Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘International’ Category

ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and more than 50 other extremist organizations have mastered the digital media world. Many have a simple message: “Do you have feelings of hopelessness? Are you looking for meaning in your life. If so, come fight with us. If you can’t get here grab whatever weapons you can and fight wherever you are!” They repeat that message over and over again in every way possible. And they utilize all internet and social media platforms with impressive professional sophistication.

The challenge now for nations around the world is to rise above the clutter of daily news, identify a simple counter-message of freedom, use all of these new media platforms with ongoing persistence, and repeat that simple message over and over again until it rises above the media clutter.

Simply put, the world is in a war of ideas. Intimidation and fear have already won some skirmishes. But make no mistake, constant fear mongering cannot win over a well orchestrated war. Such an ultimately hurtful message simply won’t survive a professionally designed, super-sophisticated, and relentlessly consistent internet and social media blitz with a promise of liberation.

However, establishing credibility for this promise will be absolutely essential. And it must be established at the outset, and remain anchored in reality.

It therefore seems to me that the best way to do this would be for assimilation plans to be developed for current immigrant residents in major cities around the world. Their mayors and city managers could meet to address these “planning issues” as practical problems, rather than as political or religious issues. And because of the magnitude of our current crisis, national leaders could be urged to support the outcomes of these meetings as a way to side-step dealing with party politics and never-ending national identity debates.

Extraordinary times require bold new initiatives. Relying on cities for international problem-solving admittedly is bold.  But what other choices do we have?  The next world war is one of ideas, and has already begun. Its battleground is the Internet. The weapons are new and social media platforms and tactics. And our cities are the most threatened. The West needs to mobilize quickly… and plan for a very long fight.

Read Full Post »

I am British, But, is a film my honors students viewed at the British Film Institute (BFI) during a trip to London last spring.  The film depicts how many second and third generation immigrants are struggling with their personal identities.

Pakistani, Indian, Moroccan, and other immigrants in the film sound totally British but clearly look like natives of their family’s original country. And they often end up living  together in poor neighborhoods in London with little opportunities for jobs, and strong feelings of  hopelessness. And today’s social media and radical websites are very effective in attracting many of these disenfranchised young people to exciting revolutionary ideologies. Promises of hope and a new sense of purpose are quite compelling to those with little or no future.

The situation in Paris is even more explosive. The terrorist assassinations this week are a serious wake-up call for all freedom-loving people around the world. There are extremely poor neighborhoods on the fringes of Paris with many immigrants who by birth are French citizens but live in hopeless poverty with no future opportunities. It is not surprising that many will act out their negative feelings. Many will also buy into any radical ideologies that offer meaning, and will accept violence as the means for advancing them.

There might not be a short-term solution to this pervasive international problem. And a long-term solution will require those with means to help facilitate cultural assimilation, make many more jobs available, and establish a climate of progress and hope. In short, Cities will need assimilation plans, and leaders capable of generating excitement about implementing them.

Similar situations to London and Paris exist in the US. But historically the US is one of the best assimilation success stories we have in the world. Therefore, it is more important now than ever to make sure that current immigration issues do not threaten the nation’s historical melting-pot identity.

In the short-term, the challenge for all nations will be to prepare for additional attacks, defeat radical extremism wherever it exists, and deal as quickly as possible with their immigration issues thoughtfully and compassionately.

The challenge for communicators will be to carve out several simple messages: Explanations of how immigrant disillusion develops. Short-term advice about providing for personal safety. And more US melting-pot assimilation stories that can provide models to emulate.

Read Full Post »

The hacking of Sony Corporation’s emails and their release to the public raises a number of critical issues related to the news media’s responsibility when it comes to reporting messages intended to be private. This is a complicated situation, but a very important one to analyze in this 24/7, highly competitive, often unedited, news media world.

Question #1. Do any of these emails have legitimate news value? For example, do some reveal improper relations with elected officials or criminal behavior?

Question #2. Do many of these emails only have “good headline” value because of the celebrities involved, or the sensational private comments of Sony insiders?

Question #3. Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe asked this critical question: “Does publishing most of these emails only result in the media doing the hackers’ bidding for them?”

Question #4. And when one or more media outlets decide to release these emails (and many will), will that mean all others will feel obligated to follow?

What makes this an even broader issue is the reality that making sensational statements of any kind these days can generate widespread headline coverage, and such headlines can multiply over and over. How often does this only amount to “doing the bidding” of the headline seeker?

This is not just a freedom-of-speech issue. It is also one of good judgment. No one questions the right to make these statements. But are they important news stories or merely audience  grabbing headlines?”

Now Sony has decided to delay or cancel the release of this movie. Was making the movie to begin with ever a wise idea? Have the hackers actually won the day?

Make no mistake. Sony’s rights are unquestioned. The news media’s rights are unquestioned. But what about their good judgment?

Should not the more principled news oriented journalists have taken more initiative to differentiate real news from what is merely good headline producing copy? Or if they cannot always make that distinction, should they at least ask the question more frequently?

In this irresponsible, lie infested, information cluttered, digital media world, should not the distinction between our “rights” and our “responsibility for exercising good judgment” become a matter for widespread public discussion? And should not the most responsible and principled journalists take the initiative to facilitate that discussion?

Read Full Post »

“In the century ahead, U.S. strategic interests will align more closely with India than they will with those of any other continental power in Asia.”  That is the first line of a very perceptive essay by former Undersecretary of State, Nicholas Burns, in the September-October issue of Foreign Affairs.

There was a widespread burst of enthusiasm in the U.S. when newly elected Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, signaled that he wanted to build a more ambitious partnership with the United States. And now there are reports that Russia’s Putin is making his own overtures to India about the possibility of building a pipeline and engaging in nuclear projects.

Anticipating this may be why Nicholas Burns urged the White House to respond quickly following Modi’s election. He pointed to already ongoing military ties and cooperative projects on space, science, technology and education as examples on which to build.

But Burns also acknowledged some stumbling blocks that need to be quickly overcome. These include specific trade disagreements, complications involving Pakistan, and discouraging taxes on new investors. Even educators have been encountering some surprising stumbling blocks.

For example, I traveled to India as a part of a delegation of university presidents and state legislators. We were welcomed by university administrators with open arms. There was little doubt they were interested in forming partnerships. Before we knew it we were being asked to sign letters of intent. Their primary interest was faculty exchanges. But it soon became obvious that these exchanges very likely would be lopsided. They could upgrade their teaching with US faculty. In most cases, however, their faculty would contribute little to US institutions. And there were financial barriers to establishing more comprehensive win-win institutional partnerships.

But if those barriers could be addressed I saw incredible long-term opportunities. I was there primarily as a speaker to deliver an address about why international higher education should be seen as a pure form of public diplomacy… people-to-people relationship building. I affirmed the value of strong institutional partnerships, and talked at length about the potential of those partnerships to solve the most pressing international problems… from water, energy, hunger, poverty, global warming and public health, to rebuilding institutions torn apart by revolutions.

If Mr. Modi’s interest in partnering with the U.S. is sincere and trade and education restrictions can be addressed, I believe a strong partnership between India and the United States has endless possibilities. And our shared commitment to democracies should clearly keep Mr. Putin’s self-serving nationalistic ambitions out of the game.   

Read Full Post »

Governments are changing their roles in higher education. Some are cutting back overall support, and others are investing selectively. Technology is dramatically changing how we teach, as well as how we explain our institutions to the world. And at the same time, globalization is turning academia into a truly global industry.

Now one of education’s most international associations, the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) is about to become even more global by announcing the appointment of Sue Cunningham, vice-principal for advancement at the University of Melbourne, as its new president.

Cunningham will follow one of the most successful presidents in CASE history, John Lippincott. For the last eleven years Lippincott built on the association’s US and European operations by adding major offices and initiatives in Asia and Latin America. And what’s more, he will also be leaving the association on a strong financial foundation…well positioned for industry leadership.

Cunningham brings a stunning background to CASE just at the right time. Beginning her career at St Andrews University, she then led advancement for Oxford University’s best known college, Christ Church, and eventually opened Oxford’s first China office. She has had a truly international career. With 17 years of global experience she is perfectly suited to lead CASE into a very challenging and exciting future.

I have described “advancement” to include all those managers, administrators and academics in colleges, universities and schools responsible for leading the advancement of institutions into a complicated future. This would include presidents, chancellors, head masters, provost’s, deans, student affairs professionals and more. And front and center with them will be the CASE member institutions and professionals in fund-raising, marketing, communication, alumni relations, and government affairs.

As the industry adjusts to dramatic changes in government support, technology, and economic forces, these dedicated professionals will be front and center solving the problems, seizing the opportunities, and leading the way. CASE is the place where everyone can come together to take advantage of education’s incredible potential.

For some time, I have been  imagining a future where institutions will gradually focus their research, teaching, and consulting expertise on solving the world’s problems, helping nations rebuild, and educating a generation of leaders with truly global perspectives and sensitivities.

The good news for CASE members is that those with experience and exceptional expertise in all areas of institutional advancement will have renewed and exciting career opportunities. And president-elect Sue Cunningham has the broad international experience necessary to integrate and mobilize this talent. CASE is now perfectly positioned  to play a leading role in helping to shape this global education industry that has so much international potential.

 

Read Full Post »

This week I attended a forum on national security at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). One of the sessions that impressed me most touched on the question of who is responsible for rebuilding societies torn apart by war and revolution?

It seems obvious to me that the decision to participate in war raises the basic question: “If you break it, do you own it?”  In the past, this question was rarely considered.  But it’s clear today that many uprooted nations desperately need rebuilding…physically, economically, culturally, and institutionally. But who should be responsible?

Should it be the responsibility of the damaged nation to rebuild itself? Or should it be the responsibility of the attacking country? Or can some kind of public-private partnership be formed to do the job? Or could an internationally funded NGO take on this enormous task?

This CSIS session got me thinking about the feasibility of creating a quasi-governmental organization to take on the task. Such an organization would combine legislature allocated funds with additional international and private funds to do the job. Globally engaged universities could also make significant contributions to the effort.

Regular readers of my blog are aware that I have been pointing out for a long time that the entire higher education industry is quickly becoming a global one. Over time more university talent and resources will inevitably get focused on helping solve many of the world’s problems. And this talent literally ranges all the way from public health to city management, and everything in between.

Further more, helping to launch such an initiative might be just the opportunity the US needs to rebuild much of its international credibility. If the US coordinated the planning, and the unique cultural and historical heritage of the devastated society would be preserved, all those charges over the years of American imperialism might finally begin to get put to rest.

Read Full Post »

How was the US midterm election viewed abroad?  If actions speak louder than words it’s clear that it will be difficult for the US to lead the way in the Middle East, or anywhere else.  How can countries have confidence in a nation where its Congress is polarized and gridlocked, where its president is attacked every day as ineffective by both parties, and where an election is characterized more by vicious attacks than by positive ideas.

Gridlock, polarization and a president under siege: Analysts often argue that only American leadership and power can rally the support of concerned countries to seriously address the most troubling international issues.

But for the last six years the world has seen daily attacks on the US president from a polarized, do-nothing congress. This situation hardly builds credibility. It’s no wonder allies hesitate to rally behind US initiatives. How can we expect other countries to have confidence in a mean-spirited and fragmented nation. It’s no wonder allies hesitate to commit troops to the current Iraq and Syria initiatives when it looks like the US does not have confidence in itself.

An election without platforms:  There is no doubt that thoughtful Americans find this dysfunction embarrassing. If so many people are dissatisfied you would think that an election would produce at least a few constructive ideas and practical plans. But the recent midterm election largely degenerated into battles where billions of dollars were spent solely to discredit the opposition.

Making a commitment to focus on creating jobs and supporting quality education was as positive as most races got. But there were few if any ideas about how to accomplish these things. And, of course, attacks on the president continued.

From a strategic communication vantage point every aspect of perceived dysfunction spells breakdown. If actions speak louder than words, then what we have here is a communication mess. Handling crises requires strong day-to-day leadership which is not under constant and relentless attack.

Political campaigns are legitimate times for alternative ideas. But focusing mostly on putting forth positive ideas and not viciously discrediting leaders would be the more responsible approach… especially during international crises.

Read Full Post »

In trying to sort out how the US can do a better job of international communication, I have been thinking once again about the potential power of public diplomacy.

In a recent speech to the South Texas World Affairs Council I concluded that daily statements from the White House about strategy (or the lack of it) in dealing with ISIS seem to accomplish very little, and often actually contribute to more confusion and misunderstanding. This is so, I asserted, because people at home and abroad tend to hear only what they want to hear, have different meanings for words such as democracy and freedom, and interpret every action as an effort of a liberal or conservative leaning  administration to impose its partisan views on everyone. Messages coming from a biased source will always lack credibility with many audiences, and therefore be immediately rejected.

As I developed this presentation I was reminded again of hearing Fareed Zakaria at the Chautauqua Institution last August argue that the thousand years of tribal warfare in the Middle East has created a situation where nothing that can be said or done now will make any short-term difference. And while I am now convinced that Fareed is right, I still see people all over the world wearing “made in America” jeans, listening to US music from country to jazz, loving Hollywood movies, and sipping Starbucks coffee. They still tend to love their “idea of America,” but only when they discover it on their own. It’s when we try to sell ourselves as “exceptional” that we are rejected as those “ugly Americans” behaving  arrogantly!

So I once again conclude that we have a long-term chance of being successful if we more aggressively “model” our “idea of America.” And this will be best accomplished by people-to-people communication and exchanges carried out by motive-credible non-governmental organizations such as Sister Cities, international NGO’s, relief organizations… and, yes, the most globally engaged colleges and universities.

The promotional flyer for my World Affairs Council speech stated: “Professor Lauer sees global higher education as the ultimate form of public diplomacy, with the potential not only to educate global leaders and accelerate world peace, but also to focus research and expertise on solving the world’s most serious problems and rebuilding nations torn apart by revolution.”

Yes indeed, I now think that more than ever!

Read Full Post »

“Meanings are in people” is a lesson learned early in Communication 101.

When we use a word like “conservative” we are only making a “noise” or sending a “sign.” The “meaning” that will be understood is already in the mind of the receiver. For some, the word may mean practical and thoughtful, and carries a very positive connotation. For others, it may mean something closer to self-serving or lack of social compassion, and may carry a really negative connotation.

The meaning of a term such as “dictator” these days seems to be determined by how each individual or social group is fairing under each one. For some the word may simply mean “tyrant.” For others, however, it may mean little more than a military-style leader. In fact, many individuals and businesses will prosper under some dictatorships, and they may think this is far better than the chaos that follows revolutions.

The demonstrations this week in Hong Kong also give us a glimpse of how the word “communism” can be understood differently by different groups of Chinese citizens. For some the word may simply mean a government administered society. And for others it may mean oppression of the masses. Today many young people see the current system as offering few opportunities. But a growing number of business people in cities such as Peking, Shanghai and Hong Kong seem to simply see a strong government that is enabling successful enterprise.

In this digital 24/7 news media world many words are losing commonly understood meanings. Politicians and pundits use words such as freedom, democracy, and justice to serve their own purposes.  As a consequence these words, as well as many others, now have various meanings.

Only when sender and receiver “experiences overlap” can common understanding be reached. Communication between nations and cultures especially requires patience, persistence and interactive  dialogue over time. This is the ultimate challenge of international relationship building, and vastly more people-to-people exchanges would be a major step toward meeting that challenge.

Read Full Post »

Newly elected Indian Prime Minister Modi has been taking the US by storm this week. He is coming off as sincere, competent and refreshing. He is making a positive impression on most everyone, from corporate CEOs to politicians to the many people from India now living in the US. His appearances often include the music and dance of the culture, all of which suggests that there is a whole new day unfolding for India. He makes the possibility of cooperation and attractive partnerships seem endless. He is demonstrating what one highly visible, articulate, and colorful person can do to establish a whole new “image” for an entire nation.

But is this initial impact sustainable? If it is, this week will have been an incredible testimony of the potential of charismatic leadership. But if it is not, the inevitable backlash will likely produce serious and widespread disappointments.

Last year I traveled to India. The group I was with had to travel more than an hour to move out of the most devastating poverty I have ever experienced. And even then the city streets and countryside were extremely difficult to navigate. Very quickly I also learned that India is a country of very independent states, each of which has its own seemingly endless bureaucratic barriers to overcome. I could not imagine how long it would take to understand all this, let alone to establish mutually rewarding partnerships. I was there to visit universities, and right up front their representatives made aggressive sales pitches to sign partnership intention agreements. Yet it soon became very clear that the benefits would be all theirs, and the cost to us very high.

My clear impression was that many partnerships in India are one-sided, and positive opportunities are very difficult to find. The proof will be if Modi’s central administration can actually deliver on his promises in a country that has been run by highly independent and entrenched state bureaucrats.

Businesses and countries built mostly on one charismatic leader’s personality often do not thrive. But when that leader is the colorful spokesperson for a group of highly talented managers ready and able to deliver on the promises, wonderful things can happen. For Modi, the verdict is still out. But if he pulls it off, he could be just what the great nation of India desperately needs.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »