It is rather difficult to choose the most important aspects of the new diplomacy as we all know that there are quite a few significant features which distinguish new diplomacy from the traditional one. These very aspects are equally important as all have a great impact on the environment in which diplomacy is operating. Here, for instance, we can mention the emergence of public diplomacy or multilateral meetings and NGOs. Nevertheless, the participation of NGOs in diplomatic negotiations deserves special attention and, in my opinion, it is also the most important aspect on the New Diplomacy. Namely, NGOs play an important role in mediation and preventing conflicts before they become a real issue. Unlike governments, NGOs have an ability to detect conflict endangered situations because they work closely with grassroots in conflicting societies. They are also in a position where they can press governments to respond to the issues without complicating the international situation. Consequently, the effectiveness of their diplomatic initiatives has given them ‘prominence as international actors’ (Feilleux, 2009:103). Moreover, the fact that NGOs work closely with government representatives on international level is of great significance. They became valuable advisers to UN and other institutions as they posses advanced research skills and specialised researchers on issues which governments, for instance, lack in capabilities. In addition, NGOs represent the civil society which actively participates in international affairs and influences policy-making processes what was not possible any time earlier. I believe that for this reason NGOs role as a partner in diplomatic activities deserves special attention and acknowledgment.
Sources:
Jean-Robert Leguey-Feilleux, The Dynamics of Diplomacy, 2009
Wednesday, 14 April 2010
Saturday, 10 April 2010
The most important aspect of New Diplomacy.
It is important to critically analyse the important facet of the New Diplomacy at level different and higher plain as the Diplomacy itself is very narrow focus. The most important aspects of the new diplomacy is multilateral diplomacy and the public diplomacy. If we look in to old Diplomacy there are several changes which have uplifted the agenda of diplomacy at higher place. For e.g. NGOs and non-state actors do not participate or contribute towards any policy making, discussion making and several negotiation process but with the new diplomacy, the non-state actors and NGOs with the help of media holds more strengths in process, discussion makings and agendas settings.
The benefit of this phenomenon of multilateral diplomacy has lobby the whole process with considering and attempting the negotiations, processes of policy and agendas settings with different point of view and referring with public diplomacy and involvement of NGOs and Non-state actors can put weight on pan of beam balance which represents the decisions makings. Taking the decision on the platform of Human rights, environmental issues, Human security these non-stators like Amnesty International, Greenpeace etc. have played pivotal role. I hence believe that non-governmental organisations, environmentalist, public opinion, news media, even celebrities seem to have an effect in a way diplomacy is portrayed.
I can conclude that there is lot more beyond just that can be looked but there are two sides of coins so there are also some issues that are still compromised, ignored and overshadowed. Below video by Dr.Linton has helped to some extent to run brain storm.
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Public diplomacy,new approaches
The relationship between states has improved considerably in the 21st century, with the development of common interest economically and even politically; but every country is in pursuit of its own interest as realists argue and in order to achieve that,it need to demonstrate its commitment and reliability to the other parties where their interests lie.This is where public diplomacy come to play as it aims at getting through to governments through their people via different the media, universities etc... Their understanding of foreign policy and cultures can win their hearts and minds and change their perception of other societies which is vital in a time when public opinion is an important tool to influence government policies. The High Commissioner of Ghana , Professor Kwaku Danso-Boafo, stressed the importance of promoting countries interests in areas such as tourism to attract potential investors in Ghana, for the development of Trade and Investments sector. Even the USA is adopting new approaches to their strategic communication and public diplomacy. This link contains videos in relation to these strategies.http://www.gwu.edu/~ipdgc/events/index.cfm.
Subtle attack
CNN, BBC and many other local and international broadcasters, allow people all over the world see many things by just changing the channels on the television. While this is the role as a well established broadcaster’s duty but along the way it not only promotes public diplomacy that affects many nations all over the world. As most states are interdependent yet when it comes to their own states interests many states would use public diplomacy.
According to the US Department of State public diplomacy is the government sponsored programs intended to inform or influence public opinion in other countries. The best example in the recent history was the ‘War on Terrorism’ how United States used an advertisement to promote the fact that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks. In an article written by Peter Baker for the Washington Post on September, 12th in 2007 and he starts his article with these lines. “The television commercial is grim and gripping: A soldier who lost both legs in an explosion near Fallujah explains why he thinks U.S. forces need to stay in Iraq. They attacked us," he says as the screen turns to an image of the second hijacked airplane heading toward the smoking World Trade Centre on Sept. 11, 2001. "And they will again. They won't stop in Iraq." In the following paragraph he continues to write “Every investigation has shown that Iraq did not, in fact, have anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks. But the ad, part of a new $15 million media blitz launched by an advocacy group allied with the White House, may be the most overt attempt during the current debate in Congress over the war to link the attacks with Iraq.” Even though this was an advertisement that was shown only in USA it still did have an impact on the way people (Public in United States) approached the War on Terror.
As countries pursue their own goals in this complex world, most broadcasters are only eager to either give it more coverage through which governments do hope to reach masses. As research show common citizens are easily persuaded and can be directed otherwise. Although most governments do what is best for the state and its people majority tends to manipulate and misdirect the public for their own interest.
Public Diplomacy in that sense has reached a broader arena where the public has an impact on the state compared to traditional diplomacy where the focal discussions where only conduct by the governments and most areas of discussion were rather obscure to the public. While public diplomacy is a new technique in bringing down the enemy, it also does promote things such as Human Rights, Good Governance and also it merely defines that states can be a victim of public diplomacy.
Taking in to consideration the gravity of public diplomacy it should be noted that in traditional diplomacy states did try to resolve issues through discussions while media, internet(Barrack Obama campaign) and many other sources can be used in a way of promoting state goals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3NU4d81Ps4
According to the US Department of State public diplomacy is the government sponsored programs intended to inform or influence public opinion in other countries. The best example in the recent history was the ‘War on Terrorism’ how United States used an advertisement to promote the fact that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks. In an article written by Peter Baker for the Washington Post on September, 12th in 2007 and he starts his article with these lines. “The television commercial is grim and gripping: A soldier who lost both legs in an explosion near Fallujah explains why he thinks U.S. forces need to stay in Iraq. They attacked us," he says as the screen turns to an image of the second hijacked airplane heading toward the smoking World Trade Centre on Sept. 11, 2001. "And they will again. They won't stop in Iraq." In the following paragraph he continues to write “Every investigation has shown that Iraq did not, in fact, have anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks. But the ad, part of a new $15 million media blitz launched by an advocacy group allied with the White House, may be the most overt attempt during the current debate in Congress over the war to link the attacks with Iraq.” Even though this was an advertisement that was shown only in USA it still did have an impact on the way people (Public in United States) approached the War on Terror.
As countries pursue their own goals in this complex world, most broadcasters are only eager to either give it more coverage through which governments do hope to reach masses. As research show common citizens are easily persuaded and can be directed otherwise. Although most governments do what is best for the state and its people majority tends to manipulate and misdirect the public for their own interest.
Public Diplomacy in that sense has reached a broader arena where the public has an impact on the state compared to traditional diplomacy where the focal discussions where only conduct by the governments and most areas of discussion were rather obscure to the public. While public diplomacy is a new technique in bringing down the enemy, it also does promote things such as Human Rights, Good Governance and also it merely defines that states can be a victim of public diplomacy.
Taking in to consideration the gravity of public diplomacy it should be noted that in traditional diplomacy states did try to resolve issues through discussions while media, internet(Barrack Obama campaign) and many other sources can be used in a way of promoting state goals.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3NU4d81Ps4
public diplomacy in contemporary world politics
Public diplomacy can be defined as; manipulation of public opinion through mass media for political goals, it can be either honest or dishonest, for long term or short term. Also public diplomacy can be used to change foreign public opinions as well as the domestic opinion.
As an example we can take Turkey’s image on abroad. Generally, traditional, practical historic expressions, broadcast and entertainment media in European countries tend to introduce Turkey “Islamic”, beyond Europe and repressive. For example; the movie Midnight Express’ negative effects on Turkey and Turks are inevitable and the damage caused by the movie still continues to effect the image of Turkey.
Although the prime minister ( Recep Tayyip Erdogan) ‘s wife’s scarf reinforced the “Islamic” impression about Turkey, Turkey is neither as “religious” as European people perceived nor militarist, repressive and easternal. There is a huge gap between the reality and the image.
Therefor, as public diplomacy Turkey started to organise various activities in different countries.
To put an end to the lingering conflict between Turkey and Armenia, Turkey has bi
lled a film festival in Armenia. At the same time, one of the other aims of the festival is to introduce the real Turkey to Armenia. One of the festival’s organizers, Gevorg Vanian stated:
“Such a dialogue is important because we know only one Turkey, the one that we have created based on our dogmatic perception of that country; whereas we have to see the real one - today’s Turkey, which we, practically, know nothing about,"
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/civilsociety/articles/eav032610a.shtml
There is an another example to this is the festivals which takes place in USA every year in New York (Turkish Days in New York), Washington DC (Washington Turkish Festival), Boston ( Boston Turkish Art and Culture Festival) and Houston ( Houston Turkish Festival).
festcom@atahouston.org
http://turkishdaysinny.org
www.turkishfestival.org
As an example we can take Turkey’s image on abroad. Generally, traditional, practical historic expressions, broadcast and entertainment media in European countries tend to introduce Turkey “Islamic”, beyond Europe and repressive. For example; the movie Midnight Express’ negative effects on Turkey and Turks are inevitable and the damage caused by the movie still continues to effect the image of Turkey.
Although the prime minister ( Recep Tayyip Erdogan) ‘s wife’s scarf reinforced the “Islamic” impression about Turkey, Turkey is neither as “religious” as European people perceived nor militarist, repressive and easternal. There is a huge gap between the reality and the image.
Therefor, as public diplomacy Turkey started to organise various activities in different countries.
To put an end to the lingering conflict between Turkey and Armenia, Turkey has bi
lled a film festival in Armenia. At the same time, one of the other aims of the festival is to introduce the real Turkey to Armenia. One of the festival’s organizers, Gevorg Vanian stated:“Such a dialogue is important because we know only one Turkey, the one that we have created based on our dogmatic perception of that country; whereas we have to see the real one - today’s Turkey, which we, practically, know nothing about,"
http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/civilsociety/articles/eav032610a.shtml
There is an another example to this is the festivals which takes place in USA every year in New York (Turkish Days in New York), Washington DC (Washington Turkish Festival), Boston ( Boston Turkish Art and Culture Festival) and Houston ( Houston Turkish Festival).
festcom@atahouston.org
http://turkishdaysinny.org
www.turkishfestival.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
