There is more of an overlap between PR and international relations than you may think

The study and practice of international relations is defined by three main theories or schools of thought: realism, liberalism and constructivism. 

Realism describes a world of anarchy, where there are no rules or norms, where states are in conflict with one another and solely focused on survival. Security is of utmost importance and survival depends on amassing military power.

Liberalism sees international relations defined by political and economic institutions. Proponents of liberalism argue that states are not driven by survival; instead, they are driven by self-interest. However, states are interdependent, and democratic values and trade can enable states to fulfil that self-interest in cooperation with others and work towards collective good.

Constructivism, however, argues that international relations is governed not by military power or institutions, but instead by the movement and flow of ideas, individual actors, and influence. Each state – and the relationship it maintains with another state – is defined by its own ideas and norms. When these ideas and norms change, so do states’ relations with one another.

The last theory presents some interesting implications for people who may not see PR and communication as having anything to do with international relations. If international relations is a function of expressing ideas, shaping norms, framing issues and persuading other states to follow your lead, then communication has more to do with international relations than typically believed.

Sure, international relations may be more prominently the domain of states and international institutions. But in the constructivist school of thought, norms and ideas are shaped by more than just states. They are also shaped by civil society, academia, businesses, citizens and the media – all of which are stakeholders for any PR and communication professional.

In this light, many geopolitical issues can be seen as a matter of communication, or how states frame problems and craft their narratives. The Cold War is the easiest example that comes to mind – it was not just a military or economic conflict, but a war of ideas, a war between liberal and communist conceptualisations of society. 

The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine is also more than just a means of asserting military, political or economic power. It is a battle of the narratives – how both countries conceptualise their historical identity and justify their actions, and try to persuade other stakeholders of the superiority of their ideas and norms. It is also a study in how Russia uses disinformation and how Ukraine taps into other countries’ own narratives and uses a blend of facts, emotion and memes to combat this disinformation.

More recently, the slew of criticism against Qatar’s hosting of the 2022 World Cup, based on concerns for migrant labourers and LGBT+ communities, can also be seen through an intersection of communication and international relations. On one hand, it is the event of the year, a way for Qatar to establish itself more firmly in the hearts and minds of people globally, and give stiff competition to its Gulf neighbours, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. On the other hand, the event has exposed Qatar to a textbook reputational crisis, with countries and businesses likely facing the pressure from their own citizens and consumers to challenge Qatar’s ideas and norms. Which of these campaigns will prevail?

True, the use of communication within international relations, foreign policy and diplomacy is widely noted. The concept of soft power as defined by Joseph Nye – the attractiveness of a country’s culture, values and institutions – is well known. Tools such as nation-branding and public diplomacy (the cultivation of favourable foreign public opinion to advance foreign policy objectives and build mutual understanding) are used to create, maintain and exercise soft power. The activities that fall under public relations and communication – media relations, event management, crisis communication and advocacy and advertising – naturally lend themselves to these tools.

But what remains to be understood more deeply is the overlap between communication and international relations, as well as the ability of PR and communication to shape – not just publicise – a country’s foreign policy. If we follow the constructivist approach, we can see that all stakeholders – not just governments – stand to affect and be affected by geopolitical developments. This is not limited to the impact on business outcomes or a client’s reputation, though these are of course noteworthy concerns. It can also mean an impact on the relations between two or more countries. 

We have already seen an example of this when businesses ceased operations in Russia and condemned the invasion as a mark of support for Ukraine. It is likely that businesses did so to demonstrate they were adhering to the norms and ideas set by the US, UK, EU and Ukraine. But this action also made it possible for some of the most extensive financial sanctions ever seen to go into action against Russia.

A 2010 article in The Guardian by a representative of the Human Rights Watch was the first of – if not the catalyst for – the many reports for Qatar’s poor human rights track record ahead of the 2022 World Cup. All of these led to a critical mass of stories resulting in the current reputational crisis and challenge to Qatar’s aspirations. It bears asking: if FIFA, sponsors, teams or coaches were to back out of supporting or hosting the World Cup in Qatar, what effect would that have on Qatar’s standing in the global world order? 

A final thought experiment can be examining the effect of UK-India relations with the appointment of Rishi Sunak as the Prime Minister of the UK. His wife, Akshata Murthy, is the daughter of the founder of Infosys, an Indian IT giant. Consequently, the norms and ideas communicated by Infosys, its shareholders and its partners could potentially shape future trade agreements between the two countries – without any actor needing to turn to lobbying. 

Even if you do not subscribe to the constructivist theory of international relations, the fact remains that the world has become so deeply interconnected due to technology and globalisation that it is easy for a single story to impact stakeholders around the globe. And, given the nature of the internet, there is no telling what idea, norm or narrative will go viral tomorrow and change the world order.

---

Curzon PR is a London-based PR firm working with clients globally. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact our Business Development Team bd@curzonpr.com