Recognize public participation to improve foreign policy

Recognize public participation to improve foreign policy

Dian Wirengjurit, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Jakarta

To adapt and anticipate to new challenges on the international
and domestic stages, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is
undergoing heavy restructuring.

A new and expanded structure will be introduced as early as
next year and, as Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda puts it, more
posts will be given to a younger generation of diplomats. It is
hoped that the new and fresh look will be able to improve the
performance of Indonesian diplomats and the country's foreign
policy.

As the multifaceted crises continues to drag on the most
immediate aim of the government's foreign policy is to restore
the nation's image and to regain the trust and confidence of
foreign investors. President Megawati Soekarnoputri underlined
the importance of achieving this at the beginning of her tenure.
Such a task is certainly not an easy job for the ministry and its
diplomats.

Under the new structure the ministry will put greater emphasis
on the need to involve the public in carrying out diplomacy.

The Directorate General for Information and Public Diplomacy
will be established in this regard, to replace the old
Directorate General of Social and Cultural Relations. In today's
world, diplomacy is no longer "the privilege of a few elite".

In short, the second-track diplomacy by the non-governmental
actors, widely known as public diplomacy, will compliment the
first-track diplomacy by the government.

The concept of two-track diplomacy emerged when diplomats,
professionals and a large part of the community realized that
government-to-government interactions were not necessarily the
most effective method for promoting international cooperation and
settling conflicts.

This concept was first coined by Joseph Montville of the
Foreign Service Institute in 1982 to describe the methods and
means of diplomacy conducted outside the governmental mechanism.

His basic idea refers to informal contacts and activities
between private citizens and groups of individuals. More
precisely, according to Ambassador Peter Galbraith, public
diplomacy is the advocacy of national interests by seeking to
influence foreign publics and leaders through open means such as
the media, exchange of persons and cultural activities.

Other experts in diplomacy say that involving the public in
diplomacy could reduce conflict between groups or nations by
improving communication, understanding and relationships.

Tension, anger, fear and misunderstanding could decrease by
"humanizing the face of the enemy" and giving people direct
personal experience of one another.

Furthermore, it could affect the thinking and action of track-
one diplomacy by addressing root causes, feelings and needs and
by exploring diplomatic options without prejudice and therefore
laying the groundwork for more formal negotiations or for
reframing policies.

The basic premise of track-two diplomacy is that the expertise
to deal successfully with conflict and peace making does not
reside solely with government personnel or procedures. Citizens
from a variety of backgrounds and with a variety of skills have
something to offer and they can make a difference. This
assumption has long been held by different groups, from religious
groups to professionals and universities.

Citizen diplomats could then be involved and activated to help
restore Indonesia's image abroad to secure national programs. The
second track could also cover some of the activities or functions
of traditional diplomats namely to represent and promote.
However, it should be remembered that the contacts they make and
the activities they conduct should be based on their capacity as
"non-state actors" in order to avoid discrepancies.

Despite its military might, the United States has attached
great importance to public diplomacy for a number of years. The
U.S. administration continues to manage public diplomacy
seriously and effectively in its foreign policy. Its agencies
such as the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and the Voice of
America have been at the forefront, acting as a main tool for
U.S. propaganda against communist countries during the cold war.
Similar mechanisms exist in the United Kingdom, Germany, France
and Japan, among others.

To adapt to the challenges after the cold war, the U.S. has
gone even further. It merged the USIA and the Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency with the State Department on Oct. 1, 1999.

Last year alone the U.S. spent no less than US$3 billion on
its tools of propaganda. Still, this does not guarantee that the
conduct of its foreign policy will run smoothly as anti-American
sentiment cannot easily be suppressed.

Today public diplomacy is imperative. Therefore, it is
certainly not too late for Indonesia to start developing and
managing public diplomacy to help promote and restore its image.
However, if Indonesia, or the ministry in particular, is serious
in developing and utilizing public diplomacy as a tool of
Indonesia's foreign policy, then many things need to taken into
account.

First, clear targets and objectives as to whom public
diplomacy should be aimed at and what needs to be achieved need
to be defined. Second, well-planned and sustainable programs and
activities on what to do domestically and internationally should
be created. Third, well-trained and dedicated diplomats need to
be made available to carry out the difficult tasks. Fourth,
appropriate funding should be provided to guarantee that public
diplomacy be carried out continuously.

Nevertheless, restoring Indonesia's image through both
traditional and public diplomacy is a long-term process and
results will not come instantly.

People should be or should be made aware that they have a role
in the conduct of their country's foreign policy if they are
seriously concerned about the need to restore Indonesia's image.

For its part, the ministry should always play the central
role. However, as former foreign minister Ali Alatas pointed out
recently, our diplomats could only contribute 15 percent toward
restoring Indonesia's image while the remaining 85 percent would
greatly depend on the domestic situation.

Last but not least, promoting a good image of the situation in
Indonesia while the troubles continue is a difficult and daunting
task. It needs persistence and patience. Therefore, it is worth
seeing how far the ministry can go with public diplomacy.