Search results

The aim of this study was to examine the early stages of the COVID-19 outbreak and the international communication management of Chinese diplomats as a case for extending the definition of intermestic public diplomacy. The goal was to reveal how Beijing subtly used both domestic and foreign social media to organize a network for communication about COVID-19 and purposefully soften the highly centralized and hierarchical political propaganda of the Communist Party of China (CPC).

Based on the literature on digital public diplomacy, the authors applied the existing concept of intermestic to Chinese politics in order to demonstrate the digitalization of public diplomacy, along with its forms and strategies under an authoritarian regime. A hybrid methodology combining quantitative network analysis and qualitative discourse analysis permits examination of China's intermestic online communication network dynamics, shedding light on how such an intermestic practice promoted Chinese values and power to international publics in the early stages of the COVID-19 crisis.

The authors’ findings extend the implications of intermestic public diplomacy from a democratic context to an authoritarian one. By analyzing the content of public diplomacy and para-diplomatic social media accounts in China and abroad at the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis, the authors outlined China's early crisis management, explaining its intermestic public diplomacy transmission modes and strategies. Moreover, the authors identified changes in the narrative strategies of Chinese diplomats and journalists during this process.

The findings of this study underline that Beijing established a narrative-making virtual communication structure for disseminating favorable Chinese strategic narratives and voices through differentiated communication on domestic and foreign social media platforms. Such intermestic communication strategies were particularly evident and even further weaponized by Beijing in its large-scale Wolf Warrior diplomacy in the spring of 2020. Thus, the study’s findings help readers understand how China digitalized its public diplomacy, its digital communication patterns and strategies.

On the one hand, geopolitical uncertainty and the popularity of social media have contributed to the evolution of the intermestic model of public diplomacy. This model allows actors to coordinate homogenous and differentiated communication practices to deploy their influence. On the other hand, the authors did not examine how intermestic audiences perceive and receive public diplomacy practices. In future studies, scholars should measure the agenda-setting capacity of diplomatic actors by examining the effects of such intermestic communication efforts.

Although a quintessentially intermestic issue, immigration policy is usually analyzed as a one-level (domestic or international) policy question, and existing theories essentially talk past each other while failing to explain changes over time. I develop a domestic-international model of migration policy-making which explores the ability of Congress, the president, and migrant-sending states to influence outcomes. I examine the U.S.-Mexican Bracero Program (1942–1964), and I find that my model strongly outperforms existing one-level theories of migration policy-making. I conclude by exploring the current immigration policy environment, and I argue that it too is best understood as a two-level process.

This article explores two gaps in the literature on European Union (EU) crises: firstly, the external effects of the crises on EU actorness and its relations with other countries and regions and, secondly, the uniqueness of the EU crises when compared to other world regions. The article explores these questions and argues that the crises did affect external views on the EU and its role in the world due to the influence of third country perspectives on its actorness and its “intermestic nature,” but that the EU is not the only regional organization in crisis. As the case of Latin American regionalism shows, other regions have suffered from common systemic factors at the global level as well as from the decreased EU support of regionalism abroad.

The European External Action Service (EEAS) is a relatively new diplomatic service established in 2010. In previous analyses, the authors noted a dominance of security and foreign policy messages emanating from the EEAS, demonstrating the European Union (EU)'s negotiating power. It was clear it had discovered the benefits of public diplomacy, but rather practised traditional diplomacy on public diplomacy specific platforms. The authors aim to pursue the monitoring of the EEAS’ strategy, covering 2019 and 2020, to understand how the use of Twitter supports the evolution of the EU foreign policy.

Questioning if the EEAS is entering the second phase of its life cycle (launched in 2010, its introduction phase was under Katherine Ashton, 2009–2014, followed by Federica Mogherini, 2014–2019, and Josep Borrell, 2019–2024), the authors carried out a content analysis on 765 tweets. The authors used the MARPE Diplo methodological framework to compare how the EU uses public diplomacy through its EEAS to negotiate its own interests with non-EU parties under the presidency of Federica Mogherini (period 1), during the transition period (period 2) and under the presidency of Joseph Borrell (period 3).

Based on the comparison with their previous studies, the authors demonstrate that, over the years, the overall discourse of the EEAS is much more oriented towards public diplomacy.

The present study has two limitations. The first refers to the sampling of the participants involved in the citizen science experiment: they belong to a homogeneous age category and similar education level which might have biased their analysis. Second, the authors acknowledge the usual limitations linked to citizen science. However, the authors acknowledge a growing emphasis on the outcomes for society involving citizens and including partnerships between the public and scientists as well as an increased public engagement in policy processes.

The research leads into new insights regarding the European-centred translation of the EEAS messages, compared to the off-centred view of non-European contributors.

The citizen science approach allows to integrate the targeted public to apply public diplomacy content analysis.

This case study is based on the principles of citizen science and demonstrates the importance of an off-centred approach in the analysis of the practices of public diplomacy.

The purpose of this research is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the EU's public diplomacy – towards both domestic and external audiences – during times of crisis. The EU's public diplomacy is examined across six major crises: the Eurozone crisis (2008), the Ukrainian crisis (2014), the migrant crisis (2015), the Brexit referendum (2016), the new transatlantic relationship (2017) and the COVID-19 pandemic (2020). The goal of examining these crises in conjunction is to derive policy-relevant insights.

This article adopts a problem-driven approach – the problem being how successful is the EU at public diplomacy during times of crisis – that draws theoretical and empirical insights from Communication Studies, International Relations and EU studies via a “strategic narratives” framework. It situates the EU as a unique public diplomacy actor, one which is becoming more prominent due to the mediatisation of diplomacy, especially driven by the advent of cyberspace.

The article finds that the EU has been experiencing a cycle of crises that have affected the political, economic, symbolic and social foundations of the common project. The EU has had some notable success – such as restoring confidence at the height of the Eurozone crisis – and some notable challenges – such as effectively combatting disinformation. Regardless, the EU has the potential to better manage these and future crises by engaging in an effective public diplomacy strategy that tells a shared European story that informs and inspires people, both domestically and externally.

The article offers an original examination of the EU's public diplomacy response to six different crises. It looks at different types of crises and utilises concepts from different social science perspectives. It offers novel strategic and policy recommendations.

This paper aims to examine the effects of domestic structure forces on “sub-national” foreign policy (SFP); an analytical concept provides a suitable operational framework for research on international activities of sub-national entities or regions.

The paper is carried out on the basis of a theoretical framework proposed by the author. First, the dependent variable is defined. Then, domestic structure is broken down into four variables, including legal grounds, the level of autonomy, the type of intergovernmental relations and institutionalization. A comparative method is used to examine the validity of the theoretical framework.

The paper finds out that domestic structural forces influence level and form of SFP with some regularity. The influence of these forces on SFP can be explained, as they recur and have such consistent effects that they create patterns and regularities in SFP. Such regularities can be detected through systematic analysis.

The topic of SFP is relatively controversial because of academic debate over international agency of substate actors. However, it is a worthwhile subject of research, as it has the potential to revolutionize research in foreign policy analysis. Moreover, the phenomenon of SFP is in need of theorizing and comparison as the literature on SFP is still in its infancy.