The Case for Domestic Digital Diplomacy

The past four days have seen the onset of a new crisis in the Middle East following a coordinated U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran. The present crisis in the region is emblematic of 21st-century crises in three ways.

First, the present crisis has engulfed the region, with Iran firing ballistic missiles and drones at Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman. Reports indicate that these countries are now preparing a retaliatory strike on Iran. Mounting tensions have already led France to deploy military units to the region to help safeguard regional allies, while the UK, which opted not to join the attack on Iran, has also deployed military units, with RAF planes shooting down Iranian drones over Jordan.

The current regional crisis is thus already morphing into a complex geopolitical confrontation with numerous actors looking to secure different interests. This complexity is the most basic characteristic of present-day crises, which are no longer contained to several nations and whose impact is no longer regional. Indeed, in an interconnected world marked by global competition over power, regional conflicts have global implications. For example, the Iran crisis has already led to soaring oil prices and a decline in oil production in the region, thus harming China’s interests, as it is dependent on cheap oil from Iran. Yet, soaring oil prices benefit the interests of Russia, which is dependent on oil revenue to sustain its war on Ukraine. In this way, the Iran crisis is already impacting the Ukraine crisis.

Second, the current crisis in Iran is mediated in real-time through different digital technologies, ranging from social media to instant messaging applications, blogs, YouTube channels, and Telegram channels. The amount of information generated and circulated globally is astounding; states, militaries, diplomats, officials, and heads of state tweet and post throughout the day. This is in addition to traditional news channels, digital news outlets, influencers, and citizens in the region sharing viral videos of attacks in the heart of Tehran or drones slamming into hotels and oil refineries in Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Present-day crises also see increased digital activity by relatively new actors: OSINT (open-source intelligence) accounts that post updated information on unfolding events, ranging from U.S. jets crashing above Kuwait to Israeli units advancing into Southern Lebanon. Yet, all this information emanating from these various sources actually leads to greater fragmentation. Social media feeds, Telegram channels, and WhatsApp groups bombard followers with disparate information without a unifying narrative. Tweets, posts, and WhatsApp updates are like bits of information floating in cyberspace that do not join into a coherent narrative of world events.

Third, the Iran crisis is marked by a rapid succession of important events. In the last hour alone:

• The IDF has ordered the evacuation of all Lebanese citizens residing along the border with Israel.
• Iran has attacked a Saudi oil installation.
• An Iranian ship has been struck off the coast of Sri Lanka.
• The U.S. Air Force has bombed targets along the border between Iran and Iraq.
• An Israeli F-35 has shot down an Iranian fighter jet.
• Reports have surfaced that the CIA plans to arm local Kurdish forces in Iran to ignite an internal uprising.
• Iran may have chosen a new leader following the assassination of the former Supreme Leader.

The Iran crisis, like all 21st-century crises, is thus a complex geopolitical crisis mediated in real-time through digital channels and marked by a rapid succession of events which may all impact the interests of regional and global actors. While information is plentiful, what is absent is any form of sensemaking. Individuals looking to make sense of unfolding events are likely to be left baffled and confounded. French citizens may wonder: How are France’s national interests shaped by this crisis? Why are French military units moving into the region? And what does any of this have to do with the Strait of Hormuz and insurance companies’ unwillingness to allow oil ships to pass through the region?

It is precisely in these moments that domestic digital diplomacy may prove most influential. Studies have found that in recent years, Ministries of Foreign Affairs (MFAs) have increasingly targeted their own citizenry on social media, a shift in diplomatic practices, as diplomats usually target foreign populations. Domestic digital diplomacy was, for example, practiced by many MFAs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Diplomats and MFAs crafted messages that would resonate with their citizens, including updates on emergency flights and repatriation efforts, information pertaining to border closures and lockdowns, updates on diplomats’ attempts to secure medical equipment and face masks, and even updates on global efforts to halt the spread of COVID-19.

Many have argued that MFAs targeted their citizens in an attempt to demonstrate their enduring relevance. Indeed, in a digitally connected world, more and more government ministries collaborate with their foreign peers, including ministries of energy, climate, sports, and culture. Subsequently, the remit of MFAs within governments has steadily narrowed. To counter their diminishing role in managing a state’s external affairs, diplomats use social media to target citizens and demonstrate how MFAs aid the nation in moments of peril. Others have suggested that domestic digital diplomacy was also a tool for sensemaking. MFAs created a national prism through which the pandemic could be understood. The UK Foreign Office, for one, explained how the pandemic would impact the UK economy, what measures the UK was taking to secure medical equipment, and British efforts to develop a vaccine.

While domestic digital diplomacy may be dubbed an exercise in PR, it can also play a pivotal role in sensemaking. Diplomats are foreign policy experts as well as skilled communicators. Their role is often to narrate complex policies and simplify complex processes. It is thus diplomats who can help digital publics make sense of 21st-century crises. It is diplomats who can help French citizens understand why France is dispatching its aircraft carrier to the region, why France has warned Israel of escalating tensions with Lebanon, and even why there are tensions between Israel and Lebanon in the first place.

Sensemaking is crucial during times of crisis, as it can also lower feelings of angst and uncertainty. Baffled by global and regional events and unable to make sense of the constant stream of information, citizens across the world may feel they no longer understand the world they inhabit. Such feelings often generate a desire for radical leaders who promise to simplify the world through radical action and by recreating the familiar world of yesteryear. Donald Trump’s promise to “Make America Great Again” was also a promise to make the world comprehensible again—to recreate the simple world of the 1980s where “good guys fought bad guys.”

The problem is that such radical leaders often deplore diplomacy; they denounce multilateral forums as “global elites” and abhor diplomatic deliberations, favoring guns over talks. As such, these leaders undermine and weaken diplomacy. By offering sensemaking, narrating unfolding events, explaining how various fragments of information relate to one another, and creating a coherent narrative of world events during crises, diplomats can aid their citizens, reduce feelings of uncertainty, and diminish support for leaders who are likely to undermine diplomacy in the future. There is now a clear case for practicing domestic digital diplomacy.