Product Description

There is a broad consensus among informed observers both inside and outside the Beltway that American public diplomacy leaves much to be desired. Recent studies describe ineffectiveness, inadequate resources, and a general lack of direction. Further complicating this situation, there is no real consensus among critics on what must be done to fix current problems. Moreover, the ills afflicting public diplomacy are poorly understood. Losing Hearts and Minds? situates these problems within the complex environment of U.S. government bureaucracy, and relates them to other instruments of national power, particularly diplomatic activities and military force. This book prompts debate by analyzing obstacles to effective public diplomacy, and offers a comprehensive vision of this critical dimension of statecraft, which without improvements will ill serve the nation in its ongoing efforts to counter the global threat of terror.

After a systematic exploration of the concepts and terminology used to characterize public diplomacy and the wider domain of strategic influence, Carnes Lord examines the contemporary security environment and sketches an overall strategy that should guide the United States in projecting influence in the war on terror and in pursuing larger global interests. The author then looks at the cultural and institutional problems that have long handicapped the performance of the U.S. government in these areas. The book concludes with a detailed examination of the specific problems facing governmental agencies involved in public diplomacy and kindred disciplines, including the Departments of State and Defense, international broadcasters, and the White House.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #943780 in Books
• Published on: 2006-08-30
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 152 pages

Review
“Lord, a professor of military and naval strategy at the US Naval War College, assesses the definition and role of American public diplomacy, or "the overseas communications activities of government." The focus is on the governmental infighting that has recently marked the American use of public diplomacy, with the author suggesting ways to restructure the bureaucracy to increase the effectiveness of public diplomacy in the "war on terrorism". He specifically champions a revived United States Information Agency (USIA) and vigorous "ideological engagement" on various issues, including the Israeli-Palestinian dispute; democracy and market economics; media policy; education reform; and state building. Public diplomacy, the author claims, should always serve the national interests of the US....[t]he work adds to the growing body of literature on public diplomacy by presenting some of the structural and practical elements that impede effective communication. Recommended. Upper-division undergraduates through practitioners.”–Choice

“Drawing on his high-level public policy experience, he outlines what he considers to be an appropriate strategy to develop the organizational mechanisms within the U.S. government needed to carry out an effective public-diplomacy campaign to defeat the "center of gravity" of Islamic terrorism, which "lies not in its organizational structure but in its ideological inspiration the real source of the fresh recruits who continue to flock to the terrorist banner."...Mr. Lord's discussion of the role of public diplomacy and strategic influence as vital instruments of American national power is especially pertinent today as the administration and Congress goes about the business of confronting religious extremism and terrorism.”–The Washington Times

“Weighs in on the vital debate over public diplomacy, offering both analysis of and prescriptions for some of the most complex issues facing U.S. foreign policy today. Lord believes that public diplomacy is a matter of strategic importance and that bureaucratic disarray, intellectual confusion, and political squeamishness are preventing the United States from performing this task successfully.... Makes a strong case that a broad review of public diplomacy is urgently needed, and his holistic approach and unblinking focus on the relationship of public diplomacy to U.S. grand strategy will greatly benefit such a review. Much of what Lord says will be controversial, but a healthy dose of controversy may help stimulate the wide-ranging debate this important subject urgently needs.”–Foreign Affairs

“Carnes Lord's Losing Hearts and Minds is one of 2006's more salient and disturbing books....Lord, a professor of strategy at the Naval War College, understands that the War on Terror is an ideological struggle, pitting democracy against tyranny and terror. Carnes argues that the United States and the West have not successfully engaged the ideas inspiring Islamist-led terrorism. It is indeed a tough subject--the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group barely touched on the terror war's ideological dimensions. Carnes notes how the media and Hollywood frequently compromise American "soft power" (moral, political and information persuasion). His suggestions for improving the "selling" of democracy include a revived and revamped U.S. Information Agency.”–Lowell Sun (Massachusetts)

About the Author
CARNES LORD is Professor of Military and Naval Strategy in the Strategic Research Department at the Naval War College in Newport, RI. Dr. Lord is a distinguished scholar, educator, and former government official who served as the National Security Advisor to the Vice President and the Director of International Information and Communications Policy on the National Security Council Staff at the White House. His most recent book, The Modern Prince: What Leaders Need to Know Now, was acclaimed by The Wall Street Journal as "an instant classic."

Customer Reviews

Contributes to the debate of public diplomacy but doesn't stand on its own
Carnes Lord, a professor at the Navy War College, takes on the question of how to win the "hearts and minds" in, just as Foreign Affairs wrote in their review of the book, a controversial manner. A look at the table of contents, one finds he is taking a rather in-depth look, with chapter titles ranging from Strategic Influence and Soft Power, Public Diplomacy and Psychological-Political Warfare, Problems of Organization, and, Defense Department: Into the Act?. Lord sets out to look at bureaucratic obstacles, friction from domestic politics, and the impact of media.

From the start, I found myself in agreement with "controversial" label from Walter Russell Mead's review in Foreign Affairs, but I don't know if our independent assessment was for the same reason(s). I had trouble with Lord's definition, arguments and positions.

To start, I disagree with his confinement of public diplomacy to essentially be positive propaganda. Public diplomacy to Lord is not about tangible programs but radio, TV, and print. In effect, as he apparently sees it public diplomacy is primarily about media diplomacy.

The essential thrust of Lord's vision of public diplomacy that comes out is an emphasis on talking with virtually no listening. There is some tangential mention of bilateral communication (not in so many words), but overall all the "three broad missions" of public diplomacy, as he sees them -- information, political action, and education and culture -- emphasize talk (not withstanding his comment on the need to "educate the world about the nature of American conservatism"). At times, this rather narrow definition is at odds with Lord's own recommendations and comments throughout the book.

Lord does do well by bringing in the Defense Department into the discussion and informs the reader of contemporary applications of "strategic influence". But his emphasis on the future role of the Department of Defense in public diplomacy is not because of institutional barriers in the Department of State (the oft-cited reason elsewhere), but because "public diplomacy", in his narrow construction is best kept with traditional diplomacy, although he does suggest there might be a place for "defense public diplomacy".

Lord's discussion of three possible models of how to institutionalize the reconstituted USIA and other public diplomacy / strategic influence capabilities is interesting. From the "Czar" model to the "Counselor" and ultimately to his "US Trade Representative" model, his strength in understanding how bureaucracy works comes through.

The book was interesting and included some history to add context (although that too was sometimes incomplete), but there was a political undercurrent that undermined any objective goals of the book. I also found the book self-limiting in defining a narrow audience of public diplomacy and in over generalizing the enemy, both to the detriment of his argument.

There is a disconnect between this book and fundamental concepts of counterinsurgency, for example, what it takes or even what it means to win hearts and minds, and even the fundamental concepts of public diplomacy or strategic influence, throughout the examples and discussions in the book. If read in conjunction with literature on the subject or knowledge on public diplomacy, this book may serve as a useful counterpoint. But absent that, this book becomes a text on propaganda (in the non-pejorative sense) tools and simplified tactics of countering misinformation. One last note, I did enjoy Lord's comment that most public diplomats are liberals, like most American journalists. A sentiment that is reflected in his concerns over current public diplomacy.