"FLETCHER IN THE INFORMATION AGE"
by Walter B. Wriston
Convocation Speech Delivered at The Fletcher School at Tufts University
Sept. 3, 2003
It has been said that when Adam and Eve were ejected from the Garden of
Eden that Adam took Eve's hand and said, "We live in an age of
transition." And this thought has been repeated throughout the ages.
Each generation believing it faces unique challenges. And they do. What
sets this age apart from every other is the speed of change. For
example, it took 40 years for radio to get 50 million listeners in the
United States; it took 13 years for television to gain a like number;
but it took only four years for the world wide net to get 50 million
users in America. The time compression means we all have less time to
absorb new information, less time to react to changed conditions. In
these circumstances it is often easier to ignore changes and stick with
what worked in the past. In her book The March of Folly, Barbara
Tuchman wrote: "Mental standstill or stagnation---the maintenance intact
by rulers and policy makers of the ideas they started with is fertile
ground for folly. Generals preparing to fight the last war is a clear
but by no means the only example of this tendency." It is a truism that
in warfare the armies of Napoleon could move and maneuver no faster than
those of Julius Caesar. Over that span of years there was little
progress in communication. Command and control systems until the middle
of the 19th Century consisted basically of messengers, buglers and
signal flags. With the relatively recent advent of satellites, fiber
optics and uses of the spectrum hitherto thought to be unusable a new
situation of warfare has been created. The new information technology
has now enabled a remote headquarters miles from the battlefield to
reach almost any ship, area commander, or aircraft in real time. Area
commanders often have instant communication with squad leaders in the
field. This situation, combined with deadly accurate weapons guided by
the GPS, is slowly transforming military doctrine in the United States
and Britain. Unfortunately, these new networks are also exploited by
terrorist organizations which has created new challenges to nation
states.
Massive historical transitions like the one now changing the world are
not only disruptive, and often painful, but also upset long held beliefs
and require us to think anew--which is itself a painful process.
Examples abound. The contrast in the way statesmen communicate is
illustrated by the fact that when President Woodrow Wilson went to Paris
to negotiate the Treaty of Versailles, he ordered his Postmaster-General
Albert Burleson, to assume control over all transatlantic cable lines in
order to control and censor the news from Europe.
Today such an action would be an exercise in futility as no one or no
nation can block the flow of information across national borders. Myriad
pathways carry information over, around and through national borders as
if they did not exist. The 24 hour news cycle is a fact of life.
In the midst of the First Gulf War, Saddam Hussein proposed what was
viewed in Washington as a phony peace settlement. The problem for
President George Herbert Walker Bush was to convey that judgment to the
26 nations of the international coalition fighting Saddam. As former
presidential spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater remembers: "The quickest and
most effective way was CNN, because all countries in the world had it
and were watching it on a real-time basis...and 20 minutes after we got
the proposal....I went on national television...to tell the 26
members... that the war was continuing.
We entrusted a vital diplomatic message in the midst of a war to a
private television company seen by the whole world.
In this and in many other instances the elite foreign policy
establishment was bypassed. When the President of the United States
picks up the phone to talk to another head of state a new paradigm is
established. No highly trained foreign service officer meticulously
drafted a note, no Secretary of State signed it, and no American
ambassadors called on a foreign minister to deliver the message.
The contrast between then and now could not be more striking. Wilson's
strategy was to control the flow of information by fiat. Many
Governments still wish they could, but Bush realized that he had to be a
winner in the world information market.
When one changes the way and the speed one communicates, a chain
reaction is started that can effect old processes in politics and
business. As recently as 37 years ago the transatlantic cable could
carry the grand total of 138 telephone calls between Europe and the
United States. The rule in business was to write a letter if the matter
was not urgent, send a cable if there was a time constraint, and as a
last resort use the telephone. Today the flood of data on the net has
overtaken and rushed past voice communications.
The explosion of ways and speeds of communicating has helped foster the
rise of NGOs and their influence. Governments are no longer the only
power centers as NGOs using the power of the internet undertake
everything from saving the whales to ridding the world of land mines.
The use of the internet to dramatically influence national politics was
driven home when Matt Drudge, who was perceived by many as a maverick
journalist, posted on his web site information about a White House
intern that started a political fire storm. His information was picked
up by the
main stream media and eventually led to a bill of impeachment of the
President of the United States.
The ability to post information, good and bad, true or false on a web
site that can be seen by anyone in the world with a computer and a modem
is a truly new situation in the world. Whatever one thinks of this
situation, the fact remains that the technology will not go away; it
will only get better and faster and constitutes a new state of affairs
which must be dealt with by policy makers. One of the great pioneers of
the integrated circuit, Carver Mead warned: "We are limited not by our
technology, but by the way we think. We still think just the way we
thought two hundred years ago, as if nothing had happened." But a lot
has happened and one of Fletcher's roles is to educate students in the
new way of the world without losing the old values that built the
country.
Americans are generous people who have poured resources into the
developing world, often with little effect. For almost 50 years, many
conferences have been held delineating the continuing economic disparity
between the West and many of the developing countries, and often
conclude by suggesting a common panacea: the transfer of resources from
the richer nations to the poorest even though that is known to be a zero
sum game. It took the late physicist Richard Feynman, at the conclusion
of a conference, to put his finger on the fallacy. "The idea of
distributing everything evenly is based on the theory there is only X
amount of stuff in the world.... But this theory does not take into
account the real reason for the difference between countries---that is,
the development of new techniques for growing food, the development of
machinery to...do other things, and the fact that machinery requires the
concentration of capital. It isn't the stuff, but the power to make the
stuff that is important." Economists have long understood this, but
Feyman captured the concept in a few words. The rub has been the absence
of the accumulation of capital, but Hernando de Soto has demonstrated
that even the poorest countries have massive amounts of locked in
capital that can be freed through titling previous untitled assets. This
requires a framework of laws and honest governments to enforce and
respect their framework of laws. Given these preconditions, Mr. de Soto
has proved his formula works. One of the greatest challenges of the new
classes at Fletcher is to understand what is required to, in Feyman's
words to "make the stuff," and start the development process.
Despite all of the advances of science and the ways in which it is
changing the world, science does not remake the human mind or alter the
power of the human spirit. There is still no substitute for courage and
leadership. One other thing remains the same. Business and Diplomacy are
now and will in the future always be conducted in the medium of politics
as long as governments exist; there simply is no other atmosphere
available.
What has changed dramatically is the explosive increase in the data
which is available to our policy makers in coping with this new world.
Hopefully that data processed by the minds of trained diplomats will
produce real knowledge, and with enough experience even wisdom. Wisdom
has always been in short supply, but it will be sorely needed in the
days and years ahead because in the words of a former president, "Only
people can solve problems people create."
We have entered a period when our leaders are once again articulating
the concept of freedom. Freedom is a virus for which there is no
antidote and despite setbacks is spreading across the planet. Once again
the realization grows that without freedom, the world is politically and
spiritually bankrupt; there simply is no other government program but
force. Two World Wars have driven that lesson home. Often forgotten is
that the expansion of freedom in the world has been American policy
since the founding of the country. Even George Washington, often
regarded as the Father of Isolationism, looked upon himself as "a
citizen of the great republic of humanity." Those who say we have no
interest or responsibility for the expansion of freedom around the globe
misread American history.
In what is said to be Thomas Jefferson's last letter written on June 24,
1826, in response to an invitation to attend a fourth of July
celebration, he wrote about America's decision for freedom: "May it be
to the world...(to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to
all)...to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and
superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and assume the
blessings and security of self government."
It is easy today to get discouraged at the pace of progress in this
sound bite world where talking heads on TV bombard us with pessimism
about just about everything. It reminds me of a line from a play by St.
John Ervine: "All the enthusiasts of my acquaintance" said the Bishop
"have no brains and all the brainy people have no enthusiasm. We are
dying of hot heads and cold feet.
Fortunately for our future, Fletcher is educating men and women who have
both brains and enthusiasm ready and able to play their part in an
increasingly complex world. At the end of the day, freedom and democracy
are the best, perhaps the only, soil in which peace can grow. The cynics
and the so called realists denigrate the power of freedom, but as usual,
Abraham Lincoln said it best in his first Inaugural Address: "Why should
there not be a patient confidence in the ultimate justice of the people?
Is there any better or equal hope in the world?"
|
|