scholarly journals Russian Foreign Policy and Public Diplomacy: Meeting 21st Century Challenges

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 491-503
Author(s):  
Greg Simons
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
Internal Sources

Foreign policy is about setting the policy aims and goals of a given country in the competitive environment of international affairs. When analyzing it, one should pay attention to many factors, namely, economic and energy potential, military-technical means, the presence of trade and economic partners, political weight and state image in the international arena, state membership in various international organizations. You can also highlight a number of tools that also play a large role in the foreign policy of states. As a specific instrument of foreign policy, public diplomacy concerns the regulation and management of international relations with various global publics in order to realise those foreign policy aims and goals. Specifically, public diplomacy intends to create a positive reputation and brand of the country, simultaneously increasing the countrys soft power potential, which is based on external and internal sources. This article intends to track and analyse the challenges and the role played by Russian public diplomacy in terms of meeting the challenges of the countrys foreign policy agenda in the 21st century. These challenges have been in a state of transformation as the nature of the environment of international relations changed. As a result, Russian public diplomacy has needed to evolve along with the changes at the global level and consequently the shifting demands enshrined in the foreign policy concepts. There are several identified distinct political policy periods noted: attempts to integrate into the Western-led global order; cooling relations with the United States dominated global order; and preparing for multi-polar and a post-Western global order.

Public Diplomacy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Snow
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Cold War ◽  
International Relations ◽  
News Media ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Goals

Public diplomacy is a subfield of political science and international relations that involves study of the process and practice by which nation-states and other international actors engage global publics to serve their interests. It developed during the Cold War as an outgrowth of the rise of mass media and public opinion drivers in foreign policy management. The United States, in a bipolar ideological struggle with the Soviet Union, recognized that gaining public support for policy goals among foreign populations worked better at times through direct engagement than traditional, often closed-door, government-to-government contact. Public diplomacy is still not a defined academic field with an underlying theory, although its proximity to the originator of soft power, Joseph Nye, places it closer to the neoliberal school that emphasizes multilateral pluralistic approaches in international relations. The term is a normative replacement for the more pejorative-laden propaganda, centralizes the role of the civilian in international relations to elevate public engagement above the level of manipulation associated with government or corporate propaganda. Building mutual understanding among the actors involved is the value commonly associated with public diplomacy outcomes of an exchange or cultural nature, along with information activities that prioritize the foreign policy goals and national interests of a particular state. In the mid-20th century, public diplomacy’s emphasis was less scholarly and more practical—to influence foreign opinion in competition with nation-state rivals. In the post-Cold War period, the United States in particular pursued market democracy expansion in the newly industrializing countries of the East. Soft power, the negative and positive attraction that flows from an international actor’s culture and behavior, became the favored term associated with public diplomacy. After 9/11, messaging and making a case for one’s agenda to win the hearts and minds of a Muslim-majority public became predominant against the backdrop of a U.S.-led global war on terrorism and two active interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Public diplomacy was utilized in one-way communication campaigns such as the Shared Values Initiative of the U.S. Department of State, which backfired when its target-country audiences rejected the embedded messages as self-serving propaganda. In the 21st century, global civil society and its enemies are on the level of any diplomat or culture minister in matters of public diplomacy. Narrative competition in a digital and networked era is much deeper, broader, and adversarial while the mainstream news media, which formerly set how and what we think about, no longer holds dominance over national and international narratives. Interstate competition has shifted to competition from nonstate actors who use social media as a form of information and influence warfare in international relations. As disparate scholars and practitioners continue to acknowledge public diplomacy approaches, the research agenda will remain case-driven, corporate-centric (with the infusion of public relations), less theoretical, and more global than its Anglo-American roots.

EMPIRE AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS IN VICTORIAN POLITICAL THOUGHT

2006 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 281-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
DUNCAN S. A. BELL
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Global Order ◽  
Colonial Empire ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Relationship

This essay surveys recent scholarly work on the political theory of empire and international relations in Britain during the long nineteenth century. It traces the dominant themes and arguments to be found, points to some interpretative and methodological weaknesses, and highlights a number of topics that remain to be explored in detail. I focus on the following: the relationship between liberalism and empire and, in particular, the role played by the idea of civilization in circumscribing liberal claims to universality; the nature and evolution of international law, and the key role that jurisprudential thought played in shaping conceptions of civilization and setting the bounds of legitimacy for imperialism; the vexed relationship between the history of imperial thought and cultural/political history; and the important, though frequently marginalized, role of the colonial empire in the Victorian imperial imagination. Finally, I suggest that areas that remain to be explored in depth include non-liberal visions of international affairs; the role of theology in shaping conceptions of global order; and the balance between the United States, Europe, and the various (and very different) elements of the empire.

scholarly journals ‘Moderate Islam’ Made in the United Arab Emirates: Public Diplomacy and the Politics of Containment

Religions ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panos Kourgiotis
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
International Relations ◽  
United Arab Emirates ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Nation Building ◽  
Political Islam ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Made In

This essay addresses the ideological utilization of religion in the international relations of the United Arab Emirates during the Arab Spring and beyond. By referring to the theoretical framework of public diplomacy and analyzing UAE regional and domestic attitudes, this essay intends to examine the politics of ‘moderate Islam’ in line with: (a) the monarchy’s nation building visions for the 21st century; (b) its national rebranding strategies; (c) its geopolitical empowerment in the Gulf and the Middle East. Throughout our analysis, it is argued that even though ‘moderate Islam’ has been devised for creating ‘soft power’, it serves ‘sharp power’ as well. As will become obvious, this has been mainly the case as far as the containment of Political Islam is concerned.

scholarly journals Latvia as the Area of Correlated Russian “Hard Power” and “Soft Power” Operations

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 1-19
Author(s):  
Gabriel Nowacki ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Hard Power ◽  
Power Operations ◽  
Impact Models

This work presents the methodology of the Russian impact on Latvia after 1991. It defines and specifies the scope of methods concerning both the hard and soft power in international relations in the 21st century, particularly the ones used to implement the Russian Federation’s foreign policy. The implemented strategies and impact models are described. The work is also focused on certain indicators used in global rankings by experts worldwide. In the 21st century, it is no longer enough to employ the hard power methods as it is advisable to use the soft power ones, which may bring about much better results than the hard ones.

scholarly journals Ideology, socialization and hegemony in Disciplinary International Relations

2022 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-123
Author(s):  
Randolph B Persaud
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
World Order ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Liberal Internationalism ◽  
The Uk ◽  
High Level

Abstract This article argues that Disciplinary International Relations (DIR) does not only explain international affairs, but it also socializes and hegemonizes publics and professionals into an ideological worldview consistent with the interest of states that underwrite the world economic and security order based on hegemonic liberalism. Considerable emphasis is placed on tracing the continuities between the early theorization of IR in the United Kingdom and the United States, and the contemporary academic/foreign policy/security ‘complex’ dedicated to the maintenance of a hegemonic world order. The article demonstrates that the call for a greater theory–policy nexus in international affairs is redundant because leading American scholars double up as policy-makers, either directly or through other avenues such as consultancies. Some of the most prominent IR scholars, such as Michael Doyle, John Lewis Gaddis, Samuel Huntington, G. John Ikenberry, Stephen Krasner, Theodore H. Moran, Joseph Nye and Anne-Marie Slaughter, among others, have served in high-level positions in the United States foreign policy and security apparatus. The article also shows the ways in which in the early days of IR theorizing in the UK, scholars such as Lionel Curtis, Alfred Zimmern and Norman Angell doubled as staunch defenders of the British Empire, albeit in the language of liberal internationalism.

Trickle Down Soft Power: Do Russia's Ties to European Parties Influence Public Opinion?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandr Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Far Right ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Elite Level ◽  
European Parties

Abstract Do states’ partnerships with foreign elites influence international public opinion? During Russia's annexation of Crimea, the Kremlin strengthened its ties with far-left and far-right European parties—leading some European elites to express more explicit pro-Russian positions. This paper analyzes how these elite-level ties influence ordinary individuals’ foreign policy attitudes, offering insight into the conditions under which soft power “trickles down.” By leveraging public opinion data before and after the conflict in Crimea (2012–2017), and employing an estimation strategy that follows the same logic as a standard differences-in-differences strategy, I demonstrate that Russia's linkages with anti-establishment parties led to greater confidence in Vladimir Putin over time, but had limited impact on favorability toward Russia, the United States, and NATO. These findings have important implications for autocratic public diplomacy, our conceptualization of soft power, and Russian foreign policy.

Public Diplomacy and Foreign Policy

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsushi Tago
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
World Politics ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Media ◽  
Quantitative Text Analysis ◽  
Naming And Shaming

Public diplomacy has become an essential subject for both practitioners of foreign policy and scholars of international relations/world politics. The more the term achieves popularity and is used in policy papers, magazines, academic books, and articles, the greater the number of different definitions of the concept. Unfortunately, no universally agreed-upon definition exists. With regard to the international relations debate on the “-isms,” some researchers claim that public diplomacy is part of constructivism. Yet, while it may be appropriate to categorize public diplomacy as constructivist for norm-oriented reputation politics such as “naming and shaming,” many realists working from the rationalist paradigm have recognized the importance of public diplomacy in international relations. Recently, beyond discussions on definitions and scope of public diplomacy, many data-oriented, empirical studies have been published on the subject. For instance, moves have been made to rank which state can achieve the greatest level of soft power through the effective practice of public diplomacy. Moreover, quantitative text analysis (QTA) or content analysis frameworks have frequently been utilized to study how international media focus on controversial diplomatic issues between states. Even tweets and social networks are being studied to reveal what types of international diplomatic communications are supported and opposed by third-party domestic audiences. Rapid developments continue to be made in the methodological sophistication of public diplomacy studies.

Public Opinion and US Foreign Relations

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas J. Cull
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Us History ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Foreign Relations

Public opinion has been part of US foreign relations in two key ways. As one would expect in a democracy, the American public has shaped the foreign policy of its government. No less significantly, the United States has sought to influence foreign public opinion as a tool of its diplomacy, now known as public diplomacy. The US public has also been a target of foreign attempts at influence with varying degrees of success. While analysis across the span of US history reveals a continuity of issues and approaches, issues of public opinion gained unprecedented salience in the second decade of the 21st century. This salience was not matched by scholarship.

Aid cuts would hit US influence

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
The United States ◽  
Considerable Change ◽  
Infrastructure Development ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Global Leader

Significance On January 18, a Gallup study found that global approval of US leadership had fallen to 30%, a record low, down from 48% in 2016 and 1 percentage point behind China; Germany has replaced the United States as the preferred global leader since Trump's inauguration. Many factors affect a country's 'soft power', including its role in international affairs; approach to trade; willingness to consider global threats; immigration policies; aid stance; and moral positions on issues such as human rights. All these foreign policy areas have undergone considerable change under Trump's 'America First' doctrine. Impacts Trump’s foreign policy will take a more Reaganite position on human rights, applying less pressure on US partners and allies. Money saved from aid cuts would not automatically boost US infrastructure development. Congress will try to mitigate the extent of the administration’s proposed aid cuts.

World Guru India

2019 ◽  
pp. 81-104
Author(s):  
Ian Hall
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Soft Power ◽  
Public Diplomacy ◽  
Indian Foreign Policy

This chapter analyses one of the most prominent aspects of Narendra Modi’s attempt to reinvent Indian foreign policy: his push to turn India into a ‘world guru’. It argues that this idea is deeply embedded in Hindu nationalist thinking and is widely supported on among the contemporary Hindu Right. The chapter traces the development of the idea that India ought to do more to build and leverage ‘soft power’ in international relations from the early 2000s onwards. It explores the Modi government’s effort to infuse India’s public diplomacy with Hindu nationalist themes, to promote yoga and supposedly Hindu ideas about the management of the environment and climate. It looks too at the unusual methods that the Modi government used to try to make India a world guru, including the use of inter-cultural and inter-religious dialogues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document