HOW EFFICIENT IS CITIZEN DIPLOMACY?

Citizen Diplomacy is a political term which describes where ordinary individuals can take an active role in promoting their nation through culture and individual efforts. This may be a deliberate action, or as a by-product of some other achievement, such as world recognition of winning a gold medal at the Olympics. The importance of Citizen Diplomacy as a means to propagate a positive world image is vital, especially if that message is meant to credibly portray independence from governmental or institutional control and doctrine.  In general, if a government or institution is seen as dictating how and which areas to promote, there is a lack of belief in the validity of the claims, and more importantly the intentions. Displays or comments from ordinary citizens, on the other hand, give a sense of sincerity and genuineness, as they are perceived as being independent.  So for a nation to be successful in promoting a positive image, it is best done independently through its people. However, there is a notable caviat to this rule when it comes to the US. Because of an increasing negative image of America and its politics, it is even more vital that a counter-image is promoted. Unfortunately, much of this anti-American feeling derives not only from the actions of its government, but of its citizens too. This means that any Citizen Diplomacy practiced would be viewed with suspicion, and this is the barrier the US must overcome.

The US has recognised that neither its government, nor its people as a whole, has a strong positive image. It also knows that to reverse this trend it must practice Citizen Diplomacy much more effectively, and at an individual level. According to the US Center for Citizen Diplomacy it states that

“Citizen Diplomacy is the concept that the individual has the right, even the responsibility, to help shape U.S. foreign relations, ‘one handshake at a time.’ Citizen diplomats can be students, teachers, athletes, artists, business people, humanitarians, adventurers or tourists. They are motivated by a responsibility to engage with the rest of the world in a meaningful, mutually beneficial dialogue.”[1]

This quotation from the document shows just important the role of Citizen Diplomats is the US, and uses the term: “responsibility” to instil an almost evangelical impetus and urgency to the task. That there are many organisations such as the Council for Educational Travel, the Public Diplomacy Council, and the US Center for Citizen Diplomacy, shows their commitment to encouraging individuals to take part to promote US culture abroad.

This approach plays to America’s strengths, in that they already have positive ambassadors abroad thanks to its highly successful film and television industries, and sports. As an example, when Angelina Jolie visited the Turkish border with regard to the conflicts in Syria, she was met with sympathy by Turkish and Syrian citizens. Turkish authorities even went as far as to describe her as the "Goodness Angel of the World."[2]  It is fair to assume that any US governmental authorities would not have been welcomed as much as Angelina. Similarly the Gates Foundation, as directed by Melissa Gates, has been working throughout Africa, helping the development of good health, agriculture and other areas. This work is widely supported by African society, and helps to reduce the US’s negative image[3].

But it’s not just the American film stars and philanthropists who are beginning to build better perceptions of America, other ‘normal’ citizens are also playing their part. When some peace keepers and environmental activists such as Jodie Evans and Medie Benjamin visited Iran, Iranian President Ahmedinejad welcomed them. Again not something that would have been possible without Citizen Diplomacy to connect the leaders of the American Peace Movement and Ahmedinejad[4].

So is Citizen Diplomacy efficient? Certainly in the case of the US where to counter the ever-increasing anti-American sentiment, particularly in the Muslin world, the role of the Citizen Diplomat to connect governments and citizens of other nations is vital. Specifically, the more the sceptical view of the States continues to grow, the greater the weight of individuality of the representative becomes. This is a lesson worth learning by other nations if they want to be seen as credible and open countries.

Baris Akin

BIBLIOGRAPHY

2011, CBC News, Angelina Jolie visits Syrian refugees in Turkey  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/17/501364/main20071886.shtml
(Accessed : 17.07.2011)

Bıll and Melinda Gates Foundationhttp://www.gatesfoundation.org/regions/Pages/default.aspx?4#/?action=region&id=africa
(Accessed : 17.07.2011)

Milazzo. L, 2008, Monthly Review Foundation, US Citizen Diplomats Arrive in Iran, Invited by Ahmadinejad http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2008/milazzo251108.html

A tribute to Citizen Diplomats http://www.nciv.org/category/4-publications.html?download=24
PDF Document (Accessed : 17.07.2011)

---

[1] http://www.nciv.org/category/4-publications.html?download=24

[2] http://www.cbsnews.com

[3] http://www.gatesfoundation.org

[4] http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org

HAS UNITED STATES (US) PUBLIC DIPLOMACY FAILED IN PAKISTAN?

Being a major world power the US, like other world powers, comes under close scrutiny and criticism which is why it has actively sought to create a positive image, specifically since the cold war. To be perceived positively, the US used an efficient Public Diplomacy (PD) over Europe. When world politics changed after the end of the Cold War, the US started to practice its diplomacy over Islamic countries.

Pakistan is a specific example where the US wanted to implement its diplomatic steps. In a speech by Colin Powell, he insisted that the US put in more effort to convince Pakistan that US promotes goodwill saying:

’’US-Pak relationship was not a temporary marriage of convenience, but rather a partnership for the long term [1] ”

However it seems that US diplomacy through music, art or cultural educational programmes does not work in Pakistan as it worked in other nations. The question now is why? here are a few main reasons why US diplomacy is not efficient in this region.

Firstly there is a strong antipathy towards the US, especially following the intervention of Afghanistan and the Iraq war. Similarly when Bush polarized the World into Muslim and Christian ‘clubs’ this further created scepticism and prevented US policies from being implemented. This has now been partly repaired by the Obama administration, and visits by the Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton, however it has not changed much in the long term. According to research during 1999-2000, there was a 74% positive perception in Europe of the US, and 68 % in some Islamic countries. However, the level has subsequently decreased to 46% in Europe, and down to 42% in the Islamic countries such as Turkey, Indonesia and Morocco[2].

The second reason why the US is struggling to practice PD, is because of the existence of terrorist organisations such as Al Qaeda in the Muslim states. These insurgent bodies now appear to have more popularity than the government itself, with sympathy for the organisations creating the national and religious goal that Pakistan should unite against “American imperialism”. Because of this ‘Robin Hood Syndrome’, it is easy for Al Quaida to find logistics, money and other resources, while for the US to gain information from individuals or institutions, it is not. An example can be seen in the level of confidence Bin Laden enjoyed at a remarkably high 41% Indonesia, and 38% in Pakistan[3] where Al Quaida is seen as the Saviour of Muslims against American Imperialism.

Because of this very strong belief that the US wants to divide and control Islamic nations, any step taken by the US, regardless of intention, is met with suspicion by Pakistani society thus hampering any it. Also, as the Pakistani society has strong religious faith, it is very easy for religious zealots to win support and mobilize the people through jihads and other religious preachings. For example, in a recent speech Osama bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, warned Pakistan saying that the "US wants to break up this nuclear-capable country and transform it into tiny fragments, loyal to and dependent on the neo-crusaders [4] ".

In summary then, it is true to say that the US has yet to go a long way to practice its public diplomacy in the Muslim region to gain the confidence of that society. While the US homeland popular jingoism may have been sated by the death of Bin Laden, this act, and subsequent American jubilation seems to have backfired and instead strengthened the Pakistani resolve. Unless the US can stop representing all Muslims and Islam as evil, and convince its population to behave respectably and maturely,  it cannot win the hearts of the people of Pakistan, which is the key to winning the intellectual argument.

 

                                                                                BIBLIOGRAPHY

Asghar  R, 2011, University of Southern California, Public Diplomacy : Sorry About Osama can we still be friends? http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/index.php/newswire/cpdblog_detail/sorry_about_osama_can_we_still_be_friends  (Accessed : 14.07.2011)

Evera. S,V, 2009, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Public Diplomacy: Ideas for the War of Ideas -  http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/19550/public_diplomacy.html  (Accessed : 14.07.2011)

Walsh. D, 2009, The Guardian, Bin Laden deputy warns Pakistan the US wants to seize its nuclear Arsenal - http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/15/al-qaida-pakistan-us-nuclear
(Accessed : 15.07.2011)

---

[1] http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org

[2] http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu

[3] http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu

[4] http://www.guardian.co.uk