a

GAO

United States Government Accountability Office

Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee 

on Science, the Departments of State, 

Justice, and Commerce, and Related 

Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, 

House of Representatives

May 2006 U.S. PUBLIC 

DIPLOMACY

State Department 

Efforts to Engage 

Muslim Audiences 

Lack Certain 

Communication 

Elements and Face 

Significant Challenges

GAO-06-535
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

May 2006

U.S. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY 

State Department Efforts to Engage 

Muslim Audiences Lack Certain 

Communication Elements and Face 

Significant Challenges 

Highlights of GAO-06-535, a report to the 

Chairman, Subcommittee on Science, the 

Departments of State, Justice, and 

Commerce, and Related Agencies, 

Committee on Appropriations, House of 

Representatives 

State has increased public diplomacy resources to countries with significant 

Muslim populations in recent years and launched three major initiatives 

directed at the Muslim world. Comparing data for fiscal years 2004 and 2006, 

overseas operations budgets have increased, with the largest percentage

increases going to regional bureaus with significant Muslim populations. 

However, the number of authorized overseas positions in all regional 

bureaus increased slightly or not at all. As part of the Secretary of State’s 

newly announced transformational diplomacy initiative, the department 

intends to reposition staff to better align with policy priorities. Since 2002, 

State has initiated three public diplomacy activities focused on the Muslim 

world—a media campaign, a youth-oriented magazine, and a group of youthfocused exchange programs—but these initiatives have been largely

terminated or suspended. However, several exchange programs continue to 

target youth in the Muslim world. In addition, posts in the Muslim world use 

a range of standard programs and tools which the Under Secretary plans to 

supplement with several new initiatives. 

GAO’s fieldwork revealed that posts’ public diplomacy efforts generally 

lacked important strategic communication elements found in the private 

sector, which GAO and others have suggested adopting as a means to better 

communicate with target audiences. These elements include having core

messages, segmented target audiences, in-depth research and analysis to 

monitor and evaluate results, and an integrated communication plan that 

brings all these elements together. These findings were reinforced by State’s 

own post-level review. State established a new strategic framework for 

public diplomacy in fiscal year 2006, calling for, among other things, 

marginalizing extremists and demonstrating respect for Muslim cultures. 

However, posts have not been given written guidance on how to implement 

this strategy. Such guidance is a critical first step to developing in-depth 

communication plans in the field. 

Posts in the Muslim world face several challenges in implementing their 

public diplomacy programs, including the need to balance security with 

public outreach and concerns related to staff numbers and language 

capabilities. For example, we found that 30 percent of language designated 

public diplomacy positions in the Muslim world were filled by officers

without the requisite language skills. State has begun to address many of 

these challenges, but it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of many of 

these efforts. Further, State lacks a systematic, comprehensive means of 

sharing best practices in public diplomacy, which could help transfer 

knowledge and experience across posts. 

Public opinion polls have shown

continued negative sentiments

toward the United States in the 

Muslim world. Public diplomacy 

activities—led by the State

Department (State)—are designed

to counter such sentiments by

explaining U.S. foreign policy 

actions, countering misinformation,

and advancing mutual

understanding between nations. 

GAO was asked to examine (1) 

what public diplomacy resources 

and programs State has directed to 

the Muslim world, (2) whether

posts have adopted a strategic 

approach to implementing public 

diplomacy, and (3) what challenges

remain to be addressed.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the 

Secretary of State develop (1)

implementing guidance for its 

public diplomacy strategy modeled

on private sector best practices, (2) 

a sample country-level 

communication plan that could be

adapted for local use by posts, and 

(3) a systematic mechanism for 

sharing best practices data to 

address long-standing program 

challenges. State agreed with the

report’s recommendations. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-535.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Jess T. Ford at 

(202) 512-4128 or fordj@gao.gov.
Page i GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Contents

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 5

State Devotes Significant Public Diplomacy Resources to the 

Muslim World, but Programs Generally Remain the Same 9

Post Program Planning and Evaluation Efforts Lack Appropriate 

Guidance, but Improvements Are Planned 18

Security and Staffing Pose Challenges to 

Public Diplomacy Efforts in the Muslim World 30

Conclusions 40

Recommendations for Executive Action 41

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 42

Appendixes

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 44

Appendix II: Countries and Territories with Significant Muslim 

Populations 47

Appendix III: Inventory of State Department Public

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs 49

Appendix IV: Private Sector Best Practices 54

Appendix V: Comments from the State Department 58

Appendix VI: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 60

Tables Table 1: Overseas Public Diplomacy Resources by Regional 

Bureau, Fiscal Years 2004 and 2006 10

Table 2: Selected Public Diplomacy Activities at Posts in Nigeria, 

Pakistan, and Egypt, Fiscal Year 2005 15

Figures Figure 1: Map of the Muslim World 8

Figure 2: Unsold Copies of Hi Magazine Returned to the U.S. 

Embassy in Cairo, October 2005 13

Figure 3: Key Elements of a Typical Public Relations Strategy 19

Figure 4: Logic Model for State Public Diplomacy Programs 29

Figure 5: Terrorist Threat Ratings for Posts in the Muslim and 

Non-Muslim Worlds, October 2005 31

Figure 6: Photographs of American Corner, Abuja, Nigeria 33
Contents

Page ii GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 7: Average Tour of Duty Length by Region (as of December 

2005) 36

Figure 8: Percentage of Filled Language-Designated Public 

Diplomacy Positions in the Muslim World Staffed by 

Officers Meeting Language Requirements (as of August 

2005) 38

Figure 9: Elements of a Typical Public Relations Strategy 55

Abbreviations

BBG Broadcasting Board of Governors

BDA Business for Diplomatic Action

DOD Department of Defense

PLUS Partnerships for Learning-Undergraduate Study

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development

USIA U.S. Information Agency

VOA Voice of America

YES Youth Exchange and Study

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

A

May 3, 2006 Letr

The Honorable Frank R. Wolf

Chairman

Subcommittee on Science, the Departments of State, 

Justice, and Commerce, and Related Agencies

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, foreign public opinion polls 

conducted by the State Department (State) and firms such as Zogby 

International have shown that negative attitudes toward the United States 

have generally grown worse in many countries around the world. One 

particular concern has been a marked worsening of such negative attitudes 

in the Muslim world1

—an audience of key strategic interest in the United 

States’ war on terrorism.2 State’s public diplomacy programs and activities 

are designed to counter such negative sentiments through ongoing 

attempts to communicate with elites and mass audiences overseas. These 

efforts include crisis management and daily news operations designed to 

explain U.S. foreign policy positions and actions; strategic information 

programs designed to more broadly engage, inform, and influence target 

audiences; and long-term activities, such as exchanges, to promote 

relationship building and mutual understanding.3

1

For the purposes of this report, the “Muslim world” refers to the 58 countries and territories 

identified as “countries with significant Muslim populations” by the State Department’s 

Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs. This list includes Muslim-majority countries and 

members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. Appendix II lists these countries.

2

These negative trends amongst Muslim populations have been documented in a variety of 

analyses and polls. For example, see Office of Research, State Department. “Independent 

Survey of Arab Publics Shows Bad U.S. Image Based Primarily on U.S. Regional Policy.” 

Opinion Analysis. Washington, D.C.: M-34-05, Mar. 23, 2005.

3

Public diplomacy programs and tools also support the department’s traditional policyoriented goals such as promoting regional stability, democracy and human rights, and 

economic prosperity and security.
Page 2 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

As a follow-up to our April 2005 public diplomacy report,4 we reviewed 

State’s current public diplomacy initiatives designed to reach out to 

countries with significant Muslim populations and determined how such 

initiatives are being implemented at the post level. Specifically, we 

examined: (1) what public diplomacy resources and programs State has 

directed to the Muslim world, (2) whether posts have adopted a strategic 

approach to implementing public diplomacy, and (3) what program 

challenges remain to be addressed.

To accomplish our objectives, we interviewed State officials from the 

Under Secretary’s office, the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

the Bureau of International Information Programs, the Bureau of Public 

Affairs, and the Bureau of Resource Management. We also interviewed 

officials in State’s Bureaus of Near Eastern Affairs, South and Central Asian 

Affairs,5

 African Affairs, and East Asian and Pacific Affairs. We collected 

and analyzed data on the allocation of public diplomacy staff and selected 

program costs by regional bureau. We also convened a roundtable of 

nongovernment Muslim experts in Washington, D.C., who were identified 

by various U.S. government officials and others as knowledgeable of U.S. 

efforts to engage Muslim audiences, to discuss key program challenges, 

obstacles, and potential solutions.

We conducted fieldwork in Nigeria, Pakistan, and Egypt to review the 

implementation of U.S. public diplomacy efforts in countries of particular 

strategic interest to the United States. In each country, we met with a 

broad cross section of U.S. embassy officials, British Council and embassy 

staff, and local focus groups to discuss public perceptions of the United 

States, program implementation efforts, effectiveness measurement 

efforts, and program challenges. Additionally, we conducted phone 

interviews with State Public Affairs officers in Indonesia and Turkey to 

supplement the information we collected at the three posts we visited. The 

combined population of these countries is approximately 680 million, or 45 

percent of the total population of the 58 countries and territories in the 

Muslim world.

4

GAO, U.S. Public Diplomacy: Interagency Coordination Efforts Hampered by the Lack of 

a National Communication Strategy, GAO-05-323 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 4, 2005).

5

In February 2006, State moved the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, 

Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan from the Bureau of European and Eurasian 

Affairs to the Bureau of South Asian Affairs, creating the Bureau of South and Central Asian 

Affairs.
Page 3 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

The focus of our review was public diplomacy activities designed to 

communicate information about the United States to target audiences 

overseas. Thus, we did not review State-led reform initiatives, such as the 

Middle East Partnership Initiative.6

 Aside from State, we examined U.S. 

Agency for International Development (USAID) efforts to tell America’s 

assistance story and Department of Defense (DOD) efforts to support 

State’s public diplomacy activities. In addition, we collected funding and 

program information on U.S. international broadcasting but did not seek to 

evaluate the effectiveness of Radio Sawa and the Alhurra satellite 

television network—the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ (BBG) two 

primary initiatives aimed at Arab audiences. GAO is reviewing these 

broadcast initiatives separately.

We performed our work from April 2005 to February 2006 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief State has increased public diplomacy resources to countries with 

significant Muslim populations in recent years and launched three major 

initiatives directed at the Muslim world. Comparing data from fiscal years 

2004 and 2006, regional bureau budgets for overseas operations increased 

by 21 percent in total, with the largest percentage going to the South Asia 

(39 percent), East Asia and the Pacific (28 percent), and Near East (25 

percent) regions, each of which includes countries with large Muslim 

populations. Over the past 3 years, however, the number of authorized 

overseas positions in all regional bureaus increased slightly or not at all. As 

part of the Secretary of State’s newly announced transformational 

diplomacy initiative, the department intends to reposition some staff to 

better align available resources with its strategic priorities, including initial 

plans to shift 28 public diplomacy officers from posts in Europe and 

Washington, D.C., to India, China, and Latin America, as well as to the 

Muslim world. Since 2002, State has initiated three public diplomacy 

activities focused on the Muslim world—Shared Values, a media campaign; 

Hi, a youth-oriented magazine; and Partnerships for Learning, a group of 

exchange programs geared to younger audiences. While these particular 

initiatives have been largely terminated or suspended, posts continue to 

6

In August 2005 GAO issued a report on the Middle East Partnership Initiative. See GAO, 

Foreign Assistance: Middle East Partnership Initiative Offers Tools for Supporting 

Reform, but Project Monitoring Needs Improvement, GAO-05-711 (Washington, D.C.: Aug. 

8, 2005).
Page 4 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

pursue a range of standard public diplomacy programs and tools available 

to embassies around the world. In addition, while Partnerships for Learning 

no longer provides a focal point for State’s exchange efforts in the Muslim 

world, several exchange programs continue to target younger, marginalized 

sectors of society in the Muslim world. The new Under Secretary has 

introduced several new public diplomacy initiatives to help officers at all 

posts better advocate U.S. policy and respond to breaking news, while 

many other initiatives are still in their early stages of development. 

Our fieldwork revealed that posts’ public diplomacy efforts generally 

lacked important strategic communication elements found in the private 

sector, which GAO and others have suggested adopting as a means to 

better communicate with target audiences. These elements include having 

core messages, segmented target audiences, detailed strategies and tactics, 

in-depth research and analysis to monitor and evaluate results, and a 

communication plan that brings it all together. These findings were 

reinforced by a worldwide review of mission performance plans conducted 

by State in 2005, which also concluded that a large number of posts lacked 

at least some of these key strategic elements. State recently established a 

strategic framework outlining priority goals for public diplomacy, such as 

marginalizing extremists, and related tactics that include education and 

empowerment; however, the department has not issued guidance on how 

these strategies and tactics should be implemented. Such guidance is a 

critical first step to developing detailed communication plans in the field.

U.S. embassies face multiple challenges in implementing their public 

diplomacy programs, including the need to balance security with public 

outreach and concerns related to staff numbers, time, and language 

capabilities. These challenges are particularly acute in countries with 

significant Muslim populations; for example, the threat level for terrorism 

is rated as “critical” or “high” in 80 percent of posts in the Muslim world, 

and 15 of State’s 20 so-called unaccompanied posts are located in countries 

in the Muslim world. Security and budgetary concerns have forced 

embassies to close publicly accessible facilities and curtail certain public 

outreach efforts, sending foreign publics the unintended message that the 

United States is unapproachable. Efforts to compensate for this loss in 

public presence include the use of small-scale external facilities staffed 

with local employees, expanded embassy speaker programs, and traveling 

teams of embassy employees engaging in outreach efforts. Meanwhile, 

public diplomacy efforts at post are hindered by a shortage of officers, and 

these officers face an increasing administrative burden. Tours of duty for 

diplomats at posts in the Muslim world are shorter than elsewhere, which 
Page 5 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

can limit the effectiveness of public diplomacy efforts in these posts. 

Furthermore, State’s data show that as many as 30 percent of public 

diplomacy positions in countries with significant Muslim populations are 

filled by officers with insufficient language skills. As a result, public 

diplomacy officers in the Muslim world spend less time communicating 

with local audiences than the position requires. While State has begun to 

address many of these challenges, it is too early to determine the 

effectiveness of such efforts. Further, opportunities to share best practices 

across posts on how to overcome some of these challenges remain 

underutilized. 

To increase the sophistication and effectiveness of U.S. public diplomacy 

outreach efforts, we recommend that the Secretary of State develop 

written guidance detailing how the department intends to implement the 

Under Secretary’s priority goals and tactics as they apply to the Muslim 

world. We recommend the development of a sample country-level 

communication plan to accompany this document as a guide for posts to 

use and adapt to their environment. Finally, we recommend that the 

Secretary develop a systematic mechanism for sharing best practices data 

to address long-standing program challenges, which have been particularly 

acute in the Muslim world. In commenting on a draft of this report, State 

concurred with our findings and recommendations. We have reprinted 

State’s comments in appendix V. We also incorporated technical comments 

from State where appropriate.

Background The overall goal of U.S. public diplomacy efforts is to understand, inform, 

engage, and influence the attitudes and behavior of global audiences in 

ways that support the United States’ strategic interests. U.S. public 

diplomacy efforts are implemented by several entities, including State, 

DOD, USAID, and BBG, and function under the broad guidance of the 

White House and the National Security Council.7

 Funding is concentrated 

in State and BBG, which together received approximately $1.2 billion for 

public diplomacy in fiscal year 2005. USAID and DOD have relatively small 

public diplomacy budgets.

7

In March 2005, the President reorganized the National Security Council and created a 

Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and Global Outreach, 

whose responsibilities include U.S. public diplomacy efforts.
Page 6 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

State Department Public 

Diplomacy Efforts

State’s public diplomacy operations are guided by the Under Secretary for 

Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, who oversees the Bureaus of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs, International Information Programs, and 

Public Affairs. The department’s regional and functional bureaus also 

contain public diplomacy offices, which report to the relevant assistant 

secretary.8 The Under Secretary has direct authority over the three public 

diplomacy bureaus but does not have line authority over public diplomacy 

operations in other regional or functional bureaus.9

 In overseas missions, 

Foreign Service public diplomacy officers (including Public Affairs, 

Cultural Affairs, Information, Information Resources, and Regional English 

Language officers) operate under the authority of the chief of mission and 

report to their regional bureau managers in Washington, D.C. 

Public Diplomacy Budget 

and Programs

In fiscal year 2005, State dedicated $597 million to pubic diplomacy and 

public affairs. According to the department’s performance plan, its 

investment in public diplomacy and public affairs continues to increase, 

particularly for efforts targeting audiences in the Middle East. Exchange 

programs received the majority of fiscal year 2005 funding, $356 million, 

which was a 12.4 percent increase over fiscal year 2004. These programs 

include international visitors, citizen exchanges, the Fulbright academic 

exchange program, and English-language teaching. State’s information 

programs received roughly $68 million in fiscal year 2005 to fund programs 

such as the U.S. speakers program, mission Web sites, and American 

Corners, which are centers that provide information about the United 

States, hosted in local institutions and staffed by local employees. The 

remaining public diplomacy funds go to State’s regional bureaus to pay for 

the salaries of locally engaged staff overseas, among other purposes. 

Appendix III provides a summary of selected programs managed by each 

bureau along with a description of staff positions. 

8

State’s regional bureaus are the Bureaus of African Affairs, East Asian and Pacific Affairs, 

European and Eurasian Affairs, Near Eastern Affairs, South and Central Asian Affairs, and 

Western Hemisphere Affairs. Functional Bureaus with public diplomacy responsibilities 

include: Administration; Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; Economic and Business 

Affairs; Intelligence and Research; International Security and Nonproliferation; Information 

Resource Management; Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs; and 

Political-Military Affairs.

9

State has begun to appoint “dual-hatted” Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Public Diplomacy 

in each of the six regional bureaus. These individuals report directly to both their Regional 

Assistant Secretary and to the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.
Page 7 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

USAID, DOD, and BBG also support the U.S. government’s communication 

efforts in the field. USAID reports that it has established an overseas 

network of more than one hundred Development Outreach and 

Communications officers, who work with Public Affairs officers to 

promote America’s assistance story. DOD has also become involved in 

public diplomacy and is developing a strategy for “military support for 

public diplomacy” to identify ways it can effectively support State’s 

operations. For example, DOD Military Information Support Teams have 

been dispatched to selected posts, at the request of the Ambassador, to 

assist with outreach efforts. Finally, U.S. international broadcasting, led by 

the BBG, is a major contributor to the United States’ efforts to 

communicate directly with foreign audiences. Between fiscal years 2004 

and 2006, the BBG expects to spend nearly $240 million on its Middle East 

Broadcasting Network, which includes Alhurra satellite television network 

and the Arabic-language Radio Sawa.

Definition of the Muslim 

World

According to State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, the 

Muslim world is composed of 58 countries and territories with significant 

Muslim populations, many of which are members of the Organization of the 

Islamic Conference. These countries have a combined population of more 

than 1.5 billion and are located in Africa, Asia, and Europe (see app. II). 

Figure 1 shows their locations.
Page 8 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 1: Map of the Muslim World

State’s public diplomacy investment in these 58 countries and territories 

has increased in recent years. According to department data, State 

provided funds for 179 speakers to travel to these countries in fiscal year 

2005, up from 157 in fiscal year 2004. Additionally, the department funded 

nearly 5,800 exchange participants from these countries in fiscal year 2005, 

up from about 5,100 in fiscal year 2004. The department spent nearly $115 

million on exchange and information programs in these countries in fiscal 

year 2005.

Europe and Eurasia

Albania

Azerbaijan

Kazakhstan

(Kosovo)

Kyrgyzstan

Sub-Saharan Africa

Benin

Burkina Faso

Cameroon

Chad

Comoros

Cote d’Ivoire

Djibouti

Eritrea

Ethiopia

Gabon

Gambia

Guinea

East Asia 

and Pacific

Brunei

Indonesia

Malaysia

Countries with significant Muslim populations

Countries without significant Muslim populations

South Asia

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Maldives

Pakistan

Guinea-Bissau

Mali

Mauritania

Mozambique

Niger

Nigeria

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Somalia

Sudan

Togo

Uganda

Near East and North Africa

Algeria

Bahrain

Egypt

Iran

Iraq

Jordan

Kuwait

Lebanon

Libya

Morocco

Oman

Qatar

Saudi Arabia

Syria

Tunisia

United Arab Emirates

(West Bank and Gaza)

Yemen

Source: State Department.

Tajikistan

Turkey

Turkmenistan

Uzbekistan
Page 9 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

State Devotes 

Significant Public 

Diplomacy Resources 

to the Muslim World, 

but Programs 

Generally Remain the 

Same

State devotes significant public diplomacy program and staffing resources 

to regions with large Muslim populations. Beginning in 2002, State 

introduced three key initiatives focused on reaching younger and broader 

Muslim audiences to supplement the standard exchange and information 

programs used by most embassies; these initiatives have been largely 

terminated or suspended. Nevertheless, posts in the Muslim world continue 

to generally employ the same exchange, cultural, and information 

programs used throughout the world.10 In fiscal year 2006, the Under 

Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs introduced several new 

initiatives designed to help officers in the field improve their advocacy of 

U.S. foreign policy and enhance their ability to quickly respond to breaking 

news stories, while other initiatives, some of which are specific to Muslim 

audiences, are still in development. 

Resources Directed to 

Regions with Significant 

Muslim Populations

In our 2003 report on public diplomacy, we reported that the department 

had increased its overall spending on public diplomacy since the terrorist 

attacks of September 11, with the largest relative increases going to regions 

with large Muslim populations. Specifically, we noted that while State’s 

Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs received the largest overall share 

of overseas public diplomacy resources, the largest percentage increases in 

such resources occurred in regions with significant Muslim populations. As 

table 1 shows, this pattern has continued over the past 3 years, with total 

spending on overseas public diplomacy increasing 21 percent between 

fiscal years 2004 and 2006. The Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs 

continues to receive the largest overall share of overseas public diplomacy 

resources, with the largest percentage increases in resources going to 

regions with countries with large Muslim populations including South Asia 

(39 percent), East Asia and Pacific (28 percent), and the Near East (25 

percent). 

Table 1 provides data on public diplomacy funding and staffing for each of 

State’s regional bureaus. The table also shows the number of countries with 

significant Muslim populations in each region, according to State’s Bureau 

of Educational and Cultural Affairs, along with the population of these 

countries.

10These programs are outlined in appendix III.
Page 10 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Table 1: Overseas Public Diplomacy Resources by Regional Bureau, Fiscal Years 2004 and 2006

Source: State Department.

Notes: Funding data include American salaries for overseas staff including regional bureau employees 

and employees from the Bureau for International Information Programs and the Bureau for Educational 

and Cultural Affairs. Data do not include salary costs of locally engaged staff. 

Funding data include exchange programs, regional bureau program funds, and program budgets 

managed by Information Resource officers and Regional English Language officers.

Authorized officer positions cover overseas staff including regional bureau employees, Information 

Resource officers, and Regional English Language officers.

a

Data current as of January 2006.

In our 2003 report, we noted that authorized officer positions overseas had 

significantly expanded, with the most notable increases occurring in State’s 

Near East (27 percent increase) and South Asia (15 percent increase) 

bureaus. However, current data show that staff numbers have stayed 

Dollars in millions

Countries with significant Muslim 

populations

Regional bureau

2004 

(actual)

2006

(estimated)

Percentage 

increase

Number of 

countries

(58 total)

Total

population

(millions)

Africa

 Funding $59 $70 19% 24 432

 Authorized officers 90 91 1

East Asia and Pacific

 Funding 78 100 28 3 266

 Authorized officers 89 89 0

Europe and Eurasia

 Funding 198 229 16 9 141

 Authorized officers 192 192 0

Near East

 Funding 69 86 25 18 341

 Authorized officers 66 68 3

South Asiaa

 Funding 41 57 39 4 337

 Authorized officers 38 39 3

Western Hemisphere

 Funding 74 87 18 0 NA

 Authorized officers 103 103 0
Page 11 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

largely the same over the past 3 years with increases of 3 percent or less. In 

January 2006, Secretary Rice announced plans to reposition officers as part 

of her transformational diplomacy initiative. State officials said that the 

department will initially reposition approximately 75 Foreign Service 

officers this year from posts in Europe and Washington, D.C., to India, 

China, and Latin America, as well as to the Muslim world. According to 

these officials, over one-third of the positions that will be relocated are 

public diplomacy positions.

Muslim-Specific Initiatives 

Have Been Short-lived

State has developed three programs specifically designed to reach Muslim 

audiences: the Shared Values media campaign, the Arabic-language Hi

magazine, and the youth-oriented Partnerships for Learning exchange 

strategy. These initiatives have been largely suspended or terminated, but 

State continues to focus many of its exchange programs on younger 

audiences.

Shared Values Initiative In 2002, State launched the Shared Values Initiative to highlight the 

common values and beliefs shared by Muslims and Americans, 

demonstrate that America is not at war with Islam, and stimulate dialogue 

between the United States and the Muslim world. The initiative, which cost 

about $15 million, centered on a paid television campaign, which was 

developed by a private sector advertising firm and attempted to illustrate 

the daily lives of Muslim Americans. This multimedia campaign also 

included a booklet on Muslim life in America, speaker tours, an interactive 

Web site to promote dialogue between Muslims in the United States and 

abroad, and other information programs. The initial phase of the Shared 

Values Initiative was aired in six languages in Pakistan, Indonesia, 

Malaysia, and Kuwait, as well as on pan-Arab media. State estimates that 

288 million people were exposed to these messages, but television stations 

in several countries, including Egypt and Lebanon, refused to air the 

programs for political and other reasons. 
Page 12 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

In 2003, the report by the Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the Arab 

and Muslim World, commonly referred to as the Djerejian report, credited 

the campaign for having a solid research basis but criticized it for taking far 

longer to develop than similar private sector advertising campaigns.11 The 

report also noted that some embassies were reluctant to promote the ads. 

A department analysis of foreign reaction to the Shared Values Initiative 

concluded that media outlets in many countries found the campaign to be 

propaganda and unlikely to succeed as long as U.S. foreign policy remained 

unchanged. While some posts continue to host events on Muslim life in 

America, the Shared Values Initiative’s centerpiece television campaign 

aired only for the holy month of Ramadan in the winter of 2002-03 and was 

subsequently discontinued. Additionally, the interactive Web site, “Open 

Dialogue,” is no longer in operation.

Hi Magazine and Web Site Following the demise of the Shared Values Initiative, State launched the 

Arabic-language Hi magazine in July 2003 with an annual budget of $4.5 

million. Designed to highlight American culture, values, and lifestyles, Hi

was directed at Arab youth in the Middle East and North Africa and was 

expected to influence Arab youth to have a more positive perception of the 

United States. Hi was produced by a private sector magazine firm, and 

State estimated its circulation to be about 50,000 in the Arab world. One 

official in Egypt, however, said that of the 2,500 copies the embassy 

distributed monthly to newsstands in Cairo, often as many as 2,000 copies 

were returned unsold (see fig. 2). State officials in Washington noted that, 

as a matter of practice, these copies were subsequently redistributed to 

public institutions in Egypt, such as schools and libraries. According to 

embassy officials, they were unable to sell many copies of Hi because it 

was so new and relatively expensive. In December 2005, State suspended 

publication of Hi magazine pending the results of an internal evaluation, 

which was prompted by concerns over the magazine’s cost, reach, and 

impact, according to State officials. State expects this evaluation to be 

completed by May 2006. According to one official, an initial assessment of

11Advisory Group on Public Diplomacy for the Arab and Muslim World, Changing Minds 

Winning Peace (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 1, 2003).
Page 13 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

the magazine found that most readers access Hi via its Web sites, which 

remain in operation.12

Figure 2: Unsold Copies of Hi Magazine Returned to the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, 

October 2005

Partnerships for Learning In 2002, State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs developed an 

exchange initiative specifically for youth from Muslim communities called 

Partnerships for Learning, which provided an organizing theme to help 

guide the department’s exchange investments. Designed to reach a 

“younger, broader, deeper” audience in the Muslim world, one senior State 

official called Partnerships for Learning, “the heart of our extensive 

engagement with the Arab and Muslim world.” According to a senior State 

12State estimated that Hi’s Web sites received approximately 3 million hits in December 

2005.

Source: GAO. 
Page 14 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

official, the Partnerships for Learning program was terminated as an 

organizing theme in late 2005 with the appointment of the latest Under 

Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. Nevertheless, 

department officials said that its exchange programs will continue to focus 

on younger audiences. These officials stated that the department is 

exploring other program models to engage the greatest number of 

undergraduate students while increasing cost effectiveness. Similarly, State 

told us that the Partnerships for Learning concept continues to infuse 

almost all of its citizen exchange programs.

Between 2002 and 2005, the department estimates that nearly $150 million 

was spent on exchanges supporting the Partnerships for Learning theme. 

This figure includes new programs developed to implement this theme and 

funds spent on existing exchange programs that targeted a younger, more 

diverse, and less elite audience in the Muslim world. The two major new 

programs developed by the department were the Youth Exchange and 

Study (YES) program and the Partnerships for Learning Undergraduate 

Studies (PLUS) program.13 Between 2003 and 2005, the YES program 

provided scholarships to more than 600 high school students from the 

Muslim world to study in the United States. Similarly, since 2004 the PLUS 

program has brought more than 170 students from the Middle East, North 

Africa, and South Asia to the United States for 2 years of academic study at 

an American college or university. The YES and PLUS programs, with a 

combined budget of $25 million, remain active in fiscal year 2006. The 

department has not yet conducted a formal evaluation of the YES and PLUS 

programs.14 

Public Diplomacy Efforts at 

Selected Posts

Rely on Standard Programs 

and Tools

Officials at the three posts we visited—Nigeria, Pakistan, and Egypt—said 

that they use a broad range of programs available to them, similar to the 

mix of programs used throughout the world, including information, 

exchange, and cultural programs. Table 2 provides a breakdown of selected 

activities at each post. In addition to these programs, these officials said 

13Other Partnerships for Learning programs include CultureConnect, which supports 

American cultural figures’ engagement of young audiences in the Muslim world, and English 

ACCESS Microscholarships, which provide English language instruction to low-income and 

underserved youth abroad.

14State officials noted however, that the Youth Exchange and Study program was modeled 

after the department’s Future Leaders Exchange program, which was assessed in 2003 and 

found to be meeting its goals.
Page 15 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

that they spend a significant amount of time on news and crisis 

management, such as responding to media inquiries and coordinating 

media events. In Pakistan, for example, we observed the acting public 

affairs officer coordinate media events related to the Secretary of State’s 

visit and arrange interviews for the Ambassador regarding U.S. relief 

efforts in the wake of the October 2005 South Asian earthquake.

Table 2: Selected Public Diplomacy Activities at Posts in Nigeria, Pakistan, and 

Egypt, Fiscal Year 2005

Sources: GAO and State Department.

Academic and professional exchanges were an important public diplomacy 

tool at each post we visited. In fiscal year 2005, State obligated more than 

$12 million for such exchanges in these countries. All of the posts we 

visited had an active Fulbright exchange program, managed by the 

embassy in Nigeria and by binational commissions in Pakistan and Egypt. 

In Nigeria, the embassy has participated in the Partnerships for LearningYES program since 2003 and has sent about 35 Nigerian high school 

students and their teachers to study in Iowa through this program. 

According to the Public Affairs officer in Nigeria, the embassy has shifted 

resources to assure that 50 percent of exchange participants are Muslim, 

reflecting their overall proportion of Nigeria’s population. Additionally, the 

Public Affairs officer in Islamabad is working to develop a database of 

Pakistani exchange alumni to enable the embassy to maintain better 

contact with this audience.

Posts have also made use of information programs such as speakers, 

magazines, information resource centers, and, to a limited extent, 

American Corners. Data from State’s Bureau of International Information 

Programs show that the bureau funded 5 speakers in Nigeria, 18 in 

Pakistan, and 7 in Egypt in fiscal year 2005. These speakers discussed 

Nigeria Pakistan Egypt

American Corners 

Number–opened 10 0 0

Number–planned 2 5 2

Number of speakers 5 18 7

Number of exchange 

participants 143 215 359

Local language magazine Magama Khabr-o-Nazar Hi
Page 16 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

topics such as the 2004 U.S. presidential election, Muslim life and religious 

tolerance in America, and U.S. foreign policy. In addition, these posts take 

advantage of “target of opportunity” speakers—American experts who 

already happen to be in the region. Each post we visited also distributes a 

U.S.-funded magazine in local languages, such as the Hausa Magama in 

Nigeria and the Urdu Khabr-o-Nazar in Pakistan. Further, these posts 

operate small reference libraries within the embassy compound, known as 

Information Resource Centers. According to officials in Egypt, the 

embassy’s resource center receives more than 1,000 visitors per month, on 

average, while security concerns in Pakistan have limited the numbers of 

visitors to its center. Additionally, the embassy in Nigeria has established 

10 American Corners, with plans to open more in the near future. While 

there are no American Corners in Egypt or Pakistan, embassy officials in 

those countries told us they are currently seeking local partners to host 

such a facility.

Finally, other agencies have played a limited role in supporting the 

mission’s overall public diplomacy efforts in the countries we visited. 

USAID has hired Development Outreach and Communication officers in 

Nigeria and Egypt and was in the process of hiring an officer in Pakistan in 

October 2005. DOD has sent two Military Information Support Teams to 

Nigeria to help publicize the department’s humanitarian assistance 

programs in the country. In addition, U.S. broadcasting reaches audiences 

in Nigeria and Pakistan through Voice of America’s (VOA) Hausa, English, 

and Urdu services, and the Arabic Radio Sawa and Alhurra satellite 

television network reach some audiences in Egypt. Finally, in November 

2005, VOA announced the launch of a new half-hour television program in 

Urdu to be broadcast on GEO-TV, a commercial station in Pakistan.

Recent Initiatives Focus on 

Improving State’s 

Policy Advocacy and News 

Management Operations

During the past 6 months, State has launched a number of initiatives 

designed to broadly improve its ability to explain U.S. foreign policy 

decisions and respond to breaking news both within and outside the 

Muslim world. These initiatives, created in Washington, D.C., impact field 

operations to the extent that Ambassadors and other spokespersons at 

posts will be better positioned to advocate U.S. foreign policy decisions 

and actions and effectively react to developing news stories. These 

initiatives include the following:

• A Rapid Response Unit established in the Bureau of Public Affairs to 

produce a daily report on stories driving news around the world and 

give the U.S. position on those issues. This report is distributed to U.S. 
Page 17 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

cabinet and subcabinet officials, Ambassadors, public affairs officers, 

regional combatant commands, and others.

• “Echo Chamber” messages to provide U.S. Ambassadors and others 

with clear guidance so they are better able to advocate U.S. policy on 

major news stories and policy issues. These policy-level statements are 

posted to State’s internal Web site and can be broadly accessed by post 

staff around the world. These statements are also made available to 

VOA’s policy office for use in crafting editorials reflecting the views of 

the U.S. government.

• Establishing a regional public diplomacy hub in Dubai, a key media 

market, this summer. The hub, which will operate out of commercial 

office space to facilitate public access, will be staffed with two to three 

spokespersons whose full-time job will be to appear on regional media 

outlets, with a focus on television given its broad reach, to advocate U.S. 

policies. According to State officials, a regional center is needed since 

embassy public affairs staff focus on bilateral issues and no one in the 

department is specifically responsible for transregional media 

operations. 

In addition to these initiatives, several other efforts are under way. These 

efforts include empowering the American Muslim community to speak out 

for the United States,15 creating an Office of Public/Private Partnerships to 

stimulate private sector involvement, and developing enhanced technology 

to expand the use of new communication venues in order to better reach 

target audiences.

15GAO’s roundtable of nongovernment Muslim experts focused on the importance given to 

reaching out to American Muslims and empowering them to reach out to the Muslim world. 

State has begun to take specific steps toward this end. For example, the department 

sponsored a symposium in Brussels in November 2005 to bring together American and 

Belgium Muslims to discuss common areas of concerns. State officials noted that this 

symposium was intended to serve as a prototype and that similar conferences could be held 

elsewhere in Europe and beyond.
Page 18 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Post Program Planning 

and Evaluation Efforts 

Lack Appropriate 

Guidance, but 

Improvements Are 

Planned

Our review of mission performance plans for the countries we visited 

found that they lacked key strategic planning elements recognized by GAO 

and the private sector as vital to effectively communicating with target 

audiences. Among the missing elements are core messages and themes, 

target audience segmentation and analysis, details on program strategies 

and tactics, in-depth research and evaluation to inform strategic 

communication decisions, and a fully developed communication plan to tie 

everything together.16 In 2005, State established a strategic framework for 

U.S. public diplomacy efforts; however, these early efforts lack guidance 

from Washington to the field on strategies and tactics. In addition, posts are 

not required to develop in-depth analysis to better inform and support their 

program decisions or country-specific communication plans to help inform 

and guide their implementation efforts. 

Posts Lack Strategic 

Approach to Public 

Diplomacy

GAO and other groups, including the Defense Science Board,17 have 

suggested that State adopt a strategic approach to public diplomacy by 

modeling and adapting private sector communication practices to suit its 

purposes (see app. IV). Key best practices identified in GAO’s September 

2003 report are shown in figure 3. 

16Appendix IV provides more details on such private sector best practices.

17The Defense Science Board advises DOD on scientific, technical, manufacturing, 

acquisition process, and other matters of special interest to the department.
Page 19 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 3: Key Elements of a Typical Public Relations Strategy

Define core messages and themes based

 on program objectives.

Monitor progress, adjust strategies

and tactics, and report results.

Refine as

necessary

Research 

and evaluation

Source: GAO.

Define target audiences.

Develop detailed strategies and tactics to 

reach your target audiences

with your intended messages and themes. 

Develop and implement a detailed 

communication plan that incorporates

your program objectives, 

messages/themes, target audiences, 

strategies/tactics, and in-depth research 

and evaluation results.
Page 20 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Based on our review of mission performance plans18 and on fieldwork in 

Nigeria, Pakistan, and Egypt, we found that posts’ public diplomacy 

programming generally lacked these important elements of strategic 

communications planning. In particular, posts lacked a clear theme or 

message and specific target audiences were generally not identified. Posts 

also failed to develop detailed strategies and tactics to direct available 

public diplomacy programs and tools toward clear, measurable objectives 

in the most efficient manner possible. Further, research and evaluation 

efforts to inform all facets of strategic communications are limited by the 

relatively small budget in Washington, D.C., allocated to such efforts and a 

general lack of expertise in the field with regard to commissioning and 

conducting such studies. Finally, posts lack detailed, country-level 

communication plans to tie everything together. These findings are 

reinforced by a worldwide review of fiscal year 2007 mission performance 

plans conducted by State’s Bureau of Resource Management in 2005. In 

particular, State determined that post efforts were generally not directed at 

specific target audiences, lacked specific and reasonable communication 

objectives and strategies, and often failed to provide outcome and impact 

measures of program success. 

Post Efforts Not Directed 

Toward a Core Message or 

Theme

Private sector communication best practices suggest the need for a core 

message or theme, which can be developed on a worldwide, regional, or 

country-by-country basis, and should be consistently applied to and woven 

through all program activities and events. The posts we visited did not have 

a core message or theme to direct their communication efforts. We found 

that post efforts focused on general program goals established in 

Washington, D.C., which are found in the mission performance plans. For 

public diplomacy, these goals are promoting mutual understanding, 

advancing American values, and influencing international public opinion. 

According to State officials, these goals can be interpreted in many 

different ways and have limited practical utility for developing a targeted 

communication strategy. As one senior embassy official in Nigeria noted, 

these goals are “amorphous” in nature and “hard to quantify” in practice. 

Specifically, posts noted the following communication goals in their fiscal 

year 2006 mission performance plans:

• Nigeria—Influencing International Public Opinion: Nigeria’s fiscal 

year 2006 mission performance plan simply states that the post intends 

18Mission performance plans serve as top-level statements of agency program goals and 

objectives, resource requirements, strategies and tactics, and performance indicators.
Page 21 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

to move the opinions of Northern Nigerians to mirror those of the rest of 

the Nigerian population, which is largely supportive of U.S. values and 

principles.19

• Pakistan—Promoting Mutual Understanding: Pakistan’s mission 

performance plan states that the post will seek to enhance the image of 

the United States in Pakistan and increase the depth of understanding 

among Pakistanis of how American society, culture, and values shape 

the objectives behind and reasons for U.S. policies towards Pakistan.

• Egypt—Advancing American Values: Egypt’s mission performance 

plan notes that the post will use information activities, exchanges, and 

local information programming to bolster awareness among Egyptians 

of values shared with Americans and increase Egyptian public 

understanding of American society.

The Deputy Chief of Mission in Pakistan told us that, while specific 

messages have been developed at post, there are in fact too many 

competing messages (such as the United States is a great place to live, the 

United States is a great place to visit, American cultural diversity and 

democracy are good things), and the post needed to do a better job of 

defining and clarifying its message. A senior embassy official in Nigeria 

echoed this point by stating that his post needed a core message that could 

be coordinated across State, USAID, DOD, and other supporting agencies.

Target Audiences Have Not Been 

Clearly Defined

Private sector best practices suggest that analyzing target markets in depth 

and segmenting these markets are critical to developing effective 

information campaigns. The posts we visited generally had not used these 

practices to help refine and focus their communication efforts. In its 

worldwide review, State’s Resource Management Bureau found that some 

posts had done a poor job of answering the basic question of whether to 

direct their communication efforts at a mass audience or opinion leaders. 

The reviewers concluded that posts should focus on opinion leaders in the 

130 less developed countries with poor communications infrastructure 

(many countries with significant Muslim populations fall in this group), 

while posts in roughly 40 other countries with adequate communications 

infrastructures should focus on reaching the general public. As a first step, 

19Post officials in Nigeria are faced with the prospect of reaching a countrywide audience of 

over 130 million people, roughly half of whom are concentrated in the Northern portion of 

the country, where the United States does not have a permanent diplomatic presence.
Page 22 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

the reviewers recommended that posts in the former group undertake an 

inventory of opinion leaders they wished to influence. This “key influencers 

analysis” could be segmented into various groups such as youth; women; 

opinion and editorial writers; professors; and ethnic, religious, and 

business leaders, who could serve as message multipliers. In 2004, 

Washington sought to supplement mission performance planning activities 

by asking posts worldwide to prepare an analysis of key influencers. 

According to senior officials in Washington, D.C., only about one-half of 

posts worldwide ever submitted the requested analysis. Among the posts 

we visited, only Nigeria was able to produce a copy of an influence 

analysis, which we found to be rudimentary in nature and not fully 

responsive to the guidance provided by Washington, D.C. 

The posts we visited generally neither focused on important subcategories 

such as urban versus rural, men versus women, and religious versus 

nonreligious, nor did they segment based on the level or intensity of 

opposition (ranging from “soft” to “hard”) toward the United States. 

However, posts have attempted to reach a “younger, broader, and deeper” 

audience20 through exchange programs such as YES, which targets high 

school students. Also, some efforts are under way to target exchange 

program alumni,21 locals who have studied in or visited the United States, 

and expatriates living in the United States who could serve as goodwill 

ambassadors for the United States. 

20According to a senior official in Washington, D.C., the term “younger” implied the need to 

target even high school students who might be tomorrow’s opinion leaders. “Broader” 

implied the need to reach beyond elites and target disadvantaged youth as well. “Deeper” 

implied a desire that all program participants have as meaningful an experience as possible.

21State officials noted that they have developed a worldwide database of exchange 

participants, established a global alumni Web site to encourage dialogue, provided field staff 

with training and best practices information to facilitate the establishment of local alumni 

programs, and codified the responsibilities of the Alumni Division in Washington with 

regards to these and other activities. 
Page 23 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

In contrast to post practices, we noted that the British Council,22 which 

maintains a presence in all three countries we visited, relies on a four tier 

audience system, which is used worldwide to target their outreach efforts.23 

Also, the Defense Science Board has reported that target audiences in the 

Muslim world can be divided into five categories, ranging from hard 

opposition to hard support. Their report notes that identifying audiences 

that are “winnable” in terms of increased public support is critical to 

successful strategic communication and requires borrowing from 

campaign and private sector methodologies and conducting political-style 

attitudinal research and identifying the highest priority support groups that 

can most likely be influenced.

Strategies and Tactics Lack 

Detail

The private sector uses sophisticated strategies to integrate complex 

communication efforts involving multiple players. Our review of mission 

performance plans revealed that only limited attention had been given to 

developing detailed public diplomacy strategies and tactics to guide their 

implementation of an array of public diplomacy programs and tools. While 

such strategies can include message amplification tactics or the use of 

third-party spokespersons to increase the credibility of delivered 

messages,24 the mission performance plans we reviewed were noteworthy 

for their brevity and lack of detail on such strategies. For example, the 

Nigerian post’s goal paper on public diplomacy and public affairs runs just 

over two pages. These two pages serve as the road map for implementing 

the post’s public diplomacy efforts, which involve several agencies, 

assorted programs and projects, and substantial program funds. The plan 

devotes one sentence to describe its strategy to achieve its performance 

goal and three sentences to describe the tactics that will be used to 

implement the strategy. 

22The British Council manages the British government’s exchanges and cultural 

programming outreach efforts. 

23The British Council divides its audiences into four tiers: T-1: top 100 most influential 

individuals in the host country; T-2: academics, professional networks (journalists/lawyers), 

alumni associations, and teachers; T-3: young professionals; and T-4: informed audience. 

24Message amplification involves using a positive story about U.S. assistance or actions and 

delivering it to a mass audience via available communication channels including 

newspapers, radio, and television. The use of third-party spokespersons, such as local 

religious leaders, can help ensure message credibility, which is often difficult when 

information is transmitted from the United States to a target audience.
Page 24 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

On occasion, the strategies and tactics outlined in mission performance 

plans were or will be supplemented by additional planning efforts. In 

Pakistan, we noted that the Public Affairs officer had drafted a summary 

level plan to guide the efforts of the public affairs section. In Egypt, the 

Public Affairs officer told us that the Chief of Mission has directed his 

section to develop an “Islamic strategy” for Egypt to include details on 

working with religious leaders, integrating English language teaching 

efforts, working with local universities, and so on.

In its review, State’s Resource Management Bureau also found that posts 

had generally not developed meaningful strategies and tactics that would 

lead to quantifiable results. The reviewers suggested that posts adopt a 

more rigorous and measurable outreach strategy focused on opinion 

leaders in countries where a mass audience cannot easily be reached. As 

defined earlier, the first step entails identifying the opinion leaders the post 

would like to influence. Second, posts should identify a “critical mass” of 

opinion leaders who must be reached and influenced in order to have a 

significant impact on the target audience. Third, posts should develop 

programs and initiatives designed to reach these specific individuals, with 

the goal of persuading and motivating opinion leaders to spread the 

message. The reviewers suggested that exchange programs could be 

reinforced with targeted strategic information programs. Public Affairs 

officers were briefed on these findings in 2005, and mission performance 

plan guidance has been updated to incorporate most of these 

recommended elements. 

Research and Evaluation Efforts 

Are Limited

Private sector best practices highlight the value of a research driven 

approach to designing, implementing, evaluating, and fine-tuning strategic 

communications efforts. Given the relatively small budgets devoted to 

research and evaluation efforts, posts had access to a limited amount of 

information to help guide their strategic communication activities.25 

Valuable research can include such topics as: (1) audience attitudes and 

beliefs; (2) root causes driving negative sentiments and beliefs; (3) countryspecific social, economic, political, and military environments; (4) local 

25As noted in GAO, U.S. Public Diplomacy: State Department Expands Efforts but Faces 

Significant Challenges, GAO-03-951 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 4, 2003), our roundtable of 

public relations experts estimated that State would need to spend up to $50 million to 

conduct adequate opinion research and performance measurement given the size of its 

public diplomacy budget and scope of operations. We reported that State’s Bureau of 

Intelligence and Research spent only about $3.5 million annually on overseas opinion 

research. In fiscal year 2005, this amount increased to $4.4 million.
Page 25 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

media and communication options; and (5) diagnosis of deeper 

performance issues and possible program fixes.

Because the posts we visited did not have the budgets or required expertise 

to conduct this type of research or program evaluation on their own, they 

relied on the Bureau of Intelligence and Research and evaluation staff in 

Washington, D.C., to conduct such studies for them. However, only a 

limited range of research and evaluation data is available to posts. Most of 

this data is not tailored to a specific country and it was unclear whether 

available research and evaluation results are incorporated in post planning 

and evaluation activities. Available research and evaluations products 

include the following:

• Broad public opinion polling data: Conducted by State’s Bureau of 

Intelligence and Research, these polls document that local populations, 

to a significant degree, hold negative views toward the United States. 

Such polls serve a valuable role in identifying the depth of the public 

perception problem but are of limited utility in diagnosing the source of 

the problem or the specific impact that U.S. public diplomacy efforts 

have had on alleviating such negative perceptions. 

• Root cause polling data: In particular, State’s Bureau of Intelligence and 

Research released an opinion analysis in March 2003 based on a series 

of surveys examining the root causes of anti-American sentiments in 10 

Muslim-majority countries (Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, 

Nigeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Uzbekistan, Malaysia, and Indonesia). 

Significantly, the 2003 analysis notes that “the belief that the U.S. is 

hostile toward Muslim countries was the single largest component of 

anti-American sentiments in all 10 countries, outweighing even the 

publics’ view of how the United States treats their own country.” This 

type of insight can provide the basis for identifying and developing a 

core message or theme—one of the key private sector best practices 

discussed earlier. Our roundtable of nongovernment Muslim experts 

noted that this view is grounded in Muslim concerns over U.S. foreign 

policies and actions in the Muslim world. All of our panelists agreed that 

U.S. foreign policy is the major root cause behind anti-American 

sentiments among Muslim populations and that this point needs to be 

better researched, absorbed, and acted upon by government officials. 

According to our panelists, these core issues include the Arab/Israeli 

conflict, the war in Iraq, U.S. support for antidemocratic regimes in the 

region, perceptions of U.S. imperialism, and U.S. support for 

globalization, which is viewed as hurting Muslims. 
Page 26 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

• Program evaluations: While State has traditionally focused its 

evaluation activities on exchanges, the department has established an 

evaluation schedule that includes ongoing assessments of key public 

diplomacy programs and initiatives, including the English ACCESS 

Microscholarship program, Hi magazine, American Corners, and a 

contract with the Performance Institute to examine State’s performance 

measurement framework for public diplomacy. Planned evaluations 

include media training and outreach and the U.S. speakers programs. 

These evaluations are conducted by staff in the Bureau of Educational 

and Cultural Affairs, the Bureau of International Information Programs, 

and the Office of Policy, Planning, and Resources in the Under 

Secretary’s office.

Additionally, other forms of research are not being fully utilized. In 

particular, the Central Intelligence Agency sponsored a series of public 

diplomacy planning papers in 2005 for six countries of strategic national 

interest to the United States (China, Egypt, France, Indonesia, Nigeria, and 

Venezuela). These papers included detailed country profiles and issue 

analyses, recommended public diplomacy strategies for each country, and 

served as the focus of two conferences that sought to promote dialogue 

among academic and agency experts regarding how to improve and refine 

U.S. public diplomacy efforts in each country. However, we found that 

State officials in both Egypt and Nigeria were not familiar with this 

exercise or the papers produced for their host countries.

Country-Level Communication 

Plans Lacking

Private sector best practices suggest that a detailed, country-specific 

communication plan serves to pull together the complex data and analysis 

required for a feasible plan of action that can be monitored and improved 

as needed based on performance feedback. However, none of the posts we 

visited had such a detailed communication plan. Prior to 1999, when public 

diplomacy efforts were managed by the former U.S. Information Agency 

(USIA), detailed communication plans were developed on a country-bycountry basis. These plans included details on core messages and themes, 

target audiences, and research on key opinion leaders, audience attitudes, 

and the local media environment. With the integration of the USIA into 

State in 1999, these country plans were eliminated, leaving the mission 

performance plans as the focal point for such information. As suggested by 

several post officials, the country plans prepared by USIA were superior to 

the mission performance planning process since they focused on public 

diplomacy (a program driven function that is distinct from the policy focus 

predominant in other department operations) and provided a detailed road 

map to guide program implementation efforts.
Page 27 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

In marked contrast to State, we noted that USAID’s new Development 

Outreach and Communications officers are developing country-level 

communication plans. These plans are based on guidance prepared by 

public affairs staff in Washington, D.C., pertaining to roles and 

responsibilities, coordination requirements, communication tips and 

techniques, and the development of a long-term communication strategy. 

This guidance notes that “having a thoughtful communication strategy that 

is understood by the key leadership of the Mission is integral to 

communicating most effectively.” The guidance suggests that a good 

communication strategy should adequately describe the Mission’s public 

relations goals, should be linked to a specific time frame and resource 

request, and should identify the Mission’s communication strengths and 

weaknesses, key themes and messages, priority audiences, and the best 

means to reach them. Most importantly, the messages must be repeated 

over and over again to ensure that they are heard.

Strategic Framework Lacks 

Implementing Guidance 

In 2005, the Under Secretary established a strategic framework for U.S. 

public diplomacy efforts, which includes three priority goals: (1) support 

the President’s Freedom Agenda with a positive image of hope; (2) isolate 

and marginalize extremists; and (3) promote understanding regarding 

shared values and common interests between Americans and peoples of 

different countries, cultures, and faiths. The Under Secretary noted she 

intends to achieve these goals using five tactics—engagement, exchanges, 

education, empowerment, and evaluation—and by using various public 

diplomacy programs and other means. This framework represents a 

noteworthy start; however, the department has not yet developed written 

guidance that provides details on how the Under Secretary’s new strategic 

framework should be implemented in the field. 

Our past reports have detailed the difficulties the White House and the 

department have encountered in developing any type of written 

communication strategy. In our 2003 report and again in our 2005 report, 

we noted several attempts by State and the National Security Council to 

develop a communication strategy for the interagency community. In 2004, 

the National Security Council and the department created the Muslim 

World Outreach Policy Coordinating Committee to develop an interagency 

strategy to marginalize extremists. The committee collected information 

from embassies around the world to help develop a draft outreach strategy, 

but it was ultimately not released to posts pending further guidance from 

the new Under Secretary. On April 8, 2006, the President established a new 

Policy Coordinating Committee on Public Diplomacy and Strategic 

Communication. This committee, to be led by the Under Secretary, is 
Page 28 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

intended to coordinate interagency activities. According to department 

officials, one of the committee’s tasks will be to issue a formal interagency 

public diplomacy strategy. It is not clear how long this effort will take or 

when a strategy will be developed.

Post Planning and 

Evaluation Improving but 

Certain Elements Still 

Lacking

While the department has not yet issued guidance on how to implement the 

strategic framework established by the Under Secretary, officials in 

Washington acknowledged the need to improve message delivery at the 

post level and have begun to implement a more rigorous approach to 

program planning and evaluation. Based on prior reports by GAO and 

others, the department has begun to institute a “culture of measurement,” 

which should significantly impact the rigor and sophistication of its 

strategic planning and evaluation efforts. Beginning 2 years ago, the 

department sought to establish this culture through a variety of means, 

including the creation of an Office of Policy, Planning, and Resources 

within the office of the Under Secretary; the creation of a Public Diplomacy 

Evaluation Council to share best practices; the creation of a unified office 

of program evaluations; and the development of an expanded evaluation 

schedule, which places a new emphasis on assessing the department’s 

strategic information programs.

The department also plans to institutionalize the use of the “logic model” 

approach endorsed by GAO and others, which could have a significant 

impact on the department’s program design, implementation, and 

evaluation efforts.26 The logic model calls for program managers to define 

their key inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes, and impact. The head of the 

Public Diplomacy Evaluation Council has briefed field staff on the logic 

model using the illustration in figure 4.

26See GAO-03-951 and GAO, Program Evaluation: Strategies for Assessing How 

Information Dissemination Contributes to Agency Goals, GAO-02-923 (Washington, D.C.: 

Sept. 30, 2002).
Page 29 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 4: Logic Model for State Public Diplomacy Programs

The logic model will be implemented via a performance measurement 

framework contract led by the Performance Institute. Implementation 

details, guidance, training, and so on will be developed by the Performance 

Institute in coordination with key State stakeholders. Major elements of the 

model should be in place by September 2006, with full implementation 

expected by the 2009 mission performance plan cycle.

In January 2006, the department issued guidance on preparing mission 

performance plans that embodies its desire to increase the rigor and 

sophistication of post strategic planning and evaluation efforts. Issued for 

the fiscal year 2008 planning cycle, this guidance calls for more strategic 

thinking and planning than was required in the past, noting that “there are 

increased expectations for measurement and specificity in planning for 

public diplomacy and this leads to requests for more sophisticated 

information from the field.” The guidance calls for identification of specific 

target audiences, key themes and messages, detailed strategies and tactics, 

and performance outcomes that can be measured with a reasonable degree 

of precision and clearly demonstrate the ultimate impact of U.S. public 

diplomacy efforts. If fully implemented, this guidance should begin to 

address the shortcomings we found in mission performance plans in 

Nigeria, Pakistan, and Egypt. However, such guidance will not be 

implemented for another 2 years, raising significant concerns about what 

the department intends to do now to address strategic planning shortfalls.

Your planned work Your intended results

Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Impact

● Number of 

web readers

● Number of 

articles

● Audience size

● Media

placements

● Exchange 

participants

● Target audience 

more aware

● Target 

audiences with 

increased 

knowledge

● Media runs

more balanced 

stories

● Local 

institutions

develop 

American 

Studies

programs

● Target 

audience(s)

● Web sites

● Outreach

● Media

placement

● Exchanges

● Partnerships

● Speakers

● Cultural 

programs

● Theme or 

message

● Funding

● Staff

● Equipment

● Better relations

● International 

support

● Improved 

cooperation

Source: State Department.
Page 30 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

While Washington’s guidance is designed to significantly improve the 

strategic decisions summarized in mission performance plans, it does not 

require that missions prepare in-depth analyses to better inform and 

support their strategic program decisions. Such analyses include countrysituation papers, in-depth audience research, media analyses to understand 

how people receive information and who the key media providers are, and 

details on how related agency programs and planning efforts should be 

integrated to achieve common communication objectives. Finally, this 

guidance does not require that missions develop a separate communication 

plan to incorporate Washington and post-conducted analyses and planned 

strategies and tactics. The lack of a country-level communication plan 

increases the risk that planning will remain largely conceptual and fall 

short in terms of effectiveness at the tactical level. Also, country-level 

communication plans could be prepared and updated as needed, apart 

from the mission performance planning cycle, particularly as the new 

guidance for mission performance plans will not take effect until fiscal year 

2008. 

Security and Staffing 

Pose Challenges to 

Public Diplomacy 

Efforts in the Muslim 

World

Public diplomacy officers struggle to balance security with public access 

and outreach to local populations. The public diplomacy corps in the field 

faces several human capital challenges, such as the lack of a sufficient 

number of officers, lack of staff time, shortened tours of duty, and limited 

language proficiency. While State has taken steps to address these 

challenges, it is too early to assess the effectiveness of some of these 

efforts, and officers at the three posts we visited told us that many of these 

issues remain unresolved. In addition, State lacks an effective means to 

share embassy best practices that could help address some of these 

challenges.

Embassy Must Balance 

Security and Public 

Outreach

Security concerns have limited embassy outreach efforts and public 

access, forcing public diplomacy officers to strike a balance between safety 

and mission. Shortly after the terrorist attacks of September 11, thenSecretary of State Colin Powell stated, “Safety is one of our top priorities... 

but it can’t be at the expense of the mission.” While posts around the world 

have faced increased threats, security concerns are particularly acute at 

many posts in countries with significant Muslim populations. As figure 5 

illustrates, the threat level for terrorism is rated as “critical” or “high” in 80 

percent of posts in the Muslim world, compared with 34 percent of posts 

elsewhere.
Page 31 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 5: Terrorist Threat Ratings for Posts in the Muslim and Non-Muslim Worlds, 

October 2005

Security and budgetary concerns have led to the closure of publicly 

accessible facilities around the world, such as American Centers and 

Libraries. According to one State official, in 1990 the majority of posts had 

such publicly accessible facilities; now, however, few do. In Pakistan, for 

example, all of the American Centers have closed for security reasons, with 

the last such facility, in Islamabad, closed in February 2005. These same 

concerns have prevented the establishment of a U.S. presence elsewhere. 

Officials in Nigeria said they would like to open a facility in the north of the 

country to serve the region’s 70 million predominantly Muslim inhabitants, 

but security and budgetary concerns prevent them from doing so—one 

senior embassy official in Nigeria said that nothing they can do from the 

capital, Abuja, would be as effective as having a permanent presence in the 

north. As a result, embassies have had to find other venues for public 

diplomacy programs, and some activities have been moved onto embassy 

compounds.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Medium High Critical

Percentage

Threat level

Muslim world

Non-Muslim world

Source: State Department.
Page 32 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Other public diplomacy programs have had to limit their publicity to reduce 

the risk of becoming a target. A recent joint USAID-State report concluded 

that “security concerns often require a ‘low profile’ approach during events, 

programs or other situations, which, in happier times, would have been 

able to generate considerable good will for the United States.”27 This 

constraint is particularly acute in Pakistan, where the embassy has had to 

reduce certain speaker and exchange programs. For example, an official in 

Peshawar, Pakistan, said that consulate staff handpicked students for a 

9/11 Commission Report reading group because the consulate could not 

widely publicize the program. While several officials in Pakistan described 

the reading group as a success, its reach was limited due to security 

concerns.

Furthermore, precautions designed to improve the security of American 

facilities have had the ancillary effect of sending the message that the 

United States is unapproachable and distrustful, according to State 

officials. Concrete barriers and armed escorts contribute to this 

perception, as do requirements restricting visitors’ use of cell phones and 

pagers within the embassy. According to one official in Pakistan, visitors to 

the embassy’s Information Resource Center have fallen to as few as one per 

day because many visitors feel humiliated by the embassy’s rigorous 

security procedures. In Egypt, one of the ambassador’s priorities is 

remodeling the embassy in order to make it more inviting to visitors.

State Has Developed Initiatives 

to Respond to 

Security Concerns

State has responded to security concerns and the loss of publicly 

accessible facilities through a variety of initiatives, including American 

Corners, which are centers that provide information about the United 

States, hosted in local institutions and staffed by local employees. 

According to State data, there are currently approximately 300 American 

Corners throughout the world, including more than 90 in the Muslim world, 

with another 75 planned (more than 40 of which will be in the Muslim 

world). Several recent studies on public diplomacy have recommended the 

expansion of the American Corners program, but its effectiveness has not 

been evaluated.28 While one State official told us that American Corners are 

the best solution given the current security environment, others have 

described them as public diplomacy “on the cheap.” The American Corner 

we visited in Nigeria was confined to a single small room housing a limited 

27USAID, Operating in High Threat Environments (Washington, D.C.: June 2005).

28The department is currently evaluating the American Corners program.
Page 33 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

reference library and a small selection of donated books (see fig. 6); at a 

meeting with a focus group of Nigerians in Abuja who had participated in 

U.S. sponsored exchanges, no one present was familiar with the American 

Corner. Other posts we visited have had difficulty finding hosts for 

American Corners, as local institutions fear becoming terrorist targets.

Figure 6: Photographs of American Corner, Abuja, Nigeria

Information Resource Centers, small reference libraries for limited 

audiences created to replace some of the functions of American Centers’ 

open libraries, most of which have closed, are another attempt to balance 

security and access. State’s Bureau of International Information Programs 

operates more than 170 such centers worldwide. Because they are located 

within the embassy compound, however, public access to these facilities is 

often limited. For example, in Abuja, the center is open only to students 

and other specific demographic groups, and access is granted by 

appointment only; officials in Islamabad reported similar restrictions. The 

head of the center in Abuja said that accessibility was one of his primary 

challenges.

State has also made departmentwide efforts to expand public outreach 

beyond external facilities, and individual posts are devising creative 

solutions to this challenge. In Nigeria, several embassy staff, including the 

Ambassador, often travel together to cities lacking a permanent American 

presence; according to embassy officials, these “embassy on the road” 

tours typically last 3 or 4 days and can involve dozens of individuals. 

Additionally, in Pakistan we observed an embassy-funded American 

Discovery Center, a small kiosk providing information on America, placed 

Source: GAO. 
Page 34 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

in a local school. There are over 180 such kiosks in schools across 

Pakistan, although one embassy official remarked that as many as half of 

these schools have restricted access to the kiosk for a variety of reasons.

Addressing concerns over the United States’ decreased outreach 

capabilities, Secretary Rice recently announced plans to deploy more 

diplomats in areas with a limited U.S. presence by increasing the number of 

American Presence Posts. There are currently 8 such posts,29 which are 

staffed by one Foreign Service officer and are intended to extend the U.S. 

diplomatic presence beyond foreign capitals and reach out to “emerging 

communities of change.” We visited one such post in Alexandria, Egypt, 

which contained a publicly accessible reading room, offered free computer 

access, and hosted frequent cultural events. One advantage of the 

American Presence Posts over American Corners, according to the 

principal officer in Alexandria, was that the post was able to maintain 

control over the facility.

Another means of reaching large audiences in high-threat posts while 

minimizing security concerns is through international broadcasting.30 

However, in a 2003 survey conducted by GAO, almost 30 percent of public 

diplomacy officers in the field said that transmission strength was 

ineffective in helping to achieve public diplomacy goals in their country. 

Officials we spoke with in Pakistan and Egypt said this challenge still 

exists, suggesting that poor signal strength for U.S. broadcasts in their host 

countries limits the impact of broadcasting. The administration’s fiscal year 

2007 budget request includes a request to increase U.S. broadcasting to 

countries in the Muslim world while reducing broadcasts elsewhere, 

particularly in Europe and Eurasia.

29American Presence Posts are located in Alexandria, Egypt; Medan, Indonesia; Winnipeg, 

Canada; and Bordeaux, Lille, Lyon, Rennes, and Toulouse, France.

30GAO has reviewed U.S. broadcasting efforts in the Middle East separately. See GAO, U.S. 

Public Diplomacy: State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors Expand 

Efforts in the Middle East but Face Significant Challenges, GAO-04-435T (Washington, 

D.C.: Feb. 10, 2004). A separate GAO review will evaluate the effectiveness of Radio Sawa 

and the Alhurra satellite network—the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ two primary 

initiatives aimed at Arab audiences.
Page 35 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Staffing Challenges at Posts 

in the Muslim World: Tour 

Length, Time, and Language 

Capability

Insufficient numbers of public diplomacy staff and staff time hinder 

outreach efforts at posts in the Muslim world. Additionally, tours of duty 

tend to be shorter in the Muslim world than elsewhere, which negatively 

impacts continuity at a post, as well as the ability to cultivate personal 

relationships. Further, we found that public diplomacy officers at many 

posts cannot communicate effectively with local populations in local 

languages, hampering overall U.S. public diplomacy efforts. To address 

these challenges, State has taken several steps, both at the department and 

post level, highlighted by the Secretary’s transformational diplomacy 

initiative, but it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of this initiative.

Lack of Staffing and Staff Time 

Hinders Public Diplomacy 

Efforts

While several recent reports on public diplomacy have recommended an 

increase in spending on U.S. public diplomacy programs, several embassy 

officials told us that, with current staffing levels, they do not have the 

capacity to effectively utilize increased funds. According to State data, the 

department had established 834 public diplomacy positions overseas in 

2005, but 124, or roughly 15 percent, were vacant. Compounding this 

challenge is the loss of public diplomacy officers to temporary duty in Iraq, 

which, according to one State official, has drawn down field officers even 

further. Staffing shortages may also limit the amount of training public 

diplomacy officers receive. According to the U.S. Advisory Commission on 

Public Diplomacy, “the need to fill a post quickly often prevents public 

diplomacy officers from receiving their full training.”31

In addition, public diplomacy officers at post are burdened with 

administrative tasks and thus have less time to conduct public diplomacy 

outreach activities than previously. One senior State official said that 

administrative duties, such as budget, personnel, and internal reporting, 

compete with officers’ public diplomacy responsibilities. Another official in 

Egypt told us that there was rarely enough time to strategize, plan, or 

evaluate her programs. In addition, State officials in Washington 

acknowledged that additional requirements for posts to improve strategic 

planning and evaluation of their public diplomacy programs would need to 

be accompanied by additional staff with relevant expertise.

Short Tours of Duty in the 

Muslim World

Staffing challenges in public affairs sections at posts in the Muslim world 

are exacerbated by shorter tours of duty and fewer officers bidding on 

31U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy, 2005 Report (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 7, 

2005).
Page 36 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

public diplomacy positions than in the non-Muslim world. According to 

data provided by State, the average tour length at posts in the Muslim world 

is 2.1 years, compared with 2.7 years in the non-Muslim world. Figure 7 

shows the average tour length by region. Furthermore, as a result of the 

security concerns mentioned above, tours at many posts in the Muslim 

world are for only 1 year, without family members. Of State’s 20 so-called 

unaccompanied posts, 15 are in the Muslim world.

Figure 7: Average Tour of Duty Length by Region (as of December 2005)

Shorter tours contribute to insufficient language skills and limit officers’ 

ability to cultivate personal relationships, which, according to a senior 

public diplomacy officer, are vital to understanding Arabs and Muslims. 

Another senior State official, noting the prevalence of one-year tours in the 

Muslim world, told us that Public Affairs officers who have shorter tours 

tend to produce less effective work than officers with longer tours. In 

Pakistan, we were told that the Public Affairs officer views himself as a 

“management consultant,” in part because of his short tour in Islamabad. 

Furthermore, the department’s Inspector General observed that the rapid 

Source: State Department.

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

South Asia

Africa

Near East

East Asia

and Pacific

Europe and

Eurasia

Western

Hemisphere

Non-Muslim

Mu

world

slim

world

Average tour of duty (all posts): 2.55 years

Post locations

Years
Page 37 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

turnover of American officers in Pakistan was a major constraint to public 

diplomacy activities in the country.32

In addition, public diplomacy positions in the Muslim world have received 

fewer bids than public diplomacy positions elsewhere. An analysis of data 

from State’s summer 2005 posting cycle shows that public diplomacy 

positions in the Muslim world received fewer than half the average number 

of bids of non-Muslim posts—averaging 3.7 bids per position at posts in the 

Muslim world, compared with 8.9 bids per position elsewhere. As a result 

of the lower number of bids for public diplomacy positions in the Muslim 

world, it has been harder to fill these positions. 

Language Deficiencies 

Pronounced in the Muslim World

Many public diplomacy officers in the Muslim world do not meet the 

language requirements established for their positions by State.33 According 

to data provided by State, in countries with significant Muslim populations, 

30 percent of language-designated public diplomacy positions are filled by 

officers without the requisite proficiency in those languages, compared 

with 24 percent elsewhere. In Arabic language posts, about 36 percent of 

language-designated public diplomacy positions are filled by staff unable to 

speak Arabic at the designated level. In addition, State officials told us that 

there are even fewer officers who are willing or able to speak on television 

or engage in public debate in Arabic. The Information Officer in Cairo 

stated that his office does not have enough Arabic speakers to engage the 

Egyptian media effectively. Figure 8 shows the percentage of public 

diplomacy positions in the Muslim world staffed by officers meeting 

language requirements.

32State Department Office of the Inspector General, Inspection of Embassy Islamabad, 

Pakistan, ISP-I-05-35A (Washington, D.C.: August 2005).

33In January 2002, GAO reported on language proficiency shortfalls at State and other 

agencies. See GAO, Foreign Languages: Human Capital Approach Needed to Correct 

Staffing and Proficiency Shortfalls, GAO-02-375 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 31, 2002).
Page 38 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 8: Percentage of Filled Language-Designated Public Diplomacy Positions in 

the Muslim World Staffed by Officers Meeting Language Requirements (as of August 

2005)

As a result, many public diplomacy officers in the Muslim world cannot 

communicate as well with local audiences as their position requires. 

According to the Djerejian report, “The ability to speak, write, and read a 

foreign language is one of the recognized prerequisites of effective 

communications. Foreign Service officers who are fluent in Arabic 

immediately convey a sense of respect for and interest in the people to 

whom they speak, and fluency prevents the distortion of translation.” 

State’s Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs has said 

that communicating in other languages is a public diplomacy challenge and 

that encouraging Americans to speak foreign languages is a priority for 

public diplomacy.

State Has Taken Several Steps to 

Address These Human Capital 

Challenges

State has recently made several efforts to address its human capital 

challenges; in particular, following the Secretary of State’s comment that 

public diplomacy is the job of the entire embassy, officials in Washington 

have encouraged posts to expand their embassy employee speaker 

programs. By increasing the number of American officers speaking to 

foreign audiences, posts have attempted to compensate for the loss of 

Source: State Department.

Language

Percentage

0

20

40

60

80

100

Arabic French Russian Turkish Indonesian Other
Page 39 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

public diplomacy staff and the diminished amount of time public diplomacy 

officers have available for outreach. We observed these efforts in Abuja, 

Islamabad, and Peshawar, where the embassies have developed mission 

speaker bureaus, which are lists of embassy staff willing to speak to local 

audiences on a variety of topics related to America. In Egypt, however, the 

department’s Inspector General noted that non-public diplomacy officers 

rarely engage in public outreach, missing a valuable opportunity to further 

increase understanding of U.S. policies, culture, and values.

The Secretary of State also recently proposed changes in staff incentives as 

part of her call for transformational diplomacy. New requirements for 

career advancement would include service in at least one hardship post, 

fluency in two or more languages, and expertise in two or more regions. In 

addition, the Secretary has announced plans to reposition staff in all career 

tracks, starting in summer 2006, from posts in Europe and Washington, 

D.C., to India, China, and Latin America, as well as to the Muslim world. It 

is too early to evaluate the impact of these efforts.

Recognizing a persistent national foreign language deficit, in January 2006 

President Bush announced plans for a National Security Language Initiative 

to further strengthen national security by developing foreign language 

skills.34 The President’s original request for this initiative was $114 million 

in fiscal year 2007, split between State, DOD, the Department of Education, 

and the Director of National Intelligence—State’s share of this funding is 

about $27 million, according to department officials. State’s efforts will 

focus on critical languages spoken in the Muslim world, such as Arabic, 

Farsi, Turkish, and Urdu, among others. Under this initiative, State will 

provide opportunities for U.S. high school students, undergraduates, and 

graduate students to study these and other languages abroad and will 

strengthen foreign language teaching in the United States through 

exchanges and professional development. State has also established a 

facility in Tunis for advanced Arabic language instruction, including 

courses to train staff to appear on Arabic-language television and radio.

State Lacks Systematic 

Means for Communicating 

Best Practices

While individual posts have devised innovative approaches to overcome 

the challenges their public diplomacy programs face, State generally lacks 

a systematic, comprehensive means of communicating these practices and 

34For a detailed description of the National Security Language Initiative, see appendix III.
Page 40 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

transferring knowledge and experience across posts. For example, in 

Nigeria, we noted the embassy practice of taking a team, headed by the 

Ambassador, on coordinated outreach efforts to key cities in the country 

where the United States currently lacks a diplomatic presence. The Deputy 

Chief of Mission noted frustration with the post’s inability to share this and 

other practices with posts that might benefit from lessons learned in 

Nigeria. 

Existing means of sharing best practices among public diplomacy officers 

tend to be regional in scope, ad hoc in nature, or underutilized in practice. 

These mechanisms include annual Public Affairs officer conferences in 

each region, anecdotal submissions in State’s RESULTS database, and 

weekly newsletters issued by regional public diplomacy offices. While 

some officers stated that the regional Public Affairs officer conferences 

were helpful for sharing these practices, one official noted that no formal 

reports were generated at these conferences and that there has only been 

one global conference. The department maintains a database of public 

diplomacy program results, which is based on anecdotes submitted by 

officers in the field following speaker, exchange, or other public diplomacy 

programs. While it is a potential tool for retaining institutional memory at 

State, some State officials said that anecdotes were not systematically 

entered into the database. Others suggested that this database be modified 

to enable officers to flag best practices to make them easier to locate in the 

future. In March 2006, State officials told us that the Under Secretary’s 

office was working on a Web-based system for officers in the field and in 

Washington, D.C., to share ideas and expected this system to be operational 

within the next month. 

A strengthened, institutionalized system for sharing best practices could 

improve the retention of institutional memory at State. However, given the 

constraints on public diplomacy officers’ time, any means of sharing best 

practices should not create an additional reporting burden on officers in 

the field. Furthermore, whichever method State chooses to communicate 

best practices, it should ensure that the practices are not self-submitted but 

rather reviewed by a third party for appropriateness.

Conclusions In recent years, State has shifted public diplomacy resources to the Muslim 

world, but three of its new initiatives specifically designed to reach Muslim 

audiences have been short-lived. Lacking specifically targeted programs, 

posts in Muslim-majority countries continue to use the same information 

and exchange programs available to posts throughout the world. GAO and 
Page 41 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

others have suggested the adoption of private sector best practices as a 

means to improve the department’s communication efforts in Washington 

and at the post level. These practices call for the use of central messages or 

themes, target audience segmentation and analysis, in-depth audience 

research and evaluation, and the preparation of detailed communication 

plans to pull these various elements together. Communication efforts at the 

posts we visited generally lacked these strategic elements. State has taken 

several steps to address this problem, including the development of a 

strategic framework with goals and tactics, the creation of a 

transformational diplomacy initiative to implement some of these best 

practices, and the issuance of updated guidance to improve fiscal year 2008 

mission performance plans. These are all positive steps. However, 

Washington still lacks written guidance to implement the strategic 

framework developed by the current Under Secretary. In addition, posts 

have not prepared in-depth analyses or detailed communication plans to 

support their strategic communication decisions. Compounding this lack of 

strategic planning and evaluation are challenges related to staffing and 

security at posts in the Muslim world. State currently lacks a systematic 

mechanism for sharing best practices, which could help address some of 

these challenges.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

To improve the delivery of public diplomacy messages to Muslim audiences 

around the world, we recommend that the Secretary of State direct the 

Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs to take 

the following two actions:

• To increase the sophistication and effectiveness of U.S. outreach efforts, 

develop written guidance detailing how the department intends to 

implement its public diplomacy goals as they apply to the Muslim world 

and incorporates the strategic communication best practices discussed 

in this report. This guidance should be developed in consultation with 

the White House, affected government agencies, and outside experts 

who have a practical knowledge of what is needed to translate private 

sector best practices into practical steps which can be taken in the field. 

To accompany this guidance, we recommend that State develop a 

sample country-level communication plan that posts can tailor to local 

conditions.

• To meet the challenges facing public diplomacy officers in the field, 

including the need to balance security with outreach and short tours of 

duty at certain posts, strengthen existing systems of sharing best 
Page 42 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

practices in order to more systematically transfer knowledge among 

embassies around the world.

Agency Comments and 

Our Evaluation

The State Department provided written comments on a draft of this report 

(see app. V). State concurred with the report’s findings and conclusions. 

State also indicated that it has begun to address the recommendations 

contained in this report. State said it is developing an integrated strategic 

plan that includes elements of private sector best practices. State also said 

it is developing a sample country-level communication plan and 

constructing a Web-based system for conveying best practices. State did 

not indicate when the strategic plan or sample country-level 

communication plans will be completed. We modified our findings 

regarding State’s exchange programs, noting their continued focus on 

younger audiences. In addition, State provided technical comments, which 

have been incorporated throughout the report where appropriate.

We are sending copies of this report to other interested Members of 

Congress and the Secretary of State. We will also make copies available to 

others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no charge 

on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. If you or your staff have any
Page 43 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-4128 or 

fordj@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations 

and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key 

contributors to this report are listed in appendix VI.

Sincerely yours,

Jess T. Ford

Director, International Affairs and Trade
Page 44 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology AAppenednxidexiIs

To determine what public diplomacy resources and programs the State 

Department (State) has directed to the Muslim world, we reviewed State 

budget requests, annual performance and accountability reports, and other 

documents. We also interviewed officials from State’s Office of the Under 

Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs; the Office of Policy, 

Planning, and Resources; the Bureaus of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

International Information Programs, and Public Affairs; the Bureau of 

Resource Management; and regional bureaus. We also observed training 

classes for new public diplomacy officers at State’s Foreign Service 

Institute. We obtained and analyzed documents on public diplomacy 

budgets and program descriptions from these offices and bureaus. To 

assess the reliability of State’s data, we reviewed documentation related to 

the data sources and discussed the data with knowledgeable State officials. 

We determined the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this 

report. We also compared data on the populations of countries in the 

Muslim world from the United Nations, World Bank, and CIA World 

Factbook, and found them sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this 

report. 

We based our definition of the Muslim world on State’s Bureau of 

Educational and Cultural Affairs’ list of 58 countries and territories with 

significant Muslim populations. These countries are spread across the 

Middle East, Asia, Africa, and Europe, and have a combined population of 

more than 1.5 billion people. Appendix II lists these countries.

To assess whether posts adopted a strategic approach to implementing 

public diplomacy, we reviewed Washington-produced mission performance 

planning guidance prepared by the Office of Policy, Planning, and 

Resources (located within the Office of the Under Secretary for Public 

Diplomacy and Public Affairs), the results of a fiscal year 2005 review of 

mission performance plans conducted by the Bureau of Resource 

Management, public opinion polling results prepared by the Bureau of 

Intelligence and Research, and related strategic planning and evaluation 

documents prepared by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and 

the Bureau of International Information Programs. In Egypt, Nigeria, and 

Pakistan, we reviewed fiscal year 2005 mission performance plans and 

related strategic planning and evaluation documentation, and, to discuss 

the scope and adequacy of each post’s strategic planning and evaluation 

efforts, also met with a wide range of embassy officials including the 

Ambassador or Deputy Chief of Mission, public affairs section staff, 

political and economic officers, regional affairs officers, and U.S. Agency 

for International Development (USAID) and Department of Defense (DOD) 
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 45 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

officials. To discuss a range of strategic planning, research, and evaluation 

issues in Washington, we met with representatives from the Office of 

Policy, Planning, and Resources; the Bureau of Resource Management; the 

Bureau of Intelligence and Research; the Bureau of Educational and 

Cultural Affairs; and the Bureau of International Information Programs. We 

also discussed private sector communication best practices with a 

representative from Business for Diplomatic Action. 

To identify the challenges facing U.S. public diplomacy efforts in the 

Muslim world and what State has done to address these challenges, we 

reviewed recent studies and reports on public diplomacy. In addition:

• We met with officials from State’s Office of the Under Secretary for 

Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, and the Office of Policy, Planning, 

and Resources; the Bureaus of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 

International Information Programs, and Public Affairs; and regional 

bureaus in Washington, D.C.

• We met with U.S. embassy officers and foreign government, academic, 

and nongovernmental organization representatives in Nigeria, Pakistan, 

and Egypt to learn about and observe challenges facing public 

diplomacy efforts at posts abroad. We also spoke with U.S. embassy 

officials in Indonesia and Turkey by telephone. We selected these 

countries based on their strategic importance to the United States, their 

proportion of the total population of the Muslim world, their geographic 

distribution, and their mix of public diplomacy programs.

• We analyzed State data on staffing, language requirements, bids for 

public diplomacy positions, and threat ratings from 2005. To assess the 

reliability of these data, we surveyed agency officials responsible for 

collecting and analyzing these data. We determined the data to be 

sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.

• In September 2005, we convened a roundtable of Muslim experts in 

Washington, D.C., to discuss program challenges and potential 

solutions. Participants included experts in public opinion and public 

affairs, foreign journalists, and representatives from think tanks and 

academia.

We did not review covert strategic communications efforts managed by 

DOD or the intelligence community. We limited our review of USAID to the 

agency’s efforts to communicate its assistance efforts and did not review 
Appendix I

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Page 46 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

the assistance efforts themselves. We limited our review of DOD to its 

support of State’s public diplomacy activities. We did not review State-led 

reform initiatives such as the Middle East Partnership Initiative but focused 

instead on public diplomacy activities designed to communicate 

information about the United States to target overseas audiences. For the 

BBG, we collected funding and program information but did not seek to 

evaluate the effectiveness of Radio Sawa and the Alhurra satellite 

network—the BBG’s two primary initiatives aimed at Arab audiences. We 

are reviewing these broadcast initiatives separately.

We performed our work from April 2005 to February 2006 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Page 47 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix II

Countries and Territories with Significant 

Muslim Populations ApendxiI

Region Country Populationa

Percentage 

Muslim

Africa Benin 7.5 20%

Burkina Faso 13.9 50

Cameroon 16.4 20

Chad 9.8 51

Comoros 0.7 98

Cote d’Ivoire 17.3 35-40

Djibouti 0.5 94

Eritrea 4.6 >50

Ethiopia 73.1 45-50

Gabon 1.4 <1

Gambia 1.6 90

Guinea 9.5 85

Guinea-Bissau 1.4 45

Mali 12.3 90

Mauritania 3.1 100

Mozambique 19.4 18

Niger 11.7 80

Nigeria 128.8 50

Senegal 11.1 94

Sierra Leone 6.0 60

Somalia 8.6 >50

Sudan 40.2 70

Togo 5.7 20

Uganda 27.3 16

East Asia and 

Pacific

Brunei 0.4 67

Indonesia 242.0 88

Malaysia 24.0 60
Appendix II

Countries and Territories with Significant 

Muslim Populations

Page 48 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Sources: State Department and Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook.

Note: As defined by the State Department’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs.

a

In millions.

Europe and 

Eurasia

Albania 3.6 70

Azerbaijan 7.9 93

Kazakhstan 15.2 47

Kosovo

Kyrgyzstan 5.1 75

Tajikistan 7.2 90

Turkey 69.7 100

Turkmenistan 5.0 89

Uzbekistan 26.9 88

Near East Algeria 32.5 99

Bahrain 0.7 100

Egypt 77.5 94

Iran 68.0 98

Iraq 26.1 97

Jordan 5.8 92

Kuwait 2.3 85

Lebanon 3.8 60

Libya 5.8 97

Morocco 32.7 99

Oman 3.0 >75

Qatar 0.9 95

Saudi Arabia 26.4 100

Syria 18.4 74

Tunisia 10.1 98

UAE 2.6 96

West Bank and Gaza 3.8 75

Yemen 20.7 90

South Asia Afghanistan 29.9 99

Bangladesh 144.3 83

Maldives 0.3 >50

Pakistan 162.4 97

(Continued From Previous Page)

Region Country Populationa

Percentage 

Muslim
Page 49 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix III

Inventory of State Department Public

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs ApendxiI

Positions Public Affairs Officer (PAO): The PAO is the senior public diplomacy 

adviser in the embassy. He/she coordinates all aspects of mission public 

affairs ensuring that public diplomacy resources are deployed in support of 

mission goals. The PAO also supervises the public affairs section including 

the work of the information/press section and the cultural section.

Cultural Affairs Officer (CAO): The CAO manages the embassy’s 

educational and professional exchange programs, including the Fulbright 

program. He/she also carries out cultural programs that highlight American 

society and achievements and administers the speaker program that brings 

U.S. experts to address targeted audiences in the host country.

Information Officer (IO): The IO is the embassy spokesperson and 

primary point of contact for information about the United States and 

mission affairs. The IO advises senior management on media relations and 

public affairs strategies and manages the distribution of information to 

members of the target audience.

Information Resource Officer (IRO): Generally librarians by training, 

IROs are responsible for embassies’ Information Resource Centers (IRC) 

and American Corners. They are also responsible for supporting IRC 

programs and training local IRC staff. There are approximately 20 IROs at 

missions around the world.

Regional English Language Officer (RELO): Worldwide, State has 17 

experienced TEFL/TESL professionals, known as RELOs. RELOs help 

embassies design strategies to support English teaching and work with 

various partners to organize in teacher training seminars and workshops 

and offer general guidance.

Programs Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Programs

• Fulbright Program: Flagship U.S. government exchange program for 

graduate students, professors, researchers, professionals, and 

secondary level teachers to teach, study, and conduct research. 

Americans are hosted by schools or universities around the world, and 

foreign participants by U.S. secondary schools, colleges, or universities.

• International Visitors (IV): 3-week visits to the United States by rising 

leaders in diverse fields. IVs travel in groups or as individuals and 
Appendix III

Inventory of State Department Public 

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs

Page 50 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

experience American cultural life and society along with professional 

interchange with U.S. counterparts.

• Voluntary Visitors (VV): Programs for foreign nationals already 

traveling to the United States, including professional appointments and 

domestic travel support. VVs can partly be funded by an embassy.

• Office of Citizen Exchanges professional and institutional exchange 

programs: Exchanges designed to link private sector American 

expertise and resources with priority institutions to engage youth 

influencers and promote civil society, democracy, youth leadership, and 

volunteerism, among other topics.

• Humphrey Program: Midlevel professionals from developing countries 

come to the United States for a year of academic study and professional 

experience.

• English Language Teaching: Targeted English language programs in 

specific regions and countries of the world, coordinated with the 

embassy. Programs include the English ACCESS Microscholarship 

program, English Language Fellow program, English Language 

Specialist program, and E-Teacher program.

• Rhythm Road: Professional jazz and urban music groups who tour 

countries with limited exposure to American culture, playing concerts 

and talking about their music and American society.

• Feature Film Service: Films provided to posts by the Motion Picture 

Association of America and other organizations for festivals, screenings 

by Ambassadors, and other programmatic usage by post public affairs 

sections.

• Cultural Ambassadors: Utilizes world-renowned American cultural 

figures to reach out to young people around the globe. 

• Cultural Envoys and Cultural Visitors: Cultural Envoys aims to utilize 

the talents of average Americans to engage with young people abroad. 

Cultural Visitors is designed to bring young “idea” leaders in the arts and 

humanities to the United States for internships.

• Arts Exchanges in International Issues: An annual grants competition 

designed to identify American partner organizations to conduct 
Appendix III

Inventory of State Department Public 

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs

Page 51 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

exchange programs in priority countries, utilizing cultural and artistic 

media and programs to address priority U.S. foreign policy goals.

• Ambassador’s Fund for Cultural Preservation: Assists less developed 

countries in preserving their cultural heritage and demonstrates U.S. 

respect for other cultures.

• International Partnership Among Museums: An institutional linkage 

program carried out with the American Association of Museums, 

selecting American museums to partner with a museum abroad to 

develop a collaborative program built around a theme.

• International Cultural Property Protection: Carries out the Convention 

on Cultural Property Implementation Act, which protects cultural 

patrimony of signatory nations.

• National Security Language Initiative: Program activity will include 

in-country language training for U.S. Fulbright students in Arabic, 

Turkish, and Indic languages; summer intensive language programs 

abroad for undergraduate beginning students and 

intermediate/advanced training for undergraduate and graduate 

students; expansion of the Fulbright Foreign Language Teaching 

Assistant Program to bring 300 native speakers of critical languages to 

teach in U.S. universities and schools; and a new component to the 

teacher exchange program to assist U.S. teachers of critical need 

languages to study abroad.

• Study of the U.S.: Promotes better understanding of the United States 

through Summer Institutes for foreign university faculty, reference 

collections, and the Currents in American Scholarship series.

• EducationUSA: Promotes higher education abroad by supporting 

overseas advising centers and collaborating with U.S. educational 

organizations to strengthen international exchange.

Bureau of International Information Programs

• U.S. Speakers: American subject-matter experts travel to a host country 

to address selected audiences on a range of policy issues and various 

aspects of American society.
Appendix III

Inventory of State Department Public 

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs

Page 52 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

• American Corners: Public diplomacy outposts in host-country 

organizations, such as libraries and universities, that provide access to 

information about the United States through book collections, the 

Internet, and local programming to the general public.

• Information Resource Centers: Computer-based knowledge platforms 

at embassies and consulates that provide information about U.S. 

policies and American society to targeted sectors of the host-country 

population.

• Digital video conferences: Two-way video/phone dialogues between 

U.S. subject-matter experts and their counterparts in a host country.

• USINFO: Authoritative, up-to-date Web site providing information on 

U.S. policy and American issues directed at foreign readers. Available in 

English and six world languages.

• Washington File: Daily compilations of news articles and official texts 

intended for foreign audiences. Available on the USINFO Web site.

• Electronic Journals: Web-based monthly publications focused on 

themes supporting mission performance plan goals. Available in several 

languages, Electronic Journals can be downloaded and printed for local 

distribution.

• Infocentral: On-line resource for U.S. government spokespersons and 

embassy officers who need information on policy issues, access to press 

clips, and cleared guidance.

• Mission Web sites: Each embassy maintains its own Web site with links 

to the State Department and other sources of information about the 

United States and U.S. policy.

• Issue Briefs: Background information on policy topics, available at the 

Infocentral Web site, intended for use only by U.S. officials who need to 

articulate and explain policy positions.

• Paper Shows: Exhibitions of 35-40 panels featuring photographic and 

documentary images and text on significant American personalities, 

issues, and events. Paper shows are produced in several languages and 

displayed in museums, libraries, theaters, and other public places 

worldwide.
Appendix III

Inventory of State Department Public 

Diplomacy Positions and Selected Programs

Page 53 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Bureau of Public Affairs Programs

• Foreign Press Centers: Support centers for foreign journalists in 

Washington, D.C., New York, and Los Angeles providing facilitative 

assistance, interviews with U.S. officials, and information resources.

• Office of Broadcast Services: Provides television and radio to overseas 

posts, runs American Embassy Television Network, and assists foreign 

TV crews making film documentaries in the United States on subjects of 

interest to the U.S. government.

Other Programs

• Media reaction: Summary compilations of foreign editorial and op-ed 

reactions to issues of interest to the United States, available daily on the 

Web.
Page 54 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix IV

Private Sector Best Practices ApendxiIV

GAO and other groups have called for a transformation in how U.S. public 

diplomacy efforts are conducted. One key element of this proposed 

transformation is the perceived need to adopt and adapt strategic 

communication best practices from the private sector. 

GAO suggested in its September 2003 report on State public diplomacy 

efforts that the department examine private sector public relations efforts 

and political campaigns’ use of sophisticated strategies to integrate 

complex communication efforts involving multiple players. GAO’s 

roundtable with public relations firms from the private sector revealed that 

the key strategic components of such efforts include establishing the scope 

and nature of the problem, identifying the target audience, determining the 

core message, and defining both success and failure. The panel emphasized 

the importance of synchronizing these activities in a systematic way, so 

that communication efforts are mutually reinforcing in advancing the 

campaign’s overall objectives. They noted that without a carefully 

integrated plan, the various elements are at risk of canceling each other out 

and possibly damaging the overall campaign. Figure 9 illustrates the steps 

in the process.
Appendix IV

Private Sector Best Practices

Page 55 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Figure 9: Elements of a Typical Public Relations Strategy

Make initial campaign decisions

Scope and nature of issue, problem, or opportunity

Define target audience and core messages

Define success and failure

Identify goals and objectives

Develop initial implementation timetables

Conduct prelaunch activities

● Develop tactics, budgets, and timetables

● Conduct media training for spokespersons

● Coordinate internal and external communications

● Reach out to potential third-party supporters

Test messages and explore options

● Measure current opinions

● Test credibility and effectiveness of messages

● Probe each problem in detail

● Use results to develop a strategy and tactical plan

Develop information materials

● Press materials, fact sheets, etc.

● Internet communications

● Advertising

● Speeches and presentations

● Mailing databases

Decisions

Implement tactical program

Communicate with target audience through:

● Events

● Media relations

● Rapid-response mechanisms

● Advertising

● Web relations

● Tracking research

● Direct outreach

● Third-party supporters

Monitor progress, adjust tactics, and 

report results

● Establish feedback mechanism

● Adjust campaign messages and tactics

● Report results to client

Research

Sources: GAO; developed from Weber Shandwick.

Refine as necessary

Refine as

necessary
Appendix IV

Private Sector Best Practices

Page 56 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Business for Diplomatic 

Action

Testimony by the President of Business for Diplomatic Action (BDA)1

provides a suggested strategic road map for the government to follow, 

building on private sector best practices.2

 BDA suggests that U.S. public 

diplomacy efforts be redesigned following a five step plan: (1) listen, ask 

questions, and analyze; (2) participate in foundation building process for a 

comprehensive communication strategy; (3) introduce a “positioning 

concept” for the United States in a post-9/11 world; (4) develop a 

comprehensive communication plan; and (5) put someone in charge. 

Under step one, BDA notes that “there are knowledge gaps with regard to 

issues of anti-American sentiment and public diplomacy programming.” 

Under step two, BDA suggests that a task force of public and private sector 

parties explore the significance and implications of the research data 

collected under step one. Under step three, a “positioning concept” for the 

United States would be developed, capturing a point of view, a promise, 

and a personality. Step four requires the development of a comprehensive 

communication plan which can take the form of a multiaudience grid 

listing existing attitudes, desired attitudes, barriers standing between 

existing and desired attitudes, and the best means to address and remove 

these barriers. BDA notes that answers to these questions will vary by 

target audience (e.g., Muslim parents, Muslim youth, Chinese business 

leaders, etc.), but all must be translations of the “positioning concept” 

agreed to in step three. Finally, someone must be in put in charge to ensure 

that all activities, behaviors, and messages are aligned to the new 

positioning concept.

Defense Science Board In its September 2004 report on strategic communications, the Defense 

Science Board makes a case that borrowing and adapting private sector 

communication practices is a critical step toward revitalizing U.S. public 

diplomacy efforts.3

 The report notes that the United States approaches 

1

Incorporated in January 2004 by interested private sector leaders, BDA seeks to counter 

anti-American sentiments that can harm U.S. business interests by helping to coordinate the 

outreach efforts of U.S. multinational companies.

2

Reinhard, Keith. Testimony before the U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee 

on Government Reform. The 9/11 Commission Recommendations on Public Diplomacy: 

Hearing Before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and 

International Relations. 108th Cong. 2nd sess., Aug. 23, 2004.

3

Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Strategic Communication

(Washington, D.C.: September 2004).
Appendix IV

Private Sector Best Practices

Page 57 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

modern warfare with cutting-edge strategies, tactics, and weapons, 

designed to be effective against modern foes, and constantly updated. By 

contrast, the report argues, U.S. current strategic communication planning 

and execution is mired in diplomatic and marketing tactics of yesteryear. 

The United States has no clearly defined strategic framework, themes, or 

messages. The report goes on to note that building an effective strategic 

communication culture that borrows the most effective private sector 

marketing and political campaign techniques will be at the core of 

rebuilding and reinventing the way the United States listens, engages, and 

communicates with the world. 

The report notes that achieving this goal will involve the following three 

key steps:

• As in a successful political campaign, the United States must clearly 

define what success means in terms of its benefits for all target 

audiences. All constituents must understand what success means for 

them in personal terms. A carefully defined set of themes and messages 

must reinforce targeted audiences’ perceived and personal benefits.

• The United States must communicate what its vision for the future 

promises on individual terms, not national or pan-national religious 

terms. The United States should personalize the benefits of its defined 

future, for example, personal control, choice and change, personal 

mobility, meritocracy, and individual rights (in particular, women’s 

rights).

• As with most effective private sector and political marketing campaigns, 

the United States must understand what target populations must be 

reached and influenced to achieve success. And the United States must 

understand what it takes to move them. More importantly, it must target 

audiences that can be moved—pragmatically and strategically picking 

its target audiences.
Page 58 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix V

Comments from the State Department ApendxiV
Appendix V

Comments from the State Department

Page 59 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy
Page 60 GAO-06-535 U.S. Public Diplomacy

Appendix VI

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments ApendxiVI

GAO Contact Jess Ford (202) 512-4128

Staff 

Acknowledgments

In addition to the individual named above, Diana Glod, Assistant Director; 

Michael ten Kate; Robert Ball; Mehrunisa Qayyum; Richard Bakewell; and 

Joe Carney made significant contributions to this report. Martin de Alteriis, 

Elaine Vaurio, and Ernie Jackson provided technical assistance.

(320339)
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help 

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost 

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go to 

www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.”

Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Congressional 

Relations

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548

Public Affairs Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548