Larry D. Lauer

The USC Center on Public Diplomacy at the Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism hosted a Summit on Global Leadership in Public Diplomacy at the US Institute of Peace in Washington this week.

In his welcoming remarks the Center’s director explained that the term “public diplomacy” was originally coined 50 years ago by US Diplomat Edmund Gullion to denote “coordinated governmental engagement with foreign publics,” but that over the years the concept became much “more expansive.”

My interest in the topic also began almost 50 years ago as a graduate student studying communication and international relations at American University. And I must say that over the years my teaching and writing embraced the more expansive concept of “people-to-people” communication. For me, government-to-people implied promoting the current administration’s foreign policy. But people-to-people implied a more mutual exchange of traditions, values and human aspirations. In short, for me the “idea of America” seemed best conveyed directly by its citizens. And so I also came to view international higher education as a highly effective form of public diplomacy.

At the Summit this week there were participants from universities, the state department, government contractors, NGO’s, and others. The speakers covered the full “expanse” of public diplomacy concepts and tools from traditional face-to-face exchanges, to uses of social media, to video projects, to MOOC’s, to establishing cultural centers abroad, and more. Common themes ranged from cultivating the ability to have civilized conversations with people with whom you do not agree, to listening first and then accepting a goal of reaching win-win agreements.

One panelist said that “credibility in communication is established by WHO is sending the message.” I certainly agree. And so everything I heard affirmed my contention that international higher education is indeed a pure form public diplomacy. It promises to produce global leaders, enhance cross-cultural understanding, and gradually focus more research on international problem-solving.

The Pope’s appearance before Congress and Obama’s presentation to the United Nations were both historic moments. They were impressive performances and could be seen as interesting topic agendas for international higher education initiatives.

The Pope addressed most of the pressing issues the planet faces these days, from reversing global warming to breaking the cycle of poverty. He made his concerns about the consequences of capitalist greed very clear, argued that everyone deserves equal opportunities, and reminded the entire world about the universal appeal of the “golden rule.”

But two other points also stood out to me: If you listened carefully he also called for an end to polarization, pointing out how destructive it is for the common good. In addition, he pointed out that US universities have an enormous research capacity to help solve the world’s most serious problems.

On a different but compatible note, Obama’s speech to the United Nations was a clearly articulated case for preferring diplomacy over military action whenever possible. Following the speech, however, a pundit quipped that this was vintage “professor” Obama, missing a perfect opportunity to talk more practically.

My reaction, however, was that all practical solutions begin with “big ideas” and diplomacy and public diplomacy are the perfect “big ideas.” And furthermore, a global higher education industry will help lay the groundwork for effective diplomacy, while itself functioning as a powerful form of public diplomacy.

In the final analysis, both the Pope and the President were challenging the US and the rest of the world to put greed aside and educate everyone everyday for the common good. A global higher education industry will certainly help bring that about.   Continue Reading »

Each week in the summer The Chautauqua Institution in upstate New York offers top quality programming on a different major topic. This week the focus is on the turmoil in Europe. Lectures, breakout sessions, arts performances, and more, provide a perfect setting for discussion and reflection.

James Walters, chaplain at the London School of Economics, kicked off the week by asserting that Europe is suffering from a fundamental identity crisis. While the common currency seems to be holding disparate countries together, he also sees major religious and secular differences as troubling complications. He described modern Europe as a collection of constantly growing multi-faith and immigrant communities. Therefore, there are both interfaith and cross-cultural problems.

Longtime New York Times foreign affairs columnist Roger Cohen continued by pointing out that after the cold war, East and West Germany united, the Soviet Union collapsed, NATO was formed, and soon 12 European counties became 28! Europe ended up with a common currency, but with little else in common.

William and Mary professor Stephen Hanson described two fundamental and opposing narratives between Russia and the West. The West contends that the recent democratic revolution in Ukraine makes a solid case for an alliance with Europe. Putin, however,  contends that the ousted Ukrainian president was also democratically elected and many Ukrainians still want to remain aligned with Russia. This reality, plus complicated disputes with other border countries, make the situation almost impossible to resolve.

David Marsh, Managing Director of the Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum in the UK, added that he thinks Europe is farther away from a political European union than in the last 100 years. He contends we are all suffering from a vacuum in world leadership.

Akbar Ahmed, chair of Islamic Studies in the School of International Service at American University, discussed the issues facing third generation immigrants in Europe. Their families came for a better life but now their children and grandchildren are facing unemployment and discrimination. For many, ISIS represents adventure and hope.

When questioned about the widespread impact of extremism Ahmed added that when he took his students to cities in the Islamic world people would always ask them why Americans didn’t like Muslims. They had no experience with Americans so they believed what they were told by extreme groups. But a groundwork for better understanding was begun just by talking with his students. Ahmed’s conclusion was that only knowledge can bring people together to solve problems.

My experience has also been that by bringing people together we build foundations for eventual problem-solving. And when we add international leadership development to the equation we take significant steps toward finding workable solutions. Indeed, this is how international higher education becomes pure public diplomacy.