By PHK
Earlier this week, I responded to a question from Bill Fisher about former Under Secretary of Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes’ legacy and my prognosis for James Glassman, the American Enterprise Institute’s right wing economist and current head of the BBG, who the Bush administration named to succeed her. I never thought much more about what I had written to Bill until I received an e-mail from him to thank me for my comments which he had included in his post on the topic. He then sent me links – not only to the post on his blog “The World According to Bill Fisher” – but also to links to the article's publication by Inter Press Service News Agency and the Middle East Times. I learned this morning from an avid Asia Times, Juan Cole's Informed Comment and WhirledView reader that the article was also picked up by Asia Times.
It’s always nice to be quoted and by someone who knows the foreign affairs establishment intimately. It's also nice, as I wrote Fisher, to have him refer to WhirledView as a “widely respected foreign affairs and public diplomacy blog” and also to name Cheryl and Pat, my two cowriters, because it’s not just one person who provides the quality and professionalism that goes into this blog. It’s all of us.
Hughes' legacy
But back to the public diplomacy personnel question at hand: I stand by what I told Bill. I think Hughes will be remembered primarily because she remained in office longer than either of her two predecessors and will, ipso facto, outlast Glassman in longevity in that highly visible and controversial position. I think she, of anyone - because of her supposed proximity to president Bush and the compliant Republican Congress on Capitol Hill when she first took over the position - had a unique chance to rescue US public diplomacy from the organizational doldrums – if not policy ones. She failed on both counts.
Yes, Hughes did get exchanges funding – with an accent on foreigners coming here – increased. Yes, she did reestablish small media reaction and outreach units at State and at a few overseas posts to focus on influencing the Arab media both old and new.
Yet, she did not tackle the fundamental institutional changes needed. I don’t think she had a clue how frayed and down at the heels this country’s governmental public diplomacy apparatus had become. Or if she did understand the severity of the problem and tried to make the case for substantial change, she was ignored by a White House which couldn’t care less how the US is perceived or received abroad.
Ironically, it’s the US military which has had a much better comprehension of the problem all the way along. Unlike poverty stricken and administratively challenged State particularly under Condi, the Pentagon has had the funds to devote to attempting to polish America's overseas image. The problem is, however, public diplomacy works best when civilians talk to civilians: uniforms, guns and the various tools of psychological warfare are not, in my book, the way to talk – or behave – in someone else’s country and “make friends and influence people” over the short or long run.
The crucial question is not Hughes' legacy or Glassman's placeholding - it's what follows.
For the next 13 months or less, Glassman will simply be a placeholder, as I indicated to Fisher. Doesn’t matter what his political predilections are – right, left or center - or what his name is. It could be Smith, Jones, Brown or Lenkowski. Regardless, a nice title will be bestowed on another right-wing somebody with scant credentials in the public diplomacy field. But it’s just too late in this tired administration’s day for Glassman, or anyone else, to initiate meaningful changes.
Meanwhile, the crucial question is the morning after the swearing-in ceremony in front of the Capitol in January 2009. There are at least three or four proposals for building a better public diplomacy mouse-trap floating around in the media, at several think-tanks and on the Hill. All have their pluses and minuses – but the one thing most people agree upon is that the current anemic arrangement at the State Department doesn't work.