Name= Ahmed Abdi Yusuf. Std No= b1106.050095.

Topic (public diplomacy).

Contents;

Introduction and Public diplomacy definition.

Between Public diplomacy and traditional diplomacy.

The modern or new public diplomacy.

Public diplomacy about hard and soft powers.

Different dimensions of Public Diplomacy.

Public diplomacy and about hard, soft and sticky power.

Is public diplomacy and propaganda same.

Conclusion.

Introduction and Public diplomacy definition.

The communication which deals with foreign public on the formation of a dialogue to inform
and influence the public of other countries is the public diplomacy. But the important thing to
know is that there is no just one definition of public diplomacy. It contains international relation
beyond traditional diplomacy, the public ideas of other countries, the relation with private groups
in one nation to another, to impact policies of other nations, the process of intercultural
communication.Public diplomacy can be defined as well the conduct of foreign relation by
public communication media, private entities in those foreign countries, such as; different ethnic
groups, including influencing individuals.Public diplomacy is public side of a traditional
diplomacy, and involves a multiple of actors and networks.It is a key mechanism through which
nations foster mutual trust and productive relationships and has become crucial to
building a secure global environment.
There are different instruments and methods used for public diplomacy, such as media like voice
of America, international visitor leadership programs, BBC London, internet web pages all of
those are methods and instruments used to implement public diplomacy. Listening, cultural
diplomacy, international broad casting, advocacy and exchange diplomacy are five elements
which Nicholas J. Cull distributed the practice.(J. Michael Waller – 2007. U.S. Department of
State, Dictionary of International Relations Terms, 1987, p. 85)

Between Public diplomacy and traditional diplomacy.

The difference between public diplomacy and traditional diplomacy can be as follows; for public
diplomacy represents not only government with government’s interaction but also individuals
and special organizations. And public diplomacy presents many different views as represented
private individuals and special organization, and also government officials’ views.

For traditional diplomacy is strongly engages the interaction of government with governments,
and also officials of the government and embassy represents the state, and host country
conducted with just relation of the officials of the other foreign country in order to maintain
relation of that government,

So generally public diplomacy engages always individuals and private organization so that is
relates to elements of nongovernmental society, and different views of those countries such as
private individuals private organizations and it is not just for government by government
relations.(Website of PDAA Public Diplomacy 2016,)

The modern or new public diplomacy.

To understand what is new public diplomacy deeply is, it is important to know that the new
public diplomacy is more standard and contains all the diplomatic practice and it is far away a
form of propaganda related by diplomats. This means new public diplomacy is not about studies
literature and it is not a kind of propaganda like the one in traditional diplomacy but is more
standardized one.As a Canadian ambassador to Washington observed: ‘thenew diplomacy, as I
call it, is, to a large extent, public diplomacy and requires different skills, techniques, and
attitudes than those found intraditional diplomacy’. Unfortunately a lot of diplomats are trying to
put the concept on the practice but their policies looks like traditional diplomacy and making
more propaganda. for diplomats should try to deeply understand what is and how it works new
public diplomacy in order their diplomacy be more influenced to their targets.(Jan Melissen, the
new public diplomacy 2005,PP28-41.)

Different dimensions of Public Diplomacy.

There are three different kinds of public diplomacy dimensions such as news management
strategic communication and relationship building public diplomacy. Each one’s explanation is
as follows;

News Management which is dimension explaining management of communication on day to a

day responding the increasing need to align communication to traditional diplomacy. And the
internal department involved to these issues for providing the foreign services with the notice
and the information needed to contextualize the issues.

The second dimension of the those dimension is strategic communication, in traditionally

governments have been good their stances on special issue but not effectively managing
perception of the country as whole, and the reason of that can be many different bodies are
involving with dealing of politics, cultural relation investment and tourism. So this dimension is
about the strategic massages that a country promotes about the other foreign country. And it is
the totality of the massage which people get about the foreign countries which will determine
how they relate to one another.

The third dimension of the public diplomacy relationship building, the most and developing
strong relationships with the key individuals by training seminars, conferences media channels, it
is about making strong relation with politicians and business people. It is related by aim which is
creating a common analysis of issue and giving people clear idea and motivations.Building
relationships is very different from selling messages because it involves a genuine exchange and
means that people are given a ‘warts and all’ picture of the country. All of those different spheres
are vital important to fully understand what is really public diplomacy is.(Mark Leonard, 2002,
Public Diplomacy.)

Public diplomacy about hard and soft powers.

Hard, soft and sticky powers are all interrelated facets of public diplomacy these are more
significant and techniques deemed to appropriate to the implementation of public diplomacy. As
soft power means gaining what someone wants to get through attraction instead of using force
and coercion, nation’s use of soft power means to rests on its policies values and culture
resources. A modern power strategy is to combine both soft and hard, for public diplomacy it is
usage of the countries to use soft power and this was one of the most important tools for cold war
period. And important thing to know in here is that public diplomacy which is modern and smart
in generating soft power. And for today’s war on terror there is no possibility to end just by using
hard power so it needs to get the minds and to attract the other societies and the only way that
countries can do is to combine both hard power and soft power. Public diplomacy is a way to
improve a country’s soft power usage. So in all of all public diplomacy is about using soft power
instead of hard power.

Is public diplomacy and propaganda same.

There are different views towards whether public diplomacy and propaganda are same or not,
there are two views one which is old viewers and one which is in the recent time.

One side linked public diplomacy to the concept of so called international propaganda, like Vreg
(2000: 109), and before Vreg’s ideas there are other authors which made links between
propaganda and public diplomacy, For example the author of Oren Stephens in 1955 he related
American public diplomacy and propaganda, another example is the author of Wilson Dizard he
had a book at that time which he mentioned that United state of America involved international
propaganda issues.(IFIMES. public diplomacy: basic concepts and trends. 15.04.2016.)

In the latest decade’s viewers in USA argued that united state P.D programs cannot be same as
propaganda, and they argued that it is something bigger than and far away from propaganda and
it needs to strongly understand. On other side there are some other argues that public diplomacy
can be same as propaganda because since propaganda can be based on fact, public diplomacy can
be equated with it. United State of America’s officials always contended that their programs
dealt with the known facts; To do otherwise would be counterproductive as their reliability can
be questioned. So as conclusion there are two ideas having argument towards this issue which Is
if the propaganda and public diplomacy are same or not, one which is early viewers argued it is
same like the concept of international propaganda and others argued public diplomacy is
something which is more deep than propaganda.(Website of PDAA Public Diplomacy 2016,).

Conclusion.

Public diplomacy is a multi disciplinary subject which has relations to sub other fields so that it
is difficult to have one definite explanation and because of this reason there are different and
many explanation but mostly have one common meaning which people’s diplomacy deals with
public foreigner’s specially private actors as well as the governments. The performance and the
arts of the foreign countries as well as different Medias and social Medias are all the instruments
used for public diplomacy.Lastly this paper discussed the topic public diplomacy by looking
different dimensions such as; Public diplomacy definition, between Public diplomacy and
traditional diplomacy, the modern or new public diplomacy, different dimensions of Public
Diplomacy, public diplomacy and about hard and soft power and is public diplomacy and
propaganda same.
 Bibliography.

Kristina PlavšakKrajnc, (March 2004), Public Diplomacy: basic Concepts and Trends, last
updated (2005).

http://www.ifimes.org/en/8020-public-diplomacy-basic-concepts-and-trends.

(J. Michael Waller – 2007. U.S. Department of State, Dictionary of International Relations
Terms, 1987, p. 85).

https://books.google.com.tr/books?isbn=0615154654

Website of PDAA Public Diplomacy, (2016), what public diplomacy is and is not.

http://pdaa.publicdiplomacy.org/?page_id=6

Jan Melissen, (2005), the new public diplomacy, PP-28-41.

https://www.google.com.tr/search?q=culturaldiplomacy.org%2Facademy%2Fpdf%2F.&oq=cult
uraldiplomacy.org%2Facademy%2Fpdf%2F.&aqs=chrome..69i58j69i57.8558j0j4&sourceid=chr
ome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8.

Joseph S. Nye, Jr, (Mar, 2008), pp. 94-109, Public Diplomacy and Soft Power.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25097996