Ambassador Petra Schneebauer comments on the importance of being active online as a public diplomat.
Austria’s ambassador to the United States discussed the evolving nature of diplomacy and diplomatic communication between the two countries at the School of Media & Public Affairs’ television studio on Wednesday.
Ambassador Petra Schneebauer spoke about diplomacy’s changes due to technology and Austria’s current relationship with the United States. This discussion was the third in an international ambassador series hosted by the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication, with moderators Qёndrim Gashi, the former ambassador of Kosovo to France and Joe Wierichs, the Department of State’s public diplomacy fellow at the IPDGC.
Schneebauer said English is the dominant language in diplomacy but that it’s “always good” to speak as many languages as possible as a diplomat as you often speak to people from around the world.
She highlighted the importance of speaking multiple languages through an example of Austrian politics during 2015 and 2016, when many migrants from Syria and Afghanistan came to Austria. In 2015, Austria counted the third-highest per capita rate of asylum applications in the European Union, with more than 88,000 applications coming from Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.
“It is good if you speak, for example, Arabic, and we don’t have so many people speaking Arabic in our foreign ministry,” she said.
Gashi asked Schneebauer how diplomacy has changed in the past 25 to 30 years and he added that in the modern day, it would not be strange for two diplomats to message each other over WhatsApp, an instant messenger, which changes what it means to be a diplomat completely as it used to take much longer to contact a fellow diplomat.
Schneebauer said Austria has had a diplomatic relationship with the United States for more than 185 years and said online media has become a helpful source to obtain information as it has become accessible for everybody.
She said it is “normal nowadays” for the 25 ministers for foreign affairs within the European Union, to exchange information via communication platforms such as WhatsApp as it’s very quick to call each other on the app.
She said instant communication may be easier for a state like Austria to utilize, as the foreign ministry is relatively small in comparison to the United States where there are thousands of State Department diplomats.
Toward the end of the discussion, a question and answer session was held in which an audience member asked about future relations between Austria and the United States’ given the new administration under President Donald Trump.
Schneebauer said there was lots of speculation around the world when Trump’s inaugural address did not mention Europe. She said “the fact is” that the relationship between the United States and Europe is very strong.
“I think it’s such an important part of a bilateral relationship, the economic relationship — and the economic relationship between the United States and Europe is the tightest relationship we can have,” she said.
She also said the Austrian embassy does not know the future and that Trump is “very determined” on what he plans to do on the global stage.
“We will have to discuss the question of tariffs when they are here,” Schneebauer said. “I think this will be coming, but we will see how everything has to work out in detail. I think what we have done from the European side, I mean, it was very clear, also from our side. And as I mentioned before, we will work with the U.S. administration. It’s very clear.”
Costa Rican Ambassador Dr. Catalina Crespo Sancho discusses her thoughts on public diplomacy.
Costa Rica’s ambassador to the United States discussed how serving the interests of both countries pushed her to develop tools for facilitating bilateral policies in the School of Media & Public Affairs’ television studio on Wednesday.
Ambassador Catalina Crespo Sancho discussed how she developed policy solutions for both Costa Rica and the United States while navigating working in international affairs as a woman. The event, moderated by Qёndrim Gashi, the former ambassador of Kosovo to France, and Joe Wierichs, the Department of State’s public diplomacy fellow at the Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication, was the second in an international ambassador series hosted by the IPDGC.
She said ambassadors are constantly adjusting their strategies for communication and policy development, so they’re prepared for shifts in foreign policy and international politics. She said the most important part of her job is to facilitate connections between both countries regardless of what political figures are in charge.
“Every time before I meet with a congressman or woman or senator, I’m like, ‘okay, what’s going on in this state?’ If it’s the House, what’s going on in their specific area?” Sancho said. “How does that relate to Costa Rica or not? Usually there’s something one way or another.”
Sancho said in diplomacy there is a difference between understanding a language and understanding a culture. She said her time spent living in the United States prior to serving as an ambassador not only helped her foster a stronger diplomatic connection between the two countries but also gave her a better perspective on both the political landscape and day-to-day life as an American.
Sancho said it is crucial that ambassadors maintain a positive mindset and tough skin while serving as a public figure. She said one observation she’s made about gender roles is that the spouses of female ambassadors are often criticized if they don’t work, but the spouses of male ambassadors are not criticized for working less.
Sancho said while facing public scrutiny as a woman in international politics, she turned to humor as a coping mechanism.
“When you are a woman in politics, or a person in politics regardless of gender, you go through a lot, people are after a lot of things you do,” Sancho said. “So you have two options. You either get grumpy, and you don’t trust anyone, and then nobody wants you around, or you laugh about it. Sometimes you don’t laugh about it, but you have a good humor into things.”
Intended for teachers of diplomacy and related courses, here is an update on resources that may be of general interest. Suggestions for future updates are welcome.
eBook text and paperback here. Kindle and paperback here.
Practitioners, scholars, and journalists are generating an abundance of content as they struggle to assess the Trump administration’s actions directed at US diplomacy’s professionals, instruments, and institutions. This issue of “Diplomacy’s Public Dimension” begins with selected items available on the date of publication categorized by practitioner community.
Episodic commitment to diplomacy’s public dimension has been a characteristic of the American way of diplomacy for centuries. The challenge now as in the past is to embrace principled and effective responses and reform strategies. Scholars and practitioners need to make strong evidence-based conceptual arguments, prioritize compelling roadmaps to transformational change, work to preserve proven practices, engage in collective action, and support all legal remedies.
Ameila Arsenault, “The Measurement Dilemma in Public Diplomacy,” 348-359, in Sean Aday, ed., Handbook on Public Diplomacy, (Edward Elgar, 2025). Arsenault (US Department of State) brings the skills of a leading scholar and experienced practitioner to this examination of the endlessly challenging issues of performance “monitoring” and outcomes “evaluation” in diplomacy’s public dimension. After an opening discussion of how terms are defined and operationalized, she explores three broad themes. (1) The evolution of public diplomacy monitoring and evaluation. (2) Complex challenges in implementing a culture of measurement and evaluation: alignment on objectives; agreement on levels of analysis; understanding audiences; time, money, and staff problems; and whether and how monitoring and evaluation are operationalized in a particular organizational setting. (3) Ways to ameliorate challenges and incorporate monitoring, evaluation, and learning into public diplomacy theory and practice. Arsenault’s chapter is a US government focused case study, but it is broadly relevant to issues facing governments and foreign ministries worldwide. It is destined to be a landmark assessment of public diplomacy’s “measurement dilemma.”
Muneera Bano, Zahid Hafeez Chaudhri, and Didar Zowghi, “Mapping the Scholarly Landscape on AI and Diplomacy,”The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, (2025), 1-36, published online, March 14, 2025. Bano (CSIRO, Australia’s National Science Agency), Chaudhri (High Commission for Pakistan, Australia), and Zowghi (CSIRO) examine challenges and opportunities in the uses of artificial intelligence (AI) and generative AI (GenAI) tools in diplomatic practice. Based on a literature review of 231 articles in Google Scholar and Scopus, they discuss how scholars have analyzed integration of digital technologies and AI in key thematic areas: bilateral and multilateral diplomacy, digital diplomacy, social media’s role in diplomacy, public diplomacy, health diplomacy, AI’s role in foreign policy and negotiation, cultural diplomacy, security diplomacy, economic diplomacy, and environmental diplomacy. Challenges include ethical concerns, uneven adoption of technologies across countries and regions, cybersecurity risks, and AI’s impact on geopolitical conflict. Opportunities include AI’s role in enhancing international cooperation, diplomatic training, and anticipation of political crises and humanitarian disasters. The authors identify a significant gap in articles specifically focused on “ChatGPT” and “GenAI” in diplomacy, which they attributed to their novelty. Overall, their article is a significant contribution to research in this trending domain in diplomacy studies.
Journal of Public Diplomacy, Vol. 5, No. 1, Spring-Summer 2025. Co-edited by Kyung Sun Lee, Zayed University, United Arab Emirates, and Zhao Alexandre Huang, Université Gustave Eiffel, France, JPD was established by the Korean Association of Public Diplomacy in 2021. Its goals are to publish peer-reviewed open access articles on the theory and practice of public diplomacy and serve as venue for dialogue among scholars and practitioners. Articles in its current issue include:
Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way, “The Path to American Authoritarianism: What Comes After Democratic Breakdown,”Foreign Affairs, March/April 2025, 36-51. Levitsky (Harvard University) and Way (University of Toronto) argue that in the second Trump administration the United States will likely no longer meet the standards of a liberal democracy: full adult suffrage, free and fair elections, and broad protection of civil liberties. This will not be a destruction of the Constitutional order. Rather it would be a democratic decline they characterize as “competitive authoritarianism” — a transformation of political life marked by politicization and weaponization of government departments, targeted prosecutions, corrupt uses of economic policies and regulatory decisions, violations of basic civil liberties, and collective action problems of targeted institutions. The authors identify possible sources of resilience: federalism, an independent judiciary, bicameralism, mid-term elections, low approval ratings, and incompetence and overreach. Opposition forces can win, but only if they do not “retreat to the sidelines.”
Alister Miskimmon and Ben O’Loughlin, “Strategic Narrative and Public Diplomacy: What Artificial Intelligence Means for the Endless Problem of Plural Meanings of Plural Things,” 34-46, in Sean Aday, ed., Handbook on Public Diplomacy, (Edward Elgar, 2025). Communication scholarsMiskimmon (Queens University Belfast) and O’Loughlin (Royal Holloway, University of London) consider important issues relating to how generative AI might change public diplomacy and the uses of strategic narratives. (1) The meaning and relevance of “information disorder” and “international order.” (2) The dilemma of establishing and verifying truth claims in information disorder when identities of communicators are unknown. (3) Using analysis of actors’ strategic narratives to locate truth in historical claims drawing on public diplomacy following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 as an example. (4) Ways in which actors are using generative AI tools to communicate in foreign affairs and control the development of AI capabilities. The authors of this deeply researched article conclude that despite the increasing complexity that generative AI will bring to communication, “the fundamentals of public diplomacy and strategic narrative are unchanged.” The political and ethical questions facing researchers, however, lie at the intersection of traditional issues in communication and the transformative impact of profoundly complex and opaque technological tools.
Clay Risen, Red Scare: Blacklists, McCarthyism, and the Making of Modern America, (Simon & Schuster, 2025).New York Times reporter and historian Risen takes care to say today’s MAGA movement is not identical to McCarthyism. However, a throughline to the Red Scare of the 1940s and 50s is essential to understanding the current moment. He leaves it to readers to find their own parallels. Risen’s deeply researched narrative, much based on new sources, is told through vivid stories of famous and little-known individuals – those who wielded conspiracy theories and hard right political agendas and the many affected by them in all walks of American life.
Senator Joseph McCarthy’s attacks on the State Department, the purging of State’s “China Hands,” hearings on the Voice of America, Roy Cohn’s and David Schine’s whirlwind assault on US overseas libraries, House Unamerican Activities Committee (HUAC) investigations, Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs, Whitaker Chambers’ largely validated claims, Hollywood blacklists, and other vignettes illuminate the “storm of investigations, loyalty programs, book bans, and ostracisms that destroyed thousands of careers and lives.” Risen documents the concerns of American diplomats on the impact on foreign public opinion. Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith’s opposition, Edward R. Murrow’s CBS exposé of McCarthy, the Army-McCarthy hearings, and Republican defeat in the 1954 midterm elections signified an end to the political hysteria for most. Among the many reasons Risen’s account is instructive: its portrayal of McCarthyism as symptomatic of an enduring thread in America’s cultural DNA, its framing of events in the contours of Cold War anxieties and domestic conflicts between conservatives and progressives, and its compelling insights into the profoundly difficult choices of individuals and institutions confronted by innuendo, secret lists, and violations of law and civil rights.
“RSF World Press Freedom Index 2025: Economic Fragility a Leading Threat to Press Freedom,” May 2025, Reporters Without Borders. RSF’s latest report documents continuing physical attacks on journalists and an unprecedented low level of global press freedom due to economic pressures on media organizations. The report finds press freedom in the United States has fallen to a record low — its first significant decline in modern history. Indicators include the (1) economic priorities of concentrated media ownership; (2) growing interest in partisan media; (3) efforts to politicize the Federal Communications Commission; and (4) President Trump’s attacks on journalists, threats to weaponize government against the media, and efforts to dismantle the Voice of America, other US international broadcasting services, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. | “Alarm Bells: Trump’s First 100 Days Ramp Up Fears for the Press, Democracy,” May 2025, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPI). In this special report, CPI calls out changes in White House press access privileges, politicized activities of the FCC and other regulatory activities, Trump’s rhetoric and behavior, efforts to derive NPR and PBS of government funding, and investigations into reporting by CBS, ABC, and NBC.
Joseph S. Nye, Jr. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone, (Oxford University Press, 2002). Joseph Nye — one of the world’s most influential thinkers on the nature of power and international relations — died on May 6, 2025. His ideas about soft power, power diffusion, cyberpower, relational power, the paradox of plenty, wielding soft power through public diplomacy, and many other topics shaped the views of scholars, students, diplomats, leaders, and friends. Nye’s career combined a lifetime of teaching at Harvard, stints in government during the Carter and Clinton administrations, and a steady stream of books, articles and op-eds written for experts and general audiences. He reached out often to public diplomacy practitioners. Examples: a webinar with the Washington Institute of Foreign Affairs in May 2025 (moderated by Pat Kabra), a webinar with the Public Diplomacy Council of America and USC’s Center on Public Diplomacy in January 2025 (moderated by Sherry Mueller), his Walter Roberts Endowment Lecture at George Washington University’s Institute for Public Diplomacy and Global Communication in January 2020 (moderated by Tara Sonenshine), and his participation at a conference on The Elements of Smart Power: Reinventing Public Diplomacy at the White Oak Conference Center in Florida in January 2009 organized by Bob Coonrod (PDCA), Kenton Keith (Meridian International Center) and Doug Wilson (The Howard Gilman Center).
Nye’s Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (1990), Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (2004), and The Future of Power (2013) among many other works could be selected as a “gem from the past.” But the current moment points to his Paradox of American Power written in 2002 shortly after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. He addressed problems that would ensue if America undertook “a foreign policy that combines unilateralism, arrogance, and parochialism.” If we squander our soft power and invest in military power alone, we will make a great mistake he argued. Nye insisted soft power is a descriptive, not a normative, concept. Like any form of power, it can be used for good or bad purposes. Hard power and soft power are related and can reinforce each other. Nye claimed persuasively that indifference to the opinions of others and reckless destruction of the values of democracy, governance norms and institutions, and societal sources of soft power are a roadmap to increased vulnerability. “I am afraid President Trump doesn’t understand soft power,” he said recently to CNN’s Jim Sciutto. “[W]hen you cancel something like USAID humanitarian assistance, or you silence the Voice of America, you deprive yourself of one of the major instruments of power.” Those who suggest Nye’s views portray a world gone by would do well to remember his frequent observation that throughout history soft power has been gained, lost, and regained.
