Paradoxes of 'public diplomacy': Ethnographic perspectives on the European Union delegations in the antipodes

Public diplomacy' is a term increasingly used among policy makers and academics, yet its meaning is ambiguous and contested. Advocates proclaim it as a new approach to statecraft entailing a participatory approach of shared meaning-making between politicians and the public markedly different from the elitist, Machiavellian inter-governmental practices of traditional (Westphalian') diplomacy. The European Union (EU) has embraced these ideals, proclaiming public diplomacy a cornerstone of European external relations policy. We examine these claims in the context of the EU's delegations to Australia and New Zealand. Using three ethnographic case studies, we highlight discrepancies between official discourses on public diplomacy and its practice. The participatory ideals of EU public diplomacy, we argue, are undermined by the EU's preoccupation with image and branding, public relations and marketing techniques, and continuing reliance on traditional backstage' methods of diplomacy. We conclude by outlining the implications of these paradoxes for both anthropological research and EU external relations.