[iwar] [fc:U.S..Developing.Communication.Strategy.in.Anti-Terrorism.Campaign]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-01-22 07:40:33


Return-Path: <sentto-279987-4359-1011714008-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com>
Delivered-To: fc@all.net
Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:43:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 10070 invoked by uid 510); 22 Jan 2002 15:40:12 -0000
Received: from n26.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.76) by all.net with SMTP; 22 Jan 2002 15:40:12 -0000
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-4359-1011714008-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com
Received: from [216.115.97.163] by n26.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Jan 2002 15:28:43 -0000
X-Sender: fc@red.all.net
X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_1_3); 22 Jan 2002 15:40:07 -0000
Received: (qmail 42359 invoked from network); 22 Jan 2002 15:40:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (216.115.97.172) by m9.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 22 Jan 2002 15:40:07 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.72.98) by mta2.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 22 Jan 2002 15:40:07 -0000
Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g0MFeX829508 for iwar@onelist.com; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:40:33 -0800
Message-Id: <200201221540.g0MFeX829508@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
X-Mailer: don't even ask
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 07:40:33 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [iwar] [fc:U.S..Developing.Communication.Strategy.in.Anti-Terrorism.Campaign]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

&lt;A HREF="http://cryptome.org/us-psywar.htm"Click 
here: U.S. Developing Communication Strategy in Anti-Terrorism Campaign&lt;/A 

<a href="http://cryptome.org/us-psywar.htm">http://cryptome.org/us-psywar.htm>

US Department of State
International Information Programs Washington File
18 January 2002 
U.S. Developing Communication Strategy in Anti-Terrorism Campaign 

(Ross, others, address Brookings Institution forum) (1360)By Stuart 
GorinWashington File Staff WriterWashington -- The United States is 
developing a total communicationstrategy utilizing three essential themes to 
tell its story in theanti-terrorism campaign, says State Department official 
ChristopherRoss.

The first is to represent the basic American values that unite thecountry, 
Ross said at a Brookings Institution forum on "<A HREF="http://cryptome.org/#propaganda">The 
Propaganda</A>&lt;A HREF="http://cryptome.org/#propaganda"War&lt;/A" 
January 16. 
He is a retired U.S. ambassador who serves as senioradviser to Under 
Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy CharlotteBeers."The second theme," 
Ross said, "is to present democratization andopenness as a vision for a 
better future, a future which does notrequire people to resort to 
terrorism."He said the third theme "hits at what we are coming to 
considerincreasingly to be perhaps the most important audience for our work 
--young people, those who are going to create the future, whose worldviews 
and mindsets are not yet fully formed." This theme focuses onthem through a 
look at educational systems and how they arestructured, Ross added.The plan 
will mobilize the resources of public diplomacy in allaspects both on the 
information side and on the educational andcultural exchange side, he said. 
Ross added that while crafting such astrategy, Beers is consulting within and 
outside the government andwill travel abroad to consult with U.S. embassies 
and local opinionleaders.Ross said he views public diplomacy as being "the 
public face oftraditional diplomacy." While traditional diplomacy seeks to 
advancethe interests of the United States through private discussions 
withforeign governments, he said, "Public diplomacy seeks to 
supporttraditional diplomacy by addressing non-governmental audiences" 
aswell, both mass and elite.Asked if "propaganda" is another name for public 
diplomacy, Ross said,"Much propaganda contains lies and does not shy away 
from them. Inpublic diplomacy, we don't deliberately look to state things 
that arenot true. We may couch them a certain way, but we deal with 
thetruth."Appearing on the symposium panel with Ross, Joseph Duffey, 
formerdirector of the U.S. Information Agency, which is now part of theState 
Department, said "propaganda is not that bad a word in French"and it used to 
be used in the United States "without the kind ofconnotation it now has."The 
issue now, Duffey said, is credibility. "You can't get away withlies very 
much. They damage your credibility," he said.Duffey added that public 
diplomacy is "an attempt to get over theheads or around the diplomats and 
official spokesmen of countries andsometimes around the press to speak 
directly to the public in othercountries and to provide an interpretation or 
explanation of U.S.values and policies."Thomas Dine, president of Radio Free 
Europe/Radio Liberty, said thenegative view of propaganda is that it is 
methodological way of eitherbeing in favor of something or against it. "From 
a news andinformation point of view, you are trying to fulfill the 
firstresponsibility of our freedom - the freedom of speech, freedom of 
thepress," he said.Credible news organizations, Dine added, try to understand 
thedifference between important and non-important news, and thendisseminate 
it with the belief that "in a democracy, in a society ofpluralistic ideas and 
situations, that you will be informing people ofnews and information so that 
they can make decisions."Washington Post associate editor Karen DeYoung said 
that from a publicdiplomacy standpoint, the Bush administration has been 
doing very wellat home because people "are very much disposed to agree with 
them."Regarding communications overseas, she said the administration is 
notdoing very well, "not because they've been derelict somehow in puttingout 
information, but just because people are not disposed to believethis 
particular brand of information and they're getting otherinformation from 
other sources."Ross said that from his perspective, "As we try to address all 
ofthis, our first task is to make sure that our government's policiesare 
understood for what they are and not for what other people aresaying they 
are."One of the main accusations hurled at the United States in theaftermath 
of September 11, Ross said, "was that we were not reallyfighting terrorism, 
we were fighting Islam, and I think we've beenfairly successful over the 
weeks in countering that to the point whereno serious commentator at this 
point in the Arab world or the Muslimworld is harping on that theme. I think 
there's been acceptance of thenotion that the war was, in fact, against the 
al Qaeda organizationand against the Taliban regime that was harboring the al 
Qaeda inAfghanistan."Asked about the value of public diplomacy educational 
and culturalexchanges in the Middle East, where Ross served much of 
hisprofessional career, he said, "When you look at the number of peoplewho 
have been brought to this country to be exposed to Americanvalues, to return 
to their own country and take up positions ofleadership, I would posit that 
had that kind of activity not existed,attitudes in the Middle East would be 
even worse than they are today."Adding that while "the world is better for 
public diplomacy," he said,"The great dilemma is that there are very few 
concrete barometers,very few concrete ways to measure the effectiveness of 
any particularactivity."Still, Ross said, the effort continues. Regarding the 
educationalprogram, he said the United States wants to ensure that "the 
currentcampaign against terrorism, particularly in the Muslim and 
Arabcountries, evolves in a way that provides to young people the toolsneeded 
for modern life so they are not attracted to the apocalyptickind of vision 
that Osama bin Laden and others have proffered."Ross said the United States 
recognizes it is "an enormous task, butthe fact that it's enormous doesn't 
make it not worth pursuing."One of the problems in the Middle East, Ross 
said, is that "civilsociety as we know it here is very weak." He added that 
one of thetasks at hand is to encourage nongovernmental organizations to 
fillthe void between government and people in many of these countries andto 
create a different kind of political culture.Asked how the United States is 
responding to disinformation in thearea, Ross said it is through its press 
guidance operation."The world press is surveyed on themes that come out, 
whether they betrue or false. If they're of relevance to them and we feel we 
need toanswer them we will. And if something is an outright lie, we will 
sayso," he added. "Another part of it is to make oneself available formedia 
appearances in which these lies come out."Noting that acts of terrorism have 
been committed by followers ofvirtually every faith in the world, Ross said, 
"This is not uniquely aMuslim problem. But it is clear, and this goes back to 
the earlyhistory of Islam, that Islam is a religion open to many 
differentinterpretations."He said that "what has happened in the Osama bin 
Laden phenomenon isthat a group of extremists with a very precise agenda 
coming out of avery fundamentalist branch of modern Islam, have begun to s
peak in thename of Islam as if that is Islam. The fact is that a vast 
majority ofMuslims do not identify with the kinds of positions that Osama 
binLaden and his Taliban protectors would take on how you live a goodMuslim 
life."There is work to be done to try to promote within the Muslimpopulation 
a discussion about what Islam is today, Ross said, but hestressed that while 
perhaps it is a discussion for the United Statesto encourage, "it is not a 
discussion for the U.S. government tolead."(A transcript of the Brookings 
forum is available on the institution'swebsite at www.brook.edu [see below]
)(The Washington File is a product of the Office of InternationalInformation 
Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site:http://usinfo.state.gov)Source: 
&lt;A HREF="http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20020116.htm"
<a href="http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20020116.htm">http://www.brook.edu/comm/transcripts/20020116.htm>

more go to: http://cryptome.org/us-psywar.htm

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Sponsored by VeriSign - The Value of Trust
Pinpoint the right security solution for your company - FREE
Guide from industry leader VeriSign gives you all the facts.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/pCuuSA/WdiDAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2002-12-31 02:15:03 PST