Abstract
Diplomacy is a key tool for conducting foreign policy, and it has experienced changes throughout the past centuries. Information and communication technologies (ICTs) and social media platforms began playing a highly important role in achieving diplomatic objectives leading to the emergence of the term “digital diplomacy.” Being one of the main trends in contemporary diplomatic communication, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, taking a closer look at digital diplomacy is worthwhile. This chapter analyzes the main characteristics of digital diplomacy as well as its opportunities and challenges, compares digital and traditional diplomacy, and aims to determine whether traditional diplomacy is in decline. The author argues that traditional diplomacy is not antiquated; traditional and digital diplomacy complement each other. Diplomats will need to function in a hybrid regime, both in offline and online environments. Utilizing digital diplomacy will improve the effectiveness of traditional diplomacy contributing to more multifaceted, comprehensive, and results-oriented foreign policy.
TopIntroduction
Technology has been developing at a rapid pace and has permeated all aspects of our lives. The increased use of digital communication technologies, such as the Internet and social media, has significantly influenced the way foreign policy is conducted and has become an indivisible part of diplomatic work. Diplomats use digital tools in their daily work, from negotiations and representation, to communication and policy analysis. Although the traditional form of conducting diplomacy - the interaction between different government representatives, remains crucial, individuals and non-governmental organizations started playing a significant role in international affairs.
Broadly defined, digital diplomacy is “the use of the Internet and new Information Communications Technologies to help carry out diplomatic objectives” (Hanson, 2012), while “the digitalization of diplomacy refers to the overall impact digital tools have had on diplomacy ranging from the creation of smartphone applications for delivering consular aid to the adoption of new norms and values such as practicing more transparent diplomacy” (Diplomat Magazine, 2017).
The use of the Internet, mainly social media has brought millions into open conversation spaces. With more than two billion people using Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat and other social media platforms daily, digital connectivity has made the world smaller and allowed for unlimited dialogue and information exchange between people from around the world. In countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen, in the period of the Arab Spring, rising action plans such as protests made up of thousands, have been organized through social media such as Facebook and Twitter (Kassim, 2012). In addition, social media platforms have been actively used to influence public opinion. Thus, digital diplomacy has significantly affected the practice of public diplomacy. While moving online is pivotal for contemporary diplomacy, it carries some challenges including increased risks of dis-information and mis-information that negatively influence its effectiveness.
Digital technologies gained even greater significance during the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. “The pandemic has severely tested Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ (MFA) capacity to offer timely and effective consular assistance, to protect the national image of their countries as the crisis escalated, and to counter the digital disinformation spread by an anxious public or by strategically minded actors” (Bjola & Manor, 2020). Moreover, the pandemic demonstrated the need for MFAs to adapt to a new environment, upgrade digital know-how and develop the ability to think digitally “outside the box.”
Considering the significance of the digitalization trend in diplomacy and the fact that digitalization does not simply include the adoption of digital tools but also, influences norms and working procedure of diplomats and diplomatic institutions, it is essential to grasp the influence of technological advancements on diplomacy, understand what are major characteristics of digital diplomacy, and what challenges and opportunities digital diplomacy might bring. Moreover, it is crucial to analyze whether digital diplomacy might replace traditional diplomacy.
Despite the availability of some research in this field, analyzing the above-mentioned topics, reviewing existent works from a contemporary perspective considering the impact of COVID-19 on diplomacy, will provide interesting additional insights to the matter. Existent studies lack a comprehensive analysis of the benefits and the risks of digital diplomacy. This chapter will attempt to bring together the key advantages and disadvantages of utilizing digital tools in diplomatic practice. Moreover, exploring the interconnection between digital and traditional diplomacy will be an important added-value of this chapter. The chapter aims to contribute to the existing research on digital diplomacy by dealing with issues that have yet to be investigated by scholars as the process of digitalization of diplomacy is ongoing.
Chapter’s hypothesis: Digital diplomacy does not intend to replace traditional face-to-face diplomacy. Traditional and digital diplomacy complement rather than compete with each other. Digital diplomacy provides significant opportunities to project foreign policy positions to domestic and foreign audiences more effectively. The benefits of digital diplomacy prevail over the risks. Diplomacy will operate in a hybrid regime in the years to come.
Key Terms in this Chapter
Nation Branding: The process of building, managing, and promoting a particular self-image and a unique identity to improve international reputation of a country that will most effectively serve its national interests. Contemporary diplomats are actively involved in nation branding through working not only with foreign governments but with foreign audiences in general.
Digital Diplomacy: The use of the Internet and various social media tools to carry out diplomatic objectives. Digital diplomacy implies expanding diplomatic practice from government-to-government communication to public diplomacy that allows for reaching both domestic and foreign publics.
Conventional/Traditional Diplomacy: The work conducted by diplomats who represent a sending state in another state. Conventional diplomacy implies conducting negotiations with representatives of a foreign country to help a sending government pursue its foreign policy objectives and protect its national interests. In a traditional sense, conventional diplomacy entails government-to-government communication.
Diaspora: People living abroad, far from their ancestral homelands but identify with a “homeland.”
Digitalization of Diplomacy: A process of adopting digital tools in diplomatic practice and an overall impact digital tools have had on diplomacy.
Virtual Embassy: Establishment of a virtual embassy implies using the Internet to establish a virtual presence in a particular part of the world. If a traditional embassy or consulate does not exist, a virtual embassy may provide e-services to people from sending and receiving states.
Zoom Bombing: Unwanted intrusion by uninvolved parties/uninvited attendees into other people’s virtual meetings. Zoom bombing might include sharing negative, disturbing or offensive content to ruin a meeting.
Zoom Diplomacy: The use of Zoom, a video conferencing platform to conduct diplomacy. The global COVID-19 pandemic has transformed the ways governments work together; Zoom diplomacy has provided new opportunities to continue international and regional communication and cooperation uninterrupted.
ChatBot: A form of artificial intelligence used in messaging applications. Chatbots are based on an automated program and communicate with people like a human being and are not limited by time and physical location.
Public Diplomacy: Direct communication and engagement of governments with foreign public that aims to influence mass perceptions in the best interests of a government and country’s foreign policy goals.