Public diplomacy is concerned with the favourable or unfavourable impression of a nation on other nations. States using public diplomacy methods endeavour to improve their image, to prevent its deterioration and, if it is not at the desired level, to attain an image that will strengthen their political effectiveness. However, having a good image cannot be acquired only by making an effort. Nations and states have certain characteristics that come from history, are attached to their identities and are perceived by others. One of these characteristics is the behaviour of armies during war.

    Before this, however, it is necessary to focus on the causes of war. Which war is just? What is an unjust war? War must be justified, such as being attacked or gross violations of human rights. On the other hand, aggressive war with the aim of destroying the opponent and without justification for defence is unjust war. There can be no ethical justification for unjust war. Naturally, it is a fact that the armies that initiate and wage unjust war behave unethically. In addition, the unethical behaviour of the members of the warring armies - such as acts of violence and extermination against civilians, destruction and looting of cultural assets, damage to the environment, disproportionate and unjustified use of force - are contrary to the norms of war ethics, whether justified or unjustified. War should be a last resort; it should not be resorted to before diplomacy and peaceful solutions are exhausted. Wars waged for the purpose of gaining power, seizing someone else's territory or riches, or for revenge are not beneficial for anyone.

    War may be inevitable in some cases. However, even in this case, it is extremely important for human dignity to apply the ethical rules that have been filtered through the development of human civilisation. Many events in history that were considered war crimes - such as the dropping of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the genocide in the Bosnian War - have been condemned internationally as being contrary to the ethics of war. Today's events in Gaza and Ukraine are evidence of how easily warring parties can violate ethical rules. In particular, the crimes defined in the 1948 United Nations Convention on Genocide and the inhumane genocides in Bosnia, Khojaly in Azerbaijan, Rwanda, Sudan and many other parts of the world are proof of the tragic situation we are in on behalf of humanity. War ethics, a discipline and approach established to protect human rights, prevent unnecessary suffering and minimise the destructive effects of war, is also an important area of international law.

    Throughout history, during war, which is an act of violence by its very nature and aimed at ‘killing’, the attitudes and actions of the parties against each other, which violate fundamental human rights, cannot be prevented even though ethical rules have been determined.

    It is not possible for states that do not comply with the ethics of war and whose armies disregard human life with massacres and genocides to have a positive image. On the other hand, states that refrain from aggression and abide by human rights and ethical rules in armed conflicts that they have to engage in for defence purposes are considered as direct public diplomacy tools and image factors. This is one of the most important sources of reputation for states whose armed forces abide by human rights rules. States and their armies that adopt the opposite attitude are doomed to be remembered with a stain that they cannot easily erase before history and humanity.

    Today, public diplomacy is rapidly transforming from a practice-oriented field to a scientific discipline with a focus on international relations. However, public diplomacy gains its real importance with its interdisciplinary character. It has close ties with a wide range of scientific disciplines from anthropology to sociology, social psychology, communication science, history, political science and cultural studies, geopolitics and economic relations. It would be surprising if such a multidimensional and multidisciplinary field is considered only within the framework of practices and does not find a scientific place in university curricula. Public diplomacy courses are included in the faculties of political science, international relations and communication sciences at universities around the world. Moreover, it is observed that public diplomacy is attracting more and more attention in postgraduate programmes. This situation is no different in Turkey. In recent years, beyond undergraduate courses, a large number of master's and doctoral theses have been written. This is considered to be an important advantage for Turkey's developing public diplomacy.

    As a result, it can be assumed that in the near future, public diplomacy will no longer be a sub-discipline of international relations or communication sciences, but will have a unique theoretical background. In particular, it can be expected to become a field of its own in relation to conflict resolution and peace research in the world.

There are many countries in the world that need Ukrainian grain. Most of these are poor countries. Turkey has also made efforts to ensure that the ships full of grain passing through the Turkish straits from Ukraine reach these countries. These initiatives of Turkey made it possible for the food crisis that emerged with the withdrawal of Ukrainian grain from the world market and the rapidly rising wheat prices to cease to be a factor of global instability with the establishment of pre-war conditions. As a result, circles that condemned Turkey on every occasion and, moreover, openly made hostility towards Turkey the cornerstone of their discourse, especially the western press, were forced to "appreciate Turkey", albeit reluctantly. However, it is also a fact that Turkey's reputation among countries that are in food crisis and need Ukrainian wheat is even higher than in western countries.

    Kathy R. Fitzpatrick published "Defining Strategic Publics in a Networked World: Public Diplomacy's Challenge at Home and Abroad" in the 7th issue of The Hague Journal of Diplomacy in 2012 ( In the introduction of his article titled (pp. 421-441), he argues, with reference to Shaun Riordan, a former diplomat, that classical diplomacy will increasingly have to take civil society into account in the 21st Century. This is undoubtedly a correct determination. Ministries of Foreign Affairs and other relevant state institutions have initiated new structures for this purpose in every country and have begun to develop strategies for the societies they have determined as targets.

    However, detection should be understood more as a technical requirement in line with the spirit of the time. Public diplomacy activities are affected by difficult-to-solve problems, starting from how to define the publics considered as targets and the means by which to approach them. First of all, it is essential that the principles of strategic public diplomacy be adopted from the very beginning.

    The expression "from the beginning" refers to the process that begins with the definition of national interest. After making this definition, every state has to think about how to express its national interest to the outside world. The outside world may interpret your definition of national interest in its own way. But the purpose is to concretize and express that definition as made by you. The next stage in the process is to determine the target, get to know it in every aspect, and decide on which methods to work with. Afterwards, competent people and institutions must step in to implement it. Implementing all these stages one after another within the scope of an interdisciplinary strategy is a must for strategic public diplomacy.

    Our age is the age of migrations. According to United Nations data, 281 million people live in a cross-border geography different from where they were born. This number corresponds to 3.6% of the world's population. Immigrants migrate from their homeland for different reasons. The majority of people who leave their countries for reasons such as political, economic, cultural and ecological reasons as well as the desire to reach better living conditions, aim to settle permanently in their new homeland. Although most immigrants initially maintain a desire to return to their country one day, ongoing conditions often inhibit their desire to return.

    Countries that are the source or target of international immigrants are subject to the observation of the world public opinion due to their legislation and especially their practices on the subject. In other words, countries whose behavior towards immigrants does not comply with international ethical and legal rules are naturally criticized and their image is damaged. The image of immigrants that the homeland they left behind cannot adequately "take care of them and provide them with a safe living environment" is a damaging element for the reputation of their country of origin. The care and protection denied to immigrants by the countries they go to is harmful to their reputation.

    In light of these views, migration and issues related to immigrants are becoming an area of public diplomacy as they concern the images of countries. For example, these attitudes of non-EU countries, which have been pushing back irregular immigrants in the Mediterranean and the Aegean Sea in recent years and preventing them from entering their countries, clearly constitute a violation of human rights and international law. There is a significant deterioration in the images of these countries.

    From the perspective of public diplomacy, it is inevitable today that policies and practices regarding migration and immigrants are included in the strategic public diplomacy of states. Of course, for this reason, it is essential that approaches to migration and immigrants comply with human rights and the rules of international law. A mentality that leaves poor and helpless irregular migrants to die in the Aegean and the Mediterranean and sees them ill-treated in every way is absolutely out of date, immoral and unlawful. Owners of this treatment cannot be expected to have a good image.