member of the SS during the rule of Adolf Hitler. Austria made sure it played politics of the masses by trying to appease them and their thoughts through public diplomacy. One surprising twist ensued in 1986 –1992 when he was elected President of the same country which had rejected him as UN Secretary General between 1972 - 1981. Wikileaks publications has also pointed out Pakistan’s staunch support for the Taliban and providing them with logistical support. After floods hitting Pakistan, most countries turned their backs on them for supporting the Taliban but Pakistan stepped forward and requested external support in exchange to battle terror networks, which I perceive as politics of opportunism to appease western public to change their mindset about Pakistan’s role in the war against terror. There are corrosive misapplications when the case of Pakistan is for instance mentioned. Long term use of public diplomacy tends to self-destruct in this case within a period of time, whilst short term public diplomacy identifies underlying issues in the fabric of this particular dispensation. Another thesis is the underestimation of self advertising, which could totally backfire at the hands of assertive post – modern publics. US policy has mostly failed in the Middle East because, it has failed to recognize a new generation who are deep rooted or traumatized through conflicts by US – Israeli alliance. President Obama reached out to the Islamic world, through a speech in Indonesia saying: ‘I have made it a priority to repair this relationship. United States is committed to human progress. America will never be at war with Islam’. This is a typical diplomatic outreach to a particular public by addressing their issues at heart knowing this carefully chosen public could catapult American public policy in a world where mistrust is key. Obama knew the crowd in Indonesia reflected Islamic moderatism and could use such audience to counter balance the power struggle with Islamic fundamentalism. Thursday, 11 November 2010
Influencing The public through 'Propaganda'.
When world politics was conducted in the spirit of savagery and wars, many felt let down by policy makers and their cohorts. This formed the danger to appeal to the masses in a coherent dimension, directing world affairs unto the doorsteps of the population. Edward Gullion is thought to have coined the term of public policy and elaborated: ‘it is the manipulation of foreign public’. Public democracy could be described as one of the most fundamental pillars to reach out to foreign publics to consider or justify your actions. I strongly believe that, public diplomacy has strong values of propagatory characteristics which could be analysed as pure propaganda. This kind of diplomacy has changed world politics because, it has gradually shifted the strength of commercial diplomacy to the periphery. Fundamental thesis on this topic derives its understanding from 3 central tenets: 1. Identity creation 2. Managing reputation 3.Image projection. There has also been situations were public diplomacy was considered as an important mechanism in the following case studies: The Netherlands has always been known in global politics as a country with civil liberties and undisputedly championed human rights. The world condemned The Netherlands when they legalized: same sex marriage, prostitution, hard drugs, abortion and euthanasia. These critical issues hadn’t even been considered in the US where civil morality was perceived to be on all time low. The decision to legalize all these ‘taboos’ was criticized in conservative countries but, the Dutch had already masterminded how to explain and justify their actions through the use of public diplomacy all over the world, convincing foreign publics that, the existence of humanity comes with certain civil liberties which it had reflected by legalizing its policies. Austria in another case had distanced itself publicly from the Waldheim affair. Kurt Waldheim was active 
member of the SS during the rule of Adolf Hitler. Austria made sure it played politics of the masses by trying to appease them and their thoughts through public diplomacy. One surprising twist ensued in 1986 –1992 when he was elected President of the same country which had rejected him as UN Secretary General between 1972 - 1981. Wikileaks publications has also pointed out Pakistan’s staunch support for the Taliban and providing them with logistical support. After floods hitting Pakistan, most countries turned their backs on them for supporting the Taliban but Pakistan stepped forward and requested external support in exchange to battle terror networks, which I perceive as politics of opportunism to appease western public to change their mindset about Pakistan’s role in the war against terror. There are corrosive misapplications when the case of Pakistan is for instance mentioned. Long term use of public diplomacy tends to self-destruct in this case within a period of time, whilst short term public diplomacy identifies underlying issues in the fabric of this particular dispensation. Another thesis is the underestimation of self advertising, which could totally backfire at the hands of assertive post – modern publics. US policy has mostly failed in the Middle East because, it has failed to recognize a new generation who are deep rooted or traumatized through conflicts by US – Israeli alliance. President Obama reached out to the Islamic world, through a speech in Indonesia saying: ‘I have made it a priority to repair this relationship. United States is committed to human progress. America will never be at war with Islam’. This is a typical diplomatic outreach to a particular public by addressing their issues at heart knowing this carefully chosen public could catapult American public policy in a world where mistrust is key. Obama knew the crowd in Indonesia reflected Islamic moderatism and could use such audience to counter balance the power struggle with Islamic fundamentalism.
member of the SS during the rule of Adolf Hitler. Austria made sure it played politics of the masses by trying to appease them and their thoughts through public diplomacy. One surprising twist ensued in 1986 –1992 when he was elected President of the same country which had rejected him as UN Secretary General between 1972 - 1981. Wikileaks publications has also pointed out Pakistan’s staunch support for the Taliban and providing them with logistical support. After floods hitting Pakistan, most countries turned their backs on them for supporting the Taliban but Pakistan stepped forward and requested external support in exchange to battle terror networks, which I perceive as politics of opportunism to appease western public to change their mindset about Pakistan’s role in the war against terror. There are corrosive misapplications when the case of Pakistan is for instance mentioned. Long term use of public diplomacy tends to self-destruct in this case within a period of time, whilst short term public diplomacy identifies underlying issues in the fabric of this particular dispensation. Another thesis is the underestimation of self advertising, which could totally backfire at the hands of assertive post – modern publics. US policy has mostly failed in the Middle East because, it has failed to recognize a new generation who are deep rooted or traumatized through conflicts by US – Israeli alliance. President Obama reached out to the Islamic world, through a speech in Indonesia saying: ‘I have made it a priority to repair this relationship. United States is committed to human progress. America will never be at war with Islam’. This is a typical diplomatic outreach to a particular public by addressing their issues at heart knowing this carefully chosen public could catapult American public policy in a world where mistrust is key. Obama knew the crowd in Indonesia reflected Islamic moderatism and could use such audience to counter balance the power struggle with Islamic fundamentalism. 
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Some interesting points here and some novel case studies. I should have liked a bit more discussion of each of these cases, to more fully demonstrate their significance as forms of public diplomacy and what they tell us about the latter.
ReplyDeleteSome of your turns of phrase are a little confusing and many of your points could be made more clearly. For example, what is dangerous about appealing to the public? And Gullion was keen to distinguish what he meant by public diplomacy from 'pure propaganda'. Finally, how can public diplomacy create identities? That sounds a bit ambitious.
I made an analytical case of public diplomacy creating identities through its appeal to various publics.It identifies and pursue cases through various avenues. The case of segregation in America for example in my opinion, was fundamentally associated to US public diplomacy even though the black population was protected by constitutional rights.
ReplyDeleteThis in my opinion created identities within and many recognized blacks as an opressed nationality which Malcolm X replied with: ' Dont start with Blacks as an oppressed nationality. Start with the vanguard place and weight of workers in broad proletetarian -led social and political struggles in the United States'.