Public Diplomacy - The most important aspect of New Diplomacy

"By the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more together than we can alone"

– Tony Blair

Public Diplomacy strives to attain the impossible. Politics isn’t just Westminster, Pennsylvania Avenue, Rosenbad or the Leinster House. Political change, in the form of social action, can arise from any aspect of society. If passion for local, national or international issues can be ignited, the general public will be more likely to be aware of and involved in political discourse, alter the opinions of those in positions of influence and “place their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day”. Public diplomacy is founded on the idea that, given most populations has the ability to legally overthrow their government at election time, people are the basis of power and influence. It is a battle for hearts and minds whereby the rules of engagement are fluid and confrontations can occur in a structured form or through the utilisation of guerrilla tactics.

The use of heightened emotions and a desire to act following 9/11 serves as a fruitful example of the ability to utilise both the zeitgeist and the public to achieve an ends. Perhaps the greatest illustration of the politicisation of public emotion is Tony Blair’s October 2001 party conference speech. Similar to Bush, although with somewhat more skill, Blair used embracing, comforting rhetoric to corral the public and direct them towards the path of action he deemed necessary. The power of public diplomacy comes from its flexibility. Largely free of the strict governing rules and procedures which impede other forms of diplomatic engagement, persuasive techniques may be applied in a variety of forms and contexts. This is clearly shown in the build up to the invasion of Afghanistan. Here we saw the leaders of two of the most powerful nations in the world playing off the concern and compassion of their people, and of the global community, to gain support for their arguments.

However, the very administrations that had shown masterful use of public diplomacy years prior soon forget the extent of its importance. The Bush administration’s over-emphasis on physical force and divisive rhetoric in the build up to the Iraq war left it vulnerable to failure from the outset. Neglect of the power of the public would soon prove to be far more dangerous than may have been expected.

No force, no matter how great, no matter how strong their arsenal can eliminate a deviant subgroup of a society without the support of the society as a whole. In fact, as was shown in the tribal regions of Afghanistan and in certain areas of Iraq, the neglect of the battle to win hearts and minds served in some way to strengthen the cause and level of support for the very individuals that the allies sought to isolate and exterminate. This was not a wasted lesson however as the Bush administration and the current Obama administration both have included- personally and financially supported- acts of public diplomacy as part of and alongside military action (as illustrated in the image below).

In fact, the Obama administration has relied heavily on public diplomacy from the inception of its campaign. What began as a mission to convince and rally the American people with a message of hope and collective responsibility continued to become a call to action for those in far off lands and on distant shores.

Obama style public diplomacy incorporates not just political actors but also citizens. Although involved through marriage, it should be remembered that Michelle Obama is not an elected official. Yet she too is offered as a diplomatic tool to conjure support for the American outlook.