Pentagon Gets A Lesson From Madison Avenue

U.S. Needs to Devise a Different 'Brand' to Win Over the Iraqi People, Study Advises

At the Washington Post, Karen DeYoung writes:

In the advertising world, brand identity is everything. Volvo means safety. Colgate means clean. IPod means cool. But since the U.S. military invaded Iraq in 2003, its "show of force" brand has proved to have limited appeal to Iraqi consumers, according to a recent study commissioned by the U.S. military.

The key to boosting the image and effectiveness of U.S. military operations around the world involves "shaping" both the product and the marketplace, and then establishing a brand identity that places what you are selling in a positive light, said clinical psychologist Todd C. Helmus, the author of "Enlisting Madison Avenue: The Marketing Approach to Earning Popular Support in Theaters of Operation." The 211-page study, for which the U.S. Joint Forces Command paid the Rand Corp. $400,000, was released this week.

Helmus and his co-authors concluded that the "force" brand, which the United States peddled for the first few years of the occupation, was doomed from the start and lost ground to enemies' competing brands. While not abandoning the more aggressive elements of warfare, the report suggested, a more attractive brand for the Iraqi people might have been "We will help you." That is what President Bush's new Iraq strategy is striving for as it focuses on establishing a protective U.S. troop presence in Baghdad neighborhoods, training Iraq's security forces, and encouraging the central and local governments to take the lead in making things better.

Many of the study's conclusions may seem as obvious as they are hard to implement amid combat operations and terrorist attacks, and Helmus acknowledged that it could be too late for extensive rebranding of the U.S. effort in Iraq. But Duane Schattle, whose urban operations office at the Joint Forces Command ordered the study, said that "cities are the battlegrounds of the future" and what has happened in Baghdad provides lessons for the future. "This isn't just about going in and blowing things up," Schattle said. "This is about working in a very complex environment."

In an urban insurgency, for example, civilians can help identify enemy infiltrators and otherwise assist U.S. forces. They are less likely to help, the study says, when they become "collateral damage" in U.S. attacks, have their doors broken down or are shot at checkpoints because they do not speak English. Cultural connections -- seeking out the local head man when entering a neighborhood, looking someone in the eye when offering a friendly wave -- are key.

The most successful companies, the Rand study notes, are those that study their clientele and shape their workplace and product in ways that incorporate their brand into every interaction with consumers.

Wal-Mart's desired identity as a friendly shop where working-class customers can feel comfortable and find good value, for example, would be undercut if telephone operators and sales personnel had rude attitudes, or if the stores offered too much high-end merchandise. For the U.S. military and U.S. officials, understanding the target customer culture is equally critical.

Helmus recommends expanding military training to include shaping and branding concepts such as cultural awareness, and the study underscores the perils of failing to understand your consumer.

"Certain things do not translate well," the study warned. "Danger lies behind assumptions of similarity." A gesture Bush made during his 2005 inaugural parade -- the University of Texas "hook 'em horns" salute with raised index and pinkie fingers -- stands for the "sign of the devil" in some cultures and an indication of marital infidelity in others. A leaflet dropped to intimidate Iraqi insurgents, the study noted, "also reached noncombatants" and "gave everyone who picked it up the 'evil eye.' "

"Words cause similar cultural confusion," it said. The Arabic word "jihad," for example, has religious connotations for Muslims; its repeated use to connote terrorism is insulting and also perversely lends legitimacy to violent acts.

Schattle acknowledged that much of what works for consumer advertising in the United States might not translate well in Baghdad. But urban ops, he said, is all about experimenting and adapting to new realities.

"We want to look at new concepts, new business practices, to see if there are things that we can learn," he said. Since his office was established after the U.S. military issued a new doctrine for urban warfare in 2002, "we've been collecting lessons learned from all over the world," he said. "Not just Iraq and Afghanistan, but places like the Philippines and South America. Wherever there have been fights, we went out and looked at them."

The challenge for the advertising study, he said, was to find "something we can learn from Madison Avenue or from the marketers, the best in the world, that might help us when we're trying to deliver a message about what democracy is." In Iraq, Schattle said, the "urban population is the center of gravity" and the problem is "how we influence them to be on our side, or at least not be an enemy" when "what they see is armor." The goal of such studies, Schattle said, is to distill what works and incorporate it into future training.

Adversaries are doing their own shaping on Iraq's urban battlefields. While intimidation, coercion and assassination might not make them beloved, such techniques effectively limit public outreach to U.S. forces, the Rand study notes. Enemy forces have also learned that "doing good works is a classic approach to winning friends and influencing people" and frequently provide basic services that the U.S. military is unable to match.

At the same time, Helmus said, U.S. military and civilian authorities must stop thinking of themselves as a "good-idea factory" whose every thought has greater merit than those of their customers. "Procter & Gamble doesn't even do that," he said.

Iraq 'Facing Grim Future'

The BBC reports:
The leading foreign policy think-tank, Chatham House, is warning that Iraq faces the distinct possibility of collapse and fragmentation.

A new report from the London-based Chatham House, also known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs, argues that the Iraqi government is now largely powerless and irrelevant in large parts of the country, as a range of local civil wars and insurgencies are fought.

The report urges a radical change in American and British strategy to try to rescue the situation.

It is not the first time Chatham House - a highly respected foreign policy institution in London - has been highly critical of American and British strategies in Iraq.

This latest paper, written by Dr Gareth Stansfield, a Middle East expert, is unremittingly bleak.

Dr Stansfield, of Exeter University and Chatham House, argues that the break-up of Iraq is becoming increasingly likely.

In large parts of the country, the Iraqi government is powerless, he says, as rival factions struggle for local supremacy.

The briefing paper, entitled Accepting Realities in Iraq, argues that "There is not 'a' civil war in Iraq, but many civil wars and insurgencies involving a number of communities and organizations struggling for power."

Dr Stansfield says that, although al-Qaeda is challenged in some areas by local Iraqi leaders who do not welcome such intervention, there is a clear momentum behind its activity.

Iraq's neighbours too have a greater capacity to affect the situation on the ground than either the UK or the US.

The report accuses each of Iraq's major neighbouring states - Iran, Saudi Arabia and Turkey - of having reasons "for seeing the instability there continue, and each uses different methods to influence developments".

The briefing paper says "these current harsh realities need to be accepted if new strategies are to have any chance of preventing the failure and collapse of Iraq".

Need for change

Dr Stansfield contends that the American security surge is moving violence to different areas, but is not overcoming it.

Certainly there is a growing sense in London and Washington that the American Commander in Iraq, General Petraeus, is likely to ask for more time to continue the surge later this summer in order to deliver results.

That will confront the Bush Administration with a real dilemma.

The president has vetoed a bill that would have set a deadline for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

The bill was approved by both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Congressional opponents of the war believe the veto signals that now it is the president alone who must take responsibility for continuing America's involvement, and the casualties.

The report urges the governments in London and Washington to change track.

It says the radical cleric Moqtada Sadr, leader of the Mehdi army (one of the major Shia militias), should be included as a political partner - no longer treating him as an enemy.

And it also calls for increasing the involvement of other countries in the region.

War-Torn Iraq 'Facing Collapse'

The BBC reports:
Iraq faces the distinct possibility of collapse and fragmentation, UK foreign policy think tank Chatham House says.

Its report says the Iraqi government is now largely powerless and irrelevant in many parts of the country.

It warns there is not one war but many local civil wars, and urges a major change in US and British strategy, such as consulting Iraq's neighbours more.

The report comes as Iran said Iranian and US diplomats would hold talks on 28 May on the security situation in Iraq.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said the talks - the third such meeting - would be restricted to the subject of Iraq.

"Negotiation is limited to Iraq, in Iraq, and will start in the presence of Iraqi officials," he told reporters during a visit to Pakistan.

The situation in Iraq will form part of discussions between UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George W Bush in Washington on Thursday.

It is Mr Blair's last official visit to the White House before he steps down as prime minister on 27 June.

'Harsh realities'

The UK Foreign Office, responding to the Chatham House report, stated that security conditions, although "grim" in places, varied across Iraq.

"Iraq has come a long way in a short time," he added, saying the international community "must stand alongside the Iraqi government".

Maj Gen William Caldwell, spokesman for the multinational force in Iraq, told the BBC the US troops surge in Baghdad was showing progress.

"We are seeing positive indicators that within Baghdad levels of violence are coming down," he said.

"That's what we want it to do, so that it will set the conditions to allow for the economic and political process to take place."

The Chatham House report, written by Gareth Stansfield, a Middle East expert, is unremittingly bleak, says BBC diplomatic correspondent James Robbins.

Mr Stansfield argues that the break-up of Iraq is becoming increasingly likely.

In large parts of the country, the Iraqi government is powerless, he says, as rival factions struggle for local supremacy.

The briefing paper, entitled Accepting Realities in Iraq, says: "There is not 'a' civil war in Iraq, but many civil wars and insurgencies involving a number of communities and organisations struggling for power."

Mr Stansfield says that although al-Qaeda is challenged in some areas by local leaders who do not welcome such intervention, there is a clear momentum behind its activity.

Iraq's neighbours also have a greater capacity to affect the situation on the ground than either the UK or the US, the report adds.

US-Iran talks

On Thursday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said that US-Iranian discussions at ambassador level would take place in Iraq on 28 May.

American and Iranian officials have held talks at ambassador level in the past. There were discussions in Baghdad in March and brief exchanges at a summit in Egypt earlier this month.

Given the climate of suspicion and hostility which has existed between Iran and the US, it is doubtful that the talks stand any chance of yielding quick or substantial results, our correspondent says.

Washington accuses Iran of arming Shia militants in Iraq.

Tehran says American and other coalition forces should be withdrawn from Iraq.