Sunday Times 2
Public diplomacy: A missing link
The unexpected change of government in January this year with a mandate for good governance, stirred hope among many. Yet 100 days on, the hope risks turning into disappointment. Government leaders may give statistics of the achievement of their promises within the 100-day programme , but public sceptism is rising.
A Tamil Diaspora rally in London: Engaging them is part of public diplomacy
Is identifying instances of alleged corruption and arresting a few offenders enough? So far, no one has made it to a proper trial, let alone sentencing. Prime time television, the most influential opinion maker, features endless thrust and parry. Talk shows raise emotions rather than reason. Is anyone assessing what the people are making of this flood of sharply divergent views? With the freeing of governmental control over information, the opposition is getting an equal share of the sound bites and ripostes, but who is connecting with the public is the major question, especially with the prospect of forthcoming elections.
The Public Diplomacy (PD) theory has traditionally urged caution its use vis-a-vis its own nationals, and directed its focus primarily on foreign publics in order to avoid the dread of the “propaganda” trap. Yet, recent developments, the rise of the diaspora and social media appear to have “lifted the veil” on the previous restrictions of its use vis-a-vis its own nationals. Mexico has a comprehensive official programme directed towards engaging its huge diaspora residing in the USA to make a positive contribution to the country of origin. In neighbouring India, the Modi government has set up a discreet unit to monitor social media and advice government leaders on addressing public concerns immediately. However, unlike in India, in Sri Lanka , although ICT literacy is rising (40%), Internet penetration and use of social media is less than 10% which imposes limitations on its effectiveness as a means of gauging public opinion.
Listening and advocacy”
A main thrust of PD theory is to underline the importance of “listening” and “advocacy” (Cull, 2008) towards building long term healthy relationships with the target groups. Since there is some confusion on what this topic stands for, some explanations are in order here. For instance, the term “listening” should not be confused with its simple meaning, but rather points to the use of modern technology, monitoring software for instance, or the use of opinion polls and using that data to re-direct policy. As for “advocacy” the objective here is to build relationships, based on information technologies like the Internet which offer the possibility of two way communication. Diasporic web sites, blogs, online forums and electronic newsletters are interactive and should be engaged to provide a more balanced view of current developments. Yet in the current atmosphere of political thrust and parry in Sri Lanka, the space for such communication appears to be receding. Here, politicians seem to prefer to deliver one way speeches rather than to have two way communication with the public. The public service too, trained to be anonymous, is wary of possible confrontations with an energized public.
In this climate of uncertainty, President Maithripala Sirisena has become a beacon of hope, who speaks in an unassuming manner, with thoughtful reasoning, to the point without lecturing, and appears to reserve his strengths to bringing about compromises behind the scenes as for example on the historic 19th Amendment in Parliament. His public announcement that he will intervene wherever necessary only to protect the environment has been welcomed by all and if operationalised, will be his lasting legacy to this country.
However, a problem has arisen in the manner in which key officials are conducting business. The Bribery Commissioner, for example, does not make public statements but does not fear to take actions like asking the former President Mahinda Rajapaksa to appear before the Commission as if he were an ordinary member of the public. Former Presidents are not above the law, but courtesies are extended to them like provision of official residence, security and allowances which should have been taken into consideration. Instead, what transpired was that the former President got the opportunity on prime time tv to claim undue harassment and no doubt raised public sympathy. Even the arrest of former Minister Basil Rajapaksa could have been explained by those responsible in the police in a manner that the ensuing publicity was not just one way, giving the former Minister the platform to protest his innocence. Even if as it is suggested, these were diversionary tactics, what is in the balance is public opinion and sympathy. At the same time, the rising tide of demonstrations and agitations is having its toll on the public. Although there are no statistics available to allow sensible conclusions, there is a distinct climate of lawlessness, a tendency to take axes into one’s own hands even in private matters, which is alarming.
No one can object to the goals of transparency and the fight against corruption, yet should not these be harnessed in favour of strengthening public institutions? The recent report on SriLankan Airlines is a case in point, where shocking revelations emerged of wrongdoing on the part of the previous top management, but no consideration appears to have been given to making such exposure in a manner to protect the airline’s interest and staff morale. Thus, the banner headlines which followed the report in the international media, “Sri Lanka Airlines is corrupt” could hardly have helped sell airline tickets or maintain the enthusiasm of young workers who need to be encouraged to provide dedicated service to the national airline.
Two ministers doing a good job
Here, the work of two first time Ministers in the government must be acknowledged who have achieved results in the areas of animal rights and child rights — Wasantha Senanayake and Rosy Senananayake. Both have studied their portfolio issues, picked key areas and moved to action, bringing the public along.
In the area of elephant protection, Wasantha Senanayake has consulted widely among the officials, private sector and activists and has led the initiative to release the young elephants stolen from the wild; he has had the main culprit arrested and pointed out that even at the level of the President, there is no right to gift domestic elephants to foreign countries, yet he has desisted from stopping previously entered into legal government to government contracts which could have brought about bilateral disputes. At each turn he has put his views and actions in the public domain with rational answers to pointed questions . There is more to be done judging by letters in the press, better conditions for the animals at Dehiwela Zoo for instance or the passage of the long awaited Animal Protection Bill but people have a sense of confidence that matters are in the right hands.
Rosy Senanayake has similarly studied with experts the long standing problem of malnutrition among young children, which is thought to have emerged after the rice ration subsidy was eliminated. She has opted for a package of nutritional supplements before and after pregnancy, which will no doubt have positive resonance in the society, although the results will be seen only in the years to come. She has explained the problem in detail at several public gatherings, the process of expert consultation that was put in place and the hope for the future.
These days the Foreign Ministry is also basking in contentment; senior officers who had under the previous administration been sent to the pool on the whims of a “monitor”, are now back to work. Minister Mangal Samaraweera has kept his promise to bring back all the political Heads of Mission and a fine crop of young first time Foreign Service Heads of Missions are due to go out soon who will make the country proud.
It is time now for the Ministry to take stock of issues of communication. Some years ago, the Foreign Ministry changed the name of its division dealing with press from “publicity” to “public communications” in acknowledgment of the growing public interest and involvement in matters which used to involve mainly governments. Yet, understaffed and demoralised under the previous government, the Ministry has not been able to move forward in this area, or come to grips with the accelerated pace of technology and new media. At best, it is geared to respond to outside misinformation, this too with some delay. The dilemma is that the speed at which information is moving today renders futile traditional diplomatic instruments like press statements and releases and calls for more creative initiatives and networking, which should also involve the capacity to harness social media.
PD Strategy
Now is the time for the Ministry to take a lead, in cooperation with other concerned Ministries like Information, to create a PD strategy to engage the diaspora. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs which has its network of missions abroad and is familiar with issues affecting the image of the country, could call upon officers dealing with human rights at different Ministries as well as representatives of tourism, culture, education, broadcasting etc to think together on how to project the country in the post-conflict era. Visitors who travel in the post-war North and East see for themselves the large scale infrastructural development ,the thriving business climate and North South people to people encounters that have followed. What is missing is a reflection of these achievements in the diasporic and external media which persist in presenting images of conflict and human rights violations frozen in the past.
In a developing country where there is a perennial political competition for scarce resources and imperative domestic needs, the question is what priority will be given to projecting the country image abroad? Yet raising Sri Lanka’s image as a country at peace will bring important dividends for trade, development cooperation, tourism and investment and sustain the country’s high growth economic strategy in the long term. It will enable the building of relationships with moderate segments of the Tamil diaspora and encourage their contribution to the national reconciliation process. However, the pity is that the space for consideration of institutional approaches is receding with the current political turmoil and the uncertainty of the next elections.
(The writer is a former Sri Lanka Foreign Service Ambassador)