FOREIGN POLICY: SEN. LUGAR URGES THE U.S. TO SEEK TO WIN HEARTS AND MINDS AGAIN WITH PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
In an Op-Ed for Foreign Policy Magazine, Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana analyzed the deterioration of the opinion of people around the world for the United States and Americans.
Reaching out to the man or woman on the streets of Jakarta or Caracas or Cairo is the practice of public diplomacy, and the United States does it in a number of ways, from the Peace Corps to the Voice of America to the Fulbright program. But the United States doesn’t have a worldwide equivalent to what Britain and France have, namely, facilities in major world cities with libraries, reading rooms, outreach programs, unfiltered Internet access, film series, lectures, and English classes that enable people to meet with Americans of all walks of life and hold two-way conversations on issues of mutual interest.
Global public opinion towards the U.S. is alarmingly low and while we complain about this, our allies as well as our enemies us public diplomacy such as cultural centers to boost opinion of themselves around the world. Lugar urges the United States to push their best and brightest to be more involved in public diplomacy.
Question to the Blogosphere: How can public diplomacy help boost world opinion of the United States? How is the Obama administration different from the Bush administration in this regard? What would you consider an American cultural center abroad? Is cultural imperialism, for example the globalization of McDonald’s, American pop music, and American films, a form of public diplomacy? What can the average American do to try to increase contact and understanding between themselves and foreigners?
EXPRESS NIGHT OUT: THE KENNEDY CENTER CELEBRATES ARAB ART
For the past few weeks, the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC has held concerts featuring Arab performers and their cultural inheritance. For three weeks, there has been and will be concerts at the Kennedy Center featured in a program called Arabesque: Arts of the Arab World.
“I think it will show people who come that there is a common human ground. That Arabs are people who have a culture — who produce art, who dance and sing, who write fiction and do photography.”–Ahdaf Soueif, the Egyptian writer and scholar describing the effects of the event on those who see it.
Arabesque, which is in full swing on the Kennedy Center’s stages and in its halls through March 15, is the largest celebration of said culture our shores have ever seen. Eight-hundred artists representing 22 nations — including Soueif and Lebanese singer and oud player Marcel Khalife, one of the region’s most renowned musicians — have descended upon Washington.
Here is a sample of a performance by Ahdaf Soueif.
Here is a sample of a performance by Marcel Khalife.
BLOOMBERG: CLINTON, OBAMA DISPATCH ENVOYS TO DAMASCUS FOR TALKS
For the first time in four years, two top US officials will go to Damascus to for talks with the Syrian government. Acting Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Feltman and White House adviser Dan Shapiro will go to Damascus from meetings with Clinton in Israel.
“There are a number of issues that we have between Syria and the United States as well as the larger regional concerns that Syria poses.”–Hillary Clinton
Engagement with Syria still depends on its compliance with core demands of the United States, including helping to stabilize Iraq, ending support for terrorist groups, stopping the flow of weapons to Hezbollah militants in Lebanon, and acknowledging Lebanon’s sovereignty and independence.
Question to the Blogosphere: Is the time right for re-engagement with Syria? Are the core demands of the Obama administration too many to ensure that negotiations will in fact happen with Syria? Do you think track one diplomacy is most useful here, or should track two diplomacy occur, away from much of the glare of the media? Why is Syria trying to reestablish relations with the United States and Israel? Is the reason we are willing to engage Syria now because of their gestures to Israel or is it something inherently different about the new Obama administration?
USIP: MAPPING PEACE BETWEEN SYRIA AND ISRAEL
Frederic C. Hof has just produced a new document commissioned by the United States Institute of Peace’s Center for Mediation and Conflict Resolutionthat lays out a roadmap for how to resolve the tense issues separating Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights plateau and small tracts in the Jordan River Valley. Hof argues that the Jordan Valley-Golan Heights Environmental Preserve, which attracted attention during earlier peace talks could help to protect sensitive and stressed water resources in the valley and on the heights and could facilitate easy access by civilians. This preserve would provide a good platform for practical bilateral cooperation. and could serve as a constructive, confidence building start to the implementation phase of the agreements reached between Israel and Syria.
“Hof reminds us at this critical juncture that Syrian requirements for a peace settlement can be squared with Israeli needs. This can have ramifications for the overall peace process in the Middle East.” —Daniel Kurtzer of “Negotiating Arab-Israeli Peace.”
Here is a summary of the report.
Question to the Blogosphere: Do you think that successful implementation of agreements between Israel and Syria could increase the possibility for peace in other parts of the Middle East? Did these negotiations attack the core issues dividing Israel and Syria? Do you think the Preserve idea could serve as an issue through which Israelis and Syrians could build lasting relationships? How much cooperation is needed on environmental issues? How is the relationship between Syria and Israel different from Israel’s relationships with her other neighbors? Can environmental preserves and mutual concerns like water supply help resolve conflicts or even prevent them? What are some other examples of mutual concerns resolving or preventing conflict?
NEWSWEEK: MOSCOW MAKES NICE…FOR NOW
In this week’s issue of Newsweek, Owen Matthews discusses the changing relations between the United States and Russia. Vice President Biden suggests that we “hit the reset button” in our relations with Moscow because we need their support in our negotiations with Iran. There are mutual interests among Russia and the US concerning Iran; namely that it is in both their interests to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
However Matthews argues that this cooperation between Moscow and Washington will be a monumental change. Economic interests and Russia’s protectiveness over the control of their foreign policy could limit cooperation. Russia’s continued relations with Iran give it a special role in the world. One that could help or harm future negotiation efforts.
Question to the Blogosphere: Is Moscow really a trustworthy partner in negotiations with Iran? How much do we need Russia in these negotiations and could our renewed sense of goodwill towards the Kremlin hurt US relations with other countries in the region, namely Ukraine and Georgia? Are Russian economic interests (taking advantage of the Iranian demand market for natural gas from Gazprom) diametrically opposed to its foreign policy interests (renewed relations with the US, preventing Iran from going nuclear)?
