Towards a critical pedagogy of comparative public diplomacy: pseudo‐education, fear‐mongering and insecurities in Canadian–American foreign policy

Abstract

Little research has examined public diplomacy as a comparative education issue, particularly regarding social‐psychological, economic and political fears or personal and national insecurities. This paper discusses American public diplomacy as a mostly Cold War strategy adapted to post‐9/11 national security interests, fears and desires. It further explores differences, similarities, and debates in Canadian media, policy documents and academia, in response to American political, economic and military pressures or demands for a ‘North American’ (i.e. joint American–Canadian) security approach. From a critical pedagogy perspective the paper argues that modern public diplomacy has been a dubious, pseudo‐educational, fear‐mongering concept nurtured by academics, politicians and military leaders as part of an American foreign policy, military security and propaganda strategy. The paper further shows that post‐9/11 Canada, problematically, adapted its own public diplomacy policies to serve American interests. Further research is needed to examine more closely public diplomacy's impacts on Canadian education.

Notes

1. Fulbright was responsible for one of the most enduring Secretary of State led public diplomacy initiatives, the educational exchange and fellowship programme legislation of 1946, which still bears his name.