Paradoxes of ‘public diplomacy’: Ethnographic perspectives on the European Union delegations in the antipodes

Abstract

Public diplomacy' is a term increasingly used among policy makers and academics, yet its meaning is ambiguous and contested. Advocates proclaim it as a new approach to statecraft entailing a participatory approach of shared meaning-making between politicians and the public markedly different from the elitist, Machiavellian inter-governmental practices of traditional ('Westphalian') diplomacy. The European Union (EU) has embraced these ideals, proclaiming public diplomacy a cornerstone of European external relations policy. We examine these claims in the context of the EU's delegations to Australia and New Zealand. Using three ethnographic case studies, we highlight discrepancies between official discourses on public diplomacy and its practice. The participatory ideals of EU public diplomacy, we argue, are undermined by the EU's preoccupation with image and branding, public relations and marketing techniques, and continuing reliance on traditional 'backstage' methods of diplomacy. We conclude by outlining the implications of these paradoxes for both anthropological research and EU external relations.

Deterrence by public diplomacy

“…Pamment (2013) hints indirectly at this issue as he mentions his research is about “the conduct of public diplomacy by nation states when dealing with other, friendly nation states” (p. 2, emphasis added). Gilboa (2016, p. 1298) points out that in times of conflict, public diplomacy “is used to defend an actor’s policies and attack those of the enemy” and a study of the EU’s public diplomacy toward Australia and New Zealand hints to the issue of western attempts “to define a normative and democratic ideal of public diplomacy” which focuses on mutuality, exchange, encounter, and reciprocal communication (Altman and Shore, 2014, p. 351).…”

Everyday Diplomacy

“…Recent events in Ukraine and Russia have brought vivid attention to the ways in which nation-states seek to cultivate grass-roots support for their international diplomatic efforts as well as for pursuing proxy wars (Dunn and Bobick 2014): what is widely referred to as 'public diplomacy' (Altman and Shore 2014) or 'popular geopolitics' (Billig 1995).…”