Abstract
The 2004 and 2007 enlargements of the European Union (EU) symbolize the EU’s shift to the east. They brought in 12 new member countries, including ten former communist states—Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia—constituting a region named Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). This chapter focuses on the former communist countries (it does not cover Cyprus and Malta, which also joined the EU in 2004). Their public diplomacy (PD) makes a suitable object for analysis for four main reasons. First, the countries are newcomers to PD, as it was the EU accession process—and in some cases joining NATO1—that triggered the work on their strategies in this field, thus providing the study with a clear starting point. Second, the fact that these countries underwent the transition process to democracy after 1989 is reflected in their foreign policy strategies and their approach to PD. Transition to democracy should thus be defined as an important context for the analysis. Third, their PD—the countries are small or medium sized—has been strongly shaped by geopolitics, particularly by their relations with big neighbors. The trend has so far been reflected in their inclination to “bandwagon” in international relations. Fourth, marketing communication, branding, and public relations within the sphere of business, trade, and political communication on the internal stage preceded realization of the importance of using PD externally.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
A. Grigorescu, “East and Central European Countries and the Iraq War: The Choice between ‘Soft Balancing’ and ‘Soft Bandwagoning,’” Communist and Post-Communist Studies 41 (2008): 282.
M. Leonard and A. Small, Norwegian Public Diplomacy (London: Foreign Policy Center, 2003).
J. Peterkova, “Actual Development of Czech Public Diplomacy,” paper presented at the ISA Conference, New Orleans (2010).
J. E. Grunig and L. Grunig, “The Role of Public Relations in Transitional Societies,” in Introducing Market Economy Institutions and Instruments: The Role of Public Relations in Transition Economies, ed. R. Ławniczak (Warsaw: Piar.pl, Poznan, 2005), 4–5.
N. Kaneva, ed., Branding Post-Communist Nations: Marketizing National Identities in the New Europe (Routledge: London, 2011).
Balt Met Proino, “Place Branding and Place Promotion Efforts in the Baltic Sea Region: A Situation Analysis” (October 2010), available at www.baltmetpromo.net (accessed October 10 2012).
N. Kaneva, “Who Can Play This Game? The Rise of Nation Branding in Bulgaria, 2001–2005,” in Branding Post-Communist Nations: Marketizing National Identities in the “New” Europe, ed. N. Kaneva (London: Routledge, 2012), 101.
The first Lithuanian campaign was launched in 1918, in order to achieve recognition by the United States. Lithuania was advised at that time by Edward L. Bernays. See J. E. Grunig, “Public Relations and International Affairs: Effects, Ethics and Responsibility,” Journal of International Affairs, 1 (1993): 137–62.
The concept of foreign image policy was derived from the article by Reiner Hülsse, “The Catwalk Power: Germany’s New Foreign Image Policy,” Journal of International Relations and Development 12 (2009): 293. The MFA documents included in the analysis are: Bulgaria: Mission and Strategic Goals, www.mfa.bg/en/;
Czech Report on the Foreign Policy (2009); Koncepce zahranični politiky České Republiky (April 28, 2011), www.mzv.cz; Estonian Foreign Ministry: Mission, Vision, Values, www.vm.ee; Hungarian Strategy of Foreign Policy: Hungary’s Foreign Policy after the Hungarian Presidency at the Council of the European Union 2011 www.mfa.gov.hu; Latvia’s Foreign Policy Guidelines 2006–2010, www.mfa.gov.lv/en/policy; Lithuanian Diplomacy in 2009–2012, www.urm.lt; Kierunki promocji Pohki do 2015; Foreign Policy Priorities 2012–2016, www.msz.gov.pl; Key Policy Areas, www.mae.ro/en; Slovak Foreign Policy Guidelines 2011, www.foreign.gov.sk; and Slovenian Foreign Policy, www.mzz.gov.si/en.
G. Notcheva and D. Bechev, “The Successful Laggards: Bulgaria and Romania’s Accession to the EU,” East European Politics and Societies 1 (2008): 116, 127, and 131;
and K. Hignett, “The Wild, Wild East,” New Eastern Europe, 2 (2012): 77–85.
Z. Volčič, “Branding Slovenia: ‘You Can’t Spell Slovenia Without Love…,’” in Branding Post-Communist Nations: Marketizing National Identities in the “New” Europe, ed. N. Kaneva (London: Routledge, 2012), 148.
The concept went back to the book by F. Naumann, Mitteleuropa (Berlin: Reimer, 1915).
See H. Winkler, Der Lange Weg nach Westen., Bd.1: Deutsche Geschichte vom Ende des Alten Reiches bis zum Untergang der Weimarer Republik (Munich: Beck, 2005), 322–3.
The concept of informational and relational public diplomacy is derived from the writings of R. S. Zaharna; see R. S. Zaharna, “The Soft Power Differential: Network Communication and Mass Communication in Public Diplomacy,” The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2, no. 3 (2007): 213–28.
J. Hrycak, Nowa Ukraina: Nowe interpretacje [New Ukraine, New Interpretations] (Wroclaw, KEW, 2009).
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2013 Mai’a K. Davis Cross and Jan Melissen
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ociepka, B. (2013). New Members’ Public Diplomacy. In: Cross, M.K.D., Melissen, J. (eds) European Public Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan Series in Global Public Diplomacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315144_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315144_3
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-34330-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-31514-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)