« December 2008 | Main | February 2009 »
January 22, 2009
Soft power in Obama's inauguration speech
Now that the text of Obama's inauguration speech is now online, it's worth following up Tuesday's look at the role of 'soft power' here. Obama asks listeners to:
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
While I would broaden out Obama's account of power - the construction of certain causes as just, for example, is politically important - it is positive that a recognition of the importance of such factors in politics has been foregrounded in his speech. Now he 'just' needs to put this into practice...
Posted by jon_mendel at 12:28 PM | TrackBack
January 20, 2009
Obama on power and security
Just listened to Obama's inauguration speech: a very well-written speech. What stood out on first listen was the discussion of power and security: Obama emphasised that US power and security will depend in part on the battle of ideas, and that US security is compatible with defending the 'rights of man'. This type of emphasis - a move towards something like 'soft power' - is welcome, and will be a valuable correction to the damage that the Bush administration has done to America's reputation in the world.
Of course, such changes are much easier said than done. It's early days, though - and, as well as facing major challenges, Obama also has real opportunities open to him. Hopefully, he will be able to take advantage of them.
Posted by jon_mendel at 05:28 PM | TrackBack
January 15, 2009
Barnett: "we still don't have an agency that concentrates on getting postwars correct?"
There's a lot of material on Thomas Barnett's often interesting - and frequently updated - blog. I'm someone who tends to write very long answers to even apparently simple questions - so it's bracing for me to see such sharp, snappy, timely responses to issues in the news. Today, Barnett responds to an article on the recently available draft federal history of reconstruction in Iraq by posting that:
after the great debacles of Iraq and Afghanistan, we still don't have an agency that concentrates on getting postwars correct?...It was almost exactly five years ago that I first started preaching in the brief about the need for a Department of Everything Else.Not that visionary; just didn't have my head up my ass.
I still think there's often a need for complexity - and, for that matter, a need to complicate and critique much of Barnett's work. However, I do look forward to seeing these much quicker responses appearing in FeedDemon.
Posted by jon_mendel at 03:33 PM | TrackBack
January 12, 2009
Remarkably ill-advised PR from BAA
The Guardian reports a shocking piece of PR from BAA:
Politicians are accusing BAA, Britain's largest airport operator, of "bullying" after it sent a warning letter to those due to take part in a mass protest at Heathrow tomorrow.John McDonnell MP and Caroline Lucas MEP say they were outraged to be sent such a thinly disguised threat. The letter said: "While we respect people's right to protest, we also have a duty to ensure that thousands of passengers can go about their lawful business within our airport on that day.
"You should be aware that the planned protest coincides with a scheduled El Al departure, during which armed Metropolitan Police officers will be patrolling the terminal. Given the current situation in the Middle East, it is vital that protesters do not put themselves at risk within the terminal."
The letter, sent by Terry Morgan, BBA director of standards and assurances, went on: "As an elected representative, I have no doubt that you will have sought assurances that the protest will be a peaceful one, and that you are keen to avoid any unnecessary disruption or danger to our passengers, protesters or your own constituents."
It is bizarre that anyone involved in PR would believe that contacting public figures in such a crude way was a good idea. Predictably, there was a backlash:
Dr Lucas, MEP for the South East and Green Party leader, said the letter was "clearly designed to intimidate". "It's outrageous that, in its efforts to try to prevent a legal, peaceful protest, BAA is using veiled threats about the lengths the police will go to," she said."This is an outrageous abuse of BAA's position. It should not be taking it upon itself to speak or act in the name of the police," she added. "This is bullying of the most unpleasant kind."
Tomorrow's protest comes in the week the government is expected to announce its decision on a third runway at Heathrow. Organised by Climate Rush, the protest has been publicised as "a peaceful picnic", during which protesters will debate expansion while "keeping the pathways clear for everyone and ensure no one trips on our dinner party accoutrement".
I hope would hope that BAA will also receive a more official rebuke for their attempts to use the presence of armed police in this way. Despite some tragic mistakes in the past, I do not believe that armed British police would be prepared to fire on peaceful protesters, or that their superiors in the police service would order them to do so. It is completely inappropriate for BAA to try to use the presence of armed police in this way. Hopefully, this will - publicly - be made clear, both to BAA and to those involved in the protest.
