Thursday, February 12, 2009
Diplomacy, Development, and Defense
How does everybody feel about these aspects being considered the pinnacle of US security? In this article, Mrs. Clinton talks about the roles of diplomacy, development, and defense as they relate to the State Department. I recently went to one of the IDPSA's Friday Forums, in which they were discussing the future of Development aid in the Obama administration. Although much of their focus was on development, I would say that development leading toward security controlled a large part of the discussion. Toward the end, however, a gentleman stood up and proclaimed that development should not only be done to promote US security, but that there also should be development done for development's sake. As with many forums, such as this one, diplomacy was not addressed except when defining what the three D's were. This got me to thinking, along with the topic of the public diplomacy offices being moved off of the State Department's campus- how many people think that diplomacy should be done for diplomacy's sake? Also, does this seem like a realistic idea? Discuss amongst yourselves.