ABSTRACT
The research paper has two parts: the first one explores the expectations of the change of administrations, the first reactions to the new President and some of the most difficult issues he had to tackle in his first 100 days of government. The surveys of the Pew Research Center and Elcano Royal Institute served as the basis for the work carried out. The second part presents how public diplomacy is articulated through the federal structures, the different views of each head and change and continuity from Bush to Obama.
The US global image was at a historical low after the Bush administration. It is not a secret that the world’s support of US was in decline during his last years. Obviously the country’s image abroad suffered the consequences. To tell the truth it is not fair to attribute all the ills of the negative image to policies. Public diplomacy’s strategies might also have played a part being not well consolidated. The image failure during the last years of the Bush Administration might have something to do with both reasons: badly oriented policies and a public diplomacy strategy lacking resources and views.
In his first trip outside the American continent Obama had a very ambitious aim: to launch an emergency plan against the world economic crisis and to convince his NATO partners of the necessity of a new strategy for Afghanistan. Both things were not going to be easy, as they were main issues to which European public opinion had showed its opposition.
The first part of this paper is devoted to this matter
For 124 days, Obama’s administration has not appointed a head for PD. During this period of time a debate has opened between the experts on what US PD for this administration should be. It was clear that when President Obama appointed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, the soft power issue was going to continue being a central part of the Department. But PD was also crucial for the Bush administration, especially after September 11th.
What are the differences between the two administrations regarding public diplomacy? What is the key to PD after Bush? What ruptures and what continuity can we find? If on balance the last Under Secretary appointed by Bush, James Glassman, had been positive, in the opinion of many, including Democrats, should US PD change as had other policies with Obama’s arrival at the White House? What should be the ideal background of the new Under Secretary? What kind of leader were Clinton and Obama looking for?
The second part of this paper aims to answer all these questions.
Here you have the index:
1. The Obama Effect: From presidential campaign to President
1.1. Change Expectations
1.2. European Media
1.3. The first transatlantic trip
1.4. The most difficult issues in Europe
2. U.S. Public Diplomacy: from Bush to Obama
2.1. Structures of Public Diplomacy (PD)
2.2. Views on Public Diplomacy
2.3. Resources for Public Diplomacy Academical
3. Conclusions
