|
Since Sept. 11 ,
2001, it has
become
commonplace to
say that the
United States is
engaged in a war
of ideas for the
hearts and minds
of moderate
Muslims.
Even Donald
Rumsfeld has
admitted that
the metric for
measuring
success in a war
against jihadist
terrorism is
whether the
numbers we kill
or deter are
greater than the
numbers that the
jihadists
recruit.
We cannot
attract the hard
core jihadists:
they have to be
dealth with by
hard power. But
we cannot win
the war unless
we win the
hearts and minds
of the
moderates.
The polls
suggest that we
are not doing
well.
In key countries
like Jordan and
Pakistan, more
people say they
have confidence
in Osama bin
Laden than in
George W. Bush.
While some polls
show a slight
improvement in
America’s image
in countries
like Indonesia
and Lebanon,
large majorities
in the Muslim
world remain
skeptical about
the United
States.
Karen Hughes,
the
Undersecretary
of State for
Public
Diplomacy, has a
daunting task.
The United
States spends
only a little
over a billion
dollars a year
on public
diplomacy to get
our message out,
about the same
as Britain or
France though we
are five times
larger. We
spend nearly 500
times more than
that on our hard
military power.
The U.S.
Information
Agency (USIA)
was abolished
during the
Clinton
Administration.
Proponents
argued that
giving its
functions to an
undersecretary
in the State
Department would
integrate them
more closely
with overall
diplomacy. But
this change
neglected the
low value
attributed to
public diplomacy
in the
traditional
culture of the
State
Department. The
job Hughes now
occupies was
left vacant for
nearly half of
the four years
of the first
Bush
Administration.
The priorities
in Bush’s first
term were on
America’s hard
power, not its
soft or
attractive
power.
President Bush
began to pay
more attention
to soft power in
his second term.
In addition to
rhetoric about
promoting
democracy and
freedom, he made
a modest
increase in
funding for
public
diplomacy,
including both
international
broadcasting and
the State
Department’s
educational and
cultural
exchange
programs. In the
president’s
words, “rarely
has the need for
a sustained
effort to ensure
foreign
understanding
for our country
and society been
so clearly
evident.” But
even with these
increases there
is a long way to
go.
The U.S. started
new broadcasting
outlets like
Radio Sawa and
Al Hurra
television for
the Arab world,
but the latter
is widely
mistrusted as
American
propaganda. In
any event,
better
broadcasting is
not enough. As
U.S. Ambassador
to Russia
William Burns
has pointed out,
public diplomacy
must be
accompanied by
“a wider
positive agenda
for the region,
alongside
rebuilding Iraq,
achieving the
President’s
two-state vision
for Israelis and
Palestinians;
and modernizing
Arab
economies.”
Even the best
advertising
cannot sell if
the product is
poor.
Edward R.
Murrow, the
noted
broadcaster who
once headed the
USIA, argued
that the most
effective
dimension of
public diplomacy
is not
broadcasting but
“the last three
feet” of face to
face
communication.
To promote this,
Hughes has to
work with the
private and
non-profit
sectors. To
accomplish our
objective of
promoting
democracy in the
region, the U.S.
must develop a
long-term
strategy of
cultural and
educational
exchanges aimed
at creating a
richer and more
open civil
society in
Middle Eastern
countries. We
need local
people who
understand
America’s
virtues as well
as our faults.
Visa policies
that have cut
back on the
number of Muslim
students in the
United States do
us more harm
than good.
Much of the work
of developing an
open civil
society can be
promoted by
corporations,
foundations,
universities and
other non-profit
organizations,
as well as by
governments.
Companies and
foundations can
offer technology
to help
modernize Arab
educational
systems.
American
universities can
establish more
exchange
programs for
students and
faculty.
Foundations can
support the
development of
institutions of
American studies
in Muslim
countries, or
programs that
enhance the
professionalism
of journalists.
Private groups
can promote the
teaching of the
English
language, and
encourage
student
exchanges.
Karen Hughes
will find that
America’s soft
power is
difficult to
wield because
the government
does not control
all the levers.
But that may not
be a bad thing.
Government
propaganda is
rarely
convincing.
America’s
strength lies in
our civil
society. Even
when our
policies are
unpopular, our
ability to be
self critical as
a free society
can earn us
grudging praise.
Our diversity is
our strength.
Only when we
manage to
unleash this
type of soft
power and
combine it with
our hard power
will we be
successful in
meeting the
challenge of
jihadist
terrorism. Then
we will be a
“smart
power.”
RF
Joseph S.
Nye teaches
at Harvard
University
and is the
author of
Soft Power:
The Means to
Success in
World
Politics,
and The
Power Game:
A Washington
Novel.
|
