INTRODUCTION
Academically,
diplomacy is defined as "a As GR Berridge analyzes, the main purpose of
diplomacy is "to enable countries to secure their foreign policy goals
without the use of violence, propaganda, or the law".(Berridge, 2015). In other words, "diplomacy is a way for
countries to achieve their foreign policy"..
The term
'public diplomacy' was raised in 1965 by Edmund Gullion with the definition of
"Public diplomacy with regard to the influence of public attitudes towards
the establishment and implementation of foreign policy. Includes planting
public opinion by the government in other countries, group interaction and national
interest in one country with another country; reporting of foreign affairs, as
well as its impact on intercultural communication policies and processes" (Cull, 2008) . According to Nye, "public diplomacy is
an instrument that governments use to mobilize soft power resources to
communicate with and attract the public from other countries, not just their
governments". (Nye Jr, 2008).
East Asia is
an international region known as the region whose economy is growing fastest in
line with the growth of public diplomacy investment and cultural relations that
are also growing significantly, but in fact East Asia is also a region
vulnerable to conflict and increased tensions between leading neighboring
countries, where tensions in the East Asia region can explode at any time and
pose a threat of war between countries. Although, East Asia as an international
region has produced two of the world's three leading economic powers (Melissen &
Sohn, 2016). With the situation of East Asia region
vulnerable to conflict of competition and friction between countries in East
Asia, it is not uncommon to damage the image or reputation of a country,
therefore public diplomacy becomes a very serious tool to restore a positive
image and realize the future of the region.
Many
countries have used public diplomacy as a tool to give other countries a good
view of their countries. This becomes very important for a country, because of
the huge impact of a country's bad image that will affect cooperation
relations. One of the uses of public diplomacy has also been used in the early
20th century by major Countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States,
and the Soviet Union also used public diplomacy as their attempt to inform and
spread their ideology, which it aimed to launch the introduction of their
ideology and its spread to other countries.
To achieve
the goal that a country wants to aim for, the use of resources used in public
diplomacy must also appeal to foreign public. Otherwise, public diplomacy
cannot function optimally. As in the three East Asian countries, namely Japan,
South Korea, and China are starting to compete to increase their soft power.
Japan is valued as a superpower, South Korea as an economic miracle and Hallyu,
and China as a military power, high economic competitiveness, and not to miss
the role of culture as a source of soft power from each of them.
The People's
Republic of China (PRC) as one of the countries in the East Asia region, is
also a country that uses public diplomacy to gain a good image in the eyes of
the international world. China spends more of its funds to be used in public
diplomacy compared to other countries in the Asian region. Noted in media
reports, China has spent about $US9 a year on public diplomacy as well as other
activities intended to boost its soft power. In the process of establishing a
good image for the country, China has used classic propaganda, such as lending
pandas to foreign zoos or by playing "ping-pong diplomacy" with
America in an effort to improve China's positive image abroad. However, then in
the late 1990s, this ad hoc approach began to be abandoned because it was
considered less systematic in building China's positive image and less
significant in the use of soft power for the improvement of Chinese public
diplomacy (Hall &
Smith, 2013).
The Chicago
Council on Global Affairs, also reported that the soft power that has been done
by China is far below Japan. So of course, this will affect the public
perception of china's political power and soft power. Japan is also a country
that successfully enjoys the results of its soft power resources, namely,
economic success and also the high level of education among Japanese people,
which has become an object of admiration for the whole world. Japan is also the
first non-Western country to attract Westerners with japanese
technology products such as Toyota, Honda, and Sony. The development of the
machinery and electronics industry was initiated by the state, and became the
driving force for the rise of Asia which was hit by the economic crisis in the
late 20th century. The appeal of Japanese culture, is also an element of
Japan's soft power, ranging from fashion, music, design, Japanese food,
including anime and manga (comics).
Japan's soft
power instruments have come under the control of the Japanese government. The
Japanese government has embraced the concept of soft power as a tool in foreign
affairs and is used to increase the attractiveness of the country and Japan's
national status in the international world. Japan is also using its public
diplomacy to establish symbiotic relations with China and South Korea. (Hall &
Smith, 2013). Namun, ternyata terdapat batasan terhadap Jepang regarding the use of soft power especially in the
East Asia region, this is due to Japan's failure to fulfill its imperialistic
past. Japan's "unapologetic" foreign policy is highly controversial
and an obstacle to Japan's intraregional reconciliation process. This then
impacted Japan's soft power, the negative policy was judged to only exacerbate
hostility and suspicion towards Japan by its East Asian neighbors. So Japan
should have four strong pillars in its use of soft power, namely, military,
economic, cultural, and foreign policy.
In addition,
since the late 1970s, the Japanese government has been active in increasing its
international influence by providing ODA funds to help underdeveloped
countries. However, the "cash diplomacy" held by Japan and in the
realm of ODA performance, in 2015, has not succeeded in strengthening Japan's
international reputation and influence.
South Korea
is also one of the three major East Asian powers in carrying out its public
diplomacy. South Korean cultural wave or known as "Hallyu", was
beginning with the export of television dramas from South Korea, and managed to
bring a positive image influence to the popularity of South Korean pop culture
in other countries. Along with the increasing economic achievements of South
Korea and the success of democracy in the late 1980s, and providing more of a
strong foundation for the advancement of public diplomacy i.e. economy, and
culture aided by the powerful information technology of South Korean popular
culture, such as drama, song, food has succeeded in attracting foreign public
to know South Korean culture and then adopted as a tool of public diplomacy (Melissen &
Sohn, 2016).
During lee myung-bak's presidency, from 2008 to 2013, Lee Myungbak was very keen to develop South Korea's soft power
by promoting national image as well as national values. Myungbak
promised that it would develop a variety of soft power instruments by combining
cultural and technological elements that later became South Korea's creative
industries, expanding the number of ODA, and contributing to global security
and peace. However, unfortunately in the midst of his presidential trip, Myungbak faced difficulties due to South Korea's declining
international popularity, over the hostile reaction of North and South Korea.
In addition, the south Korean government's increased spread of culture through
the "Hall of the Korean Wave" in China and other Asian countries has
also drawn criticism from China and sparked a backlash from other countries,
which it has seen as an aggressive move by the South Korean government (Melissen &
Sohn, 2016).
In addition,
the obstacles to public diplomacy that South Korea must face, are the response
of the South Korean people who are frustrated with the South Korean government,
and criticism of domestic politics that has reached the level of
"political phobia", so that the incident again degrades the image of
South Korea, because it is considered that South Korea is too concerned with
the use of soft power over support on human rights issues, and the success of
the democratization process. Therefore, it is necessary to improve South
Korea's national image and it requires the development of an active public
diplomacy strategy and in accordance with the needs of the country.
This research
is expected to contribute to filling the gap in current studies, especially the
study of the use of public diplomacy in the East Asia region. The authors hope
that this research can contribute as a support for the study of the efforts of
countries in the East Asia region in the reconciliation of public diplomacy in
the East Asia region since the global financial crisis hit in 2008, so that in
2008 there has been increased public diplomacy activities in the East Asia
region collectively which is faster to recover from the crisis than other
regions..
political
process in which political entities have official relations with each other in
the international sphere". Christopher Hill emphasizes the way and purpose
of diplomacy that diplomacy is the way to get the path desired by a political
entity in international politics, as well as an important instrument for
building international stability. (Hill, 2003). Malone pointed to the different purposes of
public diplomacy again, he defined it as direct communication with foreigners
with the aim of influencing their thinking, as well as their government. (Hill, 2003). The function of diplomacy also includes the creation
and implementation of foreign policy; the traditional functions of
representation, reporting, communication, negotiation, and maneuvering, as well
as taking care of the interests of citizens abroad.
The role of
diplomacy in international relations as well as at the domestic level is very
important because it is an important variable for peace and conflict South
Korea is too concerned with the use of soft power over support on human rights
issues, and the success of the democratization process. Therefore, it is
necessary to improve South Korea's national image and it requires the
development of an active public diplomacy strategy and in accordance with the
needs of the country.
This
research is expected to contribute to filling the gap in current studies,
especially the study of the use of public diplomacy in the East Asia region.
The authors hope that this research can contribute as a support for the study
of the efforts of countries in the East Asia region in the reconciliation of
public diplomacy in the East Asia region since the global financial crisis hit
in 2008, so that in 2008 there has been increased public diplomacy activities
in the East Asia region collectively which is faster to recover from the crisis
than other regions..
political
process in which political entities have official relations with each other in
the international sphere". Christopher Hill emphasizes the way and purpose
of diplomacy that diplomacy is the way to get the path desired by a political
entity in international politics, as well as an important instrument for
building international stability. (Hill, 2003). Malone pointed to the different purposes of
public diplomacy again, he defined it as direct communication with foreigners
with the aim of influencing their thinking, as well as their government. (Hill, 2003). The function of diplomacy also includes the creation
and implementation of foreign policy; the traditional functions of
representation, reporting, communication, negotiation, and maneuvering, as well
as taking care of the interests of citizens abroad.
The role of
diplomacy in international relations as well as at the domestic level is very
important because it is an important variable for peace and conflict.
Literature
Review
The author
has reviewed several literature reviews that have related topics or frame of
thought that will be written in this research.
The first
study found by the authors was a study written by Trisni
(2012) with the title “Pencapaian Kepentingan
Korea Selatan melalui Diplomasi
Publik Korean Wave” (Trisni,
Isnarti, Sinulingga, & Ferdian, 2018) The first study found by the author was a
study written by Trisni (2012) with the title where
the purpose of this study is to explain the difficulty of South Korea in the
formation of pre-existing images due to the problems faced by the South Korean
government regarding this image. Image is rated as something important for a
country. Big countries are always trying to improve their own image because it
can facilitate various interests both economic and other interests, related to
their country's policies.
The research
uses the concept of Public Diplomacy which explains that the implementation of
traditional public diplomacy is government driven where the government plays a
big role in the implementation of public diplomacy. It can be concluded that
traditional public diplomacy has several supporting components, including (1)
the government as the organizer of public diplomacy; (2) Foreign public which
is the target as the implementation of diplomacy; (3) information, culture,
education and sources of state attractions as media used to conduct public
diplomacy; and (4) foreign public interest and impartiality as the purpose of
its implementation.
The
conclusion that can be drawn from the research is that in general Korean Wave
succeeded in achieving the goal of introducing Korean culture to foreign
communities. However, Korean Wave has not succeeded in achieving the interests
desired by the government because the implementation of public diplomacy aimed
at achieving the interests of the state must get intense coordination from the
government.
The second
study was from Veronica (2014) under the title Rivalry China and Japan In East
Asian Regional Institutions (Veronica, 2015) with the aim to find out how the area called
the grand chessboard from geopolitical struggles has a high competition,
especially between the two countries that have the power, namely China and
Japan. The concept used by researchers is rivalry by using the perspective of
realism.
Two regional
powers in east Asia, Japan and China, have great potential to be the driving
factors for the establishment of regional institutions in the East Asia region.
The interdependence between the two did not stop the rivalry for influence
between the two countries. This rivalry is exacerbated by a history of
entrenched hostility, distrust, and competition in improving military
capabilities that ultimately leads to great competition between the two. Japan
and China's leadership rivalry over regional institutions is evident in Japan's
efforts to intensify its role in several existing regional institutions to curb
China's rapid progress in terms of economy, diplomacy and security in the Asia
Pacific region. Meanwhile, China is using multilateral forums in the region to
strengthen its position as a new regional power, especially after shifting
Japan economically in 2010.
Both China
and Japan have obstacles in becoming leaders in the region, especially East
Asia. Both countries have to fight hard in gaining confidence and trust from
other countries in the region as major players. And put forward trust and good
relations over their ambitions as regional leaders amid distrust of other Asian
countries.
Japan's
obstacles are (1) Japan still faces a bad history during the Pacific war that
leaves suspicions from other Asian countries; (2) Japan's proximity to the U.S.
becomes an obstacle because the U.S. often makes Japan subservient; (3) As a
capitalist democracy, Japan is identified as part of the west which poses a
dilemma for Japan to become a bridge between west and east.
While some
obstacles owned by China namely (1) China has the nature of bullying in
addressing problems, especially disputes; (2) lack of transparency shown by the
Chinese government; (3) China's foreign policy tends to be expansive and
expansionist.
The third
study found by the author was a study from Kamala (2018) titled
"Globalization of Japan and Korea Entertainment Industry: Influence on
Public Perspectives Between Countries". In his research the authors aim to
find out the impact of Industrial Globalization between the two countries.
Globalization itself can be interpreted as integrase economy, technology,
politics, culture, and social aspects between countries in the world. Because
one of the aspects that are strongly affected by globalization is culture.
The theory
used in analyzing the problem is Public Diplomacy with the concept of
liberalism, as well as soft power diplomacy. Public diplomacy is an inseparable
form of diplomacy from soft power. Joseph Nye (2004:5-6) states that soft power
as a power is the ability to shape a party's choice.
But the
conclusion of the study proves that the use of the entertainment industry as an
instrument of public diplomacy by Japan and Korea towards each other has not
fully had the effectiveness in changing and influencing the public perspective
of the opposing country. It was proven by the negative reaction from the public
based on rising tensions between the two countries in 2011 due to the Dokdo-Takeshima dispute issue.
After analyzing several journals, the authors
were able to draw conclusions from all three that the public diplomacy that has
been conducted by countries in East Asia, especially China and Japan alike – is
equally risking the position of leader in the region. The title that the author
finally got is “Regional Challenges and Competition in the application of
Public Diplomacy in East Asian Countries in 2008".
Theoretical
Framework
To explain
the failure to use Public Diplomacy in east Asian countries and efforts to
update Public Diplomacy since 2008, the author uses at least two frames of
thought that both serve as instruments of influence, namely the Theory of Soft
Power by Joseph Nye who is the parent of Public Diplomacy, of which Public
Diplomacy is a "child" included in soft power methods. In addition,
also the concept of National Interest / National Interest..
In previous
Library Reviews it has been explained that some scholars have differences in
conceptualizing certain aspects to explain the new Public Diplomacy
reconciliation efforts in East Asia. So in order to explain the background, at
least the author uses two frames of thought. The first is Soft Power. The
concept of Soft Power was first introduced by Joseph S Nye (1990) along with
the negation of Soft Power, namely Hard Power. Both are the kind of state power
defined by Barnett and Duvall (2005) as the state's ability to use its
resources to make other states subservient and do what the state wants resource
owners to do. But power or power is defined by Nye as the ownership of certain
resources to be able to direct the other party to do what the state resource
owner wants, without what element of coercion.
Soft power can be understood as a latent force
and does not appear directly, but the impact can still be felt. Soft power
sources can come from the image of a country, such as ideology, policy both
domestically and abroad, to the culture that is popular among the world
community (Nye 1990). The explanation is contrary to the concept of hard power
that provides a very clear and coercive power, such as the military and
economic power of a country. In today's contemporary era, there are many shifts
in the country's power pattern from hard power to soft power. This is due to
the dynamics of contemporary world politics that used to use a lot of hard
power, such as during the era of world wars 1 and 2. But in the industrial era
as it is today, military power no longer has such a significant influence in
the World War era, it is also supported by the many awareness and spirit of
peace shown by the countries of the world. The dynamics of the world also lead
to interdependence between countries, making new powers such as diplomacy
agreements to trade agreements become stronger, so that soft power becomes much
more useful at this time. (Nye 1990).
In the present time, there is a significant
change in world politics that has affected the importance of soft power and
hard power. However, there is little discussion about the condition of
decision-making needed for world leaders in effectively using soft power. This
paper tries to articulate a more rigorous and systematic understanding of the
soft power process, to explain how changes in the international political
process have now increased the value of soft power to hard power, and how soft
power strategies are increasingly being used by decision makers in their
application of foreign policy, as well as in the form of diplomacy by their
countries.
National
Interest as Effecting Instrument
The implementation of diplomacy conducted by
any country, certainly driven by interests. What is meant by the interest is
National Interest, is a national goal that the country wants to achieve.
Interest is a need felt by a country in relation to another country that does
not belong to its territory. It is the national interest that encourages a
great contribution to the formation of views and approaches that a country can
make. According to Norman J. Padelford (1960), the national interest is; "National
interest of a country is what a governmental leader and in large degree also
what it's people consider at any time to be vital to their national
independence, way of life, territorial security and economic welfare.”.
The national interest according to Donald E. Nuchterlain (1978) is divided into four points, namely;
Defense Interest which is in the interest to protect the country and its people
from physical or military threats from other countries or is a form of
protection from threats to the system of a country. The second economic
interest is economic interests in the form of economic-financial value increase
in relation to other countries, where trade relations conducted with other
countries will provide economic benefits. Then the third World Order Interest
is the national interest that aims to influence and desire the country's
diplomacy actors to get a good image and the impression of an established
country, as well as guarantee the maintenance of the political system - the
international economy so that a country can feel security so that the country
can operate outside its territorial boundaries. And the latter is ideological
interest, is the interest of spreading or defending ideology against a certain
set of values that can be held by society.
METHOD
In this research, using descriptive qualitative
method with case study approach, because in this study would like to see how
the efforts of countries in East Asia, especially China, Japan, and South Korea
are the strongest countries, in an effort to reconcile public diplomacy in the
East Asia region in 2008. The selection of qualitative descriptive methodology
aims to describe a phenomenon that in this case is how the efforts of countries
in the East Asia region to reconcile their public diplomacy.
This descriptive research method is a research
method that seeks to solve problems or answer any questions of the problem at
hand. Meanwhile, this qualitative approach is assumed to be an approach aimed
at understanding social phenomena from a perspective that involves the
involvement of the lives of actors. As Sukidin and Basrowi (2002) said (Sukidin, 2002) that "Qualitative research is one of the
research procedures that produce descriptive data in the form of speech or
writing and behavior of observed people. Through qualitative research, researchers
can recognize subjects and feel what they are experiencing in everyday life.
Qualitative research is expected to produce an in-depth description of speech,
writing, and/or observable behavior from an individual, group, community,
and/or a particular organization in a specific context setting that is studied
from a whole, comprehensive, and holistic point of view."
In using descriptive qualitative research
method, in choosing data source using data collection technique with secondary
data type. This case study data can be obtained indirectly from the study
subjects. Secondary data is data obtained from other parties, not directly
obtained from researchers from the subject of his research which is usually in
the form of documents or reports (Azwar, 1998). Secondary data is what helps to
provide a comprehensive discussion on the topic of Public Diplomacy in the East
Asia region.
Researchers choose to use secondary data
because in this problem the required data already exists and researchers only
collect and analyze data according to the problems raised by the author. In
this case, researchers used the official websites of the governments of Japan,
South Korea, and China in conducting their public diplomacy efforts as
secondary data because the data could be accounted for. Therefore, as a
research instrument, using secondary data in this problem can be accessed from
official reports or websites to scientific journals, books and related
articles, and newspapers.
RESULT AND
DISCUSSION
In accordance with the presentation of the
above frame of thought, actualization of the National Interest of a country
certainly influences the implementation of state diplomacy in shaping the
country's public opinion. The establishment of public opinion as a
manifestation of Public Diplomacy can be categorized as a Soft Power. So it can
be concluded that from the exposure of soft power theory and national interest
above, it can be described that the influence of Soft Power on public
perception of a country has a great contribution. This can be seen as in the
following table;
Source: Lee, Jong Sook and Melissen,
Jan. 2011. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power in East Asia
Compared to the other 2 countries namely
Indonesia and Vietnam which are still in the same continent, the perception
between other countries towards China, Japan and South Korea is quite highly
categorized. And this table shows that of the three dominant countries in the
East Asia region, China has the lowest image rate. This fact can be the main
reason why china is currently the most developed country with Soft Power method
with approach through Public Diplomacy as its main choice compared to other
East Asian countries or even various countries in the world. Also, China's
ambition to become an emerging power to rival the hegemony of the United States
in the world.
In addition to identifying the experiments of
Public Diplomacy in east Asian countries that are largely dominated by China,
and how the efforts of East Asian countries such as Japan, South Korea and
China organize new efforts in public diplomacy both in building soft power
assets ranging from music art to historical figures and cultural values. These
countries invest in public diplomacy by strengthening public diplomatic
institutions within government ministries, establishing cultural centers
abroad, spreading their own values and national interests. These efforts have
increased phenomena since the global financial crisis in 2008 that hit the
economies of countries in the world occurred, the East Asia region also felt
the impact. In order to restore economic status, East Asian countries
collectively began to use this method of diplomacy.
Japan’s
Public Diplomacy
For more than a century, Japan has aspired to
achieve "superpower" status in both global maupub
regions. In contrast to the emerging power of China and India, in terms of
economic and military strength and global influence, the decline of Jepan's economic power puts it in second place after the
United States. This has caused Japan's priorities to shift, because although
Japan disputes its validity to project an image of itself as middle power
(Holbraad, 1971). Japan is looking for its own way to become an interesting
force. In this era of globalization, Japan feels it is necessary to be
identified as a credible member of the international community. Given the value
of the word and perception of current diplomacy, Japan needs to clarify its
understanding of the term soft power and quickly find the best terms to
describe what the country it believes in. Historically, Japan has frequently
colonized neighboring countries, as a reminder that Japan must face this
problem directly and hold dialogue, especially with its closest neighbor in
Asia who has a negative view of its national image (Yoshihide, 2005).
Such bilateral efforts may not be sufficient
and may require increased regional cooperation along the East Asia region,
stretching from the Okhotsk Sea at least to the South China Sea. Meanwhile, the
growing interaction in the region creates the same Asian culture in the sense
of lifestyle: people enjoy similar music, fashion, series and TV dramas,
overseas travel, and other cultures of the region. Such interactions are key to
building communities and, if regional communities are to be established and
regional cooperation is achieved, Asian communities will have greater
opportunities to interact, which will help in developing individual national
and regional identities. Through functional cooperation in trade, finance,
climate change, and environmental matters, as well as health is regulated
according to Japanese preferences, helping to turn antipathy into empathy
(Yoshihide, 2005). Any approach that allows Japan to overcome its parochial
nationalism and move to help boost regional public interest may prove the way
to close the gap between Asia's preference for Japanese cultural products and
Japan's negative image. This will be Japan's best public diplomacy achievement
in the twenty-first century..
South
Korea’s Public Diplomacy
Source:
CCGA, Soft Power in Asia: Results of a 2008 Multinational Survey of Public
Opinion, p. 3
South Koreans view Japan's soft power as quite
attractive. Japan's political, economic and human resources soft power is
viewed more positively by South Koreans than Chinese. For soft power aimed at
politics, South Koreans view Japan as preferable to China because it
"respects human rights and legal supremacy" (an average score of 65
versus 40), and because it has a "political system that serves the needs
of its people". For diplomatic soft power, South Koreans view Japan as
slightly preferable to China for issues such as building trust in international
institutions, solving problems in Asia, and promoting politics to people in
Asia. But the effectiveness of Japan's policy is considered inferior to China's
for two substantive policies: 43.3 percent of South Koreans view China as
effective in resolving the North Korean nuclear issue, while only 31.1 percent
of Koreans think that Japan is effective; and to manage cross-strait conflict,
42.8 percent of South Koreans think that China is effective, while only 20.4
percent think that Japan is effective. For cultural areas, South Koreans view
Japanese popular culture and its spread as less negative than Chinese popular
culture: 56.5 percent of South Koreans view the spread of Chinese cultural
influence in Asia negatively, compared with 53.3 percent for the spread of
Japanese people's cultural influence. Japanese popular culture appeals more to
South Koreans than Chinese popular culture, and Japanese popular culture's
influence over South Korean popular culture feels stronger (average score of
57) than Chinese popular culture (average score of 4). If economic interests are taken as proxies of
hard power, South Korea's Free-Trade Agreements/FTA policy options are in line
with soft power in the economy. South Koreans view economic relations as trade
and investment, with the United States and China almost as important (Chun,
2008). However, Japan is preferred as an FTA partner by South Korea, although
trade and investment with China is considered more important than with Japan.
Therefore, the FTA's policy choices as opposed to intuition by South Koreans in
Japan over China seem to be explained by the perception of china's lower economic
soft power (Lee, 2005).
China’s Public Diplomacy
In the early 2000s when China took the
initiative in connecting neighboring countries to its economic network, Japan
quickly reacted by calling for an "East Asian Community". The
People's Republic of China (PRC) now seems to spend more money than any other
Asian country to use in public diplomacy. According to media reports, China has
spent nearly $9 billion a year on public diplomacy and other activities
intended to boost its soft power.
In the past, the Chinese government used
classical propaganda and other acts of public diplomacy, such as lending pandas
to foreign zoos or playing "Ping-pong diplomacy" with America in an
effort to improve its image abroad. However, in the late 1990s, this ad hoc
approach was abandoned when policymakers began to think more systematically
about how to build and use soft power leading to a significant increase in
Chinese public diplomacy.
In terms of public diplomacy, China's efforts
as a successful competing option depend on counter-narrative construction.
China's strength is largely economic, but its economic achievements produce
mixed results in the field of soft power. But power produces not only power but
also vulnerability, as a recent report on the financial crisis and soft power
in East Asia succinctly states if a country's economic and military power
increases, its soft power is at risk (Keidel, 2008). It is difficult for China
to accept the fact that foreign perceptions cannot be regulated and that
China's national government is not in a position to control the image projected
by their own society. China has successively approached public diplomacy in
both international and domestic contexts, where it is expected to contribute to
national cohesion and generate support for China's foreign policy goals (Kurlantzick, 2007).
There is little doubt that in targeting
audiences, China's soft power tends to succeed in the "Global South".
But the conclusion that the so-called "Beijing Consensus" succeeds
for China in developing countries is untested by the running of time. Soft
Power South Korea is indeed much stronger than China. Asian and European
attitudes towards China are not as positive as various sources assume, there is
no strong narrative of normative power affecting China's reputation in European
countries such as The United Kingdom, France and Germany. It turns out that
western countries are reluctant to accept China's soft power influence and
European and American prejudices further complicate China's public diplomacy in
an attempt to change it. Although China's foreign aid is a soft power resource
in developing countries, western concerns have arisen about the economic impact
of China's rise to greater since the 2008 financial crisis (Barboza, 2008). The
relationship between China and Taiwan is a great example of what is going well.
Europe's perception of China is a good case study of what doesn't work and its
implications, what is needed.
CONCLUSION
Countries in
East Asia compete to build and use soft power using public diplomacy. Many seek
to build soft power assets ranging from music art to historical figures and
cultural values. These countries invest in public diplomacy by strengthening
public diplomatic institutions, establishing cultural centers abroad, spreading
their own values and national interests, spreading culinary specialties, and
expanding academic and educational exchanges. All of these measures aim to
influence public opinion in other countries to gain support for the country's
own foreign policy goals. One important area where East Asian countries use
soft power is projecting their regional vision. Increased dependency and Asian
relations in trade, investment, and finance have made their governments realize
that East Asia is a big part of where their fate is closely related to regional
prosperity. Since the global financial crisis of 2008, as diplomacy has
improved, East Asian economies have collectively grown faster than any other
region, and quickly recovered from the crisis.
Nevertheless,
the most striking result is that there is little positive correlation between
the investment asian countries have made in public
diplomacy and how foreign entities elsewhere in the region tend to view it.
This observation is particularly striking with regard to China, as it has
invested more than most other countries in trying to create and use soft power
through public diplomacy. The future of new public diplomacy in East Asia
therefore lies in international and transnational dialogue. By definition,
government has a role to play in a country's public diplomacy. The importance
of communicative action and a more widespread socialization process in East
Asia should not be underestimated. In such perspective, soft power is a
national asset, but not inferior to relationship-based quality that has the
capacity to help the development and cooperation of communities in the region (Chiba et al., 2009). For Japan,
South Korea, China and Taiwan it seems clear that improved
community-to-community relations can help strengthen their soft power.
ReferenceS
Barboza, David. (2008). China unveils sweeping plan for economy. New York Times, 9.
Berridge, Geoff R. (2015). Diplomacy: theory and practice.
Springer.
Chiba, Naoko, Murayama, Somay
Y., Morozumi, Miyuki, Nakayama, Eiichi, Okada, Takafumi, Iwata, Satoshi,
Sunakawa, Keisuke, & Ubukata, Kimiko. (2009). Rapid detection of eight
causative pathogens for the diagnosis of bacterial meningitis by real-time PCR.
Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, 15(2), 92–98.
Cull, Nicholas J. (2008).
Public diplomacy before Gullion: The evolution of a phrase. In Routledge
handbook of public diplomacy (pp. 39–43). Routledge.
Confucius Institute
Online. Introduction to the Confucius Institutes (August 2009). Available at
http://www.college.chinese.cn/en/article/2009-08/29/content_22308.htm
Hall, Ian, & Smith, Frank.
(2013). The struggle for soft power in Asia: Public diplomacy and regional
competition. Asian Security, 9(1), 1–18.
Hill, Christopher. (2003). The
changing politics of foreign policy. Palgrave Macmillan.
Hongying, Wang and
Yeh-Chung Lu. The Conception of Soft Power and Its Policy Implications: A
Comparative Study of China and Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China Vol. 15,
No. 56 (2008), p. 438.
Jerry
S. Carlson and Keith F. Widaman. The Effects of Study Abroad during College on
Attitudes toward Other Cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations
Vol. 12 (1988), pp. 1–17.
Keidel, Albert. (2008).
China’s Economic Rise: Fact and Fiction. Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace.
Kurlantzick. Charm
Offensive, pp. 76–78 and p. 125.
Lee,
Sook J and Mellisen, Jan. Public Diplomacy and Soft Power in East Asia
(Hamsphire: Palgrave Macmillian, 2011)
Mitsuyo
Ando and Fukunari Kimura. How did Japanese Exports Respond to Two Crises in the
International Production Networks?. Asian Economic Journal , vol. 16, no. 3
(2012).
Melissen, Jan, & Sohn,
Yul. (2016). Understanding public diplomacy in East Asia: Middle powers in a
troubled region. Springer.
Nye Jr, Joseph S. (2008).
Public diplomacy and soft power. The Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 616(1), 94–109.
Simon Anholt.
Nation-Branding in Asia. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy Vol. 4 (2008), pp.
265–269
Sukidin, Basrowi. (2002).
Metode Penelitian Kualitatif Perspektif Mikro. Surabaya: Insan Cendekia.
Trisni, Sofia, Isnarti, Rika,
Sinulingga, Anita Afriani, & Ferdian, Ferdian. (2018). Pencapaian
Kepentingan Korea Selatan melalui Diplomasi Publik Korean Wave. Global
Strategis, 12(2), 131–142.
Veronica, Nuri Widiastuti.
(2015). Rivalitas Cina dan Jepang dalam Institusi Regional Asia Timur. Global:
Jurnal Politik Internasional, 16(1), 19–33.
.
Regional Challenges and Competition in the Application
of Public Diplomacy in East Asian Countries Year 2008