THE MESSAGE IS AMERICA: WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2001 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:20 a.m. In Room 2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. It is by now obvious to most observers that the role of public diplomacy in our foreign policy has been too long neglected. The problem is more than a simple lack of attention. Even were it standard practice to accord public diplomacy a more prominent place in our foreign policy deliberations, few would assert that our existing programs have been effective in achieving even the modest goals set for them. I do not believe that piecemeal reforms are likely to produce major improvements. Nor do I believe that the problems we confront can be solved simply by spending more money on ineffective programs, although we must be open to the prospect of providing additional resources if needs are identified. Instead, we must reexamine our entire approach to the subject. The tasks are many, among the most important being how to make better use of the range of media available to us-such as radio, television, the Internet and other means of communication-to expand our potential audience. But greater access must be paired with compelling content, which poses an entirely different set of problems: how to better understand our target audiences and then tailor our programming to maximize its impact. Thus, reinventing public diplomacy is an undertaking that will call upon the talents of many. In addition to those in the responsible agencies who represent an enormous reservoir of expertise, we must draw upon the talents of those in the private sector who have acquired practical experience in the creation and promotion of compelling images and ideas here and around the world. Today's hearings are aimed at that objective but represent only an initial effort. However, even if we were entirely successful in our efforts to retool our public diplomacy programs, there is no guarantee that we would use this new instrument to any great purpose. It cannot be used effectively until it is part of a larger strategy. Which begs the question: What, in fact, is its purpose? To propagandize foreign populations? To depict a pleasing image of the United States? To provide entertainment to casual listeners or to broaden minds by encouraging debate? Well, to understand the role of public diplomacy we need to reexamine our broader approach to foreign policy. That is where the problem lies, for I believe half of our foreign policy is missing. As a global power, the United States bears many responsibilities in many areas of the world, ranging from helping to maintain order in a score of regions to safeguarding the functioning and integrity of the international economic system. These and other duties require constant interaction and cooperation with a broad array of governments around the world, from friendly allies to odious autocracies. So closely is the work of foreign policy identified with relations between governments that the two are commonly equated. But this view ignores an enormous segment of what should be our foreign policy and thereby overlooks powerful allies, for the United States is a singular nation, not just in terms of unequal power and global reach but because of its deep connections with the peoples of the world. Virtually unique among other countries, the United States possesses the capacity not only to deal with the governments of the world but directly with their peoples as well. Among the latter, our power and wealth may inspire admiration or envy, but it is the values and hope that we represent that is the basis for the most powerful connection. The implications of this are surprising. The United States has the unique capacity to pursue a foreign policy along two separate tracks—that is, with the governments of the world and with their people. And our relationship with these populations can be a powerful resource in our dealings with their ruling regimes. That is why I believe that the peoples of the world, especially those ruled by unelected regimes, comprise our true allies. We are allies because we share common aspirations-freedom, security, prosperity-and because we often face common enemies, namely the regimes that rule over them. We are allies because the advancement of the aims of one advances those of the other. This deep and powerful connection was demonstrated by the collapse of the Soviet Union. First Pope John Paul II and then President Ronald Reagan summoned our allies among the imprisoned peoples of that empire and emboldened them to defy their regimes and press for their freedom. By so doing, these peoples destroyed their ruling regimes from within, almost without a shot being fired. By securing their own freedom, they handed the United States and the entire free world a strategic victory of incalculable benefit, one which a half century of enormous effort by the West had alone been unable to attain. This same connection exists in other countries, from China to Iran, where their peoples' desire for freedom poses a mortal threat to the current regimes. The connection with the United States has already been demonstrated in China. There, the advocates of democracy in Tiananmen Square quoted from the Declaration of Independence and erected a Goddess of Freedom explicitly modeled on the Statute of Liberty in order to demonstrate that the goals they were pursuing for their country were the same as those represented by the United States. That connection with the Chines people remains. Far from standing back and allowing the regime in Beijing to marshal the support of the Chinese people against the United States and its interests, I hope we recognize the existence of our alliance with the Chinese people and employ it to bring about positive change in their country. In fact, I hope that we use to it help the Chinese people peacefully to bring to power a democratic government in their country, for that may be the only way of ensuring that the growing power of that enormous country is not diverted by its ruling regime into policies that threaten the security of the international system and the interests of the United States. The same alliance can be replicated for many countries, from Vietnam to Cuba. But to use it, we first must recognize its existence and then devise policies to make it a realty. Most important of all is the decision to actively engage the people of the world and doing so separately from our ongoing relations with their governments. To do that, we must speak directly to these people, right past their governments, and do so on a permanent basis, even as we continue our necessary relationships with those governments. That, then, is the role that I would set for our public diplomacy, to enlist the populations of the world into a common cause and to convince them that the goals that they seek for themselves-freedom, security and prosperity-are the same as those the United States seeks. If we are successful in this bold endeavor, we will not only enhance our own foreign policy but will have given a powerful impetus to the creation of a world in which freedom, security, and prosperity are secured to us and to all. I apologize for the prolixity of my statement, but the ideas deserve a fuller treatment than normal. I am now pleased to yield to the ranking Democrat, Mr. Lantos of California. Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend you for an excellent statement, and I want to commend you for holding this second hearing on public diplomacy as it impacts on our international war on terrorism. As we have stated many times from this forum, the struggle in which we are currently engaged against international terrorism is like no other our Nation has ever been involved with, and it requires that we muster the resources of all Americans, including those in the private and the corporate sector. By calling this hearing, you clearly recognize the importance of the private sector and the role it must play in public diplomacy. I am pleased, Mr. Chairman, that the Administration has heeded our earlier call to action and has begun to take steps to mount a concerted public diplomacy campaign in Afghanistan and throughout Asia and the Middle East. After a late start, I am pleased to note that the Administration has come to understand the importance of developing a coordinated message with our friends, allies and others in the region. I think it is extremely important also that the Administration at long last muster the courage to speak to some of the countries in the Arab world which have grown accustomed to not only no criticism from the United States, but to quiet acceptance of the most outrageous statements. A few days ago, the Saudi foreign minister expressed his anger and frustration. Somebody from the Administration should remind the Saudi foreign minister that had we not sent a half million American troops to the Persian Gulf War, he would not be the foreign minister of any country, because Saudi Arabia would not exist today. So instead of anger and frustration, we would expect some gratitude and humility from some of our interlocutors. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that the Administration will also come to understand the importance of reinvigorating our international broadcasting agencies, including Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty; and what I mean by reinvigoration in part means dramatically increasing their funding. The overwhelming passage of the legislation authorizing the establishment of Radio Free Afghanistan in the House last week demonstrates our bipartisan, firm commitment to international broadcasting and its importance in the current struggle. I also believe, Mr. Chairman, that we must not only be afraid to proclaim the universal values we espouse, but we must recognize that those universal values are the most attractive devices at the disposal of the United States in this global battle in the field of public diplomacy-the values of democracy, human rights and social justice. These are the strongest weapons in our arsenal, and they will ultimately be the guarantors of our victory. We must also remember that many of the audiences that we talk to do not enjoy the blessing of free and independent media, and the techniques we use in a society which takes free and independent media for granted may not always be the most easily useful and valuable in dealing with other societies. It is obvious that we have a great deal to learn from our Nation's public relations professionals. This means not only honing our message but also recruiting the most effective messengers to work in the media as we conduct this battle of global diplomacy. Before concluding, Mr. Chairman, I would just like to add a comment with respect to our coming markup tomorrow. I am supportive of the basic approach to the Afghanistan Freedom Act. But I would like to inform my colleagues that, with several of my friends, I am working on an amendment which I will offer as a substitute at the right time. I think we will have to deal seriously as the military situation improves in Afghanistan with the problems of reconstructing Afghanistan after decades of civil war and Taliban rule, supporting an international peacekeeping force and the post-Taliban transition government. We clearly must take an important role in this endeavor, although the burden will have to be shared. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Lantos. I am going to ask the Members to have their statements made a part of the record, rather than give them at this point, because our witnesses all have very tight time schedules, and it is important that we hear them. So, without objection, any further statements from Members in the nature of opening statements will be made a part of the record. I want to welcome our witnesses today. We have before us extensive expertise in advertising, entertainment and image development fields. First, I would like to welcome Norman Pattiz, who is the Founder and Chairman of Westwood One, America's largest radio network, and a member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors which oversees U.S.-government-sponsored international broadcasting, which includes the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty and Radio Free Asia. Westwood One provides programming to over 7,000 radio stations in the United States, including those of the Mutual Broadcasting System, NBC Radio Networks, CBS Radio Networks, and CNN Radio News. Mr. Pattiz brings a wealth of experience on how to reach and hold an audience. Next, Ambassador Edward S. Walker, Jr., who became President and CEO of the Middle East Institute in May of this year. A career Foreign Service officer for nearly 35 years, Ambassador Walker has extensive Middle East experience, having served as the Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs and also as U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Egypt. We welcome your views on this complex region, Mr. Ambassador. Next, I would like to introduce John W. Leslie, Jr., a veteran communications strategist, having helped plan and direct political campaigns on three continents. Mr. Leslie presently serves as Chairman of Weber Shandwick, the world's largest public relations firm. A principal focus of Weber Shandwick's work is assisting corporations and public institutions in shaping public attitudes on high-profile issues. A former senior aid to Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Mr. Leslie has advised several heads of state on communications as well as having managed trade and economic development campaigns for several foreign governments. In October of 2000, the flagship magazine of the ad world, Advertising Age, named Robert Wehling number one on its list of the 50 most powerful people in marketing. Mr. Wehling began his career with Procter & Gamble in 1960, rising to Global Marketing and Government Relations Officer at the time of his retirement in August, 2001. Mr. Wehling has served as Chairman of the Board of the Advertising Council, the nonprofit group tasked with marshalling volunteered talent from the advertising and communications industry along with the resources of the business and non-profit communities to create an awareness on a select number of significant public issues. Mouafac Harb is the Washington Bureau Chief for Al Hayat, an Arabic language newspaper based in London and circulated internationally. He is widely published in the English and Arab media and is a frequent commentator on a number of Arab television news programs aboard. Before taking the Al Hayat post, Mr. Harb was responsible for the launch of a new television network in his native Lebanon. The bulk of his journalism career has been spent in the United States, where he founded a news service specializing in Middle Eastern affairs and earlier had worked 4 years for ABC News Nightline in a variety of capacities. John Romano, an Emmy-nominated TV writer/producer and screenwriter, has written and produced more than a dozen dif |