The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2020

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | JULY-AUGUST 2020 43 context for communication and engagement on the global stage is fast changing. The rise of China and other major emerg- ing economies are engendering tectonic power shifts in world affairs. At the same time, there is sharpening domestic discord, especially in the West, on the nature and extent of a nation’s global commitment and engagement. Meanwhile, global eco- nomic growth in the coming decade will be driven by regional markets like Asia; and the COVID-19 pandemic has not changed that trajectory. So uncertainties abound as the global political and economic order continues to evolve and the primacy of the United States continues to be contested. Likewise, the audiences for public diplomacy are also chang- ing. Much of the change is evidenced in the tides of demography, from population aging in developed economies to a “youth bulge” in developing countries. Overall, the audience is becom- ing more urban. And the population mix in many Western nations is undergoing ethnic remapping due to migration pat- terns. We now have more people than ever in human history joining the global middle class, and they turn to digital platforms for news and information and for social interaction. Many more are living transnational lives facilitated by wider access to trans- portation and communication across national borders. Concurrently, we also face an impassioned and polarized public at home and abroad, as nations experience crises of iden- tity in light of an increasingly culturally diverse daily existence. In this respect, what’s old is new again: The rising populist fervor in many parts of the world is the latest manifestation of the ten- sions between the two fundamental human forces of interest and identity in social decision and human action. Admittedly, digital technology is transforming the tools and platforms for public diplomacy. Digitization and advanced analytics are changing the way people seek information and stay connected. Virtual reality and augmented reality tools are redefining how people experience their worlds. Artificial intel- ligence and automation are set to reshape the future workforce and alter the meaning of work and leisure. This also includes automated communication placements with better targeting. The acceleration of digital technology has dissolved the bound- aries between domestic and abroad, making the interaction of national concerns and international engagement ever more dynamic and interdependent. Another important aspect of the disruption is that the stake- holder communities on the global scene have broadened. Nonstate actors and diverse institutions, such as cities, multi- national businesses and civil society organizations, are increas- ingly engaged in confronting local and global challenges. The stakeholder communities for public diplomacy have not only expanded; they are also greatly empowered by digital technology. The COVID-19 pandemic will likely further expose the fault lines between national and cultural communities, heightening the existing tensions in globalization manifested in the mobil- ity of goods, information and people. Decades ago, in his Moral Man and Immoral Society (1932), theologian and social critic Reinhold Niebuhr made this observation: “A technological civilization has created an international community so interde- pendent as to require, even if not powerful or astute enough to achieve, ultimate social harmony. While there are halting efforts to create an international mind and conscience, capable of cop- ing with this social situation, modern man has progressed only a little beyond his fathers in extending his ethical attitudes beyond the group to which he is organic and which possesses symbols vivid enough to excite his social sympathy.” While we may be humbled by our own fragilities in the face of a pandemic, this crisis has also revealed the weakness of our imagination to transcend the politics of negativity and to expand social cooperation. These conditions and dynamics point to the basic reality of growing diplomatic fluidity and a fast-changing communication landscape for public diplomacy. The disruptions are sweeping. So how should we rethink and reconfigure the practice of PD? Here are some suggestions. Rethinking PD: Some Suggestions Take a network view. Nowadays, individuals and organizations can easily develop networks of interactions through digital tech- nology, potentially reaching a large and even a global audience. Focusing on relationships rather thanmerely messages, a social network approach allows us to see a nation’s position in its opera- tional environment, and to identify andmobilize key influencers both online and offline to achieve scaled and sustained impact. Granted, relationship-building has always been a cornerstone of public diplomacy. The difference is that when relationships are viewed as isolated entities, we emphasize one pair of actors and their relationships at a time. In contrast, a “network perspective” represents a more holistic approach by considering multiple pairs of relationships simultaneously and by attending to how relation- ships influence the change and evolution of other relationships. To design effective public diplomacy programs, it becomes ever more important to view the sprawling complexity of the information ecosystem as a global web of communication net- works. Take the example of international exchange. Formal and informal networks established through exchanges have strategic value. But building, maintaining and sustaining such networks