Photo by Robert Nyman on Unsplash

Photo by Vasily Koloda on Unsplash

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

"the Bo Xilai scandal, the diplomatic gymnastics over Chen Guangcheng, propaganda attacks on U.S. Ambassador Gary Locke, tossing out Al Jazeera’s lone Beijing correspondent and bullying the Philippines over a cluster of rocks in the ocean"

"In the eyes of the world, Israel has shed its image of a small state struggling against impossible odds. Israel now has "security needs" and "requirements" rather than existential fears; its power obligates it to be more magnanimous and forthcoming on peace issues; its strength should produce restraint, not excess"

1. China remains an authoritarian socialist state controlled by one party with limitations on freedom
2. Israel, on the other hand, is the only other country apart from Pakistan, in this world, that was born on the basis of religious identity (different from a theocratic state). In the history of the nation state, formed on the basis of cultural or linguistic identity, Israel remains 'exclusivist.'

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

"India and China are strengthening their position in the global internet ecosystem rapidly with growth rates of more than 20 per cent..."

Talking about the growth of Internet, the report states,

"Since the 1990s, internet has grown leaps and bounds with about two billion users worldwide now. This number is growing by 200 million each year. This means, almost a third of the global population connects to the internet every day and almost $8 trillion a year is spent through e-commerce... 

 ...India leads the growth component of the McKinsey Internet Supply Leadership Index. For example, Bangalore registered 50 patents to 200 in fours years, compared to Singapore which took six years to cross this threshold"

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

"Speaking at a meeting on Thursday, he (Zhao) said senior officials in China are now more aware of the need to communicate effectively with the rest of world. Stressing on the importance of enhancing "national rhetorical competence" - the ability Zhao said is highly important to express the country's unique features effectively, and it is the key to successful public diplomacy, he added."

This is an interesting piece given its focus on 'words', 'expression' and 'conversations' as being crucial to any PD program. The same article quotes China's Vice Foreign Minister, Fu Ying as saying that, 

the job of talking and expressing oneself through public diplomacy has an integral role in China's future development. "We have been doing well on the development front, and we are facing an even better new decade. Now we need to talk better, to make our messages clearer to the world. That can not only help form a better environment, but also boost the nation's confidence," she said.

The Chinese apparently are working on the messaging - tone, semantics etc apart from just 'laundering information.' The focus it seems now is how does China express itself? How does it talk to the rest of the world that would enhance its influence in the global stage? In human history, this period will be seen as the  'age of conversations' and the Chinese are right in recognizing the need for 'national rhetorical competence'. As Zhao said,

"China cannot always be the gentleman who works more but talks less in the present world flooded with information."

 Suggestions/Critiques welcome.


-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

A columnist at the People's Daily, the official newspaper of the Communist Party of China, recently suggested that India's Look East Policy means to encircle China as India strives for a more prominent role in East Asia. This observation comes when both India and China are participating in the East Asia summit at Hanoi, Vietnam.  India's "Look East Policy" means "Look to encircle China"? (Li Hongmei, People's Daily Online)

This is an alarmist reaction to India's attempts at integrating better with East Asia. I had written in my earlier posts how India shares a lot in common with East Asia culturally, however, this was never leveraged strategically to integrate India better with the region. India's Northeast shares lot of cultural similarities with Myanmar, Thailand or Vietnam than say a Bihar or UP in mainland India. However, trade and people to people contact between the regions remained low. Similarly sea faring population from South India had strong trade and cultural exchanges from ancient times with East Asia. For a brief period in history the region was also colonized by the Imperial Chola dynasty from South India. The presence of a strong Indian diaspora in countries like Singapore, Malaysia etc is a testament to the historic links between both the regions.

India's engagement with Southeast Asia has made remarkable progress recently. Look East policy of India is just a realization of India's historic role in the region, its strategic priorities and the economic motive to engage proactively in the Intra-Asian trade. India has recently signed several trade pacts with countries like Thailand, Malaysia and Singapore. There have been several high level visits from the region in recent times including that of the Japanese Prime Minister last week. The Indo-ASEAN FTA is also the second largest free trade agreement in Asia now bringing within its ambit a market of 2 billion people. It is a course correction from the Cold War era that saw South Asia maintain a distance from the region. I feel another reason may have been the 'north India fixation' of Indian politics and a political leadership dominated by north Indians obsessed with India's western borders. The above observation, coming from the mouthpiece of Chinese Communist Party, is essentially flawed and seems more like a word of caution to Indian leadership as it strives for closer engagement with the region. 

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Media relations seem to have become crucial in managing Sino-Indian ties. Global Times of China recently focused on the effect of media coverage on Sino-Indian ties. Writing for the publication, Tian Wei, anchor of CCTV’s special coverage of important domestic and international events, said that media in both countries need to be more credible in their coverage of Sino-India relations and not succumb to, “the market and fierce media competition, since pandering to nationalism and popular hysteria is an easy way to drum up sales.” (Since media industry is growing exponentially in India and China)

Wei also highlighted that there was no media coverage in India on the passing away of prominent Chinese scholar Ji Xianlin in Beijing, “best remembered for his achievements on ancient Indian aboriginal languages, primeval Buddhist languages and Sanskrit literature.” Ji Xianlin also translated the epic Ramayana from Sanskrit into Chinese and was a recipient of Padma Bhushan, one of India's top civilian honor.

On 29th March 2010, the newspaper also carried an interview of Dr S. Jaishankar, Indian ambassador to China, on the future prospects of India- China relations. In the course of the interview, the Indian ambassador acknowledged the need to better manage the media by both countries to ensure there is no speculation among people resulting in a trust deficit between the countries. He said that, “it is important to reshape the relationship to push media reporting to a more positive direction.” The ambassador also stressed the need to improve messaging instead of worrying about the actions of the media.

The idea of managing media relations by professional managers is a new concept in China and India’s public diplomacy discourse. It has generally been limited to the mandarins in foreign office of both these countries, though, I must admit, China is a bit ahead on this. However, with the exponential growth of the industry in both these countries and also the boom in uncontrolled media like the internet, the need is felt for professional media managers within the government who can decide on the message, control the message, effectively disseminate, pitch story ideas, track and analyze coverage accordingly. Interestingly, there is a need to engage with media both internally as well as externally. The Indian ambassador is right in his reading of the situation and it remains to be seen how the Public Diplomacy Division in the MEA incorporates it in its long term strategy.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Thailand initiated an innovative project called the – “Roving Buakeaw Project” - that allows the government to take account of public opinion when formulating foreign policy. The project is led by the Foreign Minister who along with senior officials from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs goes to the people to listen on various issues with potential impact on Thai foreign policy. This is an attempt to engage and include Thai citizens from all walks of life, especially in the border provinces in shaping Thai foreign policy. Town halls, local temples, provincial schools etc serve as meeting sites and “information collected is taken into consideration in formulating foreign policy if and when appropriate.”

The Thai ministry of foreign affairs describe that the main activities of the project include, “informal discussion on issues of international affairs affecting the life such as trading and consular service as well as roving passport services.” People from the selected provinces also have the opportunity to participate through local radio stations via live broadcasts. Issues discussed include trading along the border, labor issues, tourism etc.

Apart from top echelons of the ministry, participants include Members of Parliament, businessmen, member of the local Chambers of Commerce, local media, local government officials, non-profits and civil society etc. In Southeast Asia, Thailand remains a dynamic state when it comes to foreign policy. It was one of the first states to accept the reality of a rising China and engage the Chinese aggressively despite US being the preeminent power in East Asian affairs. Historically too, Thailand was the only country in the whole of Asia to have never been colonized despite never being a great power. The “Roving Buakew Project” along with other such projects like “Young Ambassador of Virtue,” are wonderful initiatives to give ‘common people’ a direct say in formulating foreign policy. See this link for a presentation by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

Joshua Kurlantzick’s “Charm Offensive” and Sunanda K Datta-Ray’s “Looking East to Look West” are two books which provide great insights into the diplomacy in Southeast Asia. Kurlantzick describes in detail Chinese public diplomacy and how it is (now) central to Chinese foreign policy with a mission to reassure the world about “China’s peaceful rise.” Datta-Ray, on the other hand, examines India-Singapore relations and, in the process, also looks at India’s engagement with Southeast Asia since 1947.

Kurlantzick’s “Charm Offensive” describes Chinese public diplomacy in various regions of the world, examines it as a strategic foreign policy tool and also goes into the values and theories driving China’s ‘charm’ campaign. It has detailed chapters on China’s engagement of Southeast Asia and Africa and also compares China’s public diplomacy with other ‘sophisticated players’ in the arena like United States. It’s an informative read and with great foot notes, ‘Notes to Pages’ and ‘Indexes’ is invaluable for a research scholar. While Kurlantzick does a good job of chronicling Chinese public diplomacy, he failed to examine Southeast Asia as a competitive space for ‘influence’ between India and China.

In international relations, 21^st century is touted to be an Asian century. This combined with other recent developments like, economic growth of India and China, debates around Climate change, the Af-Pak War, maritime security of trade traffic in Indian Ocean region, non-proliferation, Myanmar, Kashmir etc., dominating public discourses in diplomacy, India remains, and, will be a critical player in the years to come. India and China share borders with Southeast Asia and the region is important for both, economically as well as from a security perspective. Both the countries have been active in this region.(Though I must admit, Chinese are more aggressive). A rising Asia includes both India and China, and, so I thought Kurlantzick’s book would have been complete if it had also examined India as an important player in Southeast Asian diplomacy. It is indeed curious that most writings tend to ignore India’s relevance to Southeast Asia and the transformative potential of this relationship for the world.

Indian scholars, traditionally, are more focused on security and trade issues in international relations. Books on public diplomacy are rare (almost non-existent). While Datta-Ray’s book is not explicitly on India’s public diplomacy efforts, it does provide a context to India’s ‘Look East’ policy and the need for greater engagement with Southeast Asia. Focusing on Indo-Singapore relations since 1947 the book calls for a restoration of civilizational ties between Singapore and India. The book provides important insights into India’s importance and relevance to Singapore and Southeast Asia over different periods in history (also vis-à-vis the ‘China factor.’) and how Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew had often looked to India for leadership of Asia.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

The seventh India-ASEAN summit was held in October, 2009, at Hua Hin in Thailand. At the summit Prime Minister Manmohan Singh reiterated India’s commitment to engage ASEAN nations and also outlined India’s vision of an Asian economic community based on an “open and inclusive” architecture.

Keeping with India’s “Look East policy,” public diplomacy initiatives are high on the agenda to connect India with Southeast Asia; rather emphasize the fact that India had always been connected closely with Southeast Asia through its people, culture and also geography and shared history (See me previous post on Northeast India in this blog). Prime Minister Singh suggested something interesting at the summit along the lines of the theme of ASEAN summit this year – “Enhancing Connectivity, Empowering Peoples."

The year 2012 will see the commemoration the 10th anniversary of India's participation as a summit level partner of ASEAN, and 20 years as a sectoral dialogue partner. These are significant milestones that need to be feted and also publicized. Prime Minister Singh suggested that India and ASEAN could jointly consider organizing a commemorative ship expedition in 2011-12 on the sea routes developed during the 10th to 12th centuries linking India with Southeast Asia and East Asia. He said that the sea route could cover modern and ancient ports in ASEAN countries, and other East Asian countries as well. This proposal was one of the five initiatives (economic and political) that the Prime Minister suggested to further strengthen links between India and ASEAN.

China too, as part of its public diplomacy efforts, had done something similar. It organized exhibitions in museums of Malaysia and Singapore to celebrate the anniversary of the voyages of Zheng He, a Chinese admiral who took his fleet across Asia and Africa, exploring cultures, establishing linkages between Chinese and Southeast Asia cultures in the 14^th or 15^th centuries. Zheng He's expeditions, the Chinese claim, were peaceful exploratory voyages not aimed at conquest.

While these attempts to establish a cultural and historical connect is significant by the Asian giants, what can tilt the balance in India's favor is its impeccable democratic credentials, respect for diversity and resilient political framework in an otherwise unstable region and also vis-à-vis China.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

I read the Global Times fairly regularly. I find it an interesting public diplomacy initiative of the Chinese. The Global Times, the Chinese say, is an attempt to promote an “accurate” image of China abroad since international reporting, especially the Western media, on China is often flawed, lacking in understanding of China and the Chinese culture. Almost Al-Jazeera like, its an attempt to get a share of voice in a world dominated by Western media conglomerates and present the Chinese viewpoint on important developments. Intended for an international audience/readership, the Global Times also tries to allay fears of a resurgent China threatening to disturb the present international order.

Editorials in the Global Times make it very clear that the newspaper has an agenda. Two editorials caught my attention recently: 60 foreigners who helped shape China's 60 years (Sep. 18, 2009) and Editorial: What China can contribute to the world? (Aug. 24, 2009) Both the pieces convey the image of a China that is open, freely engaging with the rest of the world, borrowing ideas to build itself and also actively contributing towards other cultures. Through such writings the newspaper argues China is not a closed society but has always been open and globalised … its just that the political system is unique when compared to the West, of which, the Western world, obviously has no understanding of.

The “60 foreigners” editorial was widely reported in the Indian press because Nehru and Tagore were included in the list of foreigners who helped shape modern China. The list was prepared based on an internet poll by the newspaper. It states, “Looking back on the nation's 60 years of tremendous changes, it's evident that foreigners have been much more than witnesses in the development of the People's Republic of China. Whether intentionally or accidentally, directly or indirectly, positively or negatively, they have become important pieces of the China puzzle – helping shape and globalize the nation… Marx and Lenin enlightened China; Richard Nixon and former Singapore president Lee Kuan Yew promoted China; Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton have impressed generations of Chinese; and Michael Jordan and Bill Gates became idols of young Chinese, to name a few.”

In What China can contribute to the world, the edit clearly aims to reassure the world that a rising China stands for a harmonious world and Chinese culture can enrich other cultures. Unlike Western cultures, Chinese culture is best suited to create “a harmonious world” as unlike Western cultures it doesn’t operate within the binaries of “good” and “evil”. The edit concludes: “The fundamental reason is that Chinese culture is advancing with the times and willing to absorb ideas from other cultures to enrich itself. It is open rather than closed; inclusive rather than exclusive. Chinese culture is part of Asian culture. With the rise of the Asian region, maybe it is time for Chinese culture to make greater contributions to the world. In the 21st century, what China could contribute to the world is probably not made-in-China products, but Chinese culture.”

Recently, there have been a plethora of articles in the newspaper that attempts to portray a China that is open with free flow of ideas unlike Western media’s perceptions of it being a closed society. It’s just a unique culture with a own unique political system that seeks to participate in the new world order based on the 2000 year old Chinese principle of “Harmony in Diversity.” What’s worrisome is the tonality in such articles which tends to assert, very subtly, the superiority of the Chinese culture. In politics it can be dangerous.

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

Madhur

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest

A few other "perception" challenges of China in recent times include:

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest