15 December 2017
For America's foes in Afghanistan and the Middle East, triumph on the battlefield is less important than winning the battle of perceptions. In response, the United States has turned to Strategic Communication and Public Diplomacy (SC-PD) to engage key audiences in ways that advance U.S. interests and to win the political-ideological contest for domestic and international legitimacy. But are these strategies effective? While winning hearts and minds is politically important, SC-PD—even at its best—is much less effective than other well-crafted and mutually supportive policies and strategies. Moreover, there are structural obstacles that greatly limit the effectiveness of SC-PD.
You might also like:
‘Just three Skittles in a bowl will kill you. Would you take a handful?’ Evidence, public policy and Islamist-inspired violent extremism
‘Alert not alarm’: The UK experience of public counter-terrorism awareness and training, with explicit reference to Project ARGUS
When Arabs and Jews Watch TV Together: The Joint Effect of the Content and Context of Communication on Reducing Prejudice
Press coverage of lone-actor terrorism in the UK and Denmark: shaping the reactions of the public, affected communities and copycat attackers