Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Understanding the Role of Hard & Soft Power in International Communications, Slides of Psychology

An insightful analysis of public diplomacy and its two components: hard power and soft power. Hard power refers to the use of military force, economic sanctions, and coercive diplomacy, while soft power is the ability to attract and persuade others through the appeal of ideas and culture. The historical context of public diplomacy, its role in international relations, and the impact of new technologies on its effectiveness. It also discusses the importance of public diplomacy in achieving national objectives without resorting to force.

Typology: Slides

2012/2013

Uploaded on 01/05/2013

aqeel
aqeel 🇮🇳

3.8

(5)

19 documents

1 / 21

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
International Communications
Docsity.com
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe
pff
pf12
pf13
pf14
pf15

Partial preview of the text

Download Understanding the Role of Hard & Soft Power in International Communications and more Slides Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!

International Communications

PD – the classic definition

‘Public Diplomacy – the open exchange of ideas and

information – is an inherent characteristic of

democratic societies. Its global mission is central to …

foreign policy. And it remains indispensable to …

[national] interests, ideals and leadership role in the

world’.

(US Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, 1991

Report).

Soft Power

‘Soft power …is the ability to get desired outcomes because others want what you want. It is the ability to achieve goals through attraction rather than coercion. It works by convincing others to follow or getting them to agree to norms and institutions that produce the desired behavior.

Soft power can rest on the appeal of one's ideas or culture … and …depends largely on the persuasiveness of the free information that an actor seeks to transmit. If a state can [do this] it may not need to expend as many costly traditional economic or military resources.’ (Keohane & Nye)

A key element of soft power =

public (and cultural) diplomacy

 Long term = cultural and educational exchanges,

establishment and maintenance of credibility and mutual trust

 Short term = credible information dissemination

through all available media (espec. Broadcasting)

 News based (Public Affairs/Public

Information/Media Operations) for domestic audiences)

 Public Diplomacy for overseas audiences

 But where is the line between national and

international anymore? Docsity.com

PD/CD Landmarks

  • French invented CD – language teaching schools (Alliance Francaise)
  • British Council founded 1934 to provide an alternative view of the world other than totalitarianism
  • BBC began foreign language broadcasts in 1938
  • Voice of America began 1942
  • USIA founded 1953

The Cold War (of Words)

  • Competition between two ‘ways of life’
  • Long-term Soviet commitment to international broadcasting since 1920s
  • US sets up Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty etc in 1950s
  • Radio Swan for Cuba
  • The Reagan Reinvigoration in 1980s
  • Radio Marti, Radio this, Radio that….
  • PD or Psychological Warfare?

PDD 68 (1999): International

Public Information

  • Goal: Achieve national objectives without

resorting to force, or act as a force multiplier in the event force is required

  • Objective: ‘to enhance US security, bolster

America’s economic prosperity and to promote democracy abroad’

  • USIA incorporated into State Department

US Public Diplomacy

  • Under the State Department's reorganization on October 1, 1999, Evelyn Lieberman became the first Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.
  • As she remarked in her confirmation hearing: "[P]ublic diplomacy, practiced in harmony with traditional diplomacy, will enable us to advance our interest, to protect our security, and to continue to provide the moral basis for our leadership in the world." http://www.usinfo.state.gov

The Voice of America ‘family’

  • VOA and Worldnet TV
  • Radio Free Asia
  • Radio & TV Marti
  • RFE/RL
  • Radio Free Iraq

1750 hours of programming per week in total, reaching 100 million people in 60 languages at a cost of $1.1 billion in 1999 – BUT only 7 hours per day in Arabic

9/11 and the failure of US PD

  • Charlotte Beers and the ‘branding’ of America
  • ‘Why do they hate us so much’?
  • 9/11 hijackers were from elite not mass
  • Erosion of world-wide sympathy for US immediately after 9/11 (‘we are all Americans now’)
  • Failure (?) of PA as well – in 2003, 70% of Americans believed Saddam was behind 9/11! Or is this what the Bush administration needed to help promote Iraqi Freedom?

‘A force for good in the world’? a

world unconvinced

Percentage drops in favourable views of US since

start of year 2003 (Pew Centre, 18 March)

  • France: from 63% to 31%
  • Italy: from 70% to 34%
  • Russia: from 61% to 28%
  • Turkey: from 30% to 12%
  • UK: from 75% to 48%

EVEN WORSE IN ARAB & MUSLIM WORLD

Reinvigorating PA/PD since 2001

  • Office of Global Communications
  • Office of Strategic Influence (aborted)
  • Freedom Promotion Act, 2002
  • Broadcasting Board of Governors
  • Radio Sawa (‘Together’) replaces VOA Arabic Service in 2002 – ‘Hi’ magazine 2003
  • Radio Farda (Iran)
  • Middle East Television Network in development

Key Documents 2

  • “U.S. Public Diplomacy” (2003), by the U.S. General Accounting Office;
  • “Strengthening U.S.-Muslim Communications” (2003), from the Center for the Study of the Presidency;
  • “How to Reinvigorate U.S. Public Diplomacy” (2003), by Stephen Johnson and Helle Dale, published by the Heritage Foundation;
  • “The Youth Factor: The New Demographics of the Middle East and the implications for US Foreign Policy” by The Brookings Institute, 2003;
  • “Changing Minds, Winning Peace: a new strategic direction for US PD in the Arab and Muslim World” by the Advisory Group on PD, October 2003.

From ‘Changing Minds, Winning

Peace’

‘Our adversaries’ success in the struggle

of ideas is all the more stunning because

American values are so widely shared. As

one of our Iranian interlocutors put it, “Who

has anything against life, liberty and the

pursuit of happiness?” We were also told

that if America does not define itself, the

extremists will do it for us.’