Journals / Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2

The Military Dimension of Public Diplomacy: Public Diplomacy Activities of U.S. Combatant Commands

Kamu Diplomasisinin Askerî Boyutu: ABD Muharip Komutanlıklarının Kamu Diplomasisi Faaliyetleri

Pages
244–270
Publication Date
2018-10-23
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Eventually, it has been concluded that U.S. military’s public diplomacy activities do not encompass all dimensions of public diplomacy and it systematically provides support to national public diplomacy activities in terms of its capability.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The issues which had been solved through hard power and traditional diplomacy until the beginning of 20th century were started to be solved through different instruments in the advancing years.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the 21st century, militaries which are the most important components of hard power have started to conduct public diplomacy activities and constitute their public diplomacy frameworks.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Eventually, it has been concluded that U.S. military’s public diplomacy activities do not encompass all dimensions of public diplomacy and it systematically provides support to national public diplomacy activities in terms of its capability.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kamu diplomasisi · askerî kamu diplomasisi · ABD ordusu

Abstract

The issues which had been solved through hard power and traditional diplomacy until the beginning of 20th century were started to be solved through different instruments in the advancing years. One of the most popular of these is the term of public diplomacy which emerged after the Second World War as an extension of communication activities like propaganda. In the 21st century, militaries which are the most important components of hard power have started to conduct public diplomacy activities and constitute their public diplomacy frameworks. At first glance, it may seem paradoxical that an institution with weapons conduct soft power activities. However, if the essence of these activities is examined, it will be understood that these activities can serve for the soft power purposes. This research aims to answer the question of “How can militaries, which are identified with hard power, serve in activities like public diplomacy in order to advance soft power?”. This research has importance in terms of filling the gap in this realm by examining military dimension of public diplomacy and its practices. Accordingly, social media contents of U.S. military were subjected to quantitative and qualitative content analyses. Eventually, it has been concluded that U.S. military’s public diplomacy activities do not encompass all dimensions of public diplomacy and it systematically provides support to national public diplomacy activities in terms of its capability.

Özet

Yirminci yüzyıl başlarına kadar sert güç ve geleneksel diplomasi aracılığı ile çözülen meseleler, ilerleyen yıllarda farklı araçlar ile çözülür hale gelmiştir. Bu araçların en bilinir olanlarından biri, İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrası ortaya çıkan ve propaganda gibi iletişim faaliyetlerinin devamı niteliğindeki kamu diplomasisi kavramıdır. Yirmi birinci yüzyıl ile birlikte sert gücün en önemli aracı olan ordular da kamu diplomasisi faaliyetleri icra etmeye başlamışlar ve bu kapsamdaki çerçevelerini çalışmalarını genişletmişlerdir. Silaha sahip bir kurum olarak orduların yumuşak güç faaliyetleri icra etmeleri, ilk bakışta çelişkili bir durum olarak görülebilir. Ancak çağdaş orduların icra ettikleri faaliyetlerin özü incelendiğinde, bu amaca hizmet edebilecek faaliyetler icra ettikleri görülmektedir. Bu çalışma ile sert güç ile bu denli özdeşleşmiş bir kurumun yumuşak gücün geliştirilmesine yönelik kamu diplomasisi gibi faaliyetlerde nasıl kullanılabileceği sorusunun cevaplanması amaçlanmaktadır. Bu çalışma, kamu diplomasisinin askerî boyutunu ve bunun uygulamalarını ortaya koyarak literatür de bu konuda var olan eksikliğin giderilmesi açısından önem taşımaktadır. Bu doğrultuda ABD ordusunun muharip komutanlıklarının sosyal medya içerikleri nicel ve nitel içerik analizine tâbi tutulmuştur. Çalışmanın sonunda ABD ordusunun kamu diplomasisinin tüm boyutlarını kapsayacak şekilde faaliyetlerde bulunmadığı ve ulusal kamu diplomasisi faaliyetlerine kendi imkânları ve belirli bir sistem dahilin de destek sağladığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

IŞIK, G., YILDIZ, O. (2018). The Military Dimension of Public Diplomacy: Public Diplomacy Activities of U.S. Combatant Commands. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 2, 244–270. https://ajindex.com/articles/13601

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Babst, S. (2008). Reinventing NATO’s Public Diplomacy. NATO Research Paper(41). Berridge, G. R. (2015). Diplomacy: Theory and Practice (5. ed.). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Borg, L. J. (2008). Communicating with intent: the Department of Defense and strategic communication. Incidental Paper, Centre for Information Policy Research and Harvard University. Cull, N. J. (2009). "Public Diplomacy" Before Gullion: The Evolution of a Phrase | USC Center on Public Diplomacy. In N. Snow & P. M. Taylor (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy (ss. 19-23). New York: Routledge. Çetin, M., & Toprak, Y. E. (2016). Çerçeveleme Kuramı Bağlamında Kamuoyu Oluşturmada Spin: Birinci Körfez Savaşı. İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi(42). Defense Science Board. (2004). Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication. Erişim Tarihi (12 Şubat 2017) https://fas.org/irp/agency/dod/dsb/commun.pdf
  2. Desjardins, J. (2017). U.S. Military Personnel Deployments by Country. Retrieved from http://www.visualcapitalist.com/u-s-military-personnel-deployments-country/ adresinden 23 Aralık 2017 tarihinde alınmıştır. Eisenhower, D. D. (1957). The Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States (January 1 to December 31, 1957). Erişim Tarihi (28 Mart 2017). http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ppotpus/4728417.1957.001/198?rgn=main;view=image
  3. Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 616(1), 55-77.
  4. Greenspan, R. (2011). Public Diplomacy in Uniform: The Role U.S. Department of Defense in Supporting Modern Day Public Diplomacy. Erişim Tarihi (22 Mart 2017). http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/2011/0104/comm/greensapn_pduniform.html
  5. Hammes, T. X. (1994). The Evolution of War: The Fourth Generation. Marine Corps Gazette, 78(9), 35-44.
  6. International Monetary Fund. (2017). World Economic Outlook. Erişim Tarihi (09Ağustos 2017). http://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPPC@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2010a). Joint Publication 1-02: Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms (Amended Through 15 February 2016). Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2010b). Joint Publication 3-13.2: Military Information Support Operations (Incorporating Change 1, 20 December 2011). Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2010c). Joint Publication 3-61: Public Affairs. Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2012). Joint Publication 3-13: Information Operations (Incorporating Change 1, 20 November 2014). Kar