Perspectives on Public Diplomacy

Web 2.0 and the White House

2009-05-03T14:30:00.001-07:00

The Washington Post reported on the Obama Administration's new outreach approach using new Internet tools - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/01/AR2009050102826.html. It reports, "Establishing direct strategic presidential communication with the populations of other countries -- especially other countries ruled by hostile governments -- is a top foreign policy priority for the new administration." Macon Phillips works with Obama's National Security Council staff to turn new communications channels into important tools for winning friends and understanding abroad. He states, "We try to find the audiences where they are, and deliver the president's message to them at the best delivery point."

The objective of the administration is to reach out to global audiences through "unfiltered" communication. Obama's March 20 Navroz message directed to the Iranian people is a case in point. It has drawn over 500,000 viewers and Iranian viewers have downloaded the video, remixed it with their own comments and put it back on the Web, a sign of "engaging with the message." For someone like Obama who successfully employed the innovative use of Facebook and other online social networks, YouTube videos, and fundraising on the Internet in the 2008 presidential campaign, Web 2.0 should be a confident next step.

The Swine Flu and PD

2009-05-03T00:22:00.000-07:00

How does an epidemic such as the Swine Flu affect PD for countries like Mexico and the United States? Mexico has been pleading for assistance and understanding, claiming that they are controlling the spread of the disease, while the United States has seemingly been deemed guilty by its proximity to Mexico for the rise and subsequent spread of the disease. The press has not been helping things since the number of cases in the U.S. skyrocketed over the past few weeks, reporting the "first U.S. death" due to the swine flu, despite the fact that the death was actually that of a Mexican child who came to the U.S. seeking better treatment for his condition. Now, even Canada is potentially at fault for inadvertently causing the outbreak of the disease (http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/05/02/swine.flu/index.html).

Despite all the hoopla surrounding the disease, only ten people have died this year due to the swine flu, while nearly 36,000 people die of what we know simply as the "flu" every single year in the U.S. My question to you is this: although the disease has clearly been blown out of proportion, will it affect the way that countries interact with one another, as it has already prompted countries like Chile and Argentina to create special medical checkpoints for visitors from Mexico and the United States? What affect will this have on Mexican, Canadian, and American public diplomacy until the disease can be contained?

Step Up 3: The Embassies

2009-05-02T20:48:00.000-07:00

Looks like the State Department's ready to dance... or at least to use dance as a vehicle for cultural diplomacy. State's Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs and Brooklyn Academy of Music announced plans to launch DanceMotion USA to send dance companies on international tours. In a press conference on April 29, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Professional and Cultural Exchanges Alina L. Romanowski announced the three lucky dance companies that will begin the program in 2010:

1. Evidence, A Dance Company, based in Brooklyn, New York, will tour South Africa, Nigeria, and Senegal.
2. ODC/Dance, based in San Francisco, California, will tour Thailand, Burma and Indonesia.
3. Urban Bush Women, also Brooklyn-based, will tour Brazil, Venezuela, and Colombia.

Of course, these three dance companies weren't just lucky. They were chosen strategically to reflect values that the State Department wants to communicate through its cultural diplomacy. Both Brooklyn-based dance companies, for example, emphasize the experiences of African diaspora communities in the U.S. In its mission statement, Urban Bush Women states:

Urban Bush Women (UBW) seeks to bring the untold and under-told histories and stories of disenfranchised people to light through dance. We do this from a woman-centered perspective, as members of the African Diaspora community, in order to create a more equitable balance of power in the dance world and beyond...

The State Department's decision to create DanceMotion USA provides a global platform for these untold and under-told histories to be communicated.

Embassy Visits as PD (2.0)

2009-05-02T16:28:00.000-07:00

I know Leslie talked about this too, but it deserves further discussion. I think embassy visits are PD efforts, however, since a lot of embassies are participating, they may not get the due credit. For example, I went with a Malaysian friend today to check out the Malaysian embassy, which had it's open house today, along with a bunch of others. So, today, I checked out not only this embassy, but also the Pakistani, Nigerian, Bangladeshi, and Ethiopian embassies.
Since the Passport DC event is so huge, (check out the website to see what was happening today: http://www.culturaltourismdc.org/calendar2532/calendar_show.htm?doc_id=76354) I think it drew attention away from events that would have been more informative. Also, it kinda made people compare countries, that would never be compared, just based on what their embassy event was like. Although, some may argue that these countries may never have gotten this attention had it not been for an event like this.
I think I was most impressed, from a PD perspective, with the Bangladeshi Embassy- this is because they greeted you politely; and by they, I mean a woman saying "Welcome to the Bangladeshi embassy, here is our Ambassador", who then shook your hand- even with the possibility of catching the swine flu! Additionally, there were people standing behind the ambassador handing out surveys about your experience at the embassy, what you already know about Bangladesh, and how you developed your opinion, of the country. Albeit there were many of these surveys that people did not bother to fill out, however there was a decent-sized box by the door full of people's precious opinions. This is information that is hard to get, and this was the only embassy that I visited that was doing it. Kudos Bangladesh!

The Best Job in the World

2009-05-02T08:17:00.000-07:00

Stumbled upon a very interesting article about Queenslands latest global tourism campaign that, while not quite PD, is an excellent example of how utilization of the internet and social networking can work. Do you think this kind of campaign has any feasible implications for public diplomacy elsewhere?

What happens if a global tourism marketing campaign dresses up as a job recruitment drive? A global reality TV show gets under way.

Tourism Queensland launched its Best Job in the World competition in January hoping to generate fresh interest in Australia's sunshine state - a dream location, according to the locals, that is beautiful one day, and perfect the next.

The internet, and its social networking sites, then delivered. Within the first 48 hours, they had received more than 7,500 online applications.

Better still, more than 200,000 people logged onto the site in the first weekend alone, placing unexpected strains on server capacity.

No wonder. In these "feel-bad" times, Tourism Queensland had opened up the ultimate feel-good job: the post of 'caretaker' at the blissful Hamilton Island on the Great Barrier Reef, with a six-month contract worth a handy Aus $150,000 (US $110,000).

Wild card

Then there's the three-bedroom beach home you get to luxuriate in, which comes with a swimming pool and golf cart.

The successful candidate must also be willing, in the words of the online advertisement, 'to explore the islands of the Great Barrier Reef, swim, snorkel, make friends with the locals and generally enjoy the tropical Queensland climate and lifestyle.'

Nice work, if you can get it, and 34,000 applicants from over 200 countries thought they stood a chance.

Now the field has been whittled down to 16 finalists, including a wild card entry chosen, in true reality television style, through an online poll.

They include a receptionist, some students, a teacher, a charity event manager, and an actress. And on 3rd May, they're all due to converge on Hamilton Island for the final.

The biggest winner, though, is Tourism Queensland, which reckons that for US$1m, it generated US$70m of global publicity.

Osama hoax

"We did it on the smell of an oily rag", says Danielle Kootman of Tourism Queensland. "We pitched it after Christmas in the northern hemisphere when there is not much news around, and so amidst all the cold and gloom here came the dream job.

"It really captured the imagination of the world."

It also helped that the organisers received a hoax application from a man purporting to be Osama Bin Laden, while Tourism Queensland generated even more headlines by concocting a story that one applicant felt so passionately about the job that she tattooed an advert for the Great Barrier Reef on her arm.

Imitation is the highest form of flattery, so it's no surprise that other have sought to replicate the success of this viral campaign. The 'NEXT Best Job in the world,' a short-lived Canadian venture, has now been postponed.

Russell Howcroft, an advertising executive who is a regular panellist on the hit Australian show, The Gruen Transfer, says Queensland's online campaign has been so successful because "it isn't an overclaim".

"All the best advertising makes a legitimate claim, and for many people this really is the best job in the world. The proposition is supported."

The challenge now for tourism chiefs is to convert interest into visitation, a tough task for such a long-haul destination and at a time when there are fears within the Australian tourism industry that visitor numbers could drop by 250,000.

But Tourism Queensland says it has received heightened interested from airlines, which might look to establish new routes serving the sunshine state, and from global travel companies.

Once again, the campaign has demonstrated the power of the internet, and of viral marketing.

President Barack Obama harnessed the power of the web to win the most powerful job in the world. Now Tourism Queensland has used similar techniques in what it claims has now become the most sought-after job in the world.

What about Sec. Clinton’s First 100 Days?

2009-05-01T20:12:00.000-07:00

With all the media hype surrounding President Obama’s first 100 days in office, it seems like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's first 100 days have been somewhat overlooked.

Interestingly, the State Department posted a 100-day report outlining Secretary Clinton’s accomplishments. The report also provides an overview of public diplomacy accomplishments, stating that engaging in public diplomacy is a priority and that some “early and significant progress” has been made in that area. Here is the section of the report, specifically focusing on public diplomacy:

“Placed New Emphasis on People-to-People Diplomacy: While Secretary Clinton and the entire State Department are engaged in vigorous government-to-government diplomacy, Secretary Clinton has also invested unprecedented amounts of time and energy into engaging in people-to-people diplomacy in countries with whom we seek partnerships.

Hosted Town Halls, Webcasts, Roundtables, and More: On the first day of Secretary Clinton’s first trip, she hosted a town hall meeting with students at University of Tokyo where she answered questions from a diverse group of students ranging from US-Tokyo relations and the financial crisis, to nuclear power and gender equality. The Tokyo Town Hall launched a series of town halls hosted by Secretary Clinton at a university in Seoul, South Korea, in Brussels with European Parliament interns, and in Mexico via webcast with students across 40 educational campuses. Secretary Clinton has also hosted roundtable discussions with women leaders in Seoul and Beijing, students and teachers in Mexico and the West Bank, and with women entrepreneurs in Israel.

Leveraged Non-Traditional Media to Reach New Audiences: Through non-traditional media, Secretary Clinton is spreading the Administration’s broader diplomatic efforts by targeting audiences previously ignored. Secretary Clinton’s interview on the Turkish version of ‘The View’ reportedly caused positive ripples throughout the country. The Secretary’s appearance on the Indonesian pop culture television program, ‘Awesome,’ reached youth throughout the world’s most populous Muslim nation and beyond and her appearance on Telehit, the MTV of Mexico, likely targeted audiences otherwise unaware of her goals visiting Mexico.”

Reviews for Secretary Clinton’s work so far have been mostly positive, but it remains to be seen how much of a priority engaging in public diplomacy will truly be for the State Department over the next four years. After learning about the importance of practicing effective public diplomacy and the benefits it yields, I am hoping for the best.

Embassy Visits as PD?

2009-05-01T17:27:00.001-07:00

I was in the Swedish Embassy on Wednesday and saw a flier for this event. Looks like a good event;
http://europe-in-dc.com/
It is an open house on Saturday May 9th from 10am-4pm at the EU nation embassies here in DC, they have shuttles to bring people on different routes to visit embassies. Its an opportunity to "look behind the gates."
What do you think? Is it PD? I think so, they are connecting with a foreign public and its a good pull technique. People choose to go into the embassies and perhaps they'll walk out with a more positive view of the nations of the EU.
Any thoughts? and Anyone going to go?

Use "Smart Power" to Help Cubans

2009-04-28T14:10:00.000-07:00

http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0224_cuba_huddleston.aspx

Contrary to popular myth and public misunderstanding, if President Barack Obama wishes to change the U.S. policy toward Cuba, he has ample authority to do so. If he takes charge of Cuba policy, he can turn the embargo into an effective instrument of ''smart power'' to achieve the United States' policy objectives in Cuba.
Obama's leadership is needed to change the dynamic between the United States and Cuba. The status quo is no longer an option. Not only has it failed to achieve its goals; it has tarnished our image in the hemisphere and throughout the world. Waiting for Congress to act will only further delay change. Fortunately, even in the case of Cuba, Congress has not materially impaired this country's venerable constitutional arrangement under which the president has the ultimate authority to conduct our foreign affairs.
Executive authority
Again and again we hear that the embargo can't be changed because the Helms-Burton law codified it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Whether you agree or disagree with the current commercial embargo, the president can effectively dismantle it by using his executive authority. Helms-Burton codified the embargo regulation, but those regulations provide that ``all transactions are prohibited except as specifically authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury by means of regulations, rulings, instructions, and licenses.''
This means that the president's power remains unfettered. He can instruct the secretary to extend, revise or modify embargo regulations. The proof of this statement is that President Bill Clinton issued new regulations for expanded travel and remittances in order to help individuals and grow civil society.
Obama will have to modify Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations to fulfill his campaign promise to increase Cuban-American travel and remittances. If he wants to reproduce the more open conditions in Cuba that led to the ''Cuban Spring'' of 2002 and Oswaldo Payá's Varela Project, he could reinstate people-to-people and educational travel. By a simple rule change, he could also speed the entry of life-saving medicines from Cuba, rather than subjecting them to delays from cumbersome OFAC licensing procedures.
Since 1992, U.S. law -- the Cuban Democracy Act -- has sought to expand access to ideas, knowledge and information by licensing telecommunications goods and services. Yet, in practice, regulations are so strictly interpreted that the United States in effect is imposing a communications embargo on Cuba. To lift it, the president can authorize a general license for the donation and sale of radios, televisions and computers. In addition, rather than helping Cuban state security keep Yoani Sánchez and others off the Internet, the Obama administration could make Internet technology readily available so that any barriers to communications would be clearly the fault of the Cuban government, and not ours.
Environmental concerns rate high with the Obama administration. So it might open bilateral discussions, exchange information and license the provision of scientific equipment to improve the health of the ocean and success of commercial fisheries.
The United States Geological Survey estimates that the North Cuba Basin holds 5.5 billion barrels of oil and 9.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves. If the president wishes, he can instruct the secretary of the treasury to license U.S. companies to explore, exploit and transport these resources that we and the region so badly need.
Failed policy
After a half-century of failed policy, there is enormous support in the Cuban-American community for initiatives that will improve the well being and independence of the Cuban people. What they didn't know -- but know now -- is that there is no reason they can't reach out to the Cuban people and still retain the embargo as symbol of their concern about the Cuban government's failure to live up to international norms of human rights, democracy and transparency

Pakistan's Public Diplomacy in Washington by Pakistani-American Interest Groups

2009-04-28T13:34:00.001-07:00

After decades of Washington tilting towards Pakistan under a Cold War mentality, Pakistani-Americans are now facing a challenge in order to maintain pro-Pakistan views in Washington. As a key nation in the War on Terrorism, the state of Pakistan is going to intense scrutiny as an effective U.S. ally. Pakistani-Americans insist that Pakistan is taking the right steps and it requires continued U.S. support in order to make progress. They warn that abandonment by the U.S., as in the past, will further deteriorate conditions and will ultimately hurt U.S. efforts.

In the past, Pakistani-American citizen groups did not get much attention because of the classic reasons of "mosque" and "military." First, because many Pakistani-Americans prefer to identify with Islamic organizations rather than Paksitani-American organizations. Second, Pakistani military generals have been able to walk into the Pentagon bypassing these citizen groups.

But now, with a democratic Pakistan under increased scrutiny, Pakistani-American groups such as the Pakistan Public Affairs Committee lobby in Washington support a change in U.S. policy toward Pakistan from the current transactional relationship to one that involves a strategic partnership and it supports a shift in U.S. engagement directed towards the people instead of the Pakistani government. They support a change in the way the U.S. looks at Pakistan by moving away from a tactically driven set of short-term exercises in crisis management to a deeper, broader, long-term strategic engagement.

(Semi)Narrowcasting to the Muslim World

2009-04-28T09:00:00.000-07:00

Much has been made of President Obama's eloquence and balanced rhetoric in his statements to, and regarding, what is sometimes monolithically-termed the 'Muslim World.' The phrase itself is a bit of a loaded term, because it ignores relevant distinctions within the global community of 1.6 billioin Muslims. It is related to objections over the now disused phrase 'Global War on Terror,' because when used in conjunction--even innocuously--they tended to convey the sentiment that the U.S. or the West in general was at war with Islam.

Obama has since made clear that the U.S. is, in fact, "not at war with Islam," and has banished the GWOT from the talking points (the FoxNews graphics department is likely not satisfied with the replacement 'Overseas Contingency Operation')...Despite the fact that the President continues to employ the 'Mulsim world' phrase (most recently in remarks at a student roundtable at a university in Istanbul, Turkey), it is clear that his distinct messages to audiences within that world are, themselves, a recognition of its internal divisions and diversity.

Consider the Administration's messages to the global Muslim community, and how their carefully-selected audiences effectively employ narrowcasting:

1. President Obama gives his first international media interview with the pan-Arab satellite network al Arabiyya calling for mutual understanding and respect, speaking directly to the region's Arab Muslims.

2. Obama records a celebratory message of outreach to the people of Iran for the Persian holiday of Nowruz, implicitly targeting non-Arab Shia Muslims.

3. Secretary of State Clinton concludes a tour of East and Southeast Asia with an appearance on Indonesia's most popular daytime TV talk show, reaching millions of Asian Sunni Muslims in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

4. President Obama wraps up his tour of Europe following the G20 with speeches in Ankara and Istanbul, again calling for mutual respect, speaking to Turkish and Kurdish Muslims and recognizing the United States' short-term image problems in Turkey and the global Mulsim community. He also affirmed the United States' support for the overwhelmingly-Sunni Muslim nation's membership bid for the European Union.

Many public diplomacy observers give Obama high marks for his Administration's willingness to recognize these distinctions and target different segments of the Muslim population worldwide with individually-tailored messages that nevertheless reinforce broad themes of respect, dialog, and understanding. In a recap of the Administration's 100 foreign policy successes in its first 100 days, Ian Goldberg of the HuffingtonPost includes, "Re-engaging with Muslim nations through targeted, positive public diplomacy."

Some perspective on those Japanese cartoons

2009-04-25T21:43:00.000-07:00

It looks like even though Taro Aso thinks Japanese anime is the future of the world, China is (officially at least) cracking down on animation programs that are going to be shown inside the country.

The China State Administration of Radio Film and Television announced earlier in February that, " From May1st, television stations at various levels should not broadcast oversea cartoon or any informational program introduces oversea cartoon from 5pm to 9pm, extend one hour compare to last restriction which is 5pm to 8pm."

Over at China Smack, I was able to read the translated commentary of netizens who all hold a diverse range of opinions on this issue. Some used anime as a platform to raise questions of nationality, while others berated Japanese anime for being too sexual and violent. I'll leave you all to read over the commentary provided here, but it would be interesting to see what you all think.

http://www.chinasmack.com/more/china-government-restricts-foreign-cartoons-netizen-reactions/

Reflections on a PD event

2009-04-25T16:24:00.001-07:00

This week I was fortunate enough to attend an event that was quite exclusive. The invite only crowd included people from State, DoD, Congress, academia, and NGO's.
I can assure you, the classic State v. DoD Turf War, with Congress in the middle was most definitely on display.
What struck me most about this event was that the conversation that went on there about the use of public diplomacy, new technology, messaging, and credibility were exactly like the debates we have in class. The main difference is that in class we don't have a stake in one side or another. I think that is a strength. It allows us to see other solutions or at least simplify the matter by not worrying about who conducts the public diplomacy but that it gets done.
I think it is important for all of us looking to become practitioners of PD not to get lost in the turf war and remember that positive action by anyone is better then inaction by all.

Tibetan Blogging as a Form of Diplomacy

2009-04-24T20:47:00.001-07:00

The Saturday profile in the New York Times of Tibetan blogger Ms. Woeser by Andrew Jacobs portrays a woman who accurately displays the situation in Tibet to the outside world. While not a politician, the poet and photographer has depicted the current situation on one of her online blogs, Invisible Tibet, since 2005. Robert Barnett at Columbia University remarked that “She is not a politician but a poet who quite late in her career started talking about politics,” and further asserted that “She is an eloquent reminder of what’s happening in Tibet.” While her blog was just blocked by the Great Firewall in China, it is usually the only source of news because of her conscious effort to remain outside of the political spectrum and use poetry to present her views. She has recorded the disappearances, beatings, and deaths of Tibetans at the hands of the Chinese. Because her information is considered accurate, it has often been utilized by the international media and press.

For her actions, Woeser and her husband have been placed under house arrest, followed, and interrogated by the police and security force. Additionally, her friends and witnesses are scared to talk to her because they are victims of abuse by the police for their actions. Upon returning home to Tibet, the police harassed her mother.

Woeser resides in China but returns to Lhasa on a regular basis. Her father was a strong Communist supporter and worked for the government. Surrounded by an education and life filled with Chinese propaganda, it was only later in life that she was able to recognize her Tibetan roots.

Her information is utilized to mobilize the people inside and outside of Tibet. In the absence of a free Tibetan government, the bloggers have led the movement for change both nationally and internationally. They have mobilized protests and given light to a variety of human rights issues. Due to accounts of human rights abuse, China often has to account for the treatment of Tibetans. While blogging has been ineffective at dramatically altering Chinese policy, it has plagued China’s human rights record and stands in the way of the country gaining clout equal to the Western world.

Institutionalizing PD: One Boss or an expert in every office?

2009-04-24T15:03:00.000-07:00

This week's guest post on MountainRunner, by Mark Pfeifle and Jonathan Thompson, discusses the importance of strategic communication and PD for US military operations, and the need for more institutionalized support for communications throughout the bureaucracy. I thought the post was interesting because it takes bit of a different view of how this should be done. We've talked a lot about Murrough's insistance that PD be in on the "takeoffs as well of the crashlandings," and have usually extended that idea to ask if there should be a "Secretary of Public Diplomacy" sitting at the same table with the Secretary of State, Defense and the rest of them.

Pfeifle and Thompson suggest a different approach. Rather than one PD boss with cabinet level authority, they argue that every agency should have at least one communications expert at the second tier. First on their list of recommendations is to:

"1. Require every military branch to create two active duty and reserve general officer positions in strategic communication, and make them eligible to reach the three-star rank. Likewise, the State Department needs at least two individuals of Ambassadorial rank dedicated to public and international communication."

They suggest more funding and control for the current Undersecretary for PD, direct from Congress, of course, but they also suggest more diffusion in the expertise and responsibility for Communication.

The idea is that these principles are important to every agency and department, military and civilian, State, Intellegence, Army, Navy, Airforce and etc, and that everybody needs to be practicing PD, rather than one PD department trying to put all these diverse activities into one package. The idea gets to the heart of the current debate about PD - is it one of the things countries do in the international arena, or is it a part of everything that countries do? The idea reminds me of Canada's approach of trying to get everybody in on the PD policy before launching it. All semester we've talked about the challanges of a country as big as the US condensing its activities into one message - maybe this more diffuse approach is one way to make that happen.

Immigrant Diplomats....

2009-04-23T22:31:00.000-07:00

I found an interesting article about Turkey and a possible public diplomacy effort in Europe. There are about five million Turkish immigrants living in Europe in 2008. Turkey has been trying to secure membership in the European Union (EU) since 1999. But their efforts have been fruitless as Germany and France continue to refuse their bid.

According to the article, “Turks living in Germany could be public diplomacy tool “

Burak Erdenir, advisor to minister of state and minister of EU affairs and chief negotiator Egemen Bağış, said: “Turkey should start to invigorate Turkish immigrants in Europe as an effective diplomatic tool for EU membership. They have been in Europe for 50 years, but Turkey has not managed to mobilize them.’’

And continues to say that

‘’Euro Turks’’ are very important in building Turkey’s image in Europe, Erdenir underlined the significant role Turkish intellectuals, artists and writers could play in influencing European public opinion by referring to the award Turkish director Nuri Bilge Ceylan won at the Cannes Film Festival in 2008. He claimed this award helped change the negative image of Turkey.

Erdenir has a very simplistic idea of how Turkish immigrants can be used as a diplomatic tool to promote Turkey’s image and possibly gain membership in the EU. However, it seems like he doesn’t take into account whether or not these immigrants will identify with Turkey or with the country they are residing in. Maybe the 1^st generation Turkish immigrants will identify with Turkey, whereas the 2^nd generation or later Turkish immigrants might identify as either French or German. At most, these Turkish immigrants can disseminate their cultural tradition.

Also, it makes me wonder if Erdenir takes into account how these countries already view Turkey because of the large number of Turkish immigrants. If Turkey tries to mobilize its immigrant population in other countries as a form of public diplomacy to become a member of the EU, I can see it having negative effects from both the immigrant population and the countries they are trying to influence.

Germany creates "House of Science" to promote its Cultural Diplomacy

2009-04-23T18:39:00.000-07:00

During our talk about German public diplomacy we touched upon the issue of Germany's intention to re-frame its image as a country with scientific and engineering achievements. What we discussed two weeks ago seems now to be an official part of Germany's public diplomacy strategy. With the overall goal to expand the cultural diplomacy, Germany has opened its first "House of Science" in Sao Paolo.

Berlin - Germany is to expand its cultural diplomacy abroad, reaching out to academics by building a series of missions to highlight German scientific and engineering achievements, officials said Thursday in Berlin. Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said the offices were part of a push to invest more in cultural diplomacy. The first such House of Science has been opened in Sao Paolo,Brazil, and more are planned in Moscow, New Delhi and New York.

Staff at a house of science can inform local academics about German scientists who are doing research in the same specialties. The houses are in addition to the chain of government-funded Goethe Institutes around the world which showcase the arts in Germany and offer German-language classes. Berlin also funds German-language schools in many nations.

Steinmeier said cultural diplomacy offered new ways to gain influence in a world of cultural and religious conflicts. "It offers others the chance to see the world through our eyes," he said. In the three years since Steinmeier became minister in late 2005, Berlin's cultural diplomacy budget rose more than 30 per cent, reaching 658 million euros (862 million dollars) last year. Steinmeier did not disclose the amount of further increases. A key planned project in Turkey is the establishment of a German university in Istanbul. (seen on Earthtimes)

Given the oftentimes event-driven attitude German public diplomacy takes, establishing Houses of Science can help focus the country's PD more on long-term achievements and relationships rather than creating campaigns around specific dates. Integrating the local public in a pull-attitude just like the successful Goethe-Institut does, is to my impression more promising than a rather pushy campaign-style approach that might create interest for a specific period of time but does not primarily focus on the long-term goals.

I am interested to see how the American audience will react to the House of Science in New York. Given that Germany is often seen as a competitor when it comes to technology and engineering, I am curious to see to what extend the American audience will accept the House as a resource.

World Leaders Facebook?

2009-04-23T10:23:00.000-07:00

Check this out from the Atlantic Monthly. Diplomacy 2.0 to be sure.
http://www.theatlantic.com/a/facebookhumor.mhtml

Twitter, Transparency, and Iraq

2009-04-22T12:00:00.000-07:00

There was an interesting article on a discussion hosted by the U.S. Department of State in Baghdad with Jack Dorsey, co-founder of the Twitter network, and others from "Web powerhouses" like Howcast, YouTube and Google - I thought Google owned YouTube, but I digress - on the "possible high-tech horizons" for Iraq. There were also execs from AT&T, Meetup, and Blue State Digital.

The article cites the importance of mobile phones in the country. Zain - one of the country's wireless companies - says that 700,000 of its Iraqi users have internet-capable cell phones. The article labels the State Department's encouragement of technologies like this to encourage political participation and to counter negative characteristics, such as corruption, as "lofty."

Also, "It's estimated just 5 percent of Iraqis have Web access at home and the connection speed can harken back to the dial-up days of the 1980s. However, users can get faster connections at Internet cafes and the Web access on their cell phones."

I am curious to know what you think of this particular spin of technology in diplomacy because it is not so much the U.S. trying to direct a message through Web 2.0 as it is the U.S. trying to improve conditions by suggesting and developing a certain approach to using technology.

I think it is a way of using technologies that are democratizing in the way that they mediatize (is this the correct verb form to discuss the concepts we discussed much, much earlier in the course?) interaction to the benefit of Iraqis. I think it would actually be excellent to push domestically in any place where the technology is widespread in its availability. I think the range of players invited to participate in a - and here comes the PD piece - "trip to Iraq's capital, sponsored by the State Department...billed as a way to assess the faint stirrings of Iraq's online culture and possibly inspire future Iraqi Web entrepreneurs."

Obama & America's Image

2009-04-22T10:25:00.001-07:00

NPR had an interesting article up earlier this week about how Obama has jump-started the American image abroad.

I was taking pictures alongside other tourists at the Temple of Karnak in Egypt earlier this month when a member of the national police marched across 50 yards of sun-blasted terrace to talk to me. He was wearing the black uniform and beret of the security forces, and he had an assault rifle strapped acoss his chest.

"Where from?" he asked me.

"America," I said.

"Obama!" he shouted, suddenly beaming and nodding.

It might have been startling, except that something similar happened every day of the dozen I was there.

It's a commonplace that President Obama has altered the perception of the United States around the world. But meeting people in an Arabic-speaking country brings that statement to life in compelling ways.

Shopkeepers and cabbies, students and business people, young and old are eager to signal their interest and approval. America, an old and well-known actor on the world stage, has undergone a character transformation overnight.

The author cautions however that this may be more of an "Obama Moment" than a lasting changing in perceptions.

It is impossible to escape the sense of something opening all around you. If it is not a new era, it is at least a new window of possibilities. Perhaps the "clash of civilizations" paradigm that dominated after Sept. 11 will not prevail indefinitely.

Yet, alongside that glimpse of hope there are shadows of caveat and doubt. For one thing, the impressions Americans receive in foreign countries are often formed inside a tourism bubble, where people have a strong interest in courting our friendship.

Beyond that, the sheer intensity of the Obama phenomenon suggests impermanence. Having dazzled his way from London to Istanbul to Baghdad, the American president is a starburst over the global consciousness -- much as he was on the U.S. political scene late in 2007. He maintained altitude well enough in 2008 to be elected, and he remains popular after three months in office. But staying aloft this well as a world figure will be more difficult.

The international version of the Obama Moment is unlikely to survive the first international crisis in which the Obama administration must defend the U.S. interest. And sooner or later, that crisis and choice will come, forced by the complexities of world problems and the simplicities of domestic politics.

For now, the Obama administration is doing all it can to postpone the day of reckoning. The White House maintains that the national interest can be redefined to harmonize with the global good. It's an inspiring vision, but it contends with powerful impulses deep in our political nature.

Again we see the issue of the say-do gap. There is a distrust of what the difference between what Obama says now and what the US would do then if a crisis did occur. America's credibility reserve with the rest of the world has been spent and seems that it will take some time and actions to build it back up.

China:English Version of Global Times was launched--another international media outreach.

2009-04-22T07:57:00.000-07:00

We discussed in class tonight about Chinese government’s increasing efforts in expanding international media. Here is a very recent example. Yesterday, The English Version of Global Times (which focuses more on international news, and affiliated to People’s Daily, the Official Party Newspaper) was launched. This was a conscious decision and also a yearning of letting the outside world know more about China and a more truthful China from the perspectives of Chinese policymakers and academia. I have highlighted a few scholars’ reaction to this launch in the news article. As some scholars pointed out, the identity of Global Times may be a concern. In my opinion, the launch of its new English-language edition and website is a good start because if the English edition of the Global Times is on the track of fair and balanced reporting of international news and also Chinese domestic news, it may help drive the Chinese government to further liberalize its media gradually and the Chinese leadership will finally learn from various international experiences how to better cope with others’ criticism. As the Tibetan story occurred in the 08 Beijing Olympics Torch relay has shown, the Chinese government was so inexperienced, clumsy, and counter-productive in tackling with this “embarrassing incident” (for many Chinese leaders). Also this is related to the “Face” culture in China, embarrassing the government in public only angers the leaders, but in my personal opinion, they finally have to get used to this because as a big rising power, it is inevitable that it draws the whole world’s attention and will be exposed to spotlight very often. What they should do is trying to learn from the healthy criticism in order to act as a more responsible power in the international arena instead of fearing these criticism and trying to insulate the Chinese people from the foreign media’s negative coverage of the Chinese government.

http://en.huanqiu.com/www/english/china/top_photo/2009-04/427254.html

The Global Times held a reception at the Kerry Center Hotel in Beijing yesterday to celebrate the launch of its new English-language edition and website.

Zhang Yannong, president of the People’s Daily, said in his opening speech, “The launch is a landmark step for the People’s Daily in building a system of modern communication.”

“This is a pivotal moment in history, ideal for the Global Times to take responsibility for making China more accessible to the English-speaking world,” Zhang said.

Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of the Global Times, said in his welcome speech that the newspaper “will speak directly to foreign readers” and that he hopes “the transformation of the Global Times will be encouraged and facilitated.”

About 100 foreign diplomats, representatives of international media organizations and almost 200 local scholars and celebrities attended the event.

Jin Canrong, deputy dean of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China, praised the timing of the newspaper’s launch, saying China’s opening up over the next 30 years should center on letting the world know and accept China.

“Chinese media should help world audiences to see China’s advancement, problems and challenges, but also make the world accept a country with a vast population that is experiencing unprecedented growth,” he said.

“It is incumbent on the Global Times to report in a fair and balanced manner, and always to seek the truth,” Ambassador Serge Abou, head of the Delegation of the European Commission to China, said at the reception.

“I started reading the Global Times today and it’s quite an experience,” said Henri Carrières, second secretary of the Embassy of Brazil. Laura Møller Dombernowsky, an assistant at the political affairs department of the Royal Danish Embassy, told the Global Times she was looking forward to “seeing how the newspaper will make a difference.”

Feng Zhongping, a professor at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, said the Global Times’ endeavors epitomized the image of a hard-working China.

Professor Yu Guomin, deputy dean of the School of Journalism at the Renmin University of China, told the Global Times that he is optimistic about the newspaper’s prospects despite the decline the world’s press has been facing since September.

While some Chinese scholars voiced concerns over the identity of the Global Times, most were upbeat about the launch.

“Many foreigners believe the Chinese media is like an octopus with lots of tentacles but controlled by a single brain. This belief could be fatal for the opening up of Chinese media, but if the English edition of the Global Times can shed light on the complexity of Chinese issues and always stick to the truth, it may help to change the Western stereotype,” Zha Daojiong, professor at the School of International Studies of Peking University, told the Global Times.

He Maochun, director of the Center of Economy and Diplomacy at Tsinghua University, said the Global Times will provide an alternative to China’s existing English-language national newspaper, and can respect the principals of journalism and improve the reporting quality.

Published by the People’s Daily, the Global Times Chinese edition was established in 1993 and specializes in current affairs and international issues. It has more than 500 correspondents in 75 countries and regions around the world.

With a circulation of 1.6 million, the newspaper is one of the country’s Top 500 brands with an estimated value of more than 1.4 billion yuan ($206 million), according to the People’s Daily.

The English edition of the Global Times launched yesterday with 100,000 copies being circulated from five cities across the country.

By 11 pm last night, the English version of the Global Times website had received 100,000 visits, according to official statistics.

On the Chinese website, an Internet user nicknamed “Sashimi” said Chinese people are eager to voice themselves in an objective way to show the world “a more open China.”

Sri Lanka's propaganda war

2009-04-21T13:13:00.001-07:00

The New York Times' blog, The Lede, reports that supporters of both sides in the 25-year Sri Lankan conflict continue to fight a global propaganda war on many fronts - http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/two-sri-lankas-struggle-to-tell-their-tales/?hp. The government has banned journalists from entering the war zone, so it is impossible to verify the facts. Instead, reporters rely on spokesmen from the Ministry of Defense on the Sinhalese side and the separatist group LTTE on the Tamil side. The Tamils claim that the government has killed massive numbers of Tamil civilians and forced them into a narrow strip of land in the country's northeast. The Sinhala government claims that the rebels were themselves killing the civilians for propaganda purposes. At demonstrations in several countries, supporters of both the Sri Lankan government and the Tamil separatists, have been pressing their case on foreign governments and international media organizations. Pro-government protesters marched Monday to the gates of the Norwegian Embassy in Colombo, demanding that diplomats from the country that has been trying to broker a peace on the island be expelled. The government blames the Norwegian government for not able to protect the Sri Lankan embassy in Oslo from being attacked by Tamil protesters last week. I think that this kind of blaming is illogical and purely political. It is purely an effort by the Sri Lankan government to victimize itself to shore up sympathy internationally. It is an effor to undercut the Tamil message of victimization in Washington and London and elsewhere.

Obama to Regulate CO2 Pollutant

2009-04-17T20:03:00.001-07:00

After our class discussion on marketing Germany as a green country, the US joined efforts to curb climate change by issuing a report on the harmful effects of CO2. Perhaps, Germany is not going alone in addressing global environmental issues.

At the Environmental Summit in Copenhagen in 2008, the results were mixed. Many environmental groups thought that the US and other Western nations were holding down progress. The developing countries refused to make concrete changes until the developed countries amended their policies and reduced their carbon footprint. At that time, the hope of seeing the US- the country with the largest carbon footprint- alter its policies was almost nonexistent. It appeared as though the environmental situation would stand still until the US budged.

The BBC article "Obama to Regulate 'Pollutant' CO2" by Richard Blake summarizes the change in policy and its effects on the global environmental movement. The leadership of Barack Obama allowed this report to go public and shows a newfound dedication to the environment. Lisa Jackson of the EPA remarks that the report, "follows President Obama's call for a low-carbon economy and strong leadership in Congress on clean energy and climate legislation; and... the solution is one that will create millions of green jobs and end our country's dependence on foreign oil."

Now, the US has sent a message of respect for the world's environment. Phyllis Cuttino, the Director of the US Global Warming Program at the Pew Center, has stated that,"This reclaims the US role on the international stage as a leader." The US indicates that it must amend national policies and streamline with the international community. Changes have to occur in its own backyard before expecting the world to make changes. As the US regains a leadership position on the environmental front, I wonder if it will align with Germany to combat environmental issues. If Germany wants a time to broadcast its strong stance on the environment,

Obama on Venezuela and Cuba

2009-04-17T13:10:00.000-07:00

President Obama is meeting with leaders from both North and South American countries at the Summit of the Americas this weekend, and one of the issues surrounding the summit is whether or not Obama will interact with Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez. Obama has publicly stated that he will speak with Chavez should he initiate conversation, and Chavez wants to restore US-Venezuelan relations to the level that they were at under President Clinton (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/17/obama.chavez/index.html).

Similarly, Obama has cracked open our doors to Cuba since he began his presidency, allowing for more freedom of movement of both capital and of people between the US and Cuba. He lifted restrictions on Cuban-Americans that prevented them from sending money to relatives in Cuba, and he also removed restrictions on visiting their families back in Cuba. (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/17/us.cuba/index.html?iref=newssearch).

Are these steps in the right direction for Obama if he wants to make America look like a country that is much more willing to hash out its differences with other countries rather than shut its doors to them as its policy had for the past 8 years?

Cricket and Pakistan's PD debacle

2009-04-17T10:18:00.000-07:00

Devastating news for Pakistan: today the International Cricket Council (ICC) stripped the country of its hosting rights for the 2011 Cricket World cup, citing security concerns. In particular, the ruling pointed to an attack last month which injured six visiting Sri Lankan players and killed seven Pakistanis. Pakistanis are not reacting well to the decision, arguing that with the tournament more than two years away, the decision was overly hasty, as there was still time to improve the security situation before teams and fans began arriving.

I'm no cricket fan, but as I understand it, the sport is a fixture of South Asian culture (Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka) as well in the former British Empire more generally, making the World Cup a major international event. Most importantly, this passion for cricket and the pending World Cup gave Pakistan visibility on the world stage as something other than a state teetering on the brink of terrorist anarchy. With the World Cup gone, news from Pakistan will be that much more dominated by stories of violence and political upheaval.

For those of us who believe economic development is a critical part of fighting extremism, this story is part of a viscious cycle. Image is reality in a case like Pakistan's: the more people think the country is disfunctional, the more it actually becomes so. A world sporting tournament would have had the opposite effect: an injection of capital and positive attention, and a much needed respite from constant political pessimism. While I hardly expect cricket players to risk their safety for the sake of Pakistan's international image and self-esteem, I'm tempted to join Pakistanis in asking if it would have killed the ICC to wait a year or so before bailing on them.

Expanding Nation Branding to City Branding

2009-04-17T08:38:00.000-07:00

Simon Anholt's Nation Branding Index has been tracking global attitudes of 50 countries with the goal to help governments, organizations and businesses understand, evaluate and ultimately build strong country images.

This year, the study gets a new feature. For the first time, the research will also evaluate the image of 50 key cities in 20 countries.

"By partnering with GfK, we are able to provide deeper analysis and offer more comprehensive city-to-city comparisons," says Simon Anholt. "The new study not only creates an opportunity to better understand a city's brand, but also provides a picture of where it stands against other key global destinations." (…)

Selected based on objective measures such as infrastructure, climate and population size as well as political, economic and cultural strengths, the cities included are listed below:
Western Europe: Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin, Brussels, Copenhagen, Dublin, Edinburgh, Geneva, Helsinki, London, Madrid, Milan, Paris, Rome, Stockholm, The Hague, Vienna
Central/Eastern Europe: Budapest, Istanbul, Moscow, Prague, Warsaw
Asia Pacific: Auckland, Bangkok, Beijing, Hong Kong, Melbourne, Mumbai, Seoul, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo
North America: Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Toronto, Vancouver,
Latin America: Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Rio de Janeiro
Middle East/Africa: Cairo, Dubai, Jeddah, Johannesburg

Each city is rated by approximately 6,000 respondents worldwide across the following six dimensions:
Presence: Knowledge of the city, perception of its global contribution to science, culture and governance, along with city "brand signatures".
Place: The overall cleanliness of the environment, its climate and other aesthetic qualities.
Pre-requisite: Affordable accommodations and quality standards of public amenities.
People: General nature of the population, how they make visitors feel (i.e. safe, welcome, etc.), work ethic and cultural diversity and sophistication.
Pulse: Ability to attract visitors and residents, availability of interesting events, food, fashion, arts, culture, sports, shopping and nightlife.
Potential: Perception of the city as a good place to do business, go to school and/or work.

I think it is interesting to look at the differences between the country’s image and the respective city. As we touched upon in class discussion, sometimes the image of a city or a State within the country takes on a completely different direction as the overall country image. However, with regards to nation branding, I am skeptical on how the image of a single city can impact the image of a whole country. After all, a city is always embedded in the nation’s context.

For more information see Press Release: "GfK Roper and Anholt Partner to Offer More In-Depth City Brands Index(SM)"

North Korea's Public Diplomacy

2009-04-15T19:28:00.000-07:00

Did you know that North Korea has a PD website? Because I didn’t until now. Many Western media have portrayed North Korea as a threat to the world (but who would blame them?), yet at the same time there is a website online http://www.korea-dpr.com/ displaying photos, videos, music clips and information (history, culture, and much more) about North Korea.

North Korea’s public diplomacy is managed by the Foundation of the Korean Friendship Association.

According to the webpage:

The Korean Friendship Association (KFA) was founded on November of the year 2000 with the purpose of building international ties with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. It has members from 120 countries.

The KFA has full recognition from the Government of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and is the world-wide leading organization of its supporters.

It has offices in DPR Korea, Spain, Norway and Thailand.

Objectives

The main objectives of the KFA are:

- Show the reality of the DPR Korea to the world

- Defend the independence and socialist construction in the DPR of Korea

- Learn from the culture and history of the Korean People

- Work for the peaceful unification of the Korean peninsula

And here are their activities:

- Public Expositions of the D.P.R.K. (pictures, books, music...)
- Conferences and meetings about the Korean history, society and other aspects.
- Information and consulting in diplomacy and business.
- Radio, T.V. and other media programs.
- Cultural Exchange with different countries.
- Link contact with associations/companies/individuals interested in North Korea.

Plus the website is available in many other languages besides the standard Spanish, French, and German, demonstrating their efforts to engage with a wider global audience.

It’s interesting to see the image that North Korea wants the world to see of them. Although I’m sure that the “reality of the DPRK to the world” is more like an illusion. This is become it is these “positive” images that North Korea want you to see. There are no other images from an outside source to prove that North Korea is like what the images on the websites portray. But I give North Korea credit for trying to improve its image. And if you get the chance listen to this song Raise your weapons to wave the Supreme commander or any of their other songs. You’ll be waving more than just your weapons high to North Korea’s public diplomacy!

JUDITH!!! JUDITH!!! JUDITH!!! - Who is Judith McHale?

2009-04-15T10:45:00.000-07:00

Judith McHale shall sit atop the not so vast R Empire at the U.S. Department of State. I must link back to an earlier posting by our dear friend Mathias with some comments building upon the criticism launched by Marc Lynch, who quotes Al Kamen and the like.

First point here, PD is not entirely PR, but we've seen that there is some overlap here...and McHale did preside over Discovery Communications - I see some wildlife features connecting the U.S. to conservation in the making - and she is not in the same position as a Charlotte Beers in "selling a message." Shall we do a brief rundown between the two? Sure, Charlotte Beers comes into an administration with far different perspectives on the U.S. position in the world on top of starting work a little under a month after 9/11...with great contradictions in U.S. action in the world to overcome by the time she leaves office in March 2003, the 28th to be precise...can you think of anything particularly important that happened around this time that may have a huge impact on plan she may have had for U.S. PD? It's slipping my mind at the moment...must not have been too big an issue because Lynch and company cite her tenure as though it were gospel truth on how PR-types turn out in PD. Our German colleague from last night might beg to differ on this generalization of PR and PD.

Back to McHale, she comes into the position under a new administration that is abuzz with new energy. I shall let the pictures speak to the world that McHale has an opportunity to engage (yes, Beers' window is noticeably more narrow an opening than McHale's):

The View From Charlotte Beers' 7th Floor Office Window

The View from Judith McHale's 7th Floor Office Window

Sources: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/uk/features/article_1411370.php/In_photos_Britain_-_Protestors_Demonstrate_Against_President_Bush and http://community.livejournal.com/ontd_political/2465793.html

No doubt, this is still not an easy time to be in this position, but there is an opportunity for change that McHale could very well pull off. I'll cover that more in the second point to follow.

Second, she does serve in a number of capacities that would lead one to believe that she's not completely new to the practice of foreign policy/diplomatic endeavors. She was instrumental in developing Discovery Communication since the mid- to late-1980s and played a major role in launching their network to over 100 channels in 170 countries in 35 languages with over 1 billion subscribers as of 2006. Notably, she also initiated the Discovery Channel Global Education Partnership (the Ambassador of which is Dennis Haysbert from "The Unit" - and according to this clip, you don't want to mess with him or the other guys he so calmly discusses how to conduct an assassination with - who happen to work for him...so LEARN...but he's not quite Mr. T as you can clearly trust him to give you good advice on car insurance) that supplies free educational programming to more than half a million students in Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. The GEF/Africa Growth Fund focuses on supplying capital to small- and medium-sized businesses that provide consumer goods and services in emerging Afrian markets. She also serves on the boards of Vital Voices, the Africa Society of the National Summit on Africa, the National Democratic Institute, and she obviously knows how to reach out to the youth - only being halfway fecetious on this point - since she was in early on MTV Networks' international efforts as General Counsel. The cherry on top here is that she is a Foreign Service brat - a child of a Foreign Service Officer and lived abroad in apartheid South Africa and Britain growing up. More details come to you courtesy of the Paley Center for Media. She also partner with the BBC in launching BBC America while at Discovery Communication.

Comparatively, and we will cover these things in reverse, Charlotte Beers was not a Foreign Service brat, worked 100-hour weeks at strings of advertising and marketing firms where she focused on profit margins, market research, and employee morale. Nothing against her success in a tough industry, but a few things against the way she proceeded at the State Department. She could have better served the position by focusing her organizational skills on integration of PD into the Building and building on it institutional capacity, since she was seemingly successful doing things like this in the private sector. Rather, she focused on a campaign and linked herself inextricably to it...and went out the door with. Check out this PBS interview text and I invite your comments on the pros and cons of the Beers approach.

An interesting dynamic will stand upon reviewing the interaction between McHale and proposed A/S (Assistant Secretary) in R. Philip J. "P.J." Crowley. Most recently of the Center for American Progress, but having 28 years of experience as a spokesman for the U.S. government (3 while Special Assistant to the POTUS for National Security Affairs - as Senior Directo for Public Affairs at the NSC and 11 at the DOD, notably PDAS (Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary - one notch below Assistant Secretary and one notch above Deputy Assistant Secretary) of Defense for Public Affairs. He is retired from the Air Force, served in Operation Desert Storm and Operation Provide Comfort (gives you a warm and fuzzy feeling, doesn't it? I bet he had a hand in the name on this one). He worked with NATO in Kosovo briefly in 1999. Before joining the Center for American Progress, though, he was a national spokesman for the property/casualty insurance industry - now, I'm from about 1,300 miles outside the Beltway, but that seems like an awefully nice way of saying lobbyist. In any case, I think there will be an interest dynamic between the new media mogul superstar and her public affairs sidekick.

Two Point Summation:

First, we should be hesitant to heed any word from the likes of Marc Lynch when he launches a criticism that the words "war of ideas" were absent from a speech McHale espousing her spin on PD.

Second, these two women have proven themselves capable in professional capacities related to different portions of PD that we've discussed during this course. So, I say give love a chance and laissez les bontemps retournez et puis roulez encore, hopefully, because it is now even more likely that McHale will be there - let's just see if she has her taxes in order.

PD Pooch?

2009-04-14T17:18:00.000-07:00

White House photo by Pete Souza, from the official White House Blog

Yes, the Obama family finally got a puppy. The much-anticipated dog Bo (or BoBama as John Stewart says) is a Portuguese Water Dog. The first family's choice was apparently a pleasant surprise for Portugal. "Obama's pick for first dog thrills Portugal," according to the headline of this AFP story. Will the increased interest in the breed create a better climate for Portuguese PD? How will the government of Portugal respond? How will the "first dog" fit into America's PD? So many questions for BoBama...

Defense vs. State

2009-04-13T20:47:00.001-07:00

A story in the New York Times in the Week in Review section talked about the reassertion of the civilian role in US foreign policy (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/12/weekinreview/12filkins.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=holbrooke&st=cse). Under Secretary of State Clinton, one of the goals of the State Department is to reassert its centrality in making foreign policy. The article notes that for the past eight years, Rumsfeld sidelined Secretaries Powell and Rice and dominated the country's interaction with the world and the military also took on roles traditionally reserved for diplomats like overseeing reconstruction and development projects. Richard Holbrooke has and is willing to use a whole range of tools like diplomacy, persuasion, and money. It also talks about how Holbrooke and Admiral Mullen make a good team talking to parties in the region. Admiral Mullen himself has decried the militarization of American foreign policy and believes that the State Department should retake many traditional roles of foreign policy.
An astonishing fact mentioned is that the State Department has less diplomats working around the globe than musicians playing in military bands. The Pentagon's budget is 24 times larger than the State Department and USAID's combined.

Soft Power Your Way Out O' This One China!!!

2009-04-11T19:32:00.000-07:00

As the unassuming title to this post conveys, China's soft power has taken yet another hit as we've moved from toys to formula to pet food to housing. I guess people really aren't joking when they say that EVERYTHING is made in China, eh?

Here's the retort from the article linked above, unfortunately for the company based in Tianjin (which has Knaupf in the title, but I guess we won't blame certain countries located in Europe who seem to be operating in China under the relaxed regulations...I wonder if that figures in the profit margin at all...yes, I am laying it on pretty thick here), this retort comes after several paragraphs of product bashing and complaints from Americans in the Southeast U.S.:

Dr. Phillip Goad, a toxicologist hired by Knaupf Plasterboard Tianjin, sampled drywall from 25 homes, some that contained the company's wallboard and some that did not.

"The studies we have performed to date have identified very low levels of naturally occurring compounds," Goad said. "The levels we have detected do not present a public health concern. The chemicals are naturally occurring. They're produced in ocean water, in salt marsh air, in estuaries."

I want to make two points on China's soft power here:

First, this is an excellent example of how China is actually where U.S. and other "developed" countries were during their phases of rapid industrialization - in both cases the countries grew bigger than their breeches. One can look up many an article/book by the likes of Upton Sinclair, Jacob Riis, Ida Tarbell, and Ray Stannard Baker to see this point. So, long-term, they'll be fine as the pressures increase due to the soft power goals - they can also turn this into a positive domestically by citing it as an instance of outsiders trying to degrade and berate China - push them to greater regulation as they become weary of these instances.

Second, there are many countries where the external efforts of China's soft power strategy have back-fired significantly. In Africa, for instance, there are instances where governments have signed deals with the Chinese government for loans and other assistance to expand information communication technologies, build roads and other infrastructure, and even to build soccer stadiums and other higher profile building projects. This often plays out in the press coverage as China making in-roads that are under-cutting the U.S. and other power players. On the flip side, though, I would venture for discussion that the domestic reception of China is not very positive in many of these places. In Sierra Leone, the Chinese employers are widely criticized for poor treatment of local employees. Further, there are several shady aspects to many deals that give Chinese interests advantages in the local economy that are not mutually beneficial at face value or after digging through the weeds of some of the deals.

Concluding Remarks:

In sum, China is where the U.S. used to be in many ways and has a lot of promise for being a major power on the international stage. I would caution, though, that the Chinese, for better or for worse, are not taking many lessons learned from how the U.S. arrived where it is today to avoid ending up in many of the same predicaments. I predict a significant say-do gap for China (already there in many ways) and an immense set of population pressures that the U.S. does not have to deal with. China is rising, but it will have a longer way to fall when it trips up. Speculating, just speculating.

Economic Stimulus and Soft Power

2009-04-11T10:35:00.000-07:00

Prime Minister Taro Aso of Japan recently unveiled the new Japanese economic stimulus plan and said that one area he wants to focus on is in capitalizing on Japan's soft power and hopes to create a large number of jobs in the anime and manga industry.

TOKYO (AFP) — Japan's manga and anime heroes could come to the rescue of the recession-hit economy, Prime Minister Taro Aso, an avid fan of the country's cartoons, said in a speech Thursday.

"The word 'manga' has entered the global lexicon... Japan has materials that attract consumers around the world such as animation, games, fashion -- so-called 'Japan Cool'," the conservative premier told a press conference.

As the world's number two economy is struggling with its deepest post-war recession, Aso said the government could facilitate overseas exports of manga, video games, fashion and other "soft power" cultural products.

"Many Japan-based fashion magazines enjoy top-level popularity" in the Chinese market, said the 68-year-old premier.

"By linking the popularity of Japan's 'soft power' with business, we wish to grow it into a major industry worth 20-30 trillion yen (200-300 billion dollars) and create 500,000 new jobs by 2020," he said in a speech.

Known for his sometimes gruff manner, Aso has sought to soften his image in recent years by casting himself as a Japanese "otaku" -- someone whose hobby borders on obsession -- by praising manga.

While this may seem like a good idea, it also runs counter to the trends that are occurring in the industry. Increased domestic production does not mean increased foreign consumption as you have to deal with licensing and distribution issues in your foreign markets.

Sources:

AFP
AFP 2nd Link
Anime News Network

Playing Nation Branding

2009-04-10T15:53:00.000-07:00

The Cinderella Castle in Bavaria, Germany. Is this all that brands Germany? photo by: Storem

In the scope of our nation branding discussion in class, we learned that images of nations don’t change from one day to another. On the contrary, the images are very persistent. Over the last century there are only two countries that have experienced a tremendous change in image: Japan and Germany.

One way to at least influence the depicted image a bit and to learn about a country such as Germany are games. Yes, the good old board games. The German game company Ravensburger is known for its puzzles and parlor games for all age groups. One of the famous games is “Germany Pairs,” a card game in which 104 cards are laid face down and two cards are flipped face up over with the goal to turn over pairs of matching cards. The “Germany Pairs” shows 52 different pictures and photos of what is typically and descriptive for Germany.

The first version of the game was launched in 1985, a second updated version was introduced in 1992 and in 2006 Ravenburger introduced the latest one. The 52 images used for the game have changed a lot over the years, partly because of historical events such as the end of the Berlin Wall, partly because of a changed perceived image of Germany.

Only six images have made it through all three versions of the game and therefore are the most persistent images others have about Germany. Among these images are a photo of a German shepherd, the Cinderella Castle and a freshly tapped bear. New photos in the latest version include a photo of the ICE 3, a German high-speed train, and a photo of Dornfelder grapes, a vine typically grown in Germany.

From a nation branding perspective I would argue that there has definitely been effort put into reshaping the perceived image of Germany and reframing the country as a technological-savvy and wine growing country. I think it is interesting that even games targeted towards kids all over the world can influence the way people think about a country.

For more infos: http://einestages.spiegel.de/external/ShowTopicAlbumBackground/a3926/l0/l0/F.html#featuredEntry (in German)

"Tired of shooting too low, so raise the bar high"

2009-04-10T11:10:00.000-07:00

Matt Armstrong recently posted a guest post on his blog MountainRunner.us. The post was by Christopher Dufour, and it was titled “Must. Be. AWESOME!” It was an amazing post. As I was reading it, I constantly had this image in my head of Uncle Sam telling the “America's strategic communication / public diplomacy / IO / PSYOP / whatever-you-want-to-call-it apparatus” to cut the shit. That, obviously made me laugh, but the article was just spot-on. Washington’s public diplomacy efforts need to be transformed because they are not doing a whole lot of good. Dufour says it well when he writes the following:

“Too often in government, we settle for the most expedient solution. The cheapest option. The quickest way. The path of least resistance.
We justify it by quoting acquisition regulations. By glomming onto existing authorities. By refusing to challenge the status quo.
It's this attitude that prevents us from accomplishing big goals. Immense objectives. Tremendous challenges. Gi-normous grand strategy. Instead, we choose to do just enough to get our assignments completed to a preexisting or arbitrary standard. This is the culture of Washington.
We shouldn't make this choice. We shouldn't be shooting for "just good enough." Instead, we should be shooting for AWESOME.”

Our government should be settling for anything less than the very best (yet, this is not just a problem within the public diplomacy/strategic communication sector; this is a pandemic that has affected all branches of the government). Although this is not a blog about country music, I think if those working on public diplomacy listened to the song “Settlin’” by Sugarland, they might get a better idea of, not necessarily what they should be doing, but how they should be doing it. In fact, the chorus would suffice and probably accomplish what Dufour and I are seeking:

“I ain't settling for just getting by
I've had enough so so for the rest of my life
Tired of shooting too low, so raise the bar high
Just enough ain't enough this time
I ain't settling for anything less than everything…”

If people working for the government right now are wondering to themselves why they are not succeeding in nearly any of their efforts, particularly the public diplomacy sector, listening to this song—or even reading these lyrics—they might get an idea of what it is that they are not doing. In the words of my high school football coach, “We didn’t come here to mess around! You either do it right or you go home! You give it your all or you go home! You go big or you go home! We have no room on this team for half-assers.”

‘Apologizing for America’

2009-04-10T10:32:00.000-07:00

Amid the worldwide praise for President Obama's overseas trip, there has also been a steady stream of criticism in the U.S. of some of his recent speeches, such as in this op-ed from The Washington Times, claiming that President Obama is ‘apologizing for America’ and doing a ‘disservice’ to the country. Some have even said Obama’s language is anti-American. Here’s an excerpt from the op-ed:

“One of President Obama's first official acts was to grant an interview to Al Arabiya, the Arabic language network that broadcasts worldwide. It signified, aides explained, the new page that Mr. Obama meant to turn in relations with the Arab and Muslim worlds.

Just as he did last week in Europe, Mr. Obama began the conversation by criticizing America. Asked about relations between Israel and the Palestinians and the appointment of George Mitchell as special envoy, Mr. Obama said, ‘what I told [Mr. Mitchell] is start by listening, because all too often the United States starts by dictating - in the past on some of these issues - and we don't always know all the factors that are involved. So let's listen.’

Throughout the rest of the interview, Mr. Obama returned again and again to the word ‘respect,’ stressing that his administration - unlike previous American presidents - would base relations with the Muslim world on ‘mutual respect.’

In Europe, the president returned to this leitmotif, telling his audience that ‘there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive’ toward Europe. He went on to note that Europeans had responded with an anti-Americanism that ‘is at once casual but can also be insidious.’ That sounds awfully high-mindedly evenhanded - except that in Mr. Obama's telling, America's arrogance comes first. If that were truly the case, who could blame the Europeans for feeling resentful?”

I think many of these critics fail to understand what public diplomacy is and the fact that the previous administration failed to reach out to the world and practice effective public diplomacy. President Obama addressing these issues and revealing that the U.S. should engage in a dialogue instead of dictating and conduct diplomacy with mutual respect has been called apologizing for America and showing weakness.

Do you think President Obama is apologizing and showing weakness on the world stage? Or is he practicing good public diplomacy?

Smith-Mundt's 21st Century Logic

2009-04-10T08:24:00.000-07:00

Noted conservative commentator Charles Krauthammer had an editorial in the Washington Post this morning blasting Obama's International Tour. By his reckoning:

"Our president came bearing a basketful of mea culpas. With varying degrees of directness or obliqueness, Obama indicted his own people for arrogance, for dismissiveness and derisiveness, for genocide, for torture, for Hiroshima, for Guantanamo and for insufficient respect for the Muslim world."

He goes on to say that Obama received nothing for this "this obsessive denigration of his own country." No European troops are going to Afghanistan, no European governments are taking Guantanamo prisoners (France will take one as a gesture), Russia won't back U.S. efforts with Iran, China won't back the security council with North Korea. In contrast to numerous commentators, foreign and domestic, who are celebrating Obama's commitment to turning over a new leaf and leaving the catastrophic Bush legacy behind, Krauthammer sees Obama weakening the US position without obtaining any concrete foreign policy results. If the point is to gain support for US policies: a more multilateral force in Afghanistan, and a united front for Iran and North Korea, he views this PD tour as near total failure.

As much as I disagree with this, and I do, strongly, at least its reasonably argued. The same cannot be said about the firestorm that just broke over a video from a Spanish news outlet of Obama bowing to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah. The comment boards under this YouTube video are elucidating as to what's being said out there, and a google news search of "Obama and Abdullah" will bring up a similar host of quasi-professional blog-posts, which are outraged that the President would bow to anyone, especially the Saudi King - these writings then degenerate into name calling directed at Abdullah, which, importantly, anyone in Saudi Arabia with an internet connection can find just as easily as I can. I would add a sidenote that showing humility in Arab culture is usually not interpreted as weakness, but actually increases your own honor/status, but that's really not the point.

The point is that these conservative reactions to what otherwise was viewed as a successful trip that attempted the critical first step of reparing America's image once again present the challenge of crafting a message for both foreign and domestic publics.

A new logic for Smith-Mundt comes to mind here: that act says that U.S. PD material must be concealed from American citizens, with the justification that we cannot have the US government propagandizing its own people. In the current political climate, however, it can be argued that PD material should be concealed from the domestic public to keep them from messing it up - the long term PD strategy this country needs cannot be sustained when engagement with foreign publics becomes a domestic liability. I'm not saying these voices are in the majority, but their public comments can be read overseas, undoing what Obama is trying to do, and in our democratic system, their lack of support will sooner or later undermine the political will to pursue such policies.

Smith-Mundt is clearly out of date for purely technological reasons - the video of the bow was originally aired in Spain after all - but this country still needs to make up its mind as to what it wants to show to the outside world. We've read about governments, like Norway, who include domestic education about foreign policy in their PD programs, or who, like Canada, include some form of public feedback into the system. The United States either needs to do away with Smith-Mundt altogether and add some element of domestic education about international issues to the PD program, or they need to find some way to enforce it, not to protect U.S. citizens from propaganda, but to protect PD from U.S. citizens. The former seems slightly less impossible than the latter, but I'd be interested to hear anyone else's thoughts.

Understanding the EU: Student Exchange Center to open in Taiwan

2009-04-08T21:47:00.000-07:00

The Taipei Times noted that an EU Center will be opening in Taiwan in May. The purpose of this is to

“…facilitate exchanges and mutual understanding with the European economic bloc” and to

“…enhance Taiwanese knowledge of the EU”

It’s great the EU is trying to promote economic understanding between Taiwan and the European bloc that follows its previous establishment of these centers first in the U.S. to help students understand the EU.

“The EU began working with U.S. universities in the late 1990s to open EU Centers in the U.S. and promote better understanding of the EU among students” and they are “successfully serving the purpose for which they were established”

And later it

“Expanded to the Asia-Pacific region, with centers in Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. Taiwan will become the third East Asian country with the center.”

What I find interesting is why they chose Taiwan, instead of China. Taiwan has a unique political status in the international community. Only about 23 countries have full diplomatic ties with Taiwan, which do not include the countries in the EU or the United States (The Republic of China Yearbook, 2008).

Personally, I think China has advantages over Taiwan in terms of political and economic status in the international community. But then again Taiwan is more similar to the EU’s members in terms of economic and political structure. I guess the issue here might be the relative attractiveness of democracies to the EU rather that international influence.

Maldovan Youth Protest Online

2009-04-08T16:16:00.001-07:00

Right now, Twitter is abuzz with discussions of #pman. In fact, #pman ranks among "Easter" and "Braves" as one of the 10 most discussed topics on Twitter. #pman is a searchable tag that protesters in Maldova coined to galvanize protests against the country's Communist government. As they ransacked the parliament building, youth were able to post live updates. Their use of Twitter has enabled global audiences to follow the situation and provided a platform for discussing Sunday's election.

By Tuesday night, the seat of government had been badly battered and scores of people had been injured. But riot police had regained control of the president’s offices and Parliament Wednesday. After hundreds of firsthand accounts flooded onto the Internet via Twitter, Internet service in Chisinau, the capital, was abruptly cut off. There was no sign that the authorities would cede to any of the protesters’ demands, and President Vladimir Voronin denounced the organizers as “fascists intoxicated with hatred.”
- excerpt from "Protests in Moldova Explode, With Help of Twitter" by Ellen Barry in The New York Times. Click here to see the full story.

This situation reflects the emergence of a global youth culture and shows how Web 2.0 tools like Twitter and Facebook can be used for grassroots activism. These protests are a breed of faster and fiercer citizen journalism. With this instantaneous feed of firsthand accounts, it becomes even more difficult for nations to create cohesive brands or communicate credible messages.

Here's BBC's story on three eyewitness accounts on the protest.

Public Diplomacy and Dissent

2009-04-07T20:24:00.001-07:00

The image presented here is useful in considering the role of dissent in Public Diplomacy. With the definitions of public diplomacy that include an aspect of influencing foreign publics to indirectly influence a country's government, I am wondering just how useful a public diplomacy campaign focused on those who dissent in the context of an authoritarian regime. Though there have been tenuous alliances with countries from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia, I think Saudi Arabia is a particularly interesting example. When you have an overwhelming ceiling on upward mobility in the structure of governance, you are left with forming exchange programs that basically woo the princes of the House of Saud in order to gain favor when their turn comes about. Most of the ways that U.S. Public Diplomacy would seek to engage only reinforce the say-do gap rather than address it and work to reduce it in the "take-offs" before the "crash landings."

Sure, you may make some headway when it comes to womens' issues, but the ground given up by a government like Saudi Arabia is only really ground ceded in order to maintain the locus of power in the country. Similar to the way the discussion ended on the political elite in China. Reforms and new notions are acceptable insofar as they can be manipulated to benefit of those in power. The moment a elite-determined line is crossed, the crackdowns happen.

I say this and then I read the transcripts from a Frontline story done and the comic makes sense from King Abdullah's comments. It is easy to see that there is amity between the leaders of the two countries and repeated references to being friends of the American people:

Can you say in just a few words what's your vision for the future of Saudi Arabia?

God willing, a prosperous future.

What is the legitimacy of the monarchy based on?

The legitimacy is the Islamic shari'a, Islam and the glorious Quran.

Do you expect this to ever become a representative democracy?

I believe it is now a democracy.

What did you tell President Bush, what was your advice to him before the invasion of Iraq?

This is the question that you should address to Bush, it is not my right to answer anymore. Before expressing my opinion to the President, it was my prerogative, but once I told it to him, it is now his own.

When you visited Crawford, Texas, what was the message that you were carrying for President Bush?

I carried to President Bush all esteem and respect and friendship to the people of America. When I saw President Bush I was convinced by his wise leadership, and I wish him all success for the next step.

You also brought newspapers and video tapes. What was the purpose?

Yes, some. I wanted to show the President what was going on in Palestine. That's it.

Did he respond appropriately?

I believe so.

I have one last question. If your father King Abd al-Aziz were here today, what would he think of the country as it is today?

Well, King Abd al-Aziz had a wide long-term vision. I believe without any doubt that he would be pleased.

…What would he think of Al Qaeda, the fundamentalists, extremists?

God knows.

Do you think there is a similarity between your struggle and his?

No, the Ikhwan's objective was power-sharing but these are criminals. They have no objective or goal but to harm human beings. And unfortunately, they have tainted the reputation of Muslims in the whole world. That is the thing that we need people to know about Islam, its history, its principles and Muslims. The truth is that those people only represent the devil.

Thank you. My regards to the American people, our friends.

Then, Bandar bin Sultan (Ambassador to the U.S.) has some interesting answers in an interview about the relationship between Al Qaeda and other fundamentalist dissidents in Saudi Arabia:

But they are without popular support in your country?

If there were popular support, their ambassador would be talking to you now. If they had popular support, he wouldn't be hiding in Afghanistan. Look, Saudi Arabia -- I believe personally, and I think my government, my leadership believes, and our people -- you cannot govern people in spite of their will forever. ... History tells us it's not doable. ...

So for us in Saudi Arabia, we are extraordinarily sensitive to our people's feeling. ... My family has been in leadership position since 1747. Now, you can call us many things, but politically stupid we are not. And we make our decisions based on one simple fact. Does it sound good [in] downtown Riyadh or not? We don't ask ourself does it sound good on CNN, or downtown Washington, or London, or Washington Post. ... We are constantly keeping our thumb on the pulse of our people.

That is why, for example, you don't find any Saudi community living overseas. There is no Saudi-American or Saudi-British community. You have Irish-American, you have Egyptian-American, Lebanese-American. Ask yourself why. How come people who go study overseas, who live overseas, do business overseas, always come home?

Except the dissidents, except the people who say that they can't say what they want to say.

I grant you that. Now, if I grant you that, you have to grant me one thing. Do you make a judgment based on 10 people, 20 people, 100 people out of 12 million people?

But how has that affected the street?

... I think, instead of talking about Al Jazeera and inflating it like bin Laden's been inflated, I would rather ignore it, to be honest with you, because to me it's fake. It's fake freedom of the press. ... Why? Because they remind me of the saying, "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with facts." They have a program, three people to discuss an issue. The problem is all three agree with each other. Either they are pro-bin Laden or anti-Arab citizens or anti-American.

... So it is irrelevant to me. What is dangerous, however, it's an outlet. It's an outlet. And that outlet allows people who have poisonous views to be given role to the public. That's okay. That's all right. No problem. They can't be more powerful than other news media outlets that we don't like. However, satellite TV generally, the advent of satellite TV, has produced new phenomenon, and that is there is no more lag time. It happens, you see it. And when CNN was the only one at one time, what we saw on CNN is the real-life things. Now almost every Arab country has satellite TV.

Where that affects the situation is when there is violence in the West Bank or Gaza or in Jerusalem, and it doesn't matter who did the violence to whom, whether it's the Israelis or the Palestinians. What you see in the 10 seconds, maybe half a minute on the news, we have it for an hour, two hours. Day in and day out, it gets to you. ...

But is that creating ... dissent in the street or popular...

Not in Saudi Arabia. It's creating uncomfort, sometimes it's creating anger at what they see, particularly if they think it is outrageous. Because, you see, everybody has the right to fight terrorism, OK? And we believe in Saudi Arabia that terrorism is terrorism is terrorism. There is no good terrorism and bad terrorism. If you go after civilians, then you are a terrorist.

But in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict situation, you have two different ... two situations overlapping. You have attacks on civilian, Israeli civilians, in discos, in restaurants. ... That to me is a terrorist act. You cannot accept it. It doesn't matter just because my brother, the Palestinians, are doing it; it doesn't make it more right.

If you are in the occupied land, West Bank and Gaza, and you are fighting the Israeli army with [guns] ... that's different. Why is it different? Because that's what you did in this country. Your Founding Fathers were terrorists, as far as George the Third was concerned. So we make that difference.

What gets to people is, the Israelis have inherited what they call British colonial laws, that I advise them strongly to get rid of it. The British gave it up. For their own sake, they should give it up.

One kid kills people, blows himself [up] in a car. They will go to his family and blow up their home. Now instead of having one terrorist who's dead, they have six kids who are going to grow up to take revenge, and now they created six.

This comes from an aboveground supporter of bin Laden. ... I said to him, "What's all this anti-American stuff? We went to the Persian Gulf and we defended your country. You know, we helped your country against Saddam." And he replied, "No one asked for the American troops to go there. You went there to protect your own interests. You went there to protect some corrupted regimes that are working against their own people."

... You see, those people would like to have it both ways. None of them will survive if Saddam Hussein was in Saudi Arabia. ... Saddam Hussein has been a secular all his life. ... Now he's a Muslim. Suddenly he's a Muslim. ...

And we felt we are the injured party. Forget the Americans now. We are the one who stood up with Iraq and the Iraqi people, when other Arab socialist and republic countries were against it. We are the one who brought the whole West to them. ... They betrayed us. But my point here is, with all of that betrayal, we did not treat Saddam as a Muslim country. ... We treated them as somebody who betrayed Islam and Arab culture and religion.

It is not against Islamic law to ask people who are your friends to come and help you protect your own people. We did not ask the Americans, or the other 33 countries that came to help us, to put down an uprising against the king. That would not be accepted. And you know what? Nobody, no force in the world, including the United States of America, can help the king of Saudi Arabia or the royal family or the government to stay in power against the will of its people.

So, my takeaway here is that it would seem to me that even the "bad guys" can see the light when they are brought into a different cultural system. You may say, "sure they'll say that in an interview with a Western media outlet because they know very well who is going to be taking that medium in." This only goes so far, though, because anyone can now access the Frontline website, including scholars in the Muslim world and everyday people who are so inclined. By putting these messages out there, the Saudi elite are creating de facto expectations for action to back up what they say. I guess what I am trying to say here is that US PD has great potential even in very unpopular situations.

Obama's global debut seen as mostly successful

2009-04-07T20:20:00.000-07:00

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090407/pl_nm/us_obama_europe

ISTANBUL (Reuters) – President Barack Obama's eight-day overseas trip yielded success on a top goal: signaling to the world a new U.S. approach that breaks with the "go it alone" style of President George W. Bush.

But Obama had more limited gains during his trip to Europe and the Middle East on concrete issues like prodding allies to do more to stimulate the global economy and help on Afghanistan.

Obama headed back to Washington Tuesday after an unscheduled stop in Baghdad, where he pushed Iraq's feuding factions to compromise and urged Iraqis to take responsibility for their country so U.S. troops could leave.

In cities from London to Prague to Istanbul, Obama got a rapturous welcome to his promise to listen and consult more, as he took his first turn on the world stage as president.

It made a high contrast with Bush, who was criticized for ignoring the advice of allies in his 2003 decision to invade Iraq and for failing to join the Kyoto climate treaty, an agreement Obama says he would have embraced.

Obama and his wife, Michelle, drew adoring crowds at campaign-style events in Europe where fans waved posters of him and media compared the couple's youth and glamour to the late U.S. president John F. Kennedy and his wife Jacqueline.

In Turkey, he won plaudits for his declaration that "the United States is not, and will never be, at war with Islam."

But at the summit of the Group of 20 economic powers in London, European countries balked at his suggestion that they spend more to try to fight the global recession.

EXPECTATIONS

Europeans were similarly reluctant to heed a call to shoulder more of the burden in Afghanistan. They offered help with training of Afghan forces and humanitarian efforts but showed no new willingness to provide combat troops.

"On balance the trip has gone extremely well. The Obama administration deliberately lowered its expectations on the specific issues," said Charles Kupchan, a scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Although Obama had made clear that a call for fiscal stimulus was part of his message to the G20, aides stressed on the eve of the meeting that they did not necessarily expect countries to spend more right away.

Ahead of the NATO gathering, the White House said Obama's chief aim was to explain the revamped policy he had unveiled to address the worsening violence in Afghanistan. They said the effort to seek more resources would be an "ongoing process."

"He was able to get some things that he wanted and then there were other things that allies and others pushed back on," said Gary Schmitt of the American Enterprise Institute think tank. "Ironically, I think they got about as much as they could get from our NATO allies on Afghanistan.

"I think people were kidding themselves if they thought there were going to be significant amounts of more capable troops heading to Afghanistan," Schmitt said.

"WHY DIDN'T THE WATERS PART?"

Top Obama adviser David Axelrod mocked the notion that Obama achieved little on substance, telling reporters at a news briefing Tuesday that they seemed to be asking: "Why didn't the waters part, the sun shine, and all ills of the world disappear because President Obama came to Europe this week?"

The 47-year-old Obama was criticized as lacking seasoning in foreign affairs during last year's election campaign.

But the U.S. president, known as "no drama Obama" for his even temperament, did impress some leaders at both the G20 and NATO summits with his ability to broker disputes.

When China and France became deadlocked over the issue of how to regulate offshore tax havens, aides said Obama lowered the temperature of the meeting, paving the way for a deal.

Financial markets cheered the show of unity from the world leaders and French President Nicolas Sarkozy went out of his way to thank Obama, saying he "helped find a consensus."

Obama also intervened when Turkey objected to a push by several European countries to name the Danish Prime Minister as the next leader of NATO. Turkey ended up dropping its objections, allowing Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen to be named as the new secretary-general.

On the sidelines of the G20, Obama emphasized what he describes as his "pragmatic" approach to foreign policy when he held sitdowns with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

While Bush talked about getting a sense of Vladimir Putin's soul when he first met the Russian president in 2001, Obama was more business-like. But aides said the meetings with both the Chinese and Russian leaders had gone well.

Still, neither country gave Obama immediate support when he sought a strong response from the United Nations Security Council to North Korea's firing of a long-range missile.

(Additional reporting by Ross Colvin in Washington and Crispian Balmer in Paris; editing by Andrew Roche)

VOA in Pashto

2009-04-07T00:08:00.000-07:00

An op-ed piece in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/opinion/30feith.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=radio%20free&st=cse) criticized the US government for spending trillions of dollars on military action in the fight against terrorism but not providing sufficient resources to a strategic communications capacity that would be key to victory. The authors make a case in point: the recent bombing of the shrine of Rahman Baba, the most revered Pashtun poet. The authors feel that the US needs to build support among the Pashtun community (the majority in this border region) to rise against foreign Taliban elements. For example, the US could have mobilized support against the Taliban by invoking images of Rahman Baba and commemorating his life and poetry, thus helping to revive the collective memory of Sufism. Voice of America director Danforth Austin hit back in a letter to the editor claiming that VOA runs a daily Pashto program, Deewa Radio and had three reporters on the scene and had programs devoting cultural shows to Rahman Baba’s poetry and interviewing Pashtun literary figures condemning the bombing.

Whether or not VOA covered the bombing and ran Rahman Baba commemoration programs, this points out that not all people in the region are against the United States. We just have to use this segment of the population that is not sympathetic to the Taliban strategically to our advantage and offer them a system of sustainable protection. The extremists have gunned down everyone that has worked against them and the people have no choice but to acquiesce. There is a moderate Sufi presence out there but it needs to be emboldened and empowered up to a point that it cannot be crushed by the much more brutal extremist presence. This has the potential to make our job so much easier.

AU Does 2.0!

2009-04-06T09:41:00.000-07:00

For all those of you who have seen AU's New Website (which must be everyone by now) this will be old news, but it's at least worth a mention. AU has officially jumped on board the web 2.0 movement. AUPedia is the University-sponsored wiki and gives any member of the AU community a chance to share his/her thoughts on AU from an insider's perspective. Contributions to this wiki are by no means anonymous. Users log in with their AU user id and password, and anyone who views a particular entry can link to the author's profile which is automatically populated with basic information, but can be edited to include a photo and a short bio.

One of the reasons behind this innovation seems to be to attract prosepective students, providing the image of a strong community and the appeal of an inside scoop, but I'm curious about how effective the feature will become. Any thought's on AU's newest tool of "public diplomacy?"

Obama in Turkey

2009-04-06T09:05:00.000-07:00

President Obama has included Turkey on his European tour, making it the first Muslim country he has visited as President, as reported in this New York Times article. The tour is deliberately framed as PD, meant to fix the existing chasm between close USA-Turkish relations at the government level, and the abysmal approval ratings the US holds among most Turks.

In a speech at Parliament, Obama said that the United States “The United States is not, and will never be, at war with Islam.” and highlighted that he has Muslim family and grew up partly in a Muslim country to emphasize that Islam has a presence and a role in his country. He also backed away from his vote to condemn the Armenian Genocide as a Senator - he didn't mention the "g-word" and said that Turkey had to come to terms with its history on its own, making a further link to the US and Native Americans.

Two things I found particularly interesting was the article's attention to the domestic dangers of this move, as right-wing websites are still accusing Obama of being a closet Muslim. Though one would hope that this kind of fringe activity would not matter to US policy, foreign or domestic, its probably true that there is a larger group of Americans who, even if they don't think Obama is some kind of sleeper agent, are nevertheless disquited by this kind of outreach. This just goes further to the issues we've been discussing about America's pluralism as a liability, as well as the inability to seperate foreign messages from domestic ones as demanded and encouraged by the Smith-Mundt school of thought.

The other point was one interviewed Turks' response that:

“It makes me happy that the Islam lived in Turkey is seen as a better version compared with other countries and that the message would be sent out from here.”

Obama's media blitz not only improves the US image in Turkey, but can be argued to improve the image of Turkey and Islam internationally, particularly in Europe. However, like all PD strategies, this could also backfire, as some elements in the Muslim world can interpret this as the U.S. "endorsing" secular/moderate Islam and can use that as accusation against the latter current, tying moderate elements to U.S. unpopularity. Hopefully however, this tour does more harm than good, which is probably a better way of conceiving any PD strategy anyway.

Robots, Space, and Public Diplomacy

2009-04-04T19:34:00.000-07:00

Japan is apparently aiming for walking robots on the moon according to this AP article.

Japan hopes to have a two-legged robot walk on the moon by around 2020, with a joint mission involving astronauts and robots to follow, according to a plan laid out Friday by a government group.

....

Other recommendations by the group include using space research as a tool to foster diplomacy with other countries and developing an advanced satellite to predict and monitor natural disasters.

Beyond the novelty of walking moon robots, there another item of interest mentioned in the article that relates to Japanese PD. The group proposing the robots for space research also recommended

promoting research into military satellites, such as an early warning system for detecting ballistic missile launches and systems to detect and analyze radio waves sent in space.

which is especially of note when tied to the a second quote in the article.

The Strategic Headquarters was established last year by a law passed to advance Japan's space technology and exploration. It allows the country, which has a largely peaceful constitution, to use space for military defense.

Given regional tensions concerning Japan's use development of military ability, I'm surprised I haven't seen anything else about this.

Fail: Mexico. Really though?

2009-04-03T19:18:00.000-07:00

It seems as though it's not only Europe that's getting a different tone from the new administration! Some of you may have paid a bit of attention to Secretary Clinton's recent visit to Mexico. She first appealed to Mexican viewers by stating that the Obama administration had never referred to Mexico as a failed state. As we all know, this has been a big public diplomacy nightmare for the Mexican government (which really only ranks 105 out of 177 on the failed state index). Additionally, Secretary Clinton then went on to surprise us all by admitting that the US may play a role in the current situation Mexico is facing.
In her chat with President Calderon, Clinton refers to the US role, especially when it comes to border control saying,
"I feel very strongly we have a co-responsibility."
Additionally, Clinton commended Calderon on his efforts in fighting the drug war, though many have said it seems as though he is attacking a hornet's nest with a fly swatter. Some effort has got to be better than none though, right? The US has also offered up even more money toward the Merida Initiative that will help to purchase more body armor, helicopters, etc. in order to aid in the drug war.
Lastly, there was some discussion on the topic of the Mexican trucking program that the US Congress cut funding off to earlier this year, however, that's all it was. Discussion. However, it can be said that this is more than the last administration was willing to do.

A New Tone Towards Europe and the World

2009-04-03T10:34:00.000-07:00

As President Obama is reaching the midway point of his European tour, it has become clear that Mr. Obama and his administration are using a completely different tone when speaking to Europeans and the rest of the world. I have been watching international news coverage of President Obama’s speeches and press conferences, and I watched him hold a town hall meeting in Strasbourg, France this morning. From a New York Times article, titled, “Obama Sets a New Tone for Alliance With Europe”:

“On the eve of a NATO summit meeting here [in Strasbourg], President Obama offered a compact for a renewed partnership with Europe, saying ‘America is changing but it cannot be America alone that changes’…Hundreds of people, many of them students from France and Germany, applauded him loudly as he spoke in a sports hall, particularly when he evoked efforts to reduce nuclear stockpiles and close the Guantánamo Bay detention center. He also drew enthusiastic cheers when he insisted: ‘The United States does not, and will not, torture.’”

I have noticed that in all his speeches over the last several days, President Obama has emphasized that the U.S. wants to listen and have a respectful dialogue with Europe and the rest of the world. Mr. Obama has even admitted U.S. mistakes concerning the global economic crisis and has implied that the U.S. will no longer dictate terms to Europe. He spoke candidly at the town hall meeting about U.S.-Europe relations in the past:

“[President Obama] urged a shift in attitudes. In America, he said, there had been ‘a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world,’ and there had been ‘times when America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive,’ Mr. Obama said…But in Europe, he went on, there had also been anti-American attitudes. ‘On both sides of the Atlantic, these attitudes have become all too common,’ President Obama said. ‘They are not wise.’”

The language and tone being used by President Obama would have been unthinkable during the Bush administration. Pledging to listen and engage in dialogue are hallmarks of effective public diplomacy, as is reaching out to foreign publics, such as today’s town hall meeting in Strasbourg. This could be a boon to U.S. public diplomacy and lead towards less anti-Americanism in Europe.

What remains to be seen is if President Obama’s tone is followed by the actual implementation of policies and if Europe is willing to reciprocate regarding a variety of issues facing the U.S. and Europe.

Is Germany ready for the new Tarantino movie?

2009-04-02T21:22:00.000-07:00

The new Quentin Tarantino movie “Inglorious Basterds” will start in theaters in August 2009. The film sets in Nazi-occupied France during World War II. A group of Jewish-American soldiers known as "The Basterds" are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis.

While watching the trailer I started thinking about the impact this Hollywood movie can have on the German public. Given the sharp tone throughout the film, I am sure that some, if not many, Germans will be offended by the way the film depicts the German culture.

Please don’t get me wrong, I do not intend to downplay any aspect of the cruel genocide. However, I feel that the film does not make a clear distinction between the Germans in general and “Nazis.” To my impression both terms are used interchangeably throughout the trailer and I am sure that the German audience will not respond well to this fact.

The film was already a great deal of discussion in 2008 when Quentin Tarantino and his Hollywood actors including Brad Pitt were in Berlin shooting the film and a part of the script leaked. The media were debating whether today’s Germany is already ready for this kind of depiction of the past. I don’t think so. Even the youngest generation, who only learns about the Third Reich in history class, still is confronted with prejudices and stereotypes when traveling to other countries. A film like Tarantino’s reinforces these stereotypes and helps them to survive.

From a public diplomacy perspective, I think that Hollywood movies, no matter how praised the directors are, definitely impact the way foreign audiences think about the US, especially if they are dealing with such a delicate issue. The impacts might not inverse a positive impression into a negative one; however, the images remain in the heads of the public – at least for a short period of time. Of course, Germans will still look up to the US and dream about Route 66, New York and San Francisco, but there will be a damper on the positive image. Cultural sensibility might be the way out of this dilemma. And yet, it is questionable to what extend this is applicable, given that first and foremost Hollywood movies are tailored to the American culture.

I am interested in what you think. Do you think this film can impact the image Germany has of the US?

Japanese ENGO’s role in Promoting Sino-Japan Friendship

2009-04-01T09:51:00.000-07:00

Japanese ENGO’s role in Promoting Sino-Japan Friendship
Alison’s post on Japanese Cherry Blossom Festival as a great PD effort makes me think of the Japanese ENGO (Environmental Non-Government Organization)’s tree planning in China . I think this would be a good example to show how civil society as a stakeholder has helped improve a country’s image abroad and act as a communication channel between two countries. Japan and China have been described as “neighbors separated by a mere strip of water,” an expression that emphasizes both the physical proximity of the two nations as well as their extensive and longstanding cultural affinities. However, China and Japan has also been called historical enemies because of the Japanese invasion of China during the WWII, a humiliating history that is so deeply ingrained in many Chinese’s minds.

Japanese NGO that has been unusually active in afforestation activities is the Chinese branch of OISCA (Organization for Industrial, Spiritual and Cultural Advancement) International, a Japanese organization devoted to agricultural assistance in developing countries. OISCA’s projects in China began in 2000 and include afforestation work in both the Yangtze River basin and in Alashan, Inner Mongolia. In addition to these planting projects, OISCA established a center for agricultural technical cooperation at Shanghai’s Jiaotong University in China in 2002 and in 2006 opened the Alashan Desert Ecological Research and Training Center at their Inner Mongolian project site. As a major international NGO with a well-established reputation, OISCA has been very successful in applying for grant aid and receives substantial Japanese corporate donations. Examples of grant aid projects include the Sino-Japan Friendship Center for Environmental Protection (established in 1996) and the Sino-Japan Forestry Ecology Training Center Project (established in 2003) in Beijing, while over 30 billion yen in loan aid has gone to combat air pollution in three designated Environmental Model Cities: Guiyang, Chongqing and Dalian.

At the moment when the “Trees of Sino-Japanese Friendship” (As the Chinese and Japanese people call it) are planted by thousands of both Chinese and Japanese people and increasing foundations were laid for various Sino-Japanese Exchange Fund, Environmental Research Center or Education Trust organizations which are springing up in China, people-to-people communication or trans-societal relationship is also enhanced, and the historical animosities are also reduced gradually although in a relatively slow pace. As Onogi, director of the Japan-China Environment Service Center and one of the co-founders of the environmental NGO BEV-NET (Beijing Environmental Network said despite the often cited Sino-Japanese historical conflicts which can be an obstacle to the Japanese NGO work in China, China and Japan share a common enemy in environmental pollution. Cooperation in this area has the potential to not only benefit Japan and China’s shared environment, but also to nurture a sense of shared purpose and values. Here, a robust, well-established set of transnational civil-societal linkages between China and Japan definitely contribute a lot to the improvement of bilateral relations, which is very critical for the further regional integration in Northeast Asia.

Source from Robert Efird. “Japanese Environmental NGOs in China” Thu, 2007-01-25.
http://www.chinadevelopmentbrief.com/node/971

Canadians are afraid of the dark!

2009-03-31T16:27:00.000-07:00

See, I wasn't making this up!

Cherry Blossoms: the PD gift that keeps on giving

2009-03-31T10:50:00.000-07:00

Spring in Washington brings cherry blossoms. The Mayor of Tokyo, Yukio Ozaki gave the first trees to the city in March 1912. For Mayor Ozaki, the trees were a gift to celebrate a continued close relationship between the U.S. and Japan. When Japan became an enemy in WWII, the festival was cancelled (1942-1947). The cherry blossom (sakura in Japanese) even became a nationalist symbol in Japan. Years after the war, in 1965, Japan gave an additional gift of 3,800 trees to America. Today, the National Cherry Blossom Festival has become a major tourist destination—with more than a million visitors each year. This is a fascinating example of PD—a Japanese gift that continues to be an attraction for families in America. Really, what better than pretty pink blossoms to reach Japan’s audiences in the United States? The festival is largely coordinated by the Japanese embassy and celebrates Japanese culture. It is is an excellent example of forward-thinking PD. Well done Mayor Ozaki.

Click here to read yesterday's Post article on the festival.

Economy causes a double hit to PD

2009-03-30T00:26:00.001-07:00

While it is generally agreed upon that credibility has taken a hit under the Bush administration's foreign policies, I read about how the financial crisis is also negatively affecting the image of the United States abroad (http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/18/economic_crisis_hits_an_already_damaged_us_image_i/). The downfall of the US market has ripple effects everywhere and it has become a global economic downturn. Given the strong and leading role that America's financial and banking sectors had in leading the world down this path and the global perceptions about what has happened in the economy, how the US cleans up the financial and banking mess will matter a lot in re-shaping America's public image. The crisis is perceived to be the making of certain greedy American individuals and corporations and this does not send a favorable message about the values of the United States. The stereotypical views about Americans being greedy and materialistic are accentuated. This again demonstrates how apart from the actions of the American government, the American private sector and corporations just like American tourists and businessmen speak volumes in shaping America's image.

Language Matters

2009-03-30T00:25:00.000-07:00

Shell Smith spoke at an event entitled "Dousing the flames: Public diplomacy in action" at the University of Delaware. She was said to "literally be the face of the United States in the Middle East" as she assumes her new position as the media liaison for the U.S. State Department. She will be the select few U.S. officials who will appear regularly on Arab television, radio and regional newspapers to present the U.S. point of view on key Middle East issues. The three ways that, she said, the U.S. can be more effective in its public diplomacy efforts in the Middle East are: 1. Policy changes, although outside the control of the public diplomacy office, will have the greatest change on overseas opinions. 2. Listening to these opinions and not just talk over them or ignore them. 3. Speaking their language will show them the respect we have for them.

Pretty basic and widely agreed upon things she said but the fact that she speaks Arabic stands out. There are very few American officials who speak Arabic and who are high up in the hierarchy to have significant weight. Shell Smith will be an asset because not only will she be able to communicate in Arabic but also have the discretion to stray from the official line enough depending on where and who she is speaking to. In the past, high level officials who don't speak Arabic have been disregarded as ignorant Americans by the local population and lower level officials who do speak Arabic have not been seriously heard. I think that this is a step in the right direction to appoint Arabic speakers in influential positions not only so that they can craft their message better but also because they have the authority to adjust their message better.

Cart-Horse, Chicken-Egg, ?

2009-03-28T21:52:00.000-07:00

Who are the publics U.S. PD needs to address? What are the means of addressing the public(s) effectively?

We can find statistics to make a point and Gallup can draw connections that can make sense, but then so can anyone with a computer. This is a point we'll come back to shortly.

According to Internet usage statistics compiled by some likewise reputable institutions, you can take a different slant on Internet penetration. Namely, that penetration may not be all that great (24% worldwide), especially in homes around the world, but the growth rates are ridiculous. Worldwide, Internet usage grew by 338% from 2000-2008. Africa experienced a growth rate of 1,100% and the Middle East saw an increase of 1,296% in that same span of time. Asia Internet uses outnumber North American users nearly 3:1 by my math.

So, blogs matter, and revisit the point of the short paragraph above, anything that anyone can do with a computer matters. The U.S. competing in this channel is an absolute necessity especially as it grows in number and diversity of uses. Some may say that the more traditional means of communication and the corresponding infrastructure should be the focus BUT WE COULD EASILY FIND OURSELVES LEAP-FROGGED AND PLAYING CATCH UP IF A NUMBER OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES SIMPLY ADOPT NEWER TECHNOLOGIES WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF MORE TRADITIONAL CHANNELS. Think about the role of and penetration of cell phones in the stead of land line telephones in many countries as a for instance.

On the note of discussion regarding the number of people using the Internet at home. I wasn't able to track down exactly how the determination of # of Internet users was made, but if they are only incorporating those with an activated Internet account at home, I would say that the penetration numbers are skewed much lower than the reality. This would be the case because personal Internet service is very expensive through satellite providers even in the U.S. People being the economic beasts that they are would opt for Internet cafes rather than the high prices of Internet at home. In Sierra Leone, for instance, you can spend upwards of USD200-300 per month for the satellite Internet, or you can spend 1000-1500 (equivalent of 33 to 50 cents US) Leones for an hour on the Internet at a shop. It would be an interesting feat to try and keep track of the number of Internet users gaining access this way.

Medical Diplomacy in Afghanistan

2009-03-27T13:54:00.000-07:00

In today's Huffington Post, there is an article related to what we talked about in class in regards to medical diplomacy. The post, found here,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/27/taliban-denies-polio-vacc_n_180071.html

is about how the Taliban is refusing to allow polio vaccinations to take place in certain areas of Afghanistan. Reading the article made me think a little about how we've talked about the important roles that NGO's and other organizations play in diplomacy. Yet, as evidenced in this example, here is a role where clearly the NGO is unable to fulfill it's proper duty, probably because of a communication misperception somewhere down the line.

Though it seems from the readings that positive activities such as this are often heralded, it makes me wonder what happens when the other party clearly has differing opinions, leading to a conflict of interest. Though it makes good sense to talk about the new role that medical diplomacy will play in the public dimension, what if US efforts at bridging humanity are spurned, such as in this case? What do we do then, when tradiotional options AND new options in the PD arena such as this seem to be failing?

I think the answer lies in more aggressive communication, but due to the nature of the area, sophisticated media techniques and television probably aren't the answer. I'd like to know more about what the US plans to do in this case, when faced with a largely illiterate and uneducated portion of the population such as this. What do we do?

First: Communication Infrastructure, then Blog

2009-03-26T20:49:00.000-07:00

Two weeks ago, the Gallup Poll published U.S. Faces Challenges With Communications Users Abroad . The article talked about how the US’ communication infrastructure can influence its image abroad. The article noted how

In some regions, the more likely respondents were to report they had household access to telecommunication technologies such as the Internet, telephone, and television, the more likely they were to disapprove of American leadership. Gallup also compared other factors, such as income, education, and age, to American approval ratings, but the relationship was not as clear as with communications.

This brings me to what we were discussing in classes about blogs and whether or not they have an impact on the US public diplomacy. I would say this is only accurate to a certain degree because not everyone in the world has access to the Internet. According to the Gallup Poll, only 14% of the world has access to home Internet. Regionally, only 24% of the homes in the Middle East have Internet access. Even when they do have Internet access, they will also need to be literate. So as it was brought up in class, “who is the public in public diplomacy?” – For the case of blogs, I would say it would be for the group of people who are educated and able to read and they are part of a certain demographic group that can afford the Internet and time to read blogs.

The Gallup Poll noted that

Mitchell Polman, blog contributor with the USC Center on Public Diplomacy, argues that, considering the low Internet penetration worldwide, the U.S. government should not forget the importance and reach of "Public Diplomacy 1.o," or focusing on radio and the printed word.

Blogs can be used a tool for the US to gain some leverage- but other communications tools should also be used, depending on the audience and how they will have access to it.

A Few Thoughts on the Tibetan Seminar

2009-03-25T13:37:00.000-07:00

A Few Thoughts on the Tibetan Seminar (March 24,DC)
I attended a Tibetan seminar with 3 distinguished Tibetan scholars from China, two of whom are ethnic Tibetan (one is a Communication Professor at the China Foreign Affairs University and the other is from the China Social Science Academy, a very prestigious academic institution in China). Although this Tibetan discussion is not directly linked to Public Diplomacy, however, the story of Tibet and 2008 Olympics did highlight this issue, and greatly tarnished China’s international image. As you may know the “face” culture in China, the pro-Tibetan independence riots (as the Chinese government calls it) or the protests (as others prefer to call) has embarrassed the government a lot who found so hard to get their own messages out. The question of how to publicize their side of the stories to the foreign audience, as opposed to the unfavorable western –media- depicted picture which actually dominates the whole world is hotly discussed during the seminar. Cultural and ideological differences are deemed as the greatest obstacles for the Chinese to communicate with the outside world. They admit that sometimes the Chinese words are just non-translatable, and if translated to English, it will lead to misunderstanding. That is why the Chinese international broadcasting can never compete with the already internationally established BBC and CNN. One of the ethnic-Tibetan scholars brought up a few advices on how to better communicate with the foreign audience. He said telling detailed and small stories; communicate heart to heart, and a grass roots approach are often more important than government propaganda. He gave an example of how his own three sisters (ethnic Tibetan)’ music band got so popular in China, and alike such as the increasing popularity of ethnic Tibetan singers in China. Based on the observations from this seminar, I sensed the Chinese academia and governments, after their struggle of telling the Tibet and Olympics , seemed to become more aware of the deficiencies of the top-down propaganda model and is learning to develop a more bottom-up approach.

de Institute for Liberty and Democracy

2009-03-24T13:21:00.000-07:00

In Peru, my group also met with several representatives from the Institute for Liberty and Democracy. This NGO was quite good at PD. The ILD was founded by the Peruvian economist Hernando de Soto. His book, the Other Path, outlined the value of tapping into the informal economy as an alternative to “The Shining Path,” or Sendero Luminoso.

At ILD, I was impressed by a series of concrete grassroots PD efforts used in a campaign to formalize assets in the early 90's in Peru. To encourage individuals to get titles to their homes and property, de Soto’s team appointed regional leaders, placed ads in local papers, gathered stakeholders, and collected information on the success of its efforts. They were very successful.

Unlike many institutions engaging in PD, ILD had a clear message: tap into the wealth of the poor. ILD also had a clear spokesperson (de Soto) and significant support from the Fujimori government. Even the name "Institute for Liberty and Democracy" set the NGO up for success in seeking the funding and approval of the U.S. and European governments. ILD used similar tactics to reach populations in many countries, especially in Africa.

Now, de Soto says he’s found the key to solving the economic crisis. According to Neasa MacErlean's article in the Guardian,

The work [de Soto] plans to do in Africa will be similar to the work he thinks the US and UK must do now - pulling trade and assets out of the shadow economy, setting up registers and focusing on transparency. But de Soto never expected that he would be giving the same advice to London and Washington as he would be giving to Africa.

Any thoughts on his view? Which NGOs do you think are especially successful in their PD efforts?

America's PD efforts in Peru

2009-03-24T12:53:00.000-07:00

This spring break, I traveled to Peru as part of my class with Prof. Quainton, former ambassador to Peru. Our meeting with Michael McKinley, the current U.S. ambassador to Peru, was especially interesting in the context of PD. McKinley’s primary message was that America’s role is “to support Peru’s objectives in ways consistent with our own interests.” This seemed on-point in a country with significant challenges, including ethnic and class divisions, remnants of the Maoist terrorist group Sendero Luminoso, historically weak political institutions and ongoing coca production. McKinley, along with the Peruvian leaders we met, seemed optimistic about Peru’s future, even amid the global financial crisis. He explained that Peru has the lowest sustained inflation and the highest GDP growth in the region. This, combined with transparency and good budget management, had positioned Peru well.

When asked about PD efforts, Linda Gonzalez, a public affairs officer at the embassy, described cultural exchanges and media relations efforts. She'd encountered relatively favorable media coverage in Peru. In fact, Peru's President Alan Garcia's successful free trade deal with the U.S. has been seen as one of his biggest achievements by Peruvians. Based on Entman’s continuum of “Frame Contestation in Mediated Public Diplomacy,” this favorable coverage of the U.S. would suggest that there is a high degree of cultural congruence. In reality, it may just be a sense of shared economic goals. Gonzalez cited a poll that found that 68-70% of Peruvians believe the U.S. doesn’t respect Peru. Both Gonzalez and McKinley noted the importance of partnerships to address this.

Obama Writing Op-Eds

2009-03-24T09:49:00.000-07:00

President Obama has decided that writing an op-ed for newspapers around the world is an effective way to convey his message and vision for the global economy in the time leading up to the G20 economic meeting. The op-ed was published in newspapers in Europe, Asia, the Arab world, South America, and South Africa.

Unfortunately, I was not able to find the op-ed or reactions to it in the online editions of foreign newspapers, such as Al Watan and the International Herald Tribune. Obama's statements seemed to be very generalized and included much of what he has been saying all along, with renewed commitments to promote economic growth throughout the world and improving the IMF.

The wording he used in addressing certain issues is what really stood out to me though. Although he talks about issues that face the whole world, he says things like, "The suffering caused by this crisis will be enlarged, and our own recovery will be delayed because markets for our goods will shrink further and more American jobs will be lost." To me, it seems as though simple things like this may be interpreted by foreigners as if Obama is looking at the economic crisis as something that is only affecting Americans, despite his insistence that this is a global crisis. I think that if he was intending this op-ed to simply be published in American papers, a statement such as this would be well received, but in a global context, it may cause a bit of a stir that he's addressing American job losses as opposed to world-wide job losses.

How do you interpret this statement and do you think it's important that Obama specifically addressed American job losses instead of referring to job losses around the world?

For the full op-ed go to:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/03/24/obama_reaches_out_to_the_world.html?wprss=44

Dalai Lama and South African Peace Conference

2009-03-23T07:21:00.000-07:00

Earlier this morning, the BBC reported that South Africa has denied the Dalai Lama a visa that would allow him to attend a peace conference being held in Johannesburg this week (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7958881.stm).

The South African government has publicly denied that denying the Dalai Lama a visa has anything to do with the relationship that it has with the Chinese government, however the article quotes "unnamed" sources from the government as saying that South Africa would not do anything that would upset their relationship with China. The government has stated that their decision had nothing to do with pressure from the Chinese, and that this was merely a strategic decision that will not detract from the attention on South Africa in the leadup to the 2010 World Cup (this peace conference is part of the buildup to the World Cup next summer).

Although the Dalai Lama has stated that he only supports limited autonomy for Tibet, he still represents Chinese independence. As a result of the government's actions, other important peace leaders, such as Desmond Tutu, have decided to not attend the conference, calling the denial of the Dalai Lama's visa "disgraceful." The fallout from this decision is not merely going to stop after the peace conference is over, though, and it will have a negative impact on events over the next year and a half in South Africa as it prepares for the World Cup.

How soon is too soon?

2009-03-21T10:05:00.000-07:00

The New York Times reported this week on the official "reopening" of the Iraq Museum in Baghdad, the institution equally famous for ancient Mesopotamian artifacts as for the extensive looting that went on there after the U.S. invasion. The move was controversial, with only 8 of 26 galleries open to a select group of invited guests, with the public kept far outside the compound. The Ministry of Culture was totally against Prime Minister's Nuri al-Maliki's decision to reopen the museum, and boycotted the ceremony.

"Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki pushed to reopen the museum, against the advice of his own Culture Ministry, as a sign of Iraqi progress. Symbol it was, and symbol it remains — not only of how much Iraq has improved, but of how far it has to go."

Archeology in Iraq has been politicized for a very long time, and archeologists from various colonial powers (US, UK, and Germany especially) as well as Iraqis themselves have used their discoveries to influence publics in ways very analogous to the PD strategies we've discussed in class. In Iraq, what qualifies as PD can be extremely muddled however, as there are a lot of groups within the boundaries of the state that behave, and are dealt with as, foreign publics. After WWI, when Britain was defining the borders of modern Iraq, archeologists were some of the most experienced colonial hands, and they've been criticized for making a country that matched the boundaries of Hammurabi's empire in 2500 BC better than it reflected the realities of 1920.

With the ethnic violence in Iraq since the invasion, there's been a move back towards archeology as a way to remind Iraqis of their common heritage, kind of an internal "rebranding" meant to give the various religious sects and ethnic groups something they can agree on. An "Arab state" or an "Islamic State" is going to alienate somebody no matter what; its thought that Iraq's unique archeological heritage has the potential to rise above this.

So Maliki's move can be viewed as both PD directed at foreign publics, showing the world that Iraq is rebuilding and is once again home to institutions of high culture. It can also be viewed as a kind of domestic PD, directed at his own people, showing Iraqis who aren't invested in the state yet that they nevertheless share this unique history with everyone else in the country.

While both of those goals are important and potentially very powerful, the effort is undermined when less than a third of the museum's exhibits are open, only select invited guests are allowed in, very visible soldiers with automatic weapons are keeping the public out, and the bureaucrats ostensibly in charge of the institution are boycotting the ceremony altogether. One can understand Maliki's urgency to unleash the PD potential of the Iraq museum, but doing so prematurely can do more harm than good.

The "Good Nazi of Nanjing" movie

2009-03-21T08:50:00.000-07:00

The BBC had an article on Thursday about a new movie being produced that tells the story of Nanjing through the perspective of John Rabe, a German business man and member of the Nazi party.

A statue of John Rabe outside his former home in Nanjing
Rabe's house in Nanjing is now a museum and centre for peace studies
"After such a long time, there should be a way of dealing differently with the responsibility they have, rather than trying to avoid it or make it disappear," he says.

John Rabe is expected to be widely viewed in China after it premieres at the Shanghai Film Festival in June. But it is unclear whether the film will be released in Japanese cinemas.

The film's producers hope that the involvement of Japanese star Teruyuki Kagawa will prevent the film from being silenced there.

Teruyuki Kagawa plays the emperor's relative, Prince Asaka, who was the top ranking Japanese officer in Nanjing at the height of the atrocities.

During the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal in 1946, Prince Asaka denied any massacre of Chinese and said he had never received any complaint about his soldiers' conduct.

Controversially, the film speculates on his involvement in the decision-making process.

Teruyuki Kagawa says: "When faced with this film, many people will be shocked [to learn] the Japanese carried out such cruel acts.

"I think Japanese people will find the two hours very hard [to watch]."

The film recently opened in Germany, and the BBC article noted that

The passage of time has allowed Germany to review its own wartime actions, notably the Nazi genocide of some six million European Jews during World War II.

Now with historical distance, the 37-year-old director hopes the film will trigger a new dialogue and help Japan also come to terms with its own past.

Reddit, a news aggregation site, has a thread about the BBC article that brings up the issue of textbook and history revision debates that are occuring in Japan, especially about issues surrounding WWII.

Using Public Diplomacy and Old Time Diplomacy: Comparing Russia and Iran

2009-03-21T06:12:00.001-07:00

Veterans of U.S. Diplomacy Try to Revive Nuclear Arms Talks with Russia

By Andrew E. Kramer

New York Times

Obama's Message to Iran Is Opening Bid in Diplomatic Drive

By Helene Cooper and David E. Sanger

New York Times

President Obama's use of videotaped messages to campaign for talks between the United States has been unseen in the past eight years. These messages are not merely seen by one leader but by the entire world, including the Iranian people. His message appears conciliatory and indicates respect for the leader. Instead of drafting a propagated message on the evils of Iran and the "war on terror," his use of media captures an understanding of Iranian society. It also demands an answer. It puts the Ayatollah in a position that will be difficult to escape. It drives the leaders to meet and discuss policies rather than chastise a nation into supporting policies.

The message on Thursday is not just an attempt to build bridges with Iran but to unify the United States and Russia. Russia refuses to apply sanctions against Iran because the US has not attempted to build relations to address the issue. Now that the US appears to be fully committed to talks with Iran, Iran's failure to meet could prompt Russia to break economic ties. These calls for discussions with Iran are not merely directed to their leader but to the world, especially Putin.

A few weeks ago, the Obama administration sent a letter to the Russian leader regarding nuclear arms. This past week the Cold War leaders met with officials in Russia in an attempt to remove all nuclear weapons. The idea of a world without nuclear weapons seems to be one unrealized by the Cold War Era but now attainable and the goal of the Obama Era. This approach has consisted of traditional meetings with leaders, which sparked the idea of creating bureaucratic offices in Russia to address the issue. It is an attempt similar to that of the Cold War, utilizing the disarmament movement's methods to bring the two countries together. As relations with Russia seem unsteady, maybe traditional talks and a return to START can re-vitalize the once close relationship.

This begs the question, which approach will win over Russia and Iran? Looking at Russian culture, maybe appealing to their traditional government structure and diplomatic measures are the best means forward. Maybe the new public diplomacy skills are appropriate to Iran because the old methods are blocked or deemed inappropriate. Does the US tend to utilize public diplomacy when diplomacy fails?

NBA "Slam dunks" in Asia

2009-03-20T15:38:00.000-07:00

In October, the NBA Denver Nuggets and the Indiana Pacers will have their preseason games in Taiwan and China. This is not the first time that NBA teams have played in Asia. However, it will be the first time Taiwan has played host to the NBA.

In the article "Two NBA teams to play in autumn preseason games in Taiwan, China" indicated that:

The NBA has played six games in Japan since the 1990s, and has held preseason games in China since 2004, after Chinese star Yao Ming joined the Houston Rockets in 2002.

The article also noted that,

Both the Taipei and Beijing games will be aired live on TV in the United States, South-East Asia and the greater China area.

These upcoming basketball games serve as one of the United States’ many public diplomacy tools. There are two beneficiaries of these displays of dribbling, jumping, and hoop-swishing prowess. First, the United States can benefit from having two games played and aired in the region. Basketball may pique the interest of those in Asia watching the games and motivate them to learn more about the U.S.

The other beneficiary will be the Asian host countries. By having the games played and aired locally, it might influence and interest those watching, whether they are in the U.S. or in the Asian region, to travel to Taiwan and/or China. China is still a step ahead of Taiwan, as they have a hidden ace in the form of Yao Ming - a Chinese public diplomat for those interested in sports. While Yao Ming himself will not play in these two games, the very fact that the NBA is in Asia may bring Yao Ming, and therefore China, into sharp focus.

Thanks to the NBA’s traveling plans, the U.S. and the Asian host countries will all score points.

Obama Reaches Out to Iran

2009-03-20T12:34:00.000-07:00

President Obama has released a video message, reaching out to the people and leaders of Iran as they celebrate Nowruz, the traditional New Year's celebration.

The message is a complete reversal of the Bush administration’s policies and shows the Obama administration’s different approach towards reaching out to countries such as Iran and trying to engage them in a dialogue, which hasn’t existed for a while. From Foreign Policy magazine’s Web site:

“‘This is huge,’ said Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council, a group that supports U.S. engagement with Tehran. ‘First of all, he is addressing the people and the government, which has not been done before. At one point he talks about the Islamic Republic. He's signaling he’s not looking for regime change; he’s recognizing Iran’s system.

‘You always heard Rice and Bush say 'Iranian regime,'’ Parsi noted. ‘It's a big difference.’ That doesn't mean Obama doesn’t support Iranian democratization, Parsi said. ‘But he recognizes the government that exists in Iran right now.’

Parsi also found remarkable Obama's comments that he recognized Iran has a ‘rightful role among nations.’

‘When he is saying the U.S. seeks constructive ties between the U.S., Iran, and international community,’ Parsi added, ‘that is signaling strategic intent. He is making it clear is that where he wants to end up through diplomacy which he supports is a constructive, positive relationship with Iran, to put aside our enmity. That is huge.’”

What’s strikingly different in President Obama’s message is the respect he shows the Iranian people, bringing in a historical and cultural aspect to the U.S.’s dialogue with Iran. This is in stark contrast to the Bush administration and opens up the possibility of greater dialogue, as opposed to labeling all Iran and Iranians as part of an “axis of evil.” From Foreign Policy magazine:

"Asked if Obama's message to Iran signals a concerted public diplomacy effort related to the Iran policy review underway, the White House official responded: 'He's making clear to the Iranian people and government the future that he sees for the two countries and that we're prepared to engage in direct diplomacy.'"

Here are some reactions from Iranian citizens, courtesy of BBC News. Some are positive, some are negative, but it seems like most of them call for action and changes in actual policy on both sides.

Using Art to Build Long-Term Relationship

2009-03-19T17:50:00.000-07:00

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe once said that “The mediator of the inexpressible is the work of art.” It is only reasonable for nation states all around the globe to use art to engage in cultural diplomacy and promote intercultural understanding and long-term relationships.

The overwhelming potential of art as a means to build relationships lies in the medium itself. It is an innate way to express ideas in an universally-spoken language that enables every country to build a bridge to another country and exchange ideas.

China provides a recent example of how a country can take advantage of art in the context of cultural diplomacy. On March 25, METROPOLIS NOW! -- an exhibition by the Meridian International Center, in partnership with the National Art Museum of China (NAMOC) in Beijing, and the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China -- will open in Washington, DC.

"METROPOLIS NOW! is a compelling selection of 52 paintings, sculptures, mixed media, and video installations by 31 artists. Their works address the enormous changes taking place in China’s cities – specifically, the major art centers of Beijing and Shanghai. Visitors to the exhibition will experience the implications of urbanization and globalization as seen through the eyes of these extraordinary artists." (Meridian International Center)

For the Chinese artists this exhibition is a tremendous opportunity to shape the image of the country as cultural diplomats and underscore the urban and modern facets of their country. At the same time the exhibition offers US citizens to experience first-hand Chinese culture.

Returning to Old School U.S. Public Diplomacy

2009-03-18T19:58:00.000-07:00

In what some herald as a return to the spirit of the good old days of U.S. public diplomacy, the State Department is pursuing expanded means of establishing exchanges. There is a portal for interaction that allows over 8,000 members from 170 countries to post and view content. In one of the latest projects, members could contribute, view, and vote on videos for the My Culture + Your Culture = ? Contest. I will withhold comment on the membership of the "expert panel" that selected the finalists and allow you to draw your own conclusions there.

Interesting little factoid shows that, as of November 2008, there were 66 Chiefs of State/Heads of Government around the world that are alumni of Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) programs.

Can Cultural Dip & Branding Rescue Israeli PD?

2009-03-18T16:15:00.000-07:00

An interesting NY Times article today probes Israel’s “crisis of isolation” since the Gaza conflict, detailing how the Israeli Foreign Ministry is considering fresh PD initiatives that are nevertheless running into far denser barriers of political reality:

Israel...is facing its worst diplomatic crisis in two decades. Examples abound. Its sports teams have met hostility and violent protests in Sweden, Spain and Turkey. Mauritania has closed Israel’s embassy...Global opinion surveys are being closely examined and the Foreign Ministry has been granted an extra $2 million to improve Israel’s image through cultural and information diplomacy. “We will send well-known novelists and writers overseas, theater companies, exhibits,” said Arye Mekel, the ministry’s deputy director general for cultural affairs. “This way you show Israel’s prettier face, so we are not thought of purely in the context of war.”

Yet, much like Kraidy’s analysis of the fundamental deficit of US PD in the region (“Policies Before Values: US policies and perceptions of these policies, and not a difference of values, are the root cause of the US image problem in the Arab world”) current Israeli image efforts face a minefield of facts on the ground:

[F]or Israel’s critics, including those who firmly support the existence of a Jewish state, the problem is not one of image but of policy. They point to four decades of occupation, the settling of half a million Israeli Jews on land captured in 1967, the economic strangling of Gaza for the past few years and the society’s growing indifference toward the creation of a Palestinian state as reasons Israel has lost favor abroad, and they say that no amount of image buffing will change that. Israel’s use of enormous force in the Gaza war in January crystallized much of this criticism.

The new thinking in the Israeli Foreign Ministry seems to be a need to sidestep the political realities behind a sinking image in foreign publics, however:

Some Israeli officials say they believe that what the country needs is to “rebrand” itself. They say Israel spends far too much time defending actions against its enemies. By doing so, they say, the narrative is always about conflict.

This is one of the clarion calls from PD communities in disarray--for unity of message. We’ve see this formulation before in the Shared Values Campaign. Unfortunately, Israeli PD professionals seem to be making the same mistakes in assuming foreign publics are empty vessels waiting to receive the magic-bullet message of a ‘more complete’ picture.

“When we show Sderot, others also see Gaza,” said Ido Aharoni, manager of a rebranding team at the Foreign Ministry. “Everything is twinned when seen through the conflict. The country needs to position itself as an attractive personality, to make outsiders see it in all its reality. Instead, we are focusing on crisis management. And that is never going to get us where we need to go over the long term.”

Not surprisingly, Gilboa rejects the quick fix marketing strategies of a Domestic PR-esque model for Israel. To fail to engage the self-defense argument or ignore the Israeli daily reality of war and terrorism is to concede the (contentious) PD high-ground for the niceties of soft power. The solution for Gilboa is perhaps more funding for a well-rounded policy that accepts the limitations of unfavorable policies and actually engages them in the discourse:

“People here feel that no matter what you do you are going to be blamed for all the problems in the Middle East,” said Eytan Gilboa, a professor of politics and international communication at Bar Ilan University. “Even suicide bombings by Palestinians are seen as our fault for not establishing a Palestinian state.”...Mr. Gilboa, the political scientist, said branding was not enough. “We need to do much more to educate the world about our situation,” he said. Regarding the extra $2 million budgeted for this, he said: “We need 50 million. We need 100 million.”

2009-03-17T20:47:00.001-07:00

Internet and Anti-Americanism
Reflecting on our class discussion on why internet somehow relates to more anti-Americanism, this question leads me to connect the internet-users with the class issue. Even today, as the London-based Economist points out, anti-Americanism is partly a class issue: Poor and less-education Britons like America lot more than their richer compatriots…Upper class anti-Americanism may be surrogate snobbery. So what is the linkage here between internet and class? Unlike the easy access to internet for most of the people in the US, not everyone in other parts of the world has equal access to internet, especially in developing countries. So I tend to believe that internet users in the world are at least the middle-class who has time to surf the internet and care about these issues, like the Iraqi War, which tarnished America’s image abroad to a great degree. Poor people’s priority concern is surviving, let alone what is going on in the foreign world. Nye calls this class-related snobbery intellectual snobbery which also accounts for the anti-Americanism.

This also makes me think of the Chinese Anti-CNN movement, escalating during the Tibet riot issue last year. It illustrates how internet makes it so easy for the Chinese intellectuals (most of whom are university students who has easy access to internet) to get messages out and motivate more people into this movement. Angered by several Western media’s one-sided reports on the Tibetans’ “protests”, “crackdown” of Chinese government and the highlighting of western countries’ (notably UK, France, and U.S.) pro-Tibet activists’ boycott of 2008 Beijing Olympics, mainland Chinese and the well-established overseas Chinese online community was instantly filled with emotional protests and fervent calls for action. In China, www.anti-CNN.net and www.anti-CNN.com website are actually established mostly by university students, which states that: “this website is established to expose the lies and distortions in the western media. The site is maintained by volunteers, who are not associated with any government officials. We are not against the western media, but against the lies and fabricated stories in the media. We are not against the western people, but against the prejudice from the western society.” On their websites, they put more comprehensive pictures in contrast with CNN’s selective use of pictures which only highlight the injuries of Tibetan monks without much depiction of Han Chinese victims in order to create a “crackdown” image of Beijing government. Facebook interestingly is another important online tool for voicing out their protest. Infuriated by a German N-TV’s borrow of a picture with Nepal policemen beating the protesters in Nepal to “justify” that Chinese government is using forces to “crackdown” the Tibetan protesters, the overseas Chinese formed numerous online groups on Facebook to further expose some Western media’s biased reports, such as “Condemn Jack Cafferty's Hatred and Racist Remarks on CNN” and many others.

This case just illustrates how internet quickly makes the anti-CNN movement into such a “vogue” especially among the young intellectuals who are also the largest group of internet users in China.

Talking with the Taliban?

2009-03-08T15:38:00.000-07:00

Looks like the say-do gap might be closing a bit after all. According to a New York Times article published today, President Obama might be willing to actually talk with the Taliban. In an interview that covered additional topics (i.e. the U.S. economy), the President "opened the door to a reconciliation process in which the American military would reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban, much as it did with Sunni militias in Iraq." The BBC's reporting of the NYT interview focused on this open door and even quoted Afghan President Hamid Karzai who supported Obama's possible talks. "'This is the Afghan government's long stand,' he [Karzai] said. 'We wanted this and we support and stand with them to bring peace and stability to this land.'"

While these potential talks may be considered traditional diplomatic efforts, one can't help but see the strategic public diplomacy angle behind this announcement. By having the President cautiously discuss this potential option with reporters, the Obama administration is now prepared to gather public opinion and feedback on this new foreign policy effort. Additionally, Obama continued to prove his own credibility, using a strategy never accepted by George W. Bush, by bluntly commenting on the military's current presence in Afghanistan:

Asked if the United States was winning in Afghanistan, a war he effectively adopted as his own last month by ordering an additional 17,000 troops sent there, Mr. Obama replied flatly, “No.”

How's that for honesty?

I'm curious to see how the public responds to Obama's suggestion over the next few weeks. While open discussion with 'the enemy' was an ideal for which Obama was criticized and praised during his run for office, what will the American people think now? While our class discussions generally lead to support for efforts to enhance the U.S's international credibility and gain back the chance to get a 'pass' on foreign policy blunders, is Obama pushing his luck by announcing his intents to the world? I fear that as the President's celebrity status and momentum of hope wears down, once his Roman Candle of optimism burns out, support for efforts so drastically different from those of the Bush administration will dwindle as well.

On a less related topic, I thought Obama's comment on his trust in blogs was interesting. I guess he won't really be reading what I say here anyway:

Mr. Obama rode to the White House partly on his savvy use of new technology, and he has a staff-written blog on his presidential Web site. Even so, he said he did not find blogs to be reliable, citing the economy as one example. “Part of the reason we don’t spend a lot of time looking at blogs,” he said, “is because if you haven’t looked at it very carefully, then you may be under the impression that somehow there’s a clean answer one way or another — well, you just nationalize all the banks, or you just leave them alone and they’ll be fine.”

Britain to Resume Talks with Hezbollah

2009-03-08T10:57:00.001-07:00

John F. Burns

New York Times

Two days ago, England lifted a four-year dialogue ban with the US-named terrorist organization Hezbollah. At the request of President Bush, Britain cut its ties with the Iranian organization known for initiating violent actions against Israel. England and Iran have a checkered past, with England regularly blamed for atrocious acts against the Islamic Republic and English involvement in the overthrow of Iranian leaders. This surprise shift in diplomatic relations indicates a new willingness of Britain to reach out to the Middle East. It also labels the old style of isolating noncompliant countries ineffective. The rationale for opening relations was pointed out in a New York Times article summarizing Foreign Officer Bill Marteson's comments that, "Britain aimed at moving Hezbollah toward becoming a nonviolent political party with policies focused on Lebanon, and not on undermining Israel."

Earlier this week, Gordon Brown visited the White House. Since the Obama administration took hold of Washington DC, the US has sought to better relations with Muslim countries and the Middle East. This outpouring of support has occurred in two branches with Obama speaking on Al Hurrah television and Congressional visits to Palestine. The rest of the world watched the hegemon and waited for the cue. Yesterday, one of the most influential countries opened its doors to discussions with one of the largest labeled terrorist organizations.

The extent of the US influence on Britain's change can only be speculated. I predict that Obama requested that Britain serve as an intermediary between Hezbollah and the United States. Since the US could not exactly reopen talks with an open and militant opponent of Israel, the US looked to its closest ally for assistance. How Hezbollah will be used is still up for deliberations, is the goal Iran, Israel or Lebanon? If Iran is the true goal, this could be the time to initiate change. With the re-election of Ahmadinejad, who is criticized for his inability to control inflation and strict oil rationing policies, he may be forced to foster a congenial relationship to face the prospect of re-election. If Israel is the focus of the attention, the temporary but fragile peace with Palestine could force many players to the table. Maybe the direction is shifting towards Lebanon, and the British want to make the new state effective.

While the political intent of the change is open to debate, Britain recognizing Hezbollah gives the country a new look. It shows an openness and willingness to collaborate that has not been seen since 2001.

Additionally, this change in England's practices reflects a changing Western view. The US is not seen as "going alone" at opening relations with the Middle East but rather at seeking the support and acceptance of the international community. Maybe the US will see itself accept a more multilateral approach to foreign relations. That is a big maybe.

Lastly, I wonder how Israel will respond to England's policy change. For the past eight years, Israel has seen unprecedented support for its often controversial practices by the United States. Now that Obama and Brown have opened their countries to talks with the Middle East, Israel will feel insecure. How will Israel brand itself in the next four years?

Al Jazeera English Struggling to Gain a Foothold in the U.S.

2009-03-06T12:58:00.000-08:00

While doing some research about international news broadcasting, I noticed that Al Jazeera English has recently been pushing for greater availability in North America. NPR’s Morning Edition recently did a story about the channel struggling to gain a foothold among U.S. television audiences. Reuters also reported on Al Jazeera English’s public relations campaign:

“Al Jazeera is starting a public relations campaign to dispel what it calls myths and misperceptions that have prevented it from reaching more U.S. and Canadian viewers, the international television news network said on Tuesday.

Al Jazeera's English-language service is starting a website called IWantAJE.net, offering news the Qatar-based network produces and a list of ‘Hits and Myths’ knocking down statements about the network that it says are untrue.”

“The websites will ask people to e-mail to their cable and satellite providers asking them to carry the channel. Viewers can also watch the channel live on the website and read bulletins with the day's top stories.”

“Al Jazeera has said that gaining access in the United States has been hampered by what it calls misperceptions that it supports al Qaeda and its leader Osama bin Laden, that it is anti-Semitic and anti-American, that it shows beheadings, and that it has an anti-Western agenda.

‘We don't wear horns. Osama bin Laden does not have a weekly interview show,’ said Tony Burman, managing director of Al Jazeera English and former editor in chief at the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

When former U.S. Marine Corps Captain Josh Rushing, now a reporter for Al Jazeera, went with a TV crew to Golden, Colorado, to cover the Democratic presidential convention last year, Al Jazeera's presence sparked protests from local motorcycle gangs.

‘People who have never watched it have a super-strong opinion about this thing they've never seen and don't want it on their airwaves,’ Rushing said.”

Since its launch more than two years ago, the channel is now available in about 140 million households in more than 100 countries and has 69 bureaus worldwide. According to IWantAJE.net, the Al Jazeera English Web site receives 22 million visits every month, with about 50% of its traffic coming from the U.S. and Canada. Even so, the channel is still hardly available anywhere in the U.S.

One of the basic rules of effective public diplomacy is listening and having a dialogue. Why then is Al Jazeera English, a channel providing a voice for billions of people around the world, not widely available in the U.S.? It’s not a hard question to answer actually; misconceptions about Al Jazeera aside, even Western international news channels such as BBC World and the American-owned CNN International are hardly available in the U.S.

Of course, no news outlet is completely unbiased; everyone ultimately has a point of view. But, by listening to different points of view, television audiences can get more of a complete picture of what is happening around the world. For example, Al Jazeera was the only English language network reporting from inside Gaza during the recent conflict there.

Being able to watch some BBC and Al Jazeera English would lead to a much more informed audience than by switching between MSNBC and Fox News. This, in turn, might just lead to a boon in U.S. public diplomacy.

Diplomacy by Invitation

2009-03-05T20:16:00.000-08:00

Secretary Clinton means business in redefining the role of the Secretary of State. With one of the Secretary's new tools, anyone can get on the Internet and keep track of the Secretary's carbon footprint (she's up to 57,944 miles traveled thus far). In case you were curious to know where she calls home, you can't miss the only American flag visible from space which marks home at the headquarters.

Seriously, though, this is a pretty powerful tool that allows you to access the Secretary's itinerary as well as links to related material on the trip. This is important because it definitely diminishes the traditional distance that stands between the everyday person and their representatives. Here, you have a tool that caters to domestic and foreign "publics" alike.

The Secretary is distinguishing not only the Office of the Secretary of State, but also herself as Secretary of State. This innovation atop the Department sets a high bar for the lower level PD folks.

UPDATE:

Hillary Clinton wows young Europeans at a town hall meeting with 1,000 attendees locally, but interactive connection through Adobe Acrobat Connect to attendees at 39 embassies. I am not altogether familiar with this application, but from the description, you can literally host real-time discussions using graphics that can be displayed and edited in real-time amongst participants at remote sites. It's commonly used for distance learning programs and the like. You gotta love how she has covered so many thousands of miles to reach out to a diverse range of publics and still she comes across this guy:

One European observer said: "I'm relieved she didn't get the nomination, she's not as good as Obama. But still, a class act."

Thank you One European Observer, may I have another.

Keyhole tv and soft power

2009-03-05T16:48:00.000-08:00

The other day, our readings in class focused on how an increasingly media-infiltrated world was affecting the daily life of the average citizen, and how these tools can be used in the public diplomacy sphere. I found it interesting when the readings mentioned how peer-to-peer technology was really changing the future of the Internet, and how it was the forefront to technological change and communication. I found a free program the other day that Japan's Ministry of Internal Affairs is testing out, using P2P technology. This project called, " KeyHole TV" allows Internet users to watch Japanese TV in real time, with a selection of the major television channels in Japan. Currently, the project is causing a stir among language learners, but I think that it's also indicative of Japan using its "soft power" of entertainment and media influence to broadcast a little more widely to the world. If anyone is interested, here is the address:

http://www.v2p.jp/video/

Nation Branding

2009-03-05T07:00:00.000-08:00

While waiting for divine inspiration to strike and inform me as to what, exactly, I would be writing a blog post on this week, I started doing a little research for my country profile, and played with typing in a few keywords into my google search bar. First thing I typed in: "Swiss branding". I was met with a direct link to the Victorinox Swiss Army Website. Ok, enough of that. I then typed in "Swiss nation branding" and was given a link to Simon Anholt's blog. I believe that we have discussed a little about him in our class- or at least some of our reading referenced him, but if you would like to find out more about nation branding, I recommend a quick browse of his site. Along with the much too wordy heading (Simon Anholt's Placeblog: "The place for anyone who's interested in national image and identity, place branding, public diplomacy, and anything to do with the reputations of countries, cities and regions; how they're formed; how they're measured and how they are (mis)managed."), you can find a link to many of his nation branding guides as well as just about any form of media he's been in in the last few years. No matter what your opinion of nation branding is, it definitely holds a place in Public Diplomacy. Whether or not it is effective is another question.

Cricket: Pakistan's Soft Power

2009-03-04T18:44:00.000-08:00

The image or word that many have when Pakistan is mentioned is “terrorism.” That is due to the past and recent terrorist attacks that have been associated with the country ranging from the Mumbai attacks last year to the recent attacks on the Sri Lankan cricket players on Tuesday, March 3. The Guardian’s "Pakistan needs to take responsibility" raised cricket as a form of “soft power” in the South Asian region.

In a region where terror has tainted virtually everything, cricket has retained an enviable immunity, making the stadium an unlikely but reliable venue for what became known as "cricket diplomacy" between India and Pakistan.

Even in a region where discord is prevalent, cricket has allowed for cooperation among countries through the medium of sport competition.

Matches can turn ugly, but very often seemingly insurmountable tensions melt away by the time trophies are handed out, and touring spectators marvel at the hospitality of their hosts.

Due to other internal and external factors, cricket diplomacy is failing in Pakistan. The attack on the Sri Lankan cricket team will have a negative effect for future cricket matches.

This is a huge blow to Pakistan, because cricket was the one area where Pakistan engaged with the world on equal terms; it was the strongest weapon in Pakistan's soft power arsenal.

While this statement may be somewhat exaggerated, in the case of Pakistan, it demonstrates that external and internal factors can influence their soft power. This makes me wonder, what can a country turn to if its core soft power turns on itself? This case will likely depend on the government’s effort to find alternative forms of soft power, but some countries do not have that option. And if they do find alternatives, they might not produce the desired results. What, therefore, can Pakistan now turn to in its arsenal of soft power to engage meaningfully with its neighbors?