|
 |
 Main Page | Month Archive | Email Updates | RSS Feed | Print Version
The Public Diplomacy Blog is intended to stimulate dialog among scholars, researchers, practitioners and professionals from around the world in the public diplomacy sphere. The opinions represented here are the authors' own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School.
EXIT KAREN HUGHES
NOV 4, 2007 - 11:57AM PDT
Posted by Craig Hayden
All posts by this author
Not too long ago, Karen Hughes discussed her job as director of U.S. public diplomacy efforts as contributing to a long term process of cultivating America's image. For her, the work of public diplomacy remains akin to "planting a tree under whose shade you would not sit." Now the mantle of that responsibility passes to another, as Karen Hughes announced her resignation this week from her post as Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. What does this signify for U.S. public diplomacy? It may be easy to view this as a sign that the job was simply too big -- the vast depth of negative views toward the United States in critical regions like the Middle East, let alone the rest of the world -- was an obstacle too large to overcome. There may be some truth to this. Hughes herself has noted the persuasive power of "deeds" in communicating the values and motivations of the United States. Yet the policies of the United States (its deeds, if you will) remain overwhelmingly defined by events in Iraq, such as the recent Blackwater scandal, the debate over torture of U.S. detainees, and the lingering resentment over a host of collateral damage incidents. How could Hughes realistically address these powerful symbols, consistently trotted out in international and pan-Arab press? Of course public diplomacy is more than a "media war" (to borrow the phrase used by former BBG director Norm Pattiz). In the United States, it is an institutional commitment towards building relationships that facilitate mutual understanding between populations. It is more than international broadcasting. It involves exchange programs, cultural diplomacy, and educational and aid programs. It is not just the advertising of foreign policy objectives. Against this broader measure, how did Karen Hughes do, and why did she quit? There seems to be some consensus that as Hughes recognized the immensity of the public opinion challenge foisted upon U.S. public diplomacy, she focused more intently on building up the organization itself for the long term. The Washington Post interviewed Ed Djerejian (author of the pivotal 2003 report "Changing Minds; Winning Peace"): "Institutionally, I give her high marks." Their article on her resignation also quotes a State Department staffer who observed, "I don't remember if it was a deliberate thing, but she realized that the background work was going to be her legacy, along with using her clout to get things done." So, there is some evidence that Hughes has contributed to a solid foundation for future public diplomacy efforts at the State Department. As Fred Kaplan reported in Slate, "Hughes established rapid-response centers to react to unfavorable news overseas. The public diplomacy budget swelled, nearly doubling to $900 million a year. She promoted cultural and educational exchanges, added summer camps and English classes for Muslim youths in 44 countries…" Yet what was the impact of the programs enacted during her tenure? The Boston Globe reports a quote from Andrew Kohut of the Pew Center, which measures public opinion in…... FULL TEXT
Read Comments (0) | Add Your Own

Read Comments:
No comments for this entry.
Add a Comment:
 |
 |
|