Interview with Dan Dima, a specialist in public diplomacy:In the Ceausescu time, Romania had a better picture

 

333481-p.4-a-dan-dima-sabian-fati

de SABINA FATI

Dan Dima , Advisor to the Presidency Office and public diplomacy specialist believes that Nicolae Ceausescu ‘s better than the current leaders to make a good image of Romania as ” any partner of Romania knew whom to call and always get a response , the Furthermore , there is no fear that a decision taken in a bilateral discussion will then be challenged by anyone . ” Dima believes that Romania would not be promoted by people like Nadia Comaneci , Ilie Nastase , Gheorghe Hagi , because , although they “have a glorious past have no future .”

Regarding the issue of Romanian migrants and Romanian labor market opening in 2014 , public diplomacy specialist believes that Romania should , as did Poland years ago , to create an image of Romanians working out model ” Polish plumber ” . Then , as the Romanians do not even want to go to work in the UK , for example , someone – Romanian Government or the British – should communicate exactly what the conditions are there. The best thing however Romanians Vaslui be doing their emigration plans have where read about what lies ahead in London before arriving there, because, as noted Dima , they do not read the Daily Mail.

Why Romania does not have a strategy for public diplomacy ?

DD : First of all , there is no institution able to provide something in Romania , and that Romania has serious concerns in this regard, but also because of perceptions previously built lives , ie the communist period . There is intense concern in this regard before 1989 external image management , it is true by using propaganda as a means of implementing what we now call public diplomacy .

External image was then good coverage of what is happening internally ?

DD : It was propaganda , of course that screens many things pertaining to reality, but even so, in the communist period was insufficient arguments appreciation for Romania . For example , at that time there government stability , a first element that produces a good external perception any partner of Romania knew whom to call and always get a response, in addition there is no fear that a decision taken in a discussion bilateral will then be challenged by anyone .

Perhaps , however, the comparison with the regime is not the happiest . That is due to effective public diplomacy , Romania during Ceausescu’s have a better picture than Romania in the EU and NATO member ?

DD : I speak only from a technical standpoint , we have , on the one hand, a set of tools that produce public perceptions and on the other hand the results we achieve. In history , not just Ceausescu got to create a good image of the country , but before him, and Charles did this using in turn including tools that today they detest . Crease , for instance, an office of the foreign press office often accused of ” select” information : foreign journalists received information chosen with great care. The results obtained by this office were very good, if we think that major newspapers like La Stampa said that Romania is a regional leader . Carol I managed to create this perception , which later helped in foreign policy.

Romania as well as to succeed the same performance as the time of Charles I, for example to be considered a regional leader ?

DD : Before and create images and desires , Romania must become credible and have a good reputation. See , speak well of Romania does not necessarily mean public diplomacy – say it whenever I can. On these two components , credibility and reputation, you can build a country brand . Credibility must , however, cultivated : can not buy , just get serious public policy actions . Nowadays a serious state of internal and external views listens before producing public policy , so that inside and outside expectations are met. Then , in creating these policies , the state is transparent and allows the involvement of society , and finally , the policy that applies fairly and promotes.

Statement by the President on the new national project of Romania, union with Moldova , Romania put in a better light than before or, conversely, a move among revisionist states ?

 

Advertisements

Comments are closed.