چکیده:
In today’s world, a country’s portrayal and prestige in public opinion is more important than before, essentially contributing to the failure or success of its policies. From this perspective, many states have considered efforts at influencing and shaping public opinion in recent years. The United States is among those which pay utmost attention to this issue, pursuing its activities within the framework of public diplomacy. In recent years, a change in mindsets in the Middle East is viewed as one of Washington's public diplomacy goals. Iran also has a few plans for introducing the Islamic Revolution’s model to the world and influencing global public opinion. Given religious, cultural and geographical commonalties, Iran pays special attention to the peoples of the Middle East. This paper seeks to compare public diplomacy employed by Iran and the United States in the region, raising the question of which has been more successful. This comparison particularly refers to certain key aspects of the public diplomacy of the two nations, including their goals, audience, sources of soft power, instruments and degree of success.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Keywords: Public Diplomacy, Foreign Policy, Middle East, Iran,United States Research Fellow at the Center for Strategic Research, (Tehran ahadi@csr.
By airing TV programs via satellites, attracting students from regional countries, using the influence of Iranian and Shi'i culture as well as the political Islam based on criticism of the Western and American hegemony, Iran seeks to increase its popularity in the Middle East.
If we want to compare their performance based on their objectives in adopting different policies within the framework of public diplomacy, we have to consider the degree of their favorability and influence among the peoples of the Middle East as displayed by opinion polls.
On the other hand, public diplomacy includes actions for interaction and communication with nations and thoughts which aim to establish and preserve long-term relations according to the culture, values and policies of the system in question and other nations (Hadian and Ahadi, 2009: 88).
According to Joseph Nye’s definition, soft power in every country stems from three sources: culture (sectors which are attractive for others), political values (when they are consistent with their expectations at home and overseas), and foreign policy when seen as legitimate and moral (See Nye, 2004).
Currently taking advantage of soft power parameters within Iran’s public diplomacy framework in the region and the world can help reduce the impact of adverse propaganda conducted by some states and media against Iran.
BBC World opinion polls conducted in 2008, 2010, 2011 and 2013 can help relatively compare the performance of Iranian and American public diplomacy in the Middle East.