, 2006). First things first, China tells Vatican. Available on: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/05/world/asia/05iht-vatican.html. [Accessed on: 24th April, 2012].
Thurburn D, (2012). Pope urges ‘profound renewal’ to prevent Church abuse. Google News online, (6th February, 2012). Available on: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h852DfWYPYBeDdSximEpWkbcu_mw?docId=CNG.3ccfa3fdf33a23e06fbc68862a74e4a7.5a1. [Accessed: 24th April, 2012].
The United States Information Agency (USIA) was once the leading public relations organization in the domain, spending over $2 billion per year to highlight America’s interpretation, while weakening the Soviet’s side.
Its stated goals were:
- To explain and advocate U.S. policies in terms that are credible and meaningful in foreign cultures;
- To provide information about the official policies of the United States
- To advise the President and U.S. government policy-makers on the ways in which foreign attitudes will have a direct behaviour on the effectiveness of U.S. policies (Information available from http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/usia/)
With the end of the Cold War between the two – US felt as it has now won the war and has left the door wide open to Americans without much further effort. Many scholars and retired USIA Officers in the Public Diplomacy domain have quickly realized the decline in public diplomacy efforts by the US and have since think thank on the issue and issued heated debates on the matter. Walter Laqueur in his article reports shortly after the end of the Cold War in 1994:
“The decline in public diplomacy efforts has taken place over a long time; 12600 people were employed by USIA in 1967; the number now is 8500 and falling. The number of those stationed abroad has been halved” (1994: 19).
The need for building on a public diplomacy as a necessity for the Americans has been since rarely paid attention to and it all hit truth again with the event on 9/11. After this horrific event, perpetrated against the US, America found itself once more in a struggle. The question afflicting Americans now is: Why they hate us?
Michael Canning a past president of the USIA Alumni Association, and a retired career USIA Foreign Service Officer, analyses the problems America’s public diplomacy has and recommends some useful solutions. One of his first criticisms to include into this discussion is: “national discussion on PD has been profoundly Washington-centric” (2008: 1).Congress is rather busy identifying potential national threats and creating a “Wanting List” of national enemies. Along the way America may have missed some great chances of building good friendships with Brazil, Russia and some other Latin American Countries.
However, the most recent public and cultural diplomacy activity in Indonesia is busily promoting Brand: America and it is also American public diplomacy’s latest effort to win over young foreigners, especially in Muslim countries.
American undersecretary of state, Judith McHale, describes it as “the world’s first high-tech American cultural center”.
It brings together young Indonesians from the age of 15 – 30 years and staff from the embassy. The staff from the Embassy now find themselves “out from behind the embassy walls” and interacting with young Indonesian people. The centre offers technological devices such as I-Pads to be explored and is holding stimulating events and talks. There are advice hours where staff is giving valuable advice for Indonesian students when wanting to study in the US.
It is really hip and cool and certainly where the young generation of Indonesia would like to hang out. It is a step forward and certainly a well-targeted activity by the US. To guarantee the continuing and successful application of this mission, Americans took on important partnerships with Google, Microsoft and Cisco. By connecting brand, technology and public to one center – US achieved a model of diplomacy, for the 21st Century, definitely worth while thinking about.
References:
- Canning, Michael (2008), The Oversea Post: The Forgotten Element of Our Public Diplomacy, Public Diplomacy Council, December 1, 2008, Available at: http://publicdiplomacycouncil.org/sites/default/files/users/Lisa%20Retterath/canningoverseasposts.pdf (Accessed: 15.04.2012)
- Laqueur, Walter (1994), Save Public Diplomacy-Broadcasting America’s Message Matters, Foreign Affairs; Sep/Oct 94, Vol. 73 Issue 5, p19-24
When it comes to the diplomacy, it is fascinating to see there are wide range of diplomatic relations evolved during the centuries of human relations, engaging with each other through political, social or even connecting cultures and communities through conversations, sharing their sense of identity and traditions making friendships. The idea of Citizen Diplomacy or perhaps diplomacy of people is regarded as a political concept of people or communities coming together, engaging with each other or simply representing their countries, cultures or traditions. (U.S Centre for Citizen diplomacy:2012)
The idea of people’s diplomacy is not new, but in fact it pretty much existed and practised during the ancient times when people had to travel from one city to another for various purposes such as business and so on. However, in the modern world, citizen diplomacy occurs when there is no any official engagement is needed or desired. It is argued that citizen diplomacy is ideal for states who do not have any political ties, but have got some great and friendly cultural or historical ties with each other, so therefore it could be argued that through people’s diplomatic attachments, it could be a good way to engage in statecraft, building more closer ties. (McDonald:2003)
Dawson,A. 2011, The role of Citizen Diplomacy India-Pakistan Relation. [Online Image] Available at: http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org Accessed on 15 April 2012
As I mentioned, citizen diplomacy can take various forms and shapes; The picture above shows Citizens from India and Pakistan standing on the same spot and waving their flags despite the decades-long conflict between them. It can truely be argued that citizen diplomacy has the potential to counter a negative way of thinking about each other through people to people interaction. Moreover, students, regional ambassadors , businessmen and women, tourists, teachers, athletes and other ordinary people who have got something sense of attachment to the idea of sharing their values, representing their traditions and so on for sake of a better world could all be regarded as the most influential layers of the societies. For instance, during the cold war the famous scientist Robert W. Foller constantly travelled to the USSR of the time to engage with the people as a people’s representative rather than representing a political channel, to up ease the tensions between the people of two countries. Or during the Nawroz celebrations, peoples of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and other central Asian countries come together and share their sense of culture and identity through food, music and so on. Although for instance in governmental level some of these named countries are not really good and do not have great political and diplomatic relations.
Bibliography:
- US Centre for Citizen Diplomacy.(2012) http://uscenterforcitizendiplomacy.org/pages/what-is-citizen-diplomacy/ [online] Accessed 12thApril ,2012
- John W. McDonald, (2003) Citizen Diplomacy, http://www.mum.edu/pdf_msvs/v05/mcdonald.pdf [online] Accessed 12thApril ,2012
“Erdogan goes to Somalia to help victims and Turkey’s image”
The National. (20.08.2011)
Nation branding plays a major role in both how countries are perceived internationally and also economically. However it can have a positive and negative affect on a countries image. In the case of Turkey lacked building affective nation brand. (Anholt, 2009). Which some argue it’s one of the reasons turkey was denied to join the E.U. Although the country has developed tremendously, it still struggles to paint a productive image.
Turkey’s interest to join the E.U, which hasn’t succeeded yet, can be dated back to 1959, when made its first application to become member of the EEC. Later accepted in 1963.(BBC NEWS, 11.12.2006) However their long time desire to join the European Union never came to reality, somewhat because of pure public perception from neighboring E.U, states. As stated by Anholt “Turkey has very weak international brand image, and brand image plays a more fundamental role in questions of international relations and regional integration than many people imagine”.(Anholt,2005)
However it has become necessary for the country to take steps in order to improve its image, and as the above statement clarifies how crucial it is for a country to brand it self more effectively, in order to achieve strong economic growth and most importantly positive image at international level
On the other hand Turkey has come very far and has proven to become strong military, and has been member of NATO since 1952. Nevertheless although the country made some progress, some argue Turkish rejection to join the E.U, is partly reason of religion, as Turkey is a Muslim country. (BB news, 11.12.2006). On the other hand experts like Simon Anholt’s, Argues it’s all about nation branding for turkey.
Nevertheless, it was stated by Simon, Holt’s, In order for turkey to go forward with more affective nation brand, “it’s not about communication or promotion but about concrete policies”.(Anholt’s) However it has been talked about for some time how turkey needs to take steps to brand itself more internationally. Turkey in the summer 2011, took very impressive steps acting as international actor in Somalia. After the collapse of the Somali central government back in 1991, the country lacked the presence of Law order and stability. Which however made international actor’s or head of states not to go to Somalia. In addition any meetings with Somali officials were held in neighboring African countries e.g. Kenya, Ethiopia. BBC NEWS AFRICA. (10.02.12)
In the summer 2011 Somalia was hit by the heaviest drought in recent history. BBC NEWS AFRICA.(20/07/2011). Even though the international community showed concern for the situation in Somalia, however they were not active enough to meet the needs of the Suffering Somali people. Nevertheless Turkey showed its farm presence in the region by “walking the talk rather than talking the talk”. Turkish Prime Minister Ankara became the first international actor to land in the capital of Somalia Mogadishu for 20 years, later followed by the United Nation secretary general Banki Moon.
Turkey has been very active in Somalia since the start of the drought and has made Somalia its priority, becoming a major aid donor but also taking part in constructions, education and has even offered scholarship to 500 Somali students. As result of that and some more facts i can’t state here all, this could improve Turkey’s image, not only to Somalis, but to the international community for the role it played in Somalia. In proofing its act as international figure, confident but also economically sufficient.
Bibliography
The National. (20.08.2011)Erdogan goes to Somalia to help victims and Turkey’s image
www.thenational.ae/…/erdogan-goes-to-somalia-to-help-victims-and-…
Accessed: : (12th, April, 2012)
Anholt, S., Places: Identity, Image and Reputation.(2010)
BBC NEWS Europe. (11.12.2006) Q&A: Turkey’s EU entry talks www.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4107919.stm
Accessed 12th, April ,2012-04-18
Anholt, S. and GMI (2005b) How the world sees the world. The Anholt-GMI Nation Brands Index. Third Quarter 2005′. www.gmi-mr.com (download on 10/27/2005).
Accessed 12th, april,2012-04-18
BBC NEWS AFRIICA.(20/07/2011). UN declares Somalia famine in Bakool and Lower Shabellewww.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14211905
Accessed: 12th, April, 2012)
BBC NEWS AFRIICA. (10.02.2012). Somalia profile: A chronology of key events.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094632
Accessed: : (12th, April, 2012)
MISS WORLD, MISS UNIVERSE: AN UNLIKELY DIPLOMACY
Most people frown upon beauty pageants and do no realise the potential that lies in the Fashion and Beauty industry, not only as entertainment, but also a vibrant and creative tourism marketing initiative, as well as a citizens and cultural diplomacy vehicle.
In its attempts to resuscitate the country’s tourism industry, suffered from the impacts of the Tsunami. Thailand out bid China and Chile by paying in excess of US$6.5 million to hold the Miss Universe Pageant in 2005. On winning the bid Thailand’s Minister of Sport and Tourism thanked the Miss Universe Organisation and said:
“We send our sincere thanks to the Miss Universe organisation … we know that bringing the Pageant to Thailand is one of the many step in re-building our economy and boosting tourism. There is no better time, for our people and our economy, for us to being this worldwide event to our country”. (Sontaya Kunplome, Thailand Minister of Sport and Tourism, 2005)
In the lead up the 2008 Olympics, China hosted the Miss World Pageant for three consecutive years as a prelude to the Olympics to bring the world into China to sample their facilities in preparation for the Olympics.
“… In the next five years, China’s culture industry is aiming at doubling from the current 2.6% to over 5.2% of the GDP. We need events like Miss World to help us grow the culture economy.” (Cai Wu, Chinese Minister of Culture, 1st April 2012)
Each contestant carries out the citizen and cultural diplomacy on behalf of her country while accompanying tourism and business officials use the Pageant platform as a business networking platform. In addition both the host and participating countries benefit from extensive global media coverage.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
- Miss World, 2012. ‘Julia Morley honoured in Beijing’ 1 April 2012 http://www.missworld.com/shownews/Julia-Morley-honoured-in-Beijing/63.html (Accessed 10 May 2012)
- Thaisvisa, 2005: ‘Thailand to host Miss Universe’. Thai Visa Forum, 2005-02-07 http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/27534-thailand-to-host-miss-universe-2005/ (Accessed 10 May 2012)
THE COMMONWEALTH – A SMART POWER
According to Andrew Dorman, the United Kingdom has three foreign policy priorities: North America, Europe and the Commonwealth. He argues that the balance between these three priorities has shifted over time and leadership of the Commonwealth is one way Britain justifies its own position.
“Britain has no vision where it is going as a ‘post-middle-sized power’ … British values are changing as the country becomes more globalised and there is a loss of confidence. Britain feels the need to justify its role on the world stage”. (Dorman cited in ICD, 2010, p5).
As Head of the Commonwealth, the Queen’s Jubilee will be celebrated in all Commonwealth countries. The Commonwealth comprises more than 54 countries, the majority of whom are former colonies of Britain. Having previously conquered these countries using hard power to colonise them, Britain now uses soft power to keep them under its wings. As former colonies of Britain, the Commonwealth ‘family’ share a history, common heritage in language, culture law, education and democratic traditions, among many other things.
Britain’s cultural and public diplomacy is carried out through the various organisations of the Commonwealth, which include the Commonwealth Secretariat which serves as an intergovernmental consultation enabling member governments to collaborate to influence world events. and setting up programmes carried out bilaterally. The Royal Commonwealth Society is an international education charity which promotes international understanding across the Commonwealth especially among young people. The Association of Commonwealth universities is one of the largest international inter-university networks in the world commitment to staff and student mobility and institution building throughout the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth Foundation is an intergovernmental organisation whose mandate is to strengthen civil society to enhance development and democracy in the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth of Learning (COL) is an intergovernmental organisation established by Commonwealth Heads of Government in 1988 to encourage the development and sharing of open learning and distant education knowledge, resources and technologies. The Commonwealth Games are held once very fours years.
BIBILIOGRAPHY:
- Association of Commonwealth Universities: www.acu.ac.uk
- Commonwealth Games Federation: http://www.thecgf.com/about/role.asp
- Commonwealth of Nations: http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/The-Commonwealth-History,4,3,1 accessed 30 April 2012
- Commonwealth of Nations: http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/Directory-of-Organisations-Commonwealth-Foundation,61,49,1
- Commonwealth of Nations: http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/Directory-of-Organisations-Commowealth-Secretariat,60,48,1
- Commonwealth of Nations: http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/The-Commonwealth-Introduction,2,2,1 accessed 30 April 2012
- Commonwealth of Nations: http://www.commonwealth-of-nations.org/Directory-of-Organisations-Association-of-Commonwealth-Universities,64,52,1
- Head of the Commonwealth: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/Internal/191086/150757/head_of_the_commonwealth/
- The Commonwealth Foundation: http://www.commonwealthfoundation.com
- The Commonwealth of Learning: http://www.col.org
- The Commonwealth Secretariat: www.thecommonwealth.org
- The Commonwealth: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/subhomepage/174739/commonwealth_family/
- The Royal Commonwealth Society: http://www.rcsint.org
Public Diplomacy
An Annotated Time Capsule from 1996
http://www.publicdiplomacycouncil.org/public-diplomacy-video-0
I’d like to think that Cultural Diplomacy’s reach can be split into two directions. From a global perspective, 49% of the world’s population are genuinely concerned with culture, and 51% of the population are superficially concerned about culture. Let me explain….
The reach of Culture
Cultural diplomacy has opened the door for many countries to experience the excitement of the international highlife. They have now the opportunity to outreach to the international community and gain recognition and visibility in an instant. It only takes a country’s football team to win or do well on a World Cup for them to be on the world of news. One must only think back of some of the most successful sports events to see the tremendous meaning of Sport Diplomacy. Ghana was gaining a new positive reputation through its well-played football at the last two world cups with its Football diplomacy, as soft power tool on its move.
Heroes like Sena and Pele were born to decorate the walls of millions of teenage bedrooms, and are remembered for generations around the world.
The latest rising star is Brazilians country singer Michel Telo, singing Ai Se Eu te pego (“Oh, if I catch you”) which has been viewed over 100 million times on you tube and was listed number one in at least nine European countries. Is that all really culture and dependable cultural diplomacy for its country, in that case Brazil?
The commercialization of the domains of entertainment is purely an economic act and a phenomenon resulting of the internet’s fragmented market. However, “Mass popular culture has a global reach” (Demos, 2007) and not only businesses (in food, fashion, music…) have realized the importance of culture but also governments.
When we look at the definition of cultural diplomacy it can be
“best described as the initiation or facilitation of the exchange of ideas, values, traditions and other aspects of culture or identity, whether they promote national interests, build relationships or enhance socio-cultural understanding”(http://www.culturaldiplomacy.org/index.php?en_culturaldiplomacy#Definition).
But I can not help but wonder where can we draw a line between traditional culture and commercialized culture? Or else, if sports should actively become a tool of public diplomacy, must it be therefore a government function or must it be privatized? And does it not make it then a pure intention of propaganda?
On the other hand we have traditional and intentional cultural events taking place around the world with a reception of, 1.3 million visitors at The Treasure of the World’s Cultures organized by the British Museum, and the British Library gets 24 million visits on their website every year (Demos, 2007).
But somehow the numbers are not adding up for me. The immense differences on what the foreign audiences seem to debate and being interested in are far more commercialized aspects of cultures. Peter van Ham suggested that we are “shifting towards a post-modern world of images and influence” (2001). Yet, if I would think of cultural diplomacy as a property for the foreign audiences and their perceptions (Batora, 2006), I could certainly conclude that cultural diplomacy (for me) is sometimes an unpredictable diplomatic tool, possibly a tool to be used by all – the future of “world culture”
Bibliography:
- Batora (2006), Public Diplomacy between Home and Abroad: Norway and Canada, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, Vol 1, pp 53-80.
- Demos (2007), Cultural Diplomacy, Available at: http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Cultural%20diplomacy%20-%20web.pdf?1240939425 (Accessed 06.04.12)
- Peter van Ham (2001), The Rise of the Brand State: The Postmodern Politics of Image and Reputation, Foreign Affairs Vol. 80, No. 5 (Sep. – Oct., 2001
Marketing is an essential part of economic growth for a country, particularly through tourism and trade. Nation branding seeks out a unique, favorable identity for a country that will make it attractive. Intercultural exchanges are used to inform the development of a national brand. In turn, a nation’s brand, if strong, can develop a strong competitive identity. (Roy 2007, p.569) This paper considers nation branding and competitive identity in theUnited Arab EmiratesandQatar.
The UAE has developed a nation brand that aims to portray the UAE as a “contemporary and vibrant country.” In doing so, the UAE is portrayed as a nation of patriotic, united citizens, an economically competitive and stable country, a major regional tourist attraction, and a nation that is influential and respected globally. (Prime Minister of the UAE 2010) This nation brand would improve the image of the UAE in several respects. First, it would attract tourism income. Second, it would attract investment income if there was faith in its economy. Third, it would command respect as an international influence with internal peace and happy citizens.
Qatar, who won the bid for the 2022 World Cup, is still developing a brand. AsQatarstarts to draw international attention, its brand will be able to translate the attention into a lasting competitive identity. The development of the national brand will portrayQataras a destination for learning, education, and sporting excellence. Cultural icons can also contribute to the tourism aspect of the national brand. (Ryman 2010, p.5)Qatarhas a chance to launch a national brand and gain a large impact. However, it needs to ensure that it seeks out many of the economically and politically beneficial items as the UAE has done, while remaining unique. With a national brand, both countries can position themselves as attractive Middle Eastern nations without being lumped together.
References
Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates, 2010. UAE Nation Brand Brief [online] Available at: <http://uaepm.ae/nationbrand/en/UaeBrandBrief.aspx> [Accessed 18 March 2012].
Roy, I.S., 2007, Worlds Apart: nation-branding on the National Geographic Channel, Media, Culture, & Society [e-journal] 29(4) Available through: SAGE Journals.
Ryman, A., Does QatarNeed a Country Brand?, Grow, [online] Available at: <http://www.growqatar.com/admin/pdf/80fc63ce87b551b02c8ec1652b66f17b.pdf >
This paper outlines the measures taken by government in the Middle East, during the Arab spring, to minimize or stop the uprisings. It will conclude that the use of soft power tools were apply to late and therefore caused no affect.
The ‘Arab Spring’ or ‘Arab Revolution’ as used by many to describe the ongoing process in the Middle East impacted the region deeply. The transformation it brought about affected the region’s domestic politicsas well as the outside word perception of it.
Governments around the world are increasingly making use of soft power tactics to promote their foreign policies (and also domestic policies), especially in regions where other forms of diplomacy have failed to succeed. In this sense, cultural diplomacy as well as public diplomacyare an effective way to go to achieve a country’s interest (Nye, 2008).
The governments overthrown during the Arab Spring used these soft power tools for two main reasons: First, it intended to persuade its own peopleto find other means to resolve the conflict. They sought to reach a mutual understanding between their people by suggesting changeson the law and regulations and holding democratic elections. Second, the governments believed that those suggestions would alleviate the international pressure and raise their profile by the international community, therefore, counter balancing the pressure they were facing internallyand the impact that it could cause on their position as governments (The Economist, 2012).
Cultural and public diplomacy are very effective tools to use in order to pursue a country interest abroad and internally. However, the efforts of the Arab Spring countries’ governments to re-brand their state and achieve their object to remain in power failed to work. And it did so because the government efforts were demonstrate too late and foremost, because people’s pledges for transformation were stronger and they were determined for regime change.
Bibliography
Nye J., Public Diplomacy and Soft power, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2008; p.94
The Arab spring – The Islamists’ long march. The Economist, Feb, 2012.
“All Wars represents a failure of diplomacy”
(Tony Penn,February 28, 1991)
(Google Pictures, online).
As the citation above identified, all wars is clearly is as a result of either lack of diplomacy or failure of state actors or government representatives to negotiate, be it the traditional way (secret diplomacy) or the new way (soft power). This blog will attempt to analyse how employing secret diplomacy and soft power can help ease the tensions in Somalia and Iran respectively using case studies of past events.
Scholars and students of diplomacy are familiar with the significant role played by the use secret diplomacy to avert the Cuban Missile crisis (Stern 2003, 33), which is why although the new concept of diplomacy (Open Diplomacy) has been widely embraced by the government and or public, it is still imperative to employ traditional methods to resolve contemporary problems in the international system.
Inarguable, the “Good Friday Agreement” of April 1998, that put an end to the crisis in Northern Ireland (BBC 2004, online), did not happen because the British governments was so strong or kept to their words of not negotiating with terrorists (as IRA at the time where seen as a terrorist organisation), rather secret negotiations between the British government and members of IRA was instrumental to an agreement been reached (Fisher et al 2003, 57). And most recently, although the international community is implying that they do not negotiate with terrorists, there is evidence to show that the United States are having secret talks with the Taliban on possible solution to ending the crisis in Afghanistan (The Economic Times 2011, online).
In conclusion, based on the evidence presented above, it is evident that if the international community really wanted to end the conflicts in Somalia then they have to look at the option of possible secret negotiations with Al-Shabab. This is important because although they have been identified as terrorist organisations; like the Taliban they have significant influence in Somalia hence will have a role to play in ending the conflict there (Helander 1999, 46-7). With that said, whilst embracing new ways of doing things, it is imperative not to do away with the old ways.
Bibliography
BBC online, (9 December, 2004). The Good Friday Agreement in full. Available on: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4079267.stm. [Accessed: 24th March, 2012].
Fisher J. et al, (2003). Central Debates in British Politics. England; Pearson Education Limited.
Helander B, (1999). Somalia. In (Ed.) Westerlund D & Svanberg I, (1999). Islam outside the Arab World. New York; St. Martin’s Press,
The Economic Times, online (20 February, 2011). US Opens Direct Secret Talks with Taliban. Available on: http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2011-02-20/news/28615592_1_taliban-qaeda-afghan-constitution. [Accessed: 24th March, 2012].
Stern S.M, (2003). Averting “the Final Failure”: John F. Kennedy and the Secret Cuban Missile Crisis Meetings. California; Stanford University Press.
“Commentators from every part of the political and social spectrum have at different times in very different publications expressed their loathing and contempt for the idea as repellent and superficial, that is when they don’t regard it as entirely risible” –Wally Olins
The concept of nation branding, mostly practiced and prominent in western states, seeks to compute, construct and control the reputation and public diplomacy, not to mention the status and image, of countries. Nation branding has had its growing influence on states, frequently the United States, France, United Kingdom and other western European countries, to emphasize their “distinctive characteristics,” through the increase of importance on the symbolic value of products. The past decade has shown a turning point in the types of approaches states have conducted with relative ease to manage their reputations. It is still ongoing theory and has been highly criticized for its pressure on a nation to care about its image, as mentioned by Wally Olins. However, Simon Anholt’s argument also gains weight whereby he advises countries on how to strengthen their national brands, says in CFR.org Interview that two main concepts separate new forms of nation branding from more traditional forms of public diplomacy. (Jacqui, 2006, 74)
Anholt makes the claim that nations have become far more aware of the value of their brand as an asset. Therefore, this means that understanding valuation helps countries to comprehend the investments they make in their image to a sufficient extent. This is, to an extent, evident in the US scholarship programmes ‘full bright,’ which allowed students from a suppressed state such as Afghanistan to gain educational opportunities and study in the US. Clearly, this gave a fine perception of the US in terms of promoting their image as ‘democratic’.
Three Emirati students head to US as Fulbright scholars (www.thenational.ae, 2011)
This example supports Anholt’s viewpoint where he states that a second reform can be to focus on the behavioral aspects of managing a nation’s image. He suggests officials from government, nonprofits, and the business world can better collaborate to make sure the messages a country is putting out represent what they view as “the fundamental common purpose” (Wally, 2002, 5-6)
To conclude the branding and image of a nation-state and the successful transference of this image to its exports – is just as important as what they actually produce and sell.
Bibliography
- True, Jacqui (2006). “Globalization and Identity”. In Raymond Miller. Globalization and Identity. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-19-558492-9
- Olins, Wally (2002). “Branding the Nations’ the historical context, the Journal of Brand Management” Vol 9, pp 5-6
- Thomas, Jen (2011) Foud Emirates Students head to US as Full Bright Scholors. Available at http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/education/four-emirati-students-head-to-us-as-fulbright-scholars (Accessed on 20.03.2012)
“The military has come to help not to occupy the country”
“The understanding of cultural difference and of the consequent variance in patterns of behaviour is crucial when deciding which media to use in support of commercial or political communication and engagement strategies. In individualistic cultures people read more than in collectivistic cultures” (Jolyon, 2008, 101)
In a collectivistic culture like Afghanistan it’s important to use radio and television to get to your target audience. After the fall of the Taliban Much of the market research came out were against print media. The reasons were the high illiteracy rate as well as difficult distribution logistics. Currently, there are more than forty radio stations operating in Afghanistan. Most of these stations broadcast 24 hours in Afghan languages Dari and Pashtu. (Rogers, 2012, 27-28) Some of these Radio stations are founded by Afghans themselves and the rest founded by International donors and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) Country members. It can be argued the radio stations has their own agenda and target audience.
Radio Azadi has distributed nearly 20,000 solar-powered, hand-cranked radios to Afghan across the country. (www.rfel.org.2010)
For example German military service replaced United States Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in some areas and managed to win the heart and mind of the Afghans. Firstly, the German military founded radio freedom (Sada-e-Azadi) that broadcast 24 hours, the radio stations play afghan and Indian music to their target audience but their main aim is to inform the Afghan people that the military has come to help not to occupy the country. Secondly, they started working at the basis of the society, in direct contact with the people in aimed at establishing dialogue and understanding. Just like all other PRT’s the German military has also conducted more than 350 projects in Kabul, these include the equipment for girl’s school, building bridges and assisting the local people on their basic needs. Interestingly, their dialogue and communication either via the radio station or direct connections with the local peoples can be truly seen as an example of cultural diplomacy.
The examples mentioned above make it clear that not only intercultural knowledge but also having a good public and cultural diplomacy strategy can benefits the operations and sustainability in war zones like Afghanistan.
Bibliography:
- Welsh, Jolyon and Fearn, Daniel(2008): Foreign and commonwealth office “Engagement: Public and Cultural diplomacy in a globalised world” pp 101-115
- Rogers, Tony (2012): A Guide to Broadcasting in Afghanistan. Available at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/bdxcuk/afghanistan.pdf (Accessed on 15.03.2012)
- Milton C. Cummings (2003): Cultural Diplomacy and the United States Government: a Survey. Center for Arts and Culture, 2003, p.1.
- Knap, Julian (2012): Radio Azadi Distributes 20,000 Radios In Afghanistan. Avaiable at http://www.rferl.org/content/off_mic_radio_azadi_distribution_drive/2241690.html (Accessed on 19.03.2012)
Through the history, states have always competed for power and prestige. And brand was one of the most important elements in this competition. Old imperial branding projects were aimed domestically, towards own citizens. These projects were not based upon noble purposes. Their main aim was to appeal on own citizens and persuade them to pay taxes and fight wars. Each empire had ‘mission statement’, which represented purpose of their strategies and desirable achievements in their mission – colonization for example. Whereas brand of America was and mainly remained about idea of freedom (Anholt, Hildreth, 2010:23), the mission statement of British Empire was ‘justice and the rule of law’, whereas French advertised ‘La civilisation Françoise’. (Olins, 1999:10-11) Modern states are more concern about their image, however, globalization created very competitive environment between states for direct foreign investment, export or tourism. On the other hand, Anhotl pointed that in old system could country really succeed suchenvironment only if it had had 
military, economic and political power. Therefore, logically, majority of states lost before even stared. (publicdiplomacy.wikia.com/wiki/Nation_Branding)
Nowadays, branding is aimed at foreign audiences to promote mainly investment, tourism export and positive image of the nation abroad. Country of ‘origin effect’ became crucial for evaluating of product or nation as entity. And so, brand image of country has an important impact on cultural, political and economical destiny. Therefore ‘Made in’ label became as powerful and as important as a ‘Made by’ label. People are just people and are influenced by everything they see, read or hear. And as a result, corporations, for whose investment states compete, are full of people who make their choice by perception. (Anholt, Hildreth, 2010:19-20) These prejudices or ignorance of nations attractions and positives have to be fight by ‘weapons of modern marketing’ such advertising, websites, brochures….(Olins, 1999:12) Marketing is one of the most powerful weapons of inward investment, and most of the economically successful regions of the world run expensive promotional programmes and employed professional marketing strategists. (Olins,1999: 13) But one can argue that does not work for every nation.
States, which seek to rebrand themselves, are those with kind of traditional position or reputation which they want to change. (Olins, 1999:20) Nevertheless, the most of the states have image they deserve. Is much easier to brand long-term successful state rather then state with no brand association at all. Each county’s image is built upon a long history of its government policies, and does not exist a ‘quick fix’ for such image
. State has to address policies which caused such reputation in the first place. (publicdiplomacy.wikia.com/wiki/Nation_Branding) As a result, the most difficult position in rebranding themselves have small new states which nobody knows, or states with chaotic and corrupted history. (Olins, 1999: 20)
Globalisation has negative influence on nation branding and their ‘marketing’ strategies. However, in globalized world economic growth, profit and welfare (not necessary welfare of people) became highest ‘national interest’. In competitive environment nations simply became trade articles on global labour market. Nations for Sale!!!! States with have long-term problem to attract foreign investment are because of their BAD name or unknown status are disadvantaged. Often are able to attract less attractive investors by providing them ‘tax holidays’ exchanged for long-term investment. Working conditions for workers in such ‘companies’ are not great, even in the EU. People are working under pressure of loosing job if they do not m
ake enough articles. It is normal to work night shifts for which they do not have extra money and they work for minimal wage of course. Unfortunately, they often do not have another choice. Complain and you will lose job, reality…. People are treated just like cheap labour.
Nation branding as marketing strategy does not promote rights of the workers or good working conditions. It is just about foreign investment; unfortunately nobody sees negative side, which exists as reality of small, unknown states with chaotic history……Big differences between states, first class and the rest.
- http://publicdiplomacy.wikia.com/wiki/Nation_Branding, accessed 18/03/2012
- Anhotl, S., Hildreth, J. 2010, Brand America : the making, unmaking and remaking of the greatest national image of all time, London : Marshall Cavendish Business
- Olins, W., 1999, Trading identities : why countries and companies are taking on each others’ roles, London : Foreign Policy Centre
“The most potent voice for an international actor is not what it says but what it does” (Cull, 2009)
The European Union (EU) meets with two principal criticisms:
1) it should play a greater role in International Relations arena,
2) and the lack of a common European diplomatic service of the EU.
An external service of the European Commission was laid in Washington DC, 1954, since then, a global network of approximately 130 European Commission delegations has been built up. These diplomatic representations are essential to the promotion of European Union interests and values around the world, and are in the front line in delivering EU external relations policy and actions. Foremost, values of respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights are central to EU public diplomacy efforts. With Europe being the world’s biggest aid donor and the advantages it has through its single market, the EU secured itself some potential diplomatic control. Still, Rasmussen argues, that it is
“difficult to paint a general picture of the public diplomacy activities” (2010) of the EU.
It may even still be that the EU, as an international actor is ‘under construction’. The attractiveness and constitute character of a state for the use of ‘soft power’, to pursue national interest, is an ever-increasing diplomatic streak. The terminology ‘soft power’ was invented by Joseph Nye and is as follows defined:
“Soft power rest on some shared values and soft power means getting others to want the same outcomes you want” (J. Nye, 2004: 111). According to Joseph Nye, the European Union as a symbol of uniting power carries a good deal of soft power. Polls conducted… found that a majority of Americans had a favourable image of the European Union, and ranked it fourth for its influence in the world behind the United States, Britain and China. (2004: 77)
Consequently, EU’s strength and dynamic in its economic capacity, the numerous delegations for the promotion of human rights and peace in the world, and its multilateral proficiency conduct the key values the EU self-images (Rasmussen, 2010: 271).
So how did the EU towards 2012 perform? (The analysis will be based on some of the lessons from the past by N. Cull)
To make public diplomacy effective and ‘soft’, one needs to listen. That should mean listening to what citizens are thinking and what opinion they are about to shape. This is why the 130 EU Delegations, working around the world, on a local level, are crucial of building up bridges between the EU and the foreign public. Margot Wallström (former European Commissioner for Institutional Relations and Communication Strategy) calls it ‘putting ears on the EU’. A recent event from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees, ‘Engaging Youth – Palestine Refugees in a Changing Middle East’, was held in Brussels and supported by the EU. The main focus was to engage and listen to Palestinian youths. That could explain the next and second important lesson of public diplomacy – it must be connected to policy. Given the example, if Palestinian young citizens see that the EU are undertaking the ‘right’ issues, and ‘their’ issues that may very well increases the EU democratic legitimacy. As mentioned earlier, indeed the EU and its member states are responsible for most of the world’s development aid support and that counts in what they do not just what they say; possible another strength of EU’s public diplomacy – is not always about you. Public diplomacy is everyone’s business and the EU is not only informing and influencing foreign public but engaging them: Malawian children design EU-inspired stamp or Brazilian journalist create for the EU stories about Europe and get awarded.
As pointed out earlier, one of the main critics the European Union has to face is his weakness as an actor in the domain of international politics. Despite the critics the EU are facing, the first step in becoming a more powerful international player is by highlighting Europe’s financial and political commitment to deploying “civilian power.”
Bibliography
- Cull, Nicholas (2009), Public Diplomacy – Lesson from the Past, USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School, available at: http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/publications/perspectives/CPDPerspectivesLessons.pdf (Accessed 18.03.2012)
- Nye Joseph S. (2004), Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics , New York: Public Affairs
- Rasmussen, Steffen Bay (2010), The Messages and Practices of the European Union’s Public Diplomacy, The Haque Journal of Diplomacy, Vol 5, No. 3, pp. 263-287
“Not only is the United States at increased risk of direct attack from those who hate it most, but it is also becoming more difficult for it to realize its long-term aspirations as it loses friends and influence”
Independent Task Force on Public Diplomacy, (2003).
This review analyses the view represented by Lord K.M the United States Public Diplomacy Strategy in the 21st century and recommendations on how to renew its dwindling image in the publics of other countries.
Following the summary of the report:
(i) a critical review of the article
(ii) will be the conclusion
Summary of Lord’s Report
This report examines the Public Diplomacy (PD) strategy of the United States (US) in an attempt to change the negative perception by publics of other countries; especially non-allies. It also recognises the progresses and shortcomings of the US PD strategy since 9/11.
The report seems to be centred on recommendations on new forms of PD and who should be involved; including taking advantage of globalization tools like the internet, example pointed out the need for the U.S president (Obama) to take up policies that would redefine the US is viewed abroad (Lord 2008, 16-18 & 30). The way America is perceived abroad has deteriorated particularly in the Middle East since the Bush Doctrine on pre-emption motivated the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and when the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo bay was reviewed to be an abuse of human rights. In retrospect, or with ‘hindsight’, the way forward for the US PD strategy seems exciting, but as recent happening shows; the policy makers need to do more than talk.
Critical Analysis
(Hamm & Leighton 2001, online)
Whilst the recommendations and way forward for the U.S PD is seemingly “realistic and attainable” (Lord 2008, 44); the U.S has a minute chance of achieving its PD goals whilst making its national interest the priority in its foreign policy agenda. It might be attainable if we lived in a perfect world, but as we live in an imperfect world the U.S have to walk the talk, if they really want fully achieve its PD goals particularly in the Middle East.
The U.S will not for example have the Yemeni and or Middle Eastern public on their side when despite being accused of being responsible for the killing of thousands of Yemeni citizens during the revolution against his regime in 2011, the US government played host to the Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Although the US government stated in a report that Saleh was only in the US for medical treatment (Fox news 2012, online); a clip from YouTube, showed the former president stating that he was going to the US “to cool the tension”. Clearly the above illustration presents the US as two faced; aiming for a United Nations Security Council Resolution on Syria, whilst sheltering Saleh, who his people has accused of committing more atrocities than the Syrian President (YouTube 2012, online).
In conclusion, having critically analysed the views represented by Lord, it is obvious that whilst recognising the need for a new PD strategy; Lord reiterated that the US national interests will always come first (Lord 2008, 41-43). Inarguably, for the US government to attain its PD goals, there is need for them to go beyond talking by “walking the talk” by recognising that there might be times when they need to compromise there national interests. A good way to start would be making the first step towards nuclear disarmament (Bidwai & Vanaic 1997, 49), and closing down the Guantanamo Bay prison.
As stated by Patricia Sharpe, during the cold war the US was successful in triumphing over communism and breaking the bounds of the Soviet Union because they were a model nation. They triumphed because unlike now, they didn’t have to explain the shocking cruel and illegal treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo, at Abu Ghraib, in Afghanistan (Waller 2007, 189); which is why they should be ready to make compromise on certain issues and or foreign policies if they are really keen on meeting its PD goals.
Bibliography:
Bidwai .P & Vanaic .A, After the CTB….. India’s Intentions. The Bulletin of Atomic Science; Chicago. Vol. 53, No. 2, March/April 1997.
Fox news, (January 28, 2012). Yemeni president heads to US for medical treatment. Available on: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/01/28/yemeni-president-heads-to-us-for-medical-treatment/. [Accessed on 13th February, 2012].
Hamm .H & Leighton .P, (2001). Understanding anti-Americanism: A Bin-Laden Special on Al-Jazeera Two Months Before September 11. Available on: http://stopviolence.com/9-11/mideast/antiAmericanism.htm. [Accessed on: 13th February, 2012].
Lord K.M. Voices of America: U.S. Public Diplomacy for the 21st Century. November, 2008: Washington, pp. 16-18, 30-31, 41-44. Available on: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2008/11_public_diplomacy_lord/11_public_diplomacy_lord.pdf. [Accessed on: 10th February, 2012].
PressTVGlobalNews, (February 6, 2012). US Imposes Media Blackout on Saleh’s Visit. Available on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0RO1MZ-9iIo. [Accessed on: 15th February, 2012].
Waller J.M, (2007). The Public Diplomacy Reader. United States; The Institute of Word Politics Press.
“Ask not what your country can do for you…Ask what you can do for your country.”
John F. Kennedy (January 20, 1961).
(Sterling times online).
As Britain declare war on Germany during the First World War (WW1); the government knew that they couldn’t do it on their own, there was great need for more men to be enrolled. This led to a campaign which had Lord Kitchener’s image with the words “your country needs you” (Llewellyn 2010, 38) inscribed on it, within months more than 2 million men were enrolled. This is just one key example of getting the citizens involved in issues concerning a state.
In recent times, whilst the threat a country faces has changed from that of war to economic, environmental, political and or threat from fundamentalists, “our country’s needs us” to be its representatives, to help change the way it is perceived (especially the negative perceptions) by publics of other countries especially non-allies.
Shale quoted Davies and Kaufman classification of citizen diplomacy as follows; it “compliments official diplomacy, therefore opening opportunities for communication, cross-cultural understanding, and joint efforts to address parties’ needs” (2006:197). This has been proven to be correct as countries are resorting to citizen diplomacy in a bid to improve its public diplomacy. It has been suggested that the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo is still ongoing or got out of hand due to government’s involvement instead of getting private citizens involved (Shale 2010, 198). Due to technological advancement e.g. Web 2.0 and mobile phones people are able to get direct information about other people rather than rely on perceptions.
The Nigerian government is one of the many countries in Africa that are embracing this new form of diplomacy. In 2007 it adopted a new approach to foreign policy “citizen diplomacy” and is striving to synergy between foreign policy and domestic affairs in such a way that citizens are taken as the focus of foreign policy (Dickson 2010, 1). Whilst this might not unite the country and stop the ongoing ethno-religious crisis and or terrorist attacks; it might help avoid another civil war in that citizens are able to interact with each other and get unbiased situation report about things around them.
In conclusion, in times where relations between countries are deteriorating, the onus lies on citizens to be the voice of their countries in diaspora; to not only help change the perception of their country especially by publics of non-allies, but also to attract businesses and open doors. “Your country needs you” to “be the change you would like to see” (Kitchener & Ghandi).
Bibliography
Dickson M, (2010). Citizen Diplomacy in President Umaru Musa Yar’adua’s Nigeria, 2007-2009: An Assessment. International Journal of Politics and Good Governance; Nigeria, Vol. 1, No. 1.3, Quarter III, 2010. Available on: http://onlineresearchjournals.com/ijopagg/art/59.pdf. [Accessed: 6th March, 2012].
Llewellyn D, (2010). The First Lady of Mulberry Walk: The Life and Times of Irish Sculptress Anne Acheson. United Kingdom; Troubador Publishing.
Sterling Times online. “Your Country Needs You”. Available on: http://www.sterlingtimes.org/memorable_images53.htm. [Accessed: 5th March, 2012].
Shale V, (2006). Post-Cold War Diplomatic Training: The Importance of Multi-Stake Holder Approach to Inter and Intra State Conflicts. In (Ed.). Kurbalija J. & Katrandiev V, (2006). Multi-Stake Holder Diplomacy: Challenges and Opportunities. Malta; DiploFoundation Publications.
In today’s globalised world, nations are defined by their identity, history, state affairs, economy or culture. These aspects are pretty much the image a country will portray to the rest of the world and it can implicate crucial consequences. Public and cultural diplomacy should be solely organised by the nation’s state, however in the modern era of globalisation, technological improvements, media, corporations, non-state actors and citizens are all playing an important role in the domain. The reputation of a place or nation can be highly influenced by all of these players and I will illustrate the case by looking into Palestine.
“Living Links”
There are nearly eleven million Palestinians on this world and around 5 million are currently living in what is called the Palestinian Territories. Yet, most are both emigrants and refugees, or Palestinians living within the areas occupied. The figures illustrate the importance of the diaspora of Palestinians (PASSA, 2010). Not only can they represent their identity and culture, but challenge the state of affairs of poverty and isolation, and so being ambassadors for the Palestinian cause.
‘Electronic Intifada’ issues articles on the Middle East and is regularly updated by the Palestinians in the diaspora. The website ‘Electronic Intifada’ is one example of many. They publish opinion pieces, use blogs, social networks and give interviews. It is well received and the Israeli newspaper ‘The Jerusalem Post’, declared the site as “very professional, user-friendly and well written” (Brown, 2002). By replicating the grief of the Palestinian people in their publications and writings they too act as lobbyist for their Palestinian brothers and sisters.
That can be also applied to cultural aspirations. Just to name one: Palestinian’s fashion designer Rami Kashou, well-known in the Fashion industry, represents a diaspora generation as a professional in parts that have no direct link to the conflict. This can be also a very useful tool of the normalisation process within the Palestinian diaspora public.
Yet, the current conflict between Palestine and Israel form the background of our opinion. As Simon Anhalt argues,
“these clichés and stereotypes – whether they are positive or negative, true or untrue – fundamentally affect our behaviour towards other places and their people and products” (2007: 3-4).
Further he argues that “it seems unfair” and “it is very hard for a country to persuade people in other parts of the world to go beyond these simple images” (2007: 4).
“Independent Actions”
The intensification of trade and cultural exchange crossing borders is building a new sense of competition between countries. Place branding (new umbrella term to encompassing nation branding), can be argued is a soft governance technique (B. Stoeber, 2007: 179), and is generally built on factors like trust (van Ham, 2002: 264) and credibility. Simon Anholt has therefore recommended a ‘new model for the brand management of nations, cities and regions’ and stresses of the importance of ‘competitive identity’ in a globalised world.
“Competitive Identity (or CI) is the term” he uses to “describe the synthesis of brand management with public diplomacy and with trade, investment, tourism and export promotion. CI is a model for enhanced national competitiveness in a global world” (S. Anholt,2007:5).
The biggest Palestinian company by market value, Padico, is working with a group of other dominant Palestinian business leaders to boost their image and changing the minds of global opinion in a different direction. A new body the ‘Palestinian Institute for Public Diplomacy’ is creating a Palestinian national brand and promoting it around the globe (Buck, 2011). The chief executive of Padico, Samir Hulileh says, as reported in the article ‘Palestinians seek to boost their image’ by T. Buck,
“the new Palestinian initiative, consciously echoes the long-running Israeli “Hasbarah” (ICIC – Israel Citizens Information Council ) effort to bolster its image around the world. But it also draws inspiration from Lebanon, which has undergone a striking image transformation in recent years”.
At high literacy rate of 95 per cent and by 45,000 graduates produces every year at Palestinian universities, international companies such as Cisco Systems Inc. (CSCO) has reason to outsource Palestinian companies including Asal Technologies and Exalt Technologies. Mellanox Technologies Ltd. (MLNX), an Israeli company chose the West bank after considering India and China because of lower cost and the proximity to the headquarters of Mellanox (Ackermann, 2011).
Palestinian’s “Living Links” and “Independent Actions” may well construct a new image abroad and act as creators of soft power. The Palestinian authority has so far failed to engage with its Diasporas. Not only can they return as well-educated Palestinian’ citizens, but, also be crucially important for the development of Palestine’s territories and future.
Bibliography
- Ackermann, G. (2011), Israeli Technology companies turn to west bank for outsourcing, Bloomberg, Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-15/israeli-technology-companies-turn-to-west-bank-for-outsourcing.html (Accessed 05.03.2012)
- Anholt, S (2007) ‘Competitive Identity: A new model for the brand management of nations, cities and regions’ in Policy & Practice: A Development Education Review, Vol. 4, Spring 2007, pp. 3-13, available: http://www.developmenteducationreview.com/issue4-focus1
- Buck, T. (2011), Palestinians seek to boost their image, Financial Times, Available at: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a2a65628-b131-11e0-a43e-00144feab49a.html#axzz1ntwiMfEC (Accessed 03.03.2012)
- Brown, H. (2002), Virtual war, The Jerusalem Post, 27 September 2002, http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/208068391.html?dids=208068391:208068391&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Sep+27%2C+2002&author=Hannah+Brown&pub=Jerusalem+Post&edition=&startpage=24&desc=Virtual+war
- PASSA Palestinian Academic Society for the Study of International Affairs(May 2004), Palestine Refugees, Available at: http://www.passia.org/publications/bulletins/Refugees/Pal-Refugees.pdf (Accessed 07.03.2012)
- Stoeber, Birgit (2007), ‘Place Branding – How the Private Creates the Public’ in Hans Krause Hansen and Dorte Salskov-Iversen (eds) Critical Perspectives on Private Authority in Global Politics, Pelgrave Macmillian, Ch9
- Van Ham, P. (2003), Branding territory: Inside the wonderful world of PR and IR Theory, Millennium, 31 (2): 249-269.
Websites
“There has never been a more effective salesman for American products in foreign countries than the American motion picture.”
Gerald M. Mayer (1947)
(Daily Cultural Diplomacy News 2010, online).
Public and Cultural Diplomacy (PCD) is a subject of debate amongst scholars and students of International Relations (IR); whilst some scholars have argued that Cultural diplomacy equals propaganda because of state involvement (Gienow-Hecht 2010,9), others have commended it for being instrumental to bringing the cold war to a non-violent end. Falk noted that “Whilst political calculations, economic programmes and military technologies helped wage the war, cultural programs and commodities helped end it” (2010:214). In recent years, government of different countries in an attempt to find ways to establish good and lasting relationships with public of other countries are resorting to cultural diplomacy.
Undoubtedly, there is no universally agreed definition for cultural diplomacy, as it can mean different thing to different people; but for the purpose of this blog, cultural diplomacy will be defined as “the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their people in order to foster mutual understanding” (Waller 2007, 169). Based on this definition, it is obvious that cultural diplomacy goes hand in hand with public diplomacy, as cultural act are the best ways for nations to sell itself to others.
Like most developed countries, the Canadian government are taking advantage of the positive effects of Cultural diplomacy in an attempt to rebrand the image of Canada abroad. One of the ways they do this is by sending groups of Aboriginal leaders to foreign countries to discuss the history of Canada’s treatment of its first people; thereby sending the message that it is an open nation, willing to discuss the darker parts of its past(Potter 2009, 103). Although this will not erase the past events, rather it has made publics of other nations more receptive of Canada and what it represents in present times, rather than judging them on events of the past. Germany is another country that has recently adopted similar approach to dealing with the period of Nazi dictatorship (Potter 2009, 103).
Evidently, although opinions might vary as to the real intentions behind a country’s use of its culture for diplomatic purposes; be it as propaganda, as dissent, as a neutral content amongst others (Falk 2010, 214); what matters is that it has helped in not only changing the perception of a certain country’s public towards another country, it has also opened their eyes to different and possibly better way of living. The Middle Eastern Revolution and Occupy Campaigns are few examples of how cultural diplomacy is changing the world for better.
(Jilani 2011, OWNI.EU online).
The image above displayed on placards used by protesters during the revolutions in Libya and Egypt respectively; depicts “fighting till the end”; but most interesting the wording is a line from reggae musician Bob Marley’s 1973 hit “Get up Stand Up”, which is evidence that culture is going a long way uniting people of different back grounds, identity and beliefs. What better way to conclude than to say that cultural diplomacy is very important in contemporary times and possibly as it did during the cold war, will be significant to the peaceful resolution of future conflicts.
Bibliography:
Cultural Diplomacy News, (July 14, 2010). Creating Cultural Dialogue Between Europe and Its Muslim Population. Available on: http://dailyculturaldiplomacynews.wordpress.com/tag/morocco/. [Accessed on: 26th February, 2012].
Falk A.J, (2010). Upstaging the Cold War: American Dissent and Cultural Diplomacy. U.S.A; University of Massachusetts Press.
Gienow-Hecht J.C.E, (2010). What Are We Searching For? Culture, Diplomacy, Agents and the State. In (Ed.) Gienow-Hecht J.C.E & Donfried M.C, (2010). Searching For A Cultural Diplomacy. U.S.A; Berghahn Books.
Jilani. Z, (2011). Five Arab Countries That the “Jasmine Revolution” May Spread to Next. OWNI.EU News (17 February, 2011). Available on: http://owni.eu/2011/02/17/five-arab-countries-that-the-%E2%80%98jasmine-revolution%E2%80%99-may-spread-to-next/. [Accessed on: 26th February, 2012].
Potter E.H, (2009). Branding Canada: Projecting Canada’s Soft Power through Public Diplomacy. Canada; McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Waller J.M, (2007). The Public Diplomacy Reader. U.S.A; The Institute of World Politics Press.
Welcome to Public and Cultural Diplomacy, a group blog by students on the eponymous module at London Metropolitan University. Please leave them some comments on their work. They will be pleased to hear from you and to know that their work is being read beyond the campus.
Thank you.
Steven Curtis (s.curtis@londonmet.ac.uk)
Public and Cultural Diplomacy 5 