Public Diplomacy: Concepts, Approaches and Implementation

Öz

Public diplomacy is an important tool that provides governments with a structured approach to engaging with foreign publics, shaping perceptions through cultural exchanges, information sharing, educational programmes, and media outreach. While the conceptualisation of public diplomacy in the International Relations literature is relatively new, its practice dates back to ancient times since historically, nations sought to influence foreign public opinion to manage their external relations. However, the digital age has accelerated the prominence and development of public diplomacy as a structured mechanism. In this line this article aims to analyse the historical development, theoretical foundations, and current practices of public diplomacy, explaining how it was conceptualised in the first place, and in this way to provide an understanding of why and how different nations implement public diplomacy strategies. It begins with a mapping of the conceptual evolution of public diplomacy, paying special attention to its different dimensions. It then proceeds with a historical overview of public diplomacy, from its ancient roots to its modern conceptualization and the evolution of its tools and actors. Following the historical overview, the theoretical foundations such as soft power, nation branding, communication theories, constructivism, and critical international relations theories of public diplomacy are explored. The article discusses how these approaches underpin public diplomacy practices. The practical implementation is demonstrated through a case study of NATO’s public diplomacy strategies. The case study indicates the strategies and practices adopted by NATO and serves as an example of how an intergovernmental organization can effectively carry out public diplomacy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Public Diplomacy
• Soft Power
• Nation Branding
• Cultural Diplomacy
• NATO Public Diplomacy

Kamu Diplomasisi: Kavramlar, Yaklaşımlar ve Uygulamalar

Öz

Kamu diplomasisi, hükümetlere yabancı halklarla ilişki kurmaları için yapılandırılmış bir yaklaşım sunan önemli bir araçtır. Kültürel değişimler, bilgi paylaşımı, eğitim programları ve medyaya erişim gibi etkinlikler aracılığıyla algıları şekillendirerek uluslararası ilişkileri yönetmek temeline dayanmaktadır. Kamu diplomasisinin uluslararası ilişkiler literatüründe kavramsallaştırılması görece yeni olsa da uygulama olarak geçmişi antik çağlara kadar dayandırılabilir. Nitekim tarihsel olarak da uluslar dış dünyaya yönelik imajlarını yönetme ve yabancı kamuoyunu etkileme ihtiyacı ile gerekli mekanizmaları kurmuş ve kullanmışlardır. Ancak dijitalleşme çağında bilgiyi paylaşma ve yayma olanaklarının artmış olması kamu diplomasisini uluslararası ilişkilerde ön plana çıkarmakla kalmamış, kavramsallaştırmasına ve yapılandırılmış bir mekanizma olarak ortaya koyulmasına da yol açmıştır. Bu makale temel olarak kamu diplomasisinin tarihsel gelişimini, teorik temellerini ve mevcut uygulamalarını inceleyerek öncelikle nasıl kavramsallaştırıldığını açıklamayı ve bu şekilde farklı ulusların kamu diplomasisi stratejilerini neden ve nasıl uyguladıklarının kavranmasını sağlamayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaçla yola çıkılan makale, esas olarak analitik ve betimleyicidir. Bu bakımdan kamu diplomasisinin kavramsal evriminin farklı boyutları vurgulanarak bir haritalandırma ile başlamakta, ardından, kamu diplomasisinin antik köklerinden başlayarak modern kavramsallaştırmasına, araçlarının ve aktörlerinin evrimine kadar kamu diplomasisine tarihsel bir bakışla devam etmektedir. Tarihsel genel bakışın ardından, kamu diplomasisinin teorik temelleri, yumuşak güç, ulus markalaşması, iletişim teorileri, inşacılık ve eleştirel uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri odağında ele alınmakta ve söz konusu yaklaşımların kamu diplomasisi uygulamalarını nasıl desteklediğini tartışmaktadır. Uygulama kısmında NATO'nun kamu diplomasisi örneği ele alınmaktadır. Bu kapsamda NATO tarafından benimsenen kamu diplomasisi strateji ve uygulamaları incelenerek hükümetlerarası bir örgütün kamu diplomasisini nasıl etkin bir şekilde yürütebileceğine dair bir örnek ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kamu Diplomasisi
• Yumuşak Güç
• Ulusal Markalaşma
• Kültürel Diplomasi
• NATO Kamu Diplomasisi

Kaynakça

1. Adler, E. (1997). Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in world politics. European Journal of International Relations, 3(3), 319-363. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066197003003003
2. Aksu Ereker, F. (2019). Kuzey Atlantik Antlaşması Örgütü - NATO”, Güvenlik Yazıları Serisi, No.28. Erişim adresi: https://trguvenlikportali.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/NATO_FulyaAksuEreker_v.1.pdf.
3. Anholt, S. (1996). Making a brand travel. Journal of Brand Management, 3(4), 357-364. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.1996.17
4. Anholt, S. (2007). Implementing competitive identity. Competitive identity: The new brand management for nations, cities, and regions içinde (s. 113-128). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
5. Amirbek, A. ve Ydyrys, K. (2014). Education and soft power: Analysis as an instrument of foreign policy. Procedia: Social & Behavioral Sciences, 143, 514-516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.428
6. Ayhan, K. J. (2019). The boundaries of public diplomacy and nonstate actors: A taxonomy of perspectives. International Studies Perspectives, 20(1), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/eky010
7. Banks, S. (2011). A resource guide to public diplomacy evaluation. Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.
8. Bjola, C., (2015). Making sense of digital diplomacy. Digital diplomacy: Theory and practice içinde (s. 1-9). London & New York: Routledge.

9. Cull, N. J. (2009). Public diplomacy: lessons from the past. Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.
10. Cull, N. J. (2008). The cold war and the United States Information Agency: American propaganda and public diplomacy, 1945–1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Cummings, M. C. (2003). Cultural diplomacy and the United States government: A survey. Washington: Center for Arts and Culture.
12. Entman, R. M. (2008). Theorizing mediatized public diplomacy: The U.S. case. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(2), 87-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161208314 Fullerton, J. A. ve Kendrick, A. (2017). Shaping international public opinion: a model for nation branding and public diplomacy. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 10(2), 102-118. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-018-00110-6
13. Golan, G. J., Yang, S. U. ve Kinsey, D. F. (2015). International public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement. New York: Peter Lang.
14. Gregory, B. (2011). American public diplomacy: Enduring characteristics, elusive transformation. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(3-4), 351-372. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119111X583941
15. Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 55-77. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716207312
16. Hayden, C. (2012). The rhetoric of soft power: Public diplomacy in global contexts. Lanham, Boulder: Lexington Books.
17. Hocking, B. (2005). Rethinking the ‘New’ Public Diplomacy. The new public diplomacy: soft power in international relations içinde (s. 28-43). Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Jansen, S. C. (2008). Designer nations: Neo-liberal nation branding – Brand Estonia. Social Identities, 14(1), 121-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630701848721
19. Khademi, M. (2014). The importance of international cultural exchanges: some normative considerations. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 29 (1), 47-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632929909597285
20. Kochhar S. ve Molleda J.C. (2015). The Evolving Links Between International Public Relations and Corporate Diplomacy. International public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement içinde (s. 51-71). New York: Peter Lang.
21. L’Etang, J. (2009). Public relations and diplomacy in a globalized world: an issue of public communication. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), 607-626. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642093476
22. Lee, G. ve Ayhan, K. (2015). Why do we need non-state actors in public diplomacy? theoretical discussion of relational, networked and collaborative public diplomacy. Journal of International and Area Studies, 22(1), 57-77. Erişim adresi: https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/43490280.pdf
23. Ma, Y. ve Pan, S. (2015). Chinese returnees from overseas study: an understanding of brain gain and brain circulation in the age of globalization. Frontiers of Education in China, 10(2), 306-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03397067
24. Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005). The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice. The new public diplomacy: soft power in international relations içinde (s. 3-28). Houndsmill: Palgrave Macmillan.
25. Metzgar, E. T. (2012). Is it the medıum or the message? Social media, American public diplomacy & Iran. Global Media Journal, 11(21), 1-16. Erişim Adresi: https://www.academia.edu/14944016/
26. Mikhail, P. (2018). Power imbalances and education diplomacy. Childhood Education, 94(3), 16–19. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_69275.htm
27. NATO. (2022). Communications and public diplomacy. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_69275.htm.
28. NATO. (2023a). NATO’s approach to countering disinformation. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_219728.htm.
29. NATO. (2023b). NATO’s approach to countering disinformation. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_219728.htm.
30. Nye, J. S. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Affairs, 80, 153-171. https://doi.org/10.2307/1148580
31. Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: The means to success in world politics. New York: Public Affairs.
32. Nye, J. S. (2009). The powers to lead. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Nye, J. S. (2019). Soft power. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271620731169
34. Oktay, E. (2012). NATO’nun dönüşümü ve kamu diplomasisi’nin artan rolü. Uluslararası İlişkiler, 9(34), 125-149. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/uidergisi/issue/39282/462600
35. Pahlavi, P. (2007). Evaluating public diplomacy programmes. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 2(3), 255–281. https://doi.org/10.1163/187119007X240523
36. Pamment, J. (2013). New public diplomacy in the 21st century: A comparative study of policy and practice. New York: Routledge.
37. Pratkanis, A. (2020). Public diplomacy in international conflicts: A social influence analysis. Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (s. 111-153). New York, London: Routledge.
38. Scott-Smith, P. (2020). Exchange programs and public diplomacy. Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (s. 50-56). New York, London: Routledge.
39. Sevin, E. ve Ayhan J. K. (2021). Evaluation in public diplomacy. Communicating with Purpose and Value: ASEF Public Diplomacy Handbook içinde (s. 61-68). Singpore: Asia-Europe Foundation.
40. Szostek, J. (2020). What happens to public diplomacy during information war? critical reflections on the conceptual framing of international communication. International Journal of Communication, 14(2020), 2728–2748. Erişim adresi: https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/13439/3092
41. Şehitoğlu, R. (2024). Eğitim diplomasisi ekosisteminde eğitim müşavirlerinin rolü, International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences (IJOESS), 15(55), 314-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.35826/ijoess.4426
42. Tokgöz, E. ve Tanyıldızı, N. (2023). Gündem belirleme ve çerçeveleme teorileri bağlamında TASS ve Ukrinform haber ajanslarının Rusya-Ukrayna savaş sunumlarının incelenmesi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 25(1), 61-92. https://doi.org/10.16953/deusosbil.1238337 Vlahos, M. (2009). Public diplomacy as loss of world authority. Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy içinde (s. 24-38). New York, London: Routledge.
43. Watanabe, Y. ve McConnell, D. L. (2008). Soft power superpowers: Cultural and national assets of Japan and the United States. Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391-425. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-23773-9_7
44. White, C. L. (2015). Exploring the role of private-sector corporations in public diplomacy. Public Relations Inquiry, 4(3), 305–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/2046147X156148
45. Yağmurlu, A. (2019). Kamu diplomasisi ve ulus markalaşması: Bir elmanın iki yarısı mı? İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, (49), 122-138. Erişim adresi: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/ikad/issue/69411/992336
46. Zamorano, M. M. (2016). Reframing cultural diplomacy: The instrumentalization of culture under the soft power theory. Culture Unbound, 8, 166–186. https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.1608165