Chapter 10 - Public diplomacy and the wider society
Introduction
10.1
The committee in this report has clearly shown that public diplomacy is not
only the concern of diplomats, analysts, or individuals involved in
international relations. It noted previously that private activities—from art,
education, popular culture to fashion, sports and news—have a bearing on
foreign policy including national security, trade, tourism and other national
interests.[1]
The new diplomacy
10.2
Some commentators now refer to a 'new diplomacy' which is a multi-stake
process.[2]
They recognise that foreign ministries must develop a public diplomacy
framework that involves a wider society that goes beyond government departments
and agencies and cultural and educational institutions.[3]
NGOs, journalists, sports and business people as well as a country's diaspora
are engaged in activities that may feed into public diplomacy. This means that,
to have an effective public diplomacy policy, a foreign ministry should build
effective linkages with all these constituent entities that affect
international policy. Indeed, the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office has
adopted as one of its key operating principles in its public diplomacy strategy
'work with others, including the business and diaspora communities and NGOs'.[4]
10.3
Thus, diplomats are now engaged in building 'extensive networks at home
and abroad'.[5]
Professor Krishan S Rana, Professor Emeritus, Service Institute, New Delhi,
described the changing nature of foreign diplomacy with its emphasis on managing
and coordinating the many and varied agents of public diplomacy:
The gatekeepers of external contracts have become shepherds that
try and keep the flock that goes to foreign pastures more-or-less together,
trying to push them to act with coherence.[6]
10.4
This chapter looks at this new 'multi-stake' diplomacy. It considers how
the government works with the many non-official organisations or groups who are
engaged in international activities that may have a bearing on Australia's
public diplomacy.
Non-state participants in Australia's public diplomacy
10.5
Students of public diplomacy in Australia recognise the challenges
presented by the increasing number of organisations participating in public
dialogue and influencing international perceptions of Australia. Professor Naren
Chitty, Professor of International Communication at Macquarie University,
wrote:
...while the nation state, particularly the powerful nation state,
remains a key actor, other actors have grown in importance. These actors
include international organisations, multinational corporations, non-government
organisations, religious organisations and movements, publics, markets, high
profile individuals and even terrorist networks.[7]
10.6
These private organisations with overseas connections are removed from
government control or funding, but nonetheless exert significant influence on Australia's
public diplomacy. According to Professor Chitty: 'non-state actors must be
drawn into the picture if one is going to have an effective scheme'.[8]
NGOs
10.7
There is growing recognition that some NGOs can assist in effective
communication with communities in other countries. Many of these
organisations—International Red Cross, Amnesty International—have credibility, respect
and established global networks.[9]
Although they tend to be fiercely independent, and sometimes highly critical,
of governments, they nonetheless present opportunities to assist or complement
a government's public diplomacy efforts. Professor Kishan S. Rana, noted:
Official trade negotiation and domestic socio-economic
development networks now include NGOs as regular partners, some including them
in their delegations to global conferences. Foreign ministries in the West also
use them as partners on world hunger and disaster relief, and in relation to
human rights advocacy. The NGOs, having gained a status as interlocutors, would
like to become part of the policy formulation process; there are finite limits
to how far foreign ministries can accommodate them in decision-making councils—they
are after all special interest groups, sometimes making conflicting demands.[10]
10.8
In evidence presented to the committee, Mr Geoff Miller also noted the
increasing presence of NGOs in multilateral diplomacy which in his view is
'growing in volume, scope and complexity'.[11]
He drew attention to the growth in 'the size, power and roles of multinational
corporations, and the degree to which they now routinely involve themselves in
issues that once would have been regarded as the prerogative of governments'.[12]
10.9
Mr Trevor Wilson referred to the 'terrific job' that Australian NGOs of
all kinds are doing for the country's reputation. They include in particular
church organisations or non-government humanitarian groups that are identified
as Australian.[13]
Dr Mark Zirnsak, Uniting Church in Australia, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania,
noted the need for the Australian Government to work with NGOs to facilitate
and build on their ability to engage in public diplomacy. He said:
Often non-government organisations or civil societies have an
ability to reach other parts of the overseas community in ways that governments
may not be able to. Government could then also get recognition for the positive
actions it has taken in a number of areas and the need to work with NGOs to
give overseas communities realistic expectations about what an Australian
government might do, particularly in the areas of the promotion of human rights
and peace-building. We commend the government on its efforts with regard to
sending volunteers overseas as a form of public diplomacy.[14]
10.10
Members of the Foreign Correspondents' Association (FCA) provide an
example of another group of people whose activities contribute to overseas
perceptions of Australia. They maintain that it is 'foreign news agencies and
journalists that predominantly shape the views overseas audiences form of Australia'.[15]
For example, the FCA noted:
It is they who report on the reality of life, politics and
business—unhindered by the constraints of being public servants or being
otherwise dependent on the government.[16]
10.11
According to Mr Urs Walterlin, President of the Association, 'If you
talk to us, 'you talk to the world'.[17]
10.12
The Association was of the view that Australian Government entities
other than Tourism Australia are yet 'to discover what opportunities the FCA
can offer'. It noted that the only departmental contact the FCA has had in the
past few years was with the DFAT. It stated further that most years the department
sponsors an annual visit to Canberra for a group of members to observe the
delivery of the budget. According to the FCA, it has recently indicated to DFAT
its desire to widen the list of potential interview partners to include ministers
and senior bureaucrats as well as the government offering assistance to visits
projects such as the North West Shelf oil and gas fields. It was FCA's view
that:
...the Australian Government not only could but also should
use the FCA much more to communicate messages to the world. It is very clear that
our members significantly shape the image the world has of Australia. We believe
the Australian Government has not yet realized this and is underestimating or
not recognizing at all the impact our members' work has.[18]
10.13
The Association made a number of recommendations, key among them was
that ministers of all portfolios give priority to invitations to speak before
the FCA and further that their departments develop direct lines of
communication with the Association to facilitate visits by members to places
and projects of interest.
Sporting diplomacy
10.14
Sporting activities are among the range of private activities that could
have a bearing on foreign policy. In chapter 8, the committee considered the
government-sponsored Australian Sports Outreach Program and noted that the work
being done by the Australian Sports Commission in sports development in
overseas countries was commendable.
10.15
The committee, however, has not explored in detail the connection
between the sporting activities of private organisations or clubs and Australia's
public diplomacy. It notes that in 2005, the Lowy Institute produced a report
which considered Australia's membership of the Asian Football Confederation
(AFC) and the opportunities this membership offered to deepen people-to-people
links with Asia.[19]
10.16
The author of the study argued that 'AFC membership means that, for the
first time in its history, Australia will have a significant, on-going sporting
relationship with a large number of Asian (and Middle Eastern) countries'.[20]
This study makes valuable reading and suggests a number of ways to integrate
sport into the various public diplomacy programs particularly those conducted
under the auspices of the bi-lateral councils. The committee notes the
reference in the study to sport providing a 'common point of conversation'.[21]
The recent very public debate about the proposed tour by the Australian Cricket
team to Zimbabwe illustrates how sport can become the focal point of what is a
public diplomacy concern.[22]
A good reputation built on a solid bank of goodwill means that Australia's
message can be heard over the controversy generated by the occasional international
sporting incident.
10.17
In this regard, the committee again draws attention to the work being
done by the ASC in sports development and the substantial body of goodwill that
these types of activities build up over time. The Lowy report suggests that
there are other potential sporting activities worth exploring that could
contribute to Australia's public diplomacy.
Business diplomacy
10.18
Business is yet another area that intersects with a country's public
diplomacy programs. This inquiry did not take evidence on business diplomacy
but mentions this activity to indicate how widely the net can be cast when
taking account of the many organisations that, deliberately or not, affect
public diplomacy. A recent issue of the Journal of Business Strategy was
devoted especially to the role of business in public diplomacy. The
editor summarised the views of the authors contributing to this edition which tended
to agree that, 'one way or another, business has a role in public diplomacy, whether
by default or intention'.[23]
10.19
Based on its work, Invest Australia demonstrated its awareness of the
business community as a public diplomacy resource. It advised the committee
that towards the end of 2006, it initiated the Australians Abroad pilot program
to 'increase positive public diplomacy within the international business
community'. It informed the committee that a key strategy of the program is 'to
educate and encourage endorsement, word-of-mouth marketing and reinforcement of
key messages by influential Australian business leaders based in key
international markets'.[24]
It explained:
Two key expatriate organisations in the US—Advance and the American
Australian Association—were selected through a competitive process to raise the
level of awareness of Australia as an investment location. They have been
responsible for distributing Invest Australia's e-newsletter, Inflow, to their
membership and organising networking events in the US on behalf of Invest Australia.[25]
10.20
Without the need for further evidence, the committee notes that both sport
and business open up avenues for dialogue and engagement between Australia and
other countries and provide the opportunity for Australia to deepen and broaden
its people-to-people links.
Committee view
10.21
The committee acknowledges that the many and varied activities
undertaken by NGOs, civic activists, writers, journalists, business and sports
people, religious groups and leaders and many other individuals and
organisations may affect Australia's public diplomacy. In some cases, their
activities may complement or support the government's public diplomacy
objectives but, in others, they may not. Clearly DFAT has an interest in
monitoring the influence that various organisations have on Australia's public
diplomacy and their potential to contribute to efforts to promote Australia's
image abroad. Furthermore, where the potential does exist, it is important for
DFAT to be able to take full advantage of those opportunities and to coordinate
and integrate the relevant activities into Australia's public diplomacy
strategies.
10.22
The committee now turns to Australia's diaspora as another group relevant
to the promotion of Australia overseas.
Diaspora
10.23
A 2004 Lowy Institute Paper looked at Australia's diaspora and
concluded:
Australia’s expatriates should be seen as an integral element of
our diplomatic efforts. A strategically located diaspora can help our
international representatives to do their job: to gather information, build
relationships and advocate Australia’s interests. They can also assist our
public diplomacy effort, serving as goodwill ambassadors and helping to project
an accurate and contemporary image overseas...Properly mobilised, the members of
our diaspora could be powerful instruments of Australia’s soft power.[26]
10.24
After inquiring into Australia's diaspora, the Senate Legal and
Constitutional References Committee reinforced this view. It argued that Australia
should embrace its expatriate community as part of Australia and recognise that
they are an important part of the society. Importantly, it noted:
...expatriate Australians represent an underutilised resource: not
only are they an asset in terms of promoting Australia and its social, economic
and cultural interests; they are also ambassadors for our nation, which is otherwise
disadvantaged by our geographic remoteness and small population.[27]
10.25
Although estimates of the number of Australians living overseas vary,
figures provided by DFAT to the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee
in 2004 indicated that there were well over 750,000 Australians resident
overseas.[28]
The Lowy report suggested that the figure of Australians living overseas was
close to one million with perhaps three quarters of that number relocated on a
long-term basis.[29]
10.26
The views of some witnesses to this committee were consistent with the
findings of the Lowy and the Senate committee reports. They were of the view
that Australia's diaspora is 'far-flung, influential and well-disposed'.[30]
Ms Buffington cited two cases where prominent Australians have given a boost
to Australia's public diplomacy. Professor Ian Frazer, a former Australian of
the Year, gave a symposium in Bangkok in April 2007 and spoke to the media
about his discoveries. He also addressed a lunch-time meeting at the Australian
Consulate in New York. Professor Peter Doherty, a Nobel laureate, also took
part in similar promotional work in India. Ms Buffington explained further that
Professor Doherty had been a very positive Nobel laureate:
He has done a lot of multimedia for us in terms of the sort of
material that we would show at education exhibitions, where he is talking about
the impact of an Australian education as a foundation for his work that gained
him the Nobel prize. He has been very generous with his time. So there are a lot
of subtle ways that we also engage the global community, both in the overt
sense of promoting Australia as an education destination but also in the subtle
showcasing of that excellence.[31]
10.27
Indeed, Australian scientists through their extensive international
connections and their high standing in the science community have played a
major role in promoting Australia's interests.
10.28
Australian expatriates do not have to be famous to contribute to Australia's
public diplomacy. Dr Wells was of the view that the millions of Australians
living and working offshore were a resource to be exploited 'as part of an
industry engagement framework'.[32]
She said:
...so much of people’s impressions and understanding of Australian
values and the Australian way of life come from a person to person engagement.
It is our industries and our industry representatives who are doing a lot of
that person to person engagement on the ground. It is our expatriate diaspora,
which is working with industry offshore, that is doing that engagement on the
ground.[33]
10.29
Similarly, Mr Mirchandani also drew attention to the potential for Australia's
diaspora to have a constructive role in Australia's public diplomacy. His view
of public diplomacy was 'Team Australia'. He explained:
Team Australia is anyone who is going abroad to interact in
overseas countries at whatever level. They should all form part of the
Australian narrative...Every Australian overseas is a small part and a carrier of
this narrative. It would be great if they were empowered, trained, informed—many
going overseas do not even know that—about what this narrative is and therefore
they could lend their weight to it.[34]
10.30
He noted a private sector summit on public diplomacy held by the US
State Department which supported the creation of a corps of private sector foreign
service officers made up of academics and businesspeople with specialised
expertise. The suggestion was that they could work abroad on short-term
assignments.
Mr Mirchandani was of the view that Australia should be considering creative
proposals based on the notion that, 'Everyone is an Australian, and everyone is
a diplomat when he or she is overseas'.[35]
10.31
According to Mr Mirchandani, expatriates would love to be involved as long
as it did 'not take them into areas of discomfort in policy terms'. He
indicated that they do not really need financial incentive, 'but recognition
would certainly play a part in spurring them on'.[36]
As noted previously, Invest Australia has already taken active steps to involve
expatriates in their promotional work.
10.32
The Lowy report acknowledged DFAT's excellent work in connecting with
Australian expatriates. It noted, however, that while many Australian diplomats
use their contacts with expatriates to promote the national interest, the
Australian government has not given priority to this type of activity. Overall,
the report claimed that there is no strategic, whole-of-department—let alone
whole-of-government—effort to interact with the diaspora or to use it to
achieve the department’s goals, including advocacy, information collection and
public diplomacy. In particular, the authors identified the following gaps:
- There is no central unit within DFAT or any other department to engage
with the diaspora.
- Outside the performance of consular duties, there is no regular surveying
of contacts with the diaspora in diplomatic posts, or a specific diaspora
element in post evaluation reviews.
- The issue is not emphasised in official DFAT documents such as annual
reports and white papers.
10.33
The report suggested that the bureaucratic focus on the diaspora should
be sharpened. The authors did not believe that a large new bureaucracy was
necessary but that certain modest, targeted reforms to DFAT’s processes could
address present shortcomings, namely:
- A unit should be created to generate new ideas on expatriate
engagement, capture the experiences of different diplomatic posts, and
distribute best practices throughout the system. This unit should be located in
DFAT but work with other arms of government, such as the Australian Electoral Commission
(AEC), Austrade and Invest Australia.
- Diaspora engagement should be made an explicit aim of the Department
and be included in post and divisional objectives and ministerial directives to
heads of mission. Posts should, of course, be allowed flexibility as to how
this end is achieved, given the variety of environments in which they operate.
For example, there are likely to be more opportunities to work with expatriates
to advance Australia’s interests in global cities such as New York, London and Hong
Kong. However, the ambition should be consistent, even if the programs are not.
- A tailored, up-to-date and comprehensive website should be
created to function as a ‘one-stop shop’ for expatriates. It should be
administered by the government to ensure it is regarded as trustworthy by
users.[37]
10.34
The Legal and Constitutional References Committee made some similar
recommendations which were supported by government members of the committee. It
recommended the establishment of a policy unit within the DFAT to facilitate
the coordination of policies relating to Australian expatriates.[38]
The Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade is of the view
that this recommendation could be expanded to include public diplomacy in the
duties and responsibilities of the proposed unit.
10.35
The Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee also
recommended that the consular role for foreign missions be revised to contain a
specific requirement that posts engage with the local expatriate community in
all ways appropriate to that location.[39]
10.36
In its response to the Senate committee's recommendation, the government
did not support the establishment of a special policy unit within DFAT dealing
with expatriate matters. It stated that Australian missions work 'closely and
actively with Australian expatriate communities, organisations and social
groups to maintain positive and productive links to promote Australian goods
and services as well as information and cultural activities'.[40]
The government accepted the recommendation that the consular role for foreign
missions be revised to require posts to engage better with the local expatriate
community. It noted, however, that this requirement already existed. The
government explained that Australian missions 'provide a broad range of
services across, inter alia, consular, immigration, trade, cultural and
business activities, as part of which there is a continuous process of
engagement with local expatriate communities'. It reported that there was to be
'an expansion of consular services, with an additional 15 officers to be posted
to Australian missions over the next two years [from 2006], as well as the
appointment of 16 local support staff [to] further improve the service
delivered to Australians abroad'.[41]
10.37
Even so, evidence to the committee strengthened the call for measures to
be taken to ensure that the network of Australians living abroad is regarded as
a vital part of the Australian community, with significant potential to make a
valuable contribution to Australia's public diplomacy. RMIT argued that the
government should make better use of the network of Australians living and
working overseas and cited from the Lowy report:
...many of these Australians enjoy positions of influence and
authority in academia, business, communications and the arts; and are
favourably disposed to promoting Australia’s influence through public diplomacy
channels...Support for country-based professional networks—in the form of
resources for partnered activity with Government—would sustain and give focus
to this work. This is another area in which universities, with their
international staff and alumni linkages, could be engaged.[42]
10.38
Professor Joseph Siracusa suggested that if Australia wants to promote
'the Australian story', it should consider how the Harvard alumni
organises itself around the world, which would provide a proven and successful
model. He said, 'A lot of our students spend six months overseas, and they are
your great ambassadors, but you have to regularise or systematise this thing'.[43]
In stressing the important contribution that Australians overseas could make to
Australia's public diplomacy, he recommended:
- a stock take of all the talent Australia has and the
opportunities they have to tell Australia's story—identify the resources;[44]
- a major conference called 'Australia's World, World's Australia'
that would bring together educators, elected people and Australians who work
overseas to work out a strategy for Australia's public diplomacy.[45]
10.39
It should be noted that in December 2006, Advance-Global Australian
Professionals hosted a gathering of expatriate Australians 'at the top of their
fields from around the world and their on-shore peers'. They met in Sydney to
identify 'strategies to leverage their networks and influence in their
respective industries and fields of endeavour'.[46]
This meeting confirmed the notion that some of Australia's 'best and brightest'
while living overseas, have 'a desire to strengthen the connection with Australia'.
Participants also showed a willingness to enquire into how 'best advantage can
be made of their personal networks and influence abroad'.[47]
Although, those attending the summit saw themselves as a major element in 'Australia's
public diplomacy kit bag' they agreed that they are 'currently almost totally
unused with little global application of their talents and resources to Australia's
public diplomacy objectives'. A recommendation coming out of the summit was to:
Extend programmes which leverage
leading Australian professionals around the world as a major public diplomacy
asset, assisting in the promotion of Australia as an excellent trade,
investment, education and tourism destination.[48]
Photographer:
Jon
Love
Advance 100 Global
Australians on the steps of the Sydney Opera House at the conclusion of the Summit.
10.40
Invest Australia has clearly demonstrated its interest in using
Australian expatriates to assist it in promoting Australia.
Committee view
10.41
The committee notes the government's response to the Legal and
Constitutional Committee's recommendation to improve links with Australia's
diaspora. It believes, however, that the opportunities to engage Australian
expatriates more actively and constructively in promoting Australia overseas
are not being fully explored. It suggests that DFAT look carefully at the Lowy report,
Diaspora; reconsider the relevant recommendations made by the Legal and
Constitutional References Committee; and the evidence before this committee
with a view to implementing measures that would encourage more active
engagement by Australia's expatriates in Australia's public diplomacy.
Recommendation 14
10.42
The committee recommends that DFAT review the findings of the Lowy
report, Diaspora, reconsider the relevant recommendations made in
March 2005 by the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee on
Australian Expatriates and consider the evidence set out in this report with
regard to Australian expatriates and Australia's public diplomacy. The committee
urges DFAT to formulate and implement strategies that would enable DFAT to take
advantage of the significant resource of the diaspora and encourage Australian
expatriates to engage more constructively in Australia's public diplomacy.
The problem of integrating and coordinating public diplomacy activities
10.43
There are many government agencies, private sector entities and
individuals who have made or could make a contribution to the effectiveness of Australia's
public diplomacy. As noted in chapter 8, even among government departments
there is a need for strong communication networks and clear direction from a
recognised central body. Bringing the many non-state organisations into Australia's
public diplomacy framework so they can complement the work of government bodies
poses a significant challenge for government.
10.44
Australia is not alone in grappling with this problem of successfully
integrating the activities of many organisations and individuals into the one
framework. A dominant theme in overseas literature on public diplomacy concentrates
on the importance of coordination and strategic planning. Many refer to the
need 'to foster synergies between activities of governments and societal
actors'.[49]
Mark Leonard suggested that:
Each country has a different set of institutions to manage its
public diplomacy strategy. Some are part of government, others are independent.
Each will have its own mission and priorities, but in order to practice public
diplomacy effectively, it is important to examine the institutions as a
spectrum and see whether there are gaps between the institutions which are not
yet filled.[50]
10.45
Evidence to this committee has already noted the importance of
developing a coherent public diplomacy strategy with other stakeholders in
government and society.[51]
Indeed, the previous chapter drew attention to the observations of some
cultural and educational institutions that the lack of strategic planning
impedes more effective engagement in Australia's public diplomacy. More
generally, Mr Trevor Wilson criticised DFAT's current public diplomacy because
of its short-term focus. He suggested that the objective of public diplomacy is
a 'strategic building of not so much our image but our reputation, our
influence, and good understanding of Australia'.[52]
He said:
I think we need to identify the sorts of strategies that we
should be pursuing in our public diplomacy that are above politics—bipartisan
strategies, which the community would strongly support. If you look at DFAT’s
annual reports or those of the Australia International Cultural Council or any
of the other institutions and bodies, there are broad statements of principle,
but there is no statement of strategy that would actually inform public
diplomacy activities; there is no direct connecting thread there.[53]
10.46
Media Gurus referred to the need to harness and coordinate the relevant
activities of all the various contributors to Australia's public diplomacy to
take full advantage of their position, 'so that different agencies are not
knocking on the same door at the same time'.[54]
Committee view
10.47
In its recommendation to expand and strengthen the role and function of
the IDC and to develop a strategic public diplomacy plan (see recommendation 6),
the committee recognised the importance of non-state organisations and Australia's
diaspora to Australia's public diplomacy. It suggested that:
- the government's strategic framework take account of non-state stakeholders
and adopt as one of its key operating principles in its public diplomacy
strategy 'work with others, including business, NGOs and Australian
expatriates;
- a sub-committee of the IDC be established with responsibility for
ensuring that non-state organisations involved in international activities,
including diaspora communities, are incorporated into an overarching public
diplomacy framework.
10.48
The final chapter of the report will also draw together some of these
suggestions and recommendations made in the body of the report.
Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page