The Challenge of Public Diplomacy for the European External Action Service. EIPAscope 01/2011

One of the main questions emerging from the EU nascent diplomatic corps – the European External Action Service (EEAS) – is what type of diplomacy the EU will conduct and what will be the added value of this new level of diplomacy for the years to come? This article looks at the concept of public diplomacy both in general and in the specific context of EU external relations. It considers the potential of the Lisbon Treaty and the establishment of the EEAS to improve the public diplomacy capacity of the EU and argues that effective EU public diplomacy could be essential to the success of the new European level diplomacy1

DAMPAK TERBENTUKNYA RCDD (REGIONAL CONFERENCE ON DIGITAL DIPLOMACY) TERHADAP NEGARA ANGGOTA STUDI KASUS : INDONESIA, CHINA, JEPANG, AUSTRALIA

This study reviews the impact of the establishment of the Regional Conference On Digital Diplomacy (RCDD) on member countries, with a special focus on Indonesia, China, Australia, and Japan as the main participants in the conference. RCDD is considered a regional forum in the Asia-Pacific designed to address digital diplomacy issues in the context of technological transformation. Indonesia's important role as the originator of RCDD is central in driving digital diplomacy issues at the regional level. In this study, qualitative methods were used by collecting data through literature and scientific references relevant to the topic. The results show that digital diplomacy carried out by Indonesia involves adaptation to advances in digital technology globally. RCDD was identified as a crucial platform for Indonesia to strengthen digital diplomacy and establish cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. In addition to enhancing digital diplomacy, RCDD also opens opportunities for Indonesia to strengthen bilateral relations with key partners such as China, Australia, and Japan. Through collaboration in the field of digital diplomacy, Indonesia can optimize digital technology to strengthen bilateral relations in a number of sectors, including trade, investment, and tourism. With digital transformation increasingly crucial in diplomacy, RCDD is considered a strategic step in creating a more stable and prosperous Asia-Pacific region

Corroding consensus-building: how self-centered public diplomacy is damaging diplomacy and what can be done about it

Public diplomacy (PD) is an activity which has become central to the analysis of modern diplomacy. Yet while there are common definitions of PD widely used internationally, practice between states has come to diverge more and more. There is disagreement in the academic literature about what should be included in PD activities, the actors, and boundaries. But there is little analysis of the effects of PD on mainstream diplomacy. This paper, written by a diplomat and sometime practitioner of PD, argues that PD is losing its connection with wider diplomacy which is based on reciprocity and consensus-building. The digital revolution has enabled PD self-promotion which diminishes the necessity for diplomatic partnering. Global rivalries are played out daily for global publics with little room for quiet reflection and compromise. Such self-centered PD has immersed itself in the confusing and divisive nature of online engagement. While the Internet has brought massive benefits and opportunities to both diplomacy and PD, the consensus-building part of true diplomatic engagement is receding. The activities of ISIS and Russia were just the first major collective challenges to diplomacy through new PD techniques. In the past, diplomacy has responded to crises and conflicts and rebuilt its options. Now PD’s chaotic and troubling evolution needs a new response. This should include partners in the non-state sector and the owners of technology platforms. The article takes a practitioner’s perspective and proposes a forum where state and non-state experts could discuss appropriate collective responses by diplomacy so it can reassert options available for consensus-building.Accepted manuscrip

The European Union’s Multi-Level Cultural Diplomacy vis-à-vis the United States of America. Working Paper Series W-2018/7

This paper examines how, to what extent and why the EU engages in cultural diplomacy vis-à-vis the US. While providing an empirical review of and conceptual reflection on the current state of the EU’s (including key member states’) efforts at employing cultural diplomacy vis-à-vis the US, the paper also strives to explain the forms of this activity. It argues that a multi-level EU cultural diplomacy in the US does exist, but that its potential is currently underused. As could be expected, the EU Delegation to the US seems to be most willing to pursue EU cultural diplomacy, whereas the extent of EU cultural diplomacy at the level of coordinated activities between the EU and the member states, as well as at the member state level remains low. This finding can be explained primarily with a latent competition between member states. While the general motivation to engage in cultural diplomacy can be interest- or value-driven – and is in the case of EU cultural diplomacy vis-à-vis the US arguably both –, it is undeniable that, in a country like the US, the interest-driven soft power competition that is often a key incentive for actors to engage in cultural diplomacy activities at all plays out negatively inside the EU. These findings are corroborated by a brief discussion of the potential acceptance of EU cultural action in the US, which highlights how, despite positive perceptions of European culture as such, the EU is hardly recognized as an actor in the field of culture

Council of the Baltic Sea States: The Role of a Sustainable and Prosperous Region in Bringing Science Diplomacy Forward. EL-CSID Working Paper Issue 2018/19 • July 2018

2017 has been a year full of promising major milestones for the future EU Science Diplomacy Strategy. At the beginning of 2017, the Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (DG RTD) of the European Commission released a thought-provoking report Tools for an EU science diplomacy (Van Langenhove, 2017). This publication was accompanied with a recognition among some parts of the academic circles and practitioners that the "Union is in process of reinforcing its diplomacy for science (the classical international S&T cooperation), while developing a genuine science for diplomacy" (López de San Román & Schunz, 2018, p. 262). Later on others have called the subsequent developments a worldwide "jump on the “science diplomacy” bandwagon" (Penca, 2018, p. 1). In the Baltic Sea Region setting, on 20 June 2017, the Reykjavík Ministerial of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) took place and resulted in a Declaration on the Occasion of the 25th Anniversary of the CBSS (CBSS, 2017), as well as the endorsement of Realizing the Vision: Baltic 2030 Action Plan (CBSS Secretariat, 2017), which serves as "a solid basis for concrete CBSS action to meet the Sustainable Development Goals at regional level" (CBSS, 2017, p. 2). The report Tools for an EU science diplomacy outlines promising recommendations for further assembly of cases, which might serve as reference points or potential sources of inspiration once crafting the main structures and guidance enshrined in the upcoming 'EU Science Diplomacy Strategy'. As it will be outlined in subsequent paragraphs, the CBSS-endorsed multilateral cooperation initiatives have spurred various macro-regional dynamics of implicit science diplomacy,1 which might serve as a source of inspiration in the crafting of certain elements for the forthcoming strategy

The rhetoric of “science diplomacy": Innovation for the EU's scientific cooperation? EL-CSID Working Paper Issue 2018/16 • April 2018

In the recent years, the EU policy discourse has endorsed the notion of “science diplomacy” that points to the interaction between scientific research and foreign policy as instrumental in the societal and political progress. Commissioner for science, research and innovation Carlos Moedas is particularly keen on seeing “the EU play an increasingly active and visible role in international science diplomacy” (Moedas, 2016). In doing so, the EU is part of, and perhaps leading among, those global actors that have jumped on the “science diplomacy” bandwagon, where the activities concerned with scientific cooperation (such as part of the work by UNESCO or The World Academy of Sciences – TWAS) are framed as “science diplomacy”

Case study report The perception of the EU cultural and science diplomacy in Turkey. EL-CSID Working Paper Issue 2018/14 • April 2018

The study is undertaken in the framework of the European Leadership in Cultural, Science and Innovation Diplomacy (EL-CSID) project. This project has the ambition to codify and articulate the relevance of cultural, science and innovation diplomacy for EU external relations as part of a systematic and strategic approach. It aims to identify how the Union and its member states might collectively and individually develop a good institutional and strategic policy environment for extraregional culture and science diplomacy. The overarching objectives of this project are threefold: 1. To detail and analyse the manner in which the EU operates in the domains of cultural and science diplomacy in the current era; comparing its bilateral and multilateral cultural and science ties with other states, regions, and public and private international organisations. 2. To examine the degree to which cultural, science and innovation diplomacy can enhance the interests of the EU in the contemporary world order and specifically, to identify: a) How cultural and science diplomacy can contribute to Europe’s standing as an international actor; b) Opportunities offered by enhanced coordination and collaboration amongst the EU, its members and their extra-European partners; c) Constraints, both existing and evolving, posed by economic and socio-political factors affecting the operating environments of both science and cultural diplomacy. 3. To identify a series of mechanisms/platforms to raise awareness among relevant stakeholders of the importance of science and culture as vehicles for enhancing the EU's external relations. The research generates both scholarly work and policy-oriented output, which is disseminated through an extensive and targeted dissemination programme

More than a touristic visit: scholar exchanges as a communication method in public diplomacy

This paper discusses the concept of Public Diplomacy and the effectiveness of a specific Public Diplomacy tool: Scholar Exchanges as a tool of Public Diplomacy. The foreign Fulbright Program of the United States Government is introduced as a case study and for further interpreting the perceptions of the program, a survey is ran among 59 current grantees. Scholar exchanges programs are suggested to be implemented in order to overcome the barriers in communication processes in the international arena

Promoting Public and Private Reinvestment in Cultural Exchange-Based Diplomacy

Makes the case for renewed investment in public diplomacy and cultural exchange. Analyzes trends in government, foundation, and other private support for cultural diplomacy, the benefits and obstacles, and models of engagement. Details recommendations

Integrating Diplomacy and Social Media: A Report of the First Annual Aspen Institute Dialogue on Diplomacy and Technology

This report is a result of the first annual Aspen Institute Dialogue on Diplomacy and Technology, or what we call ADDTech. The concept for this Dialogue originated with longtime communications executive and Aspen Institute Trustee Marc Nathanson. Since his tenure as Chairman of the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), Nathanson has been concerned with how American diplomacy could more rapidly embrace the changing world of social media and other technologies. He is also a graduate of the University of Denver where former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's father, Josef Korbel, namesake of the Josef Korbel School of International Relations there, was his professor. Thus, Albright, another Institute Trustee, was a natural partner to create the first Dialogue on Diplomacy and Technology. The cast is ably supplemented with Korbel School Dean and former U.S. Ambassador Christopher Hill and Aspen Institute President Walter Isaacson, who himself was also recently the chair of the BBG.The topic for this inaugural dialogue is how the diplomatic realm could better utilize new communications technologies. The group focused particularly on social media, but needed to differentiate among the various diplomacies in play in the current world, viz., formal state diplomacy, public diplomacy, citizen diplomacy and business diplomacy. Each presents its own array of opportunities as well as problems. In this first Dialogue, much of the time necessarily had to be used to define our terms and learn how technologies are currently being used in each case. To help us in that endeavor, we focused on the Middle East. While the resulting recommendations are therefore rather modest, they set up the series of dialogues to come in the years ahead