The doctrinal nature of the policy of promoting the state`s external image in the conditions of a new world order formation

THE DOCTRINAL NATURE OF THE POLICY OF PROMOTING THE STATE'S EXTERNAL IMAGE IN THE CONDITIONS OF A NEW WORLD ORDER FORMATION

Nagornyak T.L., Polovyi M.A.,

Bondarenko S.V., Osmolovska A.O.

Annotation

information policy political external

Within the framework of the author's scientific research, three types of communicative models of the world's states were identified, which reflect the basic principles of building state information policy and reflect the key characteristics of the political system. Among them are subsidiary, vertical, and transitional models. The institutional method was used to prove the specifics of the state as a political institution that is the bearer of national images, as well as the role and degree of influence of public policy on the formation of ideas about the state in the external information space, on the policy of promoting and transforming these images, with an emphasis on the actions of those states that shape the global political discourse of today. The authors propose an integral model of state 's public image formation, which provides for the synergy of actors of public diplomacy. The result of its implementation is the formation of the components of the state image (regional, multicultural, culinary, educational, expert) together with official products (national symbols, reputation characteristics, socio-economic development indicators, rating indicators and e-diplomacy products) «from below». Both the central government and local communities in the context of the implementation of «bottom-up» policy should be involved in the realization of a successful image formation policy. The authors emphasize that the policy of state 's image formation in the external information space should be considered as a multifaceted component of the foreign policy of the state. Th e tools, channels and subjects offormation and adjustment of the state's image should be embedded in each of the vectors offoreign policy - in security, diplomatic, economic, social, legal, and directly information vectors.

Keywords: international political subjectivity, state's image, information space, new world order, US foreign policy, Ukrainian-American relations.

Анотація

Ключові слова: міжнародна політична суб 'єктність, імідж держави, інформаційний простір, новий світопорядок, зовнішня політика США, україно -американські відносини.

Introduction

Modern processes of forming a new world order are changing the structure and content of many processes in world politics. This statement fully applies to the promotion of state ' s external image within the framework of foreign policy activity of states. The aim of this article is to study modern trends towards a strong interrelationship of foreign policy to promote state ' s image with the doctrinal foundations of both state policy in general and foreign policy in particular. Primary examples of the research will be the USA and the Russian Federation.

It should be noted that since the last decade has seen a sharp expansion of foreign policy's informational component, this is also reflected in the topic under consideration. In recent years, the world has faced massive use of hate speech, disinformation, "fakes", acts of psychological pressure and symbolic violence, information and psychological operations aimed at destabilizing and destroying modern political systems, forming and promoting a negative image of entire states, compromising public figures. Systematic examples of using «dirty» modem information technologies are provided by the Russian Federation (hereinafter - the RF), which produces many information drives with the aim of creating tension in certain territories - primarily in the border states, which are the bridgehead of the Russian Federation before the European Union (hereinafter - the EU) and North Atlantic Alliance (hereinafter - NATO), which pose a direct threat to its security and stability.

State's public image is understood by the authors as a product of constructed reality promoted through strategic narratives common to all (key messages, legends, plots), events, decisions and actions explaining the state's vision to target audiences, with regard to their interests and expectations.

State's public image is formed by strategic communication tools and state policy vectors (external and internal) with the aim of promoting a state's positive public image and established demand for it in certain areas for specific target groups and within a specific market of world economy. One of the tools for promoting state's public image is public diplomacy - a component of the state's strategic communications - a field where social attitudes towards loyalty to the state are formed outside of traditional diplomatic protocols. The program for promoting the public image of a state is supported by additional special programs:

• personal image programs of state's first persons and projects related to "personification of the territory";

• program of state 's strategic communications and generation of its positive image;

• event management program for state 's promotion abroad;

• industry programs (tourism, investment climate, education, etc.);

• programs for coordinating the hierarchy of images (cities, special zones, regions, subregions), etc.

The policy of forming the state's image, as a complex of real mechanisms and purposeful actions to form and promote a set of ideas (images, associations, interpretations) about it in the information space, is the result of effective international cooperation and internal consolidation of the nation. In modern conditions, information policy is a component of each state's national development strategy, an indicator of its worldview and implementation of the principle of cooperation between states to preserve their own traditions and global integration. Isolation of states from information flows and channels is impossible in conditions of global challenges and rapid technologies.

Group of researchers representing leading foreign scientific centers and schools in the field of public image, information space and communications, including those specializing in the issues of forming and promoting a positive image of the state, can include: S. Anholt [1], K. Keller, Aperia and Georgson [8], A. Sengupta [19], A. Scott [18], E. Sampson [16], F. Webster (2004), and others. Useful methodological approaches are presented by Ukrainian scientists and practitioners: Y. Hrytsak [26], D. Bohush [20], T. Vodotyka and Y. Mahda [28].

Strategic and socio-cultural potential makes the states a political institution and a social community at the same time. The interrelationship of socio-cultural, communicative, and power factors of regions' development is a necessary condition for the involvement of territorial communities in the information and communication environment and the opportunity to influence political decision-making as a full-fledged political actor. Thus, the states, performing the functions of aggregating and articulating the interests of local authorities, communities, and businesses, should rely on an effective communication model in the promotion of state policy at all levels.

Quality communications are a key factor in system functioning, including in a political system. The importance of communication and communicative interaction was indicated by K. Deutsch (Deutsch, 1966), J. Coleman [4], J. Habermas (Habermas, 1984) and others. It can be concluded that without ensuring effective communication, it is impossible to achieve the planned results. Especially when it comes to the existence of states in the information space in conditions of fierce competition for influencing population' s opinion and perception of the surrounding world and the processes occurring around it.

The activization of strategic communications of states and their territorial administrative units, as political actors with constitutional right to manage the territory, are deeply connected with global shifts and crisis of political identity. The authors involved several vectors of political knowledge to study these strategic communications: hyper-globalism (R. Keohane [9], G. Nye [14], T. Friedman [6]; anti-globalism (D. Korten [10], M. Chossudovsky [3], J. Stiglitz [35]; urban studies (S. Sassen [17], R. Florida [40]).

Among the Ukrainian researchers studying the construction of media discourse are O. Zherebko [29], L. Klymanska and H. Herasym [30], V. Kulyk [11], P. Lenio [31], Y. Turchyn [39]. Such researchers as V. Liaporov [32], V. Tarnavskyi [37], L. Shulhina [43], O. Shevchenko [42], Y. Tykhomyrova [38] devoted their scientific work to the research of strategic communications used by states.

Development of a modern information society is characterized by diffusion of state information boundaries, loss of production monopoly, and most importantly, monopoly on the interpretation of socially important information. This leads to increased competition for the attention and opinions of the population of certain states and their alliances.

Activization of globalization processes transformed the goal of forming the information space to the refutation of the political role of national states and vulnerability of citizens ' national identity. Traditional values of national states are being eroded. Innovative progress has become a factor in reformatting traditional cultural contents. At the same time, the universalization of consumption standards strengthens the desire of national states to preserve and transmit cultural experience. Open information systems expand such opportunities. Information technologies, on the one hand, contribute to the identification of intercultural bonds, and on the other hand, fragment national cultures.

When examining political discourse as a special type of communication where participants create a communicative action, a political dialogue is provided by political institutions as a norm-forming dimension of politics. The main participants of such communication are the political elite, institutions, counter-elite, financial and industrial groups, public institutions, and the media. Through their opposition to the institutional discourse, they fill the official information space with those topics of political discourse that are paramount in country's political life.

Main body of the research

Globalization processes inherent in modern society create objective requirements for politics to go beyond political territories. This occurs not only due to the need to find resources (financial, natural, human, etc.). Such a recourse should be considered through the perspective of geopolitical processes. Development of means and technologies of information management in combination with the use of governing influences in the sphere of politics, economy and culture makes the information space a managed object, but only by those actors of international relations who have the levers of control over the world's information agenda. Sharing the views of the French sociologist and philosopher, P. Bourdieu (2005), the authors define the information space as a field where information is created, transmitted, and interpreted. The boundaries of such space are conditional, and the nature of functioning is dynamic and changeable.

In the context of the research, the work of German sociologist and political scientist, K. Deutsch, who considers the political system as a network of communications and information flows, a process of management and coordination of people's efforts to achieve set goals, is of particular interest. Political decisions are made based on two streams of information: external and internal [5]. Thus, the structural elements and the political system itself must interact in the internal and external system environment for their existence, receive information from the outside and produce their own one, distribute it, receive feedback to ensure stability and promote interests. Conventionally, the entire set of principles of development and functioning of the system's information component can be called its information policy. Using a synergistic approach when defining the information space, it can be represented as a system capable of self-organization and consisting of a set of information flows and fields that interact with each other.

To comprehend the information and communication essence of the political system, it is appropriate to review the theory of communicative action by J. Habermas [7]. Within the framework of this theory, such concepts as "system", "lifeworld", "communicative action", "communicative rationality", "instrumental rationality", "political rationality" are of special interest. According to the authors, the concepts describe the basic characteristics of interaction between structural elements during communication not only at the level of interaction of political institutions, but also at the level of a person who is the main element of any social system, including political one.

"System", according to J. Habermas, implies "processes that guarantee formalization of social interaction, stability and sustainability of these forms (status quo); it seeks to subjugate the world of senses and meanings created in intersubjective everyday communication ("lifeworld"), replacing the process of agreeing on common goals with the process of manipulation and subjugation" [25].

Based on the above mentioned, political system assumes several roles that ensure its functioning in various fields. One of the main ones, according to the authors, is the information space.

Information space is a field in which information is created by various categories of producers (both domestic and foreign), transmitted through communication channels to recipients and interpreted by them (purposefully under the influence of the owners of such channels or subconsciously), which is not limited by state borders. Such a field is formed at all levels of a state: from the local to the national level, but its filling is often influenced by actors external to the country - border states, leading states of the world, non-state actors of world politics. It can be noted that the information space of a state consists of such overlapping information fields as: 1) information field of territorial communities and local territories, 2) information field of regions and large cities, 3) official discourse of the state government and its central institutions; 4) field of influence of geopolitical subjects and external attractors [34].

Therefore, it can be concluded that the ability of modern political space to penetrate other spaces that are not inherent in the classical understanding of politics should be considered its uniqueness. It is flexible enough and intersects with other spaces, such as informational, imaginative, sensual, etc.

In a broad sense, informational space is understood as the whole set of actions and processes, the main purpose of which is to produce and distribute information that ensures the vital activity of the entire society, creates and spreads politically relevant knowledge [22]. Imaginative space should be perceived as a space in which symbolic systems function, and through which the objects are reflected. The sensual space implies a set of essential characteristics and ideas about the world [23].

The policy of forming the public image of a state in the internal and external information space is defined by the authors as a complex of real mechanisms and purposeful actions for the formation and promotion of a set of ideas in the information space (images, associations, interpretations, meanings) about the policy through local images and national identifications. Such a policy is the result of both effective international cooperation and internal consolidation of the nation. According to the country's strategic goal and place in world politics, the policy of forming its image can be considered at three levels of its functioning: global, national, regional.

Mechanisms for implementation of information policy for the formation of state's public image should be understood as a set of conceptual principles and practical tools aimed at developing and disseminating politically relevant knowledge about the state, ensuring the achievement of political, economic, humanitarian and other goals; establishing feedback with target audiences to clarify and secure support for national interests. Despite the diversity of strategic goals, ambitions of territories and their capabilities, the authors highlight the following mechanisms of information and communication activities that unite territories of different levels:

1. Public affairs - current activities of state authorities and local governments, the purpose of which is to provide target audiences with access to information (ability to independently obtain necessary information), dissemination of information about the territory through controlled communication channels (own websites, newsletters, meeting with target audiences as part of the activities of other bodies, etc.).

2. Public diplomacy - activity of the territories for dissemination of information and knowledge, establishment of direct contacts with "agents of influence" of target audiences for the purpose of promoting national interests, values, ideas, policy, and establishing positive emotional connection. In contrast to traditional diplomacy, public diplomacy uses the tools of conditionally informal communication by organizing and implementing various programs of professional, sports and cultural exchanges, learning territory's language, etc.

3. Mass media - interaction with the mass media as one of the powerful tools for spreading knowledge and information about the territories

4. New media - dissemination of information and knowledge about the territory through controlled communication channels, such as social networks and other online services for posting photo, video, and audio materials. The main feature is that it is an informal channel of communication, so free communication and expression of personal judgments and opinions is available.

5. Events - organizing, conducting, and participating in various kinds of events to spread knowledge about the territory and establish communication with target audiences in the "face-to-face" format.

6. Public-private partnerships - cross-sectoral interaction between representatives of public and private sectors, including non-governmental sector, for developing, disseminating and evaluating knowledge about the territory, establishing communications with target audiences and accumulating resources in the information space [21].

An effective branding strategy of the state together with the tools of public diplomacy is one of the main mechanisms of forming state's image and maintaining or building its positive reputational characteristics. For instance, the Public Diplomacy Strategy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, which was adopted in March 2021, defines the following areas of public diplomacy: cultural, economic, expert, culinary, scientific, and educational, sports and digital [36]. Each of these areas can be implemented "from below" to help Ukraine's public diplomacy. The synergy of directions - the so-called "network diplomacy" - is becoming a new form of strategic communications of states, which is designed to shape the public image.

The influence of some countries on the formation of information discourse of other countries is becoming one of the most common means of waging "hybrid wars", as well as a fairly effective way of putting pressure on geopolitical rivals, neighboring countries or strategic partners. At the same time, the appropriate activities of state or non-state institutions are used as technologies of political pressure, aimed, among other things, at undermining or changing the image of certain states and creating necessary discourse, presented and disseminated in the global information space in relation to countries, events, individuals etc. Thus, some states, and sometimes non-state actors, based on the presence of certain physical or mental resources of influence, replace the real image of another country with simulacra.

Conflictogenity of world political processes, vulnerability of countries ' national interests, violation of national security in international relations as trends in world politics can be leveled at the expense of the implementation of the semi-periphery and periphery by countries based on the world-system analysis according to the American sociologist, I. Wallerstein [27], a balanced policy forming an image in the external information discourse and building a controlled (to the extent possible) internal information space that would coincide with a country's state borders. It is possible to locate the core and the periphery when one can specifically see the features of the production process - monopoly (for core countries) or free market (for peripheral countries). Understanding the degree of economic profit creates an understanding of the discourse that structures the system from the periphery to the center and vice versa. Translation and adaptation of the external information field occurs due to communication as a discourse practice that changes the boundaries in the system, setting priorities in already new centers (these boundaries do not necessarily coincide with the official boundaries of any state).

World political processes acquire qualitatively new meanings in conditions of formation of a new world order and diffusion of national identities and state borders. With the intensive development of information technologies and reduction of the level of impermeability of borders, the decision-making centers and formation of the information space are shifting from states to non-state actors.

The boundaries of information space are not clearly identifiable, and social life in the conditions of a systemic crisis is managed by actors (communicators) who are the first to receive information and interpret it in a way that is convenient for making and implementing necessary political decisions, which is stated in such theories as "Agenda Setting Theory" [13] and "Gatekeeping Theory" [12]. These decisions are not limited to the political system or government.

The role of global cities, "people of the world", non-governmental institutions, transnational corporations and influencers is increasing. The information field as a system is not localized only in a state. However, the image of the state in the internal and external information space, no matter how dynamic and uncontrolled this space may be, remains a key category. Despite the transformation of the state's content as a political institution (actor), adoption, implementation and control of political decisions remains with it, including functioning of the information space. Under these conditions, it is necessary to revise the principles and systems of state communication, both in global and regional, as well as internal information spaces.

The authors propose a definition of the concept of "global information space” as a set of all information fields of individual territories (state and supranational entities, regions, local territories) and all channels that disseminate information, official information discourses of states, and means of influencing these fields by various actors.

In the context of researching strategic communications and global information space, it becomes necessary to define the concept of "external information space". External (in relation to a separate state) information space is a field outside state borders in which information is produced, and for the transmission of which various communication channels are used. However, the content and interpretation of this information is not always controlled by the state. The external information space is a combination of: 1) information promoted by the state about itself; 2) information field in which messages are interpreted and presented by communication channels of other states; 3) informational influence of those states controlling information space not only on their territory, but also outside its borders, using various levers of such influence.

Regional information space, according to the authors, is a set of information fields of territories (within or outside their state borders) located within a separate region, with regard to geographical and historical distribution, as well as channels of information dissemination operating in this region, official information discourses of the states in this region, as well as the means of influence on these fields by various actors located within or outside the boundaries of this region. Regional aspects of forming the information space are: 1) alliances of states or organizations in the region and their interaction; 2) socio-economic development of the region; 3) influence of the region in international relations or influence on the region by other states or regional entities; 4) political intentions of the influential countries in the region and vector of their foreign policy. For Ukraine, such region is Europe, because it is a geographical part of this continent (Eastern Europe).

Internal information space implies the entire set of information phenomena and processes occurring within a certain political territory (state), and aimed at ensuring its stable existence, stability through the production and dissemination of information for the inviolability of borders and preservation of information sovereignty. In this context, it can be argued that the stronger is the state, the more it controls its own (internal) information space and is able to ensure expansion into other information spaces.

Modern information space is a field of struggle between competitive states for recognition, respect, and influence over other countries or alliances of countries. In the era of multipolarity, word's leading countries determine the vector of global development, the rest either adapt and look for ways to preserve their own national interests, or are forced to give in to their regional ambitions in favor of the scenarios of strong actors, so as not to lose their territorial integrity and informational sovereignty. In modern conditions, the leading states combine their development strategies (economic, political, social) with mechanisms of influence on world processes, including through channels of information transmission to consolidate their influence on global information space. Such influence becomes especially dangerous in times when national processes lose in favor of local interests of cities or territories, the activities of individual corporations and deutocrats, the "economy of impressions".

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the "Cold War", such key actors of geopolitics as the USA and the Russian Federation have moved from the concept of "holding back each other's influence" to the concept of "spreading their influence" in their foreign policies. However, in this process, it becomes relevant for the leading states to spread their influence through the control over the global information space, or the information spaces of individual states.

In international relations, new centers of power are being formed, which may have a powerful political influence in the near future, for example, the Asian region. In such conditions, Russia seeks to keep the territory of the former USSR in its sphere of influence. Information technologies and influence, first of all, on the information space of these countries become the most convenient levers of influence. The USA is expanding its economic and military-political ties with countries that were part of the Soviet Union's sphere of influence, including Ukraine. Thus, formation of a stable model of international relations, which would be based on the principles of international law, mutual assistance, and cooperation, should not be expected in modern world politics. Regional crises, hybrid wars, information blockades are becoming attributes of modern international politics.

The main general trends of world development are following: globalization processes obscure the borders between states, provoking the differentiation of states and territories, or their individualization (struggle for preservation of national identities); the modern world order must respond to new technological challenges, including information as a weapon; structure of international relations is no longer based on interstate relations and international governmental organizations - global cities, media and their owners, non-state entities are becoming key actors; formation of a multipolar world after the end of the " Cold War" increasingly appears to be a simulacrum - confrontation between the USA and Russia continues with the simultaneous strengthening of regional centers, which eventually fall under the influence of one of the two states.

When addressing the communication theory of the German political scientist Karl Deutsch [5] and his approach to the political system of society as a communication structure, one can indicate the so-called information investors, or states on the world stage, which form the information space of today, which goes far beyond their state borders, obscuring national identities. It should be noted that information space in a state is not equal to its state borders but may be smaller than them (e.g. in Ukraine) or, on the contrary, larger (e.g., the USA, the Russian Federation).

The concept of direct influence of a geopolitical factor on the policy of formation and external perception of state's image in the information space of other states is the basis of this research. The information space, for example, of Ukraine, is not controlled by the state, which makes it a field of struggle for spheres of influence. The national interests of the state and integrity of its territory are under threat in this struggle.

This is evidenced by the images of Ukraine in the discourse of border countries (for example, Poland and Hungary) and the discourse of a strategic partner country (for example, the USA) and an "enemy" country (for example, the Russian Federation), as different image models that are not formed by Ukraine (tabl. 1).

Table 1

Ukraine in the external information space (compiled by the authors)