Showing posts with label Developments around the World. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Developments around the World. Show all posts

Friday

South Korea develops comprehensive Public Diplomacy plan

South Korea never fails to impress us with it's quiet commitment to public diplomacy. While there's lot of talk around the world about projecting soft power, very rarely do we find discussions on South Korea.

 The tensions with North Korea aside, the latest that has come from South Korea is that the country has set up clear actionable and measurable public diplomacy plans for 2018 and beyond. South Korea's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced today that it has developed the first comprehensive public diplomacy program and constituted agencies to drive and execute the plan. 
We have discussed in this blog earlier as well how relevance, 'measurability' and being 'budgeted for' will become the 3 significant challenges for foreign offices worldwide as they think of public diplomacy. 

 If we don't have answers to these, most PD programs will take the easy way out, which in India's case is narratives around Bollywood, food, culture and heritage and the occasional 'sensationalism'. 

 South Korea seems to be working to overcome these challenges:


  • The plan has a clear budget commitment of 410 billion won.
  • The plan has 49 tasks.
  • These tasks include 320 culture related projects, 200 knowledge related projects and 190 policy-oriented diplomacy projects
Among various awareness promoting initiatives, the country also has plans to constitute private committees to "correct factual errors" regarding the country. Internally for South Korea, this is the first time PD policy has been integrated with local implementation agencies and central administrative agencies of the government. This is great!

Korea Foundation will serve as the overseer of this program.

 We will definitely ask PD practitioners to keep a watch on South Korea.

Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Wednesday

Soft Power Index 2017 leaves few questions unanswered



The Soft Power 30 Index of 2017 was released in July 2017. As per the report, when it comes to Soft Power, France is the most powerful nation in the world. The report states: 

"France’s vast diplomatic network, its cultural richness and the promise of Emmanuel Macron have contributed to the country’s No 1 position. While France leapfrogged, the US has fallen from first place in 2016 to third in 2017. As per the report this may be due to President Donald Trump’s "America first" policy, that “played poorly abroad, alienating allies and damaging links with the rest of the world.” This is too simplistic.

The report raised more questions than providing answers. If we look at Soft Power, from the context of 'influence,' it's hard to accept France at the top spot. US would still be at the top.
That brings us to the polling that was conducted in 25 countries. While Asia and Europe seems to have bigger representation, a major portion of Africa and Middle East wasn't polled? We also need to contextualize the fact that the opinions or votes received are deeply conditioned by historical experiences. While North Africa may feel a tug towards French culture and institutions, South Asia may lean towards the Anglo Saxon model it would be interesting to see such trends reflected as well.

 While Trump's "America first" policy might have hurt the image of US in the short term, what needs to be understood is that the interventionist policy approaches of past administrations contributed immensely to a decline in a favorable perception of US. Have we forgotten Colin Powell lying at the United Nations in 2003? If we have this only goes on to prove how good the US propaganda machinery is in replacing collective public memory with newer issues and 'delink' old ones.


The report cites BBC as the most trusted media institution but does 'trust' necessarily translate into 'influence'? The pervasiveness of American media is hard to challenge and along with it the influence they can peddle for their country. Silicon Valley is doing it's bit too with the social networks, OTT content platforms and giants like Netflix and Amazon Prime.

The report cites that China's One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative will boost it's soft power. This may turn out to be a perception nightmare for China as OBOR and it's terms are not really admirable and one of the many reasons why countries such as India are abstaining. Without India there's no silk road or OBOR - it would not just be the real deal! Besides, with OBOR gaining visibility China might have to become accountable for it's trade and development aid practices that are pushing lesser countries into debt trap sort of scenarios (Eg. Sri Lanka).

I tried reaching Portland Communications for a discussion on questions such as above. But my emails went unanswered. The initiative to release such a report is great especially when it leads to questions such as above. Soft Power translates into an attraction for a 'way of life' and viewed in that context "Power and Influence" is central to any understanding of soft power. It goes beyond culture, cuisine and 'feeling good'. How much will the elements considered in the report eventually shape the future of our world is what remains to be seen.

Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Tuesday

CPD Blog: Integrating India's "NEIGHBORHOOD-FIRST” strategy into the South Asia satellite

The following is the text of a post I contributed to the CPD Blog. It was published on June, 26, 2017 :

South Asia Satellite
Photo courtesy of the Indian Space Research Organization

India’s space diplomacy got a major boost last month with the launch of the South Asia Satellite, envisaged in June 2014 by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as “India’s gift” to the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC). The prime minister’s vision was to increase regional cooperation among SAARC countries by leveraging India’s capabilities in space technology. The satellite was launched by the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) on May 5, 2017.

Significance of the South Asia Satellite

The satellite is intended to support communication, broadcasting and Internet services, disaster management, telemedicine, tele-education, and weather forecasting in the whole of South Asia. Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives, Nepal, and Sri Lanka, along with India, stand to benefit from it and have welcomed the initiative, while Pakistan, acting as expected, aligned with its raison d'être of opposing India and opted out of this partnership. Most importantly, the satellite may achieve the objective of maintaining strategic ties with neighbors by catering to their economic requirements.
The South Asia satellite is funded entirely by India with the intention of benefitting all eight SAARC member countries. The launch represents India “walking the talk” and making a difference to the region using its abilities, successes, and resources. India’s success in space technology is commendable, and its stature as a serious player in space technology is already established. Also, India’s science and technology workforce have the reputation as being among the best in the world. South Asia now stands to benefit from the gains that India has made in these two areas, hopefully ushering in a new era of regional cooperation.
Immediately after the launch, Narendra Modi tweeted:

From Attraction to Influence

The launch of the South Asia satellite represents a wonderful integration of India’s “neighborhood-first” strategy with its traditional strengths and desired narrative. India is dominant in South Asia, but ironically the most pressing issues facing the country are those in its very neighborhood! This is true even though South Asia is culturally very close to the Indian nation-state. Surely, India’s story needs something more in addition to the current narratives that overwhelmingly focus on India’s culture, heritage, or economic promise, and it looks like the launch of the satellite provides the Indian public diplomacy necessary to create that.

One of the biggest gripes among certain areas in the region is the perception of India as a bully. Will this launch be considered an attempt by India to assert its dominance?

For the longest time, the narrative shaped by India’s established policy focused on “attraction” attributes like Indian culture and heritage. I have argued in the past for the need to move the needle and adopt “influence” attributes if India wants to project power and be perceived as a serious geopolitical player. Influence attributes that could work in South Asia include foreign aid, bilateral cooperation, leveraging Indian media conglomerates, non-state actors, and dominance in the sphere of ideas. It would be fantastic if India’s successes could be viewed as South Asia’s successes. This region has a population of 1.6 billion and presents an opportunity for India to lead these masses to realize their potential and move towards better lives. India’s achievements in human resources, governance, science and technology, media, and defense are great examples for the emerging world to emulate.
Speaking at the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) summit in 2014, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi echoed this sentiment when he said,
“Nowhere in the world are collective efforts more urgent than in South Asia; and, nowhere else is it so modest. Big and small, we face the same challenges - a long climb to the summit of development. But, I have great belief in our boundless potential…
 “India's gift of a satellite for the SAARC region will benefit us all in areas like education, telemedicine, disaster response, resource management, weather forecasting and communication.”

Challenges Ahead

A few years from now, when the world looks back at the launch of the South Asia satellite, it should vindicate India’s position and strengthen India’s story. The policy establishment would do well to plan for certain perception challenges such as:
  1. One of the biggest gripes among certain areas in the region is the perception of India as a bully. Will this launch be considered an attempt by India to assert its dominance?
  2. Pakistan and China. How are they interpreting the satellite, and how will they project it? I am sure the foreign policy and public diplomacy establishment in India have anticipated this and would be ready to counter it. I also hope they have factored in the Indian agenda which should be consistently maintained on this topic.
  1. The successes of the South Asia satellite need to be shared aggressively, especially using digital media, and ideally would spark the same interest that is generated when the media reports on inspiring space projects like the Mars Rover. These projects may not be similar, but stories of effort and impact should generate tremendous interest.
The South Asia satellite is a significant development in India’s quest to lead South Asia towards progress and development. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi said after the launch, “With this launch we have started a journey to build the most advanced frontier of our partnership. With its position high in the sky, this symbol of South Asian cooperation would meet the aspirations of economic progress of more than 1.5 billion people in our region and extend our close links into outer space.”
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Thursday

"Culture is there, to be Shared - Not Sold" - SIMON ANHOLT


"... international public opinion favours countries that contribute to the common good of humanity, rather than countries which are merely successful, beautiful or powerful..."

- Simon Anholt

The recent Good Country Index had a surprise. India's rank under the category of "Culture" was a lowly 119 among the 163 countries that were surveyed. For India watchers like us this was indeed interesting given the huge interest in government and policy circles to promote Indian culture overseas as a component of Indian soft power. 


The Public Diplomacy Blog spoke to Simon Anholt on this aspect trying to understand why India ranked low on "Culture". Simon brings to the fore an important distinction between promotion of 'culture' versus 'cultural contribution' and there seems to be a good opportunity for India's creative economy to be internationally 'participative'.


The following is what Simon Anholt had to say:


How is 'culture' defined in the survey?

Simon: We follow the UNESCO definition of culture that incorporates cultural production, the creative industries and expressions of national/regional culture; we also consider how each country facilitates freedom of movement and freedom of expression in order to allow the production, sharing and dissemination of culture. As explained on the website at https://goodcountry.org/index/source-datathe way we ‘sample’ a country’s cultural contribution to the world in the Good Country Index is by combining the following datasets:

  • Creative goods exports: Exports of creative goods (UNCTAD's Creative Economy Report categorization) relative to the size of the economy.
  • Creative services exports: Exports of creative services (UNCTAD's Creative Economy Report categorization) relative to the size of the economy.
  • UNESCO dues in arrears as % of contribution: UNESCO dues in arrears as percentage of contribution (negative indicator).
  • Freedom of movement, i.e. visa restrictions: Number of countries and territories that citizens can enter without a visa (according to Henley & Partners).
  • Press freedom: Freedom of the press (based on mean score for Reporters without Borders and Freedom House index as a negative indicator).

Of course these five indicators don’t give a complete or exhaustive account of a country’s cultural output – it’s just a sample – but they’re the best and indeed the only suitable datasets we were able to find. 

Cultural expression just isn’t very fully measured internationally, and obviously we need data that’s collected in a consistent way, every year, in at least the 163 countries we cover in the Index. These five datasets were the only ones we could find that fitted the bill.

2. Indian government does a lot in promoting Indian culture and there is a tacit acceptance in policy and media circles that it is India's biggest soft power - and we see a lower rank for India as a whole. What is your comment on this?


Simon: I think they’re doing the right thing (although I would argue that simply ‘promoting’ one’s national culture isn’t a very Good Country thing to do: culture is there, after all, to be shared – not sold to people as a way of enhancing the country’s image). Of course a lot of this activity is 'unmeasurable' in a comparative survey like the Good Country Index, and this is one of the reasons why we are hoping to start producing more qualitative, in-depth, country-specific surveys in the near future: this will enable us to cover a lot of the activity in all seven categories that the Good Country Index is unable to measure.


3. Does the ranking reflect a perception by people of "culture" in the country or the state of culture in the country ?

Simon: Neither: the Good Country Index isn’t an opinion poll, it’s a measurement of reality; however it doesn’t directly reflect the state of culture in the country, it attempts to measure how much of that culture is shared internationally.
4. How do you think the ranking would impact India's perception?

Simon: My research over the last 15 years has consistently demonstrated that international public opinion favours countries that contribute to the common good of humanity, rather than countries which are merely successful, beautiful or powerful. So whilst a high ranking in the Good Country Index on its own is unlikely to affect public perceptions of the country, the good behavior that gives rise to that ranking certainly will. 

Simon Anholt


Suggestions/Critiques welcome.
- Madhur





Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Tuesday

The politics of perception in Charlie Hebdo

As world media discusses and debates the impact of Charlie Hebdo massacre on freedom of expression, Noam Chomsky, offers, as always, a point of view that is unique. 

Chomky brings to our attention a serious concern with regards to the dominant media narrative on the Charlie Hebdo incident. Speaking on the commentary that followed, Chomsky writes,
“The crimes also elicited a flood of commentary, inquiring into the roots of these shocking assaults in Islamic culture and exploring ways to counter the murderous wave of Islamic terrorism without sacrificing our values. The New York Times described the assault as a "clash of civilizations," …
Chomsky juxtaposes this against media commentary that followed recent act of violence across the world such as:

All the above incidents were marked by violence against civilians, public institutions, journalists but never quite qualified to feature in narratives of attacks against freedom of expression, freedom itself, or even narratives of outrage and concern on a scale similar to reactions received by the Charlie Hebdo incident. 

It's only sensible to wonder why.

In the politics of narrative and perception, Chomsky’s position is significant. The “media power structure” of our world is no different and is the same as the political power structure in international politics. We don’t often realize this, but as stories compete, some voices tend to get lost or are never expressed.

Chomsky states,
“These few examples illustrate a very general principle that is observed with impressive dedication and consistency: The more we can blame some crimes on enemies, the greater the outrage; the greater our responsibility for crimes -- and hence the more we can do to end them -- the less the concern, tending to oblivion or even denial.”
This awareness surprisingly resulted in some Middle Eastern states like Qatar to take the initiative and establish their own international media outlets (Eg. Al Jazeera). 

However Middle East’s media landscape, as I experienced in the last couple of years, is completely dominated by experienced professionals from the West or from Asia, who come with great knowledge, but not necessarily always with a “contextual perspective” that is required to tell a story of the “other”. 

Coupled with controls over free media in the entire region, difficult questions remain unasked; indigenous experiences remain hidden and the introspection that is required to understand “why is it happening to us” never happens. 

Instead, people are told what is wrong with them, often by groups who have no context. The tradition of the story is alien.

As Chomsky states,
Contrary to the eloquent pronouncements, it is not the case that "Terrorism is terrorism. There's no two ways about it." There definitely are two ways about it: theirs versus ours. And not just terrorism. 
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

'Emotional connect' in the elections in Egypt

So we all know the results of the elections in Egypt. Muslim Brotherhood leads with radical Salafists coming a close second. In fact Islamist parties cornered two-thirds of the votes in the elections. On March 21, 2011, I had clearly written in my blog that it is too early to write off Islam as a political force as a result of the Arab Spring. In a bit of kamikaze thinking, I also applied the Gartner Hype Cycle to explain why religion might become central to Arab political discourse after the Arab Spring. You can read the post here - Revolutions and emotions in Middle East.   By this time we also know that Tunisia has turned 'green' and Libya intends to do so as well. 

History has showed us time and again that revolutions often lead to 'millenarian' expectations that often results in it becoming reactionary or throwing up results that maybe unanticipated. This is not to suggest that the victory of Islamists is a reactionary development; it might be good for those countries and the world in general. They were elected by a democratic process. Just that we don't know yet.

Religion is emotional and appeals to the heart and so has wider appeal than political concepts. It can be felt and doesn't need to be learnt unlike a political concept. Besides, religion promises final salvation, the education and training for which begins at home. It is also not alien and is instead steeped in the local customs, culture and folklore. It is familiar, pure and can be trusted. It is what in communications we call the 'emotional connect.' In societies where religion has always been central it is no surprise that people have expressed their faith in Islamists. Congratulations to the people of Egypt for successfully electing a government of their choice!

Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

-- Madhur



Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Monday

Revolutions and emotions in the Middle East

There is considerable hope and optimism all around that political churn in the Middle East  would eventually lead to a democratic transition in the entire region, overcoming political Islam and dictatorships. I feel this is where we need to be careful and understand how revolutions tend to unravel.

As I sit to write, news comes in of Operation Odyssey Dawn entering a crucial phase with coalition forces firing hundreds of Tomahawk cruise missiles into 'military targets' inside Libya. Gaddafi, meanwhile, has declared the coalition's intervention in Libya as "war on Islam." Nearby in Egypt, where a referendum is underway, critics are wary of Islamists becoming a major political force in Egyptian politics. 

Expectations tend to rise to unrealistic levels during revolutions. Revolutions also create powerful emotions. The measures that follow, more often than not, may not be able to meet such expectations resulting, very often, in a reactionary tide against the revolution. In the  Middle East, lack of economic dynamism, unstable political culture and a closed society may very well lead to a gap between expectations and delivery. This is when reactionary forces might set in, and in the Middle East, it may very well be Islam. Because when people lose hope, become desperate, they often turn to God. Besides religion is something deeply emotional and  personal and is in the heart. It appeals to emotions unlike a political concept  - democracy. 

This might be bit of  a stretch, but I would like to apply Gartner's Hype Cycle to the above argument as it is applied to new technology in the world of communications. There might be the possibility of Islam emerging as a  force in the "Trough of Disillusionment" as illustrated below:

Stages in the Gartner's Hype cycle hypothetically applied to revolutions in Middle East

Freedom, as the West understands it, may not appeal to some societies in these regions. Besides, be it the French Revolution or the Iranian revolution, examples of a strong counter current are many in history. Hence, it is too early to write Islam off as a political force in the Middle East. In this entire debate, there is a tendency to assume that Islam is antithetical to democracy. In fact, India is the best example where the second largest Muslim population in the world have embraced democracy. To pit Islam against democracy, and, adopt a line of discussion/news reporting that encourage such a demarcation will only lead to a "clash of emotions." 

Suggestions/Critiques welcome

-- Madhur
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

Saturday

Two separate surveys reveal public opinion towards US remain negative in Pakistan

Add to Technorati Favorites

The 2009 "Pew Global Attitudes survey of Pakistan" released on 13th August 2009, outlines fresh challenges for the US Public Diplomacy machinery. The report highlights the fact that growing concerns about Islamic extremism among Pakistanis have not resulted in a positive perception of US. In fact, the report mentions that, "Opinions of America and its people remain extremely negative. Barack Obama's global popularity is not evident in Pakistan, and America's image remains as tarnished in that country as it was in the Bush years. Only 22% of Pakistanis think the U.S. takes their interests into account when making foreign policy decisions, essentially unchanged from 21% since 2007. Fully 64% of the public regards the U.S. as an enemy, while only 9% describe it as a partner." Winning the war of ideas in America's war against terror will be a huge challenge.
The Indian press carried the story widely. The financial daily 'Mint,' quoted the strategic affairs expert C. Uday Bhaskar saying that “One of the abiding features of Pakistan is that in this region the highest incidents of anti-US protests and attacks have been on Pakistan’s streets. The paradox is that the Pakistani establishment is closely aligned with the US, so much so that it has been designated as the only non-NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) ally in the war against terror.” For US public diplomacy, the challenge will be to counter the view that the war on terror in Pakistani soil amounts to interfering with Pakistan's internal affairs. The war should go on without the US looking meddlesome.
The Hindustan Times, The Times of India, in the meantime, carried a PTI story -- Most Pakistanis see US as bigger threat than India: survey on 14th August, 2009. This story quoted another survey, commissioned by Al Jazeera News Channel and conducted by Gallup Pakistan (and not the one conducted by Pew). This survey "revealed that 59 per cent of respondents believed the greatest threat to Pakistan right now is the US. Eighteen per cent said that the greatest threat came from neighbouring India." So, these are two separate surveys with almost similar findings when it comes to attitudes about US. But, on the threat perception from India this is what the Pew Survey had to say, "And growing worries about extremism notwithstanding, more Pakistanis judge India as a very serious threat to the nation (69%) than regard the Taliban (57%) or al Qaeda (41%) as very serious threats."
The Pew survey reveals that "by a margin of 54% to 4% the U.S. is seen as favoring India over Pakistan." Conspiracy theorists in Pakistan have recently talked about a Indo-US-Israel nexus to dismember the country. For US public diplomacy the second challenge, may be, is to debunk such conspiracy theories. These have the potential to become an ideological rallying point against US, around the banner of Islam, possibly destabilizing the entire region from South Asia, Middle East and Central Asia.
Suggestions/Critiques welcome.
Madhur
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments

G-2 embassies in New Delhi

Add to Technorati Favorites
The Chinese Embassy at Chanakyapuri, in New Delhi, is now surrounded by a barbed wire fence. It starts next to the pavement and is a good 6-7 feet away from the walls of the compound. It is an eyesore! It looks more like a compound housing a security agency/military outpost than an embassy at New Delhi’s beautiful diplomatic enclave.

Embassies in New Delhi, or for that matter anywhere in the world, take great care to project an authentic (or desired) perception of the country. When I first visited New Delhi as a 13 year old, I remember my parents taking me around the Diplomatic Enclave. That was quite some time ago and I was amazed by the wide boulevards, the neatly manicured lawns, “foreign cars” (India only had the Maruti to boast of then) which was so unlike the rest of Delhi. I remember loving the ‘cottage like’ Belgian Embassy and the Pakistan Embassy for its unique Islamic architecture with domes and all. But yes, every embassy I visited embedded in my mind an image of the country.Years later, when I happened to visit the US embassy, I could sense "power" - in its sprawling campus, high walls, layers of security surrounding the embassy, cumbersome and tiring security checks conducted by paranoid and angry staff. There are barricades, check posts in the lanes and roads leading to the embassy, there is a ring of security by the paramilitary forces (most likely the CRPF) and an outer layer of security of Delhi Police both outside the embassy and then there are layers inside. You realize, this is a country that takes itself really seriously. It was inaccessible and unfriendly. There was nothing “diplomatic” about it and you could sense the “empire.” In a way, the preeminent position of US in the world was being reinforced by its heightened threat perception.

The Chinese seems to be doing something similar. Is it reflective of its growing power in the world now? I don’t know exactly when this fence and layers of security came up around the Chinese embassy. Possibly, after the Urumqi riots with threats of attacks by Islamic terrorists the Chinese are being extra careful. However, contrast this with the Algerian Embassy, a country which has been a victim of Islamic terror for quite some time now. The Algerians don’t look so paranoid. The rest of the P5 - Russian, French and English - seem comparatively relaxed too. The Chinese are beginning to take themselves seriously or maybe I am taking the Chinese seriously! But as my colleagues and me drove by the Chinese embassy we could sense "power."
The G2 has arrived in New Delhi. Contrast this to a visit to the New Zealand High Commisssion or the embassy of Nepal for that matter. You will know what I am talking about!
Suggestions/Critiques welcome.

Madhur
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 1 comments

Sunday

"Morocco to Connect Cultures Through Music in Washington & Chicago" - The Associated Press

An ensemble of musicians separated by oceans and thousands of miles will perform together later this month for the first time, having composed music layer-by-layer with sound files exchanged over the Internet


-- Madhur

Add to Technorati Favorites
Posted by Madhurjya Kotoky 0 comments
Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)