Adapting Public Diplomacy to the Populist Challenge
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Andrew F. Cooper in
Current site
Google Scholar
Summary
Public diplomacy has been externally directed via a strategy of assertive reputation-building. In an era of insurgent populism, this model faces strong backlash, driven by the image of public diplomacy being disconnected from domestic publics. Under these conditions, an opportunistic set of ascendant political leaders — even those located at the international system’s core — have considerable incentive to diminish ‘their’ own diplomats as part of a wider campaign to stigmatize the traditional establishment. While more attention needs to be directed to the causes of this disconnection between diplomats and public, this article highlights a number of key ingredients in a menu of adaptation to the populist challenge. Above all, the focus of engagement in public diplomacy should be broadened to include domestic as well as foreign audiences. Disruption, it must be emphasized, does not mean the end of public diplomacy. Rather, public diplomacy must take a domestic turn.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 2785 | 456 | 76 |
| Full Text Views | 979 | 70 | 6 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 797 | 104 | 12 |
Adapting Public Diplomacy to the Populist Challenge
In: The Hague Journal of DiplomacySearch for other papers by Andrew F. Cooper in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Summary
Public diplomacy has been externally directed via a strategy of assertive reputation-building. In an era of insurgent populism, this model faces strong backlash, driven by the image of public diplomacy being disconnected from domestic publics. Under these conditions, an opportunistic set of ascendant political leaders — even those located at the international system’s core — have considerable incentive to diminish ‘their’ own diplomats as part of a wider campaign to stigmatize the traditional establishment. While more attention needs to be directed to the causes of this disconnection between diplomats and public, this article highlights a number of key ingredients in a menu of adaptation to the populist challenge. Above all, the focus of engagement in public diplomacy should be broadened to include domestic as well as foreign audiences. Disruption, it must be emphasized, does not mean the end of public diplomacy. Rather, public diplomacy must take a domestic turn.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 2785 | 456 | 76 |
| Full Text Views | 979 | 70 | 6 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 797 | 104 | 12 |