Speeches & Texts
As prepared for delivery.
Diplomacy in the 21st Century
Bertelsmann Forum
Gütersloh, February 9, 2011
Ambassador Philip D. Murphy
Sehr geehrte liebe Frau Mohn,
Sehr geehrter Herr Ostrowski,
Sehr geehrter Herr Dr. Thielen,
Sehr geehrter Herr van Kampen,
Meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren!
Vielen Dank für Ihre Einladung, bei dieser renommierten Veranstaltungsreihe hier in Gütersloh zu sprechen. Ich bin sehr gerne zu einem Unternehmen gekommen, das Maßstäbe gesetzt hat im Bereich der Medien und des gesellschaftlichen Engagements.
Als Allererstes möchte ich Ihnen, liebe Frau Mohn, meine Anerkennung für Ihre Arbeit und für das beeindruckende Lebenswerk Ihres Mannes Reinhard Mohn aussprechen. Die Fortentwicklung der deutsch-amerikanischen Beziehungen war immer Teil Ihrer Arbeit, auch in der Bertelsmann-Stiftung. Dafür an dieser Stelle ganz herzlichen Dank.
Frau Mohn, you invited me to participate in the Bertelsmann Forum last summer but I must confess that it wasn’t until December that I started to give some more thought to how I should frame a discussion of the German-American partnership. I decided for a number of reasons to put our conversation this evening in the broadest possible perspective and talk about the context of diplomacy in the 21st century. For one, put quite simply, because our partnership is the success story of modern diplomacy. During the Cold War, American foreign policy and military strategy was largely all about Germany. Today we work together as partners "auf augenhöhe" to address problems around the globe. Over the past six and a half decades, Germans and Americans: diplomats and soldiers and government leaders, not only at the federal levels, but also in state legislatures and city halls; businesspeople on both sides of the Atlantic; hundreds of thousands of students and their mentors, their teachers and professors; and writers, performers and other artists have shown that they believe in the importance of our partnership in many different ways. They have lived those convictions and I am sure that each and every one of us could tell a story about how the German-American relationship has touched us in our personal or professional lives. The Bertelsmann concept of corporate responsibility based on principles such as fairness, honesty, integrity, and respect belongs to the category of shared values – and they can touch lives. It is an example of how values can be translated into practice. "Menschen bewegen. Zukunft gestalten. Teilhabe in einer globalisierten Welt." These are the goals that the Bertelsmann Foundation has set for itself.
This is a unique moment in history, marked by an interdependency that has never been seen before. One example of the overlapping of interests that I believe characterize our times is that the Bertelsmann goals that I just cited could also be used to describe the broader goals of diplomacy, especially if we want to see the kind of success stories that we have seen in the past. One decade into the 21st century and two decades after the end of the Cold War, international relations is indeed a multi-dimensional chess game that Professor Joseph Nye often refers to. There are a number of separate boards – one representing, for example, military resources; another, economic relations; and each board projects various degrees of power. Military and strategic assets are played on one field with various degrees of polarity; but on the economic playing field, we know that nothing can be accomplished within the areas of trade, financial regulation or global sustainable growth without multilateral cooperation. Issues that cross borders, such as pandemics, climate change, drug trade, or transnational terrorism, reside on another playing field. And then there are the parallel and intersecting spheres that represent the six billion citizens of the some 200 separate and sovereign nations on this planet. Each of these nations has a distinct past that has shaped its interests, values, and goals; and each of these nations has a future that will be shaped by an infinite series of new choices. These choices, when made by politically awakened and technologically empowered people, represent an enormous potential for transformative and positive change. Diplomacy in the 21st century has to be grounded in the reality of this multi-dimensional reality, a reality where the stakes are high and passions may also run high. To play the game and win, or more simply, to operate effectively on the shifting ground of the global landscape, nations have to play all the chess boards I just mentioned, both horizontally and vertically at the same time.
Diplomacy in the 21st century brings to the table representatives of societies with diverse cultural norms, and so while “gesundem Menschenverstand und Höflichkeit” are important as one of my predecessors and others have said (and as my wife Tammy and I try to tell our four children every day), the rules of diplomatic etiquette are exponentially more intricate than they ever were before. President Obama addressed this complexity in his first trip abroad as president, when he said, and I quote: “If there’s just Roosevelt and Churchill sitting in a room with a brandy,” he said, “that’s an easier negotiation. But that’s not the world we live in, and it shouldn’t be the world that we live in.”
The inclusion of newly pivotal powers in international negotiations does not just add a few more talking heads to the old club. Domestic politics shape the positions advanced by states and so international negotiations take place both within and between nations. Diplomacy must therefore recognize and engage the vastly increased number of people whose opinions are politically important.
Before I go on, I would like to say a few words in memory of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke, who I am sure many of you remember from his time in Germany. As you know, Dick Holbrooke passed away suddenly and unexpectedly in December. He was, by any measure, a towering figure, both publicly and privately, and he brought a unique blend of energy and tenacity to the challenges at hand. He grappled with some of the most difficult and important challenges of American foreign policy; and he left an indelible mark on the United States, on the German-American partnership, and on the world. He had a passion for serious policy questions and I know if he is looking down on us this evening, he would appreciate the fact that we are having this discussion here tonight. I spoke earlier about the multi-dimensional chess game of international relations. Dick’s description of the process of international relations was “a combination of chess and mountain climbing." It is tough work.
Over the past two weeks, we have seen just how tough it can be as we monitor the political situations in Egypt, in Yemen, in Jordan, in Tunisia, and the entire region. The people of the Middle East, like people everywhere, are seeking a chance to contribute and to have a role in the decisions that shape their lives. In Egypt, the protests have underscored the deep grievances that exist there. The situation continues to be volatile and the United States will continue to urge the Egyptian Government, as it has for 30 years, to respond to the legitimate aspirations of the Egyptian people and take concrete steps to implement democratic and economic reform.
As both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have said, in response to the current situation and on earlier occasions, leaders need to engage with their people to respond to their aspirations and to help build a better future. President Obama spoke directly to the people of Egypt, particularly the young people of Egypt, last week from the White House. “I want to be clear,” he said, “We hear your voices and [we] have an unyielding belief that you will determine your own destiny and seize the promise of a better future for your children and your grandchildren.”
On the weekend at the Munich Security Conference, Secretary Clinton spoke of the transition process and how it needs to be a process that, first, respects the universal rights of the Egyptian people; secondly, that leads to free and fair elections; and most important, that addresses the legitimate grievances of those who seek a better future. This is a moment of opportunity and the whole world is watching.
At the same time, while it is clear that this transformation needs to be worked out by Egyptians themselves, both President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton, as well as other members of the U.S. government, including the U.S. Ambassadors in the region, have talked and continue to talk privately with leaders and other contacts in Egypt and other countries about meaningful and peaceful change and the road forward. These concerns are important; they are ongoing; and they underscore the priorities of the Obama administration. The demonstrations in Cairo and elsewhere illustrate that one of the givens in our world is that the conditions of people's lives in one country can affect security in countries on another continent or on the other side of the world.
What can we do now? It would be wonderful if we could wave a magic wand and create the conditions for economic prosperity in Egypt that would give young people there – young men and women – good jobs that pay well and that offer a fulfilling, meaningful future. Economic development is important, although it’s not the whole story. The Egyptian economy, before this upheaval, had actually been growing at around 5% a year; and this, despite the recession. What it does mean is that economic opportunity, combined with political freedom, is crucial. It would also be wonderful if we could wave that magic wand and create good jobs for young men and women in our countries as well – in particular, for those who, for various reasons, feel that they have been left behind. But although the world's problems are vast, we all know that resources are not; and that we must look for ways to work together as effectively as possible in the new parameters of the 21st century.
For that reason, President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are committed to a forward-thinking, sustainable and sustained concept of diplomacy. Hillary Clinton began her tenure as Secretary of State by stressing a "smart power" approach to solving global problems. The broad definition of smart power is a combination of soft and hard power. Secretary Clinton was more specific. She described smart power in terms of cooperating with military partners and other agencies of government, while simultaneously developing and maintaining effective partnerships with both NGOs and the private sector. She talked about applying pressure and exerting leverage – when necessary with military power; but also about the role, in many ways, more important, that diplomacy and development can play in defusing tensions.
She talked about getting results through the thousands of separate interactions that take place around the globe every day in the name of diplomacy. And when I see how active the Embassy and our Consulates are here in Germany, believe me we are literally talking about thousands of interactions. Consul General Janice Weiner will back me up on that.
And so very early on, Secretary Clinton requested a new strategy to lay out a road forward on how the United States can most effectively engage with the world. That new strategy was completed and released in December. It has one under-lying theme: namely, that robust diplomacy and effective development implementation have to be the first faces of America’s international engagement. Diplomats and development experts can indeed diffuse crises before they explode. And how? By standing up for universal values and human rights; by creating new opportunities for economic growth; and by partnering to advance economic growth that is inclusive and prosperity-producing.
Last week, I was in Washington at the very first all-hands-on-deck ambassadorial conference in the history of the State Department. Chiefs of Mission from every corner of the world met at the State Department headquarters at the end of the Mall just across from the Lincoln Memorial in DC to discuss both the theories and the practices of foreign policy implementation in the 21st century, the theories and the practices that will help us play a winning game.
One of the issues on the agenda at the conference in Washington was why development matters to U.S. foreign policy. Why should the United States, or Germany for that matter, spend money on people overseas when we face economic challenges at home? The answer is that development, when done effectively, is one of the best tools we have to enhance stability and prosperity everywhere. Sensible, effective development, coupled with diplomacy, can strengthen fragile or failing states, support the rise of capable partners that can help solve regional and global problems, and advance democracy and human rights.
An emphasis on development and diplomacy is in keeping with America's history and traditions. The Marshall Plan was a civilian development initiative undertaken with European governments. Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the drafting committee that produced the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Decades before the term "soft power" was coined, President John F. Kennedy founded the Peace Corps to show the world a different face of the United States. And today, we have other stories to tell, stories that will hopefully one day be the success stories of tomorrow.
For example, a little over one year ago, the most devastating earthquake that has ever hit a major urban center destroyed Port-au-Prince, the capital of Haiti. Haiti, by any measure, was already one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere. There was an enormous international response and I think it is accurate to say that it was one of the best rescue operations that have ever been implemented. The United States did its fair share, but many other countries also played key roles – including Germany. Now the efforts have moved on to reconstruction; and here too, both our countries are involved.
Afghanistan is another example. NATO is moving steadily towards the goal of a stable, independent Afghanistan able to provide for its own security. As many people mentioned at the Munich Security Conference this past weekend, however, these gains are still fragile and reversible. To sustain that progress, the Afghans will have to assume the responsibility for security and governance. As part of the transition, we must continue to work with our Afghan partners to improve the provision of basic services, to promote transparency and accountability, and to strengthen civic institutions.
Last month, I traveled as a guest, a return guest I might add, of the German Bundeswehr to Mazar-e Sharif and Kabul to witness the latest efforts in civilian development, security training, and joint operations in German-led RC-North. It was an opportunity to assess the progress that had been achieved in the past year, as well as the challenges that remain. I was amazed by what I saw. Camp Marmal, which houses RC-North headquarters, was an efficient, well-run installation when I first saw it last year. This year, it was bustling with a jolt of renewed energy. Over the course of the past year, ISAF has sent 5000 American troops to the north and greatly increased the capacity to implement our joint goals for training of Afghan government forces. The U.S. Army 4th Combat Aviation Brigade is now up and running out of a building at Camp Marmal that did not exist last year, providing aviation and medevac support throughout the north. This is the brigade whose pilots flew in under fire to rescue wounded Bundeswehr soldiers in October 2010. It is very evident that a close partnership is being built, at every level, across U.S. and German forces.
On the development front, I had the opportunity to visit a German-built Teacher Training College at Mazar-e Sharif. This is one of forty-four such institutions nationwide preparing the next generation of Afghanistan’s teachers. At this particular location, sixty percent of the students are women. 550 women applied for roughly 150 spots in the female dormitory. This is a fantastic development. A decade ago, girls in Afghanistan could not even go to school. Today, this teacher training college is bursting at the seams with women who are anxious to teach Afghan children – both girls and boys.
I also visited the town of Hairatan on the Uzbekistan border. That visit offered an inside glimpse at the type of economic growth that will be vital to Afghanistan’s enduring stability and development. Hairatan is home to “Friendship Bridge” across the Amu Darya River. The bridge links Afghanistan by truck and rail to Central Asia and Russia, and by extension to Europe. Here, our soldiers are training Afghan Border Police to ensure open lines of commerce.
I was also very encouraged to see that ISAF forces at Hairatan are not only focused on capacity-building. They are also conducting outreach through the military’s FETs, which stands for Female Engagement Teams. I had lunch with a young female Army lieutenant involved in the program and learned about the eagerness with which Afghan women wanted to be heard. The program has been a huge success. In the case of this particular lieutenant, the welcome has been so warm that women and children chant her nickname (which happens to be “Cookie”) when she walks down the street.
Well, what Cookie is doing is exactly what Secretary Clinton means when she talks about smart power. And by the way, believe it or not, you here at Bertelsmann can take some credit for this concept. One of the first people to use the term was Suzanne Nossel, another very smart lady (or smart cookie, forgive the pun). She wrote an article entitled “Smart Power” in 2004 for Foreign Affairs magazine; the same magazine in which George Kennan, writing as “X” in 1947, put a name to what became American policy for the next forty years: the policy of “containment” that also had a lot to do with earlier forms of soft power. At the time, Ms. Nossel was the Vice President of U.S. Business Development at Bertelsmann in New York. When Hillary Clinton started talking about smart power two years ago as the new Secretary of State, Ms. Nossel was enthusiastic, commenting, “She is going to make smart power cool.” Ms. Nossel was in fact so enthusiastic that she now works at the State Department as Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of International Organization Affairs.
And so, liebe Frau Mohn, here’s to the power of international networks because effective networks shape and form smart people – the most basic prerequisite of smart power. Networks provide the kind of contextual knowledge that make it possible to function in the multi-dimensional world we live in.
I would love to be able to wave that magic wand I just mentioned and also send all young people from both of our countries and from countries around the world on exchange programs so that they can gain the kind of contextual knowledge that would make them all true citizens of the world; but here, too, resources are limited. There are, however, other ways people can engage and be engaged.
Janice Weiner, our Consul General in Düsseldorf, can tell you about the very active school outreach programs that she and colleagues in other Consulates around the country participate in. I myself regularly meet with young people around Germany at town hall meetings to discuss the past, the present and the future of our partnership. My goal or my hope is that they come away from the discussion just as convinced as I am that the transatlantic relationship has never been more vital or more needed.
That was certainly the message at the Munich Security Conference this past weekend. The focus this year was to be on the Euro-Atlantic security community and how NATO and the post-Lisbon European Union are becoming organizations that are truly global in scope. Egypt and the situation in other countries in the Middle East added a different dimension to the conference. Those discussions certainly showed why the transatlantic partnership is so important, especially in terms of the multidimensional chess game that I spoke of earlier. Speaking for myself, I think chess is a great game but to be perfectly honest, my preferred sport is Fussball. And in spite of the challenges that lie before us I am encouraged because I see individual players and teams on the playing field that are incrementally stronger, faster, and able to carry the ball further than ever before – and here I think in particular of Germany. And that is the message I communicate to young people in Germany at town hall meetings.
But as you all know, in today’s fast-paced media and information environment, we have to go beyond face-to-face contact. I conduct virtual town halls, nurture my Facebook friends, count my YouTube hits, and Twitter discreetly. The Internet has changed the world and that includes the world of diplomacy. Here in Germany, there is enormous potential to engage more people, especially young people, using digital tools than we could ever have done, even when we had a network of Amerika Haus libraries and cultural centers.
But these new possibilities for communication have also created new challenges, such as the recent release of confidential documents and classified material via Wikileaks. Over the last two weeks, as governments, yours and mine, have monitored the situation in the Middle East, we have seen how important both public and behind the scenes forms of communication are.
In the United States, there are established times when classified material is made available to the public but due to a severe breach of security, cables were released on the Internet much in advance of those time specifications. Diplomats are not unique in their reliance on confidential communications; doctors, lawyers, journalists, among many others, rely on them too. Even widely published authors understand the need for establishing time periods before sensitive information is released.
Mark Twain, the creator of Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn and perhaps one of the most frequently quoted authors in the world, left behind 5,000 pages of memoirs when he died in 1910. He stipulated that he did not want them to be published for at least a century; talk about a long-term marketing campaign. Twain's uncensored biographical writings show the same humor and sharp social commentary as the novels, short stories and essays he published on a more normal publishing schedule. In his stream of conscious autobiographical comments, Twain touched on religion, politics, and many topics in between, including many barbed criticisms of friends and acquaintances. He was, however, more immediately candid and forthcoming with his criticism regarding diplomats. In a letter to his mother in 1868, he wrote, and I quote, “They want to send me abroad, as a Consul or a Minister. I said I didn't want any of the pie. God knows I am mean enough and lazy enough, now without being a foreign consul.” Well, as I well know, our Consuls General are anything but mean and lazy.
And if there is any good thing to say about Wikileaks, it can only be that it made people more aware of what diplomats really do. Going back to the image of the multi-dimensional chess board, it is clear that relations between governments are not the only concern of diplomats. American diplomats meet with local human rights workers, journalists, religious leaders, and others outside of governments who offer their own candid insights. For example, if an anti-corruption activist shares information about official misconduct or a social worker passes along documentation of sexual violence, revealing that person’s identity could have serious repercussions, including imprisonment, torture, or even death in some countries. Diplomacy is all about dialogue and communication. We all know, however, that even the most constructive discussions can often be passionate and critical, even when well-meaning. Diplomacy therefore is also all about trust and discretion. Anything that recklessly undermines that trust can endanger people – from human rights activists to religious leaders; and it leaves us all worse off. The Wikileaks disclosure does not just affect America’s foreign policy interests. It also affects the entire international community – the alliances and partnerships, the conversations and negotiations that safeguard global security and advance economic prosperity. And that too is what diplomacy in the 21st century stands for.
But I do not want to leave you with the impression that diplomacy is only discussion, conversation, and negotiation – public or private. If indeed Dick Holbrooke is looking down on us this evening, I think I know what he might say. He would say that talk ultimately has to lead to action. Diplomacy has gone through some major changes in the last decade. We live in a time of sweeping change. Key global trends are reshaping international affairs. New actors, good and bad, have the power to shape international affairs like never before. Threats loom, including violent extremism, nuclear proliferation, climate change, and economic shocks that could set back global prosperity. At the same time, the forces that fuel these challenges – economic interdependence and the speedy movement of information, capital, goods, and people – are also creating unprecedented opportunities. It’s not enough simply to keep up with all of this change. We must stay ahead of it and we need to dedicate ourselves to turning ideas into action.
Always, of course, using Menschenverstand und Höflichkeit. That is part of the Golden Rule that we teach to our children. In that context, let me close with something that Johann Wolfgang von Goethe once said that could be used as a Golden Rule for diplomacy. Ich zitiere: “Behandle die Menschen so, als wären sie, was sie sein sollten, und du hilfst ihnen zu werden, was sie sein können. ”
Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit.