Final thoughts on Direct Diplomacy
Article by Ben Rowswell.
With this blogpost, Matthieu and I hand responsibility for the Direct Diplomacy web presence to our collaborator Julian Dierkes and his team at the University of British Columbia. I’ve really enjoyed the contributions Julian made both to this blog and to the study of digital diplomacy more generally, and couldn’t be happier with him taking on the leadership of this project.
It’s been three years since the government of Canada formally entered the digital diplomacy era with a series of announcements by our then foreign minister. I was an early proponent of the use of digital tools in Canadian diplomacy, and was honoured when CERIUM offered a research project with three great students to explore this brave new world.
Our first accomplishment was to walk the walk by having a serving ambassador create a digital presence. Many countries had blogging ambassadors, but this blog was the first by a Canadian one. Bureaucratic reserve is not an excuse for silence in the digital era; Canadians expect us to be transparent and sharing our thoughts online is one way to do that.
In our first year, Amal Azouz and I examined what other foreign ministries are doing and clarified some of the key terms in digital diplomacy. The form I’m most interested in is direct diplomacy, which we defined in terms of individuals being direct players in the management of global affairs. Whereas public diplomacy involves states communicating with citizens, direct diplomacy is citizens taking international action into their own hands, through the disintermediating capabilities of the internet.
In our second year, Thibaut Timmerman and I were joined by a team of talented U of T students and together we explored how citizens were doing just that. The landmark report we produced was our report and playbook on how citizen movements can run digital campaigns that have impact and longevity.
This past year, Matthieu John and I have delved more deeply, examining tools for mobilizing online communities. Like crowdfunding, which gives a role for all members in a community to interact my moving beyond words to action, spreading ownership as funds get raised.
Takeaways
A lot has changed in the government of Canada’s use of digital tools for foreign policy since 2013. Authorization for diplomats like me to speak publicly online is now taken for granted. The online presence of Global Affairs Canada has ballooned to over 400 social media accounts, and the majority of my fellow ambassadors are on Twitter if not blogging themselves.
Within government, the debate has shifted from whether diplomats should be online, to how they can achieve the greatest effect. We’re examining different platforms from Buzzfeed to Periscope. We’re building advocacy campaigns that are “digital by default” as the audiences we are trying to influence are moving online. And we’re trying to do a better job of listening by using open source analysis to separate the signal from the noise of internet chatter.
To be honest, we’ve also come across some disconnects in digital diplomacy. One disconnect I fear may be permanent concerns the audiences different people are trying to reach.
Diplomats like me are primarily interested in using digital to talk to foreign citizens. Our focus is outward, past Canada, because that’s our job. But many Canadians I’ve interacted with online these past three years want to talk to us, in hopes that they can shape policy debates.
From a diplomat’s perspective, too many policy debates are like the symphony orchestra warming up before the show begins. We’re conductors trying to align all the different players to deliver a single piece of music to decision-makers. Adding a few extra oboes and timpanis doesn’t make the conductor’s job any easier.
There are some productive exercises in which public opinion can feed into well-structured policy development exercises. But my view is that diplomats are not and should not be the only people giving our political leaders advice. Citizens should go straight to their elected representatives. This is the age of distintermediation – so skip us intermediaries and get right to the action.
New areas of investigation
For those of us inside the government, the time has come to integrate the digital tools of diplomacy with all the others. We can reach massive audiences through social media, and through genuine interaction we can shape attitudes and change international outcomes. So build digital tools directly into our strategies for advancing Canada’s interests.
For those of you outside government, go forth and embrace the role you now have to shape global affairs. Diplomacy can now be direct, not just from states to citizens but between citizens of different countries. This can take on the attributes of diplomacy if you have a clear goal for shifting an international outcome and systematically build relations and leverage them to advocate for your objective.
For my next project I plan to mobilize global citizens to help citizens inside Syria, the defining conflict of our generation. I’ll share my experiences and lessons learned in a separate blog on www.beperennial.com and on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/in/benrowswell . Join me there as you continue to join in the discussion on this site.
Now over to you Julian and the UBC team!
Social Media in International Relations: Meaningless or Menace?
(Read in French) On the one hand, countries supporting Ukraine’s territorial integrity launch a campaign of solidarity under the Twitter hashtag #unitedforukraine are derided for being ineffectual in the face of Russian hard power.
On the other hand, the Turkish Prime Minister denounces Twitter as “the worst menace to society” responsible for links between the 2013 protests that shook his country and “foreign powers.”
Opinions on the use of social media in international relations are all over the map. To some it seems a waste of time, to others a mortal threat to the most powerful institutions in the world: national governments.
Time for a deep breath. To those who reacts with derision, we would reply that social media is a tool which is increasingly used in all sectors of political and economic life, and so deserves to be used in diplomacy as well.
To those who react with fear about dark plots of foreign subversion, I would remind them that social media has no special power beyond the power of citizens talking and cooperating with one another. If a government does not fear its own citizens, it should have nothing to fear from Twitter or Facebook.
But the wild divergence in opinions about digital diplomacy also underlines how important it is for us to come to terms with these tools. As they reshape how we conduct global affairs, we need to learn how they can be used effectively, and how they can be used legitimately.
This blog aims to be a discussion by practitioners for practitioners about the role of digital tools in diplomacy.
In launching the blog, our hope is that in having actual diplomats talk about what we actually do with social media will help inject rationality and objectivity into the discussion. For nothing so demystifies a profession as being a part of it. And nothing demystifies digital tools as actually using them.
The discussions on this site will aim to accelerate the learning process as diplomats race to get up to speed with tools the rest of the world has adopted with astonishing speed. With luck, it will also help others interested in international relations understand how diplomacy is adapting to the digital world, and what opportunities are opening for them, as individuals, to play a role.
Our research team will monitor the online activity of prominent digital diplomats and the relatively few analyses that have been written about their work. Along the way we will draw on this research to address the following questions:
- How is the increasing use of digital tools transforming the traditional practices of diplomacy?
- Who are the most successful diplomats using social media and what should we learn from them?
- How should governments engage with new actors in digital diplomacy?
- If governments must act through individual diplomats in a social media world that only really responds to individuals, how should diplomats balance their institutional and individual identities?
- In a world that demands more and more transparency, how should foreign ministries balance openness with the occasional need for secrecy when negotiating or advancing national interests?
Picking up the Gauntlet Thrown by Minister Baird
[Diplomats] have traditionally been good at working with people behind closed doors. Now we are applying those skills to the very public arena of the digital world.
“In the last few months, our missions have made a lot of progress on social media. All outgoing heads of mission are getting training in it. Our services are evolving to meet the needs of a digital generation… This form of direct diplomacy is something we need to build on.
(Read in French, in Spanish) On March 27, Canada’s Foreign Minister confirmed once and for all that the internet is a primary platform for our country’s foreign policy. In a speech inaugurating the John G. Diefenbaker building beside our foreign ministry headquarters, he provided the most detailed vision yet of what this government is trying to accomplish in the world, and how it aims to do so. Social media featured very prominently in the “how.”
This is now the third public statement he has made declaring that the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development is going digital. Along the way, the public response has been positive but marked by a distinct streak of skepticism.
After the Minister’s last statement on the subject in Silicon Valley on February 7, for example, respected University of Ottawa professor Roland Paris acknowledged that “Baird deserves credit for finally acknowledging that a genuine embrace of digital diplomacy is necessary.” But Paris added that to make it successful means “allowing diplomats to communicate in the relatively informal and rapid style of these media.” Hinting he was not convinced this is likely to happen, he concluded that “Baird’s avowed willingness to let Canadian diplomats take chances and make mistakes will need to be demonstrated, not just stated.”[1]
Let me speak here as a Canadian diplomat myself. I agree the government needs to take a risk to embrace the full power of social media. After all, it is always harder to be coherent when speaking in hundreds or thousands of voices rather than one.
But to make this work, we diplomats need to take risks as well. Expressing ourselves in public, on the record, in real time to all possible audiences at once – these do not come naturally to public servants.
This blog represents my effort to take that essential first step. Our Minister has laid the gauntlet by calling on us to “move fast, try new things and not be afraid to make mistakes”. I want to help other diplomats pick it up by showing how we can use the tools to improve the work we do. What better way than to use the internet itself to show how it can be used?
My hope is that many of colleagues will join me in embracing these new tools. Some already have and done great work establishing Canada’s presence online. Others are still reticent. Having proselytized the use of social media from within our foreign ministry for close to three years now, I’ve come across three prominent objections.
So for those of you that still hesitate, let me address these three concerns here.
1) I don’t have the knowledge or skills required to use social media
This is the easiest to deal with. Using Facebook and Twitter is not exactly rocket science. Much of social media can be learned by simply doing. In order to help strategize, line up resources, find your voice and measure your performance there are training courses that take no more than a day or two.
2) I don’t have the time to use social media in addition to all my other responsibilities
The unstated corollary of this objection is that communications is not a priority relative to other tasks. This goes to one’s view of what a diplomat’s basic function in life is. For those based at headquarters I might agree; the principal tasks at home are the formulation of policy, providing assistance to Canadian companies, the administration of a worldwide network, and support to ministers.
But for diplomats posted abroad, particularly ambassadors, your task is to promote, explain and convince other countries of the merits of your policies. You may spend a lot of time developing networks, seeking information, trying to understand local cultures and knowing who’s who. But the purpose of mastering the local context is to promote your national interests more effectively. If you are not communicating, you’re simply not your job.
Do social media have to be part of your communications effort? Well, they probably are for each of the politicians, journalists, investors and business partners you’ll be dealing with. If they can’t afford to ignore the treasure trove of information and forego the opportunity to convince others that social media represent, how can you?
3) I will be punished if I say something online that displeases the powers that be
A colleague of mine once expressed the dilemma tweeting civil servants face in particularly stark terms. “Social media extolls the role of the individual” he said “but when we represent a government we are NOT individuals – our job is to promote the views of the government we represent.”
I couldn’t disagree more. Yes, public servants do have a responsibility to execute the platform our elected leaders have selected – these are what we call our “democratic values” in the Public Service Code of Values and Ethics. But I believe that we promote the government’s views most effectively when we speak in our own voice. The skill a public servant is to bring all that he or she offers as an individual to advancing the collective agenda the citizens of Canada have selected through our political system.
Balancing our individual personalities and our collective responsibilities need not be difficult. When choosing what to say online in our professional capacities, we must bear in mind what the government thinks and what it wants to achieve, and then make sure that we do not contradict that. Within those parameters, there is an awful lot that we can say and how we say it.
A State Department official once boiled it down to four simple rules they follow in U.S. digital diplomacy:
- Don’t be untrue
- Don’t be boring
- Don’t embarrass yourself
- Don’t embarrass the government
I am entirely confident that diplomats can follow these four rules. Now that the Canadian government has clearly indicated it welcomes, even expects its diplomats to use social media in advancing our collective interests, we have no excuse not to try.
directdiplomacy.wordpress.com 
Recent Comments