Recognize public participation to improve foreign policy<\/p>\n
Dian Wirengjurit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jakarta<\/p>\n
To adapt and anticipate to new challenges on the international
\nand domestic stages, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is
\nundergoing heavy restructuring.<\/p>\n
A new and expanded structure will be introduced as early as
\nnext year and, as Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda puts it, more
\nposts will be given to a younger generation of diplomats. It is
\nhoped that the new and fresh look will be able to improve the
\nperformance of Indonesian diplomats and the country's foreign
\npolicy.<\/p>\n
As the multifaceted crises continues to drag on the most
\nimmediate aim of the government's foreign policy is to restore
\nthe nation's image and to regain the trust and confidence of
\nforeign investors. President Megawati Soekarnoputri underlined
\nthe importance of achieving this at the beginning of her tenure.
\nSuch a task is certainly not an easy job for the ministry and its
\ndiplomats.<\/p>\n
Under the new structure the ministry will put greater emphasis
\non the need to involve the public in carrying out diplomacy.<\/p>\n
The Directorate General for Information and Public Diplomacy
\nwill be established in this regard, to replace the old
\nDirectorate General of Social and Cultural Relations. In today's
\nworld, diplomacy is no longer \"the privilege of a few elite\".<\/p>\n
In short, the second-track diplomacy by the non-governmental
\nactors, widely known as public diplomacy, will compliment the
\nfirst-track diplomacy by the government.<\/p>\n
The concept of two-track diplomacy emerged when diplomats,
\nprofessionals and a large part of the community realized that
\ngovernment-to-government interactions were not necessarily the
\nmost effective method for promoting international cooperation and
\nsettling conflicts.<\/p>\n
This concept was first coined by Joseph Montville of the
\nForeign Service Institute in 1982 to describe the methods and
\nmeans of diplomacy conducted outside the governmental mechanism.<\/p>\n
His basic idea refers to informal contacts and activities
\nbetween private citizens and groups of individuals. More
\nprecisely, according to Ambassador Peter Galbraith, public
\ndiplomacy is the advocacy of national interests by seeking to
\ninfluence foreign publics and leaders through open means such as
\nthe media, exchange of persons and cultural activities.<\/p>\n
Other experts in diplomacy say that involving the public in
\ndiplomacy could reduce conflict between groups or nations by
\nimproving communication, understanding and relationships.<\/p>\n
Tension, anger, fear and misunderstanding could decrease by
\n\"humanizing the face of the enemy\" and giving people direct
\npersonal experience of one another.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, it could affect the thinking and action of track-
\none diplomacy by addressing root causes, feelings and needs and
\nby exploring diplomatic options without prejudice and therefore
\nlaying the groundwork for more formal negotiations or for
\nreframing policies.<\/p>\n
The basic premise of track-two diplomacy is that the expertise
\nto deal successfully with conflict and peace making does not
\nreside solely with government personnel or procedures. Citizens
\nfrom a variety of backgrounds and with a variety of skills have
\nsomething to offer and they can make a difference. This
\nassumption has long been held by different groups, from religious
\ngroups to professionals and universities.<\/p>\n
Citizen diplomats could then be involved and activated to help
\nrestore Indonesia's image abroad to secure national programs. The
\nsecond track could also cover some of the activities or functions
\nof traditional diplomats namely to represent and promote.
\nHowever, it should be remembered that the contacts they make and
\nthe activities they conduct should be based on their capacity as
\n\"non-state actors\" in order to avoid discrepancies.<\/p>\n
Despite its military might, the United States has attached
\ngreat importance to public diplomacy for a number of years. The
\nU.S. administration continues to manage public diplomacy
\nseriously and effectively in its foreign policy. Its agencies
\nsuch as the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and the Voice of
\nAmerica have been at the forefront, acting as a main tool for
\nU.S. propaganda against communist countries during the cold war.
\nSimilar mechanisms exist in the United Kingdom, Germany, France
\nand Japan, among others.<\/p>\n
To adapt to the challenges after the cold war, the U.S. has
\ngone even further. It merged the USIA and the Arms Control and
\nDisarmament Agency with the State Department on Oct. 1, 1999.<\/p>\n
Last year alone the U.S. spent no less than US$3 billion on
\nits tools of propaganda. Still, this does not guarantee that the
\nconduct of its foreign policy will run smoothly as anti-American
\nsentiment cannot easily be suppressed.<\/p>\n
Today public diplomacy is imperative. Therefore, it is
\ncertainly not too late for Indonesia to start developing and
\nmanaging public diplomacy to help promote and restore its image.
\nHowever, if Indonesia, or the ministry in particular, is serious
\nin developing and utilizing public diplomacy as a tool of
\nIndonesia's foreign policy, then many things need to taken into
\naccount.<\/p>\n
First, clear targets and objectives as to whom public
\ndiplomacy should be aimed at and what needs to be achieved need
\nto be defined. Second, well-planned and sustainable programs and
\nactivities on what to do domestically and internationally should
\nbe created. Third, well-trained and dedicated diplomats need to
\nbe made available to carry out the difficult tasks. Fourth,
\nappropriate funding should be provided to guarantee that public
\ndiplomacy be carried out continuously.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, restoring Indonesia's image through both
\ntraditional and public diplomacy is a long-term process and
\nresults will not come instantly.<\/p>\n
People should be or should be made aware that they have a role
\nin the conduct of their country's foreign policy if they are
\nseriously concerned about the need to restore Indonesia's image.<\/p>\n
For its part, the ministry should always play the central
\nrole. However, as former foreign minister Ali Alatas pointed out
\nrecently, our diplomats could only contribute 15 percent toward
\nrestoring Indonesia's image while the remaining 85 percent would
\ngreatly depend on the domestic situation.<\/p>\n
Last but not least, promoting a good image of the situation in
\nIndonesia while the troubles continue is a difficult and daunting
\ntask. It needs persistence and patience. Therefore, it is worth
\nseeing how far the ministry can go with public diplomacy.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/recognize-public-participation-to-improve-foreign-policy-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}