The Latin America Left | Newly Elected President in Uruguay

Following the path of Brazil, Chile, and Peru, Uruguay solidifies the socialist hold on government:

The victory by Mr. Mujica, a farmer and Socialist senator, completed an improbable journey. He helped found the Tupamaro movement, inspired by the Cuban Revolution, and waged an urban guerrilla war robbing banks and businesses and seeking to install a Marxist-style government here. He spent almost 15 years in prison.

His running mate, Danilo Astori, is the buttoned-down former finance minister under Mr. Vázquez who shares credit for the macroeconomic policies that improved Uruguay’s social conditions after a financial crisis at the beginning of the decade.

Mr. Mujica, who has piqued the Argentine political establishment by criticizing President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, said in an interview Sunday on Argentine television that he would “fight hard to have a good relationship with Argentina.”

via Leftist Wins Uruguay Presidential Vote – NYTimes.com.

President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts 09/24/09 | The White House

I’m not sure how we missed this, but one more thing that John Dinkelman knows—and he does know everyone.  There are now three LDS U.S. ambassadors abroad, in China, Jordan, and now a Special Envoy on North Korea.  For those of you who have already made the wise decision to participate in the BYU Washington Seminar, you know Bob (now, “your excellency”) and Kay, who is equally impressive.

Robert R. King, Nominee for Special Envoy on North Korean Human Rights Issues, with the rank of Ambassador, Department of State

Bob King has worked on Capitol Hill for the last 25 years, and for 24 of those years he was Chief of Staff to Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA). He was concurrently Staff Director of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives (2007-2008), Democratic Staff Director of the Committee (2001-2007) and held various professional staff positions on the Committee since 1993. After Congressman Lantos’ death, Mr. King continued as Committee staff director for Chairman Howard L. Berman (D-CA) for one year. As Staff Director of the Committee, Mr. King supervised committee staff on all aspects of its legislative, oversight and investigative work. Mr. King was heavily involved in the planning and conduct of Congressman Lantos’ human rights agenda, including the establishment and supervision of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, which recently became the Tom Lantos Congressional Human Rights Commission. Prior to his service on Capitol Hill, Mr. King served on the National Security Council Staff as a White House Fellow during the Carter Administration. He was Assistant Director of Research and Analysis at Radio Free Europe in Munich, Germany. Mr. King has also taught courses in U.S. foreign policy and international relations at the University of Southern California German Study Program, Brigham Young University Study Abroad, American University in Washington, D.C., New England College, and other institutions. He is author of five books and some 40 articles on international relations issues. He earned a Ph.D. in International Relations from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and a B.A. from Brigham Young University. Among his honors and recognitions, he received the Knight’s Cross Order of Merit of the Republic of Hungary. He is a Member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

via President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts 09/24/09 | The White House.

 

 

See Hillary Run | Madame Secretary in Public DIplomacy Mode

The manner in which a diplomat schedules and conducts meetings/interactions makes a difference.  Hillary has been on the road pushing the U.S. policy agenda, but in a manner different from her immediate predecessor, employing what is known in the corporate world as public relations or marketing, but to diplos has become defined by Joseph Nye of Harvard’s Kennedy School as “soft power”:

It is difficult to assess what impact this public diplomacy is having on America’s image abroad or on advancing the foreign policy goals of President Barack Obama’s administration.She may be mostly preaching to the converted or adding to the surge of goodwill towards the US after Mr Obama’s election, though this could help appease anti-American feelings in some corners.

Mrs Clinton, who already has her own star power from her days as first lady, also presents a stark contrast to Condoleezza Rice, her predecessor, who conducted her foreign policy in a more rigid, academic style, sticking mostly to official meetings during short trips that were run with military precision.

Critics say Mrs Clinton’s focus on soft power is a result of her being marginalised – town hall meetings about women’s rights are all she has left after the major foreign policy files like the Middle East and Afghanistan were outsourced to special envoys.

via BBC, “Clinton Focuses on Soft Power”

How The Nobel Peace Prize Works | The New Republic

The big debate over Obama’s Nobel obscures an intriguing voting system that starts with broad nominations.  (Did you know Armand Hammer tried to buy the prize, but lost out to the Dalai Lama?):

“In 2009, a record 205 nominations were received. Unlike the Oscars or Golden Globe awards, The Committee keeps the nominations secret and asks that nominators do the same for several years. (When the past nominations were released, it was discovered that Adolf Hitler was nominated in 1939, as were Joseph Stalin and Benito Mussolini.)

“Nominations are considered by the Nobel Committee at a meeting by permanent advisers to the Nobel institute, which consists of the Institute’s Director and Research Director and a small number of Norwegian academics with expertise in subject areas relating to the prize. The 5-man Committee then selects the laureate. Even though it seeks a unanimous decision, the winner may receive a simple majority of 3 votes.”

via How The Nobel Peace Prize Works | The New Republic.

Unesco Voting Concludes

And we have a winner… and she’s from Bulgarian.  The voting was more interesting (perhaps) than the actual outcome; it all came down to the backroom, and this tantalizing tidbit (we heart anon sources!):

In the fourth round of voting on Monday night, the candidates were tied, 29 to 29. Two countries changed their votes overnight in the secret balloting, but it was not clear which ones, since some countries had promised support to Egypt in the first round, but shifted in later rounds, diplomats said.

One person close to the proceedings said that Spain and Italy had shifted their votes after learning new information about what is alleged to have been Mr. Hosny’s role, as an Egyptian diplomat, in protecting the perpetrators of a terrorist act involving an Italian cruise ship in 1985, but that could not be confirmed Tuesday night. The person spoke anonymously because of the delicacy of the matter.

The lastest on the round 4 of UNESCO voting:

In the fourth round of voting of Unesco’s 58-nation executive board, the two candidates were tied, 29-29. If the vote remains tied on Tuesday, the 193-member General Conference will choose a new director general next month, and Mr. Hosny is expected to win in the larger body, where Egypt is thought to have more influence.

The original field of nine candidates has been slowly thinned, with Ms. Bokova, who comes from a family that was prominent in the old Communist government, becoming the alternative to Mr. Hosny, 71, who has been Egypt’s culture minister for 22 years.

President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has pressed hard for his candidate, who had hoped to win with 30 votes in the first round.

But some of the countries that had pledged to Mr. Mubarak to vote for Mr. Hosny — like France, Italy and even Israel — have not felt obliged to keep that commitment in later rounds.

Some American Jewish organizations and civil libertarians have fiercely opposed Mr. Hosny.

In the Egyptian context he is considered liberal, but last year, in a parliamentary debate, defending himself against charges that he was soft on Israel, he said he would personally burn any Israeli book found in the Alexandria library, Egypt’s most important.

Via NYT 21 September 2009

PREVIOUS STORIES:

With more voting on Friday, the game is on for Unesco:

The candidacy of the Egyptian culture minister, Farouk Hosny, left, to lead Unesco suffered a setback on Thursday when he failed to win in the first round of voting. Mr. Hosny had said he had more than the 30 votes required from the 58-nation executive board of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization to win outright. But he got only 22 votes, Unesco officials said, and some of the country votes pledged were for only the first round.

via World Briefing – United Nations – No Winner in First Round of Votes for Unesco Chief – NYTimes.com.

And my previous link to the Op-Ed making the case for Hosny.

Word for Word – A Tutorial From Lyndon B. Johnson – ‘Don’t Let Dead Cats Stand on Your Porch’ – NYTimes.com

Source: National Archives

From the applied perspective, international politics is very similar to the national level—tactics, timing, and personal relationships matter.  Budding diplomats could do well to study effective power brokers, and one of the most clever implementers of the Prince, former US President LBJ, has some lessons to be culled:

In their new book, “The Heart of Power: Health and Politics in the Oval Office,” David Blumenthal, a professor at Harvard Medical School, and James Morone, a political science professor at Brown University, reviewed the nation’s many attempts at health care reform to find some “rules of success.” Here are six lessons from Mr. Johnson’s triumph — captured in his own words, at least those that can be published. It appears that President Obama has studied at least some of them closely.

via Word for Word – A Tutorial From Lyndon B. Johnson – ‘Don’t Let Dead Cats Stand on Your Porch’ – NYTimes.com.

Specifically:  go fast, keep the specialists quiet, master the process (i.e., parli pro), give credit, go public and build momentum, and be passionate.  (Still, read the piece…)

Grading the Obama Health Care Speech

Let’s look at President Obama’s speech for how it measures up on the standards of  effective oratory (and what you’ll learn more about in class next week)–organization, content, and delivery.

1.  Organization:  A

I didn’t listen to it contiguously, so this is a mashup of my observations and others’ commentary:

• Framing is an important part of a speech–something that you’d look for at a more advanced level of analysis.  Andrew Sullivan muses in his live-blogging discussion:  “His description of the public option – that it can provide more efficient treatment because it doesn’t need to make large profits and because it will have less overhead – is the best framing I’ve heard… He’s framing the public option in the conservative language of competition and consumer choice. Smart move. And he isn’t demonizing the insurance companies: he’s saying they are merely encouraged by the system to over-price and under-deliver.”
• Pivots are words pundits love to use but really are just transitions designed to draw contrast in order to make your original point.  Sullivan, again: “Classic Obama pivot: describe the right and the left and then say he is in the middle. And the Burkean twist: “I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch.“”
• Anticipating objections are a key rhetorical device, but complementing old enemies and even chastising friends (in what may be a straw man attack) can be useful to show you are really serious about trying to forge consensus. From Slate.com: “Twice Obama referred to Republican ideas. He praised John McCain’s idea of providing catastrophic care for those who’ve been denied insurance because of a pre-existing condition. He also said he was looking into medical malpractice reforms considered by George Bush. He made a detailed appeal for the public option, a favorite of liberals, but then downplayed it, saying it would cover only 5 percent of the uninsured.“

2.  Content  B+

• Good lines make for good speeches.  According to the Economist live blogging of the speech, this one worked:  “No one should go broke because they get sick.” That was a Facebook meme this week, turned into the “status message” of thousands of liberals. Mr Obama’s speechwriter is not yet 30, and it shows sometimes, not in harmful ways.
• Ultimately you have to say something–have a message.  Ed Rollins, Republican strategist on CNN.com sees that Obama “laid out his goals, he laid out his key objectives. The details will come from Congress” but failed to provide the full answers many sought.  “There’s a lot in this that could be challenged tonight.“
• Who is the audience, Congress or the people? (the latter).  Liberals or conservatives? (base + middle).  And in this sense, he didn’t have a lot new to add.  As John Dickerson in Slate.com notes,  “As for the substance, there were some new nuggets. But mostly the president sought to reiterate what he’s been saying for months.”  The problem:  he needs to reach that audience, and get them to vote his way.  And, more importantly, as David Gergen observes on CNN.com, “We saw the Obama we elected.” … “But for a lot of others, I don’t’ think it move them very much…the people he needed to move to reverse the tide.”  Hugh Hewitt agrees.
• Facts are useful things, but prone to misuse.  Politicians and diplomats employ information to their own ends.  Its always good to use them in your own speeches–but its also nice as a consumer to consult a factchecker, such as the NYT in this case.  (Summary: Obama isn’t perfect.)
• Summed up nicely by the oddball conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan:
  

  A masterful speech, somehow a blend of governance and also campaigning. He has Clinton’s mastery of policy detail with Bush’s under-rated ability to give a great speech. But above all, it is a reprise of the core reason for his candidacy and presidency: to get past the abstractions of ideology and the easy scorn of the cable circus and the cynicism that has thereby infected this country’s ability to tackle pressing problems. This was why he was elected, and we should not be swayed by the old Washington and the old ideologies and the old politics. He stands at the center urging a small shift to more government because the times demand it.

  And he makes sense. And this was not a cautious speech; it was a reasoned but courageous speech. He has put his presidency on the line for this. And that is a hard thing to do.

  via The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan.

3.  Delivery:  A-

Tough to compete here–even if you’re a hard-core conservative.  This is Reaganesque, Kennedyesque, and whatever adjective you want to invent.  We are living with a U.S. president who happens to be a pretty amazing public speaker.  (Get over it/enjoy it.)

Still, one laugh line (or was it?) fell flat.  He seemed off on timing with the teleprompter on a few occassions–perhaps a tough critique but not typical for this amazing orator.

Conclusion?   A-  He has to do the work now.  Speechifying is just one part in politics or diplomacy.  Maureen Dowd turned another clever phrase in relating what Obama had to do tonight with what he tried to do in the ‘controversial’ school speech this week:

The president told students on Tuesday that “being successful is hard” and “you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.” He should take his own words to heart. He can live long and prosper by being less Spocky and more Rocky.

But the fact is, making your speech turn into reality is tough. Dickerson summed it up best:

Barack Obama must envy Steve Jobs. In a speech Wednesday afternoon, Apple’s CEO unveiled several spiffy new product updates, and within hours, on millions of computer screens across the country, little windows popped up asking users if they wanted Apple’s new software. If they did, it was seamlessly a part of their lives in just minutes.

Op-Ed Columnist – An Egyptian for Unesco – NYTimes.com

An appointment to a top job is simple, right? Thumbs up or thumbs down?  Roger Cohen analyzes a candidate for the Unesco top job–an agency no stranger to US controversy [see this useful overview by BYU Kennedy Center and former Reagan-era State Department official Gregory Newell, nonetheless]–on an issue that is one of the most explosive (charges of antisemitism), and delves adeptly into the tough work of sorting out the complexities of diplomacy, leadership, and decision making:

This is an important political appointment, behind which Mubarak has put all his weight, so let’s think coolly about it. Hosny, within a grim and repressive Egyptian political spectrum, has shown some openness — taking heat to get Daniel Barenboim to conduct the Cairo Symphony Orchestra, daring to criticize women in headscarves, and pledging to translate the Israeli writers Amos Oz and David Grossman (although this move is being contested). He brooks debate, at least.

The Obama administration, which needs Mubarak for its Middle East peace plans, is keeping quiet. So is Sarkozy, who needs Mubarak for his dreams of a Mediterranean Union. So, most surprisingly, is Israel.

The daily Haaretz quoted a leaked Israeli Foreign Ministry cable after a meeting between Mubarak and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in May. It said that “in line with understandings with Egypt,” Israel’s position on Hosny had changed to “not-opposed.” The quid-pro-quo remains unclear. Bibi was ever a horse-trader.

So how does Cohen approach it?  In parli pro we’d call it an abstention:

I’m also in the not-opposed camp. What Hosny said was vile, a reflection of the prejudices of his compatriots — prejudices that Israel’s settlements policy does nothing to assuage. There are good alternative candidates, notably the former Austrian foreign minister Benita Ferrero-Waldner, who carry none of his baggage.

But Cohen is not about to lose some leverage in his consideration:

But there’s also something evasive about the alternatives. Hosny stands at the crux of the cultural challenges confronting us. Let’s get him inside the tent rather than stoke the old anti-Western, anti-imperialist flames — reminiscent of what led the United States to abandon Unesco between 1984 and 2002 — by rejecting him.

And then, with the big U.S. contribution to the Unesco budget as leverage, let’s press him relentlessly to fight the anti-Semitic bigotry poisoning young Arab psyches; favor dialogue; open Arab minds to science and education; and embrace the peace that Unesco was set up to foster by draining the poisonous well from which his own now-regretted venom was drawn.

via Op-Ed Columnist – An Egyptian for Unesco – NYTimes.com.

The Joy of Conflict – Inc.

Consensus is great, but sometimes we must fight.  From an article incorporating insights on groupthink with a different take on conflict management–not resolution, but working through to the right decision:

It’s nice to pretend that we work in a no-conflict zone. But that’s a myth—an unhealthy, even disastrous, one. Unresolved conflict stirs up anxiety, fear, and frustration. Elaborate defense mechanisms arise, which hamper an organization’s ability to operate effectively. A classic example is the space shuttle Challenger and its infamous O-rings. Problems with the seals were identified four years before the first shuttle flight but disregarded by NASA, notes Howard Schwartz in his book Narcissistic Process and Corporate Decay. He calls the episode “perhaps the most tragic example of the exportation of conflict.”

via The Joy of Conflict, Team Building Article – Inc. Article.

Booklist | Problem Finders and other Leadership Thoughts

We think of the problem-solver as a useful leader in an organization, but what about the problem-finder? Prof. Michael Roberto at Bryant University thinks hard about this unique approach, including some memorable anecdotes:

This book has argued that leaders at all levels must develop their problem-finding skills. We have provided an in-depth description of the seven critical skills and capabilities required to ensure that problems do not remain hidden in your organization. These processes and techniques will help you discover the bad news that typically does not surface until far too late. Becoming an effective problem-finder requires a different mindset, though, not simply a set of new behaviors and competencies. That mindset begins with a certain level of intellectual curiosity. You must be willing to ask questions, seeking always to learn more about both the familiar and the unfamiliar.

Another Wharton story assesses President Obama’s term thus far against insights from management and leadership thinkers.  There’s no real consensus–which makes for even more interesting reading.  A few highlights:

Grant suggests that Obama should work publicly with experts to win confidence for his programs — perhaps a general to speak about the situation in Afghanistan or respected doctors who back his health care plan. “There are studies showing that leadership can be outsourced,” Grant notes, adding that Americans have indicated they respond better to messages from people who have “first-hand experience, expertise and knowledge about the issues.”

However, outsourcing might also take away from what some experts consider to be one of Obama’s strongest points as a leader — his own ability to speak at length about complex issues in a way that is intelligent, rational and even calming. Wharton’s Friedman, for one, believes Obama’s soothing nature as a speaker may explain his appeal more than any ability to simplify his message. “His sense of competence and calm, and the pragmatic way that he’s been able to get things done to date, have given people a lot of confidence,” says Friedman, describing Obama as “unflappable.”

Useem notes that according to David Gergen, who has advised four presidents, one of the most important elements of presidential leadership is ambition — not the personal kind, but an ambition for the country. “As President, Barack Obama is very ambitious. We know the list — the litany of objectives like health care, economic recovery, ending two wars and changing the way that the court system and Congress operate.”