Category: public diplomacy

Cultural Diplomacy and non-government organizations: Who is a diplomat?

Cultural Diplomacy, public diplomacyLeave a Comment on Cultural Diplomacy and non-government organizations: Who is a diplomat?

WhoIsADiplomat

As J. Michael Waller (editor) notes in The Public Diplomacy Reader, the definition of public diplomacy has evolved over time and people view it in different ways.  The link between all these definitions is that the audiences involved come from different cultures and backgrounds. Cultural diplomacy, by the very nature of the work, is done by many different organizations in many different sectors of a given country.  Because cultural diplomacy encompasses so many different subcategories of diplomacy- arts diplomacy, educational exchanges, speaker series, etc.- there is a wide open field for those that can and do conduct these programs.  This brings up a larger question of exactly who is considered a diplomat.

Like the definition of public diplomacy, the definition of who is a diplomat has also evolved over time. Of course everyone is going to have an opinion on where to draw the line between diplomat and non-diplomat, but I’d like to propose some questions in order to draw some rough boundaries. With the increase in the amount of people that can do and are doing diplomacy, there is the possibility, as Robert Albro suggests, of “interest-free cultural diplomacy”.  People are more likely to engage if there is not a hidden interest or if the organization conducting the program is not affiliated with the government.  These possibilities exist with the advent of new diplomats other than those belonging to the Foreign Service.

If you, or the organization you work for, represent a country and not a government are you a diplomat?

This question depends on the situation. You, as a singular person travelling abroad for pleasure, do not constitute a diplomat.  If that were the case, then everyone who travels internationally would be considered a diplomat. That would be unproductive because then there would be no point to identifying organizations and people who are part of the Foreign Service as diplomatic representatives for a specific country.  We would no longer need the Foreign Service Officer Test and we would no longer need the Foreign Service Institute.  The sheer ubiquity of international travelers would diminish the value of having that position as a job.  Everybody who travels internationally cannot be considered a diplomat even though each person would be representing a country.

However, as part of an organization, there is a possibility that you could be considered a diplomat depending on the type of organization and the nature of the work you are doing. An Armenian NGO called OST Armenia-Cultural Center of the East, acts as a cultural representative for Armenia with countries of the East according to their website.  Their “About the Organization” section says that they are funded by “membership dues, donations and sponsorship funding.” From their website, it seems that they are not affiliated with the government of Armenia and are truly committed to advancing cultural diplomacy initiatives. In this case, people who work for this organization are doing the same type of work that we traditionally consider diplomats to do; thus I see no reason not to consider them diplomats.   They are representing Armenia without representing the government, but are still conducting diplomatic work.  Of course, there may be something in their operational policies that we are not aware of that links them to the Armenian government, but, for all intents and purposes, they are representing a country without representing a government and are on their way to conducting interest-free cultural diplomacy. .

If your organization is not representing or promoting a country then are you still a diplomat by virtue of working for/ representing this other type of organization internationally?

A related question that needs to be addressed in partnership with the above one is: What kind of organization does not represent/ promote a country? Many people will argue, and correctly so, that even if the organization is a true NGO, the country that the organization is based in is still going to be somehow represented.  The challenge in this question is finding a truly international organization.  For purposes of this discussion, I have chosen Greenpeace.  According to their website, Greenpeace was founded by a group of Canadian citizens, is currently headquartered in Amsterdam, and has 2.8 million supporters worldwide and regional offices in 41 countries.  In this case, Greenpeace is promoting a cause, not a country, and does not represent a government.  Having its headquarters in a different country than where it was founded takes away that problem of the country still being reflected within the organization.  So here is an organization that has essentially no ties to government or country, yet they are doing international work.  Does this make the organization and its members diplomats? Due to the lack of ties to a country or government, they come even closer to Albro’s interest-free diplomacy idea, but is their work really diplomacy?

To me, the crux of public diplomacy is creating the space for dialogues which hopefully lead to relationship building. Greenpeace’s website says that their “solutions work promotes open, informed debate about society’s environmental choices, and involves industries, communities and individuals in making change happen.” I think they reach the dialogue state of public diplomacy, but I don’t know whether or not they reach they state of building partnerships.

 Where do non-government organizations that are contracted by the government or partially funded by the government fit into this?

There are many examples of organizations doing diplomacy that are not government entities but are still funded, at least partially, by a government.  These organizations do not really reach the notion of interest-free diplomacy and are not really NGOs, but fall somewhere in between.  They do diplomacy such as exchanges, arts diplomacy tours, and more, and so the people of these organizations are diplomats by the nature of their work.

To reach Albro’s interest-free diplomacy, do you have to be independent or just come across as independent?

L’Alliance Française purports to be independent even though it really isn’t (see the official charter, in French but translatable) but you have to do some serious digging to discover this. The average person is not going to go to through the founding documents and will only see the website for their local chapter such as this one for L’Alliance DC which says that “L’Alliance Française de Washington, D.C. is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-governmental organization that is not subsidized by the French government. It is an educational, cultural association headed by a Franco-American Board of directors.” Therefore, the organization comes across as independent without actually being independent.   There is no question that that they are doing cultural diplomacy activities, but it is very much a projection of the French government.  As Albro notes, interest-free cultural diplomacy often engages more people because they do not see it as a government trying to push its views on others. To most people, L’Alliance and other examples, such as the British Council and Goethe Institute, appear to be furthering the goals of their respective nations while being less-affiliated with government than other government organizations such as the Foreign Ministry.  While this is not exactly interest-free, it is getting closer.

In summary, NGOs can be invaluable resources when it comes to public diplomacy measures.  NGOs can range on a sliding scale from interest free to closely associated with a government. Depending on where they fall on this scale, they are free to express alternative views and have more freedom with their online presence, official statements, and programming efforts. This helps to reach a broader audience that may or may not agree with the views of a given country’s government, but may still be interested in that country’s culture. NGOs potentially have the power to reach an audience that may have been absent from the discussion when governments were solely involved in diplomacy. Depending on the context and the work of the organization, people and their organizations can be diplomats without being part of a country’s official government initiatives. However, one must be careful when considering NGOs to be interest-free.

Digital Diplomacy’s Reach and Risk

public diplomacy2 Comments on Digital Diplomacy’s Reach and Risk

stewart

The recent Twitter row between the United States and Egypt triggered a number of issues – freedom of expression; the role of media in modern societies; the balance between diplomacy and public diplomacy; between interests and values, both ours and theirs; and the ability to communicate not just governments but populations using traditional channels and social media. It represents a great teachable moment, for students (and professors) of public diplomacy and practitioners as well.

To briefly recap, the Morsi government (along with conservative elements within Egyptian society) has been cracking down on more and more political speech. The U.S. expressed concern privately, and then publicly following the detention of political satirist Bassem Youssef, Egypt’s Jon Stewart. Everything got amped up when the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, perhaps the most aggressive user of social media within the Department of State, tweeted a link to a segment about Youssef’s arrest by the real Jon Stewart.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/LyDOAQNsTrI]

The Egyptian government blasted back, on Twitter no less, criticizing the Embassy for its “negative political propaganda.” Morsi’s Freedom and Justice Party piled on, calling the offending tweet “undiplomatic & unwise.”

The Embassy’s Twitter account was taken down, the link to the Jon Stewart removed and then brought back on line. The Egyptian government claims American Ambassador Anne Patterson apologized for the incident. The State Department has tried to say as little as possible about the whole flap, but apparently sees the posting of the Stewart clip as a mistake.

What should we make of all of this?

In Egypt’s transition from dictatorship to democracy, it is hardly surprising that political Islam and civil society are struggling to comfortably co-exist. The Morsi government claims it was not responsible for Youssef’s detention, although someone in authority was. Beyond government, under Egyptian law, anyone can sue over perceived offensive speech. Just this week, an Egyptian court dismissed a lawsuit by an Islamist lawyer that would have forced Youssef’s show off air. After his release, Youssef resumed his broadcast, seemingly unbowed.

Clearly, a necessary debate within Egypt and across the Arab world about democracy, the evolution of political Islam and the development of inclusive and tolerant civil societies is underway.

Bassem Youssef

The United States has been drawn into this debate, significantly through Twitter and Facebook. For example, Embassy Cairo has engaged Egyptians of all stripes on these issues. They are all unhappy with the United States, but for different reasons, believing Washington has been too lenient on Morsi, too critical, or should have no opinion at all.

Spend some time on the Embassy Twitter feed, @USEmbassyCairo, and you see what digital public diplomacy can do. Its tweets are engaging, candid and direct. Some samples:

  • “It is part of normal ‪#diplomacy to voice our view and encourage actions.”
  • “Just talking straight with you.”
  • “We believe that when diplomats use Twitter, they should be frank, casual, and dare we say even witty on occasion.”

In the past, such conversations would occur in quiet settings involving mostly government officials and policy elites. Now exchanges are out in the open, with newly empowered citizens offering their views and hoping for a genuine dialogue.

If this is the future of public diplomacy, Embassy Cairo is a trendsetter. Its recent experience demonstrates both the potential and the risk regarding how it is employed. Social media have greatly expanded public diplomacy’s reach, where actions and reactions can quickly take on broader political and social significance.

Embassy Cairo knows this better than anyone. Last September, an attempt to mitigate Egyptian outcry (and aggressive demonstrations) over an obscure American video perceived as being disrespectful of Islam became an issue in the American presidential campaign.

What are the public diplomacy lessons in this latest case?

There was a “practice what we preach” aspect to The Daily Show link. Stewart pokes fun at both Democratic and Republican political figures. Stewart highlights Egyptian contributions to modern society. He commends Morsi for assurances that political speech will be protected. He reminds that critics love their country every bit as much as leaders.

That said, it was probably inappropriate for the Embassy to link to the segment on its Twitter feed. Stewart calls Morsi a “crazy guy.” It’s inevitable that many would view it as official agreement.

While edgy works, this went too far, an “in your face” action at a sensitive time when the new Egyptian government was likely to overreact to any perceived slight.

But once the tweet was out there, connecting to publicly available content, the Embassy compounded its first mistake by removing the link. The Ambassador’s private apology with a pledge to avoid a repeat in the future was all that was needed. The removal sent precisely the wrong message that objectionable speech can and should be curtailed, a point Egypt made repeatedly during last September’s film controversy.

The retreat also sends the wrong message to the State Department’s global communicators. Ambassadors and public diplomats should be fully engaged in the vigorous debate about the critical issues of the day, not on the sidelines where it’s safe. They should be pushing the envelope, even if it means going over the line once in a while.

While integrating transformational technology into U.S. public diplomacy programs, mistakes inevitably will be made. How organizations react says a lot about what lessons will be learned.

Analyzing “Cultural Diplomacy in Africa” through the IR Positioning Spectrum

public diplomacy1 Comment on Analyzing “Cultural Diplomacy in Africa” through the IR Positioning Spectrum

Analyzing Cultural Diplomacy in Africa

In his piece, “Schools, Hospitals or Cultural Relations?” John Worne outlines the “crude version” of the International Relations Positioning Spectrum (IRPS), a continuum that illustrates international relations as falling somewhere between aid and military power. As he defines it, the IRPS is “giving, helping, sharing, boasting, shouting, fighting.”

However, just as people have different conceptions of what “culture” means to them, a (cultural) spectrum, of sorts, can also vary in meaning. For example, Nick Cull, in his response to John Worne’s spectrum, argues that a more appropriate spectrum might fall: “listening – facilitation – exchange – cultural diplomacy – broadcasting – advocacy.” When using this spectrum in analyzing diplomatic efforts, though, understanding Cull’s classification of cultural diplomacy is crucial. As Cull defines it, cultural diplomacy is “an actor’s attempt to manage the international environment through making its cultural resources and achievements known overseas and/or facilitating cultural transmission abroad.” In this sense, his definition most closely aligns with Worne’s “boasting” in the sense that an actor is promoting, or projecting, its own society to others.

IRPS
source: the British Council

Each spectrum, regardless of their respective labeling, contains similarities that are interesting when applied to a case study, such as “Cultural Diplomacy in Africa: A Forum for Young Leaders.” Cultural Diplomacy in Africa: A Forum for Young Leaders (CDA) is a network of students, young professionals, and cultural practitioners from across the world “who share an interest in the African continent.” Housed and run within the Institute for Cultural Diplomacy, the CDA believes in the significance of cultural diplomacy as a tool for policy and uses it to address the challenges currently faced in Africa. Further, the network “conducts ongoing activity aimed at supporting development and strengthening relations between different countries and cultural groups within Africa, and between Africa and external partners…[and] provides an opportunity to network and experience the vibrant city of Berlin.” The Forum’s objectives are defined as follows:

  • Establish a long-term, interdisciplinary network of young leaders that contributes on both a professional and personal level to exchange within African states;
  • Educate, enhance, and sustain African relationships through the empowerment of the participants;
  • Support valuable contributions to civil society in Africa through “Leadership Initiatives” that the young leaders will organize as part of the program;
  • Provide the participants with fresh insights and new perspectives to deepen their understanding of the economic, political, cultural, religious, and social frameworks of the African Project; and
  • Strengthen professional, economic, cultural, political, and scientific cooperation through close personal and professional relationships.

As is fairly evident in its description (and in its many objectives), the CDA Forum is composed of a number of cultural diplomacy programs and initiatives. First, the CDA Forum greatly focuses on the role of African leaders within its program. These speakers, involved in lectures and discussions include “leading figures from the fields of politics, diplomacy, academia, civil society and representatives from the private sector.” Each speaker is expected to bring his or her own insights on the theme of the Weeklong Seminar. These activities of the Forum seem to fall nicely under Worne’s “sharing” or “boasting” category of the spectrum, but the nature of program will obviously affect the classifications. For example, lectures might align more closely with “boasting,” while discussion-based programs involve more “sharing.” One note of importance is that Worne astutely observes that some words might be better suited for describing various activities than others. For instance, he states, “‘Exchanging’ is perhaps a more accurate term than ‘sharing’ because it is more actively mutual and more purposeful. ‘Telling’ is perhaps fairer than ‘shouting’ to encapsulate diplomacy and campaigning…The intent behind it and the way it is done make the difference.”  Therefore, lectures may be better classified as “telling,” since speakers are sharing their insights and experiences, whereas seminars and workshops are more about the mutual exchange of information. In addition to the speakers, the program provides opportunities for the participants to network with other attendees and explore the cities in a new setting. According to ICD’s website, social and cultural activities range from film nights to debates to group dinners to visiting historical sites. Although these visits provide an outlet for the attendees to meet informally with one another, the ICD website clearly notes that during group visits, participants “are able to see the city from a different perspective. They will be able to experience all that Berlin has to offer, as well as partake in visiting Germany’s top institutions, including foreign offices, the city hall, the German parliament, and various embassies throughout the city.”

review-2010-06
source: culturaldiplomacy.org

Looking at the program from this angle shows that the CDA Forum through Institute for Cultural Diplomacy, in addition to supporting efforts aimed at African civil society and its overall development, is also an opportunity to promote the German culture to participants. This element of the Forum’s activities would fall farther to the right of the spectrum—perhaps under boasting or shouting, but what components are necessary before an initiative is classified as ‘shouting’ versus ‘boasting’? Determining whether participants felt like a significant portion of the program was geared toward German society would be interesting to examine within this context. Worne notes in his piece that “at its best, cultural relations means more ‘helping and sharing’, less ‘shouting and fighting’ and maybe one day a less urgent need to ‘give.’

This is a fair point, but it’s difficult to know the relationship between these points within the context of the CDA Forum because there is little knowledge on the CDA Forum’s participants. Although the website classifies them as “students, young professionals and cultural practitioners,” there are great differences between the former category of students and the two latter categories.

Is this Forum primarily composed of students trying to learn and “take it all in,” or is it composed of individuals who can take the knowledge they learn and actually apply it in their home countries? Both classes are extremely important, and relationships need to be built with each group, but there is a difference when considering the short and long-term implications of exchange programs. Ultimately, when looking at the elements of the CDA Forum, each of the tactics could be placed at different points along Worne’s—and along Cull’s—International Relations Positioning Spectrum. The cultural diplomacy elements of the program attempt to build relationships with African leaders, create networks (and lasting relationships) among today’s young leaders, and even promote the German lifestyle and culture through history, tours and dinners.

Although I tend to believe that multidisciplinary initiatives with numerous aims might have a greater chance of success, do multiple aims have the ability to dilute the central, core purpose of an organization or an enterprise? Does the Forum’s focus on multiple areas mean that this particular initiative has a greater or less likelihood of experiencing success, or does the spectrum not matter not matter as much in the grand scheme of things?

Democracy and 21st Century Statecraft

Cultural Diplomacy, public diplomacy, Social Media2 Comments on Democracy and 21st Century Statecraft
Tallying election results with the aid of cellphones in Kenya
Tallying election results with the aid of cellphones in Kenya

By Rebecca Woodward

The recent presidential elections in Kenya served as a platform to showcase mobile technology as a medium for transparent and fair processes in a country troubled by election violence and fraud in the recent past.  There are roughly six billion mobile phones in the world, in Kenya over 75% of the population uses cell-phones, so drawing upon technology already in use as a tool for institutional accountability is a logical choice. Much has been said and written about the Obama administration’s approach to digital government, and it has mostly revolved around former Secretary of State Clinton’s plan for 21st century statecraft.  This novel approach of Government using technology as the building blocks and foundation to reach out and connect with friends and (not-so-friendly) partners, has meant rethinking many of the tenets of diplomacy up until now.

TechCamp imageThe U.S. State Department has developed several programs, which have revolutionized traditional diplomacy; among them is TechCamp, which is a program within the Civil Society 2.0 initiative.  Since 2010, there have been over 15 TechCamps held all over the world, from Santiago (Chile) to Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina), aimed at educating civil societies around the world providing them with stronger technology skills, which in turn will lead to more transparent governments and empowered citizens, ultimately strengthening democratic institutions.

Other countries have similar initiatives using technology as a key component of their diplomacy toolkit, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), for example, has a wide array of programs across the world which use basic SMS to request service from government agencies, report service interruptions or lack of service in order to keep governments accountable. In the U.S., organizations such as the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), among others have been active in democracy promotion for many years, and as technology has become ubiquitous in our daily lives, it has also become part of their programs.  More recently, organizations such as Code for America have begun expanding internationally to partner with local governments worldwide to provide them with the tools and insights needed to bring technology to their citizens.

The TechCamp initiative differentiates itself from other organizations in that it brings together people from varying socio-economic backgrounds around technology, whereas NDI or SIDA bring technology to specific groups with common interests (teachers, economists).  TechCamp reflects the values of 21st Century Statecraft touted by the Obama administration: openness, transparency, and engagement.  TechCamp reflects these values in its entire organization; the website provides “TechCamp in a box,” which includes all the tools needed to start a TechCamp, the planning process, as well as solutions which are documented (both in English and other languages) through TechCamp Wiki.

TechCamp Mumbai Tries Out the Harlem Shake
TechCamp Mumbai tries out the Harlem Shake

Through TechCamp, the U.S. is not only sharing cultural norms and values (including the Harlem Shake), but is also establishing valuable ties and on-going relationships with the future decision makers around the world.  Finally, the recent TechCamp in Philadelphia is an interesting addition to the TechCamp curriculum.  Having the domestic component could be interpreted as a signal to the rest of the world that the U.S. is not just exporting the program without applying it at home, but also to showcase work being done overseas by the State Department to U.S. taxpayers.

Countries using culture and diplomacy to advance democracy abroad, such as the U.S., need to take advantage of their privileged positions with regards to access to technology, communication channels and international presence.  The U.S. could focus on strengthening the programs it has started to develop over the last four years and incorporate them into its diplomatic toolkit for future democracy promotion around the world.  Programs such as TechCamp need to multiply at every level, promoting a grassroots approach to technology.  As NGO’s move forward with successful results using technology platforms to promote transparency and civil society engagement; at the state level, cases such as Kenya illustrate the many uses technology can have in promoting democracy worldwide.

Rebecca Woodward is a graduate student in the Global Communication program at the George Washington University with a focus on Communication and Information Technology.

The above post is from Take Five’s new Student Perspective series. Graduate students studying Cultural Diplomacy as Communication at the George Washington University are encouraged to think about themes such as youth, gender, health, climate, free press, and democracy, and write on how these themes relate to cultural diplomacy and to communication.  The posts involve thoughtful commentary on the writer’s chosen theme, linking to class readings and discussions. 

Paying it Forward? TechWomen and Cultural Relations

Middle East, public diplomacy2 Comments on Paying it Forward? TechWomen and Cultural Relations

Women - Tech

By Kate Mays

“When I was Secretary of State, I decided that women’s issues had to be central to American foreign policy. Not just because I am a feminist but because I believe that societies are better off when women are politically and economically empowered … So I think that it behooves us, those of us that live in various countries where we do have an economic and political voice, that we need to help other women, and I really dedicated myself to that, both at the UN and then as Secretary of State.”—former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in a December 2010 TED Talk

Since 2006, the World Economic Forum has published the Global Gender Gap Report because “clos[ing] global gender gaps [is] a key element of our mission to improve the state of the world.” The report finds that the more a country utilizes its female half of the population, the better off that country is. In recent years, the US has emphasized women’s rights as key foreign policy objective, including the creation in 2009 of an Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s issues.

John Worne, in his piece “Schools, Hospitals, or Cultural Relations?,” presents an International Relations positioning spectrum that ranges from “giving” (aid) to “fighting” (military action).  Cultural relations spans the middle points on the spectrum: “helping, sharing and boasting” (access, influence, and messaging).  Worne justifies spending on cultural relations because, “at its best, cultural relations means more ‘helping and sharing’, less ‘shouting and fighting’ and maybe one day a less urgent need to ‘give.’” Considering the correlation between women’s greater participation in society and that society’s prosperity, it makes sense for the US to focus some of its efforts and resources on bringing women to the table; eventually, hopefully, those women will reach out and do the same for others in their society.

techwomen.Facebook1-300x225A current initiative that strives to “help and share” is TechWomen, a US-based mentorship program that connects emerging female tech entrepreneurs from the Middle East and Africa with American women mentors who come mostly from Silicon Valley tech companies. These “Emerging Leaders” are paired with both professional and cultural mentors, to foster not only professional development opportunities but also to facilitate mutual understanding and cultural acclimation during their time in America. A public-private partnership, TechWomen is an initiative of the State Department and managed by the Institute of International Education.

Announced in April 2010, TechWomen piloted in Spring 2011, bringing over to the US 37 women from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, and the Palestinian territories, where they engaged in a five-week project-based mentorship that included professional networking as well as a concluding trip to DC for workshops. The program was enough of a success in 2011 that it not only continued in 2012 but also expanded to include women from Tunisia and Yemen. In 2013, it’s expanding even more to include women from Cameroon, Kenya, Libya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. The Emerging Leaders are all women who have already begun careers in the tech industry; the idea is to develop them further to become real leaders in their field.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5mXvkZarEoY]

TechWomen is notable for its dual focus on empowering women through education, and focusing that education in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) fields. The initiative was developed in response to President Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech, where he called for greater collaboration between the American and Muslim populations to address seven main issues. TechWomen hits on two: women’s rights and economic development and opportunity (through the development of science and technology).

The program has both short-term and long-term goals. In the immediate, of course, the goal is to bolster the mentees’ skills, by sharing tips and ideas, and building their confidence. A main theme in the stories shared on TechWomen’s blog speaks to the power of simply providing a common and supportive space in which these women would feel comfortable vocalizing their ideas. In the case of Evelyn Zoubi, the validation she received from her peers and mentor for her idea (eCloset.me, a website that digitizes wardrobes), was empowering and invigorating. For another Emerging Leader, Thekra, the most powerful workshop taught her to “speak the thoughts I have and not be afraid to take some risks.” These outcomes – confidence-building, creating a network of support and ideas – are mostly intangible, but are nonetheless important in creating a large, sustainable TechWomen network in the Middle East and Africa.

There are so far some real tangible outcomes to the program as well. The mentorship is project-based, so the mentees pick up practical skills and learn more about the tech field from mentors who are on the cutting-edge of the industry. They are also afforded opportunities to network with other leaders in the field to pitch their ideas. Evelyn’s pitch led to a connection with a US organization. Thekra’s idea, EduGirl – an NGO that would build a mentorship model to educate girls in neglected areas in Jordan – encompasses both the skills she learned through her mentorship, and touches on the longer-term goal for TechWomen, which is that the Emerging Leaders will go back to their countries and share their knowledge, to become mentors themselves for younger generations of women in STEM.

While the main focus of TechWomen is to expand opportunities and education, another major tool of cultural diplomacy is woven throughout the program: exchange. During their stay in the US, the Emerging Leaders have opportunities to visit schoolsto see the American education system in action. The program also encourages a two-way exchange. Once the 5-week program is complete, TechWomen mentor delegations travel to some of the mentees’ countries to “focus on: expanding networks of women in the technology sectors, creating and strengthening partnerships, and ensuring the sustainability of Mentor/Emerging Leader relationships.” (excerpted from the TechWomen website. In a video appeal for more TechWomen mentors, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emphasizes not only the benefits for the mentees, but the opportunity for growth and enrichment for the US mentors.

[youtube=http://youtu.be/MpeRrcLdxJs]

Hillary Clinton’s appeal for more mentors from American tech companies.

On the TechWomen blog, mentors’ cultural exchange experiences are well-documented, alongside the stories from the mentees themselves.

Speaking of the blog, the technical communication infrastructure around the TechWomen initiative seems to be an important piece of its sustainability: there is a robust website, an active presence on social media, and a blog that posts throughout the year. While US mentorship only occurs in the fall, and the delegations take a few trips after that, the conversation around TechWomen appears year-long, so that engagement remains fairly active.

To my mind, TechWomen has been a successful program because of its specificity in mission and audience. The ambitious vision of creating a professional network that can support the next generation of women leaders in technology in the Middle East and Africa (and continue to be self-perpetuating within the regions) is grounded in concrete efforts like the projects-based mentorship, professional development workshops, and networking opportunities.  Hopefully the success of these kinds of initiatives will lead to others with larger targeted audiences – opening up educational opportunities for women who are not already on a career path. TechGirls is a promising initiative that reaches younger women to encourage careers in science and technology. Thekra’s EduGirl is a great example of the next step for this movement – an initiative that comes from within the region and reaches out to disadvantaged girls and women.

Kate Mays is a graduate student at the George Washington University.

The above post is from Take Five’s new Student Perspective series. Graduate students studying Cultural Diplomacy as Communication at the George Washington University are encouraged to think about themes such as youth, gender, health, climate, free press, and democracy, and write on how these themes relate to cultural diplomacy and to communication.  The posts involve thoughtful commentary on the writer’s chosen theme, linking to class readings and discussions. 

Denmark’s Green Vision

Cultural Diplomacy, public diplomacyLeave a Comment on Denmark’s Green Vision

Screen Shot 2013-03-06 at 4.29.04 PM

The following reading is from Take Five’s new Student Perspective series. Graduate students studying Cultural Diplomacy as Communication at the George Washington University are encouraged to think about themes such as youth, gender, health, climate, free press, and democracy, and write on how these themes relate to cultural diplomacy and to communication.  The posts involve thoughtful commentary on the writer’s chosen theme, linking to class readings and discussions.  

By Kalyani Phansalkar

The potential of cultural diplomacy, at least in the US, is hampered by the lack of coordination between private and public entities in creating a coherent strategy. Scholars such as Cynthia Schneider argue that a lack of “interagency strategy for cultural exchange and diplomacy [marginalizes] arts, culture, and media…and limits the potential of existing programs.” In the age of Web 2.0, the cost of gathering content and coordinating programs has diminished significantly, opening up a space for cultural programming to take a more significant role in diplomatic issues. However, without the presence of a robust cultural diplomacy framework, these fragmented digital interactions will have a limited effect.

In some ways, Denmark has harnessed the new technologies and facilitated cooperation between public and private sectors to create a cultural program that raises awareness about climate change. The Culture | Futures Network, a growing collaboration of cultural actors and private enterprises, strives to educate and engage the global population on issues of sustainability and the human ecological footprint. This network serves as a kind of umbrella for smaller cultural and creative groups that specialize in film, art, dance, drama, or graphic design. By joining different, often fragmented efforts, the Culture | Futures Network is able to most effectively translate the message of environmental sustainability across borders.

It has recently launched an Earth Day 2013 Art Campaign called the CO2 Drive that leverages the use of new technologies, including the smartphone, to create art and raise awareness about climate change. The CO2 Drive creates GPS-based paintings, using cities as “canvases” and smartphone technology as “paint” as people around the world promote climate-friendly transportation. In essence, the GPS paintings will look like CO2 tags around the world. Furthermore, the network also promotes film screenings about environmental issues around the world. A recent screening included Vertical Cities – a film about a large slum settlement outside Mumbai. Films, productions, dramas, and other exchanges followed by debates offer a forum to discuss environmental issues through the prism of culture.

The issue of climate change is not tangible, in the sense that it cannot be given, traded, exchanged, stolen, etc. Unlike poverty or disenfranchisement, it cannot be ameliorated through donating food or demanding rights, respectively. Therefore, it needs to be resolved through a mean of cultural exchange that empowers citizens to take ownership of their surroundings and reduce their environmental impact. According to John Worne, “strong, effective cultural relations mean ultimately we will need less guns and fewer food parcels because sharing knowledge and ideas between people worldwide is among the best antidotes to conflict and giving people access to skills, languages, jobs and opportunities.” In essence, programs that empower global citizens enable enduring efforts across the globe to resolve large-scale problems.

The Danish Cultural Institute, along with various other parallel organizations, has formed bridges with private and NGO groups in order to facilitate a cultural dialogue on environmental issues and climate change. These organizations include the British Council, Culture Center of Spain, The Goethe Institute, International Federation for Arts Councils and Cultural Agencies (IFACCA), and The Asia-Europe Foundation. By offering avenues for different art projects, the Culture | Futures Network strives to make climate change a relevant part of one’s identity and culture. For instance, the network recently launched the Roskilde Festival, which asks participants to produce original works of art from garbage and recycled material. Therefore, participants from around the globe can imbibe their meanings and tradition of art into a concept that strives to raise awareness about environmental issues and climate change. This cultural resonance will make environmental sustainability a prominent issue on the global stage.

Furthermore, the Culture | Futures Network ties with a larger Danish foreign policy initiative called Global Green Growth Forum. The 3GF strives to explore avenues for a new green economy that sustains industrial growth, but curtails greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the “3GF seeks to become the leading international venue for public demonstration of leadership and cooperation on green growth by top-level global decision-makers.” Therefore, this cultural framework brings together participants from all across the globe around the environmental issues, while at the same time, promoting Denmark’s vision about a new industrial revolution that will “effectively realize the potential for long-term global green growth.”

Kalyani Phansalkar is a second year graduate student at the George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs.

The Book on Iraq and Afghanistan: Lessons Learned

public diplomacyLeave a Comment on The Book on Iraq and Afghanistan: Lessons Learned

Image

In Vietnam, the United States fought a counterinsurgent war on behalf of a government lacking popular legitimacy using primarily conventional tactics in support of a flawed strategic objective that turned out to be inconsequential to the broader Cold War struggle against Communism. The primary lesson learned, particularly within the Army, was “never again.”

However, a decade ago, a cadre of officers well schooled in irregular warfare and intrastate conflicts, eventually marshaled by General David Petraeus, scrambled to rearticulate the lost principles of counterinsurgency deliberately buried after Vietnam, incorporate them into a new Army doctrine and apply them (appropriately) in Iraq and (less so) in Afghanistan.

This experience is compellingly detailed in Fred Kaplan’s book, The Insurgents: David Petraeus and the Plot to Change the American Way of War.

Kaplan cautions whether the military is capturing the right lessons or adequately incorporating them into future planning. Coupled with the Obama administration’s understandable reluctance after unwinding two wars to engage in large-scale interventions any time soon, the risk is that the military will walk away from counterinsurgency doctrine when the war in Afghanistan ends next year, just as it did after Vietnam.

The Insurgents offers several strategic lessons regarding the nature of future conflict; how the United States should wage war; and key factors that will determine success or failure.

The first is the preeminence of political rather than military outcomes. As Kaplan relates, Petraeus adopted the dictum that counterinsurgency is 80 percent political and 20 percent military. That is likely to be true with any future intervention.

The United States entered Afghanistan and Iraq knowing what it wanted to eliminate – Osama bin Laden’s sanctuary and Saddam Hussein’s regime – but with only a vague conception of a desired strategic end state. In Iraq, the lack of a post-conflict strategy was not an oversight, but deliberate. In neither case was there a grasp of the political, social and cultural forces in those countries that would shape the eventual outcomes.

 

Regime change is not the end of the war, only the end of the first phase. The desired end state, a government with perceived legitimacy that earns the support of a large cross-section of the local population, is very difficult. This is not only clear from the mixed results achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan, but Libya as well.

An effective plan for the conflict and what happens afterwards requires integrated civilian and military action, a second lesson. This rarely happened over the past 12 years. While there was an effective partnership in Iraq between Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the norm involved civilians and the military pulling in different directions. The worst case involved Paul Bremer’s ill-advised orders regarding the disbanding of the Iraqi Army and de-Ba’athification of the government, uncoordinated steps that fueled if not generated the insurgency.

Future interventions will involve a “whole of government” effort, involving not just soldiers and diplomats, but development experts in wide-ranging fields from agriculture, policing and justice to energy, commerce and communication. Unfortunately, the United States government is not structured to plan or naturally operate that way. As it is, Congress fully funds only one element of national power, the military. Given the military cuts associated with sequestration, Congress over time may be tempted to restore some of them with offsets from non-defense discretionary accounts. If so, this will only widen the gap between military and civilian capabilities.

The third lesson regards time. Wars of insurgency are by nature “slow and messy.” Kaplan questions whether the American people are unwilling to support such long, complicated and costly endeavors.

While this remains a richly debated field of study, the American people gave its leaders 12 years to succeed in Afghanistan and eight years in Iraq. While some have already argued the military has been withdrawn too quickly, the fact is the United States squandered too much time developing workable strategies and putting appropriate levels of resource in place.

Going forward, any intervention will be a race against time. Better strategic planning is an imperative. Given the emerging global media environment, the perceived legitimacy of any action is on the clock with no time to waste.

Given how lethal force can be delivered through more technology and fewer troops, future Presidents will be tempted to solve the time problem by engaging in high-tech wars without mobilizing the American people or the government. But given the proliferation of smartphones with cameras linked to the Internet and social media like Facebook and Twitter, future warfare will still be influenced by public opinion. Governments may choose to ignore the impact, as is happening now in Pakistan, but public pressure can be expected to increase, overseas if not at home.

The final lesson is simple, yet compelling. If we are not confident that military action can be decisive, the most prudent decision may be not to intervene militarily in the first place. This is certainly not easy with various constituencies calling on the United States to “do something.” But the reality is that, if future conflict is mostly political, military action may incur profound costs without actually solving the problem.

This appears to be the one lesson that has been put into practice. The result, right or wrong, is evident in Syria.

 

The use of Social Media in Public Diplomacy: Scanning e-diplomacy by Embassies in Washington DC

public diplomacy, Social Media17 Comments on The use of Social Media in Public Diplomacy: Scanning e-diplomacy by Embassies in Washington DC

DigitalDiplomacy

This post was co-written by Dr. Ali Fisher, Associate Director, Intermedia. Ali produces analysis of social movements which enhances organisational strategy, strategic communication and evaluation through network analysis and big data.  Current research includes the use of digital media during elections, and social media as an information sharing tool during moments of tension, in addition to projects focused on e-diplomacy strategy and methods to disrupt the use of the internet by violent extremists. Ali’s book Collaborative Public Diplomacy; How transnational networks influence American Studies in Europe was published earlier this year.

Social media is one of the fastest growing tools of modern public diplomacy. The advantage of social media provides the opportunity to reach citizens of other countries in near real-time.  Social media platforms also provide spaces for interaction, increased engagement, and thus furthering the goals of public diplomacy.  This research has been conducted by Jeanette Gaida as part of a capstone project for the Masters in Global Communication at George Washington University, working with Ali Fisher at InterMedia.

The potential ease with which social media can be accessed and the low cost in comparison to other methods make it an attractive tool for many embassies, as well as other government offices, that are facing budget cuts and demands to increase engagement.  Numerous platforms allow for the use of more dynamic content, such as videos, photos, and links, than traditional methods of giving lectures or passing out pamphlets. In addition, social media are key channels in reaching youth populations, a major goal of current public diplomacy efforts.

However, public diplomacy is not only about reaching a youth audience. It is equally important to listen to and understanding young publics, their thoughts, aspirations, information seeking and sharing behaviors along with the actions they take as a result. With this insight, there is greater potential to engage and collaborate with key communities rather than broadcast to a target audience.

Which platforms are used to conduct e-diplomacy in Washington DC?

With over 170 diplomatic missions in the United States, American citizens and social media users around the world have a vast range of channels with which to engage. Adding to the range of channels, many embassies also have multiple accounts on the same platform, often an account representing the Ambassador and an account for the embassy.

To analyze the extent to which Embassies in DC are conducting e-diplomacy, accounts were identified through the websites of the respective embassies. An embassy was recorded as conducting e-diplomacy if the embassy website had easily identifiable links to social media accounts or if a brief, basic, search of social media platforms uncovered an account.  

Image1

Which platforms are embassies in DC most frequently using to conduct e-diplomacy?

Image2Twitter and Facebook are the most popular platforms.

Logically, some embassies will use more than one platform to conduct e-diplomacy. The research found that every embassy that uses more than one platform, use at least one of Facebook or Twitter as part of their e-diplomacy strategy.

Platform Usage Among Embassies

  Twitter More Than 1 Twitter Facebook Both Neither Facebook and Not Twitter Twitter and Not Facebook
Embassies using 2 platforms 88% 14% 100% 88% 0% 13% 0%
Embassies using 3 or more platforms 100% 19% 86% 86% 0% 0% 14%

Total number of embassies using 2 platforms= 24

Total number of embassies using 3 or more platforms= 21

This overview of the data raises some important questions for further analysis:

  • Which embassies are reaching the most users?
  • Which Ambassadors or representatives are reaching the most users?
  • Are embassies using the persona of an ‘Ambassador’ more frequently than ‘Embassy’ accounts?
    • Do the same social media users engage with both an Ambassador and Embassy from the same country?
    • Are individual or institutional accounts reaching more users?
    • Are embassies engaging with the same people, or does each embassy engage a different group of social media users.
      • If social media users are engaging with more than one embassy, what can we tell about these users?

An evidence based approach to e-diplomacy strategy:

To analyze the strategic implications of this data to inform the conduct of e-diplomacy, the capstone project will focus on five embassies to study in depth: the United Kingdom, Peru, India, Italy, and Sri Lanka.  These accounts were chosen as they represent countries from a range of continents and will give a more detailed picture of social media usage. Further parts of the research will be made available at a later date.

About the Capstone Project

The Global Communication program is joint venture between the Elliott School of International Affairs and the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University.  In this program, I have chosen to concentrate in Public Diplomacy.  As part of the program, students complete a capstone project in which they partner with local firms.  This project partners with InterMedia and looks at the uses of e-diplomacy by foreign embassies in the United States.  Embassies mainly market to the American public, but some embassies reach out to citizens of their country living in the United States or to the public in their home country.

How Does Cultural Diplomacy Communicate? Let Me Count the Ways

Cultural Diplomacy, Global Communication, in the field, public diplomacy1 Comment on How Does Cultural Diplomacy Communicate? Let Me Count the Ways
U.S. senior diplomat Robert Jackson and Casablanca high school research team at Rabat Environment Eair, 2010
Opportunities to Engage: U.S. senior diplomat Robert Jackson with Casablanca high school research team members (Morocco’s Earth Day Network Fair, 2010)

Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Tara Sonenshine, who delivered the annual Walter Roberts Lecture at George Washington University last Thursday, comes from a serious press and media background.  She is the recipient of 10 News Emmy Awards and other awards in journalism for broadcast programs on domestic and international issues.  She has also worked as strategic communications adviser to Internews and the International Women’s Media Foundation, among a number of other international organizations.

TS pink suitSo it was all the more striking how prominently cultural diplomacy featured in her comments last Thursday, just as it does in many of her other communications — including the U.S. public diplomacy highlights she publishes every few weeks.

This is a reminder that the Under Secretary recognizes and embraces the fact that cultural programming IS communication.  It is an essential diplomatic tool that enables the U.S. to persuade influential people to listen to us with an open mind; allows us to share knowledge and skills with potential international partners and allies; and helps us attract positive attention via mass media and digital media.

As Harvard scholar Joeph Nye has noted, the scarcest information resource in the 21st Century is likely to be the audience’s attention span.  Here in the U.S., despite the plethora of contemporary media distractions, most citizens still pay some attention to what our own government says, because we know it might affect us directly, and also because we conceive of every citizen having a watchdog role.   Certainly U.S. journalists see scrutiny of government as an obligation.

cross cultural iceberg
THE ICEBERG MODEL This graphic shows why direct messaging – via print or audio-visual media – can so easily fail to reach its target.

But it would be a mistake to think that official U.S. statements and policy explanations get even the modest automatic hearing abroad that they do at home.   People are certainly interested in what the U.S. is up to, but they have a host of non-U.S. sources for that information that are more familiar to them, more trusted, and frequently more accommodating to their preconceptions.

Overseas, it takes creativity and insight to increase the chances that people will listen to U.S. officials with an open mind, and be prepared to respond accordingly.

This is why public diplomacy practitioners know that cultural programming is increasingly vital to the achievement of foreign policy goals.  Some cultural programs serve as the proverbial “picture worth a thousand words,” projecting the essence of American policies, principles, and values via local mass media and fast-growing new digital media.  Some cultural programming works as a powerful teaching tool to help influential people abroad understand (if not necessarily accept) both U.S. foreign affairs priorities and fundamental American principles.

More fundamentally, cultural programming fosters relationships and understanding between foreign officials and U.S. diplomats who will be called on, sooner or later, to work on contentious issues across the table from one other.  It helps sustain generalized affinities even as individuals come and go in the diplomatic service.  And it helps connect the real global communicators of the 21st century:  journalists, activists, scholars, researchers, teachers, writers, artists, scientists, and entrepreneurs, as well as young people just joining the conversation.

The following recent U.S. public diplomacy highlights show the variety of ways in which cultural programming communicates.  These highlights, published in January by the Office of the Under Secretary, are here sorted into three categories:  Talking, Teaching, and Spreading the Word.

1)  Talking — recognizing the people who are (or are likely to become) influential, and bringing them together across borders for focused and purposeful exchange of ideas.

  • Alumnus Hassen Ould Ahmed was recently appointed Deputy Director of Mauritania’s Cabinet.  Ahmed was a 2008-2009 Hubert H. Humphrey Fellow at Penn State University.  Meanwhile, Armenian political magazine De Facto named Edmon Marukyan, an alumnus of the Hubert H. Humphrey Program 2010 and previously the International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP), “Member of Parliament of the Year.” Marukyan was elected to parliament in spring 2012.  
  • Public Affairs Section Jerusalem hosted Oberlin College Professor of History Dr. Gary Kornblith, who spoke on American democracy at An-Najah University, Birzeit University, and Al Quds Open University.  Dr. Kornblith also discussed the possibility of establishing an American Studies Program at the universities, meeting with university staff and academics at an Embassy reception designed to nurture cultural dialogue and advance the pursuit of American Studies.
  • At Rich Mix, East London (U.K.), playwright Wajahat Ali participated in an evening monologue and discussion with members of the Muslim arts community. The event attracted artists, writers, students and community leaders, including many women.  An accomplished Muslim-American writer and an engaging speaker, Mr. Ali is comfortable with both his American and his Muslim identities, and there was much discussion about the contrast between American and British Muslims on that topic.
  • xborders gamesOn January 5-6, while India and Pakistan faced each other on the cricket pitch, teams of exchange program alumni from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh engaged in the xBorder Games.  Using social media tools like Google+, Storify, and Twitter, two teams comprised of alumni from each country competed in a digital scavenger hunt.  The xBorder Games connected 45 alumni separated by geographic, cultural, and linguistic lines, created new friendships, and increased cross-cultural understanding.  U.S. Embassies Islamabad, New Delhi and Dhaka organized the event.
  • Paralympian and Fulbright Scholar Yevgeniy Tetyukhin spoke about disability policy to an audience of special education teachers and administrators at the University of Guam.  A professor, two-time Paralympian, and lifelong disability advocate, Tetyukhin is spending a year at the University of Hawaii at Manoa’s Center on Disability Studies, researching disability policy in the context of globalization and multicultural diversity.
  • Unconventional artists and activists narrate their own stories on a new VOA program that seeks to connect underground communities in Iran and the rest of the world.  The twice-monthly TV and web program called ZirZameen is produced by Voice of America’s Persian Service and is available in both English and Farsi editions.  The show, hosted by Mehrnoush Karimian, premiered in December and is available on social media sites, the VOA Persian satellite stream and on Livestation, a 24/7 Internet streaming platform.
  • The U.S. Ambassador to Korea hosted a New Year’s party for the Embassy’s online friends.  Out of 35,000 people who follow the post’s various social media accounts, a diverse group of 20 were invited based on their online activity. The Ambassador blogged about the party, and the Embassy will post an “Ask the Ambassador” YouTube video highlighting the event.  The Ambassador will continue this type of online-offline engagement with innovative netizens in the future.

2)  Teaching — transferring knowledge and skills that are essential in civic life, political life, and international relations.  Cultural programming promotes retention and “useability” of new knowledge through dialogue, debate, and learning-by-doing.  Two-way knowledge transfer and “paying know-how  forward” are frequent outcomes of cultural programming.

  • Pilarani Phiri from Zodiak Broadcasting radio station in Malawi – a participant in the State Department Foreign Press Center’s (FPC) 2012 Elections program for visiting journalists – reported that he Malawi journo interviews presidentsecured the first live phone interview with a Malawian president as a result of his U.S. program experience.  In his words: “one thing I learned while covering the elections is that the American President is always scrutinized by the public.  Immediately I arrived home I got in touch with our ‘White House’ to have the President answer questions from the public.  I am proud to announce that on December 31, I was the first Malawian journalist to have a live phone interview with the President where people posed questions to [him], a thing that has never happened before in my country.”
  • For four months, hundreds of Indonesian English teachers gathered every Saturday morning to take part in the series “Shaping the Way We Teach English,” taught by the [U.S. Embassy] Regional English Language Officer and English Language Fellows.  The teachers came to @america [the high-tech American Center] in Jakarta or participated via digital link from the Consulate in Medan and the American Corner in Yogyakarta.
  • U.S. Embassy Kampala’s Information Officer gave a presentation at the “Writing Our World” (WOW) workshop at Makerere University, coaching participants on using social media to broadcast their voices and market their writing.  Facebook, Twitter, and blogging were introduced as tools to expand the young writers’ network and increase attention to their work.  The Embassy has also given grants to facilitate the activities of Writing Our World through readers and writers clubs in 10 schools.  WOW’s leader is a member of the Embassy’s Youth Council.
  • AC SalfeetJerusalem: The board game Monopoly has proven a potent tool in fostering the entrepreneurial spirit among Palestinian youth, while simultaneously introducing a mainstay of American culture.  American Corner Salfeet hosted 20 undergraduate students from Al Quds Open University for a discussion about business plans, barriers to entry, and board games with a visiting U.S. diplomat.
  • Seven officials from Zambia’s Ministry of Tourism traveled to the U.S. in January on an IVLP program to enhance their planning of the 20th session of the United Nations World Tourism Organization General Assembly, which will take place in Zambia in August 2013. During the program the officials examined how to plan a world conference, including best practices, leveraging partnerships, and capitalizing on them for longer-term benefit beyond the conference.

3) Spreading the word – via local media coverage or on digital media.  While the previous two genres of cultural programming are designed to make a significant impact on the immediate participants, the purpose of this third type is to spark positive interest among the many.

  • U.S. Embassy Caracas held its annual “Baseball Visa Day” during which Venezuelan players in the U.S. major leagues and their family members obtain visas for the upcoming season.  This year some 40 major leaguers and their families visited the Consular Section for their visas, and afterwards participated in a brief ceremony and reception with coverage by multiple print and television media outlets.  Chargé d’Affaires (CDA) James Derham reminded those present that baseball is just one of many historic and cultural ties uniting Venezuela and the United States, and congratulated the players for an unprecedented season in which one Venezuelan won the batting Triple Crown, one pitched a no-hitter, another pitched a perfect game, and nine played in the World Series.   During this event, Embassy Caracas took the opportunity to promote its youth outreach program “Béisbol y Amistad” (Baseball and Friendship), now in its seventh season.
  • OBama in hong kongIn the lead-up to the U.S. Presidential Inauguration, Consulate Hong Kong began a social media project that included photos, videos and travelling cardboard cutouts of President Obama and the First Lady.  Consulate Hong Kong Facebook posts of “President Obama” riding the Mid-Levels Escalator and standing in a Mass Transit Railway (MTR) station generated 42 comments, and 213 likes.  Public Affairs Section Hong Kong will complete the project on January 21, 2013 with a video montage of the cutout President’s “tour” of Hong Kong.
  • The Innovation Generation Facebook page of State Department’s IIP Bureau hosted Monica Dodi, co-founder of MTV Europe and The Women’s Venture Capital Fund, on its “Ask the Entrepreneur” series, which features accomplished American entrepreneurs.  The discussion sparked questions from around the globe including from India, Indonesia, Mauritania, Mexico, and Pakistan.
  • MeetUS program in GermanyThe U.S. Consul General in Munich spoke to students and faculty of “Berufsschule 4,” an off-the-beaten-track school in Nuremberg.  He addressed U.S.-German relations, the U.S. presence in Bavaria, and economic and commercial ties, and tackled tough questions about car emissions, Guantanamo, gun control, and social media topics.  The MeetUS speaker program is a core part of Mission Germany’s youth outreach, and the discussion was live Tweeted to highlight the event to a broader audience.
  • Bosnian Brooklyn Nets Player Interview Makes Front Page:  The State Department’s New York Foreign Press Center assisted the U.S. Embassy in Sarajevo in securing an interview with Brooklyn Nets player Mirza Teletovic – a Bosnian basketball star who has recently joined the NBA – in Dnevni Avaz (Daily Voice), the leading Bosnian newspaper and news website.
  • In January, [State Department] hosted 20 Youth Ambassadors from Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, and Panama for a reception and meeting with the Acting Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs (WHA), which promoted the event on social media along with the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and the relevant U.S. Embassies; Embassy San José alone received nearly 6,000 Facebook page views and 300 likes.

All the above constitute just a few of the highlights shared by the Under Secretary’s office for January alone.  January’s highlights in turn constitute a tiny sliver of the cultural programming that takes place week in, week out at every U.S. Embassy and Consulate around the world.  Most of it is targeted to advance specific foreign policy goals, and just about all of it is conceptualized strategically.

Each example is also a reminder that cultural diplomacy IS communication.  The U.S. can only benefit from greater use of cultural programming  to advance U.S. foreign affairs priorities.

Viewing Message: 1 of 1.
 Notice

This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. Visit GW’s Website Privacy Notice to learn more about how GW uses cookies.