Trials of Engagement: The Future of U.S. Public Diplomacy (review)

Public diplomacy (PD) is much under discussion these days as governments and nongovernmental organizations seek ways to influence foreign audiences in countries around the world. This book opens with an 18-page introduction by the two editors, followed by ten chapters on “US Public Diplomacy Today,” five chapters on “The Public Diplomacy of Tomorrow,” and a conclusion that attempts to sum it all up.

Most of the chapters are written by academics or people with a university connection, which is perhaps why the introduction opens with the question, fortunately unanswered, whether PD is an academic discipline. Some of the contributors to this book would lead you to believe that it is. Most of the chapters, however, answer that question by emphasizing the abstract aspects of PD, and only two appear to be based on practical experience abroad. Student readers, consequently, are likely to find the book overly theoretical, but some chapters could easily be recommended by their professors.

Philip M. Taylor, in a chapter titled “Public Diplomacy on Trial,” reviews the failures in U.S. PD that followed the end of the Cold War and the closure of the United States Information Agency, which raises the question of post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Eytan Gilboa and Nachman Shai, two former Israeli diplomats, relate how a small country like Israel has been working to overcome its poor image abroad. John Robert Kelley writes about “the estrangement” between PD’s advisory and advocacy roles and reminds us of the failures of Charlotte Beers and what he calls “her Madison Avenue approach” to PD. Scott Lucas writes about “the development and implementation of U.S. foreign policy charged with the awkward task of reconciling interests and ideals.” David Ryan finds fault with George W. Bush’s administration but offers hope for the administration of Barack Obama. Giles Scott-Smith is critical of the Pentagon’s role in PD but hopes that “a cut back in the military budget accompanied by a regeneration of the State Department and a large scale improvement in diplomatic resources could be the best possible outcome from the credit crisis and resulting financial turmoil.” Nicholas J. Cull writes authoritatively on the domestic political aspects of U.S. PD, a factor often neglected in discussing PD, and the mishaps of Karen Hughes as under secretary of state for public diplomacy during the George W. Bush administration. Lina Khatib writes about PD in the Middle East with special emphasis on the successful programs of Qatar. Elizabeth Fox provides a useful, detailed historical overview of U.S. relations with Latin America, and Bevan Sewell follows with a chapter on U.S. PD in Latin America that is heavy on criticism of George W. Bush.

In a final section titled “The Public Diplomacy of Tomorrow,” Daryl Copeland, a retired Canadian diplomat whose service in Thailand, Ethiopia, New Zealand, and Malaysia gave him an insider’s view of PD and made him a strong supporter, says that the overriding purpose of PD in a world of insecurity should be to address the root causes of underdevelopment. R. S. Zaharna introduces a new term, “strategic stakeholder engagement,” to describe the new communication strategies that “provide the motivation and platform for people to want to connect with others and stay connected long after a public diplomat returns home.” Biljana Scott tells us that the most pressing problem facing PD is “the plethora of possibly conflicting messages, likely to arise from a host of public diplomats spilling out into the world, each with a plenipotentiary mandate,” and she counsels that the overriding skill a public diplomat should possess is a sensitivity to the role of language and narrative in influencing perception, action, and allegiance.” Naren Chitty sees a need to broaden PD by bringing in the public at home, and he concludes that the best PD “arises from measuring up, in terms of policy and practice, to the best humanitarian values of one’s own civilization.” Finally...