I couldn't help but notice the contrast between two global news stories about Africa from the past couple of weeks. A quick review, as I'm headed to Colorado to build soft power with my in-laws.
On the one hand, French President Jacques Chirac hosted a two-day summit for African leaders in Cannes. Discussions ranged from international trade and the world image of Africa to the fight against AIDS and the crisis in Sudan.
What did the United States do? Well, it announced the "Department of Defense Unified Combatant Command for Africa."
More after the jump
Now, to be clear, this new USAFRICOM is good news in a lot of ways. With security issues in Africa now an official Pentagon (and U.S. taxpayer) priority, perhaps American policymakers will be forced to keep closer watch on the goings on there. And as the White House press release discusses, more attention to the security of Africa hopefully will result in additional attention to the "development, health, education, democracy, and economic growth" of the continent. All of this, if managed properly, could turn the dial on American soft power there.
The fact, however, that this new foreign policy development - one with enormous soft power ramifications - came in the form of a military directive from the commander in chief speaks volumes about the nature of power in the United States. Working toward development, better health and education - these are soft power tactics. Yet it's the U.S. military, once again, that is taking the lead. U.S. policymakers are again leaving it up to the military to practice public diplomacy and, in turn, to affect U.S. soft power.
Is this good or bad? I for one am not so sure. I do know, however, that if the DoD expects to succeed as a public diplomacy arm of the United States, ongoing conversations about the overall mission of the U.S. armed forces must not only continue, but intensify.
Comments (1)
This is a terrific example. I hope we continue talking about this issue: using the military to exercise soft power.
My gut reaction is split in two. On the one hand, this feels like a result of childish U.S. domestic politics. Basically, we use the military to do our public diplomacy because it is important and costs resources, and American politicians and voters cannot stomach the thought of extending and funding any branch of the government that is not military. So outreach and public diplomacy programs sneak into the military infrastructure where they have a chance to fly, and we fund them because we figure that since generals and military people are tough and don't like bullshit, the money won't be wasted.
On the other hand, I can see an argument that the military is far better run than our other foreign policy departments. Our reading on the RMA vs. the RIA vs. the RDA or whatever shows that the military can adapt and respond. So, in the absence of any other strong department to take the lead on this, the military is our best bet.
But in either case, we should not kid ourselves about the reality of this move. Just because the military is our best option for doing something doesn't mean it is a good option. The ramifications of adding public diplomacy to the military's portfolio will come to bear on our overall effectiveness in the international arena. To be blunt, combat and relationship building are simply not the same thing. The ability to do one effects the other, but they are still done very differently. A military that is burdened with building trust, good will and aiding social organization in the areas where it fights will soon face contradiction. Do I shoot first or ask questions first? We should not put our brave men and women in this kind of a bind.
Just as we train combat specialists, we should train public diplomacy specialists. The fact that we feel the military is more accountable and efficient than other departments is not an excuse for making a bad decision. Instead of outsourcing the problem of how to do effective PD to the military, our leaders should figure it out and build the institution that we need.
Posted by Drew | February 16, 2007 6:42 PM
Posted on February 16, 2007 18:42