The - New - Era - of - Diplomacy - The Effects of Public Diplomacy Nation Branding and Cultural Diplomacy

Table of contents
Introduction.....................................................................................................................4
Methodology.....................................................................................................................5
An historical outline of diplomacy.................................................................................8
The resident embassy................................................................................................ 8
The French system................................................................................................... 10
The ministry of foreign affairs...................................................................................11
Public diplomacy...........................................................................................................11
Goals of public diplomacy......................................................................................... 13
Public diplomacy and propaganda............................................................................14
The established diplomacy and public diplomacy.....................................................14
Three dimensions of public diplomacy......................................................................16
e!s management............................................................................................... 16
"trategic communications.....................................................................................1#
$elationship building.............................................................................................18
Nation branding.............................................................................................................19
%n branding.............................................................................................................. &0
'imits to nation branding........................................................................................... &1
Planning branding campaigns..................................................................................&&
ultural diplomacy........................................................................................................!!
"heory.............................................................................................................................!4
"oft Po!er................................................................................................................ &(
Po!er.................................................................................................................... &(
The three chessboards of po!er...........................................................................&8
Gro!ing importance of soft po!er.........................................................................30
"oft po!er and public diplomacy...........................................................................31
1
eorealism............................................................................................................... 33
)uman beha*ior.................................................................................................... 34
"tate structure....................................................................................................... 34
+nternational anarchy............................................................................................ 3(
The international political system..........................................................................36
%n anarchy........................................................................................................... 38
%n sociali,ation..................................................................................................... 3-
.onstructi*ism.......................................................................................................... 40
The )obbesian culture.......................................................................................... 41
The 'oc/ean culture............................................................................................. 43
The 0antian culture...............................................................................................4(
The sociali,ation of international relations.............................................................4-
"ummary.............................................................................................................. (0
Analysis...........................................................................................................................51
1pplication of soft po!er........................................................................................... (1
e! !ays of conducting diplomacy......................................................................(&
2ore efficient in reaching foreign policy goals.......................................................(3
3rea/through in international relations..................................................................(3
"ummary.............................................................................................................. (4
1pplication of neorealism..........................................................................................(4
e! !ays of conducting diplomacy......................................................................((
2ore efficient in reaching foreign policy goals.......................................................((
"ummary.............................................................................................................. (6
1pplication of constructi*ism....................................................................................(6
e! !ays of conducting diplomacy......................................................................(#
2ore efficient in reaching foreign policy goals.......................................................(#
3rea/through in international relations..................................................................(8
&
"ummary.............................................................................................................. (8
onclusion......................................................................................................................59
Abstract of #"he Ne$ %ra of &iplomacy' "he %ffects of Public &iplomacy( Nation
)randing and ultural &iplomacy*............................................................................+5
3
Introduction
During my internship at the Danish Embassy in Tokyo in 2007 I learned that public
diplomacy is one of the most important concepts in the Danish Ministry of Foreign
Affairs at the moment This is underlined by the recent opening of the public diplomacy
di!ision in the ministry" #ho orchestrates the total public diplomacy effort by the
foreign ministry in close cooperation #ith the representations abroad $Ministry of
Foreign Affairs of Denmark%
At the embassy public diplomacy #as mentioned on a daily basis" but #hen asked
directly nobody could really gi!e a fulfilling ans#er for #hat it constituted and #hat
aspects it included There I later found out it #as often mi&ed up completely #ith nation
branding initiati!es and ad!ertisement in general This lack of complete understanding
for a topic e!erybody talked about but nobody seemed to be able to define completely
sparked my interest to go deeper in the topic
This tendency is not restricted to Denmark alone 'ublic diplomacy is increasingly
gaining importance in se!eral ministries of foreign affairs especially in the more
economically de!eloped countries ( notably )anada" *or#ay and the +nited ,tates all
ha!e a !ery #ell de!eloped public diplomacy The +nited ,tates has it for -uite ob!ious
reasons as it has the biggest foreign ser!ice and because they are often engaged deeper
#ith se!eral different areas around the #orld than many other states *or#ay and
)anada on the other hand are more interesting in this relation as they both ha!e
comparati!ely smaller foreign ser!ices yet they ha!e chosen to become among the
leading trend setters in relation to public diplomacy Furthermore France is note#orthy
as they ha!e the #orld.s largest funding for cultural diplomacy ( #hich is a close
relati!e of public diplomacy
The reason for the increasingly central placement of this former niche area of the
diplomatic effort has been the recognition of the !alue of winning the hearts and minds
of the people and the gro#ing importance of ci!il society in international relations ,o
the ministries of foreign affairs ha!e to #iden their focus and not /ust concentrate their
efforts on foreign go!ernment offices and the multilateral diplomacy $Melissen 20070
&!ii1&&ii%
4
A concept linked to" yet !ery different from" public diplomacy is that of nation
branding This is an approach #here go!ernments and the foreign ser!ices ha!e been
inspired by modern marketing concepts such as brand creation The thought is that it is
possible to mould people.s perception of a state or organi2ation by using some of the
same tools as commercial enterprises use to sell their products E!en though the
approach seems increasingly popular amongst #estern states it is difficult to come by
solid proof that it is #orking or that it is beneficial to use commercial approaches like
this in politics
It is -uite symptomatic that focus to a higher e&tent Is mo!ing a#ay from the traditional
approaches of the ministry of foreign affairs There is a #ide tendency to 3think outside
the bo&. in conducting foreign relation policies ( #ith !ery !arying degrees of success
Furthermore the ministries of foreign affairs in a #ide range of countries are trying to
combat pre!ious stigma of being closed" secreti!e and elitist and there seems to be an
increasing a#areness of the importance of mass media and public opinion
The thesis #ill try to unco!er #hy these ne# approaches to conducting diplomacy and
maintaining or creating good foreign relations ha!e emerged and ho# significant a role
they are and #ill be playing in international relations Furthermore it #ill be e&plored
#hether the importance of the ministries of foreign affairs can be deemed as increasing
or decreasing The problem formulation of the thesis #ill be as follo#s0
Why have several ministries of foreign affairs lately made moves to reinvent
themselves and have been introducing several new ways of conducting diplomacy? Is
the increased focus on mass media and public relations more successful in reaching
foreign policy goals compared to the traditional means of diplomatic practice and can
this constitute a breakthrough in international relations?
Methodology
This chapter #ill describe in #hat #ay the main problem #ill be approached ( including
#hich theories #ill be used and #hat role they play in the thesis" #hich data #ill be
used and the analytical approach It is the hope that this chapter #ill help gi!e a logical
(
frame#ork for the thesis" #ill help clarify #hy the thesis is structured the #ay it is and
#hy this is a suitable #ay to reach a conclusion
The theories #hich #ill be used to analy2e the problem are all based in -uite
con!entional theories #ithin international relations ( neorealism" neoliberalism and
constructi!ism The latter t#o theories ha!e been chosen because they can both be
conduci!e to the analysis of the problem instead of dismissing the importance of public
diplomacy" nation branding and similar concepts right a#ay ( #hich a theory like
neorealism #ould ha!e a tendency to do 4ithin neoliberalism the main concept used
#ill be 5oseph , *ye.s soft po#er" #hich stresses the e&istence and importance of other
po#er factors than military and economic might ( #hich he terms hard po#er The
ackno#ledgement of the po#er of attracti!eness being /ust as military and economic
po#er and #orth competing o!er #ill help /ustify the e&istence and gro#ing importance
of public diplomacy" nation branding and other communicati!e strategies of conducting
foreign affairs and #ill ultimately ( it is hoped ( pro!ide a path to understanding
#hether these approaches signify a more effecti!e #ay of achie!ing foreign policy goals
compared to traditional diplomatic tools
)onstructi!ism #ill be used as it can possibly attribute e!en more importance to the
increased focus on dialogue and communication in international relations than
neoliberalism and soft po#er can The reason for this being that constructi!ism is more
open to the potential change of the most basic of mechanisms in international relations
Therefore it #ill be e&plored #hether the ne# approaches might be a tool of states to
change the most basic premises of the community of states in the #orld of today
The final theory utili2ed in the thesis #ill be neorealism The choice has fallen upon this
theory to maintain a critical !ie# of the ne# communicati!e approaches to diplomacy
and international relations and -uestion the importance of it altogether Furthermore it
#ill pose counter arguments to the other t#o theories and thereby help dri!ing forth the
analysis and discussion of the problem
6
It is standing out that the choices of theories are all !ery state1centred #hich might be
considered as -uite old1fashioned" but taking the problem formulation in to account this
is the most ob!ious #ay to approach the problem As focus is on the traditional
diplomacy and its utili2ation of these ne# concepts the theoretical focus #ill therefore
also need to be centred on state agents E!en though international organi2ations" *67s"
big business and ci!il society in general all can be in!ol!ed in both public diplomacy"
nation branding or cultural diplomacy in one #ay or the other focus remains on state
institutions and their !ie#s on international relations
After this chapter of methodology the empirical chapters #ill follo# These #ill include
a short outline of the de!elopment of traditional diplomacy and ministries of foreign
affairs #hich #ill set the setting from #here the ne# concepts #ill ha!e to be !ie#ed in
relations to the scope of the thesis The short outline #ill be follo#ed by a presentation
of the three communicati!e aspects of the ne# #ay of conducting diplomacy" namely (
public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural diplomacy The main focus #ill be on
the concept of public diplomacy as this must be deemed the most significant ne#
approach to diplomacy and foreign affairs )ultural diplomacy is not a ne# concept in
international relations but #ill be presented together #ith public diplomacy and nation
branding nonetheless as it is so closely related to these and o!erlaps the t#o other
concepts in se!eral areas
After the empirical chapter the three theories mentioned abo!e #ill be presented and
discussed after #hich the analysis #ill follo# In the analysis the e&planatory models of
the three theories abo!e #ill be applied to the empirical e!idence and #ill be poised
against each other The analysis #ill generally be -uite hea!y on the theoretical side as
the ne# public diplomacy in particular still is a fairly ne# phenomenon and difficult to
measure in general so undisputable empirical e!idence is generally limited and difficult
to come by Furthermore it is the theoretical discussion #hich is truly the most
interesting aspect of the possibilities of public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural
diplomacy" as this cannot be ans#ered unless one has a clear understanding" or rather
belief" of ho# the dynamics of international relations truly #ork and #hether the
mechanisms are static or not As an e&tension to this" the data #hich #ill be used in the
thesis #ill be of a secondary character
#
An historical outline of diplomacy
As the main premise of this thesis is in!ol!ing the changed focus of the traditional
diplomatic institutions an outline of ho# diplomacy #as established and e!ol!ed is
essential to maintain the rele!ance of the problem itself Furthermore e&panding this
historical outline to co!er diplomacy in general is thought to pro!ide a fundamental
basis of understanding for ho# public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural
diplomacy potentially might benefit from the diplomatic machinery already in place (
ie the contacts and reputation of the embassies and to a lesser e&tent the consulates
might ha!e
Diplomacy is as old as ci!ili2ation itself" #ith the first signs of rudimentary diplomatic
acti!ity taking place as long ago as possibly the fourth millennium 8) in the near and
middle east At this time the diplomatic acti!ity #as -uite sporadic as communication
o!er long distances by traders and messengers #as !ery slo# and unpredictable In
anti-uity diplomatic practice began to e!ol!e both in fre-uency and in mutually
accepted norms ( such as diplomatic immunity This can possibly be attributed to the
multitude of small ( usually coastal ( 6reek city states compared to the large inland
empires of the ancient *ear and Middle East $8erridge 20090 :12%
The resident embassy
During the middle ages the diplomatic system had entrenched itself into t#o main types
of en!oys ( the nuncius and the plenipotentiary The plenipotentiary #as tra!elling as
the direct representati!e of his liege usually of high nobility and had full negotiation
po#ers #hereas the nuncius #as limited to deli!ering a message ,ending off an
embassy each time negotiations bet#een states #ould take place became !ery e&pensi!e
and troublesome due to the pomp and often -uarrels bet#een the negotiators about
precedence and ceremony 'artly due to this the resident embassy #as born in the
Italian city states in the late fifteenth century It #as also soon disco!ered that not only
#as ha!ing a resident embassy #ithin a state cost effecti!e but also beneficial in the
creation of contacts" creating a better understanding of the state and thereby creating an
in!aluable source of information $8erridge 20090 :0;1:0<%
8
)ontemporary of the creation of the resident embassy #as the infamous political
philosopher and career diplomat *iccolo Machia!elli and" although he didn.t spend
much time theori2ing about diplomacy as such" he had some interesting opinions on
diplomatic practice #hich illustrate the crossroads of #hich Italy around :900 can be
seen Machia!elli belie!ed in permanent diplomacy #ithin all courts important to a
country ( both #ith friends and foes" as you ne!er could kno# #hen a friend turned into
a foe E!en though Machia!elli #as in fa!or of the ne# modern resident diplomacy his
ideas #ere in many #ays far from #hat #ould later become the #idely accepted
diplomatic norms For one he #as in strong fa!or fre-uent use of deception and bribery
to achie!e goals ( #hich in later diplomatic practice #ould be ad!ised against as it in
the long run #ould ruin the reputation and credibility of the embassy and in turn their
home go!ernment Also" he didn.t see the diplomat as being part of an international
system but rather merely ser!ing selfish interests for the diplomat himself and for the
state he ser!ed in #hat he sa# as the almost continuous state of #ar bet#een states
$8erridge 200:0 2:12=%
A later but !ery important diplomatic thinker #as the de facto ruler of France :>2=1
:>=2 ( )ardinal ?ichelieu @e #as a strong proponent of diplomacy and preferred it
much to the use of brute force" particularly ?ichelieu is kno#n for his concept of
continuous negotiation 8y this he means that the state must ha!e diplomatic
representations in all courts ( e!en #here it doesn.t seem #orth#hile Furthermore the
representations shall not be limited to gathering information but must conduct
negotiations at all times to reach ob/ecti!es e!en #here the ob/ecti!e seems difficult if
not impossible to reach or #here no interesting ob/ecti!es are to be found *egotiations
doesn.t necessarily ha!e to take place along the established channels either they can be
done in secrecy too if that is preferable 8ut the most important goal for ?ichelieu is the
reputation of the state and the so!ereign ( #ho is the embodiment of the state Through
the !ast net#ork of diplomatic representations France in this case #ould ha!e a large
amount of diplomatic agents speaking the case of their home country in all countries
The continuous negotiation is therefore in many cases only secondarily intended to
achie!e specific political or economic goals" but primarily a #ay of ad!ocating the
!ie#points of the French state and increase a#areness and perhaps in time support for
these causes $8erridge 200:0 7:1;2%
-
?ichelieu can in this regard be seen as much ahead of his time as much of his
continuous negotiation concept can be seen as a form of proto1nation branding or public
diplomacy centuries before these concepts #ere e!en coined
The French system
As the diplomatic practice became more ingro#n it began to be institutionali2ed As
?ichelieu had recommended diplomatic representations had become more #idespread
and permanent and the role of the resident embassy gradually increased its status (
#here it pre!iously primarily #as the occasional special en!oys that had the highest
status it #as no# the ambassador This institutionali2ation of diplomatic practice
created a sense of professionalism and collegiality bet#een the diplomats in the
different capitals ( the notion of the diplomatic corps #as created The diplomatic corps
became a !aluable source of information for all in!ol!ed diplomats as #ell as ha!ing
some similarities #ith a trade union as all the diplomats had some similar interests" such
as maintaining the diplomatic immunity $8erridge 20090 ::2%
Another de!elopment introduced #ith the French system of diplomacy #as that of
secrecy *egotiations generally began to be held in secrecy in order for both parties to
ha!e a bit more lee#ay in the process #ithout ha!ing too much interference from the
negotiators home go!ernments or from public sentiment This secret style of negotiation
#as fa!ored because usually both parties of a negotiation #ould need to gi!e in on some
areas to reach a deal This #ould be easier to present to their go!ernment and in turn the
public after the deal had been struck +nfortunately this also stigmati2ed the diplomatic
corps as being closed and unapproachably" #hich is a reputation that might limit their
success in public diplomacy unless the image undergoes a change
As the diplomatic practice had become institutionali2ed some dilemmas became !isibly
7ne of the main dilemmas #as the tradeoff bet#een e&perience and loyalty The longer
time a diplomat #as stationed at a location the larger chance he had of establishing an
in!aluable net#ork of contacts and gains a deeper understanding of the place he #as
stationed 7n the other hand" diplomats #ho #ere stationed at the same location for
long stretches of time ran the risk of going native This means that the diplomat can
10
begin to ha!e more sympathetic !ie#s of the policies and !ie#points of the place he is
stationed rather than his home go!ernment To a!oid this" ministries of foreign affairs
generally imposed a time limit for ho# long a diplomat could be allo#ed to be stationed
at the same location" #hich still is in effect to this day $8erridge 20090 ::01::=%
The ministry of foreign affairs
The ministry of foreign affairs is a fairly ne# in!ention in the #orld of diplomatic
practice E!en though the first ministry of foreign affairs #as created by )ardinal
?ichelieu in France it didn.t spread that much before the end of the eighteenth century"
#hen the ministries #ere opened in countries such as +nited Aingdom and the ne#ly
independent +nited ,tates It #asn.t until the nineteenth century real importance can be
put on the ministry
The reason for the creation of the ministries has primarily been to standardi2e
diplomatic procedures" create consistency in policies and pro!ide analysis of reports
recei!ed from the diplomatic representations In many countries there has been a sharp
distinction bet#een the #ork of the ministry at home and the #ork of the
representations abroad ( often separate career paths #ithin each sector ,maller
countries tend to ha!e the areas mi&ed though $8erridge 20090 91;%
Ministries of foreign affairs are usually the entity organi2ing and planning strategies of
public diplomacy though they #ill also include se!eral other organi2ations" institutions
and other groupings 8elo# follo#s a more in depth presentation of public diplomacy
and ho# it is practiced
Public diplomacy
As it has been made clear abo!e" diplomatic practice has al#ays been centered on
official bilateral or multilateral channels of communication bet#een states and has
usually been shrouded in secrecy 4hile this traditional diplomacy #ill continue to be
essential for states to conduct their foreign relations" se!eral go!ernments ha!e begun to
reali2e that it is necessary not only to target foreign go!ernments in their efforts to reach
foreign policy goals 7ne of the most notable products of this reali2ation has been the
11
gro#th of public diplomacy ( ie diplomacy targeted not at foreign go!ernments but
rather at selected segments of foreign publics The practitioners of public diplomacy
#ill utili2e se!eral tools in their efforts to clarify the policies of their go!ernment to
a!oid misunderstandings based on propaganda or lack of information in the hope of
e!entually #inning the hearts and minds of foreign publics This chapter #ill go in
depth #ith the e&ploration of public diplomacy goals and tools $?oss 20020 79177%
*e# public diplomacy is based on a number of principles #hich distinguishes it clearly
from other related topics These principles can help to gi!e a basic o!er!ie# of the
concept and are as follo#s0
1. dialogue, not monologue. To awaken understanding and wanting to
understand
2. integration in the other diplomacy from the beginning
3. cooperation with non-state partners
. work after the network method, not the hierarchical method
!. coherence between the public diplomacy work at home and abroad
". tailored solutions for assignments# There is no common definition or common
behavior which fits everyone.$
%. honest and reliable information, not propaganda
8. observer role, i.e. registration of other countries& behavior in the area with later
reporting back to the home country.$
1
$Andreasen 20070 B;1B<%
This di!erse concept occupying the crossroads bet#een communication strategy"
propaganda" cultural diplomacy and traditional diplomatic practice #ill be presented
and e&plored in further detail in this chapter The aim of the chapter is to pro!ide a
1
Translated from 4anish5 15 dialog 6 i//e monolog. 1t *7//e til forst8else og at *ille forst8 &5
integration i det 9*rige diplomati fra startfasen 35 samarbe:de med i//e;statslige partnere 45
arbe:de efter net*7r/smetoden6 i//e den hierar/is/e metode (5 sammenh7ng mellem public
diplomacy;arbe:det i h:emlandet og udland 65 s/r7ddersyede opga*el9sninger5 <4er er ingen
f7lles definition eller f7lles adf7rd som passer alle.< #5 7rlige og p8lidelige informationer6 i//e
propaganda 85 obser*at9rrolle6 d*s. registrering af andre landes adf7rd p8 omr8det med
efterf9lgende indberetning til den h:emlige instans.
1&
thorough basis for a later analysis of this and related diplomaticCcommunicati!e
practices in order to conclude #hether it is a more effecti!e means of reaching foreign
policy goals or not
Goals of public diplomacy
'ublic diplomacy can make impacts on se!eral le!els depending on ho# successful the
public diplomacy initiati!es are conducted" for ho# long they run and ho# many
resources are in!ested in them The possible achie!ements for public diplomacy are
listed belo# in a hierarchical order0
'ncreasing people&s familiarity with one&s country (making them think about it,
updating their images, turning around unfavourable opinions)
'ncreasing people&s appreciation of one&s country (creating positive
perceptions, getting others to see issues of global importance from the same
perspective)
*ngaging people with one&s country (strengthening ties + from education reform
to scientific co-operation, encouraging people to see us as an attractive
destination for tourism, study, distance learning, getting them to buy our
products, getting to understand and subscribe to our values)
'nfluencing people (getting companies to invest, publics to back our positions or
politicians to turn to us as a favoured partner)$ $Deonard 20020 <1:0%
,o the goals of public diplomacy can span a !ast area from basically introducing the
country to targeted audiences or dispelling any misperceptions they might ha!e about it
to acti!ely engaging people #ith the country by attracting people there for sightseeing"
studies or making in!estments or political deals The hopes of #hat to e&pect of public
diplomacy initiati!es relies on ho# the relations already are and in #hich areas mainly
are sought strengthened ( be it political" economic or cultural relations
13
ublic diplomacy and propaganda
It can be tempting to see public diplomacy as a more easily digestible term for #hat has
al#ays gone under the name of propaganda Although the concepts are related in that
they both seek to affect the opinions of foreign publics they are" needless to say" !ery
different too 6enerally speaking" propaganda seeks to narro# do#n the hori2on of
people by trying to mould their minds through any means necessary #hile public
diplomacy stri!es to open the minds of people through information and education
'ublic diplomacy of course has the moti!es to broaden the minds of people in #hat they
see as the right direction and has a specific agenda but it can be more helpful to see it as
counter-propaganda or the breaking do#n of pre/udices the recei!er has of the sender
'ublic diplomacy has furthermore borro#ed crucial e&periences from the con!entional
diplomacy ( namely lies and disinformation is in the long run !ery counter1producti!e
and should ne!er be done As soon as diplomatic practitioners are caught in spreading
disinformation in any area it undermines all their #ork and the messages they ha!e been
trying to send out $Melissen 20070 :>1:<%
A final distinction bet#een propaganda and public diplomacy is" #hile propaganda
continuously spreads messages to its targeted audiences public diplomacy utili2es a
t#o1#ay communication strategy 'ractitioners of public diplomacy has to listen to
#hat their audiences thinks and has to say about them and their go!ernments" since this
#ill pro!ide them more credibility and opportunity to continuously tailor the messages
they are sending out to ha!e the biggest positi!e impact The key is not the amount of
information sent out but rather finding out the most effecti!e #ay to deli!er the correct
message by the right means to achie!e the best result An understanding of the situation
and general !ie#points of different segments of the target population has to be
de!eloped in order to achie!e these results $Deonard 20020 =>1=<%
The established diplomacy and public diplomacy
The emergence of the ne# public diplomacy has created a !ast array of conundrums for
the established diplomatic community and their ministries of foreign affairs 7ne of the
biggest challenges in this regard is ho# to integrate this ne# area in the diplomatic
14
organi2ation The !ery nature of public diplomacy is to seem open and outreaching
#hich historically has not been one of the strongest suits of the diplomatic corps ( #ho
al#ays has had an aura of secrecy and inapproachability about it This is because as
mentioned earlier partly because it has pre!iously been necessary for them to conduct
negotiations #ith counterparts and to in!estigate situations of the countries they are
stationed in ( neither of #hich is an area conduci!e to a culture of openness $@ocking
20070 B91=0%
The reason openness is a necessity for successful public diplomacy is not only that it
targets foreign publics but also that it is useful to include other organi2ations in parts of
the public diplomacy strategies )ooperation #ith *67s" the pri!ate sector $including
mass media% or other state organi2ations $ie ministries of education" tradeCeconomy or
culture% are all ob!ious means of enhancing the impacts of the strategies as the
ministries of foreign affairs #ill ine!itably ha!e limited resources and connections $!an
@am 200B0 =B21=BB%
These groupings and organi2ations are necessary to include in any public diplomacy
strategy as they ha!e e&pertise kno#ledge in areas the ministry of foreign affairs and
their staff lacks Furthermore the incorporation of *67s and ci!il society can gi!e an
aura of credibility to public diplomacy initiati!es #hich go!ernment officials #ould
ne!er be able to do ( especially to#ards potentially hostile population segments The
in!ol!ement of non1go!ernmental actors should both include people and organi2ations
in the sending and recei!ing countries and could include /ournalists" uni!ersities"
indi!idual academics" businessmen or artists /ust to mention a fe# The most interesting
for public diplomacy planners are to get people and organi2ations in!ol!ed #ith the
strategy in the recei!ing country" but it #ill often be necessary to recruit people in the
sending country first to gi!e the initiati!e credibility 7ne of the big challenges for the
traditional diplomacy #ill therefore be to include more actors and begin to sho# more
openness $?iordan 20070 <01<:%
1(
Three dimensions of public diplomacy
'ublic diplomacy acti!ities can roughly be di!ided in to three dimensions depending on
the specific needs in different scenarios These three dimensions are reacti!e" proacti!e
and relationship building ( and can be directed to#ards the politicalCmilitary" economic
or societalCcultural areas or any combination of these The reacti!e !ariation of public
diplomacy practice centers on ne#s management and is a !ery short term strategy to
spread the official opinion of the go!ernment about any ne#s affecting it in any #ay
The proacti!e approach is a medium term strategy to acti!ely create positi!e ne#s
regarding any messages go!ernments #ant to send out ( for e&ample through the
organi2ation of e!ents and acti!ities Finally the relationship building approach is the
long term strategy to create" maintain and impro!e relations bet#een foreign people and
the sending country This takes years of funding of programs of for e&ample scholarship
sponsoring 8elo# follo#s a more in depth presentation of the three dimensions
$Deonard 20020 :01::%
Ne$s management
This dimension of public diplomacy includes a short term rapid response strategy The
main idea behind this approach is that #hen something happens in the #orld #hich
might affect people.s perception of a go!ernment it is necessary to react fast and ensure
the go!ernment.s official positions are e&plained and clarified to the public 7ne ma/or
obstacle for this approach is that it is !ery difficult to tailor a message to a certain group
of people as most people around the #orld #ill ha!e access to more or less the same
information and #ill also hear #hat go!ernment officials has to say about an issue This
can be illustrated !ery #ell #ith follo#ing -uote of )olin 'o#ell about his time in the
6ulf 4ar #here he told his staff0
&-emember, when we are out there on television, communicating instantaneously
around the world, we&re talking to five audiences.& .ne, the reporters who ask the
/uestion + important audience. 0econd audience, the 1merican people who are
watching. The third audience, 1%2 capitals who may have an interest in what the
sub3ect is. 4ourth, you are talking to your enemy. 't was a uni/ue situation to know that
16
your enemy was getting the clearest indication of your intentions by watching you on
television at the same time you were giving that message. 1nd fifth, you were talking to
the troops. Their lives were on the line.$ $Deonard 20020 :21:B%
This illustrates the dilemma practitioners of public diplomacy faces #hen confronted
#ith con!entional mass media It is problematic to con!ey a message in a rhetoric
#hich #ill not be misconstrued by some of the audience The public diplomacy plans
can easily be scrapped in fa!or of pleasing domestic cro#ds
A #ay to direct the correct communication to a chosen foreign public or grouping in
another country to the fullest effect is to increase support and potentially funding for
local media 8y funneling the messages #hich is in correlation #ith the public
diplomacy strategy through local media #ith a limited audience" it is easier to tailor a
message #hich #ill pro!ide a satisfactory result in relation to this local audience This
approach can be enhanced further if one of the locals con!ey this message as the
audience #ill belie!e more in one of their o#n than in foreign go!ernment
representati!es ( especially in areas hostile to#ards the sending go!ernment $@offman
20020 <:1<B%
,trategic communications
This dimension of public diplomacy represents the medium1term strategy #hich lasts
for months at a time This approach emphasi2es on setting the ne#s agenda instead of
/ust responding to #hat is happening and can be done through e!ents or organi2ing
advertisement campaigns ( #here public diplomacy begins to o!erlap to#ards its
related concept of nation branding The strategic communication strategy can be aimed
at impro!ing relations in either political" economical and cultural areas or any
combination of these E!ents could be anything from hosting the 7lympics or a summit
on global #arming depending on #hat image a country #ould like to promote
The main difference from the first dimension here is thereby that it in the second
dimension is possible for the actor to put more planning and consideration in to the
messages they send out and can more easily target the people and organi2ations they
#ould like to affect #ith the message or image they send out A problem #ithin this
1#
area in the meantime is that different state organi2ations #ill often ha!e di!erging
interests in #hat image they #ant to promote An e&ample here could be #hether to
promote a country.s more traditional sides to promote tourism or the more modern sides
to promote in!estments $Deonard 20020 ::" :=1:7%
A first hand e&ample of this #as the dilemma the commercial section of the Danish
embassy in 5apan #as standing in #hen they had they #ere publishing the maga2ine
5ello 6enmark to the 5apanese public As the t#o main interests for the Danish strategy
to#ards 5apan #as to attract in!estments and to increase tourism" they had to promote
an image of an idyllic country #ith small !illages and a highly technologically modern
country #ell #orth#hile in!esting in
Relationship building
The third and last dimension of public diplomacy is relationship building ( this is the
most long term strategy used and is potentially the most significant The relationship
building programs stretches o!er years and is aimed at gi!ing deep insight to a select
group of people of one.s country through !arious schemes such as scholarships and
net#ork creation A notable element to this approach is that the planning go!ernmental
organi2ation plays a secondaryCfacilitating role as the approach is mainly focused on
establishing net#orks bet#een likeminded people across borders ( be it politicians"
academics" artists or businessmen A truly successful relationship building public
diplomacy effort #ill be !ery costly as it #ill ha!e to administer" plan and sponsor the
e&change of a significant amount of people in order for it to ha!e a decent impact
$Deonard 20020 :;120%
'robably the most important relationship building scheme is educational e&change If
go!ernments set up beneficial conditions for foreigners to come to their country to study
for months or years they are sure to get a nuanced picture of the country they are
staying These #ill possibly then function as de facto ambassadors for the country they
had been to#ards their friends or families An added bonus is that some of these people
#ho had been en/oying the benefits of such an e&change program might rise to
prominent positions #ithin their o#n countries It is estimated that :900 cabinet1le!el
18
ministers and 200 current and former heads of state has been participating in the
American International Eisitors 'rogram $?oss 200B0 27%
A potentially !ery important area to create ties and foster communication is bet#een
political parties across borders Facilitating meetings bet#een members of similar
political parties and not /ust go!ernment officials and cabinet members #ill likely
pro!ide increased understanding both bet#een politicians but could secondarily affect
the message these politicians send out to their respecti!e constituencies An e&ample of
this is Aonrad Adenauer ,tiftung #hich is a 6erman organi2ation #hich promotes
contact bet#een )hristian Democrat parties in different countries and is funded by the
state $Deonard 2002b0 99%
Nation branding
8randing has for years been a bu22#ord in the business #orld and companies ( big and
small alike ( has channeled significant funds into the creation of their o#n brand and
increase brand1recognition 8efore long this marketing approach has begun to spread to
the state sphere and the practice of location branding has arisen" #ith states hiring
branding consultants from the pri!ate sector This ne# tendency has arisen at the
crossroads of public relations and international relations and for this reason ought to be
!ie#ed together #ith the other communicati!e approaches of dealing #ith international
relations $!an @am 20020 2=<%
The increasing globali2ation has created a sharper competition bet#een states as it has
become increasingly difficult to stand out from the others and go!ernments ha!e
therefore sought #ays to increase their o#n relati!e competiti!e edge in relation #ith
their neighbors *ation branding has here been a #elcomed #ay to try to stand out from
other comparable countries This chapter #ill go more in depth #ith ho# nation
branding originated and ho# it is practiced $)erny 20070 272127B%
The idea of nation branding and the brand state is in a #ay not that ne# a concept In a
#ay the creation of nations in itself is a kind of branding 4hen states began to be
transformed to nation1states primarily in the nineteenth century many strategies similar
1-
to branding strategies #ere utili2ed The creation of a national flag" a national anthem or
a constitution all helped setting the country apart from the others and created a kind of
national identity both for people !ie#ing the state from the outside as #ell as its
citi2ens $!an @am 20020 29<12>0%
7ne of the main differences bet#een the creation of nations in the :<
th
century and the
nation branding of the 2:
st
century is that the creation of national ideas #ere primarily
planned to affect the inhabitants of the state #hereas the nation branding initiati!es are
directed to#ards foreign publics and corporations
On branding
8efore mo!ing on it is necessary to e&plore the concept of branding in itself before
putting it in a national and international conte&t 8randing is in its origin a part of an
ad!ertisement terminology Ad!ertisement tries to deli!er a message that a certain
product has a certain -uality or promotes a#areness about the product 8randing is
taking this a step further by adding some emotional !alue to the product and making the
product tell a story This does not necessarily ha!e to ha!e anything to do #ith the
primary product function as such and the -uality does not necessarily ha!e to be better
than similar products 'eople.s perception of the product is #hat counts and by adding
some sort of emotional !alue to it #ill make it stand out from the rest as it has its !ery
o#n story to tell the consumer 4ith successful branding strategies and increased brand1
recognition there #ill be an added !alue to it
The idea behind nation or location branding is to gi!e an added !alue to a country" to a
region or to an organi2ation The added !alue comes from the general perception people
around the #orld has about the country They might see it as an en!ironmentally
friendly country" technologically de!eloped country or a !ery artistic country *ation
branding is the conscious effort of state officials to defineCredefine peoples.
understanding and !ie# of their country $!an @am 200=0 21B%
It is suggested that there are four main reasons #hy it is a good idea to consider creating
a brand and they are as follo#s0
&0
7(1) products, services and locations have become so alike that they can no longer
differentiate themselves by their /uality, reliability and other basic traits. 8randing
adds emotion and trust to these 9products&, thereby offering clues that make consumers&
choices somewhat easier, (2) this emotional relationship between brand and consumer
ensures loyalty to the brand, (3) by creating an aspiration lifestyle, branding offers a
kind of *rsat: for ideologies and political programmes that have lost their relevance,
and () the combination of emotions, relationships and lifestyle (values) allows a brand
to charge a price premium for their products, services and locations, which would
otherwise hardly be distinguishable from generics.$ $!an @am 20020 29:%
,o in short these reasons for embarking on brand creation campaigns are to set the
location apart from so many other similar locations and through this making people.s
perception of the location more fa!orable than to any other place and making sure they
#ill consider the place if they are planning a holiday" considering #here to in!est or any
other possible interaction #ith the place 8y tying !alues to the locations the added
!alue #ill also come out of it and people #ill suddenly pay much more to go to one
holiday island instead of the neighboring one because of its brand recognition
Limits to nation branding
It is not possible for a state to completely freely decide on #hat image they #ant to
sho# to the outside #orld as people around the #orld #ill likely already ha!e some
perceptions of the country These perceptions co!er both countries people might kno# a
lot about such as ideas of 6ermany being a strict and efficient country or +nited
Aingdom being a conser!ati!e and traditionalist country or countries people might /ust
ha!e a faint idea about Estonia has for e&ample struggled #ith getting rid of the stigma
of being a post1,o!iet state through trying to brand itself as a pre1E+ or ,candina!ian
state These mainstream !ie#s of a country can either be good or bad for a country and
the state can therefore try to get rid of or enhance the image The 6erman brand for
e&ample has been good economically for the automoti!e sector as the cars made in
;ermany #ill ha!e a higher percei!ed !alue than the car made in +kraine ( it matters
less if the 6erman car really is better than the +krainian one The +nited Aingdom on
the other hand has generally had a bad brand economically resulting in for e&ample
&1
8ritish Air#ays and 8ritish Telecom changing their names to 8A and 8T in an effort to
hide their country of origin $!an @am 20020 2>:12>B%
Planning branding campaigns
The planning of nation branding campaigns poses se!eral areas #hich are necessary to
consider 7ne main point is considering #hich interests a country and its inhabitants
ha!e primarily E!en though nation branding campaigns could be designed to promote a
country.s art or cultural acti!ities" three main areas tend to be in focus #hen considering
a nation branding campaign ( namely the promotion of foreign direct in!estments"
e&ports or tourism The strategy aimed primarily at increasing e&port usually promotes a
branding campaign #hich #ill increase the !alues of its ma/or industries ( be it cars"
agricultural products or the entertainment industry A campaign focused on attracting
more foreign direct in!estments #ill likely be more state centered through ad!erti2ing
campaigns using rele!ant media Finally a tourism centered brand creation campaign
#ill often ha!e a !ery different approach than the e&port oriented campaign as it #ould
#ant to signal other !alues 4hen considering ho# to orchestrate a nation branding
campaign it #ill most likely be !ery unsuccessful if it is only based in state institution
but should rather be planned by both the public and pri!ate sector alike as #ell as
inclusion of any cultural !enuesCorgani2ations #ill be of significant interest $7lins
20070 :721:7<%
Cultural diplomacy
The third and final communicati!e diplomatic approach to be e&plored is that of cultural
diplomacy )ultural diplomacy stands out from the other t#o concepts ( public
diplomacy and nation branding ( in that it is not a fairly ne# concept like the others" but
it is /ust as old as traditional diplomacy itself 4hen relations #ere maintained bet#een
states there #ould al#ays ha!e been an e&change of ideas" language" art and religion
taking place to mention but a fe# $Arndt 20090 :12%
)ultural diplomacy is in short the official effort to facilitate e&change and spread of
culture around the #orld #hether it is #ithin music" art" philosophy or !alues The effort
&&
to spread one.s culture can ha!e se!eral different causes such as economic promotion or
the hope of transferring one.s !alues to people in other countries and thereby create
better relations 7f this reason cultural diplomacy can be seen as o!erlapping public
diplomacy significantly $+, Department of ,tate 20090 :17%
Different go!ernments attribute !ery different importance to cultural diplomacy but
often it has been a -uite neglected niche area compared to the more traditional
diplomatic acti!ities In the +nited ,tates for e&ample it has since the end of the )old
4ar been a much neglected area despite rhetoric stating other#ise ( cultural diplomacy
sa# se!eral significant budget cuts throughout the :<<0s and the cultural diplomacy
organi2ation +,IA #as e!en closed do#n 7ther countries ha!e practiced a more
successful cultural diplomacy than the +nited ,tates ( amongst these +nited Aingdom"
6ermany and the former ,o!iet +nion Most note#orthy though is France #ith an
annual spending on cultural diplomacy of more than one billion +, dollars and postions
in the French cultural diplomacy is !ery prestigious $,chneider 20070 :9>1:9;%
An important note on cultural diplomacy and cultural e&change is that cultural e&change
does not necessarily constitute cultural diplomacy The key #ord in this relation is
diplomacy ( the cultural e&change has to take its basis in an official initiati!e for it to be
classified as cultural diplomacy The reason for this being that non1official cultural
e&change might bring the same or better benefits than the officially planned and funded
e&changes" but they are too erratic and unpredictable to include in measuring the
success or failure of cultural rapprochement $Andreasen 20070 >21>B%
Follo#ing -uote finely describes the definition and importance of cultural diplomacy as
follo#s0
<ultural diplomacy may be defined as the use of various elements of culture to
influence foreign publics, opinion makers, and even foreign leaders. These elements
comprehend the entire range of characteristics within a culture# including the arts,
education, ideas, history, science, medicine, technology, religion, customs, manners,
commerce, philanthropy, sports, language, professional vocations, hobbies, etc. and the
various media by which these elements may be communicated. <ultural diplomacy
seeks to harness these elements to influence foreigners in several ways# to have a
&3
positive view of the =nited 0tates, its people, its culture, and its policies7$
$Denc2o#ski 20070 :<>%
This signifies ho# !ery di!erse the area of cultural diplomacy is and ho# !ast an area it
is used to influence Furthermore it gi!es a better idea of ho# closely related this area is
#ith that of public diplomacy They do clearly o!erlap in se!eral areas e!en if they are
not the same
After these presentations of public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural diplomacy
an in depth presentation of the three theories used in the analysis #ill be presented (
namely soft po#er" neorealism and constructi!ism
"heory
In this chapter the three theories #hich #ill be used as tools of the analysis #ill be
presented and discussed The first neoliberalism #ill be presented and more specifically
the concept of soft po#er" #hich has been de!eloped by the prominent neoliberal
theorist 5oseph , *ye This section #ill e&plain ho# public diplomacy possibly can
#ork as a tool of the state to promote its soft po#er ( the po#er of attracti!eness ( and
ho# this po#er is /ust as rele!ant as the hard po#er of military and economy
The second theory #hich #ill be presented #ill be neorealism primarily on the basis of
Aenneth 4alt2 The use of neorealism is primarily intended as a #ay to keep a critical
approach to#ards public diplomacy and maintain a counterargument to#ards the other
t#o theories #hich are more positi!e to public diplomacy *eorealism #ill not attribute
much importance to public diplomacy ( at best it #ill be a decent appendi& to real
po#er politics
The third and final theory presented #ill be constructi!ism as it has been de!eloped by
Ale&ander 4endt This theory #ill break a#ay from both neoliberalism and neorealism
and be able to deli!er the most positi!e approach to public diplomacy as constructi!ism
possibly is the most open theory of international relations to#ards potential change in
the most basic mechanisms of international affairs
&4
After the presentation of the three theories the analytical chapter #ill follo# #here each
theory #ill be attempted applied to the areas of public diplomacy" nation branding and
cultural diplomacy
!oft ower
7ne of the central concepts de!eloped by 5oseph , *ye" #ho is amongst the most
prominent theorists #ithin the *eoliberal theory" is soft po#er This concept #as for the
first time presented in :<<0 in 8ound to >ead and has since been de!eloped into its final
form as presented in 0oft ?ower + the means to success in world politics from 200=
,oft po#er is best e&plained #hen contrasted against its counterpart ( hard po#er
4here hard po#er is signified by the utili2ation of sheer force and coercion to reach
certain ob/ecti!es" the more indirect soft po#er is a #ay of reaching the goal through
persuasion and cooperation ( soft po#er uses carrots rather than sticks so to speak 7ne
thing the t#o ha!e in common though is the term po#er $*ye 200=0 &i" 91>%
5oseph , *ye is educated from 'rinceton" 7&ford and @ar!ard +ni!ersities and has
been publishing #orks related to theory of international relations since the :<70s and is
to this day !ery producti!e #ith se!eral published articles and chapters in books e!ery
year ( =9 in 200; alone *on1academic positions he has held include Assistant
,ecretary of Defense for International ,ecurity Affairs" )hair of the *ational
Intelligence )ouncil" and Deputy +nder ,ecretary of ,tate for ,ecurity Assistance"
,cience and Technology $@ar!ard ( Aennedy ,chool%
Po$er
The central term power is !ery difficult to gi!e a concrete definition of An attempt to
make the term po#er seem more ob/ecti!ely measurable #ould be by looking at power
resources of a state ( this could include military and economic strength" si2e of territory
and population or abundance of natural resources This can be a useful approach #hen
po#er is defined as the ability to get #hat you #ant This approach to try to understand
and measure po#er seems fla#ed though ,ome countries #hich e&cel in many of these
measurable parameters don.t ha!e the po#er #hich they ought to on the basis of their
resources ( an e&ample of this could be 5apan since the :<>0s 5apan ha!ing the second
&(
largest economy in the #orld" a large population and ad!anced technology has
oftentimes been termed an economic giant but a political d#arf 7n the other end of the
spectrum some countries seem to be more po#erful than #hat their ob/ecti!ely
measurable resources #ould /ustify ?easons for these discrepancies can e&plained by
different abilities of deception or by con!incingly acting more po#erful than #hat the
resources /ustify Another factor #hich has to be taken into account is to see the
resources as potential po#er and this has to be mobili:ed into reali2ed po#er 8efore
resources are used specifically to increase the po#er of a state it does not really signify
po#er $*ye :<<:0 2>127%
Traditionally the real test of a country.s po#er #ould be its ability to #age #ar The
basis of this ability has changed o!er time though In the pre1industriali2ed society of
the se!enteenth and eighteenth centuries the ability to #age #ar #as primarily based on
a large population #hich #ould pro!ide manpo#er and a basis of ta&ation in order to
hire mercenaries ( this is #hy France #as the leading po#er in Europe in this period
This is best illustrated during the reign of the ,un Aing Douis FIE and culminating #ith
*apoleon 8onaparte #here the most important po#er resources started to change #ith
the da#ning industrial re!olution As industrial production capacity and efficient
administration became more important than population si2e and sheer manpo#er as a
basis of po#er the centers of po#er changed to the 8ritish Empire and slightly later
6ermany In the middle of the t#entieth century the industrial capacity of +,A and
+,,? had far outgro#n the traditional po#ers of the old world and another po#er
factor #as no# nuclear #eapons as #ell the deli!ery methods of these ,ince then the
traditional understanding of po#er as the ability to #age #ar has been significantly
modified The horrifying destructi!e capacities of nuclear #eapons #ere one of the
reasons of this as it had become too costly and risky for great po#ers to sort their
disputes on the battlefield 7ther reasons include that high casualties are much less
acceptable to domestic populations in the post1industriali2ed society" territorial
e&pansion is much more difficult in a more nationally a#akened #orld and economic
gro#th is often depending on a state.s reputation and relations #ith others $*ye 20020
917%
&6
This change in po#er resources are finely illustrated in the table belo# #here the
leading states of each century are lined up and the different resources of po#er these
utili2ed to achie!e this status 5oseph , *ye has furthermore included his prediction for
the 2:
st
century An interesting detail in this table is the gradual entrance of different
forms of soft po#er as a ma/or resource of po#er0
?eriod 0tate @a3or -esources
,i&teenth century ,pain 6old bullion" colonial trade"
mercenary armies" dynastic
ties
,e!enteenth century *etherlands Trade" capital markets" na!y
Eighteenth century France 'opulation" rural industry"
public administration" army"
culture $soft po#er%
*ineteenth century 8ritain Industry" political cohesion"
finance and credit" na!y"
liberal norms $soft po#er%"
island location $easy to
defend%
T#entieth century +nited ,tates Economic scale" scientific
and technical leadership"
location" military forces and
alliances" uni!ersalistic
culture and liberal
international regimes $soft
po#er%
T#enty1first century +nited ,tates Technological leadership"
military and economic
scale" soft po#er" hub of
transnational
communications
$*ye 20020 :B%
&#
+nderstanding that merely resources #ill not necessarily determine #hether a state is
po#erful or not there ought to be other #ays of !ie#ing and determining po#er in
international relations This can be to look at as a #ay of achie!ing one.s goals The
most direct #ay of doing this is by forcing your #ill through by the use of military force
or the threat thereof Another #ay to get #hat you #ant #ould be through utili2ing a
state.s economic strength through threat of sanctions" bribery etc The final and more
subtle #ay to get #hat you #ant and make other agents change their beha!ior is not to
coerce them but rather to con!ince them 'ersuade them to think that your goal is
identical #ith their goal This is the background of the di!ision bet#een hard po#er (
military and economy
2
( and soft po#er #hich is the po#er of attraction so to speak
$Mead 200=%
To see po#er as getting another agent to do #hat heCsheCit other#ise #ould not ha!e
done is a helpful #ay to e&plain both hard and soft po#er although it has one inherent
trapdoor 4hat if the target for this e&ercise of po#er ( be it hard or soft ( already
#ould ha!e done #hat they are trying to be coerced or con!inced to doG Then it is all of
a sudden !ery difficult to determine #hether or not the attempt to #ield the tools of hard
and soft po#er has been the deciding factor for reaching the result achie!ed and thereby
difficult to determine #hether or not the #ielder truly possess po#er o!er the other
agent This is especially the case for soft po#er #hich in its nature is more subtle than
the tools of hard po#er $*ye 200=0 2%
"he three chessboards of po$er
5oseph , *ye has made a model to understand the po#er relations of international
relations better #hile incorporating soft po#er This model is to see the international
struggle of po#er as a game of chess ( but played on three interrelated boards rather
than /ust one The top board is the classical struggle bet#een states for military
dominance and centers itself on security policy" alliance building" maintenance of a
balance of po#er etc 7n the second board the game of economic gro#th is played
&
The t!o sides of hard po!er ha*e later been sought di*ided bet!een sharp =military> and
stic/y =economic> po!er by ?alter $ussell 2ead in Americas Sticky Power @ but this further
distinction has limited rele*ance to the topic of the thesis6 and !ill therefore not be de*eloped
further.
&8
#here issues can be anything #ithin the financial and the economy policy realms ( trade
agreements" anti1trust la#s etc The bottom board game of po#er is dedicated to a
multitude of international issues such as international crime" climate change or for
e&ample the 7lympics It.s on this board soft po#er comes into play ,ome political
actors fail to ackno#ledge other spheres than the classical po#er game of military
muscle though
B
( a blunder that can ha!e se!ere repercussions for the state.s standing in
the t#o other spheres $*ye 200=0 =19%
7n table : seen belo# the tripartite di!ision of the forms of po#er 5oseph , *ye
describes are illustrated key#ords attached to each in relation to type of beha!ior"
primary currencies and go!ernment policies @ere it is seen ho# soft po#er really is
markedly different from the other t#o 4here military and economic po#er both utili2e
!ery direct means to gain po#er" soft po#er uses more subtle and difficult to e!aluate
means 4here the t#o types of hard po#er is signified by terms such as coercion"
deterrence" sanctions and threats the soft po#er key#ords include attraction" !alues and
culture The thing #hich is possibly most important to notice in the table the !ast
amount of primary currencies soft po#er is spanning ( !alues" culture" policies and
institutions ( #hile the go!ernment policies are limited to diplomacy This is an area
#hich #ill be e&plored more thoroughly later in this chapter
3
This point is illustrated !ell by the famous Aoseph "talin Buote5 The Pope? How many
divisions has he got? "talin apparently only recogni,ed military po!er here and not the *ast
amount of soft po!er held by the papacy.
&-
$*ye 200=0 B:%
As mentioned abo!e there is an interplay bet#een the three chessboards of po#er
+sing hard po#er #ithout analy2ing possible impacts on its soft po#er can be !ery
counterproducti!e E!en if a state actor has significantly more military po#er than any
potential opponents" the unrestricti!e use of force #ill possibly lead to mistrust"
alienation of allies and neutrals and in turn restrict the freedom of action for the state
actor in the long run to restore good#ill" a!oid possible sanctions or boycotts and
ultimately a!oid unfriendly alliance building to create a balance of po#er The classic
illustration of some of these points is the American in!asion of Ira- in 200B Another of
the many e&amples of a time #here a state actor ignored the importance of soft po#er
#hich in turn led to repercussions in other areas #as )hina after the Tiananmen ,-uare
massacre in :<;<" through #hich e!ent )hina destroyed its po#er of attraction and #as
hit hard in the economic realm through trade embargoes and boycotts $*ye 200=0 291
2<%
-ro$ing importance of soft po$er
As mentioned abo!e" soft po#er has gradually increased its importance to states
struggle for po#er This tendency is like to increase e&ponentially in the da#ning global
8eha!iors 'rimary )urrencies 6o!ernment
'olicies
Military 'o#er coercion
deterrence
protection
threats
force
coerci!e diplomacy
#ar
alliance
Economic 'o#er inducement
coercion
payments
sanctions
aid
bribes
sanctions
,oft 'o#er attraction
agenda setting
!alues
culture
policies
institutions
public diplomacy
bilateral and
multilateral
diplomacy
30
information age #here access to the most and #idest channels of information #ill be a
determining factor for #ho #ill e&perience the fastest gro#th in soft po#er The access
to the most and #idest channels of information #ill not be the sole determining factor in
relations to gro#th in soft po#er though ( t#o other general factors are also !ery
important The first of these is that a state #ith an ideological background of their
dominant culture #hich is closest to the general predominant global norms and !alues
of a certain time #ill command a !aster soft po#er than a state #ith a dominant culture
far a#ay from the global standard norms Aey !alues in the #orld of today include
terms such as pluralism and liberalism ( it is therefore unlikely to see a state far a#ay
from these !alues being successful in the realm of soft po#er as it #ill not seem !ery
attracti!e to the broad global public If a state is not a genuine supporter of these !alues
at least it #ill ha!e to pretend to support these if it has any interest and
ackno#ledgement of the importance of soft po#er The second factor important to a
state in order to be successful in the realm of soft po#er is enhancing one.s credibility (
#hich can be done both through domestic as #ell as international actions If a state
generally li!es up to e&pectations and practice #hat it preaches its chances of gaining
soft po#er in the long run significantly increases $*ye 20020 ><17B%
,oft po$er and public diplomacy
*o# after ha!ing dealt #ith the presentation of the concept of soft po#er" its interplay
#ith the t#o forms of hard po#er and the gro#ing importance of soft po#er in the
global age of information it has yet to be e&plored further from #hat sources soft po#er
actually stems and #hat direct tools can be conduci!e to the gro#th of soft po#er for a
state It #ill be e&plored to #hat e&tent the state actually is able to directly control its
progress in soft po#er or lack thereof
In the t#o main forms of hard po#er ( military and economic ( the state has a !ery
large direct impact on the de!elopment of po#er resources through di!erse economic
policies" beneficial trade agreement" subsidies to reach technological breakthroughs or
de!elopment of more efficient military doctrines to gi!e but a fe# e&amples ,oft po#er
is not as straightfor#ard though as this encompasses fairly uncontrollable terms such as
culture and !alues Much of any country.s soft po#er resources ha!e little or nothing to
do #ith the state" be it anything from famous #riters" painters" architects or singers"
31
natural beauty" important mass media or #ell kno#n brands Many of the sources of
soft po#er are therefore not determined by direct actions of the state apparatus but
rather of the people and the land they inhabit $Mead 200=0 9:%
4ith this being said it seems as if the state has little to do #ith ho# much soft po#er it
has #hich of course is not the case ,oft po#er is more than /ust a matter of #hich states
got lucky to ha!e the most sides that attracts people from around the #orld ,oft po#er
has more to it than 3ust culture" and it is a mistake to think of soft po#er as a direct
result of culture although culture is conduci!e to the gro#th of it The t#o other main
sources of soft po#er include foreign policy and general political !alues $*ye 200=0
::%
6eneral political !alues and foreign policy can both be linked to go!ernmental policies
These policies can" as mentioned earlier" diminish the soft po#er of a state ( for
e&ample through committing atrocities or displaying arrogance to#ards the opinions of
others The opposite can also be true though 8oth domestic as #ell as foreign
go!ernment policies can help increase the country.s soft po#er if these policies help
increase its attracti!eness to population segments E&amples of these could be
comparably generous contributions of de!elopment aid" a strong profile in peacekeeping
operations or a tolerant and fair treatment of domestic minorities Also the more general
political !alues reflect on the gro#th or decline of soft po#er ( a clean record of
democracy and rule of la# #ill for e&ample generally benefit a gro#th of soft po#er
$*ye 200=0 :B1:9%
7ne of the seemingly most effecti!e tools to increase soft po#er and #hich #ould
probably be a big mistake to o!erlook is public diplomacy 4hile public diplomacy is
not a primary source of soft po#er itself" it is one of the most direct tools a state has to
market itself for the foreign public E!en if a state tries to act in a #ay that #ould
increase its soft po#er the attempt might not be successful or there might be more
attention on negati!e actions the same state @ere the role of public diplomacy is to
attract focus on the positi!e sides of a country" not through mere propaganda #hich is
hopelessly obsolete but rather through dialogue $*ye 200=0 :091:07%
3&
To sum up" the logic behind include the concept of soft po#er is that this e&act concept
is !ital to the success and in the end the !ery e&istence of public diplomacy ,oft po#er
is the raison d&Atre of public diplomacy because public diplomacy seeks to increase the
attracti!eness of a country" signifying that attracti!eness is important ie #orth
competing o!er If attracti!eness is #orth competing for it must contain a certain
amount of po#er ( soft po#er
Neorealism
The ne&t theory to be presented and used in this thesis #ill be that of neorealism In
theories of international relations" realism has the most longstanding tradition going
back to the likes of Thucydides and Machia!elli #hich first de!eloped from the
obser!ation of statecraft and diplomatic conduct $6ilpin :<;>0 B07% The scope of this
presentation #ill be that of *eorealism though" #hich is ( as the name implies ( a
ne#er branch of realism #hich is more scientifically minded compared to its older
counterpart and has a #ider scope than solely security policy as it also takes in aspects
such as economic factors or social theory $Ashley :<;>0 2>012>:%
The theorist mainly used in this section #ill be Aenneth * 4alt2 $:<2=1% #ho is the
founder and most prominent proponent of the *eorealist approach @is #orks primarily
centres around nuclear deterrence and the causes of conflict #ithin the international
system ( a field he has been occupied #ith for the past fi!e decades @e has been acti!e
in teaching in )olumbia +ni!ersity" 8erkeley" 8randeis and ,#arthmore as #ell as
!isiting positions at Dondon ,chool of Economics" @ar!ard and 'eking +ni!ersity @e
has contro!ersially maintained his realist standpoint during his career and has put forth
contro!ersial remarks regarding the positi!e impacts of the gradual proliferation of
nuclear #eaponry $)olumbia +ni!ersity *e#s%
In his earlier #ork @an, the 0tate and Bar + a theoretical analysis originally from :<9<
he e&amines the causes of #ar bet#een states #hich forms the foundation of his entire
theoretical structure @e di!ides the main e&planatory models of the causes of #ar into
three so called images ( $a% human beha!ior" $b% the internal structure of states and $c%
international anarchy A short introduction of these three e&planatory models #ill
follo# here" before the #ider implications of this fundamental !ie# #ill be e&plored
$4alt2 200:0 :1:9%
33
.uman beha/ior
The first image 4alt2 presents in his #ork is human beha!ior ( that is the thought that
the reason for the e&istence of conflict and #ar lies #ithin human nature itself The
reason springs from the evil and sometimes irrational beha!ior of human beings Among
the supporters of this strand there are pessimists and optimists The optimists belie!e
that it is possible to create a peaceful #orld by changing human beha!ior Depending on
#hich theorist or philosopher this could be through education" religious a#akening or
political indoctrination The pessimists on the other hand are more skeptical as to ho#
much it is possible to create a peaceful #orld as it can be impossible to change human
nature itself $4alt2 200:0 B<1=:%
8oth the pessimists and especially the optimists are -uite incorrect according to 4alt2 (
as they focus too much on indi!idual itself instead of its setting They disregard the
arena in #hich the actors are found and ho# big a role this is playing ( #hether it can
be the structure of states or the entire system of international relations Interestingly
enough by optimists it is generally suggested that to change the indi!iduals in order to
create a more harmonious #orld it #ould take some changing of the setting the
indi!idual acts #ithin ( this in itself pro!es the human beha!iorists #rong as they
themsel!es partly suggests that the causal effects are to be found in the system and not
in the agent as such $4alt2 200:0 7917<%
,tate structure
The second image 4alt2 presents as the e&planation for ho# conflict and #ar come into
e&istence in international relations is the internal structure of states This means the
thought that the cause of conflict for e&ample lies in the form of go!ernment a state has
,ome belie!e if all countries #ere democracies the cause of armed conflict #ould
disappear" some think the same about communist countries and still others has thought
enlightened absolutism has been the right #ay to go The list can go on in infinity but
all share the same fundamental thought that it.s the #rong kind of go!ernance #hich
causes the misery in the #orld
34
4alt2 stresses in his presentation of the second image that conflict still has e&isted
bet#een democracies or bet#een communist states contrary to the ideas of the
supporters of the second image Furthermore it is underlined that e!en if the internal
structure of the state #ill ha!e a big say in ho# the state is acting" it cannot be assessed
as if it #asn.t part of the international en!ironment of states It is" so to speak" a matter
of looking at the international en!ironment more than at the internal structure of the
state itself #hich is the important factor in the search for the causes of conflict ( this
#ill therefore lead us on to the third image in 4alt2. analysis $4alt2 200:0 :201:2B%
International anarchy
The third image 4alt2 presents as the cause of conflict in international relations is
international anarchy The international anarchy of states e&ists because there is no
#orld go!ernment or supreme entity #hich can control the beha!ior of state actors This
entails states #ill do #hat.s in their po#er to ensure their interests such as sur!i!al and
increasing po#er ( including the possible use of force 4ith the follo#ing decrease in
the common perception of security an anarchical en!ironment #ill not end until a
superior po#er keep state actions in check This is not too different from anarchy on the
national le!el #hich 4alt2 assumes #ill e&ist if there #as no state to control the people
In this !ie# it is a common superior entity #hich #ill pre!ent the use of force bet#een
actors 4here the actors are indi!iduals it is the state #here the actors are state it #ill be
a #orld go!ernment $4alt2 200:0 :9<1:>:" :7B%
As a concluding remark in Man" the ,tate and 4ar 4alt2 sums up his position as
follo#s0
*ach state pursues its own interests, however defined, in ways it 3udges
best. 4orce is a means of achieving the eCternal ends of states because there eCists no
consistent, reliable process of reconciling the conflicts of interest that inevitably arise
among similar units in a condition of anarchy. 1 foreign policy based on this image of
international relations is neither moral nor immoral, but embodies merely a reasoned
response to the world about us. The third image describes the framework of world
politics, but without the first and second images there can be no knowledge of the forces
3(
that determine policy, the first and the second images describe the forces in world
politics, but without the third image it is impossible to assess their importance or
predict their results.$ $4alt2 200:0 2B;%
,o in this early #ork of 4alt2 he does not discard the first and second images
completely in fa!or of the third image ?ather the first and second images resemble the
contents #hich #ill re-uire action and reaction among the states ( #hether this is the
nature of a head of state or the changes in the domestic political setup of a state The
third image does constitute the machinery of the theory though and it is #ithin this area
the real theoretical analysis comes into place *o matter #hat the ideas of a *apoleon or
a 8ismarck are or #hat political party #ins an election or brings about a re!olution it is
the international conte&t of anarchy and self1help #hich must be the real sub/ect for
analysis
The international political system
To clarify the neorealist !ie# of international relations it #ill be helpful to use a fe#
graphs The first one sho#s ho# most people !ie# international relationsCpolitics @ere
*:" 2" B represents #hat is happening in the states domestically #hich #ill create an
impact on its international beha!ior The international beha!ior of the states is sho#n in
F:" 2" B #hich represents their e&ternal actions to#ards each other and ho# this
influence the other actors

*: F:
*2 F2
*B FB
36
$4alt2 :<;>a0 <9%
This graph is a good !isuali2ation of ho# a supporter of the abo!e mentioned images :
and 2 #ould !ie# the #orld ( seeing the main importance in for e&ample either state
leaders or domestic structures
*:
3#
C1
C&
C3
C3
C3
*2
*B
$4alt2 :<;>a0 <>%
The second graph sho#s ho# *eorealists see international relations and e&emplifies the
third image @ere the main difference is the role of the international political system as
an entity in itself ( sho#n in the graph as the big circle #hich affects the e&ternal
beha!ior of states as #ell as influencing the decision1making process domestically in
the states It thereby gi!es the highest significance to the en!ironment in #hich the
states act
On anarchy
As the importance of the concept of anarchy in international relations has been
established" it is necessary to elaborate some further on this notion as #ell as its
opposite ( hierarchy 4here anarchy is signified by the absence of go!ernment"
hierarchy is signified by the organi2ed presence of go!ernment T#o points are
important to mention in relation to these concepts0 $a% anarchy and hierarchy or the
38
outer points of a spectrum of organi2ed order and there are a multitude of shades of gray
bet#een the t#o e&tremes" and $b% anarchy does not necessarily entail complete chaos
and barbarism ( /ust the absence of organi2ed order
=

,ince anarchy only means the absence of go!ernment and nothing moreH claims stating
that international relations is signified by a modified anarchy due to the presence of
alliances" international organi2ations" ci!il society etc #ill be re/ected by the
neorealists E!en though these institutions are a reality" they #ill not alter the basic fact
that anarchy is the foundation of international relations ( e!en if they seem to alter
$4alt2 :<;>b0 ::B%
On socialization
A -uestion still left unans#ered in relation to #hy it is the third image #hich is so
determining for ho# international relations play out is ho# this system of international
anarchy not only #as created but also remains unchanged According to *eorealists
such as 4alt2" the system #ill not change because rule1breakers #ill be punished
automatically and forced to conform or perish in the process E!en if the anarchical
international en!ironment is as old as the state system itself it #ould not be unthinkable
that this could possibly change in time as some actors !anish throughout history and
others appear ne#ly on the stage To this *eorealism #ould argue0 as the international
anarchy signifies a kill or get killed system" states trying to rein!ent their approach to
their neighbors #ould ultimately suffer as they #ould not be prepared to defend
themsel!es properly against the states still trying to sur!i!e and increase their po#er
The e&ception to this automatic pre!ention of rule-breakers is states #hich are outside
the competiti!e struggle for sur!i!al or dominance This could for e&ample be states
that are -uite isolated from the communications #ith other states ( #hate!er the reason
might be E&amples of this could be the +nited ,tates in the :<
th
century or 5apan in the
:7
th
and :;
th
centuries $4alt2 :<;>b0 :2;1:2<%
A #ay this unchanging anarchical system is e&plained further is through the tyranny of
small decisions This means that the states #ill act to #hat is in their immediate best
4
i.e. go*ernment
3-
interest in the short term e!en though the reality created through such action is not #hat
the state #ould prefer if it could choose 4alt2 e&emplifies this as follo#s0
'f one eCpects others to make a run on the bank, one&s prudent course is to run faster
than they do even while knowing that if few others run, the bank will remain solvent,
and if many run, it will fail. 'n such cases, pursuit of individual interest produces
collective results that nobody wants, yet individuals by behaving differently will hurt
themselves without altering outcomes.$ $4alt2 :<;>b0 :0=%
The same thing is the case of the state acting in its en!ironment amongst other states
The state #ill make the decision #hich secures itself and is in its short term interest"
e!en if they kno# that the culture de!eloping from these actions #ill not be in the best
interest of any of the states ,e!eral rational decisions #ill add up and create one
irrational culture of state beha!ior $4alt2 :<;>b0 :09%
A recent illustrati!e e&ample of this idea could be the Ayoto 'rotocol or other summits
and agreements aiming at reducing emissions to decrease global #arming E!en if the
states kno# that it is in e!eryone.s best interest to secure the en!ironment" they #ill be
!ery #atchful about not losing any relati!e competiti!e edge compared to their fello#
states ( primarily in the economicCindustrial realm
"onstructivism
The third and final theory used in this thesis to shed light on the potential" roots and
possible e!ol!ement of public diplomacy #ill be constructi!ism The theory #ill be
presented and de!eloped primarily on the basis of Ale&ander 4endt.s !ersion of
constructi!ism as it #as presented in his :<<2 article 1narchy is what 0tates @ake of it#
The 0ocial <onstruction of ?ower ?olitics and further de!eloped in his book from :<<<
titled 0ocial Theory of 'nternational ?olitics
Ale&ander 4endt is professor of international security at the 7hio ,tate +ni!ersity and
speciali2es in social theory" theory of international relations and philosophy of social
science @e has published se!eral books and articles on theory of international relations
during the :<<0s and especially in the years after the turn of the century @is first
40
published article is 1narchy is what 0tates @ake of it# The 0ocial <onstruction of
?ower ?olitics. $Mershon )enter for International ,ecurity ,tudies%
The point of departure for the chapter #ill be the three different cultures #hich
according to Ale&ander 4endt.s constructi!ist approach can e!ol!e in international
relations ( these include the @obbesian" Dockean and Aantian cultures After the
presentation of these three main cultures states can e&ist in in international relations the
chapter #ill mo!e on to e&plaining ho# states are becoming sociali2ed and through this
establish or help maintaining a specific culture in international relations It is this final
mechanism #hich is at the core of the theory and #hy this theory is completely different
from neorealism because it is open to change
"he .obbesian culture
The first of the three different kinds of cultures the #orld of international relations can
sociali2e itself into is the @obbesian culture This is named after the English philosopher
Thomas @obbes" #ho li!ed bet#een :9;; and :>7< and #ho.s most famous #ork
probably is the >eviathan published in :>9: It #as #ritten during the English )i!il
4ar as @obbes #as a royalist by heartH he #as promoting a strong state #hich should
toil the other#ise uncontrollable egoism of human nature 4ithout a strong go!ernment
he thought a #ar of all against all #ould e!ol!e 4hat especially stands out is the
memorable front page resembling the so!ereign $the embodiment of the state%
containing the indi!iduals of the population $Martinich 20090 &i!1:;%
The !ie#s of @obbes on human nature and the de!ol!ement of society during the lack
of presence of a centrali2ed po#er can crudely be boiled do#n to the follo#ing -uote
from De!iathan0
7 D' Et is manifest that during the time men live without a common power to keep
them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of
every man against every man.$ $@obbes :<<=0 7>%
41
@obbes goes on to e&plain ho# this #ar of all against all can be ended through creating
a common po#er #hich can keep the peace0
IThe only way to erect such a common power as may be able to defend them from
invasion of foreigners and the in3uries of one another7 is to confer all power and
strength upon one man, or upon one assembly of men, that may reduce all their wills,
by plurality of voices, unto one will$ $@obbes :<<=0 :0<%
According to @obbes this is done only #hen e!ery man relin-uishes his indi!idual
rights and freedom in e&change of protection from the so!ereign as #ell as peace of
mind through kno#ing all other men like#ise ha!e relin-uished their rights and
ambitions 4hen this is done @obbes does not accept any form of re!ersing the oaths
people has pledged to the so!ereign ( #ith the sole e&ception of #hen the so!ereign
does not pro!e able to pro!ide safety and security from !iolence0
7DTEhey that have already instituted a commonwealth, being thereby bound by
covenant to own the actions and 3udgments of one cannot lawfully make a new covenant
amongst themselves to be obedient to any other, in any thing whatsoever, without his
permission. 1nd therefore, they that are sub3ects to a monarch cannot without his leave
cast off monarchy and return to the confusion of a disunited multitude, nor transfer
4&
their person from him that beareth it to another man, or other assembly of men7$
$@obbes :<<=0 :::%
4hen the ideas of @obbes are taken from a domestic to an international le!el a -uite
depressing #orld emerges #hich follo#s the lines of kill or get killed strategy in
international relations This is the hardest case for constructi!ism to e&plain but has
nonetheless e&isted at se!eral points in history The main term to e&plain the
relationship bet#een self and other #ould in this case be enemy Ale&ander 4endt
e&plains the term enemy as follo#s0
*nemies are constituted by representations of the .ther as an actor who (1) does not
recogni:e the right of the 0elf to eCist as an autonomous being, and therefore (2) will
not willingly limit its violence towards 0elf7 this is a narrower definition than one
normally finds in '-, where enemy$ is often used to describe any violent antagonist$
$4endt 20070 2>0%
The reason 4endt utili2es a narro#er definition of enemy than the norm is that it is
important not to confuse enemy #ith ri!al ( #hich is the characteristic term of the
relationship bet#een self and other in a Dockean culture As the @obbesian enemy does
not recogni2e their counterparts rights to e&ist and #ill therefore not limit itself The
only things #hich can limit the aggression #ill be the e!entual lack of capabilities to
destroy the other or the inter!ention of the >eviathan if there #ere a form of
international go!ernment in the #orld ?i!als of the Dockean culture on the other hand
recogni2e the right to e&ist of their counterparts but #ill at times seek to re!ise their
beha!ior or gain possession of their property ( eg land" natural resources etc The main
difference bet#een the t#o is therefore the non1e&istence of self1restraint in the
@obbesian culture $4endt 20070 29<12>:%
"he 0oc1ean culture
The second potential culture of international relations #hich Ale&ander 4endt describes
is based on the thoughts of the English philosopher and contemporary of Thomas
@obbes 1 namely 5ohn Docke Docke li!ed from :>B2 to :70= and #as one of the ma/or
8ritish empiricists and thus #orked a lot #ith human understanding and e&perience for
43
#hich he is most famous @e also del!ed into political philosophy #ith his Two
Treatises of <ivil ;overnment from :>;< $Docke :<;00 !ii%
Docke #as strongly influenced by @obbes but there #ere se!eral areas #here he
departed completely from the position of @obbes The t#o most striking e&amples are
the !ie# of human nature and the right to re!olution against an illegitimate go!ernment
The Dockean culture as used by Ale&ander 4endt in his constructi!ist approach is
characteri2ed by the live and let live approach instead of the @obbesian kill or get killed
The !ie# of the other is in this culture as a ri!al and not as an enemy There is in
general a mutual ackno#ledgement bet#een states of their rights to e&ists This can for
e&ample be seen since the 4estphalian system came into being in :>=;" since #hen the
death rate of states has been !ery small compared to earlier times ( this e!en goes for
the tiniest states E!en if a mutual recognition of states. rights to e&ist and so!ereignty
is in place" it doesn.t mean the use of !iolence has disappeared There #ill still be
disputes o!er for e&ample territory and resources ( e!en to the e&tent of leading to #ar
8ut as mentioned abo!e" the #ars #ill be limited #ars mainly aimed at re!ising borders
or gaining concessions from the losing part and not as a struggle of life and death
bet#een the states
The effect of a Dockean culture is not limited to ho# and ho# often #ars are #aged
,ince the so!ereignty of other states are generally respected and #ars become less
fre-uent" states no longer ha!e to focus solely on security and short term gains but can (
or ha!e to" in order to keep up #ith their ri!als ( focus on longer term goals in a #ider
range of areas Furthermore the mutual recognition of so!ereignty and the increased
focus on longer term goals gi!e #ay to a degree of trust bet#een allies $4endt 20070
27<12;2%
,ince the 4estphalian 'eace in :>=; and partly since the 'eace of Augsburg hundred
years before that" the Dockean culture has been the one signifying the international
relations at least at regional le!els until the decoloni2ation #hen the culture become
more entrenched and all1embracing
The -uestion is then ho# this culture came in to being and ho# it became so entrenched
that it persisted ma/or 3rule1breakers. such as *apoleon or @itler The root of the culture
44
has to be found in coercion ( after the protracted Thirty Jears 4ar #hich brought
nothing but misery and po!erty in itself it became in the interest of the in!ol!ed great
po#ers and the 6erman principalities to respect each other.s so!ereignty As this #as a
ne#ly introduced norm it had to be effectuated by coercion in the beginning An
e&ample could be England and the *etherlands. inter!ention in the conflicts bet#een
Denmark1*or#ay and ,#eden" #here the latter #as pre!ented in anne&ing the first
$4endt 20070 2;>%
After this first phase of coerced Dockean culture the culture becomes more entrenched
as a norm This means that the state1actors are beginning to get used to that it is
e&pected they respect other states. so!ereignty ( or at least seemingly respect 8y
recogni2ing other.s so!ereignty can bring them benefits #hile not doing so can bring
them harm In other #ords the states #ill respect each others. so!ereignty as long as
they belie!e it.s in their interest to do so
The third and final step of an entrenched Dockean culture is #hen the recognition of
others. so!ereignty becomes such a habit and !alue in itself that the states #ill
automatically adhere to the norm e!en if it might not be in their direct interest to do so
$4endt 20070 2;712;<%
"he 2antian culture
The last of the three cultures of international relations Ale&ander 4endt outlines is that
of the Aantian culture #hich is based on the ideas of 'russian philosopher Immanuel
Aant $:72=1:;0=% in his treatise ?erpetual ?eace 4here the @obbesian culture #as
based on enmity and the Dockean culture based on ri!alry ( the Aantian culture operates
#ith the concept of friendship
'erpetual 'eace is a short pamphlet #hich contains si& preliminary and three definiti!e
articles #hich #ould" if follo#ed" transform international relations completely It is one
of the most essential #orks of cosmopolitanism in history although it is -uite utopian
The si& preliminary articles are0
4(
I:0 *o Treaty of 'eace ,hall 8e @eld Ealid in 4hich There Is Tacitly ?eser!ed Matter
for a Future 4arK
20 *o Independent ,tates" Darge or ,mall" ,hall )ome under the Dominion of Another
,tate by Inheritance" E&change" 'urchase" or DonationK
B0 ,tanding Armies $miles perpetuus% ,hall in Time 8e Totally AbolishedK
=0 *ational Debts ,hall *ot 8e )ontracted #ith a Eie# to the E&ternal Friction of
,tatesK
90 *o ,tate ,hall by Force Interfere #ith the )onstitution or 6o!ernment of Another
,tateK
>0 *o ,tate ,hall" during 4ar" 'ermit ,uch Acts of @ostility 4hich 4ould Make
Mutual )onfidence in the ,ubse-uent 'eace Impossible0 ,uch Are the Employment of
Assassins $percussores%" 'oisoners $!enefici%" 8reach of )apitulation" and Incitement to
Treason $perduellio% in the 7pposing ,tateL $Aant 20070 71::%
And the three definiti!e articles are0
I:0 The )i!il )onstitution of E!ery ,tate ,hould 8e ?epublican
20 The Da# of *ations ,hall be Founded on a Federation of Free ,tates
B0 The Da# of 4orld )iti2enship ,hall 8e Dimited to )onditions of +ni!ersal
@ospitalityL $Aant 20070 :B12:%
In Aant.s !ision of a peaceful #orld a fe# things stand out Most importantly from the
theoretical point of !ie# are the preliminary articles #hich try to pre!ent suspicion or
animosity bet#een states such as article : or > This !ie# in itself entails that there is a
possibility to change the #ay states interact and !ie# each other ( it doesn.t ha!e to be
an anarchical society for eternity This particular point also e&plains #hy 4endt has
found Aant.s thoughts intriguing enough to incorporate them into his theoretical
frame#ork T#o other curious points in Aant.s 'erpetual 'eace is that he goes to great
lengths to e&plain the differences bet#een a republican and a democratic form of
go!ernment as he is -uite skeptical of democracy but supports the di!ision of po#er and
46
meritocracy *ot surprisingly he strongly recommends that philosophers should be
taken in on counsel in any go!ernment decision In his !ie# of a peaceful future he
doesn.t en!ision a #orld go!ernment as he thinks it #ill be too la& and lose its
legislati!e dynamics 7n the other hand he ad!ocates a loose federation of states #hich
guarantees safety for all people tra!eling among them ( as can be seen in the definiti!e
articles 2 and B
Turning to 4endt.s !ersion of Aant.s ideas and the Aantian culture again 1 an e&ample
#hich is difficult to e&plain #ithin the logic of neither the Dockean nor the @obbesian
cultures is the close cooperation seen bet#een the *AT7 countries In a @obbesian
culture this #ould ne!er ha!e happened #hereas in the Dockean culture it could ha!e
been e&plainable as long as the 4arsa# 'act and the +,,? still e&isted After the fall of
the +,,? and the disappearance of a percei!ed common enemy of the *AT7 member
states" ri!alry bet#een the member states should ha!e reignited and the alliance slo#ly
dissol!ed Instead the alliance has persisted and there are still areas #ith close
cooperation bet#een member states #hich in instances goes beyond national egoism
$4endt 20070 2<7%
The term friendship #hich this culture in!ol!es is signified by t#o rules ( namely that
conflicts or disputes #ill be resol!ed #ithout #ar or threat of #ar and they #ill both
engage in a conflict if one of the t#o is attacked ( ie #ork as a team This can
resemble an alliance but" in a friendship the notion of #ar bet#een the friends are
unthinkable in an alliance the notion of #ar is only unthinkable as long as the alliance
e&ists ( in other #ords a kind of friendship limited by time Furthermore it is important
to note that the term friendship in the Aantian culture is regarding security areas only (
friends can still compete economically for e&ample E&amples of friendships in
international relations in our contemporary #orld could be the special relationship
bet#een +,A and +A or bet#een the *ordic states The relations bet#een these
countries are characteri2ed by it being inconcei!able for a state of #ar to e!ol!e
$4endt 20070 2<<%
+sing the notion of friendship in international relations must also signify a degree of
selflessness since state A might help its friend state 8 #ith a problem e!en if this
doesn.t directly benefit state A If a state is not necessarily egoistic and selfish and a
4#
degree of trust can e!ol!e bet#een states it is a possibility to escape the international
anarchy characteri2ing @obbesian and Dockean ideas ( if not on a global le!el then on a
regional le!el Ale&ander 4endt gi!es the e&ample of the +nites ,tates and )anada
E!en if these t#o neighboring countries ha!e se!eral disputes o!er for e&ample fishing
rights and the +nited ,tates is much more po#erful than its northern neighbor it #ould
ne!er consider using force to its o#n benefit to#ards )anada The same situation could
be seen #ithin for e&ample the European +nion A culture has de!eloped here #hich
has made military po#er obsolete #ithin the sphere
Furthermore it.s #orth mentioning that the constructi!ism de!iates from for e&ample
neorealism in the approach to the difference bet#een anarchy and hierarchy 4here the
neorealist sees anarchy as a result of the absence of a centrali2ed authority ( ie a
@obbesian le!iathan or #orld go!ernment ( the constructi!ist doesn.t necessarily see
anarchy being the necessary product of the absence of a centrali2ed authority If the
Aantian culture de!elops sufficiently amongst a community of states on a global or
regional le!el" it is possible for anarchy to !anish in a decentrali2ed arena $4endt 20070
B0>1B0;%
An important aspect #hen looking at the contents of the Aantian culture in international
relations is looking at ho# this culture can de!elop and e!entually become entrenched
It is some conundrum ho# the former enemies of the @obbesian #orld or ri!als in the
Dockean #orld can become friendly to#ards each other This #ill certainly not happen
from one day to the other but #ill be a long process #hich can be split up in three ma/or
phases The first phase #ould be an e&tension of #hat can be seen in a Dockean culture
( if the pre!ention from killing other states in time increases to become a norm of not
attacking the foundation for the Aantian culture is in place ( #here coercion maintains
the non!iolence From here it can de!elop #ith the norms becoming more entrenched
and cooperation increases Jou #ill in this second phase see states cooperating and
seemingly act selflessly ( this #ill not be genuine though The norms are here to act
friendly" and as this is the e&pected #ay of communication the state is acting this #ay
because it kno#s this is ho# it achie!es its goals and a!oids becoming the !ictim of
sanctions The idea behind the third and final phase is that the actions #ill e!entually
become more genuine and less fundamentally based on egoism $4endt 20070 B0B1B0>%
48
"he sociali3ation of international relations
After ha!ing e&plored the different cultures #hich can de!elop in international relations
and ho# they can become entrenched" it is time to disco!er the most important aspect of
the constructi!ist theory ( the ability of states to learn and affect one another The core
of constructi!ism is that interests and identities are created and are continuously
modified through interactions #ith others
4endt tries to e&plain this through his e&ample of Alter and Ego meeting each other for
the first time 8oth are focused on sur!i!al and ha!e material force to try to back up that
interest ( but apart from this they ha!en.t created any common interests or e&pectations
At this first meeting e!ery single gesture and mo!ement is important to signal
peacefulness" animosity or outright threatening beha!ior As soon as Alter decides to act
one #ay" Ego #ill begin to interpret that action and respond to this beha!ior Ego might
misinterpret Alter.s intentions and act unaccordingly to this" causing Alter to change its
stance In any e!ent" a common history is starting to #rite itself for the t#o and each of
them #ill begin de!eloping opinions of the other and also de!elop beha!ioral patterns in
relation to other entities in general based on its recent e&periences The understandings
and e&pectations of others #ill therefore be the ma/or part of the formation of the
actor.s interests and identities $4endt :<<20 =0=1=07%
8elo# is a figure sho#ing the formation of states identities and interests through
interaction0
4-
As seen in the figure the process of state sociali2ation is seen in a limited arena of only
t#o states ( the formation of state identities and interests are here !isually e&plained A
state encounters an issue and begins analy2ing it from the perspecti!e of its pre!ious
e&perience $ie it.s pre!iously created identities and interests% and decides on #hat it
deems to be an appropriate action 7ther states #ill begin analy2ing this action and #ill
try to figure out #hat reaction it might re-uire and acts upon it ( and so it continues
These state actions all add up to the common history of the states and are the
fundamental building blocks of the mutual e&pectations of each other.s actions and in
turn formation of o#n identity and interest
,ummary
The constructi!ist theory is distinguished from the other theories presented and utili2ed
in this thesis as more dynamic and some#hat more unpredictable than the others
"tate 1 !ith identities and
interests
+ntersub:ecti*e understandings
and eDpectations possessed
by and constituti*e of 1 and 3
"tate 3 !ith identities and
interests
=1> "timulus reBuring
action
=&>"tateEs 1 definition
of the situation
=3> "tate 1Es action
=4> "tateEs 3
interpretation of 1Es
action and 3Es o!n
definition of the
situation
=(> "tateEs 3Es action
(0
Instead of e&plaining beha!ior in international relations as static ( as in neorealism ( or
follo#ing more predictable rules ( such as in neoliberalism ( constructi!ism is more
open1ended 4hat matters is the interaction bet#een the actors and their shared history
A history of !iolence and a high death rate among states #ill result in a /ustified
paranoia amongst them and a de!ol!ement into a @obbesian culture of kill or be killed"
#hile a history of cooperation and mutual respect of so!ereignty can lead to a Dockean
or e!entually e!en a Aantian culture 4endt therefore see the anarchy of international
relations as a product of the state sociali2ation and therefore possible to change ( or as
his article is titled0 IAnarchy is #hat states make of itL $4endt :<<B0 B<:%
Analysis
In this chapter it #ill be attempted to pro!ide an analysis of the topic of the thesis in
order to reach a conclusion and as clear an ans#er for the problem formulation as
possible The analytical chapter #ill be di!ided in four main sections The first section
#ill attempt to analyse the problem through the application of the soft po#er theory" the
second section from the perspecti!e of neorealism and the third from the perspecti!e of
constructi!ism In the fourth section the findings of the three preceding sections #ill be
held up against each other and discussed This final analytical discussion #ill in the end
pro!ide a basis for the final conclusion of the thesis
Application of soft power
This chapter seeks to pro!ide an e&planatory model for the problem formulation
through the lens of soft po#er As the problem formulation is di!ided in to three steps
so #ill this chapter At first it #ill be e&plored #hy ministries of foreign affairs ha!e
made mo!es to rein!ent themsel!es through the introduction of rather ne# concepts
such as public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural diplomacy After this it #ill be
e&plored #hether or not these ne# approaches signify a more efficient #ay of reaching
foreign policy goals Finally it #ill be e&plored #hether this constitutes a breakthrough
in international relations from the !ie#point of soft po#er theory
(1
New ways of conducting diplomacy
4hen considering #hy these ne# communicati!e and open approaches to conducting
diplomacy to#ards a #ider group than traditional diplomacy it is necessary to look at
the basic moti!ations of the states behind the diplomacy Throughout time the areas of
competition bet#een states ha!e been mo!ing from the core hard po#er areas of
economic and military affairs to increasingly include soft po#er areas as #ell ( this has
to especially be seen in the light of #ars generally has become too destructi!e
If it is becoming more difficult to coerce other states in to doing #hat you #ant then it
is possible to utili2e the more subtle approach to po#er mentioned in the theoretical
section ( namely to persuade them to think that your goal is identical #ith their goal
'ublic diplomacy and cultural diplomacy can then be seen as tools of increasing other
publics understanding and sympathy of one.s cause and thereby in turn make these
people pressure there go!ernments to act fa!ourable to#ards the sending state ( or at
least not hostile As mentioned in the theoretical presentation of soft po#er" it is
necessary for a go!ernment to increase its credibility to increase its soft po#er and that
is e&actly the same case as #ith public diplomacy and ho# public diplomacy is
distinguishable from its cousin propaganda The same goes for the necessity to listen to
#hat others has to say and be focused on the dialogue instead of /ust the monologue All
these points suggest that the ne# approaches to conducting diplomacy ha!e come in
place because of the recognition of the !alue of soft po#er
A final note to this area is #hy the initiati!es primarily ha!e been introduced in Europe
and *orth America It could likely be because there are directed more resources in to
trying out ne# approaches in these countries. ministries of foreign affairs but there
could also be another cause of this As mentioned in the theoretical presentation of soft
po#er that states #hich are closer to the predominant !alues and ideologies in the #orld
#ill command a !aster soft po#er than countries further a#ay from the predominant
ideologies ,ince the end of the )old 4ar these !alues has generally been dictated by
the +nited ,tates ( #hy it is namely this and fairly similar countries #hich focus on
these ne# approaches to conducting foreign relations
(&
More efficient in reaching foreign policy goals
In accordance #ith the theory of soft po#er the increased focus on public diplomacy
can signify a more efficient #ay of reaching foreign policy goals assuming that these
goals are fairly standard ones such as impro!ing one.s economy" international standing
and political positioning As mentioned in the theoretical chapter these initiati!es cannot
stand alone as it is /ust one part of a bigger soft po#er picture and one could fear that
this is not al#ays reali2ed )omplementary areas to increase soft po#er could include
generous contributions of de!elopment aid" strong profile in peacekeeping operations or
a tolerant and fair treatment of domestic minorities Areas such as these #ill more often
be guided by either domestic or hard po#er $economic% concerns rather than soft po#er
concerns ( de!elopment aid #ill be cut due to budget concerns" domestic minorities #ill
e&perience high le!els of intolerance in order to increase support amongst more
nationalist minded segments of the electorate etc This can easily result in public
diplomacy not being able to achie!e results to its fullest potential as it does not recei!e
the backing it needs in other areas
Furthermore the concept of nation branding could pose a problem to the success of
public diplomacy As nation branding is -uite focused on commercial principles and has
the attention of the pri!ate sector its primary goal is to benefit the area of economic
po#er ( ie the second chessboard This can be unfortunate for the possibilities for
success in the area of public diplomacy The reason for this is that nation branding in
itself does not ha!e to follo# the complete truth ( rather it is about creating images and
artificially a#aken emotional attachments to a location In this #ay it di!erges from one
of the basic principles of soft po#er and public diplomacy ( namely to stick to the truth
and increase credibility In this #ay the concept of nation branding is counter producti!e
to public diplomacy and thereby to increase soft po#er
Breakthrough in international relations
As it has been established that public diplomacy cannot reach its potential due to other
factors such as remaining hard po#er concerns" domestic concerns and the counter
producti!e element of nation branding" the introduction of public diplomacy does not
(3
constitute a breakthrough in the basic principles in international relations ( it rather
seems like an initiati!e taken #ith all the best intentions but to limited effect
If it is assumed that public diplomacy did not ha!e these current hindrances ( #ould it
then plausibly signify a change in the basic principles of international relationsG Ie if
all the necessary support #as in place for the public diplomacy efforts and the main
attention of foreign relations policy #as on soft po#er In a #ay it a change #ould be
plausible in that ma/or armed conflict has gro#n increasingly rare and obsolete but then
again the focus on soft po#er is basically /ust taking the international competition to
another chessboard and states #ill remain as competiti!e as al#ays The introduction of
public diplomacy #ould therefore signify yet another tool of po#er rather than a #ay to
increase cooperation
Summary
4hen !ie#ing public diplomacy through the lens of the theory of soft po#er it e&plains
that public diplomacy has come to e&istence because the state actors see soft po#er as
real po#er and therefore #orth#hile competing o!er 8ut as public diplomacy often
#ill stand alone #ithout the necessary support of other policy areas" it does not at the
moment signify a more efficient means of reaching foreign policy goals or constitute a
fundamental breakthrough in international relations
If public diplomacy at one time recei!es the necessary backing of other areas and focus
on soft po#er #ill rise to prominence alongside economic" domestic and military
concerns it can potentially be a !ery important competiti!e tool of po#er bet#een
states It is still unlikely though that there #ill be any significant change in the basic
principles of international relations
Application of neorealism
This chapter #ill aim at analy2ing the topic of interest from the perspecti!e of
neorealism in order to reach an attempt of an ans#er for the problem formulation The
structure of this chapter #ill be similar to that of the preceding one #ith one e&ception
(4
As the analysis at hand #ill reach a -uite different conclusion than the one reached
pre!iously the subchapters" of #hether or not the ne# approaches to diplomacy are
more efficient at reaching foreign policy goals and #hether the concepts signify a
fundamental change in international relations" #ill be merged After the main analytical
sections of the chapter there #ill be a short summary of the conclusions reached through
the analysis from the neorealist perspecti!e
From the neorealist perspecti!e the rise of concepts such as public diplomacy is -uite
pu22ling at best and utterly nonsense at #orst As the only entity #hich truly matters in
international relations is the state and the state #ill act rationally and not change its
basic beha!ioural patterns as long as there is no #orld go!ernment in place the rise of
public diplomacy is a mistake The assumption that by creating close relations bet#een
one.s o#n population and foreign populations or by seeming more open to dialogue #ill
change other states beha!iour to#ards oneself is a miscalculation as state beha!iour #ill
ne!er change due to the anarchic conditions states e&ist under
,ince it is a fact that public diplomacy initiati!es has been established in a #ide range of
countries the reason must lie in the #rong perception that the reason for conflict lies in
the evilness of man and the unpredictable beha!iour of the indi!iduals in po#er ( ie
the first image In other #ords the public diplomacy initiati!es has been started because
it is hoped that one can directly or indirectly affect the future leaders of a country to
ha!e a good impression of one.s o#n country and thereby increasing the security of that
country because it #ill ha!e postponed possible conflict #ith this state
Follo#ing the argument of the preceding paragraph the rise of public diplomacy does
not signify a more efficient #ay of reaching foreign policy goals as the basic interests of
a state is static and communication #ith foreign publics #ill not to any significant
e&tent result in increased security for the sending state rather it #ill likely be a #aste of
((
resources gi!ing a competiti!e edge to the states not #asting funds on these ill1
concei!ed concepts
?egarding nation branding though" this can be a good initiati!e as such from the
!ie#point of neorealism in that it can affect a state.s economic strength positi!ely and
thereby increasing its po#er and security *ation branding as such does not really ha!e
anything significant to do #ith international relations as such though since it only is of
importance as an e&port1enhancing initiati!e and #on.t change the approach to#ards
other states fundamentally
,ince the concepts are not really of any significant use in the competition bet#een states
or affecting the relationship bet#een states in any real #ay" the rise of public diplomacy
does not constitute any fundamental change in the #ay international relations are taking
place
Summary
,ince neorealism !ie# state beha!iour as rational and the international en!ironment as
anarchical and static" the ne# concepts of public diplomacy does not ha!e any rele!ance
to international relations at all and has probably arisen to prominence lately by the
mistake of seeing human beha!iour as the source of conflict and therefore the #ay to
limit direct conflict is to create beneficial !ie#s of one.s state among foreign publics
E!en though nation branding can be seen as beneficial indirectly to a state.s security by
proposing a #ay to increase the economic strength of a state it does not ha!e anything to
do #ith international relations as such but is merely an ad!anced ad!ertisement
campaign
Application of constructivism
Dike the t#o pre!ious chapters" this chapter #ill aim at pro!iding an e&planatory model
in order to gi!e some ans#ers in relation to the problem formulation It #ill do this
through the application of constructi!ism as it #as presented in the corresponding
theoretical chapter This current chapter #ill generally be structured in the same #ay as
the preceding t#o chapters by e&ploring the three le!els of the problem formulation one
at a time First it #ill look in to #hy the communicati!e approaches to diplomacy has
(6
arisen to prominence the last years follo#ed by an in!estigation on #hether it can
signify a more efficient #ay of reaching foreign policy goals from a theoretical
approach Finally it #ill be e&plored #hether or not this can be deemed as constituting a
significant breakthrough in the #ay international relations generally are conducted
After this chapter the final analysis and conclusion of the thesis #ill follo#
From the constructi!ist point of !ie# the reason #hy public diplomacy and other
communicati!e approaches to conducting diplomacy has arisen can be manifold as it is
a -uite fle&ible theory so to speak ( international relations is #hat states make of it after
all 7ne interpretation can be de!eloped by looking at the general #orld history since
4orld 4ar II In 4orld 4ar t#o the dominant culture must be deemed to ha!e been a
@obbesian culture ( a kill or be killed culture This #as re!erted back to a Dockean
culture as the Allies or the status -uo po#ers #on the #ar During the post1#ar period
and the )old 4ar the Dockean culture became increasingly entrenched ( this #as partly
due to coercion" as the theory proscribes" since it became too costly to engage in #ar
partly due to the nuclear bomb Ma/or #ars #ere rare" borders hardly mo!ed and a -uite
significant amount of respect for so!ereignty of states ( at least for the most part E!en
as the ma/or ri!alry in the #orld bet#een the +nited ,tates and the ,o!iet +nion ended
#ith the )old 4ar alliances persisted and gre# closer e!en though an increased
competition should ha!e been e&pected As this did not happen the Dockean culture
must be deemed to ha!e reached one of its most entrenched phases ,ince the culture is
that entrenched there is no serious fear that the status -uo should not be maintained and
it is becoming increasingly desirable to increase dialogue and understanding bet#een
countries
As the Dockean culture can be deemed to ha!e reached its most entrenched phase it
gi!es room to se# the seeds of friendship bet#een peoples and states among the #orld
,o #hen seeing #hether a state becomes more efficient at reaching its foreign policy
goals through the use of public diplomacy or not" this might not be the right -uestion to
ask in this relation If the Dockean culture has reached its final stages and has begun to
(#
approach other countries through increased dialogue" openness and honesty" this can
signify the mo!e from a Dockean to a Aantian culture If the culture of international
relations are changing from a Dockean to a Aantian it #ould entail a change of foreign
policy goals #hich in turn makes the -uestion obsolete in itself
The emergence of public diplomacy can therefore more be seen as a tool to increase
sociali2ation bet#een states #ith foreign publics as the medium 8y affecting foreign
publics through openness" sincerity and dialogue these #ill in turn affect their
go!ernments increasing the prospects of possible friendship bet#een the t#o states in
-uestion
Breakthrough in international relations
If the culture of international relations are changing from Dockean to Aantian partly due
to the effects of public diplomacy this signifies an enormous potential change in the
fundamental #ays international relations are taking place The reason for this is that it
changes ho# states are sociali2ed ( from seeing each other as ri!als they #ill begin to
see each other as friends instead This can in turn make room for a pre!iously unheard
of degree of cooperation in international relations In the early stages after a ne# culture
has been introduced in international relations" it #ill be se!erely fragile though The
slightest break of trust bet#een the former ri!als turned friends could potentially re!ert
the culture back ( at least until it has become more entrenched In short" the rise to
prominence of public diplomacy does not in itself signify a big fundamental change in
the conduct of international relations but rather plays an important part in this potential
change
Summary
,ince constructi!ism is a !ery fle&ible theory" se!eral different scenarios could be
plausible according to the theory The e&planation mentioned here ha!e been chosen as
it resonates #ell #ith the theory as presented in the theoretical chapter as #ell as
pro!iding a distinct third way ( meaning that it is -uite different from the e&planatory
model used both in the chapter of soft po#er and of neorealism Throughout the past
(8
si&ty years the Dockean culture has gro#n increasingly entrenched as the primary
culture of international relations There ha!e been fe# #ars due to the costly nature of it
after the in!ention of the nuclear bomb" a high degree of respect for so!ereignty and
maintenance of the status -uo This has especially been true for the post1)old 4ar era
and can be deemed as signifying a highly entrenched Dockean culture
The rise of public diplomacy can therefore be interpreted as a sign that the culture of
international relations are on the !erge of a change from the Dockean to the Aantian
culture #ith an increased focus on communication" openness and dialogue ( key tools to
sociali2e the states into seeing each other as friends rather than ri!als
Conclusion
In this chapter the final conclusion for the problem formulation #ill be sought This #ill
be done through a criti-ue of the pre!ious three analytical chapters #hich took their
basis in soft po#er" neorealism and constructi!ism
In relation to the theory and analytical chapter of neorealism" this theory is in its !ery
nature -uite conser!ati!e and static 8ecause of its firm !ie# that the basic #ays states
are relating to one another ne!er changes ( there #ill al#ays be anarchy and states #ill
al#ays secure themsel!es" e!en if it means attacking others This lea!es no room for
analysis of concepts like public diplomacy or nation branding" but it rather dismisses
these outright Furthermore a pu22ling aspect to this theory is that if the state is a
rational actor and public diplomacy initiati!es e-uals nonsense ( ho# can a state then
rationally choose to organi2e and fund significant public diplomacy strategies
As for the analytical approach of constructi!ism ( this theoretical approach lea!es
plenty of room to speculate about the causes and effects of public diplomacy strategies
As it potentially attributes -uite a significant amount of importance to public diplomacy
initiati!es" it thereby also makes it more understandable #hy so much time" effort and
resources are channelled into public diplomacy" nation branding and cultural diplomacy
initiati!es Furthermore it lea!es open room for the most positi!e e&planation of #hy
these public diplomacy initiati!es ha!e been initiali2ed around the #orld This is
(-
e&plained in the analytical chapter as because there is a change of culture taking place
or about to change place in the international en!ironment #hich #ill affect ho# states
are reacting to#ards one another
7ne of the more problematic areas of the e&planatory model this theory offers is also
#hy it is ultimately re/ected as usable in achie!ing a satisfactory ans#er to the problem
formulation is that the theory is too open1ended 8asically the theory lea!es room to
e&plain any and all state beha!iour to#ards other states ,ome firm standpoints of the
theory #ould make it easier to utili2e efficiently As the theory stands no#" the only
firm standpoint it has is that international relations is #hat states make of it As it
stands" state actions and beha!iour is completely dependable on ho# states are
sociali2ed to#ards one another in the international en!ironment If the international
en!ironment does not see armed conflict for a significant amount of time the states
inhabiting this en!ironment #ill ultimately stop e!en considering armed conflict in the
future
4ith regards to the theory of soft po#er and its analytical approach to the present
problems it occupies a middle1ground bet#een the stance taken by the constructi!ist
approach and the stance taken by the neorealist approach The e&planatory model used
#ith this theory attributes a certain amount of potential to#ards the public diplomacy
initiati!es seen around the #orld E!en though attributes much significance to #hat the
initiati!es are aimed at achie!ing it promotes some scepticism to#ards #hether it #ill
succeed or not The reason for this scepticism is that presently it seems like most states
are prioriti2ing other areas before considering soft po#er ( namely economic" military
or domestic issues As the theory of soft po#er estimates that it is necessary to act on a
large front in order for soft po#er to rise to any significance ( e!en if it means taking
un#ise decisions in relation to economic gro#th or domestic support A point of interest
is especially #ith regards to nation branding As nation branding is a close cousin of
public diplomacy one #ould assume that they #ould complement each other but that is
not the case as it #as disco!ered ?ather the false or ideali2ed images promoted through
nation branding campaigns di!erts -uite a bit from se!eral of the basic principles of
public diplomacy ( namely to promote openness" dialogue and most importantly
increase credibility and honesty
60
Finally" to address the problem formulation #ith some concluding remarks ( the reasons
#hy public diplomacy initiati!es has gained prominence in the last years can be
attributed to an increased recognition of soft po#er It is currently not deemed to be of
much importance though" as the area still has a secondary priority despite praising
#ords from ministries of foreign affairs around the #orld ,ince it is only a secondary
priority and does not recei!e the kind of all round support it needs" it is not likely to
foreign policy goals more easily attainable In relation to the last part of the problem
formulation ( #hether or not the focus on public diplomacy constitutes a breakthrough
in international relations ( the ans#er must be no It might one time play a primary role
of international relations but it #ill not change the basic principles states are operating
under internationally
61
Bibliography
Andreasen" + $2007% 6iplomati og ;lobalisering + *n introduktion til ?ublic 6iplomacy"
Museum Tusculanums Forlag AMbenha!ns +ni!ersitet0 )openhagen
Arndt" ?T $2009% The 4irst -esort of Fings# 1merican <ultural 6iplomacy in the Twentieth
<entury" 'otomac 8ooks0 4ashington D)
Ashley" ?A $:<;>% The ?overty of Georealism" *eorealism and its )ritics" ?obert 7 Aeohane
$ed% pp 2991B00" )olumbia +ni!ersity 'ress0 *e# Jork
8erridge" 6?" Maurice Aeens1,oper and T6 7tte $200:% 6iplomatic Theory from
@achiavelli to Fissinger" 'algra!e0 *e# Jork
8erridge" 6? $2009% 6iplomacy + Theory and ?ractice" 'algra!e Macmillan0 *e# Jork
8ull" @ $2002% The 1narchical 0ociety + 1 0tudy of .rder in Borld ?olitics" 'algra!e0 *e#
Jork
)erny" '6 $2007% ?aradoCes of the <ompetition 0tate# The 6ynamics of ?olitical
;lobali:ation" 6o!ernment and 7pposition !ol B2 issue 2" pp 29:127=
)olumbia +ni!ersity *e#s" http0CC###columbiaeduCcuCprC00C0BCkenneth4alt2html"
Naccessed on :
st
March 200<O
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark" ###umdkCenCmenuCAbout+,C7rganisationC
7rganisation)hartC+AAE7rganigramhtm" Naccessed :>
th
*o!ember 200;O
6ilpin" ?6 $:<;>% The -ichness of the Tradition of ?olitical -ealism" *eorealism and its
)ritics" ?obert 7 Aeohane $ed% pp B0:1B2:" )olumbia +ni!ersity 'ress0 *e# Jork
!an @am" ' $2002% 8randing Territory# 'nside the Bonderful Borlds of ?- and '- Theory"
Millennium ( 5ournal of International ,tudies 2002" B: pp 2=<12><
!an @am" ' $200B%Bar, >ies, and Hideotape# ?ublic 6iplomacy and the =01&s Bar on
Terrorism" ,ecurity Dialogue !ol B=" no = pp =271===
!an @am" ' $200=% The -ise of the 8rand 0tate + The ?ostmodern ?olitics of 'mage and
-eputation" Foreign Affairs !ol ;0 no 9 pp 21>
@ar!ard ( Aennedy ,chool" http0CC###hkshar!ardeduCaboutCfaculty1staff1directoryC/oseph1
nye" Naccessed :>
th
March 200<O
@obbes" T $:<<=% >eviathan" @ackett 'ublishing )ompany0 IndianapolisC)ambridge
@ocking" 8 $2007% -ethinking the 9Gew& ?ublic 6iplomacy" The *e# 'ublic Diplomacy ( ,oft
'o#er in International ?elations" 5an Melissen $ed% pp 2;1=>" 'algra!e Macmillan0 Dondon
@offman" D $2002% 8eyond ?ublic 6iplomacy" Foreign Affairs MarCApr 2002 !ol ;: issue 2"
pp ;B1<9
6&
Aant" I $2007% ?erpetual ?eace" Fili-uarian 'ublishing" DD)0 +nited Aingdom
Denc2o#ski" 5 $2007% Feep the purpose clear" The 'ublic Diplomacy ?eader" 5 M 4aller
$ed%" The Institute of 4orld 'olitics 'ress0 4ashington pp :<>1:<7
Deonard" M $2002% ?ublic 6iplomacy" The Foreign 'olicy )entre0 Dondon
Deonard" M $2002b% 6iplomacy by .ther @eans" Foreign 'olicy ,eptemberC7ctober :B2" pp
=;19>
Docke" 5 $:<;0% 0econd Treatise of ;overnment" @ackett 'ublishing )ompany0
IndianapolisC)ambridge
Martinich" A' $2009% 5obbes" ?outledge0 *e# Jork
Mead" 4? $200=% 1merica&s 0ticky ?ower" Foreign 'olicy" MarchCApril 200=" no > pp =>19B
Melissen" 5 $2007% 8etween Theory and ?ractice" The *e# 'ublic Diplomacy ( ,oft 'o#er in
International ?elations" 5an Melissen $ed% pp B127" 'algra!e Macmillan0 Dondon
Mershon )enter for International ,ecurity ,tudies"
https0CCkbosueduCdspaceCbitstreamC:;::CB00<0C:C4endtP20Ale&anderP20Mershon
P208ioP20200>107pdf Naccessed :>
th
March 200<O
*ye" 5, $:<<:% 8ound to >ead + the changing nature of 1merican power" 8asic 8ooks0 +nited
,tates
*ye" 5, $200=% 0oft ?ower + the means to success in world politics" 'ublic Affairs0 *e# Jork
*ye" 5, $2002% The ?aradoC of 1merican ?ower + why the world&s only superpower can&t go
it alone" 7&ford +ni!ersity 'ress0 7&ford
7lins" 4 $2007% @aking a Gational 8rand" The *e# 'ublic Diplomacy ( ,oft 'o#er in
International ?elations" 5an Melissen $ed% pp :><1:7<" 'algra!e Macmillan0 Dondon
?iordan" , $2007% 6ialogue-based ?ublic 6iplomacy" The *e# 'ublic Diplomacy ( ,oft
'o#er in International ?elations" 5an Melissen $ed% pp :;01:<9" 'algra!e Macmillan0 Dondon
?oss" ) $2002% ?ublic 6iplomacy <omes of 1ge" The 4ashington Quarterly" spring 2002" 2902"
pp 791;B
?oss" ) $200B% ?illars of ?ublic 6iplomacy + ;rappling with 'nternational ?ublic .pinion"
@ar!ard International ?e!ie#" summer 200B pp 22127
,chneider" )' $2007% <ulture <ommunicates# =0 6iplomacy That Borks" The *e# 'ublic
Diplomacy ( ,oft 'o#er in International ?elations" 5an Melissen $ed% pp :=71:>;" 'algra!e
Macmillan0 Dondon
+, Department of ,tate $2009% <ultural 6iplomacy + the >inchpin of ?ublic 6iplomacy"
http0CC###statego!CdocumentsCorgani2ationC9=B7=pdf Naccessed 2nd of February 200<O
63
4alt2" A* $:<;>a% ?olitical 0tructures" *eorealism and its )ritics" ?obert 7 Aeohane $ed%
pp 701<7" )olumbia +ni!ersity 'ress0 *e# Jork
4alt2" A* $:<;>b% 1narchic .rders and 8alancing of ?ower" *eorealism and its )ritics"
?obert 7 Aeohane $ed% pp <;1:B0" )olumbia +ni!ersity 'ress0 *e# Jork
4alt2" A* $200:% @an, the 0tate and Bar + a theoretical analysis" )olumbia +ni!ersity
'ress0 *e# Jork
4endt" A $:<<2% 1narchy is what states make of it# the social construction of power politics"
International 7rgani2ation =>" 2" ,pring :<<2 pp B<:1=29" 4orld 'eace Foundation and the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
4endt" A $2007% 0ocial Theory of 'nternational ?olitics" )ambridge +ni!ersity 'ress0
)ambridge
64
Abstract of The New Era of Diplomacy: The Effects of Public
Diplomacy, Nation randing and Cultural Diplomacy!
The topic on !hich the thesis is centered is on concepts of public diplomacy6 nation
branding and cultural diplomacy @ especially public diplomacy is in focus. The aim of
the thesis is !hy these concepts has rised in prominence amongst se*eral ministries of
foreign affairs in Furope and orth 1merica lately and has become an integrated part
of their diplomatic strategy. Furthermore it see/s to eDplore !hether these concepts !ill
contribute to an increased efficiency in reaching foreign policy goals and if they signify
a fundamental change in the !ay international relations are *ie!ed. The first parts of
the thesis gi*es a short outline of the history of traditional diplomacy6 follo!ed by a
presentation of public diplomacy6 nation branding and cultural diplomacy. The biggest
significance is gi*en to the presentation of public diplomacy as it is the most analytically
interesting concept in relation to the problem formulation.
These Buestions are eDplored from the *ie!point of three theories namely Aoseph ".
yeEs theory of soft po!er6 0enneth ?alt,E *ie! of neorealism and 1leDander ?endtEs
*ersion of constructi*ism. ?here the analysis from the neorealist perspecti*e dismisses
the importance of public diplomacy and partly nation branding the constructi*ist are
more enthusiastic in its approach @ accepting the possibility of fundamental change in
international relations6 partly due to the significance of public diplomacy. The theory of
soft po!er occupies a middle;ground bet!een the other t!o theories and is cautiously
optimistic of public diplomacy but *ery sceptical to!ards nation branding. $egretably
the analysis from the soft po!er approach deems public diplomacy to ha*e limited
rele*ance in international relations at the moment as most state initiati*es to increase
their soft po!er are at best half;hearted. +n the conclusion the analytical results of the
soft po!er approach are deemed more realistic than both constructi*ism and
neorealism.
The methodological approach of the thesis is *ery theoretically centered and a
significant effort has been put in presenting the three theories thoroughly !ith use of
both the !or/s of the theorists themsel*es as !ell as se*eral !or/s of philosophers
often cited by them @ including +mmanuel 0ant6 Thomas )obbes and Aohn 'oc/e.
6(

The - New - Era - of - Diplomacy - The Effects of Public Diplomacy Nation Branding and Cultural Diplomacy

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

The - New - Era - of - Diplomacy - The Effects of Public Diplomacy Nation Branding and Cultural Diplomacy

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Table of contents

Potrebbero piacerti anche