Next Friday is my first day teaching at USC and I’m excited. Hopefully the students are at least moderately excited as well. My goal of PUBD510: Public Diplomacy and Technologies is to the students capable of engaging a senior policy maker on the importance and requirements of engaging in today’s Now Media global information environment while cognizant that different geographies – be they physical, social, or cultural – demand different tools, methods, and expectations.
Category: Public Diplomacy
Recalling History: Secretary of State testifies before House Appropriations
On March 3, 1947, Secretary of State George C. Marshall testified before a subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee on the issue of the Department of State Appropriation Bill for 1948.
Continue reading “Recalling History: Secretary of State testifies before House Appropriations
“
Three posts over the break you may have missed
Three posts on public diplomacy, strategic communication, global engagement, or whatever you and your tribe calls empowering and encouraging others to share common cause now or when necessary in the future.
-
The Real Psychological Operation for Afghanistan
We must understand and undermine the real mechanisms that empower the enemy and take “aggressive actions to win the important battle of perception.”
-
Reorganizing Government to meet hybrid threats posted at the Stimson Center’s Budget Insight Blog
Nine years ago we went to war with the enemy we had, not the enemy we wanted. For several years after 9/11 we struggled to comprehend how military superiority failed to translate into strategic victory.
-
A Global Call to Arms in the Virtual Century, a guest post by Carson T. Checketts
An active, educated and dynamic vigilance is required by our world’s citizens to intercept the individuals and groups who (like pariahs) feed off hateful, bigoted and narrow ideologies to the detriment of everyone.
Guest Post: A Global Call to Arms in the Virtual Century
Carl Jung once warned during the Cold War that: “Everywhere in the West [World] there are subversive minorities who, sheltered by our humanitarianism and our sense of justice, hold the incendiary torches ready, with nothing to stop the spread of their ideas except the critical reason of a single, fairly intelligent, mentally stable stratum of the population. One should not, however, overestimate the thickness of this stratum.” (C.G. Jung, “The Undiscovered Self,” 4).
If Carl Jung were still living, we may find him to be rather (appropriately) proud of a modest, rational banker who resides in Nigeria. On December 25th, 2009, the Free World was given a great gift that mirrors the one Jung sought to impart more than 50 years ago. While the media will mark the day as another attempted 9/11, they miss the mark. The most profound and courageous feature of this attempted attack has nothing to do with the terrorist himself, but with his father. A father, who, upon sensing his son was falling into the orbit of radical ideologies, took it upon himself to use this information to protect our global commons by letting authorities know they should be watching his son. Certainly we can all understand what a grueling and emotionally fracturing experience it must have been for this brave man. We would all do well to spend a few moments this New Year viewing the world from this man’s shoes.
Continue reading “Guest Post: A Global Call to Arms in the Virtual Century
“
The Real Psychological Operation for Afghanistan
This article is cross-posted at the George C. Marshall Foundation. Also at AOC’s IO Blog.
On December 1, 2009, President Obama announced his Afghanistan strategy and what immediately followed was an expected and unoriginal cacophony of sound bites based on selective memories of the past and shallow and ignorant visions of the present and future. The decline in the public’s support for the struggle is surely a delight for Al Qaeda and the Taliban who, unlike our pundits and some in Congress, understand this is foremost a psychological struggle for the minds of people in “Af-Pak” and around the world to affect their will to act.
Continue reading “The Real Psychological Operation for Afghanistan
“
CRS Report: U.S. Public Diplomacy: Background and Current Issues
U.S. Public Diplomacy: Background and Current Issues by Kennon H. Nakamura and Matthew C. Weed, 18 December 2009, at Congressional Research Service.
…The attitudes and perceptions of foreign publics created in this new environment are often as important as reality, and sometimes can even trump reality. These attitudes affect the ability of the United States to form and maintain alliances in pursuit of common policy objectives; impact the cost and the effectiveness of military operations; influence local populations to either cooperate, support or be hostile as the United States pursues foreign policy and/or military objectives in that country; affect the ability to secure support on issues of particular concern in multilateral fora; and dampen foreign publics’ enthusiasm for U.S. business services and products.
This report cites Matt Armstrong and his work several times throughout the report.
Cultural Exchange and the Cold War: How the West Won (Part II)
by Yale Richmond
Yale Richmond, a retired U.S. Foreign Service Officer and author of 11 books on intercultural communication, worked on U.S.-Soviet cultural and other exchanges for more than 20 years. He delivered the following speech at the Aleksanteri Institute’s 9th Annual Conference “Cold War Interactions Reconsidered” 29-31 October 2009, University of Helsinki, Finland. This is the second of two parts and originally appeared at Whirled View. It is published here with the author’s permission. Part I is here.
Exhibitions: Better to See Once. . .
And now to exhibitions. As an old Russian proverb tells us, it is better to see once than to hear a hundred times.
The Cultural Agreement also provided for month-long showings of exhibitions in the two countries to show the latest developments in various fields. Prepared by the U.S. Information Agency, the American exhibitions were on such subjects as medicine, architecture, hand tools, education, outdoor recreation, technology for the home, and agriculture. Each exhibition had some 20 Russian-speaking American guides who responded to questions from the Soviet visitors. For most Russians who saw the exhibitions, it was their first and only opportunity to talk with an American.
Despite harassment by the KGB, the exhibitions drew huge crowds with long lines awaiting admittance, and they were seen, on average, by some 250,000 visitors in each city. All together, more than 20 million Soviet citizens saw the 23 U.S. exhibitions over a 32-year period.
Continue reading “Cultural Exchange and the Cold War: How the West Won (Part II)
“
Cultural Exchange and the Cold War: How the West Won
Yale Richmond is a retired U.S. Foreign Service Officer, the author of 11 books on intercultural communication, and he worked on U.S.-Soviet cultural and other exchanges for more than 20 years. Yale delivered the following speech at the Aleksanteri Institute’s 9th Annual Conference “Cold War Interactions Reconsidered” 29-31 October 2009, University of Helsinki, Finland. This is the first of two parts and originally appeared at Whirled View. It is published here with the author’s permission.
I want to thank the Aleksanteri Institute at the University of Helsinki for this opportunity to speak to you. It is an honor to be asked to address such a well-informed audience.
First a disclaimer. Although I worked for the US Government for more than 35 years, and many of those years on the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, I do not speak for the State Department today. The views I present here today are my own.
There are many theories of why communism collapsed and the Cold War ended, as you will likely be hearing in this conference.
There are a few grains of truth in some of those explanations, and more than a few in others, but I will provide today many grains of another explanation–that the end of the Cold War and the collapse of communism were consequences of Soviet contacts and cultural exchanges with the West, and with the United States in particular, over the years that followed the death of Stalin in 1953.
When cultural exchange with the Soviets is mentioned, most people think of Soviet dancers, symphony orchestras, ice shows, and circuses that came to the West and filled our halls with admiring spectators. But cultural exchange consisted of much more–exhibitions, motion pictures, and most important, exchanges of people.
Continue reading “Cultural Exchange and the Cold War: How the West Won
“
What is Strategic Communication?
What is “strategic communication”? To many, it is synonymous with public diplomacy, but are they? Is it that strategic communication is simply engagement by the Defense Department and public diplomacy is engagement by the State Department?
To many in the Defense community, strategic communication encompasses public affairs. This is reflected in the comment by a senior Defense official who noted beliefs that strategic communication is “public affairs on steroids.” Personally, I have never heard public diplomacy similarly described.
I’m interested in thoughts on the difference between strategic communication (SC) and public diplomacy (PD).
I’ll fire off the first observation on the differences for your comment:
The difference is not merely semantic but based in differences in techniques, tactics, procedures, time horizons, and audiences. On the last point, audiences, strategic communication is global as it does include public affairs, the US public and US media. From the comments from the Secretary of Defense to the “orchestra chart“, the struggle to communicate is not restricted to audiences beyond our borders. In stark contrast, public diplomacy is exclusively aimed at audiences residing out the geographic borders of the United States at the moment of contact.
Back to you. What are your thoughts on strategic communication and public diplomacy, including or ignoring my above statement.
See also:
Guest Post: A Failure to Explain
By Peggie Duggan
Exactly who is responsible for explaining the United States to the rest of the world? Perhaps, more importantly, who is responsible for explaining the United States to her own people? The answers are the U.S. Department of State and nobody, respectively. As Dr. Phil would say, “How is that working for you?”
On a forgotten day, buried in the Congressional Record, one senator stood up and said,
Our country, I think we can all admit, has experienced a tremendous decline in international respect since 1943. At the end of World War II, due both to our leadership toward victory and to an accumulation of international prestige built over the decade, this country occupied an enviable stance.
It was liked, admired, and trusted to a degree even by conquered nations, and we had the one great Military Establishment intact in the whole world.
Now what has happened? Why has the world deteriorated? You can’t point your finger of blame at any individual or any individual policy. But when that kind of historic demonstration is before us, it seems to me that alert Americans ought to ask themselves why and what can we do about it?
This country today is being popularly blamed by much of the politically conscious population of the world for a great share of the misfortunes of the world…
Something is wrong with American policy. There is nothing wrong with American attitudes, nothing wrong with the American ideal, nothing wrong with the basic concept that we provide a lot of foreign aid and leadership and help the free world get stronger…Nobody really believes we are imperialistic. Nobody really believes we are trying to superimpose any religious creed or a political philosophy on anybody.
We do this out of an abundance of good will and out of some impulse of self-preservation, and we get attacked.[1]
US Government Meets New Media
From Helle Dale at The Heritage Foundation, Public Diplomacy 2.0: Where the U.S. Government Meets “New Media”:
Public diplomacy and strategic communications experts within the U.S. government are exploring the potential of the new social media in the effort to win hearts and minds abroad, especially in the Muslim world where today’s war of ideas is being fought. Enemies of the United States are already expert in using these low-cost outreach tools that can connect thousands, potentially even millions, at the touch of a computer key or cell phone button. As public affairs blogger Matt Armstrong writes,
In this age of mass information and precision guided media, everyone from political candidates to terrorists must instantly and continuously interact with and influence audiences in order to be relevant and competitive. Ignoring the utility of social media is tantamount to surrendering the high ground in the enduring battle to influence minds around the world.
… When employed strategically, social-networking sites clearly offer potential for U.S. public diplomacy to reach younger, tech-savvy audiences around the world. Social-networking sites can also be cost-effective and run with relatively low overhead. Yet, nothing can replace the power of person-to-person contact and individual exposure to American culture. Furthermore, the unevenness of global technological progress means that a variety of media will remain critical to spreading the U.S. message. As part of a clear and calibrated U.S. government communications strategy, however, Public Diplomacy 2.0 can be a valuable tool.
I would add that there is the convergence of new and old media into Now Media makes intense focus on “new media” channels as distracting and potentially dangerous. As Helle Dale notes, person to person contact remains essential. Even in America’s social media world, studies indicate online relationships that have by real world connections are far stronger than those without.
A powerful, important, and too often ignored is the use of the online media by our adversaries. We require culturally aware, linguistically capable actors in the same languages and cultures we are operating in the “meat space.” What you see in your English-language search of Google or YouTube is not the same list as an Arabic-language search using the same .com site. How many know that? This is a far more dangerous world than many realize. Helle Dale’s recommendations are valid but are ultimately a small part of the solution. The institutional dysfunction across Government and the extreme lack of awareness of the requirements in both the executive and legislative branches overshadow any advantage of these recommendations. We have surrendered primary battlegrounds in the struggle for minds and wills. It is time to reverse this and answer counter the highly damaging propaganda of our adversaries.
Related:
- Public Diplomacy and New Technologies, a USC graduate course I’m teaching
- Understanding and Engaging Now Media, a 3-night executive training (previous seminar info here) to be held February 8, 9, 10 in DC. Email me for more info.
Event: Public Diplomacy and the United States Information Agency
At the USC Washington, DC, office Thursday, December 10, 2009:
A reception and discussion to celebrate the publication of The Cold War and the United States Information Agency: American Propaganda and Public Diplomacy, 1945-1989, new in paperback.
Discussion to include Dr. Nicholas J. Cull, Professor and Director, USC Master of Public Diplomacy program, and Dr. Michael Schneider, USIA veteran and Professor of Practice, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University
Time and place:
Thursday, December 10, 2009
6:00 pmUSC Washington DC Office
701 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Suite 540
Washington, DC 20004
(Navy Memorial metro station)
Event: The Abolition of USIA and Its Effects on U.S. Public Diplomacy
At The Heritage Foundation December 9, 2009, 10a – 11:30a: The Abolition of USIA and Its Effects on U.S. Public Diplomacy. Speakers include Joe Duffey, Bill Kiehl, Stephen Johnson, Robert Schadler and hosted by Helle Dale.
Founded in 1953, the mission of the United States Information Agency (USIA) was to “understand, inform and influence foreign publics in promotion of the national interest, and to broaden the dialogue between Americans and U.S. institutions and their counterparts abroad.” For years, USIA was the U.S. government’s public diplomacy arm, charged with telling America’s story abroad. Ten years ago, USIA was disbanded and its functions were folded into the State Department under the management of Undersecretary of State for Public Affairs and Public Diplomacy. Since then, U.S. public diplomacy has fallen upon hard times. The new administration has repeatedly proclaimed that U.S. engagement in the world would be revitalized and yet there has been little change at U.S. foreign policy’s lead agency. Our panelists will analyze the changes that U.S. public diplomacy has gone through in the past 10 years and what should be done to improve America’s ability to “understand, inform and influence foreign publics in promotion of the national interest.”
I won’t be there but RSVP here if you want to be there. I’m interested in your feedback on the discussion.
Not an ordinary government news service
Do you think Russia Today, PressTV, or CCTV would broadcast a story like this one from VOA: Studies Contend Bhopal Still Contaminated, 25 Years After World’s Worst Industrial Disaster? I don’t think so.
News aggregators for Public Diplomacy / Strategic Communication
Several resources that comb news sites and blogs for what they believe is relevant information for those in public diplomacy, strategic communication, or related issues. With one exception, I did not include aggregators that broadcast individual articles via Twitter or blog posts.
- RFE/RL’s The Rundown – An essential read broadly on communication and today and tomorrow’s hotspots. I get it emailed but I didn’t see a way to subscribe through email.
- NightWatch – is an “executive intelligence recap” edited and annotated by John McCreary.
- John Brown’s Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review – a broad (sometimes too broad) coverage of media, academic, and “plain” blog posts on public diplomacy and related matters. Too often the cited headline is the only part of an article that refers to public diplomacy. John is, however, the major aggregator of public diplomacy-related content.
- Public Diplomacy in the News – result set is focused and includes more non-US examples.
- Kim Andrew Elliott – required if you’re monitoring global communication.
- COMOPS Monitor – is an automated aggregator for the “latest links from the blogosphere on Strategic Communication, Terrorism, & Public Diplomacy.”
- Layalina Review – a bi-weekly update of public diplomacy news as it primarily relates to the Middle East.
Feel free to add to this list.
Public Diplomacy Alumni Association Announces Top Achievers
Public Diplomacy is too often misunderstood and more frequently ill-supported. Even within the State Department, stories abound of poor perceptions of the public diplomacy career track from other career tracks (unfortunately named “cones” in State). I particularly liked a recent anecdote where an Econ officer who took a public diplomacy job was disappointed to her he would have to actually work in his new assignment. His expectation of a free ride was the reason he chose a tour in the PD cone.
Stories like that make the recognition from the Public Diplomacy Alumni Association all the more important. Too often successful despite lack of resources and support, State Department public diplomacy officers do excel. Below is from the PDAA:
Continue reading “Public Diplomacy Alumni Association Announces Top Achievers
“
Event: National Summit for Global Citizen Diplomacy
A date is not yet available, but something to monitor is the National Summit for Global Citizen Diplomacy to be put on by the U.S Center for Citizen Diplomacy.
Continue reading “Event: National Summit for Global Citizen Diplomacy
“
Still unarmed in the struggle for minds and wills
Last month, The New York Times reported on the recruiting successes of Somali-based terrorist group Al Shabab. From Charges Detail Road to Terror for 20 in US by Andrea Elliott:
The case represents the largest group of American citizens suspected of joining an extremist movement affiliated with Al Qaeda, senior officials said. Many of the recruits had come to America as young refugees fleeing a brutal civil war, only to settle in a gang-ridden enclave of Minneapolis. …
The disclosures are the government’s first public account of a recruitment operation that it says has largely focused on Somali-American men from the Minneapolis area. Those young men included Shirwa Ahmed, 26, who carried out a suicide attack in northern Somalia in October 2008, becoming the first known American suicide bomber. Since then, at least five other recruits have been killed in Somalia, relatives and friends say, and four defendants have entered guilty pleas.
There is painfully little in the article about the information war and how the community gets their news from their homeland and home region.
See also:
- Censoring the Voice of America
Public Diplomacy and New Technologies
Beginning January 15, 2010, I will be teaching “Public Diplomacy and New Technologies” (PUBD510) at the University of Southern California. The semester-long course will meet every Friday for 3hrs as part of the Masters of the Public Diplomacy program. This is a practical class intended to make the student an effective information actor and capable of explaining to senior policymakers the requirements of the modern information environment.
The focus will not exclusively be on the “new technologies”. In fact, I’d rather call the course “Public Diplomacy in the Now Media Environment”. There is no “old” or “new” media, simply Now Media. When speaking with the BBC or The New York Times, are your comments restricted to the broadcast or print editions of the respective outlets? Today’s news and information is simultaneously instant and persistent, global and local, and moves seamlessly across mediums: print, broadcast, cellular, and online.
The course will explore the foundations of public diplomacy, the legislation (of course), and the convergence of old and new media into Now Media. We will spend time on the opportunities and constraints on the US government as an information actor, adversarial use of the global information environment, including their use of YouTube, and other actors such as China, NATO, and hackers. We will look at the tools to identify and monitor the listening being created as well as citizen diplomacy in “non-traditional” issue areas. There will be several case studies, including one on the US healthcare debate, private sector risk management, Afghanistan and Pakistan (of course), and another case study of the students’ choosing. Several guest lecturers will contribute their expertise, either in person or teleconference.
I look forward to teaching at my alma mater.
Smith-Mundt Symposium: A Discourse to Shape America’s Discourse
Below is the report on the Smith-Mundt Symposium of January 13, 2009. Subtitled “A Discourse to Shape America’s Discourse”, it was a frank and open discussion across a diverse group of stakeholders, practitioners, and observers from Congress, the Departments of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, and outside of government, many of whom never had a reason to be in the same room with one another before. Ostensibly on the law that authorized what we now call public diplomacy, it was really a way to foster an interagency, public‐private, and inter‐tribal discussion was on the purpose, structure, and direction of America’s global engagement. The report has been online since April. It is republished at Scribd for greater attention and comment. Please contribute your comments below.
Continue reading “Smith-Mundt Symposium: A Discourse to Shape America’s Discourse
“