The awkward moment when Syria accepts Russia’s proposal to turn over its chemical weapons; while the United States mounts “credible military threat” against Basha al-Assad regime ready to blow someone’s head off to order military strikes on the war thorn country. While President Obama claimed he delayed the military strikes in efforts to allow for a diplomatic resolve, the fact remains the United States failed to come up with a diplomatic resolve. Russia DID. Which leaves me to ask the obvious question “why didn’t or couldn’t anyone in the U.S. states dept. and or at the white house come up with that idea?”
So let’s say hypothetically the United States did come up with the idea of Syria turning over its chemical weapons to international control, would Syria accept?
Foreign Policy, Culture wars and Cultural relativism are great tools in public diplomacy and negotiations, and will be better understood in my opinion if we encourage more arts and humanities in our education system; an education system that’s been significantly systemically skewed towards STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering & Math) – (That the US is not even excelling in). The question becomes how do we educate ourselves to meet the demands of public diplomacy and the real needs that confront this generation while staying competitive in STEM?
As this event unfolds, I believe we can at least agree on these three (3) things; that
- We need leaders that not only understand high level diplomacy that’s credible and feasible, yet has the abilities and or the know how to deliver on such types of diplomatic discourse to avert a debacle.
- We can’t afford a one size fits all education system or a cookie cutter approach to education; we’ve got to be open to new ideas to effectively train, manage and lead with strong understanding of a global environment with ability to connect locally.
- We lose if we continue to educate and train for a future we can’t predict; of what relevance is that kind of education system? So rather than continuous wastage on failed academic models why not channel substantial resources to teach adaptability? Our failure to adapt or promote our ideals leaves us playing catch up almost all the time. Especially in cases such as this.
One of my favorite Education pioneers once said:
We have to rethink the fundamental principles, on which we are educating our children.” – (Sir Ken Robinson) [FEB 2006] [How education kills creativity. ted.com]
He was right then, and he’s still right now. Our collective failures to relate and understand changing cultures and paradigms, will result in arms race in leadership both locally and most especially around the world.
It’s one thing to be a Harvard educated lawyer with pedestrian appeal to rally the world around what could have been a major foreign policy achievement for his administration, and It’s entirely different to be a master strategic leader of diplomacy that successfully averted what could have been catastrophic for the middle east and the United States’ allies.
How we educate ourselves now will determine how prepared we are to lead the future. So let us broaden the scope of our understanding of global affairs including its complexities through current curriculums; while exploring new academic frontiers to strengten our goal of “Glocalization” through new education frontiers.
Related Post: RE:DEFINE HOW YOU VIEW EDUCATION