Digital Diplomacy Ignited: Forging Global Narratives in the Age of Technology

Vassilia Orfanou, PhD, Post Doc
Writes for the Headline Diplomat eMagazine

Introduction

In today’s rapidly evolving digital age, the world has become interconnected like never before, transcending borders and cultures. Amidst this transformation, global narratives have emerged as a pivotal factor in shaping international relations. Digital diplomacy, the use of technology and digital tools to conduct diplomatic relations and influence public opinion, has taken centre stage in this new era. In this article, we delve into the significance of digital diplomacy and its role in shaping the narratives that define our interconnected world.

Understanding Digital Diplomacy: Definition and Significance

Diplomacy, as Bull defines it, involves the peaceful conduct of relations between states and other entities in world politics through official agents (Bull, 1997, p. 156). This definition remains the most widely accepted among diplomatic scholars and aligns with Watson’s characterization of diplomacy as a negotiation process between political entities that acknowledge each other’s independence (Watson, 1984, p. 33).

The Internet, described as “a communication tool for publishing, sharing, and storing information” (Westcott, 2008, p. 2), has evolved into a central hub for public and private communication. Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Qzone, Snapchat, VKontakte, and others engage over 2 billion people daily. Digital communication has not only shrunk the world but has also profoundly altered the daily lives of billions (Adesina, 2017, p. 7).

The emergence of Web 2.0 technologies paved the way for social media development. Online networking tools empower users to create content, interact, and build communities (Payne et al., 2011, p. 54). This continuous mediation and information exchange connect people globally 24/7, offering significant opportunities for governments and international organizations in emerging policy areas on the Internet.

Globalization has not only transformed individual behaviors and lifestyles but has also significantly influenced the actions of states and international actors on the world stage (Westcott, 2008, p. 4). This societal shift has given rise to new disciplines like digital diplomacy or e-diplomacy, emphasizing citizen participation, mass movements, and people-to-people communication in the era of globalization (Payne et al., 2011, p. 47).

Digital diplomacy leverages soft power through social media as a potent tool for engaging target audiences, utilizing social networks as platforms to build social relations. Marcus Holmes challenges the conventional view of digital diplomacy in his book, “The Theory and Practice of Digital Diplomacy” (Corneliu Biola, Marcus Holmes, 2015, pp. 13-32). He argues that digital diplomacy is more than just a cost-effective form of public diplomacy; it plays a broader role in managing international change.

Digital diplomacy, or eDiplomacy, transcends traditional approaches by harnessing technology and digital platforms to engage a broader audience while fostering transparency and mutual understanding. Acting as a crucial link between governments and citizens, it enables direct communication and facilitates the co-creation of narratives with global resonance. The profound significance of digital diplomacy lies in its unparalleled ability to connect people, stimulate dialogue, and advance international cooperation within a more inclusive and community-based framework.

The adoption of the Council Conclusions on EU Digital Diplomacy in July 2022 marked a pivotal moment, establishing a robust foundation for our external engagement on digital issues. Building upon this momentum, Council Conclusions on EU Digital Diplomacy adopted on June 26, 2023, delineate a strategic framework comprising priority actions. These actions are indispensable for fortifying the EU’s position, ensuring a more cohesive and effective policy in the realm of global digital affairs.

The latest Council Conclusions advocate for a collaborative “Team Europe” approach, urging both the EU and its Member States to implement these priority actions. This involves bolstering coordination and strategic engagement towards multilateral and multistakeholder fora. Additionally, emphasis is placed on enhancing bilateral and regional partnerships, particularly in critical and emerging technologies. The Conclusions underscore the imperative to strengthen engagement and cooperation with global partners in addressing digital connectivity and mitigating digital divides. Lastly, there is a call to amplify EU leadership in shaping global digital rules and enhancing the efficiency of the EU and Member States’ digital resources. This entails fostering a more robust dialogue with the tech sector and other stakeholders, underlining a commitment to navigating the evolving digital landscape with foresight and effectiveness.

The Role of Technology in Shaping Global Narratives

In shaping global narratives, technology assumes a crucial role, endowing individuals with a potent voice through social media platforms. Governments and organizations, recognizing the influence wielded by these platforms, employ them as direct conduits to communicate messages to the public. Through adept use of technology, they extend their reach and sway, actively participating in the sculpting of global narratives.

According to Manor (2019, p. 9), the surge of information technology has given rise to a “global media ecology,” characterized by the continual flow of information within and between networks of individuals, unrestricted by national boundaries and the constraints of time and space.

Yet, this emerging “global media ecology” poses challenges to traditional diplomacy in several ways. Firstly, the monopoly over diplomatic communication once held by diplomats and Ministries of Foreign Affairs (MoFAs) has waned, as nonstate actors now harness digital tools, as noted by Pamment (2012). Secondly, nonstate actors, assuming roles as new public-diplomacy agents, have turned the digital arena into a competitive space. Here, multiple actors vie for the attention of the digital audience, engaging in efforts to influence them, as highlighted by Manor (2016).

A third challenge lies in the fragmentation of public diplomacy audiences within the global media ecology. Hayden (2012, p. 3) describes this as the creation of “networks of selective media exposure,” further complicating the landscape of diplomatic communication.

Digital Diplomacy in Practice: Case Studies and Success Stories

Real-world case studies illustrate the success of digital diplomacy in shaping global narratives. An indicative list of such examples is enlisted below:

• The first ever global diplomatic session with online participation was held by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in 1963. Since then, remote participation has been a possibility for more open and inclusive international negotiations.
• Two early developments in digital diplomacy occurred in 1992. Civil society activists utilised emails and mailing lists for the first time during the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit to coordinate their stance during lobbying and talks.
• The Mediterranean Academy of Diplomatic Studies created the first Unit for Computer Applications in Diplomacy at the same time in Malta. Later, the group became the DiploFoundation1, which has spent the last 20+ years researching and instructing thousands of diplomats on how the internet and computers affect diplomacy.
• Sweden became the first country to open its virtual Embassy in Second Life in 2008. Any computer user throughout the world could access this embassy, overcoming time and space restrictions.
• The Arab Spring followed in 2010, which compelled ambassadors to use social media to engage with online users and keep an eye on online discourse in order to foresee upcoming shocks to the international system.
• Indian diplomacy went digital when the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) posted its first tweet in 2010. With its newly created public diplomacy division, MEA quickly became a digital leader within the Indian government.
• To make for the lack of an actual diplomatic presence in Teheran, America also opened a virtual Embassy in 2011.
• During the Syrian refugee crisis in 2011, the Canadian government used social media to share heartfelt stories and real-time updates, garnering global support and compassion.
• In the present times, Covid-19 and since 2020 has once again changed digital procedures. Diplomats increasingly blended offline diplomacy with virtual summits using Zoom or comparable tools. The pandemic led to the advent of what is called- ‘Zoom Diplomacy’.
• The European Union’s digital diplomacy efforts focused on countering disinformation and promoting democratic values, strengthening their influence, and countering false narratives.

Challenges and Limitations of Digital Diplomacy

While digital diplomacy presents vast opportunities, it also faces challenges. The digital divide hampers equal access to technology and the internet, limiting some countries’ engagement in digital diplomacy. Additionally, the rapid spread of disinformation and fake news poses a significant challenge, requiring careful navigation to ensure messages are not overshadowed or distorted.

Diplomats and nations are increasingly worried that social media, once seen as an interactive engagement platform, is now becoming a tool for widespread deception. State actors exploit these platforms to influence public opinion and interfere in foreign democratic processes through misinformation and emotionally charged propaganda, as seen in instances like the Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections, Brexit elections in 2016, and the 2017 German elections (Manor, 2019).

A pressing concern is the impact of algorithmic filtering on social media, fostering hyperpartisanship and political polarization while hindering diverse interactions. This not only undermines diplomatic efforts but also erodes public trust in institutions due to pervasive disinformation. Diplomats are forced into the role of media judges, discerning credible sources amidst a sea of misinformation. (Manor, 2019).

Financially, countering fake news poses a challenge for cash-strapped diplomatic entities, given the rapid diffusion and replication of false information (Bjola & Pamment, 2018). Additionally, overreliance on social media in digital diplomacy has been criticized for neglecting other digital tools, with diplomats often unclear about their choice of platforms. (Riordan, 2019).

The effectiveness of tweets and posts in shaping public opinion is debatable, as evidenced by instances like the 2014 campaign to free the Chibok girls, which inadvertently elevated a regional terrorist group without holding them accountable. The interconnected nature of cyberspace and physical space poses challenges, with nonstate actors, including extremists, exploiting both realms for harmful attacks (Riordan, 2019).

The Internet’s “culture of anonymity” allows anyone to adopt various personas or engage in mischief, creating a volatile environment. (Yakovenko, 2012, para. 6). Even digital diplomacy advocates can make errors, as illustrated by a tweet from the Swedish Foreign Minister that sparked online backlash.

Dangers associated with digital diplomacy include information leakage, hacking, and the overall anonymity of Internet users. The Wikileaks episode highlighted the risk of information leakage, while hacking attacks on government officials’ websites underscore the ongoing threat. (Manor, 2015b, para. 1). Criticisms about the effectiveness of digital diplomacy focus on the ease of “slacktivism”[1] on social media, where joining a cause is simpler than pursuing effective policy-making solutions to complex problems (Holmes, 2015). Instant dissemination of information through the Internet, while a boon, is also seen as a curse, potentially leading states into trouble with hasty responses to global events.

Strategies for Effective Digital Diplomacy

Effective digital diplomacy requires tailored strategies. Understanding the target audience is essential, as different platforms and demographics necessitate distinct approaches. Fostering dialogue and engagement is crucial, as actively responding to feedback builds transparency and trust. Collaborating with influencers and stakeholders can amplify the impact of digital diplomacy efforts.

Crucial strategies when navigating the nuances of digital diplomacy are as follows:

I. Strategic Leadership for Innovation

Strategic leadership for innovation in diplomacy demands a top-down commitment to championing innovation. While fostering a forward-looking vision, leaders must avoid overly grand strategies, embracing flexibility and adaptation. Recognizing that digital diplomacy extends beyond social media, smart budgeting is crucial, understanding that success is not solely tied to high budgets. Strategic platform selection, considering factors like target audience and resource availability, is paramount, with websites, Twitter, and Facebook serving distinct purposes. Empowering diplomats, particularly younger officials, to spearhead digital initiatives is key, as successful projects often stem from within the diplomatic service. Encouraging a balanced approach, leaders should promote early adopters while providing training and support for those with varying digital skill levels, ensuring a unified and effective digital diplomacy landscape.

II. Cybersecurity: Managing Digital Risks

In the realm of cybersecurity and digital risk management, the key lies in treating digital data akin to water, recognizing its tendency to find paths to leak. Cybersecurity efforts should prioritize risk management, with a particular emphasis on addressing the human factor and potential errors. Embracing failure is essential, especially in social media initiatives, as it is crucial to acknowledge that setbacks are inherent. Cultivating a culture that not only tolerates but learns from failures is imperative in fortifying cybersecurity measures and adapting to the dynamic digital landscape.

III. Time Dynamics in Digital Diplomacy

Navigating digital diplomacy requires a nuanced understanding of time dynamics. Leaders must recognize the temporal investments involved: learning platforms may take a day, utilizing them effectively requires a month, and full institutional integration demands a year. Striking a balance in technology adoption is crucial—while early experimentation is valuable, leaders should also leverage the advantages of delayed starts, allowing for a more stable and mature landscape when embracing emerging technologies. This strategic approach to time dynamics ensures a thoughtful and effective trajectory in the ever-evolving field of digital diplomacy.

IV. Crafting Content, Considering Context, and Embracing Failure

In the realm of digital diplomacy, crafting compelling content takes precedence, emphasizing the importance of engaging and timely material for a vibrant online presence. Understanding that context is as pivotal as content, effective communication involves tailoring messages for diverse audiences across various social media platforms. Notably, a key strategy is the distinct separation of formal and informal communications, exemplified by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs. Managing the delicate balance between professional and private communication is paramount, drawing lessons from the experiences of Indian diplomacy. Given the challenge of maintaining message control in the dynamic landscape of social media, leaders must acknowledge the inherent risks and be prepared for difficulties, anticipating crises even during ‘sunny days’ and fostering community credibility to weather potential challenges.

V. Leveraging Knowledge and Hidden Resources

Unlocking the potential of diplomatic expertise is paramount in the realm of digital diplomacy. Leaders should acknowledge and tap into the invaluable knowledge and experience possessed by diplomats, recognizing them as essential resources for efficient public diplomacy. Understanding diplomacy as a form of extensive writing, diplomats are inherently well-suited for digital diplomacy efforts. Drawing inspiration from successful examples, particularly the Indian diplomatic service, embracing and leveraging the wealth of knowledge within the diplomatic community is a strategic imperative for effective and impactful engagement in the digital sphere.

Vi. Training and Support for Digital Diplomats

In the realm of digital diplomacy, it is imperative to presume diplomats’ inherent social media skills while establishing continuous training and crisis management protocols. By fostering intergenerational learning, the proficiency of junior diplomats can be synergistically combined with the experience of senior diplomats. Managing social media should adopt a social approach, emphasizing professional culture and inclusivity. Prioritizing ongoing training, especially in adapting to emerging technologies, is crucial. Just-in-time coaching mechanisms should be deployed to skilfully navigate critical moments.

Such strategies can present an effective and multifaceted approach for innovation in digital diplomacy. Leaders should champion innovation from the top, avoiding overly grand strategies and embracing a smart budgeting mindset. The acknowledgment that digital diplomacy extends beyond social media is crucial, and the strategic selection of platforms, along with empowering diplomats at all levels, contributes to success. Managing digital risks through a focus on cybersecurity and embracing failure as a learning opportunity are key elements. Understanding time dynamics and balancing adoption timelines play a crucial role in successful digital diplomacy. Crafting engaging content with context awareness, differentiating between official and informal communication, and preparing for difficulties are essential in navigating the challenges of the digital space. Leveraging diplomatic expertise, recognizing diplomacy as a writing-intensive practice, and providing training and support for digital diplomats contribute to efficient public diplomacy. The emphasis on continuous training, intergenerational learning, and a social approach to social media management ensures adaptability to evolving technologies and effective crisis navigation.

Tools and Platforms for Digital Diplomacy

A diverse array of tools and platforms is available for digital diplomacy. Social media platforms like Twitter (now X), Facebook, and Instagram offer direct access to a global audience. Podcasts and webinars facilitate in-depth discussions and knowledge-sharing. Online forums and blogs encourage interactive conversations and engagement, allowing governments and organizations to choose platforms aligned with their objectives and target audience.

The use of social media and digital platforms is increasing in both national governments and international organizations and authorizes more actors to engage with foreign publics (Summa 2020, p. 11). This extends the idea of traditional media gatekeepers (ibid) Digital diplomacy can be described as […the use of social media by international actors to accomplish their foreign policy goals and proactively manage their image and reputation] (ibid).

According to Amanda Clarke, and given this development, two perspectives arise. First, this digital proliferation and use in diplomacy, provides an extension of the diplomatic service and second digitalization replaces the traditional role of the diplomat into a more civil society-driven model of diplomacy (ibid).

Digital diplomacy signals a recognition amongst diplomats and foreign ministers that the social web has redistributed informational resources, ensuring the civil society – and not the government – is the best placed to perform the functions of networking, influencing and intelligence gathering and analysis that have long been preserve of state actors as per the state-to-state, intergovernmental model of international relations (Bjola & Holmes 2015, p. 111).

The Future of Digital Diplomacy: Trends and Predictions

Looking into the future, the potential of digital diplomacy is immense. The rise of artificial intelligence and machine learning is set to revolutionize how governments and organizations interact and communicate with audiences. Chatbots and virtual assistants can provide personalized and instant responses, enhancing engagement. Virtual reality and augmented reality technologies can break down physical barriers, fostering understanding and inclusion.

According to Tom Fletcher, it is not possible to be a diplomat today without working with digital policy (Fletcher 2016). He also says that people are today more sceptical and don’t trust authorities to the same extent as in the pre-digital age (Fletcher 2016, p. 149). This means that for example, diplomats need to be more transparent in what they do and how their work affects people. Diplomats need to understand the tension between individual needs and state requirements without opposing the state. They also need to use digitalization in favour of gaining efficiency and not jeopardize the efficacy (Stanzel 2011, p.1).

The interactivity and connectivity of new media, combined with the diversity of new players and the ways that they are using the media, have arguably ushered in a new global communications’ era, defined by connectivity, interactivity, and cultural diversity. The underlying dynamic has shifted from a focus on information as a product, to communication as a process. This shift is significant because it means a parallel shift from message content to message exchange. In this new terrain, those who master and facilitate message exchange command communication power (Zaharna 2007, p. 217).

And to gain power and to maintain a good connection with the public, influential leaders would need to adapt quickly to the medium of their age (Fletcher 2016, p. 149).

Conclusion

In conclusion, the transformative power of digital diplomacy in shaping global narratives is undeniable. As we navigate the complexities of an interconnected world, the strategic use of technology and digital platforms has become a cornerstone in international relations. The evolution from traditional diplomacy to digital diplomacy, marked by the adoption of the Council Conclusions on EU Digital Diplomacy, signifies a pivotal moment in external engagement on digital issues. This strategic framework, emphasizing collaboration, multilateral engagement, and leadership in global digital rulemaking, establishes a robust foundation for effective policy in the digital age.

Technology’s role in shaping global narratives cannot be overstated. The “global media ecology” facilitated by information technology has empowered individuals and nonstate actors, challenging traditional diplomatic communication channels. While digital diplomacy has proven successful in numerous case studies, challenges such as the digital divide, spread of disinformation, and the need for effective cybersecurity persist.

Strategies for effective digital diplomacy, including strategic leadership, cybersecurity management, understanding time dynamics, crafting context-aware content, leveraging diplomatic expertise, and continuous training, provide a roadmap for navigating the digital landscape. Recognizing the diverse array of tools and platforms available, governments and organizations can tailor their approaches to engage with target audiences effectively.

Looking toward the future, the potential of digital diplomacy is poised for further expansion with the integration of artificial intelligence, machine learning, chatbots, and virtual reality. Diplomats must adapt to the changing landscape, understanding the evolving dynamics of communication as a process rather than a static product. As influential leaders navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by the digital age, the ability to facilitate message exchange will be key to maintaining a meaningful connection with the public.

In essence, digital diplomacy stands as a dynamic force, continually shaping and reshaping the narratives that define our interconnected world. As we embrace innovation, adaptability, and strategic foresight, the potential for positive global impact through digital diplomacy remains vast.

References

ANTWI-BOATENG, O. and AL MAZROUEI, K.A.M. (2021) The Challenges of Digital Diplomacy in the Era of Globalization: The Case of the United Arab Emirates [Preprint], (15). Available at: https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/16150/3583 (Accessed: 07 October 2023). doi:1932–8036/20210005.

Bjola, C. (2018) Diplomacy in the Digital Age [Preprint]. Available at: https://media.realinstitutoelcano.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ari113-2018-bjola-diplomacy-digital-age.pdf  (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

(2023) Digital Diplomacy. European Union External Service Action. Available at: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/digital-diplomacy_en  (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

Kurbalija, J. (2016) ‘25 Points for Digital Diplomacy’, 4 August. Available at: https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/25-points-digital-diplomacy/  (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

Manor, I. (2018) ‘The Digitalization of Diplomacy: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Terminology’, DigDiploROx Working Paper [Preprint]. Available at: https://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-08/DigDiploROxWP2.pdf (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

Ördén, H. and Theander, F. (no date) Digital Diplomacy A study of social media and the changing role of the diplomatic service [Preprint]. Available at: https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=9045024&fileOId=9045171 (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

SHARMA, N. (no date) Digital Diplomacy: The Evolution of a New Era in Diplomacy. Available at: https://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/2023-01/interns/topics/Nandika-Sharma.pdf (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

Tolkun Bekturgan kyzy and Ayhan, N. (2022) ‘Understanding Digital Diplomacy through Ukraine-Russia events’, Maintaining International Relations Through Digital Public Diplomacy Policies and Discourses, pp. 121–135. doi:10.4018/978-1-6684-5822-8.ch010. https://www.igi-global.com/chapter/understanding-digital-diplomacy-through-ukraine-russia-events/314417 (Accessed: 07 October 2023).

[1] a term originally coined by Malcom Gladwell to characterize the use of social media in politics argues that it is much easier to join a cause on social media than 4582 Antwi-Boateng and Al Mazrouei International Journal of Communication 15(2021) to pursue the effective-but-difficult path of policy making to tackle a problem that might be costly (Holmes, 2025, p.29).

Photo: Mikhail Nilov: https://www.pexels.com/el-gr/photo/7672015/