Test marketing foreign policy: populism in Ohio

Christian Century, March 11, 1998 by Jeffrey Jaynes

Smack in the center of Ohio is Columbus, home of the White Castle burger and headquarters of Wendy's International. Marketing strategists love the town's middle America demographics. They choose Columbus to try out new twists in automobiles, technology and toys.

When the Clinton administration decided to test public opinion about its plan to launch a military response against Saddam Hussein, a National Security Council staffer suggested a visit to Columbus. CNN agreed to foot the bill and provide the coverage, and Ohio State University agreed to host the made-for-TV forum: "Showdown with Iraq: An International Town Meeting."

President Clinton sent his three top foreign-policy advisers: Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Defense Secretary William Cohen and National Security Adviser Samuel "Sandy" Berger. The day before the town meeting, Clinton had presented a 25-minute terse and tough message on Iraq--in the safety of the Pentagon's auditorium. According to one White House staffer, the plan for the Columbus event was to "get out beyond the Beltway filter and talk directly to the American people."

But the PR interests of the administration collided with the concerns of a public that demanded to be heard, even when its questions or commentaries had to be delivered without the benefit of a microphone. Hard questions were posed regarding administration resolve, apparent contradictions in U.S. policy, and even moral right, but they were sometimes muted by the obnoxious chanting of balcony demonstrators.

The event was quickly characterized as a disaster for the White House, something like a car crash--or as one Pentagon official said, "like watching a food fight." After further reflection, however, Albright maintained that the proceeding illustrated a "vibrant democracy."

I was in St. John's Arena that afternoon, and I left wondering if I'd witnessed democracy or anarchy or something too staged and self-serving to merit further reflection. Although I came with serious questions, I knew that an audience of 6,000 would provide little opportunity for participation. I intended only to join several people in protesting the threat of more bombing. I agreed with a Mennonite woman who carried a sign saying: "People of Iraq, Christians are not your enemies!" Others chanted, "Stop the violence," which seemed eerily premature.

Initially I sympathized with those who shouted their questions and voiced their disapproval from the rafters. It was clear that the administration officials would have the first and last words, which reinforced the feeling that this forum was about conveying a message and not about listening to the public.

But the sustained interruptions became increasingly annoying. It's one thing to use the acoustics of old St. John's to disrupt the concentration of a free-throw shooter, and quite another to repeatedly jeer the secretary of state. The breakdown in civility was disappointing. It also illustrated how those who perceive themselves as powerless behave when their concerns are not taken seriously.

The questions advanced by members of preselected audience left little room for prescripted platitudes. Is our government willing to finish the job with Saddam? Why do other sanctioned global despots seem to get away with murder? Where are our allies and why are we standing nearly alone on this issue? What are the possibilities of terrorist backlash in the Middle East or at home?

I still have the sense that "international town meeting" is an oxymoron. Does this mean that we have already moved into some sort of global village aided by cellular and digital technology? Nevertheless, I liked the concept. There was a reverent silence when calls came in from Tel Aviv, from the United Arab Emirates and from Germany.

The "town meeting" format has become a bit of a fad in the past few years. It can generate interest in political campaigns, help explore national health-care policies and generate discussion of values related to education. In the fall of 1992, NASA staged a series of six town meetings to find out what Americans want in a space program. In December, Clinton attended a town meeting in Akron, Ohio, to discuss the question of race.

Historian Michael Zuckerman has pointed out that the original New England town meetings mostly served to reinforce or even enforce a public consensus, not to provide a platform for every voice. Yet at times amid the staid tenor of the town meeting a frenzied populism would erupt that civic leaders found threatening. It was all there at Ohio State--aristocratic elitism, ardent populism and persistent democracy.

Jeffrey Jaynes is assistant dean at Methodist Theological School in Ohio, located in Delaware, Ohio.