The Foreign Service Journal, March 2013

74 MARCH 2013 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL endeavors that the Pentagon refers to as “strategic communication,” civilian gov- ernment agencies often call “public affairs and public diplomacy,” businesses see as advertising, and political advisers view as campaigning. He uses numerous real-world examples to illustrate his points. His basic argument is that the overriding goal of any informa- tion campaign is not only to inform, but also to influence the people who matter. This is the case for authoritarian regimes and dictators seeking to keep their populations in line, as well as for democracies, militaries, foreign officials and elected politicians. He goes on to argue that whatever the message, the facts and the story need to be accurate. They must be judged as credible by the intended recipients because the long-term verac- ity of the messenger is crucial to gaining and maintaining popular support. Toward that end, the messenger must choose the most effective medium for delivery of the message, whether for good or ill. Witness, as Farwell tragically documents, the efficacy of hate radio campaigns during the 1994 Rwandan genocide—and, I would add, similar propaganda conducted in the former Yugoslavia during the same decade and earlier. In “Change that Would Matter,” Far- well’s penultimate chapter, he includes lists of recommendations for the U.S. military and State Department as these behemoth bureaucracies navigate the shoals of divided government and reduced resources. Since one of those lists is mine—you may credit or blame me for its contents—I will note that I stand by all of my suggestions. (In the interest of full disclo- sure, let me add that you will see my name in several other chap- ters, as well, because I was involved in the book’s initial editing.) Fundamentally, I argue in that list of initiatives that U.S. public diplomacy—indeed U.S. foreign policy as a whole—needs to begin at home with “the last three feet.” In my view, the State Department has been derelict in its treatment of public diplomacy specialists abroad, thereby squandering much potential influence. Moreover, it has yet to grasp the need to garner support for its activi- ties and policies through educating and communicating better with publics right here in the United States. Let me close by adding one more recommendation to Farwell’s. There needs to be greater concerted support by the State Department, Congress and the rest of the American political leadership, as well as members of the international business community, for the long-planned Museum of Diplo- macy than there has been up to now. Washington, D.C., overflows with eas- ily accessible and impressive memorials to America’s war dead. There’s even a Spy Museum that commemorates the Central Intelligence Agency, while the Newseum trumpets the feats of the commercial media. An attractive, welcoming and publicly accessible Museum of Diplo- macy in the nation’s capital should be part of that mix, as well. n Patricia H. Kushlis was an FSO with the U.S. Information Agency from 1970 to 1998. A longer version of this review appeared on Whirled View, the world politics, public diplomacy and national security blog she co- writes with former FSO Patricia Lee Sharpe (http://whirledview.typepad.com/). Farwell’s basic argument is that the overriding goal of any information campaign is not only to inform, but also to influence the people who matter. You Are Our Eyes & Ears! Dear Readers: In order to produce a high-quality product, the FSJ depends on the revenue it earns from advertising. You can help with this. Please let us know the names of companies that have provided good service to you — a hotel, insurance company, auto dealership, or other concern. A referral from our readers is the best entrée! Ed Miltenberger Advertising & Circulation Manager Tel: (202) 944-5507 E-mail: miltenberger@afsa.org