Continued.....
B. The Changing Nature of
Diplomacy – A Theoretical Review
As public diplomacy and strategic
communications experts continue to explore the potential of the relatively new
social media, one cannot deny the changing nature of the world of diplomacy. The
marvel of information and communication technology has significantly impacted
the conduct of diplomacy, which traditionally centered on government officials
and took place behind the close doors.
Although many argue that ICT is only a
tool which facilitates the overall business, but the changing nature of
diplomacy is inevitable. New technologies are impacting the policies and
changing the landscape of diplomacy, governance and international relations.
Along with the development of new
communication means and tools, we have seen novel approaches involving
information and communication technologies introduced and implemented in the
conduct of diplomacy. Websites, social media outlets, and live-chats are now
among the common platforms used by ministries and government agencies.
At the same time, those approaches and
mediums enable government officials to seek and invite new partners and
counterparts, which might include bloggers, artists and musicians. Many argue
that the “21st century statecraft” can no longer be conducted exclusively
between governments, but it must be government-to-people and people-to-people.[1]
Perhaps, it is also crucial to agree
that interconnectedness is undeniably one of the significant characters of the
21st century. So is in the business of diplomacy. With connectivity as a
crucial element in diplomacy, this is where ICT plays significant roles. Thanks
to the exponential grow of the Internet, ensuring connectivity among states and
peoples is not expensive nor complicated as it used to be. At this juncture,
e-Diplomacy, or some might say, digital diplomacy, was born.
Moreover, in order to understand further
the fascination over digital diplomacy, we need to refer to Joseph Nye’s theory
of soft power. Described as “the ability to persuade through
culture, values and ideas, as opposed to ‘hard power’, which conquers or
coerces through military might, ”it
further highlights the significant roles of “technology, education and economic
growth,” in influencing the state’s behaviors.[2]
Whilst
the ‘hard power’ approach has historically been a favored policy of governments
in conducting international and regional relations, the need for a new way of
cooperation and approach in this increasingly interconnected world is
imperative. This is where the role of soft power in the form of public
diplomacy becomes significant. Exchanges of ideas, values and cultures are
packs and parcels within the international relations and social media fits in
well with this notion. This expansive implication of soft power diplomacy has
strengthened the role social media played in shaping public policies as well as
ensuring connectivity among peoples and nations.
Here,
the significant need of networking is also highlighted. Although it has been
long recognized as one of the prerequisites of good diplomacy, but the way
diplomats expand their networks are also evolving along with the advances of
ICT. Some can argue that traditional venues such as formal meetings and
functions like diplomatic receptions will serve this purpose, but ICT has
proven to facilitate more acquaintances and sustain the relationships.[3]
Another development in the traditional
conduct of diplomacy that is relevant here is multi-track diplomacy. Clearly,
the conduct of diplomacy now involves many actors and stakeholders other than
the diplomats or government officials. These many facets of diplomacy have to
be managed and again, the evolution of public diplomacy includes the use of
powerful new tools, social media outlets, to connect cultures, increase awareness,
and advocate policy positions.
In the networked age where transparency
and accountability are highly demanded, the growing desire of governments all
over the world to have "two-way-dialogue" with their constituencies,
whether it is at national, regional as well as international level, can be
catered by social media.
In
conjunction with that, networking sites such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and
even local social media services like china’s micro blogging site, Sina Weibo,
are now common platforms used by governments to interact with public. As
expected, the U.S. is a leading player in this field, as the State Department
has spawned approximately 301 Twitter accounts and 408 Facebook pages with
millions of “followers” from every corner of the world.
Meanwhile,
most other countries still lag behind although they have embraced or even
implemented similar strategies to conquer digital diplomacy world. United
Kingdom, which ranks number four on most active Twitter user and number six for
most active Facebook members, now has around 20 of its ambassadors as active
Twitter users, following William Hague, their tweeting foreign minister.
At
individual level, no less than the late Hugo Chavez, the President of
Venezuela, managed his Twitter account actively with approximately 3.7 million
followers. Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s prime minister, has 1.5 million followers,
while Barack Obama’s twitter account has nearly 20 million followers.
Similarly, Dilma Rousseff, Brazil’s Pesident and Carl Bildt, Sweden’s Foreign
Minister, add to this extensive list. In the case of Indonesia, two striking
examples are Dino Patti Djalal, Indonesian Ambassador to the U.S., with 119.138
followers and 2,440 tweets; and Hazairin Pohan, the Head of Center for
Education and Training as well as Indonesian Ambassador to Poland from 2006 -
2011, with 17,421 tweets and 1,743 followers, in times of writing.[4]
The
European Union, which is the home of roughly 150 million of Facebook users, has
also embraces digital diplomacy, with European External Action Service (EEAS)
as the spearhead of EU’s public diplomacy. Creating Facebook page since May
2011 and maintaining two Twitter accounts, EEAS continues to improve its
engagement through social media.[5]
If
we analyze further, there are three main reasons why social media has been
successfully chosen as the new frontier of diplomacy. Firstly, social media
enables us to directly engage with citizens around the world. With millions of
subscribers from almost every corner of the world, social media can facilitate
the network expansion and make public diplomacy effective. Second, sharing information in real-time and
on global scale can be easily done. User-friendly technologies and
down-to-earth approach used in social media make the dissemination process
easier, faster, and farther. Third, intensive communication with extensive
networks in social media enables us to understandpeople and events more deeply,
giving us a more comprehensive picture of public’s aspirations and
perspectives. Therefore, further analysis on the information received through
social media will be the best use of it.
However, there are some limitations as well. We cannot
deny that the slow pace adaptation to digital diplomacy by many foreign
ministries suggest that there is a degree of uncertainty over what digital
diplomacy is and its potentials. It can be a rude awakening for governments as
digital diplomacy requires transparency, where some countries still restrict
the internet connection for their citizens. At some point, loss of control due
to public demands is the risks governments must be willing to take. In
additions, the use of social media outlets do not always yield benefits, as
people do have illicit and ill-fated purposes while using them. E-culture among
people also varies, resulting in different level of acceptability and
responsiveness towards contents distributed through social media outlets.
It
is also important to note that digital diplomacy is not, and is never meant to
be, a replacement of face-to-face diplomacy. It, in fact, builds on traditional
statecraft, incorporating the new technologies, demographics and networks of
the modern era. Social media is just a new means, new instrument, for advancing
the same end which is built on the traditional government-to-government
connections. It is indeed too naïve to believe that meaningful relationships
with and among people can be built through social networking media only. Therefore,
virtual interactions need to move forward in order to get real substantive gains
in diplomacy.
[1] Owen Henry, ““Twitter Diplomacy” Engagement Through Social Media in
21st Century Statecraft,”(Accessed 15 October 2012), in http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgl/ris.cgl?acc_num=oberlin1338307388.
[2]Joseph S. Nye, Jr., “Public Diplomacy and Soft Power,” Journal of
the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616: 94 – 109.
[3] Henry Owen, ibid.
[4] This paper was prepared in November 2012, using the latest data and
statistics during the time of writing.
[5] Megan Kena, “Social Media: following EU public diplomacy and
friending MENA”, Policy Brief, European Policy Centre, July 2011,(Accessed 15
November 2012) in http://hawk.ethz.ch/serviceengine/files/ISN/141498/epublicationdocument_singledocument/
55edfa45-e002-4363-ac6a-292ccfd9042b/en/pub_1320_social_media.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Welcome! Thanks for visiting My Purple World. I am delighted to have you all here in my blog.
If you like what you read, feel free follow this blog through the button on the right side of the blog and hope you can leave some comments too. Nevertheless, all comments with direct links will be deleted.
Terima kasih sudah mampir ke blog aku ya. Selamat menikmati dan semoga suka. Komentar akan sangat dihargai, tapi link hidup dan spam akan langsung saya hapus ya.
Happy Blogwalking and enjoy 😘