DOCSLIB.ORG

A Global Ranking of Soft Power 2018 2 the SOFT POWER 30

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

A Global Ranking of Soft Power 2018 2 THE SOFT POWER 30 Designed by Portland's in-house Content & Brand team. SECTION HEADER 3 CONTENTS 7 16 Contributors Introduction Disorderly conduct Order up? The 2018 Soft Power 30 12 The Soft Power 30 30 Methodology of the index Objective data Subjective data Changes, challenges, and limitations 40 Results and analysis The top five Breaking down the objective data Breaking down the results 60 116 The Indo-Pacific in focus: Soft power platforms: old and new The Asia Soft Power 10 The transformational (soft) power of museums: India rising: soft power and the world’s at home and abroad largest democracy Tristram Hunt, Victoria and Albert Museum Dhruva Jaishankar, Brookings India The quest for Reputational Security: interpreting The ASEAN we don’t know the soft power agenda of Kazakhstan and other Ong Keng Yong, RSIS newer states Nicholas J. Cull, USC Center on Public Diplomacy China goes global: why China’s global cultural strategy needs flexibility Reimagining the exchange experience: the local Zhang Yiwu, Peking University impact of cultural exchanges Jay Wang and Erik Nisbet, USC Center on Japan: Asia’s soft power super power? Public Diplomacy Jonathan Soble, Asia Pacific Initiative #UnknownJapan: inspiring travel with Instagram Australia in Asia: the odd man out? Max Kellett, Portland Richard McGregor, Lowy Institute Table talk: bringing a Swiss Touch to the The two Koreas and soft power American public Aidan Foster-Carter, Leeds University Olivia Harvey, Portland The Asia Soft Power 10 Soft power and the world’s game: the Premier League in Asia Jonathan McClory, Portland 92 Public diplomacy and the decline of liberal New coalitions of the willing & democracy Vivian S. Walker, USC Center on Public Diplomacy emerging issues For NGOs, we live and die by soft power Fighting back: fake news, disinformation, and the Bijan Frederic Farnoudi, Kofi Annan Foundation question of sharp power Max Kellett and Justin Kerr-Stevens, Portland Malaria elimination: The role of public and private leadership Hard laws, soft power Benjamin Rolfe and Patrik Silborn, APLMA Philip Hall, Portland Soft power and global health diplomacy: the rise of France 158 Tara Ornstein, USC Center on Public Diplomacy Conclusion and look ahead Global collision or international collaboration? Addressing a framework for cyber policy Trends and lessons Elizabeth Linder, Chatham House Going forward The future of diplomacy takes root in cities Nina Hachigian, City of Los Angeles and Penny 168 Abeywardena, City of New York Appendix Appendix A – Metrics Appendix B – References Creator and Author JONATHAN MCCLORY Jonathan is the author of The Soft Power 30 and a specialist in soft power, public diplomacy, cultural relations, and place branding. Based in Singapore, he is Portland’s General Manager for Asia. He has advised senior government clients in the UK, Europe, and Asia on reputation, policy, and effective global engagement. Before working in the private sector, Jonathan was Senior Researcher at the Institute for Government (IfG). While at the IfG, Jonathan created the world’s first composite index for measuring the soft power of countries. This prior research helped inform the development of The Soft Power 30, which is now used as a benchmark by governments around the world. PORTLAND USC CENTER ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY Portland is a strategic communications The USC Center on Public Diplomacy (CPD) was consultancy working with governments, established in 2003 as a partnership between the businesses, foundations, and non- Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism governmental organisations to shape and the School of International Relations at the their stories and communicate them University of Southern California. It is a research, effectively to global audiences. analysis, and professional education organisation dedicated to furthering the study and practice of global public engagement and cultural relations. With special thanks to contributors whose efforts in research, editing, guidance, and design were instrumental to the completion of this report. | Warren Aspeling | Florence Feng | Henri Ghosn | Kate Joyce | George Kyrke-Smith | Natalia Zuluaga Lopez | Kit Neill | Mary Peters | Melanie Thienard| 7 Contributors Penny Abeywardena Penny Abeywardena is the Commissioner for International Affairs at the New York City Mayor’s Office for International Affairs. Penny was Director of Girls and Women Integration at the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) from 2009 to 2014. Nicholas J. Cull Nicholas J. Cull is the Professor of Public Diplomacy and the founding director of the Master of Public Diplomacy program at USC. Nicholas is also a Faculty Fellow at the USC Center on Public Diplomacy. Bijan F. Farnoudi Bijan Farnoudi is the Head of Communications at the Kofi Annan Foundation. He was Head of Communications at the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) from 2008 to 2013 in South Sudan, Nepal, Afghanistan, and Geneva. Aidan Foster-Carter Aidan Foster-Carter is an Honorary Senior Research Fellow in Sociology and Modern Korea at Leeds University. He has covered Korean affairs for Oxford Analytica and the Economist Intelligence Unit. Nina Hachigian Nina Hachigian is the Deputy Mayor for International Affairs in the Office of the Mayor of Los Angeles. Nina was appointed US Representative to ASEAN with the rank and status of Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary from 2014 to 2017. Philip Hall Philip Hall is a Partner at Portland and leads the firm’s disputes practice. He has particular expertise in litigation, conflict, and crisis communications, as well as developing complex digital campaigns for conflict and crisis situations. 8 THE SOFT POWER 30 Olivia Harvey Olivia Harvey is an Account Manager at Portland. She specialises in developing communications strategies for governments, with a particular focus on soft power and public diplomacy. Tristram Hunt Tristram Hunt is the Director of the Victoria and Albert Museum. He was a Labour Party MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central from 2010 to 2017, and Shadow Secretary of State for Education from 2013 to 2015. Dhruva Jaishankar Dhruva Jaishankar is a Fellow in Foreign Policy Studies at Brookings India and the Brookings Institution in Washington DC. He was a Transatlantic Fellow with the German Marshall Fund in Washington DC from 2012 to 2016, where he managed the India Trilateral Forum. Max Kellett Max is a Senior Account Manager at Portland, where he advises clients across Asia and the Middle East on integrated communications activity. He has particular experience in digital communications and crisis management and has spent time embedded within government units. He also has a strong interest in how soft power and digital technology can be leveraged in pursuit of foreign policy priorities. Justin Kerr-Stevens Justin Kerr-Stevens is a Partner at Portland with expertise in capability building and digital strategy for governments in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Europe. He was a Strategic Communications Advisor to various ministries in the UK government from 2004 to 2012. Lisa Koh Lisa Koh is a Senior Account Executive at Portland. She specialises in developing and implementing communications strategies for government and philanthropic organisations, with a focus on East Asia. 9 Elizabeth Linder Elizabeth Linder founded the Conversational Century in 2016 and serves as Chair of the Kinross House Meetings in Scotland. She is a Senior Consulting Fellow at Chatham House and Executive Director of Global Communications & External Affairs at Beautiful Destinations. Richard McGregor Richard McGregor is a Senior Fellow at the Lowy Institute with expertise in the politics and economies of East Asia, primarily China and Japan. He was the Financial Times bureau chief in Beijing and Shanghai from 2000 to 2009, and headed the Washington office from 2011 to 2015. Erik Nisbet Erik Nisbet is Assistant Professor in the School of Communication at The Ohio State University specialising in public diplomacy and foreign policy. Erik is also a Faculty Fellow at the USC Center on Public Diplomacy. Ong Keng Yong Ong Keng Yong is an Ambassador-at-Large at the Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Executive Deputy Chairman of the S.Rajaratnam School of International Studies at NTU. He was High Commissioner of Singapore to Malaysia from 2011 to 2014, and Secretary-General of ASEAN from 2003 to 2008. Tara Ornstein Tara Ornstein is a Multilateral Advisor for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). Tara is an international affairs and global health professional specialising in the management of international research and service delivery programmes. Benjamin Rolfe Benjamin Rolfe is the Chief Executive Officer of the Asia Pacific Leaders Malaria Alliance. He was the Pacific Lead Health Advisor at the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade from 2013 to 2014. 10 THE SOFT POWER 30 Patrik Silborn Patrik Silborn is the Senior Director of Financing and Resource Mobilisation at the Asia Pacific Leaders Malaria Alliance. He was Head of the Private Sector Engagement Department at The Global Fund from 2014 to 2017. Jonathan Soble Jonathan Soble is a Visiting Fellow at the Asia Pacific Initiative. He was formerly the Tokyo correspondent for The New York Times and Tokyo bureau chief for the Financial Times. Vivian S. Walker Vivian S. Walker is a Faculty Fellow at the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, where she serves as Guest Editor for CPD Perspectives and is a Research Fellow at Central European University Center for Media, Data, and Society in Budapest. Jay Wang Jay Wang is the Director of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy and an Associate Professor at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism. Zhang Yiwu Zhang Yiwu is the Deputy Director of the Center of Cultural Resource Research at Peking University. He is a member of the 13th Political Consultative Committee, and a delegate of the Beijing Municipal People’s Congress. In memory of Dr. Martin Roth, 1955 – 2017 The 2018 Soft Power 30 report is dedicated to the memory of Dr.
Recommended publications
  • Soft Power Amidst Great Power Competition

    Soft Power Amidst Great Power Competition

    Soft Power Amidst Great Power Competition May 2018 Irene S. Wu, Ph.D. What is soft power? Soft power is a country’s ability to persuade other countries to follow it. Soft power is about a country’s culture, values, and outlook attracting and influencing other countries. It contrasts with military or economic power. Harvard University’s Joseph Nye coined the term in the 1990’s in part to explain the end of the Cold War. Maybe burgers and rock and roll, not just missiles and money, contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe.1 Why does soft power matter? Research shows that for big issues like war and peace, public opinion in foreign countries has an effect on whether they join the United States in military action. Foreign public opinion matters less on smaller issues like voting in the United Nations.2 Non-U.S.-citizens can love American culture but disagree with U.S. government policies. However, there is a difference between criticisms from countries with close ties compared to those with few ties. 3 The meaning of feedback from friends is different from that of strangers. Why is it useful to measure soft power? Until now, there were two approaches to soft power–relying entirely on stories or ranking countries on a list. Relying entirely on stories is useful and essential, but makes it hard to compare countries with each other or across time. Ranking countries on a single list makes it seem there is only one kind of soft power and that a country’s soft power relationship with every Soft Power Amidst Great Power Competition other country is the same.4 A framework which takes advantage of the available quantitative data that also integrates well with the stories, narratives, and other qualitative analysis is necessary to understand fully soft power.
  • China's Soft Power in East Asia

    China's Soft Power in East Asia

    the national bureau of asian research nbr special report #42 | january 2013 china’s soft power in east asia A Quest for Status and Influence? By Chin-Hao Huang cover 2 The NBR Special Report provides access to current research on special topics conducted by the world’s leading experts in Asian affairs. The views expressed in these reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of other NBR research associates or institutions that support NBR. The National Bureau of Asian Research is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research institution dedicated to informing and strengthening policy. NBR conducts advanced independent research on strategic, political, economic, globalization, health, and energy issues affecting U.S. relations with Asia. Drawing upon an extensive network of the world’s leading specialists and leveraging the latest technology, NBR bridges the academic, business, and policy arenas. The institution disseminates its research through briefings, publications, conferences, Congressional testimony, and email forums, and by collaborating with leading institutions worldwide. NBR also provides exceptional internship opportunities to graduate and undergraduate students for the purpose of attracting and training the next generation of Asia specialists. NBR was started in 1989 with a major grant from the Henry M. Jackson Foundation. Funding for NBR’s research and publications comes from foundations, corporations, individuals, the U.S. government, and from NBR itself. NBR does not conduct proprietary or classified research. The organization undertakes contract work for government and private-sector organizations only when NBR can maintain the right to publish findings from such work. To download issues of the NBR Special Report, please visit the NBR website http://www.nbr.org.
  • Donald Trump Shoots the Match1 Sharon Mazer

    Donald Trump Shoots the Match1 Sharon Mazer

    Donald Trump Shoots the Match1 Sharon Mazer The day I realized it can be smart to be shallow was, for me, a deep experience. —Donald J. Trump (2004; in Remnick 2017:19) I don’t care if it’s real or not. Kill him! Kill him! 2 He’s currently President of the USA, but a scant 10 years ago, Donald Trump stepped into the squared circle, facing off against WWE owner and quintessential heel Mr. McMahon3 in the “Battle of the Billionaires” (WrestleMania XXIII). The stakes were high. The loser would have his head shaved by the winner. (Spoiler alert: Trump won.) Both Trump and McMahon kept their suits on—oversized, with exceptionally long ties—in a way that made their heads appear to hover, disproportionately small, over their bulky (Trump) and bulked up (McMahon) bodies. As avatars of capitalist, patriarchal power, they left the heavy lifting to the gleamingly exposed, hypermasculinist bodies of their pro-wrestler surrogates. McMahon performed an expert heel turn: a craven villain, egging the audience to taunt him as a clueless, elitist frontman as he did the job of casting Trump as an (unlikely) babyface, the crowd’s champion. For his part, Trump seemed more mark than smart. Where McMahon and the other wrestlers were working around him, like ham actors in an outsized play, Trump was shooting the match: that is, not so much acting naturally as neglecting to act at all. He soaked up the cheers, stalked the ring, took a fall, threw a sucker punch, and claimed victory as if he (and he alone) had fought the good fight (WWE 2013b).
  • Disruptor in Chief

    Disruptor in Chief

    the author(s) 2019 ISSN 1473-2866 (Online) ISSN 2052-1499 (Print) www.ephemerajournal.org volume 19(3): 663-670 Disruptor in chief Thomas Lopdrup-Hjorth review of Woodward, B. (2018) Fear – Trump in the White House. London: Simon & Schuster (HB, pp xxii + 420, £12,29, ISBN: 978-1-4711-8129-0) Bob Woodward’s book Fear: Trump in the White House was one of the most awaited, hyped, and talked about books of 2018 – and understandably so. Woodward has authored or coauthored 18 books, several of which have portrayed American presidents and topped the national bestseller-lists. His previous work, not least with Carl Bernstein at the Washington Post, has earned him fame and acclaim, and has, among other things, been instrumental in starting a process that brought a former president down (e.g. Bernstein and Woodward, 1974). In 1973, the Washington Post received a Pulitzer Price for public service for the reporting Woodward and Bernstein did on the Watergate break-in. Here, they revealed how the scandal had ties all the way to the White House, implicating President Nixon who had to resign, as the nefarious details were uncovered. Woodward’s role in shaping America’s recent political history explains the hype and anticipation leading up to the publication of his latest book on Trump in the White House. And it perhaps also explains some of the mild disappointment generated in reading the book – at least for readers who had expected (or hoped for) consequences that merely gestured in the direction of those generated by the disclosure of the Watergate-scandal.
  • India-Australia Poll 2013

    India-Australia Poll 2013

    India-Australia Poll 2013 Partners, problems and prospects Indian attitudes to Australia Rory Medcalf 1 Executive summary The India-Australia Poll reports the results of a nationally consider Australia a safe place, with 29% disagreeing, and representative opinion survey of 1233 Indian adults conducted 48% see Australia as a good place to raise a family, with face-to-face between 30 August and 15 October 2012. It is a 26% disagreeing. Indians from large cities are much more collaboration between the Lowy Institute for International positive about Australia on all these questions, with 61% Policy and the Australia India Institute. considering it a safe place and 69% agreeing it is a good place to raise a family. Warmth towards Australia Despite the bad press it has had over student issues and Education in Australia uranium, Australia is well-liked in India. Indians hold The controversies over Indian student safety a few years ago relatively warm feelings towards Australia (56 degrees do not seem to have damaged Indians’ overall perceptions on a scale of 0 to 100), which ranks fourth after the of Australia as a place to gain an education. Australia United States (62), Singapore (58) and Japan (57) out of ranks second after the United States as a good place to be 22 countries in the survey. Indians feel warmer towards educated, according to 75% of Indians, and rates more Australia than towards countries in Europe, including highly than Canada, Singapore, Britain and Germany. Still, Britain, or towards India’s fellow so-called BRICS: Brazil, 62% of Indians continue to see Australia as a dangerous Russia, China and South Africa.
  • FAKE NEWS!”: President Trump’S Campaign Against the Media on @Realdonaldtrump and Reactions to It on Twitter

    FAKE NEWS!”: President Trump’S Campaign Against the Media on @Realdonaldtrump and Reactions to It on Twitter

    “FAKE NEWS!”: President Trump’s Campaign Against the Media on @realdonaldtrump and Reactions To It on Twitter A PEORIA Project White Paper Michael Cornfield GWU Graduate School of Political Management [email protected] April 10, 2019 This report was made possible by a generous grant from William Madway. SUMMARY: This white paper examines President Trump’s campaign to fan distrust of the news media (Fox News excepted) through his tweeting of the phrase “Fake News (Media).” The report identifies and illustrates eight delegitimation techniques found in the twenty-five most retweeted Trump tweets containing that phrase between January 1, 2017 and August 31, 2018. The report also looks at direct responses and public reactions to those tweets, as found respectively on the comment thread at @realdonaldtrump and in random samples (N = 2500) of US computer-based tweets containing the term on the days in that time period of his most retweeted “Fake News” tweets. Along with the high percentage of retweets built into this search, the sample exhibits techniques and patterns of response which are identified and illustrated. The main findings: ● The term “fake news” emerged in public usage in October 2016 to describe hoaxes, rumors, and false alarms, primarily in connection with the Trump-Clinton presidential contest and its electoral result. ● President-elect Trump adopted the term, intensified it into “Fake News,” and directed it at “Fake News Media” starting in December 2016-January 2017. 1 ● Subsequently, the term has been used on Twitter largely in relation to Trump tweets that deploy it. In other words, “Fake News” rarely appears on Twitter referring to something other than what Trump is tweeting about.
  • The Case of Donald J. Trump†

    The Case of Donald J. Trump†

    THE AGE OF THE WINNING EXECUTIVE: THE CASE OF DONALD J. TRUMP† Saikrishna Bangalore Prakash∗ INTRODUCTION The election of Donald J. Trump, although foretold by Matt Groening’s The Simpsons,1 was a surprise to many.2 But the shock, disbelief, and horror were especially acute for the intelligentsia. They were told, guaranteed really, that there was no way for Trump to win. Yet he prevailed, pulling off what poker aficionados might call a back- door draw in the Electoral College. Since his victory, the reverberations, commotions, and uproars have never ended. Some of these were Trump’s own doing and some were hyped-up controversies. We have endured so many bombshells and pur- ported bombshells that most of us are numb. As one crisis or scandal sputters to a pathetic end, the next has already commenced. There has been too much fear, rage, fire, and fury, rendering it impossible for many to make sense of it all. Some Americans sensibly tuned out, missing the breathless nightly reports of how the latest scandal would doom Trump or why his tormentors would soon get their comeuppance. Nonetheless, our reality TV President is ratings gold for our political talk shows. In his Foreword, Professor Michael Klarman, one of America’s fore- most legal historians, speaks of a degrading democracy.3 Many difficulties plague our nation: racial and class divisions, a spiraling debt, runaway entitlements, forever wars, and, of course, the coronavirus. Like many others, I do not regard our democracy as especially debased.4 Or put an- other way, we have long had less than a thoroughgoing democracy, in part ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– † Responding to Michael J.
  • Submission to Joint Standing Committee on Foreign

    Submission to Joint Standing Committee on Foreign

    SUBMISSION TO JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND TRADE INQUIRY INTO THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC FOR AUSTRALIA'S FOREIGN AFFAIRS, DEFENCE AND TRADE 7 AUGUST 2020 This submission has been prepared by Lowy Institute researchers based on their research published by the Institute in two digital features in April 2020 and June 2020. Where relevant, amendments have been made to update the work since the earlier publication. The first twelve articles were published as a feature titled "The World After COVID" on 9 April 2020. The second twelve articles were published on 29 June 2020 in the feature titled "Emerging from COVID, Securing Australia’s Future: Policy Responses to the Pandemic". The views expressed in this submission are entirely those of the individual authors and not of the Lowy Institute. 1 SUBMISSION TO JSCFADT PART 1: THE WORLD AFTER COVID The United States ..................................................................................... 5 Dr Michael Fullilove AM China .............................................................................................................. 7 Richard McGregor US-China competition ............................................................................. 9 Bonnie Glaser The international economy ................................................................... 11 Roland Rajah Globalisation .............................................................................................13 Dr Stephen Grenville AO Multilateralism and the nation state .................................................
  • A Global Ranking of Soft Power 2018 2 the SOFT POWER 30 SECTION HEADER 3

    A Global Ranking of Soft Power 2018 2 the SOFT POWER 30 SECTION HEADER 3

    A Global Ranking of Soft Power 2018 2 THE SOFT POWER 30 SECTION HEADER 3 Designed by Portland's in-house Content & Brand team. 60 116 The Indo-Pacific in focus: Soft power platforms: old and new The Asia Soft Power 10 The transformational (soft) power of museums: India rising: soft power and the world’s at home and abroad largest democracy Tristram Hunt, Victoria and Albert Museum Dhruva Jaishankar, Brookings India The quest for Reputational Security: interpreting The ASEAN we don’t know the soft power agenda of Kazakhstan and other Ong Keng Yong, RSIS newer states CONTENTS Nicholas J. Cull, USC Center on Public Diplomacy China goes global: why China’s global cultural strategy needs flexibility Reimagining the exchange experience: the local Zhang Yiwu, Peking University impact of cultural exchanges Jay Wang and Erik Nisbet, USC Center on Japan: Asia’s soft power super power? Public Diplomacy Jonathan Soble, Asia Pacific Initiative #UnknownJapan: inspiring travel with Instagram 7 16 Australia in Asia: the odd man out? Max Kellett, Portland Richard McGregor, Lowy Institute Contributors Introduction Table talk: bringing a Swiss Touch to the American public Disorderly conduct The two Koreas and soft power Aidan Foster-Carter, Leeds University Olivia Harvey, Portland Order up? The Asia Soft Power 10 Soft power and the world’s game: the Premier The 2018 Soft Power 30 League in Asia 12 Jonathan McClory, Portland 92 The Soft Power 30 30 Public diplomacy and the decline of liberal New coalitions of the willing & democracy Methodology of the index
  • Foreign and Security Policy in the New Malaysia

    Foreign and Security Policy in the New Malaysia

    Foreign and security policy in Elina Noor the New Malaysia November 2019 FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY IN THE NEW MALAYSIA The Lowy Institute is an independent policy think tank. Its mandate ranges across all the dimensions of international policy debate in Australia — economic, political and strategic — and it is not limited to a particular geographic region. Its two core tasks are to: • produce distinctive research and fresh policy options for Australia’s international policy and to contribute to the wider international debate • promote discussion of Australia’s role in the world by providing an accessible and high-quality forum for discussion of Australian international relations through debates, seminars, lectures, dialogues and conferences. Lowy Institute Analyses are short papers analysing recent international trends and events and their policy implications. The views expressed in this paper are entirely the author’s own and not those of the Lowy Institute or the institutions with which the author is affiliated. FOREIGN AND SECURITY POLICY IN THE NEW MALAYSIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Malaysia’s historic changE oF govErnment in May 2018 rEturnEd Former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad to ofFice supported by an eclectic coalition of parties and interests under the Pakatan Harapan (AlliancE of HopE) bannEr. This raisEd quEstions about how thE sElF-declared Malaysia Baharu (NEw Malaysia) would EngagE with thE rest of thE world. AftEr thE ElEction, it was gEnErally assumEd that Malaysia’s ForEign policy would largEly stay thE coursE, with some minor adjustments. This trajEctory was confirmEd with thE SEptembEr 2019 relEasE of thE Foreign Policy Framework of the New Malaysia: Change in Continuity, thE country’s First major Foreign policy restatement under the new government.
  • Woman of the WORLD

    Woman of the WORLD

    IntervIew talk Did you join the Lowy Institute straight after that? Was it different from working with local government? No, I was offered a position at the International Atomic There was a lot less financial security, being a non-profit, Energy Agency in 1997, but chose instead to accept non-government organisation. Even though it’s one of the the post of Australian Ambassador in Argentina in oldest non-profit organisations in Australia, it’s always February 1998. The day I left for Buenos Aires I recall difficult to secure long-term, reliable financial support. But listening to the debate in the Australian parliament about it was exciting to work in an organisation that delivered whether Australia should become a republic. It was an important humanitarian services at home and internationally exciting time in Australian politics and an exciting time based on enduring, global, internationally recognised for me professionally. I was also excited at the prospect of humanitarian principles with a strong practical focus. building on what was beginning to be a more important relationship between Australia and Latin America, still very And, after that, you started at the Lowy Institute? much in its infancy. I started there in 2005, when I was appointed the Deputy Later in 1998, Qantas commenced operating one-stop Director. The Lowy Institute was established in 2003 to flights to Buenos Aires via Auckland, which was an historic mark the 50th anniversary of Frank Lowy’s arrival in event. The strategy behind this decision was to open the Australia. In 2005, we moved to Sydney’s CBD so we could gateway to the much larger potential market in Brazil.
  • Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: the Case of the European Union in Brazil by María Luisa Azpíroz

    Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: the Case of the European Union in Brazil by María Luisa Azpíroz

    Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: The Case of the European Union in Brazil By María Luisa Azpíroz CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy Paper 2, 2015 Soft Power and Public Diplomacy: The Case of the European Union in Brazil María Luisa Azpíroz March 2015 Figueroa Press Los Angeles SOFT POWER AND PUBLIC DIPLOMACY: THE CASE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IN BRAZIL by María Luisa Azpíroz Published by FIGUEROA PRESS 840 Childs Way, 3rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90089 Phone: (213) 743-4800 Fax: (213) 743-4804 www.figueroapress.com Figueroa Press is a division of the USC Bookstores Cover, text, and layout design by Produced by Crestec, Los Angeles, Inc. Printed in the United States of America Notice of Rights Copyright © 2015. All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purposes of criticism and review, no part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system now known or to be invented, without prior written permission from the author, care of Figueroa Press. Notice of Liability The information in this book is distributed on an “As is” basis, without warranty. While every precaution has been taken in the preparation of this book, neither the author nor Figueroa nor the USC University Bookstore shall have any liability to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly by any text contained in this book. Figueroa Press and the USC Bookstores are trademarks of the University of Southern California.