Been fun!

One last blog entry (for now) to say it's been fun doing this with you all! Great last official class today, read Laura McGinnis' live blog if you get nostalgic...cheers!

A Soft Power Straw Man

A continuation of the soft power debate at Foreign Policy.com

Ken Adelman, former US Ambassador to the UN proffers that if if Congress cuts the foreign aid budget, US influence will be unaffected. He cites a cohort of data that show that US aid has not improved the behavior of certain countries.

His argument is a straw-man for two reasons. First, he looks selectively at only certain recipients. There are also US allies who receive aid, such as Columbia, Mexico, the Philippines, Georgia, to name a few. Second, Adelman misunderstands what soft-power is. Aid is hard power, something tangible: you could cash the checks the US rights and throw all the money in the air. Soft-power is something entirely different. When ideals attract another country and induce it into a favorable course of action, that is soft power.

True, America's ideals don't promote themselves. Dedicated civil servants are necessary to promote our ideals. True, not everyone is attracted to US ideals, culture, etc., but no one will be if America does not promote itself. That is why cutting the State Department budget is so dangerous. Without money and the necessary staff, we cannot promote.

Japan's pop culture PD--what's that about??

After our talks in class about Japan's PD through its pop culture products, I've had to think quite a bit about the value of such images, and what they might accomplish for Japan. As I said after class, my kids played with Power Rangers, traded Pokemon cards, passed around Manga books (I still remember images from the book like the one you see here, and how much my son loved the wordless stories). We also all saw Spirited Away, a very bizarre
Japanese children's fantasy film, so all of these things were of interest to my kids as well as other young kids in the international community where we lived overseas.

Did they know that any of those things were Japanese? Probably not. They knew the products were Asian, I think, but not necessarily Japanese--mainly the kids just enjoyed the products.

So this gets back to the question, what do these products to for Japan? I have to think that rather than being a Japanese identifier, they at least help promote an industry of books, art and film worldwide. In that way, they serve the country's economic interests. I think realists would say that that's all that counts anyway, and it's a bonus if folks also like the products for their cultural or artistic value.

I'm sure Japan earns more money from its car and electronics industries, but I'll put out the question to others: How big of an industry are Japan's pop culture exports, and how much revenue do they garner? Does the manufacture and sale of those items put a lot of people to work, and really benefit Japanese citizens?

I would also ask, can we call it PD if it's in blatant support of a country's (largely private sector) economic interests? Isn't that part of what PD does in promoting a nation's interests??

Food for Peace

America's reliance on hard power has done its international image irreparable harm I believe. Harm that will take decades of altruistic intervention (who am I kidding, right?) to undo. But the food-for-peace program, where the U.S. sends food as a form of aid is a wonderful step in the right direction. While it often seems that the U.S. talks out of both sides of its mouth with regards to its moral righteousness, providing aid to malnourished and impoverished children is a great thing for U.S. PD.

Naomi Leight, over at USC blog, -http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/index.php/newswire/cpdblog_detail/food_diplomacy_and_school_meals_for_peace/

disagrees. She claims that America no longer is the only nation capable of aiding those in need and the fact that we're all obese (sadly true) says that we can't even take care of our own children. Perhaps she's right. With the advent of factory farming and fast-food, fried chicken and french fries are now some of the cheapest foods available. No wonder America (and other nations) are fat. However, that is an issue all together different than what she is writing about, I think she's wrong about the food as a source of soft power. While we refuse to disband our innumerable military bases and continue to occupy sovereign nations, the least we can do is help counteract our bully image via something good. Something altruistic. Perhaps, something yummy. Since foreign aid is such an insignificant amount of the budget, it makes no sense to do anything but augment these types of programs. While America's greatest export is war, perhaps this food aid is a soft power step in the right direction...

A Fire Bell in the Public Diplomacy Night

Alarming read over at Foreign Policy.

Since today is the sesquicentennial of the start of the Civil War, a slavery-related analogy is in order.

In 1820, Thomas Jefferson said that the Missouri dispute "like a fire bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. I considered it at once as the knell of the Union." The Missouri Compromise delayed disunion until for 40 years, until 1860.

By cutting the State Department budget significantly, the Great Budget Compromise of 2011 may be the beginning of the end of American soft power.

For the GOP, the State Department cuts are only partially balanced budget. That party has always been a skeptic of State because diplomacy, public or not, does not conform to their view of a muscular foreign policy. Public diplomacy is especially suspect because, to them, American greatness should be self-evident To try to explain or promote America abroad implicitly contradicts that self-evidence. Your Correspondent believes equally in America's greatness, if not exceptional greatness. However, reasonable people recognize that those with completely different life experiences may not share that view. One of the jobs of U.S. public diplomacy, soft power, or whatever you call it, is to introduce foreigners to our country so that can make judgments about us based on something other than local orthodoxies.

Thankfully, Joseph S. Nye has sounded the alarm on the GOP's threat American soft power. Let all those who value comprehensive national power hope that legislators heed the advice of Mr. Nye and Secretary Gates.

-Jake

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/159.html

Smile Israel, you're on Candid Camera.

This is a bit short, but I thought it was worth mentioning.
Israel is planning on attaching a dedicated cameraman to squads of soldiers, much in the same way that every unit would have a dedicated radio, medical, and machine gun specialist. The idea, of course, is that the army will become more accountable for its actions, and there will be an appearance of transparency. Transparency is something that Israel could use, as allegations of abuses and war crimes mount up in the war against Hamas.

Of course, there is no way that Israel can prove that any images or footage released by the Army isn't doctored or edited - this is something that Israel recognizes, in fact. It makes me wonder, then who they are trying to impress with this initiative. The US and other allies are fairly firmly bound up with Israel, but perhaps the embattled nation is trying to rebuild bridges after the debacle with the aid ships last year. The Palestinians and other Arab nations will not be impressed by this program, and it seems that Israel, as we discussed in class, just isn't really "getting it" as far as who their target audience should be.

Get off My Back, Brutes.

Public Diplomacy in the United States does a good job of slandering the Chinese negligence of human rights. And for good reason. The Chinese have numerous problems preventing Western Europe and North America from taking them seriously when China claims to take steps to address concerns. 

But what about the greatest purveyor of violence in the world? The United States? 

How can the United States via Hillary Clinton disparage China when we have atrocities occurring in our own backyard (and in a country near you!). It's hypocritical. It's outrageous. Although China is right to call out the US on this non-sensical behavior, it doesn't excuse their complicity with human rights violations. Two wrongs don't make a right. 

Most Americans, I presume, influenced by media and our government's diplomacy messaging, only see things from an American ethnocentric mentality. But, the rest of the world and your smarter than average American knows better. Check the Rolling Stone article this week on the Kill Team. Or trying children as adults. Or waterbording/other torture. Or executing retards. Or.....etc. etc...

Although we may stand above China in regards to human rights, we're certainly no archetype of altruism and the phony schadenfreude is growing stale. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/10/china-human-rights_n_847287.html

What Wine and Branding Have in Common

Even cheaper wines mark their year. No one has any illusion that giving the vintage makes the wine better. Rather, no self-respecting consumer would buy a wine without a vintage on it. “What, Yellow-Tail, you expect us to believe that every year is a vintage year?” The point is cheap wines have to pretend they belong in elite company for people to even consider them.

Therein lies the problem with China’s branding. China isn't globally pretentious enough. As Wang notes, “[t]he Chinese are too humble to promote China in international society.” (262) China is too defensive in nature, it is concerned especially about correcting misconceptions (Li, 6). Certainly, it has adopted a more proactive posture, setting up Confucius Institutes. However, although they teach Chinese values, they don’t make a claim of universality.

True, not all countries have to claim to have the best value system. Rather, they might pick a characteristic and promote that as their brand. However, these are mostly small and middle-tier powers. China wants to be a superpower, and so its branding must aspire to similar standards. That means China must proclaim it has superior culture and values, major powers such as France and America do.

Look the part, be the part.

-Jake

China's Soft Power in Developing Countries

I found Mingjiang Li's "Soft Power in Chinese Discourse: Popularity and Prospect" to have some interesting presentations of Chinese politicians and academicians in what constitutes China's soft power. I liked, for example, the mention by President Hu Jintao that China needs to ensure its soft power in four "environments:" in the international realm, with its neighboring countries, in its cooperative agreements "based on equality and mutual benefits," and in its media environment.

Historically, China has been seen as an aggressor both by its neighbors and now the rest of the world, particularly Western countries see China's growth as an economic and environmental threat, for example, so that's a tough one to overcome. Its media is also seen as being completely controlled by the state, which just doesn't sell in this day and age, even if you're trying to use media build a country brand. As Yiwei Wang says in "Public Diplomacy and the Rise of Chinese Soft Power," defining the Chinese brand is also a challenge, especially in a society that is evolving so quickly in so many ways.

Where China is making headway, and with a healthy dose of self-interest, is in its relationship and cooperative agreements with developing countries. All of the theory is spot on--promoting the idea of win-win relationships based upon equality and mutual benefits. In Africa, for example, even if you scratch the surface and say, this looks like the same ol' same ol', it is a refreshing change to many Africans after doing business with Western countries that have a colonialist spirit.

As most people know, China is going into business deals without putting "conditionalities" on loans, which doesn't exactly help with African countries' reform processes, namely with regard to governance and human rights, but it is a helluva lot less condescending than someone coming in and telling you how to resolve your problems. It is also resulting in the achievement of some great infrastructure projects. For example, in Angola, the Chinese are building roads in exchange for oil, with the guarantee being the oil that China is sure to receive, and needs for its own development and Angola finally has decent main artery roads that extend throughout the country. Win-win, commodities for basic infrastructure that African countries need to advance development, business interests, and everything else.

In other African countries China has also built schools, health clinics, and sports stadiums, and has refurbished old factories (if for example they judge them to have the potential to be viable). China has also sent doctors and other professionals to work where they're needed, and the folks who come over are paid very modest wages so their living standards are much more comparable to those of their African counterparts, another thing that is winning hearts in developing countries. The fact that China itself is a developing country means that it is more of a South-South relationship and is already endearing to many.

The Confucius Institutes are also a brilliant move! There are plenty of Chinese to staff them, and the ideas of Confucius are certainly one of the pieces of the Chinese brand that many people throughout the world are interested in and would like to know more about.

But the jury is still out, for example, on the development side with regard to what extent the relationships are really win-win, or whether China is just another big power that is in need of primary materials and is complicit in the rape of the African continent. The Chinese development model seems quite promising as part of the country's PD, and it is certainly meeting Chinese interests. If it succeeds over time, then watch out--China's successful PD efforts in this area may pay off dividends both now and even farther down the road in helping position the country to successfully compete in this international realm and meet its foreign policy goal of getting the raw materials it needs to ensure its own development.

UN, France in the Ivory Coast

As the NY Times reports in this article, France and the UN have entered into the conflict in the Ivory Coast, supporting democratically elected Alassane Ouattara against the former president  Laurent Gbagbo, who refused to step down from power after recent elections. I do not wish to discuss the "rightness" of this action - many bloggers, reporters, and commentators have already attested to Gbagbo's many crimes and faults, and that is not really the purview of this post. Instead, I'd like to comment on what is on its way to becoming a pattern. The UN, throughout its history, has been plagued with problems in its peacekeeping missions. Often, the UN troops are not allowed to take action, or may do so only in a limited way. While I do believe that protecting civilians and upholding the legitimate results of free elections is a worthy cause, I wonder at what the UN is saying about itself with the armed support of the Ouattara loyalists, and earlier this year, the Anti-Qaddaffi rebels.
In Libya, the UN has already recieved some criticism from some of its more prominent members (including Russia and China, who abstained from the vote), on the grounds that it is overstepping its boundaries and infringing on state sovereignty. I can't help but feel that the action in the Ivory Coast will produce the same result. It is hard to say as well, whether the people of both Libya and the Ivory Coast will feel any particular gratitude towards France and the UN. Although I can only assume that the UN has more reason to be in the Ivory Coast because of the humanitarian crisis, showing off the hard power of its forces would be a great boost to its soft power bargaining capabilities.

The Culture Problem

Edward Hall, in Beyond Culture writes of the problematic nature when engaging in communication cross-cultures. Given that Public Diplomacy 2.0 has increased access for others to learn about our own culture, does this do more harm than good. As this USC article states -http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/index.php/newswire/cpdblog_detail/secretary_clintons_culture_complaint/
the perceptions other cultures have are often myopic or skewed. For example, Baywatch is replayed overseas which relays an image of Blondes in Bikinis. That's America. Moreover, the perceptions Americans have are just as skewed, as our information is siphoned off from select footage. Hopefully, with increased social networking, we'll be better able to grasp what other cultures are actually like, not just the sensationalist clips.