A Saving Face of Public Diplomacy

The public diplomacy is a powerful tool which constructs international relations for better or for worst. It is considered to be the 'soft power' in political practise, indeed, a smart way to gain self interests and strengthen national influence in international system; promoting national culture, values, and development. It might be observed as far more open, peaceful, democratic diplomacy, however, at the same time, it can be very manipulative performing in the direction of nation state's interests, or emerging need to mislead vulnerable society, gaining support for the governmental actions.

The public diplomacy could be widely disregarded. From one hand, it could give a bad name to diplomatic practise, on the other had, it may be suggested, perhaps it is inevitable knowing that politics is likely to have a strong origin of nationalism, which spreads 'disease' in international relations.

This blog will try to look at one element of the public diplomacy – individual representatives and their importance in shaping world politics.

If the public diplomacy is to one side of the ‘soft power’, the US President Barack Obama perhaps the best representative of its practise:

Obama jokes at White House Correspondents' dinner:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rONk7YLtaLc&feature=related

President Obama plays a key role in the US foreign policy making, which is more or less successful from side to side building effective public diplomacy.

Like most of the world leaders, with goals to be a good representative of the nation, promoting its culture and values, building good international relations, and negotiating for the best deal of the state interests, indeed, public diplomacy is a significant, essential tool in modern diplomatic practise.

However, the public diplomacy is seemed to be very diverse in the sense of who is behind the scene and what a purpose of use is. For instant, diplomats or elected representatives can be seen as the public ‘face’ of the state or organization chosen for specific purpose to fill needed role. In this matter, individual representative can’t be detected as the ‘body’ of the organisation and this suggests the possibility of being manipulative organism, which doesn’t illustrate the true leaders behind the action.

Although, extraordinary individual qualities of President Obama have helped to aid the US international relations and increase trust of American government among people home and abroad, especially after the end of the Iraq War, reminds that personality matters shaping diplomatic cooperation, building prestige and peace. However, successful outcomes come to straight decisions making of the agreed strategy, not just attractive, sympathetic talking.

Few issues:

• "Outcome of G20 summit in Seoul in doubt after talks between US and Chinese leaders to end tensions over trade…The Beijing leadership criticised the Obama administration as pursuing policies harmful to free trade and today stepped up the attacks.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/11/g20-trade-deal-doubtful

Also:

· There are many questions on the will Obama face a primary challenger on expected re-election campaign in 2012 - “The guessing game goes on President Obama, weakened by his midterm “shellacking,” has to worry both about the newly empowered Republicans and about the possibility of a primary challenge from his left.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/1109/Will-Obama-face-a-primary-challenger-in-2012

The public diplomacy could help to increase international cooperation, fairer understanding of the international issues and the common interests, open negotiations with NGO's and other non-sate actors, also increase public awareness and engagement in politics, and perhaps the most importantly it is more open diplomacy with en area of the certain level for criticism towards decision making, etc.. However, it also raises production of the international propaganda, which weakens international security and relationship between sates, spreads competition, and ‘game strategy ’using media and other tools to influence international society wining public support or the best seat in international 'market'.

My point is that public diplomacy can be very diverse with conflicting outcomes. It might suggest that in the end, the building international reputation and prestige is not the most important aim of diplomacy. Finally, it might be, that to the day diplomacy will keep its practise based on national interests and ‘zero-sum' game, without effective actions working on international common goals and minimization of nationalism, there will be lack of encouraging transformation in international system, what it may be the major goal of diplomacy in its nature.

To end, just a suggesting idea, not a fact:

http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1921867