Alliance of Belief
I attended the annual dinner of the Atlantic Council of the United States on Monday night in Washington, DC. Tony Blair, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, delivered the keynote address. His central thesis was that the world needs to move beyond alliances based on interests to an Alliance of Belief. He argued that there are certain universal values that are common to humanity and key to governance in the 21st century. Among these are freedom and justice, which must be the foundation for our way of life. Mr. Blair went on to say that these values need to be accepted as universal rather than Western, particularly by those in the Middle East. “We are in a battle of ideas,” the former Prime Minister said. “We must explain what we stand for and why, to address concerns so that we forge an alliance of conviction.” He added, “The idea that the West suppresses Muslims and Muslim culture is absurd. We must confront this myth and persuade Muslims of our acceptance of diversity.” He went on to espouse a combination of force and attraction, going beyond the minimum needs of security toward a better mutual understanding.
The next day, I heard Dr. Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State, describe a quite different theory of governance, one premised on balance of power. He suggested that as Asia is emerging as the new center of gravity, there is the potential for a 19th century system of interlocking alliances (think of Metternich’s Europe post Napoleon). The interests of the world “should be to prevent the emergence of an Asian bloc,” he said, by maintaining close connections between US, Europe and the three key nations of China, India and Japan. Dr. Kissinger did acknowledge a gap between the economic organization of the world which embraces globalization and the political organization which resists this logic in favor of preserving the status quo via protectionism and nationalism. He agreed that there are issues such as environment and energy that can only be solved on a global basis. But his basis approach is one of interaction of elites in business and government, establishing rules to be followed by others, a classic application of the pyramid of influence.
So here is the contrast between the new and old worlds on government or business management, between soft power and hard power, the multiple stakeholder model of Blair versus the realpolitik of Kissinger. A traditional approach to issues management for business is to create an alliance of interested parties who can bring special influence to bear on the legislative process, often times aimed at slowing regulation. I am reminded of the incredibly humorous section of "Thank You for Smoking" novel by Christopher Buckley, in which he describes a regular meeting of the alcohol, firearms and tobacco lobbyists, who describe themselves as the Merchants of Death. This was the period of the “inside game” when the right connections in Washington, often shaped by political contributions, helped business to shape the political agenda. In the new world of transparency and wisdom of crowds, companies have to be prepared to make their case to the outside world. There will need to be different sorts of alliances, with civil society and communities, with employees and passionate consumers. Without an informed debate, politicians will bow to the path of least resistance and will remove business’ license to operate at the first sign of problems. Our job as PR people must be to introduce the views of the non-traditional stakeholders, to sit at the policy-making table to shape outcomes not just communication.