Besides all the issues that come from their history and lack
of i9nclusion in the international power structure, Taiwan also has a big
challenge when it comes to soft power because of its highly competitive elections.
That means that domestic popular opinion is extremely important within Taiwan.
Many of their soft power decisions are based not upon foreign policy, but rather
domestic election issues. So instead of focusing on contentious issues for
their soft power, they focus on culture. As Rawnsley says, they portray
themselves as the preserver of traditional Chinese culture. They emphasize
going beyond democracy for their soft power. The problem with that is that they
are wasting a lot of soft power opportunity.
The biggest opportunity Taiwan has is that they can promote
themselves as democracy, something China is obviously not. It is something the
major powers, like the U.S. often stress, so Taiwan should be capitalizing on
it more. The reason they don’t is often because they don’t want to offend
anyone in domestic election. Rawnsley suggests they should take a more “holistic”
approach towards their soft power and include politics and history, as well as
culture. Then they wouldn’t just be focusing on contentious political issues,
but they also wouldn’t be wasting their soft power potential. This could possibly
have more tangible results than culture on its own could have. It would also
prove to be less objective. Those are both complaints that Rawnsley and others
have about Taiwan’s current soft power strategies.
I am very intrigued by countries like Taiwan that are attempting to assert themselves on the global stage, but are finding some setbacks in their public diplomacy practices. As you mentioned, the issue with Taiwan is that it is not heavily involved in international alliances (like the UN) or other types of foreign outreach, but have an advanced cultural and domestic sphere.
ReplyDeleteI've been finding some of the same things are going on in other countries. My group is working on making strategies for Brand Kenya, a campaign to advance the image and attraction to Kenya. However, we've found that Kenya is too bogged down domestically to really continue conducting foreign public diplomacy effectively. Taiwan is the same way, although their domestic society is not weighted with social problems like Kenya.
However, I wonder if that is a central issue that so-called 'Middle Powers' are having - striking that balance between foreign and domestic...
I can definitely see it having something to do with being a middle power, but I think Taiwan's situation is more based on the fact that is an unrecognized nation, being most comparable I guess with someone like Palestine (although obviously not so extremely volatile). Many of their foreign issues are highly controversial because of Taiwan's relationship with China. So I don't think it's so much that they are bogged down in their domestic issues, but more that their international ones are so contentious that they shy away because politicians are afraid of making too many angry on these highly contested issues.
ReplyDeleteGood points made here - I like your analysis and response to Corey, Jessica. It's a tricky situation for Taiwan. I made Rawnsley's points at the Brookings event a few weeks ago, and I don't think people were too enthused about it. That was an interesting reaction. Taiwan's PD seems to be confounded by 1) institutional problems, 2) too much influence by domestic politics, and 3) the big challenge of international recognition. I wonder also if in Middle Power PD, it becomes necessary to blend PD and Nation-branding.
ReplyDelete