The War of Ideas: An Abandoned Front in the Global War on Terror
Versandkostenfrei!
Versandfertig in über 4 Wochen
53,99 €
inkl. MwSt.
PAYBACK Punkte
27 °P sammeln!
This paper, which was prepared using a historical research methodology, argues that the U.S. is losing the "war of ideas," and it provides recommendations that can support a comeback. The importance of the U.S. Department of State in the global war on terror is briefly introduced; as the lead agency for strategic communications in the war of ideas, it is distinguished from the U.S. Department of Defense, which leads the physical struggle. To develop a sense of urgency in resolving the State Department's subsequently outlined problems, the argument is made that the ideological struggle is strat...
This paper, which was prepared using a historical research methodology, argues that the U.S. is losing the "war of ideas," and it provides recommendations that can support a comeback. The importance of the U.S. Department of State in the global war on terror is briefly introduced; as the lead agency for strategic communications in the war of ideas, it is distinguished from the U.S. Department of Defense, which leads the physical struggle. To develop a sense of urgency in resolving the State Department's subsequently outlined problems, the argument is made that the ideological struggle is strategic in nature, as it can target the underlying source of terrorism. Key statements made by U.S. spokespeople are reviewed to identify the State Department's communications strategy. Polling data is then reviewed to demonstrate the Department's performance. The lackluster track record in the war of ideas is linked to three problem areas: resources, organization, and strategy. Each problem area has contributed to a precariously weak wartime posture. Recommendations that can help resolve these issues include: a study to better determine the enemy's propaganda expenditures; an approximate three-fold increase in resources (funding and personnel) for State's public diplomacy activities; an organizational architecture that provides unity of command, centralized control, decentralized execution, interagency coordination, and implicit communications across the chain of command; and the development of a new communications strategy that aims more directly at the underlying source or cause of terrorism.
Andere Kunden interessierten sich für
