Karen Hughes' office of public diplomacy keeps bumping up against the same problem, even as it rolls out a new program to shape the views of Muslim youths about America: what to say when critics just want to talk about policy? Via WhirledView, we get this objection from a writer from the United Arab Emirates' Gulf News:

[Hughes], and other simple-minded officials in Washington, refuse to admit that their so-called outreach programme will not work unless accompanied by a change in US policies [my itals].

Millions of dollars spent on projects aimed to tell us how wonderful the US is will not erase memories of victims around the region who have lost families to US attacks or Israeli bombs made and delivered by mighty America.

Hughes has said, in response to objections like this, "I agree that there is concern about policy. But that doesn't mean that we can't forge common interests and values, or that we shouldn't invite people to come and see what America is like."

This is an old argument that's played out many times before. How effective can this sort of "dialogue on the side" be when there are huge grievances overshadowing things held in common? And, as the Gulf News editorial points out, can Hughes really talk about a diplomacy of deeds without sounding absurdly naive or disingenuous?