A Battle for Hearts, Minds and Burgers

DOHA, Qatar —  Shortly after the Gulf War in 1991, I visited Syria, where the warmth of the Syrian people stood in stark contrast to the imposing portraits of Hafez Assad that lined the streets. After a day of sipping tea and wandering through Damascus marketplaces, my friends announced that they wanted to take me to a “very special” restaurant. Famished and expecting a rich meal of Syrian cuisine, I hid my disappointment when we arrived at Burger King.

Over Whoppers, these Syrian university students told me how -- if they were really lucky -- Damascus might hit the mother lode: McDonald’s was considering opening a local franchise. Enjoying a Big Mac would mean they had arrived in the world.

That evening in 1991 was the ultimate manifestation of what political scientist Joseph Nye calls American “soft power” -- cultural and diplomatic dominance that persuades, rather than forces, others to do our bidding. Soft power, he argues, is the necessary complement to “hard power” -- otherwise known as coercion and the projection of military force.

As war looms again in the Persian Gulf, that Damascus dinner returns to my mind. Traveling the region, I find that my friends’ dreams have indeed come true. McDonald’s operates in almost every Arab country. Many other American fast-food companies also have franchisees. Starbucks is the latest brand to infiltrate, adding an American twist to the coffee-drinking tradition, which began on the Arabian peninsula about 12 centuries ago.

Meanwhile, local papers advertise satellite TV systems with more than 800 channels. It would seem that American soft power has only risen in the dozen years since I wolfed down my Syrian Whopper. Best estimates are that Arabs spend about $20 billion a year on U.S. products. And the real potential remains untapped -- there are 300 million consumers in the region.

But here’s the problem: That market will probably remain untapped for the time being. Lately, news has not been good for American companies here.

With the most recent intifada in the Palestinian territories, many Arabs have joined a boycott of American goods, seeing this as a logical extension of the boycott of Israeli products that began in 1951. The boycott has intensified with the recent months of U.S. saber rattling over Iraq. Major U.S. exporters report regional sales down 25% to 40% in the last quarter of 2002. McDonald’s has announced a pullback from the region; the company will shut 175 stores in 10 countries, pulling out of three countries altogether -- reversing a 20-year policy of global expansion. Coca-Cola’s revenues also have fallen as the popularity of Muslim-owned Mecca Cola, and its Iranian equivalent, Zam Zam Cola, has risen at staggering rates, even outstripping supply.

Yes, there are now 800 satellite channels available, but many of them carry Arabic broadcasters who present points of view that are the polar opposite of American “propaganda” -- for example, the dateline for Israel is “Occupied Palestine.”

Ditto for the Internet. Islamic fundamentalism has risen -- not decreased -- with prolonged exposure to American culture.

The Arab boycott and retreat of McDonald’s are important indicators of long-term American prospects in the Middle East. The pro-invasion side argues that regime change in Iraq is about making the region safe for American values. The more cynical, antiwar view is that getting rid of Saddam Hussein is really about opening up the flow of oil and export markets for American products. Yet whether we are exporting values, products or both, we may not be as welcome as we would like to think.

A recent poll conducted in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Turkey found that 78% of the population of these Muslim allies of the U.S. thought that “the spread of American ideas and customs is a bad thing.”

Growing anti-Americanism is partly because of the Catch-22 that the combination of hard and soft power presents. With every threat of war from President Bush, the sales of Mecca Cola rise further.

One example of how the U.S. is becoming serious about the American image problem is the government campaign led by Charlotte Beers, a former advertising executive who is now a ranking State Department official. New diplomatic efforts include broadcasting positive messages about the U.S. over the radio, organizing a Middle East book tour for American authors and dropping leaflets over Iraq.

These activities, however, seem quaintly 1950s-like in a world linked by multilingual 24-hour news channels, the Internet, wireless telecommunications and global air travel. The Bush administration is seriously deluded if it thinks a few leaflets are going to counter the image of the U.S. as an imperial bully with little respect for international agreements.

Viewed in this light, the retreat of the Big Mac might do the U.S. some good. After all, there are better ways to cultivate soft power. We might, for instance, learn to respect international agreements like the Kyoto treaty on global warming; perhaps we could support the International Criminal Court; and just maybe we will deal with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before it deals with us.

In the meantime, I am putting my money into Al Jazeera and Mecca Cola.