Category: Bruce Gregory’s Resource List

Andrew Chadwick. Internet Politics: States, Citizens, and New Communication Technologies, (Oxford University Press, 2006). Chadwick, a Senior Lecturer in Political Science at the University of London, takes a fresh and in-depth look at ways in which the Internet is changing relations between citizens and states, and thereby is causing “fundamental shifts in patterns of governance.” Contains a thorough look at the origins and nature of the Internet, the Internet’s role in political deliberation, the development of online political communities, and speculation on the future of Internet politics and institutions.

David von Drehle. “A Lesson in Hate: How an Egyptian Student Came to Study in 1950s American and Left Determined to Wage Holy War,” Smithsonian Magazine, February 2006, pp. 96-101. Washington Post reporter von Drehle describes Sayyid Qutb’s experiences as a young man while briefly in Washington, DC and as a graduate student at the Colorado State College of Education. Qutb returned to Egypt to become active in the Muslim Brotherhood, “to refine a violent political theology from the raw anti-modernism of his American interlude,” to long prison stays, and to become a significant influence on the thinking of Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and other Muslim radicals.

“Forum: Mobilizing the Media,” Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, Winter/Spring 2006, pp. 3-50. The editors of Georgetown’s quarterly journal explore the role of the media in mobilizing activists, as a channel for government messages, and as space for public discourse in international politics. Includes an introduction (pp. 3-8) by John Walcott, Knight Ridder’s Washington Bureau Chief and adjunct professor at Georgetown, and the following articles:

— Yong-Chan Kim and Kyun-Soo Kim, “Online Storytellers: Blogging in South Korea,” pp. 9-16.

— Adel Iskandar, “Egypt’s Media Deficit,” pp. 17-23.

— Roger Atwood, “Media Crackdown: Chavez and Censorship,” pp. 25-32.

— Claude Salhani, “Media in Conflict: Inciting Violence in Kosovo,” pp. 33-39.

— Mia Malan, “Exposing AIDS: Media’s Impact in South Africa,” pp. 41-49.

Brief summaries online.

International Crisis Group. In Their Own Words: Reading the Iraqi Insurgency, February 15, 2005. The ICG’s report analyzes the textual discourse of Iraq’s insurgents and concludes that the US “fights an enemy it hardly knows.” The ICG finds there are fewer groups, less divided between nationalists and foreign jihadis than assumed. They are focused on responding to US actions and maximizing acceptance by Sunni Arabs, and have rising confidence in defeating the occupation. Counterinsurgency approaches that emphasize reducing the insurgents’ perceived legitimacy rather than military defeat are more likely to succeed.

Tony Judt. Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945, (The Penguin Press, 2005). New York University’s professor of European studies provides a sweeping account (831 pages) of changes in Europe during the last half century from social, cultural, political, economic, and military perspectives. Judt pays close attention to the history of ideas. Public diplomacy specialists will find of particular interest his brief overview (Chapter 7, “Culture Wars”) of the struggle over ideas during the 1940s and 1950s, the views of U.S. and European intellectuals, the Congress for Cultural Freedom, and USIA’s early cultural diplomacy.
(Courtesy of Dick Virden)

Thomas N. Hale and Anne-Marie Slaughter. “Transparency: Possibilities and Limitations,” The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Winter 2006, pp. 153-163. Hale, a Princeton graduate, and Slaughter, Dean of Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, explore ways in which market pressures, personal and institutional values, and dialogue with civil society can take transparency mechanisms beyond monitoring to accountability.

Harmony and Disharmony: Exploiting al-Qa’ida’s Organizational Vulnerabilities, Combating Terrorism Center, United States Military Academy, February 14, 2006. This study by faculty and research fellows at West Point’s Combating Terrorism Center examines al-Qa’ida’s documents, scholarship on organization theory, and case studies in developing views on al-Qa’ida’s vulnerabilities and elements of successful counterterrorism strategies. The authors stress the importance of scholarship and content analysis in understanding terrorist networks. Includes a case study on Syria and texts of al-Qa’ida documents in English and Arabic.

International Network for Social Network Analysis (INSNA) website. INSNA is a professional association for researchers interested in social network analysis — the interdisciplinary study of patterns and networks in human interaction. The association publishes online bulletins and scholarly articles, hosts conferences, and through its website serves as a clearinghouse for scholars and practitioners interested in the field. Social network analysis and computer software programs designed to analyze structural data hold promise for public diplomacy scholars and for practitioners interested in influence structure analyses in embassies and foreign ministries.
(Courtesy of Jarol Manheim and Al May)More information is online.

Alexander Nikolaev and Ernest A. Hakanen, eds. Leading to the 2003 Iraq War: The Global Media Debate, (Palgrave Macmillan, 2006). The editors have assembled 15 essays not previously published by leading media scholars from around the world on the media’s role in reporting and shaping views on the decision to go to war in Iraq. Chapters analyze media coverage in the US, UK, Australia, Europe, Middle East, Eurasia, Africa, and Latin America.
Includes essays by

– William Dorman. (California State University, Sacramento), “A Debate Delayed is a Debate Denied,” (Chapter 1).

– W. Lucas Robinson (Adger University College, Norway) and Steven Livingston (George Washington University), “Strange Bedfellows: The Emergence of the Al Qaeda-Baathist News Frame Prior to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq,” (Chapter 2),

– M.G. Piety (Drexel University) and Brian J. Foley (Florida Coastal School of Law), “Their Morals are Ours: The American Media on the Doctrine of ‘Preemptive War,'” (Chapter 4).
(Courtesy of Steve Livingston)

Amartya Sen. “Chili and Liberty: The Uses and Abuses of Multiculturalism,” The New Republic, February 27, 2006, pp. 25-30. Should human beings be categorized in terms of inherited traditions, particularly the inherited religion of the community in which they were born? Should that unchosen identity be privileged over other affiliations — politics, class, gender, profession, language, etc.? Should perceptions of identity reflect multiple associations based on an individual’s reasoned choice? Should the fairness of multiculturalism be judged on the extent to which people with different identities are “left alone” or on ways civil society supports their reasoned choices? Nobel laureate Sen, author of The Argumentative Indian (2005), addresses these and other “foundational questions” in this TNR essay and in his forthcoming book, Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (W.W. Norton, spring 2006).

Transnational Broadcasting Studies. Electronic Journal No. 15, 2005. TBS’s latest online edition contains several articles of interest. The following articles and others can be found on the journal’s web link below.

— Marc Lynch, “Reality TV is Not Enough: The Politics of Arab Reality TV.”

— Lindsay Wise, “Whose Reality is Real? Ethical Reality TV Trend Offers ‘Culturally Authentic’ Alternative to Western Formats”

— Nicholas J. Cull, “‘The Perfect War’: US Public Diplomacy and International Broadcasting During Desert Shield and Desert Storm, 1900/1991.”

— William A. Rugh, “Anti-Americanism on Arab Television: Some Outsider Observations.”

U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. International Visitor Leadership Program Outcome Assessment, February 2006. Evaluation based on 827 in-person interviews of program alumni conducted November 2004 to March 2005 in Georgia, Kazakhstan, Russia and Ukraine conducted by ORC Macro.

– One Page Summary

– Executive Summary

U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. Visiting Fulbright Student Program Outcome Assessment, February, 2006. Evaluation survey of 1,609 Fulbright student alumni conducted by SRI International from June to October 2004.

– One Page Summary

– Executive Summary

Gabriel Weimann. Terror on the Internet: The New Arena, The New Challenges, (U.S. Institute of Peace Press, 2006). Weimann, a professor of communication at Haifa University and former USIP fellow, has written a comprehensive analysis of terrorist uses of the Internet based on eight years of monitoring and archiving terrorist websites. Weimann discusses their common characteristics, the psychology of terrorism, communicative and instrumental uses of the Internet for terrorism, and what he views to be an exaggerated fear of cyberterrorism. He concludes by looking at responses and missed opportunities in counterterrorism, the challenge of balancing security and civil liberties, and an inability thus far to grasp the full potential of the Internet for nonviolent conflict management and virtual diplomacy.

Weimann’s book develops themes in his 2004 USIP fellowship study, How Modern Terrorism Uses the Internet, USIP Special Report 116, pp. 1-12, available online.

Molly Worthen. The Man on Whom Nothing Was Lost: The Grand Strategy of Charles Hill, (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2005). In this unusual, well written biography, a recent Yale graduate chronicles Charles Hill’s life as a diplomat and his second career as a professor at Yale. Teachers and students of public diplomacy will find of interest her account of Hill’s career as a foreign service officer; his role as an advisor to Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, and others; his transition to the world of teaching; and his development (with John Lewis Gaddis and Paul Kennedy) of Yale’s renowned “Grand Strategy” course.

Bill Berkeley, “Bloggers vs. Mullahs: How the Internet Roils Iran,” World Policy Journal, XXIII, Spring 2006, 71-78. Columbia University’s Bill Berkeley reviews We Are Iran: The Persian Blogs by Iranian journalist Nasrin Alavi (Soft Skull Press, 2005) and offers his own analysis of the Iranian blogosphere. Both writers discuss evidence of ways (Alavi through extensive blog excerpts) in which the Internet provides public space for political, cultural, and personal expression, especially among Iran’s educated younger generation.

John Brown, “Three Schools of Thought on Culture and Foreign Policy During the Cold War,” Place Branding: A Quarterly Review of Branding, Marketing and Public Diplomacy for National, Regional and Civic Development, Issue 4 (November 2005). Brown’s essay on recent books about the role of culture in international relations during the Cold War is now available in the journal Place Branding. His three schools: (1) U.S. cultural programs effectively contributed to opening repressive societies; (2) narratives that reflect leftist suspicion of U.S. power: and (3) a category in between that acknowledges doubts and raises concerns. Brown is a retired U.S. diplomat and compiler of USC Annenberg’s Public Diplomacy Press Review.
Steven R. Corman and Jill S. Schiefelbein, Communication and Media in the Jihadi War of Ideas, Consortium for Strategic Communication, Arizona State University, April 20, 2006. The authors of this paper look at goals and means in communication strategies used by groups promoting jihad. Relying on open source documents, many of which have been released by the United States Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center, the paper looks at a variety of strategies with particular emphasis on jihadist use of the Internet. Includes recommendations based on the analysis. (Courtesy of Tom Bayoumi)
Thomas Carothers, Responding to the Democracy Promotion Backlash, Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, June 8, 2006. The director of the Carnegie Endowment’s Democracy and Rule of Law Project analyzes difficulties in U.S. government and NGO democracy assistance programs prompted by U.S. policies (the Iraq war as the leading edge of U.S. democratization); the “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan; strengthened non-democratic regimes due to high oil and gas prices; and other factors. Carothers offers recommendations to NGOs (strategy adjustments) and the U.S. Government (policy adjustments including not confusing regime change with democracy promotion, changes in prisoner detention and interrogation policies, not taking sides in foreign elections, reducing the double standard in differentiating between countries helpful and not helpful to U.S. interests, and increased partnership with European governments and international organizations).
Philip Evans, Perspectives: From Reciprocity to Reputation, The Boston Consulting Group, April 6, 2006. In this brief essay in a series on networks and transaction costs, a senior vice president for the Boston Consulting Group looks at how technology is “driving the substitution of one form of trust for another: reputation for reciprocity.” Evans contends that cheap, multiple, and redundant information channels can create trust relationships based not on thin, mutually dependent reciprocal signals, but on reputations that emerge from network “trust technologies.” For example, in a blogosphere where millions “vote” with hyperlink clicks, top bloggers gain “authority” in their content domain through navigation services that analyze citations and traffic patterns.
Josef Joffe, Uberpower: The Imperial Temptation of America, (W.W. Norton & Company, 2006). Die Zeit’s editor and longtime observer of U.S. foreign policy examines the gap between American power and legitimacy and complexities in the world’s anti-Americanism and non-military forms of “balancing.” Joffe cautions both sides: the U.S. must “match self-interest with obligation,” power with responsibility; the world should reevaluate the roots and consequences of its anti-Americanism. Useful for its detailed analysis of forms of hard and soft power, deficiencies in American grand strategy, varieties of anti-Americanism, and the range of balancing options available to opponents of American power.
Andrew Kohut and Bruce Stokes, America Against the World: How We Are Different, Why We are Disliked, (Henry Holt and Company, 2006). Based extensively on survey data collected by the Pew Global Attitudes Project (and others), the authors examine how American attitudes and values differ from other publics – and how those differences are manifest in attitudes toward the United States. One stop shopping for those interested in what surveys show about anti-Americanism and views of global publics on democracy, globalization, unilateralism, business, religion, social attitudes, use of military force, the role of government, and the role of individuals in society.
Mark Leonard, Andrew Small, and Martin Rose, British Public Diplomacy in the Age of Schisms, Foreign Policy Centre and Counterpoint, 2005. In this collaborative project, two UK think tanks call for reexamination of the way Britain is perceived in the world consequent to its role in the Iraq war. The paper looks broadly at six political, religious, and economic “cultural divides” and calls for “a new public diplomacy” focused on mapping these schisms and bridging them through long-term efforts focused on mutuality and trust rather than message delivery. The Foreign Policy Centre was launched by PM Tony Blair. Counterpoint is the British Council’s think tank on “Cultural Relations and Public Diplomacy.”
Douglas McGray, “Lost in America,” Foreign Policy, May/June 2006, pp. 40-48. McGray, a fellow at the New America Foundation, looks at challenges of globalization and deficiencies in the study of global languages, politics, culture, and history in U.S. schools. Includes a brief discussion of the U.S. government’s National Security Language Initiative and efforts in America’s business and education communities to foster foreign language study. A sidebar by journalist Michael Erard discusses ways China is making it easier for foreigners to learn Mandarin.
Jan Melissen, ed., The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations, (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave, Macmillan, 2005). Melissen, Director of the Clingendael Diplomatic Studies Programme at the Netherlands Institute of International Relations, has edited a strong collection of essays supporting the proposition that public diplomacy is “more than a technical instrument of foreign policy: it has become part of the changing fabric of international relations.” Teachers and other public diplomacy enthusiasts will find the nearly $80 (US) worth the investment. Essays include:
— Jan Melissen, “The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice”
— Brian Hocking (Loughborough University), “Rethinking the ‘New’ Public Diplomacy”
— Peter van Ham (Netherlands Institute of International Relations), “Power, Public Diplomacy, and the Pax Americana”
— Alan K. Henrikson (Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy), “Niche Diplomacy in the World Public Arena: the Global ‘Corners’ of Canada and Norway”
— Ingrid d’Hooghe (Netherlands Institute of International Relations), “Public Diplomacy in the People’s Republic of China”
— Paul Sharp (University of Minnesota), “Revolutionary States, Outlaw Regimes and the Techniques of Public Diplomacy”
— Anna Michalski (Netherlands Institute of International Relations), “The EU as a Soft Power: the Force of Persuasion”
— Cynthia Schneider (Georgetown University), “Culture Communicates: US Diplomacy That Works” — Wally Olins (Saffron Brand Consultants), “Making a National Brand”
— Shaun Riordan (ZEIA SL) “Dialogue-based Public Diplomacy: a New Foreign Policy Paradigm”
— John Hemery (Centre for Political and Diplomatic Studies) “Training for Public Diplomacy: an Evolutionary Perspective”
Hugh Miles, “Al Jazeera,” Foreign Policy, July/August, 2006, pp. 20-24. In FP’s “Think Again” feature, the author of Al Jazeera: The Inside Story of the Arab News Channel that is Challenging the West (2005), takes a measured look at attitudes toward Al Jazeera in the U.S. and the Arab world. Miles examines conventional arguments: AJ supports terrorism (“False”), AJ is anti-Semitic (“Wrong”), AJ is spreading political freedom (“Wishful Thinking”), AJ is biased (“True”), AJ is censored (“Not Yet”), AJ wants to compete with CNN and BBC (“Yes, and it plans to”), only Arabs will watch AJ International (“Not so Fast”).
The Pew Global Attitudes Project, America’s Image Slips, But Allies Share U.S. Concerns Over Iran, Hamas, June 13, 2006. The Pew Research Center’s latest annual survey finds “America’s global image has again slipped and support for the war on terrorism has declined even among close allies like Japan.” Favorable opinions of the U.S. have fallen in most of the 15 countries surveyed, despite some positive feelings in 2005 due in part to US aid for tsunami victims. The U.S. and major allies share concerns over Iran and Hamas in contrast to opinions in predominantly Muslim countries.
Steven Poole, Unspeak : How Words Become Weapons, How Weapons Become a Message, and How That Message Becomes Reality, (New York: Grove Press, 2006). Poole, an author and writer for The Guardian, discusses the uses of language and the construction of meaning through political speech. Drawing on numerous anecdotes, Poole looks at language choices by politicians, governments, interest groups, and the media. Contains extensive references to the Bush administration’s word choices in connection with terrorism, freedom and democracy, and the war in Iraq – plus two pages on public diplomacy as a euphemism for propaganda.

Daniel Shulman, “Mind Games,” Columbia Journalism Review, May/June 2006, pp. 39-49. CJR’s associate editor examines theory and practice in the U.S. military’s information operations after the attacks of 9/11. Issues discussed include: concepts and blurred lines between public affairs and psychological operations, the rise and demise of the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Influence, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld’s Information Operations Roadmap and transformation of military information operations, concerns by journalists and retired military officers about the military’s information policies, and a recent call for a review of those policies by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Julia E. Sweig, Friendly Fire: Losing Friends and Making Enemies in the Anti-American Century, (Public Affairs, 2006). Sweig, a senior fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, analyzes roots of anti-Americanism during the Cold War and the domestic politics and identities of countries in Europe, Asia, and Latin America that have moved away from traditions of close relations with the United States. Her book concludes with suggestions for change that include government funded public diplomacy programs if they complement changes in policy, manners, and respect for international institutions.
U.S. Government Accountability Office, U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Efforts to Engage Muslim Audiences Lack Certain Communication Elements and Face Significant Challenges, GAO-06-535, Washington, DC, May 2006. GAO’s 60-page examination of State’s public diplomacy finds increases in overseas operations budgets and some promise in State’s announced transformational diplomacy initiative. GAO develops at length, however, its findings that State and overseas missions lack “important strategic communication elements found in the private sector” which GAO and others have recommended. Includes discussion of challenges created by the need to balance security with outreach, staff shortages, insufficient language capabilities, and the need for more systematic sharing of best practices in public diplomacy.
U.S. Government Accountability Office, U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Efforts Lack Certain Communication Elements and Face Significant Challenges, Testimony before the House Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Science, the Departments of State, Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies, Washington, DC, May 3, 2006. A shorter statement of findings in the May 2006 report on State Department Efforts to Engage Muslim Audiences. Includes additional comments drawing on GAO’s reports in 2003 and 2005 that the U.S. lacks an interagency communication strategy to guide government-wide public diplomacy activities. Both documents provide information on public diplomacy activities of USAID, the Defense Department, and other agencies.

U.S. Department of State, Jazz Ambassadors Program Evaluation, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, May 15, 2005. Conducted by AMS Planning and Research Corp. and Philliber Research Associates, the evaluation assesses the program’s “effectiveness in fostering mutual understanding, serving as a mechanism of public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy, targeting and reaching key audiences, extending awareness of American cultural heritage, and offering unique opportunities for musical education and training.” The evaluation is described as “the first of a major Cultural Exchange program at the U.S. Department of State.” For a copy of the report, call (202) 453-8808 or email pdevaluations@state.gov.
Wilton Park Conference, Public Diplomacy: Key Challenges and Priorities, Report of a conference co-sponsored by the UK’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Foreign Affairs Canada, and the US Embassy in London, WPS06/21, March 10-12. In this 12-page conference summary, Dr. Ann Lane, summarizes the main points discussed by participants: definitions of public diplomacy, partnerships within and outside government, public diplomacy and “the war on terror,” two way public diplomacy, branding, measurement and evaluation, bridging public diplomacy and policy, the blogosphere, and harnessing non-governmental actors. (Courtesy of Barry Zorthian)

Kofi A. Anan. “The U.N. Isn’t a Threat to the Net,” The Washington Post, November 5, 2005. In an opinion column, the United Nations Secretary General argues the UN does not want to “‘take over,’ police or otherwise control the Internet,” but the U.S. should share Internet responsibilities with the world community. The 2005 World Summit on the Information Society in Tunisia is intended to ensure the Internet’s global reach and bridge the digital divide.

Zeyno Baran, “Fighting the War of Ideas,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2005, pp. 68-78. The Nixon Center’s Baran contends that nonviolent but radical Islamist groups, such as Sunni Islam’s Hizb ut-Tahrir, combine “fascist rhetoric, Leninist strategy, and Western sloganeering with Wahhabi theology” to prime recruits for more extreme organizations such as al Qaeda. Baran argues the ideological struggle must be engaged in two ways: through strategies and policies that challenge these groups and deprive them of opportunities to discredit the US and its ideals, and through suppression of these organizations “without sacrificing too many civil liberties.”

Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon. The Next Attack: The Failure of the War on Terror and the Strategy for Getting it Right, (Henry Holt & Company, 2005). Former NSC staffers Benjamin and Simon, authors of The Age of Sacred Terror (2002), argue that U.S. actions in Iraq and failure to understand the ideology that motivates jihadist attacks since 9/11 have confirmed militant narratives and undermined U.S. strategy. They propose an alternative strategy based on reduced militarization, sustained reforms in the Muslim world that go beyond rhetoric, and priorities for homeland security. Contains a brief critique of the Bush Administration’s approach to public diplomacy (pp. 218-221).

The Centre for International Governance Innovation. Worlds Apart? Exploring the Interface between Governance and Diplomacy, November 16, 2005. Canadian based CIGI is sponsoring three conferences — Canberra, Australia (March 2006), Wilton Park, UK (June 2006), and Waterloo, Canada (September 2006) — focused on examining linkages between global governance and diplomacy and on how the structures and processes of diplomacy are being redefined. Deliverables include papers, a published volume, and on-line dialogue during the project. Project partners are Brian Hocking, Innovation in Diplomacy Project, Loughborough University and Bill Maley, Director of Asia-Pacific College of Diplomacy, Australia National University.

Michael A. Cohen and Maria Figueroa Kupcu. “Privatizing Foreign Policy,” World Policy Journal, Fall 2005, pp. 34-52. Cohen and Kupcu, co-directors of the Privatization of Foreign Policy Project at the World Policy Institute, assess the growing influence of non-state actors (NSAs) in promoting democracy, humanitarian relief, disease prevention, environmental issues, economic liberalization, nation-building, counter-terrorism, and fighting wars. The authors contend that in the past NSAs operated largely within a state-centric system. Today, many still collaborate with states, but increasingly NSAs challenge state sovereignty and operate by rules that run counter to government interests. States “continue to lag in adjusting to the new NSA reality.”

Charlotte F. Cole, et al. “The Educational Impact of Rechov Sumsum/Shara’a Simsim: A Sesame Street Television Series to Promote Respect and Understanding Among Children Living in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza,” International Journal of Behavioral Development, 2003, 27 (5), pp. 409-422. A pre-and post-test study sponsored by Sesame Workshop and academic teams in the U.S., the West Bank, and Israel. The study’s results demonstrate the effectiveness of the Sesame Street television series in countering negative stereotypes and developing positive attitudes in describing others.

Timothy E. Cook. Governing the News: The News Media as a Political Institution, second edition, (University of Chicago Press, 2005. Louisiana State University professor of mass communication and political science Cook updates his study of the news media as political actors and integral elements in governance and policymaking. Includes his assessment of narrowcasting trends in mass media, web-based media, and increased alienation of publics from the press.

Daryl Copeland. “New Rabbits, Old Hats: International Policy and Canada’s Foreign Service in an Era of Diminished Resources,” International Journal, Summer, 2005. Veteran Canadian diplomat Copeland looks at how diplomacy must adapt “structures, doctrines, and techniques” to more powerful transnational forces and non-state actors. Writing about what he calls “new diplomacy,” Copeland examines partnerships with allies and stakeholders, mainstreaming public diplomacy, new diplomatic skill sets, the impact of downsizing, and other issues.

Kenneth Neil Cukier. “Who Will Control the Internet? Washington Battles the World,” Foreign Affairs, November/December 2005, pp. 7-13. Cukier, a writer for The Economist on technology issues, discusses contrasting views in the debate on whether Internet coordination should continue to be managed by a U.S. nonprofit (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN) or administered under a multi-lateral treaty. Examines central arguments in relevant policy, political, regulatory and technology issues sparked by a Department of Commerce announcement that the U.S. “plans to maintain control of the Internet indefinitely.”

Commentary (60th Anniversary Issue), “Defending and Advancing Freedom: A Symposium,” November 2005. Commentary’s editors invited 36 thinkers to write brief essays evaluating the Bush Administration’s policies on preemption and promoting democracy. Students and teachers of public diplomacy will find essays by Paul Berman, Francis Fukyama, Reuel Marc Gerecht, Stanley Hoffmann, Josef Joffe, and Joshua Muravchik of particular interest. All are available online.

Faisal Devji. Landscapes of the Jihad: Militancy, Morality, Modernity. Cornell University Press, 2005. Devji looks at al Qaeda’s violence in the context of global mobility, the media, and ethical discourse. In examining “new patterns of belief and practice” in modern jihad, Devji distinguishes his analysis from those who focus on Islam’s nature and history (Bernard Lewis) and on the political and geostrategic (Olivier Roy, John Esposito, Gilles Kepel). His chapter on “Media and Martyrdom” and analysis of the writings of Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri are especially useful. Devji was born in Tanzania, educated at the University of Chicago, and is a professor of history at New School University.

David Fabrycky. “U.S. Public Diplomacy and Religion in the Muslim World,” The Review of Faith & International Affairs, Fall 2005, pp. 25-30. Fabrycky, a Thomas R. Pickering Graduate Foreign Affairs Fellow and M.A. student at George Washington University, argues that expert reports on public diplomacy and government programs lack adequate strategic thinking and planning on engaging religion in the Muslim world. The article examines benefits and risks in doing so, and offers practical suggestions for U.S. public diplomacy in dealing with religious societies.

John Hope Franklin. Mirror to America, (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2005). Historian John Hope Franklin’s autobiography portrays his life as a scholar, civil rights activist, and public intellectual. Includes a number of passages on his work as a delegate to UNESCO and activities as a member of the Board of Foreign Scholarships and the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy.

Stephen Holmes. “The War of the Liberals.” The Nation, November 14, 2005. In this assessment of the thinking of Paul Berman, Holmes challenges Berman’s arguments in his recent book, Power and the Idealists, (2005), and earlier study Terror and Liberalism (2003). Holmes concludes that liberals who supported the use force in Rwanda, Bosnia, and Kosovo now find they have “lost their moral bearings” in their support for intervention in Iraq, and they fail to understand “the political instrumentalization of humanitarianism.”

Jytte Klausen. The Islamic Challenge: Politics and Religion in Western Europe, (Oxford University Press, 2005). Klausen, a professor of comparative politics at Brandeis University, writes to give voice to European Muslim leaders in six countries — “who these people are and what they want.” Based on 300 interviews, her book is not an opinion survey, but a “political anthropology” intended to understand a range of views, find areas of overlapping concern, and identify preferred solutions. European governments have been reluctant to formulate policies for the integration of Muslim minorities, she argues, and “Muslims interpret this neglect as yet another form of discrimination.” Most European Muslims, she concludes, are looking for ways to build institutions that will allow them “to practice religion in a way that is compatible with social integration.”

Moises Naim. Illicit: How Smugglers, Traffickers, and Copycats are Hijacking the Global Economy, (Doubleday, 2005). The editor of Foreign Policy looks beyond terrorism at another dark side of globalization. Naim explores a variety of transnational criminal enterprises and their impact on political order. Contains useful sections on traffickers, government responses, network transformation, sovereignty, technologies, communication, and international relations theories. Well written. Excellent bibliography.

Lawrence Pintak. Reflections in a Bloodshot Lens: America, Islam, and the War of Ideas, (University of Michigan Press, forthcoming in January 2006). Veteran CBS correspondent Pintak examines the U.S. media’s coverage of Islam and how Arab and Muslim media portray the United States. His well documented account looks at distortions and misrepresentations in media framing, trends in the global media environments, and implications for U.S. public diplomacy. Pintak is a Visiting Professor at the University of Michigan.

Philip Seib. “Hegemonic No More: Western Media, the Rise of Al-Jazeera, and the Influence of Diverse Voices,” International Studies Review, Vol. 7, Issue 4, December 2005, pp. 601-615. Marquette University communications professor Seib states that the Iraq war marks the end of “the near monopoly in global news that American and other Western media have long enjoyed.” Al-Jazeera and other news sources with contrasting perspectives characterize a more diverse global news environment that reduces “the influence of U.S. news organizations, which have been relatively supportive of U.S. policy during recent conflicts.”

Andrew Sullivan. “The Abolition of Torture,” The New Republic, December 19, 2005, pp. 19-23. Sullivan’s TNR cover article (challenging Charles Krauthammer) argues that “the logic of torture is the logic of totalitarianism,” that torture is “antithetical to the most basic principles for which the United States stands,” and that it is a “pragmatic disaster” in winning support for America’s freedom and democracy agenda. Sullivan frames his case in moral, political, historical, and public diplomacy terms.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence. The National Intelligence Strategy of the United States of America: Transformation Through Integration and Innovation, October 2005. Objectives of the national intelligence strategy issued by Amb. John Negroponte emphasize using the intelligence community’s “collectors, analysts, and operators” to forge “relationships with new and incipient democracies that can help them strengthen the rule of law” and to give policymakers “an enhanced analytical framework for identifying both the threats to and opportunities for promoting democracy.”

Robert Westbrook. Democratic Hope: Pragmatism and the Politics of Truth, (Cornell University Press, 2005). University of Rochester history professor and Dewey biographer (John Dewey and American Democracy, 1991) Westbrook looks at today’s pragmatists and their debt to Dewey’s call for a participatory democratic culture. Useful for public diplomacy researchers interested in discourse norms, communicative action theory, democracy-building, Richard Rorty’s (Achieving our Country, 1998), and Michael Walzer’s “connected criticism.”

The Wilson Quarterly. “Correspondence — American Pictorial,” Autumn 2005, pp. 4-7. Letters from Richard Arndt (The First Resort of Kings, 2005) and Yale Richmond (Cultural Exchange and the Cold War, 2002) respond to Martha Bayles’ article on cultural diplomacy (“Goodwill Hunting,” WQ, Summer, 2005). Joseph Nye (Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics, 2004) takes issue with Frederick Kagen (“Power and Persuasion,” WQ, Summer, 2005). Mohamed Zayani (Editor, The Al Jazeera Phenomenon, 2005) comments on Marc Lynch’s article on satellite broadcasting in the Middle East (“Watching Al Jazeera,” WQ, Summer, 2005).

James Zogby. 2005 Arab Attitudes Toward US: Good News and Bad News, November 7, 2005. Zogby’s six nation survey finds Arab attitudes toward the United States in Morocco, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, and Jordan “have somewhat improved in the past year.” “Having plummeted to a dangerous low point in mid-2004, favorable ratings of the US are now back to their still low, but better, 2002 level.” “The clear and sizable lesson emerging from this 2005 AAI/ZI Arab survey is that attitudes toward the US, though better, remain troubled and shaped by US policies that negatively impact the region. The promotion of democracy and reform, while appealing to some small groups, continue to be trumped by the war in Iraq and the more general perceptions of America’s poor treatment of Arabs and Muslims.”

International Communication & Conflict, American Political Science Association Pre-conference, August 31, 2005. Presentations will focus on issues relating to media and security, public diplomacy, war, and propaganda. The Pre-conference is co-sponsored by APSA’s Political Communication Division, George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs, and Georgetown University’s Graduate Program in Communication, Culture and Technology. Co-chairs are Scott Althaus (UIUC), Steven Livingston (GWU), and Diana Owen (GU). There is no fee, and APSA membership is not required. The program will consist of panels in the morning at Georgetown University and panels in the afternoon at George Washington University. Register online.

Martha Bayles. “Goodwill Hunting,” Wilson Quarterly, Summer 2005, pp. 46-56. Boston College writer and teacher Bayles deplores the decline of U.S. cultural diplomacy (identified as “a dimension of public diplomacy”), provides a brief history of cultural diplomacy’s early 20th century philanthropic antecedents and government funded activities from World War I to the Cold War, discusses ambiguities in American pop culture’s impact abroad, and suggests new components for U.S. government sponsored cultural diplomacy focused on engaging Arabs and Muslims. (Courtesy of Mary Ann Gamble)

Samuel R. Berger and Brent Scowcroft. In the Wake of War: Improving U.S. Post-Conflict Capabilities, Report of an Independent Task Force Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations, July 2005. The Council’s study, directed by William Nash, asserts that nation-building is a national security priority equivalent to war fighting. Key recommendations: policy formulation by the National Security Advisor, a new National Security Policy Directive, State Department leadership in all civilian stabilization and reconstruction efforts, USAID leadership in day-to-day execution of programs on the ground, and creation of a standing multilateral reconstruction trust fund managed by the G-8 industrialized nations.

Steve Coll and Susan B. Glasser. “Terrorists Turn to the Web as Base of Operations,” Washington Post, August 7, 2005. In the first of a three part series, Coll and Glasser examine al Qaeda’s innovative use of the Internet for training, ideological, recruitment, operational, and other purposes.

Craig Whitlock. “Briton Used Internet as His Bully Pulpit,” Washington Post, August 8, 2005. Whitlock reports on how Babar Ahmad, a British citizen and computer savvy mechanical engineer of Pakistani descent now jailed in a British prison, uses his website, to spread ideas and fight extradition to the United States.

Susan B. Glasser and Steve Coll. “The Web as Weapon,” The Washington Post, August 9, 2005. Glasser and Coll conclude the Post’s series with reporting on Abu Musab Zarqawi’s integration of electronic jihad on the Internet with real-time war on the ground in Iraq.

David S. Jackson, Kenneth Tomlinson, Richard Richter, Philomena Jury. “His Master’s Voice,” Foreign Affairs, July/August. Letters from three current U.S. government broadcasting executives and former VOA broadcaster Jury respond to former VOA Director Sanford Ungar’s critique of U.S. broadcasting (“Pitch Imperfect,” Foreign Affairs, May/June, 2005, pp. 7-13). Ungar replies. Full text of letters online.

Stephen Johnson, Helle C. Dale, and Patrick Cronin. Strengthening U.S. Public Diplomacy Requires Organization, Coordination, and Strategy, The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder No. 1875, August 5, 2005. The authors suggest the U.S. needs more than a new Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy. Recommendations include giving additional resources and authority to the Under Secretary, streamlined management of U.S. international broadcasting, integration and coordination within the National Security Council, an independent foreign polling center, creation of a public diplomacy doctrine and global strategy, and abolishing “domestic access limits” on public diplomacy products.

Joshua Kurlantzick. “Cultural Revolution: How China is Changing Global Diplomacy,” The New Republic, June 27, 2005, pp. 16-21. TNR’s foreign editor looks at China’s projection of soft power in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. As China’s influence has grown, U.S. leverage is handicapped by a reduced diplomatic presence, restrictions on student visas, prisoner abuse scandals at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, and perceptions of America’s “obsession” with terrorism. Kurlantzick offers as an example “a small ‘American corner’ where Thais could read English language books about the United States.” What happened to the former American consulate in southern Thailand? It’s now the Chinese consulate.

Robert S. Leiken. “Europe’s Angry Muslims,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2005, pp. 120-135. Leiken (Nixon Center and Brookings Institution) profiles growing jihadism among western European nationals, examines implications for liberalism and counter-terrorism, and discusses methods to achieve more vigilant border security without ending the Visa Waiver Program.

Clark A. Murdock and Michele A. Flournoy. Beyond Goldwater-Nichols: U.S. Government and Defense Reform for a New Strategic Era – Phase 2 Report, Center for Strategic and International Studies, July 2005. A CSIS national security study team addresses ways to create a more integrated and effective national security structure. Key recommendations: recast the National Security Council’s role to greater “involvement in ensuring that Presidential intent is realized through USG action,” codify a standard approach to interagency planning, establish a Quadrennial National Security Review analogous to the Quadrennial Defense Review, put operational capabilities in U.S. agencies other than Defense, and modernize professional military education.

Edward R. Murrow Center for the Study and Advancement of Public Diplomacy. The Murrow Center, located at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, has created a website. Established in 1965 and active until the early 1990s, the Center is a memorial to Murrow’s career as a journalist and director of the U.S. Information Agency. The Center houses Murrow’s library and papers and awards Murrow Fellowships to mid-career professionals who engage in research at Fletcher on topics “ranging from the impact of the ‘new world information order’ debate in the international media during the 1970’s and 1980’s to, currently, telecommunications policies and regulation.” (Courtesy of Josh Fouts)

NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. Online Terrorism, August 2, 2005. Jeffrey Brown discusses the Internet as a tool for terrorists and focus of intelligence agencies with Rebecca Givner-Forbes of the Terrorism Research Center and Michael Vatis former director of the Justice Department’s National Infrastructure Protection Center.

Pew Global Attitudes Project. U.S. Image Up Slightly, But Still Negative American Character Gets Mixed Reviews, June 23, 2005. The Project’s latest findings: “Anti-Americanism in Europe, the Middle East and Asia, which surged as a result of the U.S. war in Iraq, shows modest signs of abating. But the United States remains broadly disliked in most countries surveyed, and the opinion of the American people is not as positive as it once was . . . President George W. Bush’s calls for greater democracy in the Middle East and U.S. aid for tsunami victims in Asia have been well-received in many countries, but only in Indonesia, India and Russia has there been significant improvement in overall opinions of the U.S.”

Janet Steele, Wars Within: The Story of an Independent Magazine in Soeharto’s Indonesia, Equinox Publishing, 2005. This book examines the 23-year history of Indonesia’s most important news weekly, Tempo magazine, its influence on Indonesian intellectual and cultural life, and its internal dynamics as a news organization prior to its being banned in 1994. Professor Steel is on the faculty of George Washington University’s School of Media and Public Affairs, a Fulbright Scholar, and a frequent visitor to Jakarta.

“Indonesian Media and the Freedom of Expression,” Thursday, September 8, 2:00 – 6:30 p.m, a conference hosted at GWU’s Jack Morton Auditorium by the The United States-Indonesia Society in cooperation with the School of Media and Public Affairs and Asia Society Washington Center. Wars Within book launch and reception to follow.

U.S. Institute of Peace, Arab Media: Tools of the Governments; Tools for the People? Virtual Diplomacy Initiative, Released online, August 2005. USIP’s new Virtual Diplomacy publication analyzes the role of Arab media in shaping the information environment that encourages popular hostility toward the West, particularly the United States. The study is based on a six-month workshop series co-chaired by USIP Senior Fellow Mamoun Fandy and Sheryl Brown, Director of the Virtual Diplomacy Initiative. The series examined the primary media sources of information, perceptions, and opinions among Arab populations.

U.S. Institute of Peace, U.S.-Pakistan Engagement: The War on Terrorism and Beyond, Special Report 145, August 2005. This new USIP report, written by Touquir Hussain, looks broadly at the history and current state of U.S.-Pakistan relations in the context of America’s evolving strategic relationship with South Asia, democracy in the Muslim world, and the dual problems of religious extremism and nuclear proliferation. The author is a USIP senior fellow and former Pakistani ambassador to Japan, Spain, and Brazil.

Jonathan Zittrain and John G. Palfrey, Jr. Internet Filtering in China in 2004-2005: A Country Study. Investigators sponsored by the OpenNet Initiative conclude “China operates the most extensive, technologically sophisticated, and broad-reaching system of Internet filtering in the world.” The study examines multiple levels of legal regulation and technical control including Web pages, Web logs, on-line discussion forums, university bulletin board systems, and e-mail messages. It is part of a larger collaborative project of the University of Toronto, Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, and the University of Cambridge.

Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman. Empirical Analysis of Internet Filtering in China, Berkman Center for Internet & Society, Harvard Law School. The authors provide data on the “methods, scope, and depth of selective barriers to Internet access through Chinese networks.” Blocked are a wide range of sites from WashingtonPost.com to George Washington University’s web site to the State Web Site of Mississippi. A number of U.S. government sites are blocked including DefenseLink and Voice of America. The State Department‘s public diplomacy is not listed.

Danielle S. Allen. Talking to Strangers: Anxieties of Citizenship Since Brown v. Board of Education, University of Chicago Press, 2004. University of Chicago humanities professor Allen’s examination of Brown and political values is useful to public diplomacy scholars and practitioners for her inquiry into the meaning of trust and distrust, friendship, mutuality, reciprocity, sacrifice, and solidarity. Allen offers a critique of Habermas’ account of deliberative discourse and a strong interpretation of Aristotle’s Art of Rhetoric in the context of listening, persuasion, and generating trust. (Courtesy of Eric Gregory)

Simon Anholt and Jeremy Hildreth. Brand America: The Mother of All Brands, Cyan Books, 2004. The authors define brand as image, reputation, or “the good name of something that’s on offer to the public.” They trace the concept of America as a brand from colonial times to the present, discuss the impact of today’s anti-Americanism, and offer recommendations (many drawn from recent reports on public diplomacy) for rejuvenating an American “brand in trouble.”

Anne Applebaum. “In Search of Pro Americanism,” Foreign Policy, July/August, 2005, pp. 32-40. Washington Post columnist Applebaum finds “not everyone has chosen to get on the anti-American bandwagon.” She suggests adding new stereotypes — the “Indian stockbroker, the South Korean investment banker, and the Philippine manufacturer” and their equivalents in other countries — to the Arab radical and the French farmer. “They may not be a majority . . . but neither are they insignificant.” Applebaum concludes “their numbers can rise or fall, depending on US policies.” “Their opinions will change according to how often the U.S. Secretary of State visits their cities, and according to how their media report on American affairs.” Includes a sidebar piece by Steven Kull, “It’s Lonely at the Top.”

Check Foreign Policy’s website for future posting.

Ralph Begleiter. “Of Battlegrounds and Blogs: U.S. Media and the World,” The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Winter/Spring, 2005, pp. 213-222. University of Delaware journalist-in-residence and former CNN world affairs correspondent Begleiter responds to questions on global news, his law suit seeking access to images of caskets of U.S. soldiers returned from Iraq, how U.S. media and American soft power influence foreign media and attitudes toward the U.S., and the impact of web-based news.

Craig Charney and Nicole Yakatan. A New Beginning: Strategies for a More Fruitful Dialogue with the Muslim World, Council on Foreign Relations, CSR No. 7, May 2005. Drawing on focus group research in Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia, Charney and Yakatan conclude that “the right efforts to communicate” can produce significant shifts in negative Muslim attitudes toward America characterized by anger, ambiguity, and ambivalence. The authors urge more listening, “a humbler tone,” emphasis on bilateral aid and partnership, toleration for disagreement on policy issues, and significant resources over time.

Cold War Broadcasting Impact, Report on a conference sponsored by the Hoover Institution and the Cold War International History Project, Stanford University, October 13-16, 2004. Includes rapporteur Gregory Mitrovich’s summary of seven panel discussions and a subsequent analysis prepared by A. Ross Johnson and R. Eugene Parta, “Cold War International Broadcasting: Lessons Learned.” Panelists included experts from Western and former Communist countries. Useful especially for insights drawn from recently available materials from East European, Baltic, and Russian archives and sections on “lessons learned.” (Courtesy of Barry Fulton)

John F. Harris. The Survivor: Bill Clinton in the White House, Random House, 2005. Washington Post reporter John Harris’ account of the Clinton years treads lightly on foreign policy and very lightly on public diplomacy. Media, image, and communication issues are discussed in paragraphs on the exit from Somalia and on Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, terrorism, Iraq, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, White House spokesman Mike McCurry, and the President’s trips to Africa (a full chapter), East Asia, and South Asia.

Christopher Henzel. “The Origins of al Qaeda’s Ideology: Implications for US Strategy,” Parameters, Spring 2005, pp. 69-80. Henzel, a foreign service officer and 2004 National War College graduate, argues the United States, Arab regimes, and traditional Sunni clerics share an interest in avoiding instability and revolution. American strategy should understand and exploit the divide between mainstream Sunnis and revolutionary Salafists.

Lawrence J. Korb and Robert O. Boorstin. Integrated Power: A National Security Strategy for the 21st Century, Center for American Progress, June 2005. Korb, Boorstin and the Center’s national security team call for a strategy that links and goes beyond “hard” and “soft” power concepts, leverages alliances and unifying forces of globalization, integrates public diplomacy into all components of national security, and integrates defense, homeland security, diplomatic, energy, and development assistance policies. The Center’s four public diplomacy recommendations (p. 19) include: support for new schools and textbooks as alternatives to extremist madrassas, a reexamination of US visa policies, increased funding for exchanges with Muslim majority countries, and partnerships with private media to develop programs about American life and culture.