US Public Diplomacy Plan For Syria

Ruoshi Li

Syracuse University

  1  

Part 1. Syria Crisis --- A Foreign Policy Issue for the United States The United States always supports people’s fighting for democracy, freedom and equality. U.S really appreciated the Syrian people’s call for a democratic and unified Syria, starting with a group of young people writing graffiti “falling the regime”, as an expressions of piled dissent. Yet, the Bashar al-Assad’s bloody repression was a brutal violation of human rights, a humiliation for democracy and a cue to its current civil war. The United States and other ten partner nations are pressing for a political solution to Syria Crisis via “Geneva Talk” and “Geneva II” Talk. Based on the Final Communique, It is imperative to advance Syria’s transition to a democratic nation with a governing body established by mutual consent and restrained by constitutional orders. However, Assad regime’s rejection to participate in two rounds of Geneva’s negotiations and the government’s repressive ruling suggested the existed governing body can not lead the transition. Thus, US diplomatic efforts should be placed on bringing down the dictatorial ruling of Bashar al-Assad by political isolation and economical sanctions; on supporting the Syrian people’s pursuit for democracy and ending the nationwide violence and on laying the legal and political bases for a democratic post-Assad Syria. Also, anti-terrorism is in everyone’s mind, which is one of the dominant missions undertaking by U.S. However, Syria has long been on U.S. government’s list of one terrorism-sponsoring state besides Cuba, Iran, Sudan. Although condemning international terrorism, Assad financially and politically supported the legitimate armed resistance in Palestinian, Lebanon and Iraq which are regarded as terrorist attacks in our US definition. Although Syria attempted to increase border monitoring activities, the already-existent foreign fighter facilitation networks inside the country continually helps transit extremist foreign fighter into Iraq through Syria.

To make thins worse, Syria’s strategic alliance with Iran, another state sponsor of terrorism a Syrian-Iranian defense cooperation agreement has already been reached, stating two countries are defenders for each other’s policies, notably, even Iran’s nuclear plan. This poses a great threat to US foreign policy objectives in the field of anti-terrorism, thus making Syria a foreign policy issues for the United States.

Part 2. Target Publics There are two groups of people as the target audiences in U.S. public diplomacy campaigns concerning the issue of Syria.

  2  

First, the young generations inside Syria who are suffering at the hand of Assad regime and may be displaced outside countries.

Second, International publics outside Syria who show great concern about Syria Civil War and Syria’s human rights situations.

Part 3. Public Diplomacy Objectives U.S. public diplomacy campaign shoulder two-fold objectives.

First, it aims at influencing Syria’s young generation’s opinion of democracy and perception of the United States. These young teenagers may be displaced outside or be given humanitarian assistance inside the country.

Second, it aims at winning the recognition on U.S. contribution to democracy and regional peace and stability by demonstrating America’s active role in preventing the spread of terrorism in the middle east in the media.

Part 4. Public Diplomacy Tools/ Strategies

v   Humanitarian Aid Foreign Humanitarian aid would be one of the most appropriate public diplomacy strategies to help achieve the objectives. With the intensifying competition among the world’s major powers in every aspect, wining favorable perceptions of your nation in global public opinion is increasingly important. It helps to increase economic and social well-being in developing countries, to leverage over political elites to advance foreign policy goals and finally to curve positive sentiments among the global publics. Conducting targeted, sustained, and visible foreign aid is more likely to affect mass opinion, even at the war time (Goldsmith, Horiuchi & Wood, 2014).

In Syria, Foreign aid is one of the effective tools for U.S.to achieve our public diplomacy goals and it shoulder two-fold objectives. For one thing, it. For another, by increasing the funding for displacements for the youth and education for the Syrian children outside their homeland, U.S.

  3  

can plant the seed of democracy and freedom in the minds of Syrian’s next generation, thus helping foster Syria’s democratic transition in the long run.

With the intensified fighting and increased aerial bombardments in multiple areas of Syria, the situation is deteriorating. 13.5 million people are in need of Humanitarian Assistance in Syria and 4.8 million Syrian refugees have fleet to neighboring countries, according to the report of UNHCR by May 2016. However, persistent armed conflict on the ground, accompanied the aerial attacks from sky, humanitarian access is limited and great difficulties remains in conducting humanitarian assistance convoys and providing lifesaving assistance.

According to USAID, the United States has already provided $5,130,024,551 for humanitarian funding for Syria Response till 2016, making U.S. the largest donor in the humanitarian aid. In partnership with the United Nations, international NGOs and local Syrian organizations, U.S. humanitarian assistance has reached over 4.2 million Syrians across 14 governorates (U.S. Department of State, 2014). In the near future, the U.S should continue funding the relief agencies, and even increasing funding in particular refugee displacement programs, like Children’s displacement.

Young generation is one of the target groups in U.S public diplomacy for the reason that they serve as the countries’ change agents and shoulder the responsibilities of leading the nation’s economics to greater productivity and global understanding(U.S. Department of State, 2014).By engaging the displaced young people beyond Syria’s border and providing opportunities of exchange and outreach programs to them, U.S. can cultivate a new generation who are familiar with America’s values and politics and willing to fight against dictatorship and for democracy back home in Syria. This undoubtedly help with the transition of Syria and preparation for a new, democratic government.

For the method of foreign aid, there are several governmental and non-governmental organizations the U.S. can work with.

According to U.S. reports, USAID’s Office of Food for Peace (USAID/FFP) has conducted 22 high-altitude humanitarian airdrops in partnership with the UN World Food Program(WFP) (USAID,2016). In the future, US can continue this kind of partnership with WFP in airdropping the blankets, food baskets and medicine. Probably what needs to be considered is that how could U.S. made US-sponsored assistance more visible to the Syrian publics.

Also, U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration(State/PRM)

  4  

has worked with the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to conduct the refugee displacement within the country or beyond its border(USAID,2016). As our newest public diplomacy plan focuses on increasing the funding for the displacement programs exclusively for the young, it is necessary to strengthen U.S. cooperation with UNRWA and with UN Children’s Fund (UNICF).

Syrian Arab Red Crescent (SARC) and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) can also be good partners for USAID to conduct its foreign assistance inside Syria.

v   Mediated Public diplomacy

•   Framing and Agenda Settings

As Nye noted, information is power. Wining the credibility and trust for your story is the part and parcel of the mediated political competition in an information age (Arquila & Ronfeldt,1999). The contest to gain access to the news production and to affect media framing has become the central topic in the international , in modern multi-sided warfare at particular( Van Ham, 2003).

Entaman (2004) categorized the functions of framing into four types: 1) problem definition, 2) causes attribution, 3) moral judgment, and 4) treatment recommendations. And all four types are interlocking and intertwined , serving as the meta-frame.

In Syria’s case, because of the multi-lateral conflicts and military fighting among Syria Armed Force(SAF), Syria rebellions, ISIS and Combined Joint Task Force, it is urgent to dominate the message channel and convey the messages not only to the public pursuing for a democratic, inclusive and unified Syria within the country but also to the responsible global audiences beyond borders.

With the aim to win the favorable attitudes and support from the global audience, it is wise for U.S. to employ the methods of framing to identify causes of the civil war, to lead the moral judgments on the war, and to recommend remedies. Therefore U.S. should spare no effort to promote a ‘war against terror and for democracy’ frame both for its military activities and for its media reporting, which is in line with the stated U.S. foreign policy:

“provide non-lethal assistance to moderate factions of the Supreme Military Council (SMC) of the Free Syrian Army, which is contesting extremist groups as well as struggling against the Assad regime on behalf of the Syrian people”(U.S. Department of State, 2014)

  5  

•   Media outlets and professionals

According to homophily thesis, similarity raise attractions, and attractions breeds understanding. Value proximity and political proximity of a country promoting frames (Country A) to another country (Country B) are two key determinants in the success of international frame-building campaigns (Sheafer, Shenhav,Takens & Van Atteveldt, 2014). The logic behind this measurement is simple: the proximity indicates the degree of similarity between two actors and we understand, accept, tolerate and prefer actors who share identical or similar values and politics with us. (Sheafer & Shenhav, 2009)

Yet, in a proxy war with international intervention, these proximity that indicate the likeability of success of a frame-building campaigns should be measured relatively, or in other others, should be compared with the proximity between rival country c and the target country B.

In Syria’s civil war, Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria(ISIS), enjoy a naturally higher value and political proximity given their shared religion and language, which is unfavorable for U.S. to project our frames and agendas. The low level of cultural and political congruency between U.S. and Syria may undermine U.S. mediate public diplomacy efforts and account for the perceptual gap. Therefore, it is necessary to rely on local media professionals as mediators between our government and Syrian publics. Considering the contribution of media professionals to message delivery, the mediated public diplomacy efforts should also focus on cultivating an army of media communicators. (Arif ,Golan & Moritz, 2014)

According to the annually Press Freedom Index proposed by Reporters Without Borders (2016), Syria was ranked 177th out of 180 countries in the world only followed by Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea. The strict control over media made it difficult to. So funding and partnering with some pro-rebel media outlets, like the Turkey-based Free Syria Weekly, can be most feasible and effective approach in the short term.

•   Social Media like Facebook and Twitter

Social Media has played a significant role in Syria’s civil War, making Syria the first battlefield of social media around the clock. Although , the internet users are 28.1 per 100 people( World bank, 2015). With the military operations intensifying on the ground, the censorship over media report tightening by Assad government, and the journalist casualties increasing, international

  6  

news media had little access to the war zone in Syria, which resulted in an increased dependence on social media as a real time news source(United States Institute of Peace, 2013). Because of this dependence, all the parties concerned (Assad’s government, rebel groups, ISIS as well as western countries) have their dedicated social media directors to manage and monitor accounts. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Flickr and WordPress have all been used as the news channels and media market. Opposition activist groups like Kafranbel Syrian Revolutions set up their Facebook page to call for action to overthrow the current Assad regime While the Bashar al-Assad employs similar methods to get his messages out. Surprisingly, rebel groups turn to social media for help when soliciting donations (the Wall Street Journal, 2013).

Also, when having a close look at the demographics of Syria’s social media users, it is clear that Facebook is one of the most prevalent social media platforms and simultaneously one of the fiercest battle fields of information and news routines. According to the statistics collected in the Arab Social Media Report (2014), around 87 percent of interviewees are subscribed to Facebook and receive news from Facebook. 83 percent of current Syria’s Facebook subscribers access Facebook page every day.

In this highly social-mediated environment, the United States can never overlook the power of social media in the news updating. Given the younger population of Facebook users and other social media, Facebook is also where ISIS would like to reach their potential hands, it will be a disaster if this young generation are exposed to ISIS’s brainwash and are recruited into the terrorist groups. U.S. are supposed to construct a counter-narratives on the same social media platforms as ISIS do.

U.S. has already earned 11,000 followers on Facebook and obtained 15,000 visitors a month to our embassy websites(U.S. Department of States, 2013). By increasing and deepening the engagement with foreign publics in Syria and its neighboring countries via social media, on one hand, we can ensure our message was disseminated quickly and widely to the external audiences, on the other, we can respond to any distorted news coverage on U.S and confront angers with head on.

  7  

Part 5 Evaluation of US Public Diplomacy Campaign

The outcomes of US public Diplomacy Campaign should be analyzed and evaluated both in quality and in quantity, both in a short term and in a long run.

In terms of funding or sponsoring for foreign aid and relief actives, •   Analyze the increased percentage in the budget of Syria’s humanitarian aid under

USAID comparing to the fiscal year of 2015; •   Conduct a census by the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees,

and Migration(State/PRM) on the number of Syrian people who has received US-sponsored humanitarian aid.

•   Conduct a survey by State/ PRM in partnership with UN Children’s Fund(UNICF) to figure out the number of Syrian children who were displaced in U.S.A or other partnership nations.

In terms of media exposure (social media at particular), For traditional media,

•   Count the number of news releases, special reports, Op-Editorials, governmental speeches generated covering the Syria Civil War and its refugee crisis.

•   Count the number of videos and documentaries on humanitarian assistance and anti-terrorist militaries operations in Syria post on established media outlets as well as

•   Count the increased number of new recruited local, independent media professionals.

For social media, •   Count the number of secured blog stories post on US government official websites and

affiliated websites; •   Count the number of Facebook followers and the likes and comments on U.S. Facebook

page; •   Analyzed the increased percentage of Facebook followers •   Count the hit on the internet, the visit to Facebook page and U.S. embassy websites. •   With the help of Social media analytics (e.g. Google Analytics and Hootsuite), study the

online Facebook sentiments towards the United States and bounce rate on U.S home pages.

In terms of sentiment change

  8  

•   Using the methods of focus group and random sampling, conduct a benchmark study on the Syrian perceptions of America’s images and US anti-terrorist activities during the Assad’s regime and post-Assad regimes.

In terms of long –term behavioral changes

•   Analyze the increased percentage of Syria’s teenagers who apply for the US-based universities and US-sponsored exchange programs and other outreach programs.

Part 6 the relationships between public diplomacy and foreign policies Nowadays, public diplomacy is a MUST for achieving the foreign policy objectives.

Public diplomacy, by integrating the theories from public relations and mass communications, attaches greater importance to studying and understanding foreign publics’ attitudes and perceptions of the nation’s foreign policies. Currently, public diplomacy commits to creating and promoting two-way dialogues between the nations and its external, target publics. Unlike the conventional push-down model of communication, public diplomacy pays more attention to listening, conversation and long-term relationship building, which empowers foreign publics to learn about the nation’s policies and values, thus paving way for a favorable external environment. In Syria’s cases, the lack of “cultural congruency” (Entman, 2008) results in little understanding of America’s values and politics, which hinder Syria’s process of democratization. Because of the distorted media coverage about US’s motivations in the middle East by Assad and ISIS, the general sentiments towards the United States are relatively negative and U.S. leadership was more disapproved than approved; two out of five Syria’s residents hold disapproval attitudes, according to the U.S.-Global Leadership Project(2013). Therefore, U.S.-headed activities at the government level may receive more resistance without rational reasons. Instead, public diplomacy, focus on the person-to-person relations, may work. 2) Public diplomacy is expanding the scope of private-sector involvement. Foreign policy was often planned out at the top of country, Yet, the progress in communication technology helps democratize the process of decision-making by providing more access to information and more chances to voice individuals’ opinions on certain public affairs.

  9  

First, a government-initiated or a government- sponsored campaign is often suspected to be a propaganda or an information filtering and news distortion. However, public diplomacy campaigns conducted by non-state players, like foreign aid, corporate social responsibility campaigns or exchange programs usually receive less resistance even in an adversarial state. Independent messengers (private sectors) are more trustworthy in the eyes of foreign publics, thus more capable of projecting the images and engaging target groups. In Syria Civil War, too many US-administered or US-sponsored campaigns or events can be regarded as US interference in Syria's internal affairs. Therefore, USAID’s action under the supervision of UN are more likely to be accepted by the publics in Syria. Second, at times, it is embarrassing for a governmental institution to deal with some controversial and risky issues, which may bring about some negative impacts if tackled with inappropriately. The participation of private sectors in public diplomacy can serve as a heat shield for the government or Department of foreign policies. Part 7 Changes In Your Definition of Public Diplomacy

At the very beginning of the class, as a non-public diplomacy major student, I regarded public diplomacy as interchangeable with “foreign policy” because I naively believe both fall under the umbrella categories “diplomacy” and both have something to do with the “relationship building”. However, after one-semester learning, I found myself wrong.

Although like foreign policy, the ultimate goal is to win the favorable external environment for your country to implement your policy at a globe stage, the target audience and the approach may be different. First, foreign policy focuses more on government-to-government interactions, which are dominated by official or high-level opinion-exchanges carried out between diplomats. Public diplomacy, instead, seeks to directly engage and influence the foreign publics, namely, citizens, civil leaders, media professionals and opinion leaders. Second, public diplomacy may be a comparatively long-term relationship-building and requires the expertise of public communications. Achieving two-way symmetrical communication is part and parcel of any successful public diplomacy campaign. This is where public relations theory can contribute to the theorization of public diplomacy. This is also synonymous with what

  10  

Geoffrey Cowan (2008) means “moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration”. Third, the tools of public diplomacy may be different from that of foreign diplomacy. Traditional diplomacy involves one-way, strong representation of the policies of foreign affairs to foreign governments and administrations. Yet, public diplomacy not only focus on the government-to-people activities, like nation branding, international broadcasting, government-initiated and – sponsored outreach programs, but also includes people-to-people contact; Forth, unlike traditional diplomacy where the official-appointed and professional-trained diplomats are the main practitioners, in public diplomacy, the scope of “messengers” or “diplomats” expands to “non-state actors”, including the multinational corporations, non-governmental organizations(NGOs), the foreign aid teams as well as exchange students and scholars. With the progression of this semester, I gradually realized the significance and irreplaceability of public diplomacy. After the dissolution of Soviet Union in 1991, there was an increasing anti-propaganda sentiment around the globe. Chances were high that any government-initiated diplomatic activity can be naturally considered as propaganda and turned out to be counterproductive. Therefore, public diplomacy, which cultivated a government’s opinion in a foreign country through the engagement with and communication between diverse publics and private sectors, came to the spotlight. Also, with the accelerating globalization, the contest for “hard power” descended while the competition for “soft power” increased (Nye,2008), Public diplomacy is an effective tool to demonstrate a nation’s soft power and cultural capital. The governmental opinions, together with various private views, can be conveyed via international broadcasting and mediated communications “Doing well by doing good”, the foreign aid and corporate social responsibility campaigns can help win the minds and hearts of foreign publics and gradually change publics’ perception of your foreign policies( Goldsmith, Horiuchi& Wood, 2014). In short, public diplomacy is a process of achieving two-way symmetric communication and understandings between a government and its overseas publics by employment of both governmental and non-governmental actors.

  11  

Reference: Arquila, John, and D. Ronfeldt. 1999. The emergence of neopolitik: Toward an American information strat egy. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

Arif, R., Golan, G. J., & Moritz, B. (2014). Mediated public diplomacy: US and Taliban relations with Pakistani media. Media, War & Conflict, 1750635214538619.

Congress Research Service (2009). U.S. Public Diplomacy: Background and Current Issues. Retrieved May 03, 2016, from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40989.pdf Cowan, G., & Arsenault, A. (2008). Moving from monologue to dialogue to collaboration: The three layers of public diplomacy. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 616(1), 10-30. Department of the State (2013). US. Public Diplomacy in a Changing Middle East. Retrieved May 03, 2016, from http://www.state.gov/r/remarks/2013/202945.htm  Department of the State (2014). The Syrian Crisis: U.S. Assistance and Support for the Transition Retrieved May 03, 2016, from http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2014/03/223955.htm Entman, R. M. (2004). Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion and U.S. foreign policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Entman, R. M. (2008). Theorizing mediated public diplomacy: The U.S. case. Press/Politics, 13, 87–102.

Goldsmith, B. E., Horiuchi, Y., & Wood, T. (2014). Doing Well by Doing Good: The Impact of Foreign

Nye, J. S.. (2008). Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 94–109. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25097996

Reporters Without Borders (2016). Press Freedom Index. Retrieved May 03, 2016, from https://rsf.org/en/ranking/2016 Sheafer, T., & Shenhav, S. R. (2009). Mediated public diplomacy in a new era of warfare. The Communication Review, 12(3), 272-283. Sheafer, T., Shenhav, S. R., Takens, J., & van Atteveldt, W. (2014). Relative Political and Value Proximity in Mediated Public Diplomacy: The Effect of State-Level Homophily on International Frame Building .Political Communication, 31(1), 149-167. USAID (2016) Syria: Complex Emergency-Fact Sheet. Retrieved May 03, 2016, from http://www.cidi.org/wp-content/uploads/05.05.16-USG-Syria-Complex-Emergency-Fact-Sheet-3.pdf United States Institute of Peace(2013). Social Media Reporting and the Syrian Civil War. Retrieved May

  12  

03, 2016, from http://www.alnap.org/resource/21355 Van Ham, P. (2003). War, lies and videotape: Pubic diplomacy and the USA’s war on terrorism. Security Dialogue, 34, 427–444.

World Bank. (2014) Internet users per 100 people. Retrieved May 03, from http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.P2