Sunday 17 October 2010

What is the most significant change in the nature of diplomacy?


Ronaldo; Brazilian United Nations Development Programme Representitive first, World Class footballer second.

The most significant change in the nature of diplomacy must be the use of celebrity status. A month ago at the UN summit in New York, celebrities including Ricky Martin, Gisele Bundchen and Mia Farrow pushed for Action on the Millenium Development Goals. Models, sporting heroes, actors and actors wives made their way down the red carpet, stopping only to strike a pose for Hello magazine, to an international conference aiming to tackle issues that require global participation.
In this day and age I believe the majority of issues and problems that bring global representatives together are considered that of 'low politics', for example, environmental issues. In order to persuade a government to support a convention an organisation such as the UN needs to use a familiar personality with whom the public can relate to because public opinion is vital to how a government will then tackle international concerns.
Fundamentally diplomacy has to involve communication, negotitation and representation and this remains true of modern diplomacy as it was a century ago. However they all take the form of different methods due to technological changes and the use of celebrity. For example, feature films highlighting the issue of illegal wars and video appeals for floods in asia can be made to draw attention to the problems, taking full advantage of the way we now use the mdia to communicate in order to bring diplomacy out in the open, in full view of the public rather than behind closed doors.
I think organisations such as the UN are very clever to see how they need to draw attention to the gaps governments around the world are failing to fill by using famous faces to bring their countries together to organise solutions; celebrities are the new diplomats puppeteered by NGO's.

1 comment:

  1. That's an interesting argument. I don't think many writers would agree that the emergence of celebrity diplomacy is the MOST significant development in diplomatic practice (even Andrew Cooper, who has written a book on the subject wouldn't go that far); but you seem to be referring to celebrities as a manifestation of a broader development, viz. the increasing importance of image in world politics and the emphasis on public diplomacy. You are right to claims that many states and non-state actors are keen to court celebrities as a way of gaining public support.

    However, the trend is not entirely unproblematic, as you indicate in your final point - are celebrities merely puppets? And just how much can they impact the power realities of world politics?

    ReplyDelete