3. Public Diplomacy
According to Berridge (2010,p180), public diplomacy is just a new form of propaganda. It is used by nations to show their good sides, to promote themselves, it is not necessarily untrue but not always that accurate. Whilst keeping Berridge's point of view in mind, I would rather use the definition of Potter (2002, p179) who thinks of it as “ the effort by the government of one nation to influence public or elite opinion of another nation for the purpose of turning the policy of the target nation to advantage”. Furthermore, public diplomacy will be used to show a certain image of a country to all nations, not always for policy making, but maybe to show some of the country’s values , or to defend itself.
A recent event that I think illustrates well the importance of public diplomacy and its misuse is when three weeks ago, the chief of the Secret Intelligence Service, Sir John Sawers gave a press conference to explain the way Britain conducts itself in the secret services (guardian.co.uk, 28/10/2010). It was the first time ever a serving head of MI6 was giving a public speech. I found it rather surprising, what would he want to share with the British and the rest of the world? Well Sir John gave a really deep speech on how even when dealing with terrorists, the British remained truly British and insisted that all intelligence gathering was done in accordance to Human Rights, “lawful and ethical” at all times and insisted on the “ strictly no torture” policy. The latter point was definitely the highlight of the speech broadcasted on every news channel. This media intervention seemed like a bit of a clumsy way to promote Britain and its values, I was sceptical but couldn’t help than thinking well done! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4ahH3iKJwQ
Unfortunately, this weekend revelations about the torture of Iraqi prisoners in a British base darken the portrayal made by John Sawers a few weeks ago. The Guardian article reveals the extent of the abuse inflicted to the prisoners (Cobain, 6/11/2010). The Joint Services Intelligence Organization was in charge of the interrogation centre on the base. More than a thousand videos of interrogation sessions have been recorded and some of the former inmates have passed on the videos to lawyers to press charges. Not only torture was used in the British detention centre, but the Ministry of Defence is trying to block the public enquiry in a high court hearing. The basic Human Rights of the prisoners (most of them later released without charges) were breached and the efforts to hide the affair to the general public at home and abroad reinforce the gravity of the matter. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/06/iraq-prisoner-abuse-court
In light of these events the former attempt of Sir John Sawers to reassure people of the way Britain conducts itself abroad seem a bit hypocritical. Was he not aware of the fact then? Very unlikely, he is the chief of the Secret Intelligence Service and the same The Guardian article shows that the affair has been going for a few years. The bad publicity from the USA Abu Ghraib might have still been echoing in his ears and maybe it was a way for the government to distance itself from the facts or to act like a pre-emptive coup, putting this out there before the storm.
There is a close link between foreign policy, diplomacy and intelligence and to come back to Berridge view. Sir John Sawers was ambassador for Britain to Egypt and has worked for Blair has an adviser on foreign affairs, are we being fooled with the “transparency” of the British secret service? The attempt to show that the British politeness remains at all times, a nation that promotes Human rights all over the world but not in the Iraqi camps.
Berridge, G.R, Diplomacy: theory and practice, 4th edition (Bakingstoke: Palgrave 2010)
Cobain, Ian, The Guardian, 6/11/2010
Guardian.co.uk
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/28/mi6-chief-torture-john-sawers
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/éà&à/nov/06/iraq-prisoner-abuse-court
Potter, Evan H., Cyber-diplomacy managing foreign policy in the twenty-first century ( McGill-Queen’s University Press 2002)
An interesting case study demonstrating that public diplomacy is only successful when it is based on truths. In the internet era, you will be found out and publicly shamed very quickly if you make false claims for yourself.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the difference that makes a differences between the definitions provided by Berridge and Potter? They seem identical in terms of their content and implications.