Summary This article contributes to the theorisation of collaborative public diplomacy by introducing a perceptual approach. Engaging with the collaborative diplomacy paradigm developed to conceptualise public diplomacy in the context of non-traditional security threats and conflicts, as well as nation building, the article explores and compares perceptions of the European Union (EU) as a public diplomacy actor in Ukraine (tracked in 50 elite interviews) and in Brussels (13 interviews with EU practitioners). The article engages with a concept of a 'perception gap' hypothesising a gap between the Others' perception of the EU and the EU's self-perception. It furthers the conceptualisation of a perception gap by suggesting to consider it at cognitive, normative and emotive levels in the image structure and arguing variation between the levels. The article contends that a perception gap is a critical factor in preventing genuine dialogue, engagement and listening — key concepts proposed by the collaborative diplomacy paradigm.
"This volume brings together contributions that conceptualise and measure EU perceptions in the strategic regions around the world in the aftermath of the UK referendum. Contributors assess the evolution of EU perceptions in each location and discuss how their findings may contribute to crafting foreign policy options for the "new EU-27". Brexit is very likely to have a substantial bearing on EU external policy, not merely because of the loss of a major Member State with a special relationship to the US and the Commonwealth, but also because it tarnishes the integrational success story that the EU strives to embody. This book thus serves a dual purpose: on the one hand it broadens the recent studies on Brexit by focusing on external partners' reactions and on the other it allows for an innovative evaluation of policy options for EU foreign policy. Based on a solid theoretical foundation and empirically rich data, it constitutes an innovative and timely addition to the evolving debate on Brexit and its consequences. This book will be of key interest to scholars and students of European politics, Brexit, British Politics, EU politics, comparative politics and international relations"--
This book explores the images and perceptions of the EU in the eyes of their Strategic Partners. Spanning four continents, these ten important global actors - the BRICS together with the USA, Canada, Japan, South Korea and Mexico - are of profound significance to the EU in economics, politics, security and global governance. In 2015, the volume's editors and contributors were commissioned by the European External Action Service to research these countries' perceptions towards the EU. The research highlights how in changing multilateral settings, images and perceptions significantly influence the behaviour and foreign policy choices of actors. The findings presented in this book helped to inform the content and focus of the 2016 EU Global Strategy, and will be of interest to scholars, students and practitioners of EU foreign policy, European integration and public diplomacy. Natalia Chaban is Professor and Jean Monnet Chair at the National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury, New Zealand. She has published on image and political communication studies within international relations contexts involving the EU in numerous journals and books. Together with Martin Holland, she co-leads the internationally recognised project "EU Global Perceptions", involving more than 30 locations since 2002. Martin Holland holds a Jean Monnet Chair ad personam at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, and is the Director of New Zealand's EU Centres Network. His research spans a wide range of EU policy areas: institutional integration, common foreign policy, development and EU perceptions. He regularly lectures at universities in China, Malaysia and Thailand as well as New Zealand.--
A small but growing literature has started to analyse the European Union (EU) 'as an effective peacemaker'. We make a contribution to this field by investigating EU mediation effectiveness in the Russia–Ukraine conflict. The focus is on perceptions of effectiveness. Based on information from semi-structured interviews, we compare EU self-images with Ukrainian evaluations of EU mediation efforts. How effective is the EU, including its Member States, deemed to be? What factors are believed to lie behind perceived (in)effectiveness? We concentrate on four such factors, derived from the mediator literature: perceived (im)partiality, coherence and credibility and, finally, evaluations of the EU's mediation strategies. Both internal and external views singled out EU member states as the most effective actors in current mediation. The role of EU was seen in ambivalent terms by both sides. All the four determinants of mediation effectiveness are discussed in our material, but differ considerably in the degree of attention given to each of them. While (im)partiality is not a factor that is linked to effectiveness in any straightforward way, EU incoherence is associated with inconsistent and weak policies, notably in the Ukraine material.
AbstractThis article focuses on how the European Union's (EU) mediation activities during the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine conflicts are perceived by local elites. Our analysis is based on recent interviews with decision makers in Ukraine, Israel and Palestine. Consistent with this special issue, we investigate perceptions ofEUroles, strategies and effectiveness. We suggest that theEU's relation to the parties may affect their perceptions ofEUconflict mediation efforts. Specifically, we expect that theEUis perceived as abiased mediatorin both cases due to perceived close relations to one or more conflict parties. However, contrary to our expectations and widespread assumption in mediation theory, while such a bias exists, we found it isnotperceived as a main cause ofEUineffectiveness. Other factors, including the prominence of other mediators and internalEUdisunity, are perceived as more detrimental toEUefficacy.