Hansen’s article on “War and Peace in the Information Age” brings up the important point that one of the failures of US policy in its attempts to win favor in the Arab and Muslim world came about because the US government did not take “the first important step of listening to the targeted audiences and trying to understand their values and worldviews.” (p. 118)
The US is seeking to regain credibility in the world. Many people hoped that Obama would help in this cause, but the wounds from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, combined with other polices, run deep.
How do you create a culture of listening in the front-lines (soldiers, diplomats, business people) that can effectively be translated back into policy decisions? And the government does have the primary goal of serving its own citizens. So if the government is hearing messages that don’t align with those goals, they are not going to try to appease another population at the expense of its own population. And even if those policies would help its own population in the long-run, the perceptions of the home country are equally, or more, important to politicians. But, with this concern aside, what does a culture of listening look like?
Some of the ideas that make sense to me include creating an effective data gathering system for:
students who are abroad for studies
International students in the US
Peace Corps volunteers
Government workers in the State Dept and US AID
NGO workers who are abroad
Private citizens working/living overseas
The challenge is to figure out a way to gather all of this information in a useful way for policy makers. It seems to me like we don’t lack information or resources in terms of people who are overseas and have access to other publics. I think what is lacking is a way to organize all of the knowledge to help improve listening. The other problem in the US government and public sphere is that we forget so quickly. Most people don’t follow the daily decisions of their representatives. And I do agree that the way the media frames news does not help improve retention of information. (I also think it comes from our approach to education). The problem with forgetting is that then all the listening gets lost.
I come back to listening the media and public diplomacy. How can the media incorporate listening? Citizen journalism? Blogs, comments, discussions? Does this increase media credibility and help media outlets to create effective frames (that stick) for issues? Does this then mean that the public is better informed and able to make better choices? If the media can succeed in empowering citizens through better listening and dialogue, then maybe conflicts can be resolved without the devastation of war.
To win the hearts and minds, the U.S. has more to listen what other people say. Instead of talk to them, the U.S. needs to talk with people of other cultures.
ReplyDeleteThe U.S. diplomacy is based on spreading the American culture, to make people of other nations to know about American values and American way of life.
But, I think the U.S. has to know about the values, cultures and traditions of other nations instead of sending troops into foreign lands. Being the sole super power, with a strong network of radios, CNN, FOX and all the more Hollywood, the rest of the world knows something about the U.S. It is the U.S. that knows less about other people.
I think what the U.S. needs to do is reverse the direction of the public diplomacy by becoming good listeners and observers then talkers.
This lies at the heart of many public diplomacy failures and missteps, I believe. "Winning" by superimposing one culture over another (cultural diffusion and to th nth power, if you will) particularly onto a society whose roots have been entrenched for centuries, seriously underestimates their capabilities and determination to survive on their own terms. The trick, as in all matters of communication, also is to listen without just waiting to speak and then be empathetic.
ReplyDeleteSince this goes along with the November 8 conference on "Cultural Diplomacy as a Listening Project," I'd just like to add a few things from my notes.
ReplyDeleteAs you said, we can't expect the U.S. government necessarily change policy in response to the information it gathers by listening.
However, listening does raise expectations for action. And if we can't change policy, we at least need to revise the approach, incorporating the new information. Otherwise the gains of listening to foreign publics are lost when we turn around and ignore them.
Ben Connable, former head of the Marine Corps Cultural Intelligence Program, mentioned the problem of "polling fatigue" in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the public becomes weary of participating due to the lack of response. In Iraq, it was even reported that people were providing wrong answers on purpose.
This also points out the problem of obtaining accurate information from the right people.