Mullen blasts US 'strategic communication' efforts in Afghanistan

Criticism by highest US military officer comes as officials admit the US is losing the war of ideas against the Taliban

Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, attends a hearing in 2008. Photograph: Molly Riley/Reuters

The highest officer in the US military today issued a scathing critique of American "strategic communication" efforts in Afghanistan and the Muslim world, writing that the gap between promised improvements and actual developments harms the credibility of the US message.

In an article written for Joint Force Quarterly, a military publication, Admiral Mike Mullen said that US efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere to send a positive message about US military action and development efforts hurt US credibility when they do not coincide with what the populace sees on the ground.

Mullen's criticism comes as US officials have acknowledged the US is losing the war of ideas against its Taliban and al-Qaida enemies. In an effort to bolster its image as Barack Obama ramps up the war in Afghanistan, the administration has established a $150m (£92m) effort to train Afghan and Pakistani journalists, set up radio stations and produce pamphlets, posters and CDs lambasting Islamist militants.

Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, described "a certain arrogance" to US strategic communication efforts. "We've come to believe that messages are something we can launch downrange like a rocket, something we can fire for effect," he wrote. "They are not. Good communication runs both ways. It's not about telling our story. We must also be better listeners."

By contrast, Mullen wrote, the Taliban forces match rhetoric with action. "They aren't just out there shooting videos," he wrote, "They deliver... Each beheading, each bombing, and each beating sends a powerful message."

He also noted that the Taliban has improved governance in certain areas, establishing courts, assessing and collecting taxes, and giving local populations avenues to express grievances.

Meanwhile the US message that US action will ultimately improve the lives of Afghan citizens lacks credibility because US commanders have not built lasting relationships among the local populace and has not delivered on promises. Meanwhile, unmanned drone attacks and bombing runs have killed countless civilians and enraged the people the US must win over if efforts to destroy the Taliban and its al-Qaida allies are to be successful.

Mullen lauds the Marshall Plan, which funded the reconstruction of Europe following the second world war, and other past US efforts as the "essence" of good communication, because US actions spoke for themselves without the need for opinion polling and other PR tools.

"We sure didn't need talking points and PowerPoint slides to deliver aid," he wrote. "We simply showed up and did the right thing because it was, well, the right thing to do."

He also warns that US efforts will fail if they are perceived as being done merely for credit. Mullen did not single out specific programmes for criticism. Obama has sought to distinguish himself from his predecessor President George Bush, who was seen as arrogant.

In one widely derided effort, George Bush in 2005 dispatched long-time aide Karen Hughes to Muslim countries in an effort to boost America's rapidly declining image. In one tactic, she took to repeating that she is a mother who loves children. Al Jazeera labelled her "the marquee clown [in] America's circus diplomacy".