The Foreign Service Journal looks at the state of public diplomacy ten years after the disestablishment of the U.S. Information Agency. Those of us who turned in our articles three months ago are surely relieved that no dramatic changes in the interim have made us look foolish.

However, a few teaching assignments sponsored by the Foreign Service Institute (NFATC) the past two months gave me some new insights, and the passing of time allows for a few additional comments.

The new Under Secretary, Judith McHale, has expanded dramatically her staff, which at last count numbers 38 — probably triple that of her predecessors.  The additional help will enable McHale to exercise more authority over operations, including assignments of public affairs officers and budgets.

A lot of work is going into making PD more strategic: notably, the institution of a PD implementation plan (reviving a USIA practice that was abandoned by State) and an emphasis on reporting and accounting for resources.  This is a work in progress that is bound to prompt complaints from field officers, and achieving accountability without killing creativity or slowing the real work will be no mean trick.

Many of my co-writers fret about the importance and status of PD within the Department.  On the one hand, the assistant secretary positions for the Educational and Cultural Affairs  International Information Programs bureaus remain unfilled.  That was unremarkable last summer; less so now.  On the other hand, PD leaders are optimistic about major budget increases that will be targeted to critical areas like reestablishing cultural centers and preparing for an influx of new junior Foreign Service officers.

The Obama Administration treats public diplomacy as a subset of diplomacy, but they’re doing a lot of it starting with Secretary Clinton herself.  There is less evidence that PD has a seat at the policy table.  Note the recent announcement of a new missile defense strategy that caught spokesmen and PAOs off guard and caused the administration unecessary headaches.

McHale’s staff build-out is a do-it-yourself approach to beefing up PD, as opposed to creating an external organization that would provide cover for semi-official cultural and information programs and, perhaps, a sort of  independent PR counsel to the administration.

The Quadrennial Review that is beginning under Deputy Secretary Lew could in theory take up questions of larger administrative reform.  But so far, there is every sign that the new administration sees public diplomacy as a key discipline and practice within the confines of the State Department, and an enabler for wider purposes like engagement and smart diplomacy rather than an enterprise of its own.  A glass ceiling, if you will.