On the Annenberg School of Public Diplomacy's blog, Philip Seib lauded Hillary Clinton's  legacy on the field of public diplomacy by actively participating with and listening to global publics.  Following up on George Packer's article on Clinton in The New Yorker, Seib notes how Clinton wholeheartedly and effectively put Obama's policy of engagement into practice.  In the course of his argument, he flippantly disregards the role of monologue in the diplomacy, stating "one-way communication is archaic and ineffective."

 

I take issue with the idea of diplomacy going solely towards public diplomacy.  As Ameilia Arsenaut and Geoffrey Cowan noted in their article "Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: The Three Layers of Public Diplomacy," one-way communication plays a pivotal role in diplomacy that can never be truly overturned by reaching out through collaboration and engagement--no matter how vital those roles are.  Some of history's greatest moments are cemented in our memories through well-crafted, epic lines delivered though a monologue speech by a prominent figure.  Take President Reagan's iconic line, "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" While the quote is under 160 characters, it was not a tweet and the physical circumstances added to the weight of his words.

While Clinton was an expert at using engagement in the form of public diplomacy, she did not use that to the exclusion of monologue.  For example, in her October 14th speech to the the New York Economic Club, she clearly and eloquently outlined her bold vision of economic statecraft and morphing the State Department into a dynamic organization that interfaced aptly with various strata of society.

While I certainly agree with Mr. Seib that technology and engagement are dramatically and critically altering our perspectives and practice of diplomacy, it is yet one of many tools in our toolbox.