Africa – IPDGC Smart Power

Terrorism: Countering the Boko Haram extremist narratives in Nigeria

April 14, 2022May 9, 2022Africa, Disinformation, Women, Youth9 Comments

By Adeniyi Funsho, MA Media and Strategic Communications ’22

The latest bombing attack of the Abuja-Kaduna bound train by Boko Haram speaks to the continuous reign of terrorism, and extremist narratives against Nigeria. The latest attack is coming off the back of countless others that spread from the northeast to as far as the south of Nigeria. Nigeria, a former British colony has gone through several turbulent moments in its history as a nation leading to it becoming a democratic state, running a democratic system. As a nation, its master narrative is rooted in its diverse culture, tribes, religions, and hard-fought democracy. One threat to Nigeria’s master narrative is Boko Haram, an Islamic group founded by Mohammed Yusuf, which grew out of a cell of Muslim clergies and followers in Maiduguri, a state in the northeastern region of Nigeria. Since 2009, Boko Haram has been disrupting both the economic, and social life of Nigerians with a total of over 34,000 deaths, the latest killing of passengers traveling in a train bound for Kaduna adds to the increasing number of deaths by the terrorist group.

*Courtesy of Vanguard News: Abuja-Kaduna bound train attacked by Boko Haram killing over 15 passengers and over 200 wounded*.

Boko Haram translates to ‘no to western education,’ and western ideologies describe the archetype of its master narrative as a group that is completely opposed to westernization. Unlike other ethnic militias, Boko Haram does not appropriate its ethnic Kanuri nationalist rhetoric to demand national representation for the northeast region within the Nigerian democratic system; instead, Boko Haram’s goal is the pursuit of an Islamic caliphate, a political structure, and a system of government based on Tawid ‘God’ law. Boko Haram is in opposition to what it calls ‘man-made’ laws of western democracy and the westernized culture under which the Nigerian system operates. Most importantly, however, we need to understand that Boko Haram’s narratives are founded on the “Salafi-jihadi” movement of Islam, a modern-day movement traceable to the middle east which developed roots connecting it to northern Nigeria. Their beliefs are predicated on a “Quran-only” doctrine, that strongly rejects westernized culture, and systems, owing to that reason the earliest people that first came into contact with the group branded them ‘Boko Haram’ a narrative that describes their utopia of ‘no to education’.

Specifically, Boko Haram’s Salafi-jihadi “Quran-only” identity reveals the ‘Islamist extremism’ ideology of the group, how they think, how they organize, the goals they pursue, and the reason why their narrative and activities are engrained in tough-talk and violent videos laundered through the media ecology. We get an understanding of their strategic narrative and the reason why they see an Islamic state as jihadism, and the only solution to resolve their issues with Nigeria. Boko Haram’s narratives for an Islamic state which previously appeared to have been ignored by the Nigerian state and international audiences got international attention when in April 2014, it ransacked the small town of Chibok, Maiduguri, and kidnapped 276 Chibok schoolgirls returning from school. In its messaging to Nigeria and the rest of the world, Boko Haram released a video via YouTube showing the girls as a ransom for the release of its members, and demands for an Islamic state. Nigeria’s counternarrative of peace and the use of Islamic commands on education as an appeal to Boko Haram to release the girls failed. However, it succeeded in destroying the conditions that make Boko Haram’s narratives plausible, communicable, and intelligible. It galvanized international and local nonstate actors, and media to frame the counternarrative of #BringBackOurGirls emphasizing the urgency for their unconditional release and their immutable right to education.

*Courtesy of Channels News: Images of Chibok Schoolgirls that escaped from Boko Haram’s Kidnapping Camp*

In order for Nigeria to counter Boko Haram’s extremist narratives, it should frame Boko Haram in a way that counters the group as following a false narrative of the ideology of true Islam. Framing should be crafted on peace and not violence, and Nigeria should heighten its frames on Islam as a religion that entertains peace ‘salam’ as its identity and one that abhors violence. Most importantly, Nigeria’s frames should heighten the sayings of the Islamic prophet on education and the ones whereby he implored its followers to live in peace and tolerance with their neighbors.

This should be supported by strategic use of the media ecology to counter the Boko Haram identity narrative of ‘no to education’. Nigeria’s counternarrative to Boko Haram should be based on the true Islamic authority of the prophet of Islam as he expressed his love for knowledge and enjoined his followers to seek education even if it were to be as far as China!

For more on the topic by the author, please click here.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.

PDx is Back!

September 14, 2020September 14, 2020Africa, Education, PDx

This fall 2020 marks the 2nd anniversary of the Public Diplomacy Examined podcast. This podcast takes a look at the world of public diplomacy, professional exchanges, international education, global careers, and foreign affairs.

Head pic of graduate student Victoria Makanjuola — Victoria Makanjuola

This past summer, SMPA graduate student Victoria Makanjuola worked at the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication as the PDx assistant showrunner. Victoria took on the tasks of researching and writing, conducting interviews, and handling the technical production of the podcasts. Along the way, she had many good conversations with professors of foreign relations, exchange specialists, cultural ambassadors, leaders of non-profits, and others in this diverse field.

Victoria’s PDx internship was supported by the Walter Roberts Endowment, which provided five students with small grants to pursue internships in public diplomacy work.

First PDx interview for fall

As the 2020 fall semester inaugural podcast, PDx features Hannah Jackson, a sophomore at the Elliott School of International Affairs who is the founder and the president of the new student organization, Young Black Professionals in International Affairs (YBPIA). Hannah is the first student to be interviewed on PDx.

PDx interviewer Victoria talks to Hannah about the mission of YBPIA:

“I am a strong believer in the affirming power of representation. Far too often, communities of color, particularly those in the black community, don’t see enough people who look like them in the careers that they aspire to. That reality is glaringly true within the field of international affairs.”

>LISTEN TO THE PDX podcast

Also, head over to the PDx page to hear other podcasts.

YBPIA has the purpose of providing a supportive and enriching environment for black students at the Elliott School of International Affairs to develop their voices in the field and encourage the development of both African and African-American studies and thought.

As part of its outreach, YBPIA will engage in professional, academic, and community events.

An upcoming event co-sponsored by YBPIA is in sports diplomacy:

“Sports, Ethics, and Black Lives Matter”; Wednesday, September 23, 2020, from 4pm – 5pm.

This is a virtual event and more information can be found HERE.

Get to know YBPIA better through their Instagram and their LinkedIn page.

Message & Culture Clash in the Age of Covid-19

April 15, 2020April 16, 2020Africa, public diplomacy

By Leah Bacon, M.A Strategic Communication and Media ’20

On March 14, 2020 Rwanda’s Ministry of Health reported its first positive case of Covid-19. The country was the first African nation to issue a two-week lockdown. This included the closure of schools and places of worship, prohibiting large gatherings and unnecessary movements, and preventing all domestic/foreign travel, in order to mitigate the transmission of the virus.

Prime Minister, Dr. Edouard Ngirente issued a public notice on March 6^th, that the country was taking the necessary preparation measures to “deal with the possible outbreak,” while also “urging all Rwandans” to play a role in fighting the virus. Rwanda is the second most densely populated country in Africa with a population of over 11 million people. Therefore, it comes to no surprise that the East African country is experiencing a rise in new cases—with 89 confirmed cases as of April 4^th.

Picture of Kigali (Credit: Dr. Antoine R. Gasasira)

However, missing from discussion in the Western world regarding Covid-19 is how the message is conveyed and interpreted in various countries with vastly different social/cultural norms and resources.

In an age of globalization, media outlets are “global in scope,” “interconnected,” and “overlapping. Therefore, information is able to span national and cultural boundaries with high-rates of fluidity and speed. Although the messages are reaching a global audience, this audience is not interpreting the messages in the same way. Instead, how these messages are translated (or not translated) then becomes out of the control of the original media elites or spokespersons.

One reason interpretations vary, is messages are filtered through master narratives unique to each population. Master narratives can be defined as transnational narratives that are deeply embedded in a particular culture and are systemically reproduced (See: Master Narratives of Islamist Extremism). In the case of Rwanda, issues stem from the failure of global messaging and two of the country’s master narratives—which are rooted with historical significance:

Survivor Narrative: How can victims and survivors of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi understand the severity of Covid-19 when so many individuals have lived through the horrific events of the genocide?
Rwanda-First Narrative: The country’s messaging is centered around the strength and perseverance of the Rwandan people to do their part in curving the spread of this virus. But how do we prevent the class-based differences from emerging? Is messaging about social distancing and the importance of hand-washing being delivered to (and understood by) the more rural areas or to people with little education?

The first master narrative, the “Survivor Narrative,” plays a significant role in the country’s success in reconstruction post-genocide. It is a narrative of perseverance and strength, which has allowed the country to move forward and prosper. However, in the age of Covid-19, some Rwandans are skeptical of the severity of the virus due to the fact that so many of its people already suffered from atrocities that are incomprehensibly worse. Further arguments can be made for other countries who have suffered through war, conflict, displacement and starvation. These countries are not necessarily down-playing Covid-19, but there seems to be a disconnect between the West’s messaging on best practices (such as washing one’s hands, using hand sanitizer, or social-distancing) and what is actually available or realistic to more vulnerable populations.

Refugee Camp for Rwandans in Zaire following the 1994 Genocide (Credit: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)

The “Rwanda-First Narrative” is used in the discourse of some of the country’s media. One article highlighted that “common practice” in Rwanda is to greet with handshakes and hugs, so social distancing was initially not well-received. The country’s leading English newspaper The New Times, published an article titled, “As usual, Rwanda takes the bull by the horns with vigour and rigour.” This article praises the government and entities (doctors, police, etc.) trying to enforce the precautions of Covid-19, but in the same article the author writes, “of course, there are nasties among us who are inexplicably bent on self-exposure.” I am reflective of how difficult social distancing would be in the capital city of Kigali’s outdoor market Kimironko, which is home to hundreds of vendors, or the thousands of individuals whose livelihood depends on their motorcycles (“motos”) taxi-like service. If the messaging does not reach these individuals or if its importance is not completely understood the country will face additional burdens.

Alexander Nshimiyimana posing at his stand at the Kimironko Market (Credit: Alexander Nshimiyimana)

Moto-Drivers, Muhanga-Gitarama, Rwanda (Credit: Adam Jones, Ph.D)

Since messages are global and “absolute control over the message is impossible,” each country must be vigilant in their messaging and understanding of the varying groups that make up their audience, in order to make strides in halting this global pandemic.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.

4 Reasons Why COVID-19 Won’t Change Italy’s Stance on Migration

April 13, 2020April 16, 2020Africa, Europe, public diplomacy

By Rachel Pastor, M.A. International Affairs ‘20

The destabilization of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region since the 2011 Arab Spring spurred a mass exodus of people fleeing civil war, instability, and authoritarian regimes. As a Mediterranean neighbor with a lengthy coastline, Italy is an attractive destination for North African migrants. Its geographic positioning has led to its outsized role as a receiving and transit country in the current European migration crisis. Due to cultural, security, and economic concerns, Italy has adopted a harsh policy restricting the flow of refugees into the country. The European Union campaign to influence a more relaxed Italian migration policy has been routinely ineffective due to a lack of understanding on the EU’s part. The fragility of the country coming out of the COVID-19 pandemic will harden the line between Italians and migrants. There are four perceived security threats that migration poses to Italian stability and the narratives shaping each perceived threat are likely to solidify after the current health crisis.

Physical Security: Italy vs. Outsiders

A major issue narrative surrounding Italian migration policy is the physical threat refugees pose to the domestic population. The typical Italian identity is founded in the belief of the “benevolent” Italian, a person with Italian heritage raised on the principles of family and hard work, and migrants have thus been identified as the antithesis. The way in which Italy has been impacted by the Coronavirus will affect the population’s ability to separate negative identity narratives from minority populations. The virus is seen to have been inflicted upon the Italian population by “outsiders.” This is already evidenced by the stark decline in Italian patronage at minority-operated stores and restaurants before the lockdown. Any counter narratives aimed at reframing Italian views on migrant populations will find it difficult to penetrate the COVID-19 story informing a larger narrative: if Italy opens its border to migrants, they will bring violence and disease.

Cultural Security: Migrants Threaten the Rebuilding Process

The Italian identity is heavily shaped by its cultural history and blood relations with a view of “Italian” and “other” group divisions. Italian society rewards hard work and bases the foundation of business and political decisions on relationship-building. Italy doesn’t believe it owes migrants anything because, in their view, they have not worked hard to deserve it. More specifically, they have not contributed to Italian society and thus don’t get to reap the benefits. The EU often misunderstands this narrative and frames public diplomacy campaigns around the message that Italy “should” open its borders to migrants, which backfires due to Italy’s view of system roles.

Migrants are also viewed as threats to Italian communities. Families are the foundation of Italian society and the maintenance of Italian family units is often considered the chief concern of all political policies. COVID-19 deaths are severely impacting Italians as they have a large elderly population, many of whom are matriarchs and patriarchs. The social aftermath of the coronavirus will be focused on rebuilding communities and strengthening family systems. Migration is viewed as the biggest risk to Italian communities as refugees are believed to dilute the cultural identity.

Economic Security: Italy Cannot Afford More Financial Stress

Italy’s economy is struggling, and domestic and foreign policies are geared towards strengthening its economic power. The richness of the Italian identity informs the belief that cultural and financial prosperity go hand-in-hand. Fortifying the economy and reducing the national debt will protect the prosperity of the Italian identity, making it a stronger European leader. Prior to COVID-19, the economic migration narrative focused on the financial burden migrants put on the Italian economy. The fact that the virus has brutally impacted Italy’s tourism industry, the main source of its GDP, will not entice Italian lawmakers to consider migration reform.

Political Security: EU Interference

Italy identifies as a prominent country, and any perceived threats to sovereignty will fuel intolerant migration policy. The German NGO rescue ship that illegally docked in an Italian port in June 2019, was perceived as an act of force interfering with Italy’s right to determine and enforce its own laws. Italy views itself as a global leader in culture, arts, fashion, and more and thus it should be respected and many EU migration narratives are interpreted as acts of disrespect. Italy promotes the story that the country is at capacity because it was not aided during the influx of maritime migrants. This narrative of abandonment supports feelings of disrespect in the EU sphere.

The inevitable weakness of the Italian state following the pandemic will be a sore spot, and the primary political focus will be to bolster state institutions to maintain respect in the global arena.

Often dubbed a “war of words,” EU public diplomacy campaigns fall short of accounting for the underlying narratives shaping Italian perspectives. The continued EU messaging approach only further antagonizes Italians and engrains their stance on migration. Any EU reframing of its current public diplomacy efforts to counter Italian narratives is a difficult feat in and of itself. The added layer of a global pandemic further complicates the situation and makes narrative alignment even more crucial following the COVID-19 pandemic.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author. They do not express the views of the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication or the George Washington University.

Can a U.S. Summit Change Perceptions of Africa?

August 5, 2014Africa, public diplomacy1 Comment

President Barack Obama (center) with (left to right) President Macky Sall (Senegal), President Joyce Banda (Malawi), President Ernest Bai Koroma (Sierra Leone), and Prime Minister José Maria Pereira Neves (Cape Verde) in the Cabinet Room of the White House on March 28, 2013. Credit: BusinessWeek.com/Getty Images

In advance of this week’s U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington, D.C., National Public Radio published an article that discussed the goals of the summit, the first such event organized by a U.S. president for 40 African leaders. One is to bring African heads-of-state in contact with American business leaders for discussions on investment and business opportunities; the other is, according to the article, “to change the narrative” about Africa, from one mired in violence and humanitarian crises to that of business opportunities.

Business and entrepreneurship are not often considered as public diplomacy strategies, but it makes sense why they should be. After all, business affects the national economy, which then affects how the people see their lives and their country, informing their relationships with other nations. History supports this phenomenon: after the Korean War, it was economic reforms that provided the initial boost to help South Korea become the cultural and economic powerhouse it is today. Brazil’s economic growth in the past decade has renewed international business interests in the country, with many companies establishing South American hubs in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro.

Changing continental perceptions are not new – both of the aforementioned countries were largely obscure in the world consciousness, recognized only by their regional identities until they received individual economic breakthroughs or high-profile public diplomacy events (i.e., Olympics, World Cup). But is a three-day summit in the U.S. the answer to changing the world’s perceptions of Africa? After all, Africa is comprised of 54 nations; to suggest that (largely Western) countries should singularly invest in an entire continent is vague at best and ignorant at worst.

In addition, none of the forums and panels are schedule to address specific regions or countries in Africa. Even the name – U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit – perpetuates the idea of Africa as a single unit with monolithic problems. The recent health crisis involving the Ebola virus is case in point: although only three African leaders, not the entire continent, had to drop out of the summit to address the crisis in their respective countries, international media seem to have already juxtaposed the issue with that of the entire summit involving all of Africa.

Whether the continent’s public diplomacy will be helped by the U.S.-based summit remains to be seen. Sources in the NPR article conceded that the summit is more of a “pageant” rather than a site for actual deal making. But if the amount of time, money, and attention paid to the summit are any indication, it’s clear that many are regarding it as more than just a show.

PD in Practice: U.S. Facilitates Religious Dialogue on the Central African Republic Crisis

January 13, 2014Africa, in the field, public diplomacyLeave a Comment

Michel Djotodia resigned on Jan. 10 amid rising conflict between Christians and Muslims in the country, leaving thousands dead. Credit: AFP/Getty via DW.de — Michel Djotodia resigned as president of the Central African Republic on Jan. 10 amid rising conflict between Christians and Muslims in the country, leaving thousands dead. Credit: AFP/Getty via DW.de

Note: I have noticed that much of the commentary and academic literature on public diplomacy tends to focus on the leadership, structure, funding, and theory of public diplomacy, with much less attention on the actual conduct of activities and programs in the field. In an effort to help redress that imbalance, I hope this will be the first of a series of blog posts that highlight current or recent U.S. public diplomacy efforts around the world.

The ongoing crisis in the Central African Republic (CAR) has attracted little attention in Washington over the last several weeks. The news last week that the CAR president agreed to resign has sparked hopes for a possible peaceful resolution to a situation that has already claimed a thousand lives in the last month alone and displaced almost a million people from their homes.

The African Union and France have led efforts to stabilize the situation and broker a solution and senior U.S. officials, including Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power and Assistant Secretary for African Affairs Linda Thomas-Greenfield, visited last month and pledged U.S. support as well.

In addition to our traditional diplomatic efforts, we have also brought public diplomacy efforts to bear on the problem. Some have been concerned that the conflict could exacerbate tensions between the majority Christian and minority Muslim populations, as well as other groups. With a view towards promoting dialogue and connecting religious leaders with their American counterparts, the U.S. Department of State, led by U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, Rashad Hussain, hosted an interreligious dialogue last week on the crisis that included the Archbishop of Bangui, the President of the National Islamic Association, the President of the Evangelical Association, and the Mayor of Bangui.

According to a U.S. Department of State press release, “The religious leaders from CAR described their efforts to end the ongoing violence and promote peace, thanked the United States for its assistance and efforts, and called for further international humanitarian and security assistance in CAR. The panelists from the United States praised the religious leaders in CAR for their efforts to promote religious tolerance and reconciliation, noted examples of successful interfaith cooperation in the United States, and proposed further collaboration with their counterparts. Both sides agreed to continue the discussion further, to work together to increase education and training on reconciliation and peacebuilding and to seek opportunities to support the travel of religious leaders to CAR to support peace and inter-religious cooperation.”

As always, it is difficult to measure the value of such public diplomacy efforts, but I think there is little doubt that these are exactly the type of people-to-people contacts that can help defuse tensions and contribute to a long-term resolution of the conflict. U.S. Special Envoy Hussain, the Department’s Bureau of African Affairs, and the U.S. Embassy in Bangui should be commended for their efforts in this regard.

The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the State Department or the U.S. government. The author is a State Department officer specializing in public diplomacy, currently detailed to the IPDGC to teach and work on various Institute projects.

Nelson Mandela –The Ultimate Public Diplomat

December 6, 2013Africa, public diplomacyLeave a Comment

Nelson Mandela leaves us in December, a season of holiday hope. His passing inspires us to reflect on his spirit of hopefulness and optimism and his role as a public diplomat.

I first met Nelson Mandela on February 15, 1990—four days after he emerged from 27 years of imprisonment in South Africa. I was there as a producer for ABC News Nightline. Mandela had agreed to give Ted Koppel a one-on-one interview. What I remember most when he arrived for that interview in Soweto was his gracious smile, his warm but firm handshake, and the elegance of the man who towered, physically over Koppel but still managed to look him in the eye as an intellectual peer.

So much has been written about Nelson Mandela, but what is rarely said is that he is the epitome of public diplomacy—one of those rare individuals who understood the power of people to move nations and ideas. Mandela was a connector, bringing people together from all walks of life—rich, poor, skilled, unskilled, men and women, athletes and artists. He had the gift of gab and the kindness that radiated a room.

At a time when his own country could have descended into far greater violence and societal division, Mandela instead steered his nation with words through a transition from apartheid rule that was marked by a commitment to national unity and peace even while boldly confronting the evils and divisions of its past. Mandela inspired people and governments the world over seeking peaceful and just resolution of conflict.

A good public diplomat like Mandela understood that for a nation to truly heal, its people must reckon with the past and with each other. It is why on June 28, 1995, Nelson Mandela announced the creation of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission. That act alone turned history into the present and future South Africa and elevated his story of struggle over injustice and adversity. As he said in his inaugural address as president of South Africa on May 10, 1994, “We commit ourselves to the construction of a complete, just and lasting peace.” Personal commitments sometimes mean more than treaties and documents, and Mandela knew that his word was his oath.

President Mandela, your history is our global history and you remain a lodestar shining brightly like your beautiful smile. We all wish you peace in this season of peace.

Domestic, Foreign, and Cosmopolitan: Uganda’s Potential to Build Ties Through Women

May 9, 2013Africa, public diplomacy, WomenLeave a Comment

Rebecca Kadaga is Uganda's first female Speaker — Rebecca Kadaga, Uganda’s first female Speaker

by Kate Mays

Looking at only the gender makeup of the Ugandan government, one could make the argument that Uganda is doing pretty well with gender equality. Women make up almost 35% of its current parliamentary members, and in 2011 the 9^th Parliament elected its first female Speaker. Further, Uganda was ranked 28^th in the 2012 World Economic Forum’s Gender Gap Report for political empowerment (compared to a rather shoddy 55^th place showing for the US. Of course, gender parity in government is only one of many metrics to judge how equally genders are treated within society.) And the gender parity in Uganda’s government representation right now exists primarily because of a gender quota, which was included in the 1995 Constitution, and stipulates that each district must elect a female representative (to date, there are 112 total).

I am not going to delve into the pros and cons of Uganda’s gender quota – that discussion would be divergent and has been done effectively elsewhere – but it is an important premise on which to evaluate the Ugandan government’s approach to gender equality. Namely, one that embraces gender mainstreaming principles, which gained a lot of momentum after the 1995 Beijing UN Conference on Gender and Development, and continue to be practiced and implemented by some governments, the United Nations, the World Bank, and other international organizations.

Uganda does not have a sterling history in terms of its treatment of women. In the economically dominant Bugandan culture, it is commonplace for women to kneel down before men as a respectful way of greeting them (men do not return the favor, neither to women nor other men). Patriarchy pervades Ugandan culture – this post from the WomanStats blog has a good description of the gender roles. In James Lull’s definition of culture, he emphasizes the “extreme repetitiveness of everyday behavior” as the foundation for culture: “Cultural redundancy produces and reproduces meanings which form the bases of coordinated social interaction.” While the act of a woman kneeling for a man in greeting might only seem like an odd, outdated cultural tradition, the societal manifestations of the patriarchal custom are more insidious. According to statistics from the Uganda Women’s Network, 60% of Ugandan women experience gender-based violence. While this has been the focus of some more-recent legislation, it will likely take more than a few laws to reverse the culture and improve on the kind of gender inequality highlighted in this figure.

However, even if the situation on the ground, culturally within the society, is still grim, embracing the language and principles of gender mainstreaming signals to the international community that the Ugandan government acknowledges that gender inequality is a problem that needs a solution, and shows that it is at least making strides to address it. (Uganda has a Ministry of Gender, Labour, and Social Development; it also crafted a National Gender Policy in 2007). For all of gender quotas’ potential deficiencies and possible exploitation, it is, I would argue, a step, and one that signals a commitment to being open to take further steps.

In his piece on Cosmopolitan Constructivism, Cesar Villanueva Rivas notes that “that the ways in which [countries’] identities and intentions are constructed abroad count.” Gender mainstreaming, at the very least, signals an intention, and helps to foster an environment of promoting women’s empowerment. As a result, countries like Sweden, Norway, and the US have shared knowledge and resources with Uganda, through direct engagement with the government in helping to craft gender policy, as well as through Ugandan universities and the numerous NGOs in the region.

What does this mean for Uganda’s cultural diplomacy efforts around women? I would argue that there is a lot of potential for Uganda to stake a bigger global claim on some of the issues it has been working on domestically. Many countries in Africa have adopted gender quotas and are still struggling with similar obstacles to societal and cultural gender equality. Using the NGO infrastructure that already exists, Uganda could coordinate with women’s groups like the Pan-African Women’s Organisation and FEMNET (the African Women’s Development and Communication Network) to host a summit or forum on women in politics, with particular attention paid to leadership and advocacy. A similar program, the African Women Leaders Project, was held in 2008, but it was also run by outside organizations. Although a seemingly intangible detail, if such initiatives come from the African countries themselves it gives them a real power. Further, it would show that Uganda is not only open to accepting the “cosmopolitan” values of “tolerance, friendship, and respect,” but is also “internalizing” these values.

In his piece, Rivas cites Alexander Wendt, who identifies three “degrees” of internalization, the third being “legitimacy,” which is “the most developed of these actions pursued by states, since it emerges from the state’s principles and convictions.” Wendt uses the framework of “friends” and “allies” to differentiate the modes with which countries interact; “friends” is a longer-term relationship in which countries “join a process of common understanding and societal exchanges, step by step.” Within this framework also emerges the idea of a “Self” and an “Other.” Wendt marks progress by how a state can “identify with other’s expectations, relating them as part of themselves.” In the third degree of internalization, “Self is not self-interested but rather it is interested in the Other.” In this case, I would say the “Other” is both Ugandan women as well as countries abroad. Uganda should act for women’s empowerment in recognition of what their “expectations” are for being treated equally, and internalize that goal of equality as one of its own.

The disparity in how women are treated in Ugandan society and how they’re treated in the government’s official gender policies is problematic because it sends a mixed message to other countries. Tolerance, friendship, and respect have to start at home, in order to be credibly projected to the rest of the world. Just as gender quotas project a positive image, it is important for Uganda’s reputation abroad that Ugandan women’s lives continue to improve.

The above post is from Take Five’s Student Perspective series. Kate Mays is studying Cultural Diplomacy as Communication at the George Washington University, looking at themes such as youth, gender, health, climate, free press, and democracy, and writing on how these themes relate to cultural diplomacy and communication.

India and Africa Building Ties through Youth Populations

May 2, 2013Africa, Cultural Diplomacy, public diplomacyLeave a Comment

India: the world’s most populous democratic country with one of the largest economies. Africa: a largely developing continent attempting to work itself out of vast poverty and violent conflicts. Both have large youth populations, a desire to play a stronger role in international markets and, importantly, an interest in each other.

In early April, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) sponsored a two-day collaborative workshop in New Delhi known as “INDIAFRICA: A Shared Future.” The purpose of the forum, held on April 4-5, was to bring together the youth (defined as those under 30 years old) of two populations that have a mutually growing interest in each other to fashion solutions to the many shared development challenges faced by India and Africa:

“The initiative [was] born in 2011 out of recognition of shared sensibilities, histories and intertwined cultures between India and the African continent. The connection between India and Africa, home to an over-two-million-strong Indian diaspora, has been ‘a continuous process of socio-cultural and economic exchange.’”

Given these similarities, why the targeted focus on youth? As previously mentioned, both India and Africa have considerable youth populations. According to statistics from the CIA World Factbook, the median age in India is 26.5 years, while the median age for countries in Africa ranges from 15.1 in Uganda and 18.9 in Zimbabwe to 25.3 in South Africa and 28.1 years in Algeria. The young populations, as Manoj Kohli, head of the International Business Group for Bharti Airtel, explains, are very attractive, especially when considering “the western world, Russia, China, Japan are all graying.” Navdeep Suri, joint secretary of public diplomacy in India’s MEA, said, “The driving vision of the program is to unleash the enormous energy of young people, to encourage their powerful creative ideas and to enable them to be facilitators of this process.”

As described on the website, “INDIAFRICA: A Shared Future is a unique people-to-people initiative that aims at engaging multiple stakeholders in India and Africa through contests, fellowships, discussions, events, collaborative projects and cultural exchanges.” During this workshop, a total of 72 Indian and African youth (36 Indian and 36 African individuals), coming from a wide range of disciplines, pitch and debate “their views on challenges and opportunities in areas like energy, environment, healthcare, education, culture, creative exchanges, tourism, governance, food and nutrition in their respective regions…”

Public diplomacy, in the past few decades, “has been widely seen as the transparent means by which a sovereign country communicates with publics in other countries aimed at informing and influencing audiences overseas for the purpose of promoting the national interest and advancing its foreign policy goals.” This—what one might call public diplomacy in the modern sense of the word—was put forth by the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy. The definition is useful in the sense that it is broad and fairly encompassing, but how does INDIAFRICA fit within it?

At its core, INDIAFRICA is an initiative that might be defined as “little c” cultural diplomacy, a narrower subcategory of public diplomacy. Using Dr. Emil Constantinescu’s definition, cultural diplomacy can be defined as “a course of actions, which are based on and utilize the exchange of ideas, values, traditions and other aspects of culture or identity…” INDIAFRICA fits perfectly within this characterization and has the added element of youth involvement. Rather than convening a forum for business and government officials, INDIAFRICA brings together two youth populations in the name of building positive first impressions and tapping on the energy, creativity and enthusiasm–rather than the demonstrated expertise–these groups have the potential to generate.

INDIAFRICA lumps different categories, such as business and culture, together in the same package. The initiatives taken on by this enterprise include building democratic developmental institutions; establishing governance networks in areas such as agriculture, micro-finance, entrepreneurship development and healthcare; generating employment; creating “profitable partnerships”; funding the future through Indian soft loans to its African partners; and finally “building trust and mutual respect and building relationships.” And participants tackle these strategies in a number of ways—not simply the two-day workshop. INDIAFRICA promotes India-Africa collaboration through a series of contests: 1) Business Venture, 2) Poster Design, 3) Photography, and 4) Essay Writing, each attributing to a cultural diplomacy niche.

Each of the four contests has a theme that aligns with some larger cultural phenomenon. In the 2012-2013 contests for instance, the theme for Business Venture Contest was “Entrepreneurial Solutions to Address Developmental Challenges,” the Poster Design Contest’s was “What does Freedom mean to you?” the Photography Contest’s was “Communities in India and Africa” and the Essay Writing Contest’s was “How can India and Africa collaborate to co-create a brighter future?” These themes align well with the ‘universal norms’ of democracy and innovation, while suiting INDIAFRICA’s aim to help shape the future of these two geographies through their respective youths. They emphasize the culture of both India and Africa while still moving them toward more global political and developmental environments. Suri surmised this point by noting that the multidisciplinary contest series help “create a platform for talented and young Indians and Africans to exchange ideas about emergent realities, successes and challenges and explore future collaborations in business, design and culture.”

The beauty of INDIAFRICA lies within its configuration, which includes strategic as well as shared considerations. The Indian government has increasingly viewed Africa as a realm of opportunity for furthering its commercial interests, and the “leadership of Indian and African nations have set a bilateral trade target of $100 billion by 2015.” Kohli said that his company alone has invested $13 billion in Africa, plans to invest more and has already recruited about 7,000 employees in the continent. Although cultural diplomacy is rarely conducted in the name of self-interest, it is worth noting that India’s interest in Africa extends beyond purely strategic self-interest and that the country considers this initiative as a means for achieving shared policy goals. Both geographies (both the governments and national companies) “work jointly to help in capacity building, knowledge sharing, job creation and other areas.” The similar and shared foreign policy goals lends INDIAFRICA to being seen as a joint collaboration, benefiting all involved.

“A large workforce with fewer children to support creates a window of opportunity to save money on health care and other social services; improve the quality of education; increase economic output because of more people working; invest more in technology and skills to strengthen the economy; and create the wealth needed to cope with the future aging of the population.”

This window, known as the demographic dividend, can be addressed through initiatives such as INDIAFRICA that bring together the young people in the name of a better future. For young participants, who may or may not be true opinion leaders in their home societies yet, this forum provides the ultimate learning model as well as a safe venue for the sharing of ideas. Further, this particular program not only allows youth to address development challenges and think of solutions early on, but it is also acts as the foundation for the future relationship between the two geographies.

Everybody’s Talking About World Press Freedom Day

May 3, 2012Africa, in the field, public diplomacy1 Comment

World Press Freedom Day – celebrated today, May 3, with the centerpiece UNESCO event held in Carthage, Tunisia – is one of those global phenomena, like soccer, that seizes Americans only peripherally. Yes, the main event last year was held in New York, and yes, U.S. organizations such as the Committee to Protect Journalists release key reports on the occasion, but by and large the day comes and goes here in the U.S. without much fanfare. Through the wisdom of our founding fathers and much vigilance and hard work by journalists, editors, and publishers since that time, U.S. press freedom is secure. But this is by no means the case everywhere, and therefore World Press Freedom Day becomes an important opportunity – and sometimes an all-too-necessary excuse – for renewed discussion of media freedom issues in countries around the world. The U.S. government, through its Embassies overseas, is an active participant in these discussions.

President Barack Obama’s statement on World Press Freedom Day 2012 makes U.S. principles and commitment clear, as does the video statement of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But U.S. Embassies overseas also actively seize the opportunity of World Press Freedom Day to reinforce American support for the principle and practice of media freedom. Many Embassies develop and promote creative opportunities for local journalists and editors to speak out. More on that below.

When the UN General Assembly proclaimed World Press Freedom Day in 1993, it outlined the following goals:
– to encourage and develop initiatives in favor of press freedom
– to assess the state of press freedom worldwide
– to remind governments of the need to respect their commitment to press freedom
– to encourage reflection among media professionals about press freedom and professional ethics
– to mobilize support for media that are targets for the restraint, or abolition, of press freedom
– to remember journalists who lost their lives in the exercise of their profession

UNESCO’s selection of Tunisia as the site of this year’s World Press Freedom Day ceremony reinforces its key theme for 2012: Media Freedom Helping to Transform Societies, summarized here: “the recent uprisings in some Arab states have highlighted the power of media and the human quest for media freedom, as well as underlining the fact that social inequalities will indefinitely search for equilibrium, in order to address those inequalities. Could the Arab Spring have taken place without the proliferation of social media or satellite TV? [Text messaging] and social media have enabled the diffusion of vital information to reach the widest number of people in a very short span of time. Social media have enabled protesters to self-organize, and have engaged the global youth in the fight to be able to freely express themselves and the aspirations of their wider communities.”

U.S. Embassies are making the most of this opportunity to reinforce American principles and policies in support of press freedom. Here is just a small sampling — from Angola to Surinam (both this and this), to Pakistan (via YouTube and Facebook); from the Philippines (through a new partnership with the Philippine Press Institute), to an op-ed by a State Department official that was shared via this all-Africa digital media outlet, picked up in Namibia, and tweeted by All-Africa news website Co-founder and Chairman Amadou Mahtar Ba; from an upcoming Twitter Q&A in Rwanda, to a seminar in Luxembourg, and this U.S. Ambassadorial initiative reported in Kyrgyzstan.

World Press Freedom Day is also an important occasion for the UN, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, and other global organizations to recognize journalists who are “targets for the restraint, or abolition, of press freedom” — in other words, journalists who have been intimidated, persecuted, jailed, or even killed because pf their work.

The U.S. State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, through its website HumanRights.gov, also highlights compelling and emblematic cases of journalists who are imprisoned or living under threats, among them Reyot Alemu (left) of Ethiopia, who was sentenced to 14 years in prison in June 2011.

As the UN General Assembly of 1993 intended, May 3 has become an occasion in most countries for journalists and editors to sit down, sometimes with government officials, to discuss and debate press freedom issues of local concern. Not infrequently, governments use the occasion to reinforce their own perspectives on the need for restraints and limits on press freedom – or (per our recent blog post Fear and Loathing in Development Journalism) to define journalists’ role in the country’s development. This debate around media responsibilities vs. media freedom is discussed explicitly or implicitly in many local news stories on World Press Freedom Day, including in this revealing sample of pieces from Uganda, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, India, Guyana. and Ghana.

Press freedom is an issue for every day, not just for May 3. But World Press Freedom Day is a vitally important opportunity to get people talking about what is happening in their countries and what needs to change. And public diplomacy to promote press freedom is one of the most important kinds of public diplomacy there is.