What is it about?

‘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.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

This article both explains and critiques the EU's approach to soft diplomacy. It offers empirical as well as theoretical insights into what 'public diplomacy' means in practice.

Perspectives

This article arose from a research project that I lead to investigate how the EU delegations and the EU's External Action Service were responding to the shift towards fully-fledged diplomatic missions. It was based on a study of the EU delegations in the Asia-Pacific region, but included interviews with key officials in Brussels. The story we tell was based on real events and some of the problems we encountered in the course of carrying out our investigation.

Cris Shore
University of Auckland

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Paradoxes of ‘public diplomacy’: Ethnographic perspectives on the European Union delegations in the antipodes, The Australian Journal of Anthropology, September 2014, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1111/taja.12102.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page