C. VOICE OF AMERICA

Recommendations @ The Commission recommends that USICA take greater care 10 avoid
actions and policies that can be easily misinterpreted and cast doubt on
VOA's commitment to accuracy and objectivity.

© The Commission welcomes the high priority USICA is giving to the
expansion of VOA's worldwide transmitter network and to the modern-
ization of its Washington facilities. It recommends that these initiatives be
given appropriate support.

® The Commission supports USICA's efforts to examine the most effective
means of communicating with successor generation audiences. It recom-
mends that this examination consider the cost, potential audience levels,
and technical difficulties involved in medium wave broadcasting to West-
ern Europe as well as the relative advantages and disadvantages of other
media.

The Voice of America celebrates its fortieth anniversary this year as the
overseas broadcasting arm of the U.S. Government. Broadcasting approxi-
mately 950 hours a week in 39 languages to a weekly worldwide audience
of more than 100 million, the Voice commands more than a quarter of
USICA’s personnel and fiscal resources. In many societies where the flow
of information and ideas is restricted, VOA is America’s principal means of
communication.

Washington, D.C.: Technicians at Voice of America master contro! board.

aa ee
“a ew eo

dunn aes

i : ne Saeaonacan



The Commission is convinced that these independent advisory bodies
historically have contributed to the improvement of America’s public diplo-
macy. Through their reports, and in other ways, they have sought to meet
and reconcile the interests of Congress and the Executive Branch. They
have helped to legitimize and build a public constituency for the functions
of public diplomacy as well as to provide a check on them. Their members,
non-governmental experts in a cross section of professions, have brought
insight and expertise to bear on the needs of the agencies that carry out
public diplomacy. And they have protected the public interest through
genuine oversight and evaluation of the programs of public diplomacy.

For more than a generation Congress has wisely insisted that the Commis-
sion be structured to permit informed and independent judgment. First, by
law, the Commission’s terms must be staggered so as to preserve continuity
and experience. Second, the Commission must be genuinely bipartisan.
Third, the Commission must be an independent body with its own statutory
responsibilities. Its members are appointed by the President with the advice
and consent of the Senate — a rarity among advisory commissions. Fourth,
its members must represent the public interest and be selected from a broad
cross section of educational, communications, cultural, scientific, techni-
cal, public service, labor, business, and professional backgrounds.

This Commission strongly believes that advisory bodies can only have as
much integrity as their members. Our role is a delicate balancing act be-
tween USICA, the White House, and the Congress. In order to retain
credibility and maintain the confidence of all three, the Commission urges
the Congress and the President to ensure that future appointments are
made so as to protect the independence, continuity, genuinely bipartisan
character, and broad cross section of professional backgrounds that are
required by law.

37



Some examples of the useful things that have been and are being done
under this project:

® USICA telecast by satellite to Europe Defense Secretary Weinberger’s
September 198] press conference announcing the declassification of ma-
terials documenting the Soviet arms buildup. Ninety European journal-
ists in Brussels watched the conference over a special hookup and re-
ceived copies of the booklet “Soviet Military Power” based on the
documents, Some 6,000 copies of the booklet were distributed as well as
foreign language summaries.

© The Agency gave wide distribution to a State Department report on
Soviet disinformation activities entitled “Active Measures.” An inter-
agency briefing team visited European and Asian capitals to provide
additional facts to officials.

* A new pamphlet on Afghanistan, with versions in English, Arabic,
French and Spanish, vividly portrays life in that country since the Soviet
invasion of December 1979 through photographs and firsthand accounts.

® Project Truth employs all the Agency’s media, particularly the VOA
and the Wireless File. VOA broadcasts carry statements of U.S. officials
and commentaries to an audience of millions worldwide. Similar cover-
age in print of official speeches, statements and analyses on project-
related items goes daily on the Wireless File to 159 USICA posts for
distribution to opinion leaders.

33



ize1g
ysi6u3 i

ejobog * usiueds (i

is}seoproig abenfueq

BIQWO|OD

Burin
youel4

Ay Bweued UBBIO IJIL{IIld

PUUBUed

enBeseoin JOpeAles |Z

oars ures

Bjewayenyd
* aN

Au BjeWaeNo
ee

ams
sai uy

eas ueaqqueg

uea90 ONUEIIY
orIxay JO JIND

seweyeg oul Qua

ulseg ueaqqued abe1sano0D UOISSIWSUBL |
SAB WNnIpey| Bunsixy BOWaWY JO dDIOA


sisOd a13i4

ze61 AV.
(wan
suNvaa¥ CMe iva (na) uy)
Nvisy Hunos * suivasy suivasy sua suwdav
Nraleva evan sonangae oulove suet sua
VOI HION Deed ee sO uoLOauIO so uOLDBUIG
paper 40 Y0193410 sO wOLDaHIO
suaingo Boinwas
suovuiNoo Saud wala GN
30 WOLoBHIO Noiuos NOISIATTEL
40 40193110 so uolo3Hi0
BOIAuaS
ASOTONHOSL swywooud swywooud aoinuas
SES LL usrontanoo voneve vis Sueowee syouvorens L} | Soha omuaayos ||} aaunosuad
40 o1D34I0 0 wOLD3410 40 uoLo3uI0 Oy eG 40 4OLOSHIO
TNaNaOTEASO
ssounosay
saosin cNivtcauuwey, SUOLISIA Soom. ONY Houvasse NOUULSININOY swvwooud
Jawhosima |b NOUNS AWNOUWNESINI ny Suan nouwniauoo3 [fe 30 40 20
130 wO1D3HIO eee wvuDOud woi3ui0 woisauia woioauio
so uoLDSuIO ‘
susony
40 301430
TINTLBOaaD,
AdTana Wwn03 noog Tanda ‘and00 “andeo
40 501440 SainSUVIONOS vo)
shen meas] | cyasvavunstng La] | HBINGD. (woe) te)
ananaovnens aed Se ee ssahvisva snvuooue owusvoavouR
Auninoas Os NOs Os Od
breton wo1g3wio aLvIOOSS¥ vipiSacineoser wo1o3uid S1viDoss¥ o193uid BLvIO0SS¥
SNOWDSES~
30 201840
eee eee ee a a ay
H retort
pocccc ccc BAUNOSxE
1 1

I
1
(ov)

Noisswww09|
‘ANOSIAGY

(99) Nos
TWNOISSAYDNOD ONY
“BSNNOO THANSD
BHL#O 39130

(a) Nosiwn
‘ongnd 40 301440

(a)

wouaHIa ALNdaO

wouo3uia

to)

ADNBOY 3H 40
WOTESNNOD

(voisn)

AONADY NOLLVSINNWIWOD TVNOLLYNYALNI



GZéS

g89'6E v68'9F olz9 vos’ Le Les'ty 9e'pso Les’ep

o0r’s oll 00r'é Bol 999'E vol 980’ gO°LL 000’E OLL |LYONNOd JONZIOS TWNOLLVN
+LvL'8 vol esl'9 e6S LS6'S gig £80'S sty z02'S abe VvoIsn
Lele wal 668 bet 798 wo 6OL'L Bel 966 ras saoinosay UBLUNH 79 YESH
Le9'2 ev 006’ vs 9852 es Sr9'e os ozl'z BY Aguasing ayjoads
pue peoiqy swiesBoig She
ayBliging pasosuods-uoneonp3
:NOILYONGA JO LNAWLYVd30
zig'£ CEE £v8'B B'L8E e61'9 Ors QLb'eL oser £€0'8L ovor (SW) wesBo1d
sajes Areliw uBje105
986’L o'st z00'@ oBe Zys'p SLE ZLO'S LSe 08z'9 oez (dLBWI) wesboig
Buiuies{ pue uogeonpz
Avewiiw jeuoneusaruy
‘aoa

Lr9'9 o'0S vpe'o oS 6Le'L 0°62 zz8'o Bly Se8’9 O'Bz
az6'y Sel £2L'S See £10'9 ys9 o69’S 008 S28'S ete sdiog e0ead
‘NOLLOV

syued = (SUO}||/L UI) syued = (sui sjued = (SUO!|}!UE

s12|/00
O8GL 488A IF)

Ost

wed

sui

190

GLEL 4BeA [F9SI4

sjomued
BLEL 480, 1B9SI4

~oued
9LEL ABE, [POSE

s4e||0Q

56




60

STUDENTS IN

STUDENTS IN

STUDENTS IN
USA FUNDED BY

TOTAL
STUDENTS

REGION THE USSR SOVIET BLOC USICA AND AID IN USA
Latin America 3,445, 5,690 854 49,810
North Africa 2,015 3,575 152 7,310
Sub-Saharan Africa 15,055 26,700 1,398 30,870
Middle East 6,685 14,350 357 84,710
South Asia 7,470 11,070 224 42,990
East Asia te) 25 512 51,650
Europe 500 1,355 620 25,330
TOTAL 35,170 62,760 4,117* 311,800**
SELECTED COUNTRIES***
Panama 500 640 47 1,300
Dominican Rep. 215 295 35
Equador 285 820 62 1,210
Nicaragua 135 230 42 1,150
El Salvador 30 105 18 1,450
Algeria 950 1,950 io) 1,100
Libya 55 115 0 3,080
8 Angola 625 1,485 3
Congo 800 1,360 i}
Central African Rep, 210 460 2
Madagascar 1,190 1,375 2
4 Mozambique 300 525 0
\vory Coast 240 940 47
Zimbabwe 180 275 0
Jordan 2,000 5,525 60 6,140
North Yemen 560 660 105
India 975 1,140 7 9,250
Iraq 250 1,540 0 1,460
Afghanistan 4,850 7,825 25
Pakistan 125 195 23 2,990
Cyprus 475 1,175 10

* This figure includes USICA’s 1680 academic grants,

for technical training,

AID's 1775 academic grants, and 662 AID grants

** This figure also includes Canadian and-stateless students.
*** Countries with total figure omitted have less than 1,000 students in the USA.





2. Completion of the construction of new high powered transmitting fa-
cilities in Sri Lanka and Botswana will greatly enhance VOA’s coverage
in Soviet Central Asia, Western China, and East and South Africa.

3. Replacement of an aging and underpowered World War II vintage
RIAS (Radio in the American Sector) transmitter in Berlin will permit
continued broadcasting to an estimated 40 percent of the East German
population.

4. Antiquated and in some cases dangerous equipment in VOA’s Wash-
ington studios and power distribution system needs to be modernized.
Funds are also needed for construction of a domestic satellite intercon-
nection system.

5. Basic engineering research by VOA is needed to assure a reliable and
competitive worldwide signal in the future. Uncertainties in Liberia,
Greece, and the Philippines suggest the vulnerability of VOA’s terres-
trial relay station network. Worldwide searches for alternative relay
station sites and thorough investigation of the feasibility of direct
broadcasting by satellite are in the national interest.

The Commission believes these expansion plans are justified and recom-
mends that they be given appropriate support.

Chief Justice Warren Burger
explains the American judicial
system to VOA audiences.

20



IV. APPENDIX

39


There is much yet to be done. For example, constant changes in communications technology
require that the Agency carefully and regularly assess the internal allocation of its resources to
assure maximum impact. Ways must be found to reverse the decline in America’s overseas
libraries, book translation and English teaching programs. Long-range Agency planning is needed
to meet future personnel and space needs.

1 believe that the Commission must also concern itself with the Agency's public image, both
national and international. Given the ambiguous distinction between “propaganda” and “‘infor-
mation” or “truth,” confusion exists in the public mind about the proper role of the Agency. The
Agency must explain United States policies and tell the story of America both candidly and
affirmatively, yet avoid being labeled propagandistic. Much more public awareness of the Agen-
cy’s function is needed, and both the Agency and this Commission must actively contribute to this
process,

The report which follows reflects the Commission’s principal concerns over the past year. We
have kept in mind our continuing obligation to assess both the appropriateness and effectiveness
of specific Agency actions and programs.

We know that how the U.S. is viewed by other countries may determine their policies and affect
the success of our own. It is the responsibility of this Commission to see that the communication
tools of public diplomacy are used with skill to ensure that the unique ideals for which our nation
stands are understood.

In the long run, this is our best hope for security and peace. And it is to this end that we submit

this report. se

Leonard L. Silverstein
Chairman



F. PROJECT TRUTH

Recommendations

Navy Air Commander briefs
Asian newsmen during a
USICA-arranged visit to the 7th
Fleet carrier Coral Sea.

© The Commission is pleased to note the extensive interagency cooperation
and coordination supporting this project and recommends that such co-
ordination become the rule rather than the exception for U.S. public
diplomacy efforts.

® The Commission is concerned about the connotations of the name “Proj-
ect Truth” and recommends that the Agency not utilize terminology that
gives rise to suspicions that USICA is engaging in “propaganda.”

An important development in USICA’s information policy and program-
ming was initiated last year, with the authorization of President Reagan,
under the name Project Truth. The President’s directive of September 9,
1981 charges USICA with coordinating a vigorous campaign outside the
U.S. to project an accurate image of the United States and its foreign
policy.

Conceived at a time when the U.S, was the target of well-organized demon-
strations across Western Europe protesting against nuclear weapons for
NATO forces, Project Truth is a major U.S. Government information
effort. It is designed to underscore the Soviet threat to the stability and
security of the world and to refute misleading Soviet propaganda and
misinformation. This program also seeks to convey an understanding of
American goals, ideals, and achievements, and to reaffirm the common
political and cultural values that bind the U.S, and its friends and allies.

The President's directive instructs other government agencies to cooperate
with USICA and to declassify and make available material pertinent to the
campaign, A coordinating committee chaired by USICA includes high-
level representatives from the Departments of State and Defense, the
Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Council and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. Several interagency working groups have been set up to
focus on specific topics for what is a many-faceted campaign.

31


VOA Correspondent interviews

VOA’s size, its role as an international news organization, and its ability to
reach large audiences directly make it the best known part of the Agency to
most Americans. Its unique place at the “crossroads of journalism and
diplomacy” has also made it the focus of considerable public debate. In
recent months this debate has intensified.

Some observers have expressed concern that the integrity of VOA’s news
programs has been undercut by more strident programming policies and a
series of recent senior management changes which have received national
media attention.’ Others have suggested that VOA’s coverage of world
events is unbalanced and even at times inimical to the best interests of the
United States. Still others believe that the Voice should be more hard
hitting and aggressively propagandistic as a foreign policy instrument.”

Salvadoran Army Commander |:

near the border with Honduras.
The VOA interview, conducted
in Spanish, was broadcast on
the popular morning news

program “Buenos Dias,

America”.

"These management changes include the resignation of the Deputy Director of VOA in
November 1981 and his replacement by a senior career Foreign Service Officer. Additional
attention grew from the resignation of the Chief of VOA's News Division after nineteen
years service to take a position in the private sector. In March 1982, VOA Director James
Conkling resigned to return to private life, and John Hughes, Pulitzer Prize winner and
former editor of the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, was nominated to replace him

2 See Murrey Marder, “Propaganda Role Urged by Voice of America,” WASHINGTON
POST, November 13, 1982; Murrey Marder, “Appointment of ‘Propaganda’ Advocate
Defended by VOA Chief,” WASHINGTON POST, November 14, 1981; Curtis Wilke,
“Guerrilla War at Voice of America,” BOSTON GLOBE, November 16, 1981; Barbara
Crossette, “VOA Loses Key Staffer: News Division Director Quits Amid Turmoil Over
Commentary Function,” NEW YORK TIMES, December 22, 1981; Barbara Crossette,
“There is a Voice of America but Its Tone is in Dispute," NEW YORK TIMES, March 28,
1982.

17



FRESE

In FY 1980, the U.S. spent some $600 million to sponsor more than 58,000
grantees on scientific, military, educational, and cultural exchange pro-
grams.’ Military training grants alone account for 16.5% of the total U.S.
Government grants and 61.4% of the total cost. By contrast, academic
exchanges account for less than 6% of the total number and 5% of the total
cost. U.S. Government educational and cultural exchange programs are
presently operating in real dollar terms at 60% of their 1965 levels.

The Fulbright Program is the principal academic exchange program of the
U.S. Government. Since 1948, there have been more than 130,000 Ful-
bright grantees, about 45,000 from the U.S. and 85,000 from abroad. The
U.S. has appropriated more than $600 million to the 33-year-old program,
but in recent years the relative American contribution has decreased.’ For
example, in 1980, the West German Government paid 77% of the $4.3
million required to support German-American Fulbright exchanges. The
number of American Fulbright grantees has plummeted from a high of 904
in 1966-67 to 364 in 1980-81.5 The number of French grantees has likewise
fallen from 309 to 63 per year in the past decade.

The number of Fulbright alumni that can be found in positions of leader-
ship throughout the world provide ample evidence of the value of the
program. They include economist James Tobin, Ambassador Arthur A,
Hartman, Senator Daniel P. Moynihan, British Social Democratic Party
leader Shirley Williams, Japanese Ambassador Yoshio Ohkahara, and
Shumugan Jayakumar, Ambassador of Singapore to the United Nations
Law of the Sea Conference.

USICA’s International Visitors (IV) Program brings young foreign leaders
on short-term visits to the United States to learn about American govern-
ment, institutions, and society. The number of annual IV grantees has
dropped from a high of 2,171 in 1978 to 1,579 in 1981. Allocations for the
IV Program have stagnated at slightly more than $9 million in 1974 constant
dollars, while costs have risen dramatically.

Many ambassadors and other observers have expressed to members of this
Commission their belief that the 1V Program provides American taxpayers
with the best return on their dollar in the foreign policy field. Former IV

3 For a breakdown of the principal U.S. Governement exchange programs, see Appendix II,
Chart 6

* ‘The American contribution in 1972 constant dollars dropped from $29.4 million in 1959 to
$19.7 million in 1980 while foreign contributions increased. In FY 1981, the $77.3 million
Fulbright Program received 65% of its funds from the U.S. Government, 20% from foreign
sources, and 15% from the American private sector. For further information on the U.S.
Fulbright contribution, see Appendix Il, Chart 7.

> See Appendix II, Chart 8.
® See Appendix 11, Chart 9.



Direct VOA broadcasting to Western Europe was discontinued in 1955 —a
decision based on an assessment that there was no longer a significant
audience for shortwave broadcasts in that area. With VOA’s first priority
accorded to reaching other regions, little effort was made to explore the
feasibility or usefulness of medium wave broadcasts to Western Europe.
The Commission believes that a fundamental reassessment of this policy is
needed.

‘The importance and attitudes of the European successor generation and its
influence on the foreign policies of the West European democracies suggest
© the need for a bold new programming approach. The Commission wel-
comes the initiative taken by the Agency to develop a comprehensive and
coherent regional program which would utilize all appropriate communica-
tions media.

Greenville, North Carolina: During the past year USICA has conducted a research study to assess
‘Antenna field of Voice of potential listening among elite audiences in Western Europe. The Commis-
America relay station, one of . rf . “ eas
the largest shortwave facilities S107 welcomes this step and encourages the Agency to give high priority to
in the world. the careful examination of the costs, potential audience levels, optimum
program formats for mass and elite audiences, and the technical difficulties
involved in medium wave broadcasting to Europe. Other media should also
be included in this examination to determine the most effective means of

communicating with successor generation audiences.

The Commission's first report noted that much of the Voice of America’s
technical equipment, some of it a generation old, needs to be replaced,
improved, and in many cases augmented. The previously mentioned report
of the House Foreign Affairs Committee put the matter well: “Though
U.S. arsenals of defense are stocked with state-of-the-art weaponry, the
United States has neglected the technology of broadcasting and has relayed
this Nation's message on transmitters which were ‘state-of-the-art’ in 1938. ut

We are encouraged by the Administration's request for $115 million in
budget authority in FY 1983 for the acquisition and construction of radio
facilities.> The Commission is aware that this request is a significant in-
crease of $96 million over the Agency’s FY 1982 estimate. We find the
reasons for this increase compelling.

1. Proposed construction of a network of medium wave stations in the
Caribbean Basin will permit the United States to state and explain its
policies at all levels of Caribbean society and to counteract Cuban and
Soviet efforts in the area.

* Report No. 97-480 of April 2, 1982.
5 See Appendix I.

19



32

Beijing University Vice President
Wang Xuezhen shows actor Kirk
Douglas around the university
campus. During his USICA-
sponsored visit to China, Mr.
Douglas spoke to Chinese
students at Beijing University
and other schools.

The Commission has reviewed this new project and has concluded that it is
a well-coordinated inter-governmental information program that accurate-
ly reflects and supports the Administration’s foreign policy.

Project Truth appears to contain four new elements. All USICA posts
abroad now receive or have available three new resources:

1. “Soviet Propaganda Alert,” a monthly analysis of major trends and
themes of Soviet propaganda.’

2. A fast response service providing the posts with the facts to refute
specific Soviet misstatements or instances of Soviet disinformation.

3, A news and feature service, “Dateline America,” which provides arti-
cles on various positive aspects of life in the U.S.

4, Equally new and perhaps even more significant is the extensive inter-
agency cooperation and coordination that this project enjoys. The
Commission welcomes this development and urges that it become the
rule rather than the exception for U.S. public diplomacy efforts.

The Commission is concerned, however, about the connotations of the
name “Project Truth.” The name itself and the announced aim of refuting
Soviet disinformation caught the attention of the press and created appre-
hension and misunderstanding. Fears were expressed by some media ob-
servers that Project Truth marked a return to the stridency and propaganda
tactics of the Cold War.? This, along with press reports of changes at the
Voice of America, appearing more or less simultaneously, did nothing to
dissuade skeptics at home and abroad that USICA was being transformed
into a propaganda agency. This impression, which the Commission believes
to be false, is detrimental to the Agency’s reputation for seriousness and
truthfulness. It makes vastly more difficult the work of USICA officers
abroad, for they are bound to encounter greater skepticism and resistance
to their efforts to explain American motives and policies.

The lesson to be drawn from this is that USICA must not only be dedicated
to the truth, but it must also exercise great care to do nothing that might
conceivably allow any other impression.

The first "Soviet Propaganda Alert” was issued October 15, 1981, For a brief description of
Soviet propaganda themes and examples of disinformation, see Appendix IIL

2 See “U.S. Starts ‘Project Truth’ in a Move to Counter Soviet," NEW YORK TIMES,
November 4, 1981; Murrey Marder, “U.S. Sharpening Information Policy Overseas,”
WASHINGTON POST, November 10, 19: “A Hot New Cold War in ICA," NEWS-
WEEK, November 16, 1981; "A Propaganda War,” U.S. NEWS AND WORLD REPORT,
January 11, 1982.



4

Legislation would be required to make the Director of USICA a member of
the NSC, since membership on the Council is limited by law to the Presi-
dent, the Vice President, and the Secretaries of State and Defense. After
careful review, the Commission has concluded that new legislation making
the Director of USICA a permanent member of the NSC is hot an appropri-
ate basis on which to formalize USICA’s relationship with the Council.
USICA is not a policy-making body; its role is advisory.

The Commission strongly believes, however, that USICA already has by
law a responsibility to serve as an advisor to the National Security Council.
It is a responsibility that needs only to be recognized and fully carried out.

‘The legislation that created the National Security Council provided that the
Council would have both members and advisors. The Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff and the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency were
designated statutory advisors. Historically, as a result, both have regularly
participated in the meetings of the NSC and its interagency working
groups.

The Commission is convinced that under the legislation that created the
International Communication Agency, the Director of USICA has NSC
status equivalent to the Director of CIA and the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977 provides:

“The Agency shall be headed by the Director ... who shall serve as the
principal advisor to the President, the National Security Council, and the
Secretary of State on the functions vested in the Director.”

Moreover, Congressional intent is clear. In its report on Reorganization
Plan No. 2 of 1977, the House of Representatives stated:

“What the President intends to accomplish through this consolidation is
to enhance significantly the management of the Nation's public diploma-
cy. By establishing one agency under the guidance of a director who,
according to the plan, will ‘serve as the principal advisor to the President,
the National Security Council, and the Secretary of State’ in public diplo-
macy matters, the object in mind is to increase the independence, en-
hance the prestige, and thus expand the impact of the new agency’s role
in this vital field.”

The Commission is persuaded that there are good reasons for speedily
carrying out the will of Congress in this matter.

¥ House Report No, 95-818, 95th Cong., November 18, 1977


© Charges of CIA-Red Brigade complicity in the kidnapping of U.S. NATO General James Dozier,
arguing that the kidnapping would hurt the image of the anti-NATO peace movement while
creating sympathy for NATO.

© Charges of “undoubted participation of Washington” in the November 25, 1981 attempt to
overthrow the government of the Seychelles.

© Charges of CIA involvement in the August 1, 1981 plane crash that killed General Omar Torrijos,
the former Panamanian national leader.

62



B.

ORIGINS AND
AUTHORITY

Although the U.S. Government officially has engaged in public diploma-
cy for many years, the present Agency is little more than four years old. Its
origins, however, go back to World War I when the Committee on Public
Information (known as the Creel Committee) was created in 1917 to make
U.S. war aims known throughout the world. This first official U.S. infor-
mation program was abolished in 1919 when the war ended.

The first comprehensive efforts in cultural relations began in 1938 in Latin
‘America and were conducted by the Division of Cultural Cooperation in
the Department of State. There was no comparable press or information
program. With World War Il, large-scale information activities directed at
enemy and occupied areas were undertaken by the Office of War Informa-
tion and in Latin America by the Coordinator for Inter-American Affairs.
When the war ended many of these programs were continued by the De-
partment of State.

But locating these programs within the State Department proved unsatis-
factory to some officials, and in 1953 another reorganization took place.
President Eisenhower's Reorganization Plan No. 8 of 1953 created the U.S.
Information Agency (USIA) separate from the State Department but un-
der its policy direction. The cultural and educational exchange program
was retained within the Department, although overseas it was administered
by USIA cultural affairs officers who consequently reported to both State
and their own Agency. The legislative mandate for the exchange programs
was significantly strengthened in 1961 by the Fulbright-Hays Act, which
provided for increasing “mutual understanding between the people of the
United States and the people of other countries."



E. TELEVISION

Recommendations

@ The Commission welcomes increased cooperation between USICA and
the private sector, but it opposes private funding of major programs,
particularly those articulating U.S. foreign policy.

® The Commission recommends that USICA undertake a major study,
drawing on the expertise of government and non-government specialists,
to ensure that the Agency realize the full potential of television program-
ming and remains completely abreast of technological advances.

Television, of all the media available to USICA, is perhaps the most com-
plex and powerful means of communicating with foreign audiences when it
is used wisely and well. In the Commission’s view, the Agency has not yet
realized the exciting potential of this medium through consistent profes-
sional programming that can compete for time in the increasingly sophisti-
cated world of international television broadcasting.

The Commission is encouraged, however, by recent Agency efforts to use
television effectively for programming purposes.

The unprecedented global satellite telecast, “Let Poland Be Poland,” was
impressive as a technical achievement. USICA estimates that more than
184 million people saw 30 minutes or more of the program in 46 countries.
In addition, 165 million heard an audio version on the Voice of America,
Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty. The participation of 13 foreign
heads of government was an exceptional expression of allied cooperation.

An extraordinarily complex program to produce, the 90-minute telecast
was completed within three weeks at minimum cost to the Agency. In
response to USICA’s solicitations, the business community, foundations
and private individuals contributed nearly $500,000 — about 90 percent of
the cost of production and satellite transmission.

The Commission encourages increased cooperation between the private
sector and USICA where such efforts contribute to the achievement of
mutual objectives in public diplomacy. We are concerned, however, that
the funding methods used for “Let Poland Be Poland” not become a prece-
dent. In the Commission’s view, Agency programs and products, particu-
larly those used to articulate major statements of U.S, foreign policy, ought
to be financed with appropriated funds. The possibility that such products
could be improperly influenced motivates our concern. Moreover, if under-
taken on a routine basis, such solicitation of funds could detract from the
time that top USICA officials would normally devote to issues of higher
priority.

“Let Poland Be Poland” predictably received mixed reviews: harsh criti-
cism from the Soviet Union and its allies, negative to relatively favorable
comment from other foreign and domestic press. The Commission is
pleased that much of the foreign reaction, rather than rejecting future such
telecasts out of hand, centers on how they can be improved through cooper-
ative planning and production. Improvements are needed, and USICA has

29



26

Prime Minister Indira Ganuhi
visits the World Book Fair held in
New Delhi, February 1982.

Private Sector
Involvement

With more than 300,000 foreign students in the United States, it may be
fairly questioned whether U.S. Government academic grants are neces-
sary. The foremost importance of the U.S, Government programs is their
symbolic value — the statement they make domestically and internationally
about the nature of American society. Unlike private sector grants, govern-
ment-sponsored scholarships directly serve American national interests.
Promising grantees are selected who otherwise might not be able to come to
the United States, Whereas more than half of the foreign students attend-
ing American universities come from the industrialized West and certain
petro-dollar countries, government grants place more emphasis on students
from the less developed countries. These programs, which are principally
funded by USICA and AID," serve an integral role in America’s public
diplomacy efforts.

The Commission recognizes that support from the private sector is indis-
pensable to the success of the IV Program and government exchanges.

The National Council for International Visitors (NCIV) includes some
725,000 individuals across the United States who are active in more than 90
non-profit, privately-supported organizations which seek to improve the
quality of the experience of short-term visitors to the United States. NCIV
community organizations, through their citizen volunteers, provide the
visitor with professional, community, and family experiences which offer
insights into all aspects of life in the United States. The Commission ap-
plauds this private sector participation which so well exemplifies the best
tradition of American hospitality and volunteerism.

'2 USICA’s grants are generally in the liberal arts, such as political science and economics,
while AID’s grants are usually in the more technical developmental fields, such as engineer-
ing and agriculture.



|. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

PUBLIC © The International Communication Agency is little known within the
DIPLOMACY AND United States and often overlooked, yet its role is, vital to our national
NATIONAL interest and the conduct of our foreign policy. Public diplomacy is as
SECURITY indispensable to our national security as military preparedness, and the
Commission strongly urges that it be treated with the same urgency and

concern. (pp. 11-12)

STRUCTURAL ® The Commission recommends that USICA’s role in the foreign affairs
RELATIONSHIPS community be institutionalized to ensure the regular participation of the
Agency in the formulation and execution of American foreign policy. It

urges that a Presidential Directive be issued implementing Congressional

intent that the Director of USICA serve as a statutory advisor to the

National Security Council and as the principal advisor to the President on

foreign public opinion and the conduct of public diplomacy. (pp. 13-15)

|

VOICE OF e The Commission recommends that USICA take greater care to avoid
AMERICA actions and policies that can be easily misinterpreted and cast doubt on
VOA’s commitment to accuracy and objectivity. (pp. 16-18)

© The Commission welcomes the high priority USICA is giving to the
expansion of VOA’s worldwide transmitter network and to the modern-
ization of its Washington facilities. It recommends that these initiatives be
given appropriate support. (pp. 19-20)

® The Commission supports USICA’s efforts to examine the most effective
means of communicating with successor generation audiences. It recom-
mends that this examination consider the cost, potential audience levels,
and technical difficulties involved in medium wave broadcasting to West-
ern Europe as well as the relative advantages and disadvantages of other
media. (p. 19)

EDUCATIONAL © The Commission regards USICA’s educational exchange and interna-
AND CULTURAL tional visitors programs as among the most effective tools of public diplo-
EXCHANGE macy and recommends that they be materially strengthened.
PROGRAMS (pp. 21-27)

© In view of the size of the East-West Center's budget and its potential for
creating better understanding among the nations of East and West, the
Commission recommends that the Center be comprehensively evaluated
by an experienced team of professionals selected from the fields of higher
education and cross-cultural communication. (p. 28)


Il.

ll.

IV. APPENDIX

CONTENTS

THE AGENCY: What It Is and What It Does

AS OMISSION sp: vererescogscastveesebenadvatunaeuev oss spn sastuci aes biuansgauoalcupeapasshesiascicasiptasgengassgin’ 3
B. Origins and Authority ........cccccccccccscscsessscssscscseseessevaeneeevseseseseescacsesacsevaasecseveree 4
C. Personnel and Budget ..
D. Means of Communication
By * Qrganigation Chart socesivsiisecvsasaciasisidascstosascacaaisaicasispicedinssuseutapiicadinaeserddebsnriente 9
RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISCUSSION :
A. Public Diplomacy and National Security ......:s::csssssessssesesssescescereseseesaerssessenensess ol
B. Structural Relationships:

The Position of USICA within the Foreign Affairs Community .............:0:000008 13
Ci. “Wolee of America’ :.iscsczaiteanseutatiesteanesedyicgaceeogsksnnnebiezszsnnseasenacusceaedaatsannsotsunas 16
D. Educational and Cultural Exchange Programs ..........:cssccesssesecseesesceutessesseeseneeseene 21
Ms! “TSI EV ESIGN scan ssa see gstazaomss vay oguresniynrsenesinh Gan duae ed Leb REO AEAS Ina Saale 29
F. Project Truth .
G. Research
H. The U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy. ........s:.:ssscssseseseesseseessesevecse 36



Treasury Secretary Donald
Regan and White House Chief of
Staff James Baker brief the
media at the USICA Press
Center at the Cancun Summit.

® America’s experiences in Vietnam, Iran, and now in Europe and Latin
America show clearly that foreign cultures, attitudes, and opinions must
routinely be taken seriously into account in formulating U.S. foreign
policy. As a regular participant on the NSC, the Agency could provide
special knowledge of such matters and ensure that they were given due
consideration in the decision-making process.

© Asastatutory advisor, the Agency could perform a valuable and much-
needed service by advising the government on the public presentation of
its foreign policies and by actively participating in the coordination of
administration statements announcing or explaining U.S. policies.

© Formal acceptance of USICA’s advisory role would provide a perma-
nence not based on personal relationships or transient events.

Public diplomacy is a vital element in our national security. To this Com-
mission the implications are clear and compelling. USICA should be recog-
nized as an essential partner with other foreign affairs. agencies in the policy
councils of the Executive Branch.



Il. THE AGENCY: What It Is and What It Does

MISSION — The mission of the International Communication Agency was set forth in
the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for FY 1979! as follows:

"Sec. 202. The mission of the International Communication Agency shall
be to further the national interest by improving United States relations
with other countries and peoples through the broadest possible sharing of
ideas, information, and educational and cultural activities. In carrying
out this mission, the International Communication Agency shall, among
other activities —
(1) conduct Government-sponsored information, educational, and cul-
tural activities designed —
(A) to provide other peoples with a better understanding of the
policies, values, institutions, and culture of the United States; and
(B) within the statutory limits governing domestic activities of the
Agency, to enhance understanding on the part of the Government
and people of the United States of the history, culture, attitudes,
perceptions, and aspirations of others;
encourage private institutions in the United States to develop their
own exchange activities, and provide assistance for those exchange
activities which are in the broadest national interest;
coordinate international informational, educational, or cultural ac-
tivities conducted or planned by departments and agencies of the
United States Government;
assist in the development of a comprehensive national policy on
international communications; and
(5) promote United States participation in international events relevant
lo the mission of the Agency.”

(2,

(3

(4,

In the four years since this statement of mission was enacted, there has been
much discussion and confusion and relatively little action concerning Sec.
202(1)(B) of the Act referred to as the “Second Mandate” which authorizes
USICA to tell the American people about other countries and cultures. As
the General Accounting Office has pointed out,? USICA’s overseas posts
are uncertain as to what is expected of them. The Agency has not defined
with any precision who its American audience is or how it is to be reached
beyond the exposure of a limited number of Americans to foreign exchange
scholars and international visitors. It is also evident that the Agency does
not have the resources or staff to conduct anything more than a token
program. As a result, little has been done to carry out the “Second Man-
date.”

' Public Law 95-426, October 7, 1978.

2 “U.S. International Communication Agency's Overseas Programs: Some More Useful than
Others," Report by the General Accounting Office, February 11, 1982.



D. EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL EXCHANGE PROGRAMS

Recommendations

A Comparative Look:

American Public
Diplomacy Resource
Levels

© The Commission regards USICA’s educational exchange and interna-
tional visitors programs as among the most effective tools of public diplo-
macy and recommends that they be materially strengthened.

© In view.of the size of the East-West Center's budget and its potential for
creating better understanding among the nations of East and West, the
Commission recommends that the Center be comprehensively evaluated
by an experienced team of professionals selected from the fields of higher
education and cross-cultural communication.

The Commission is deeply concerned by the reduction that has taken
place over the last several years in the resources provided for public diplo-
macy, The decline has been most acute in U.S. Government educational
exchange and international visitors programs, but the problem affects all
aspects of the Agency’s educational and cultural affairs activities.’

It is clear that the United States has failed to accord the same significance to
public diplomacy as have both its allies and adversaries, According to the
House Foreign Affairs Committee Report previously cited, the Soviet
Union spends approximately seven times as much as the United States for
international educational, cultural, and information activities. The United
States ranks below its major European allies and Japan in the percentage of
its national budget allocated to public diplomacy efforts.”

Expenditures for Public
Diplomacy, FY 1981, in

1976 Constant Dollars Percentage of
Country (in millions) National Budget
France* $678.9 0.9%
West Germany $565.0 0.8%
Britain $196.3 0.2%
United States** $348.1 0.09%

* French figures are for FY 1980.
** Includes USICA, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Declining resources are evident in several of the Agency's important cultural activities, such
as libraries, binational centers, English language teaching, and book translation programs.
For graphic representations, see Appendix II, Charts 1-4,

2 See Appendix II, Chart 5.




2861 AYWNuaas

(seBenBbue| ¢)
ANVWWH35 LSVA

(sabenbur| 7)
VayOu HLNOS
(seBenBur| €)
VINValV

(sebenbur| ¢)
a VNIHO

(seBenbup| ¢)
ve TT vonsn
(seBenBbur| ¢)
ANVWHA4D LSAM
(saBbenBbue| of)
yssn
(seBenbur| 2)
sph (08a) HN

(seBenBbur 2)
DBE vano

(sebenbue| 2)
Lev S3HQNV 3HL AO SOIOA

+S

9S

9S

86

eel

L86L - 198M Jad SINOH sSeOpeolg pue seBbenbue]
eolowy ule] pue ueaqqued



Radio, Television,
and Films:

Press and
Publications:

The Voice of America, USICA’s radio arm, broadcasts about 950 hours a
week in 39 languages to an estimated 104 million listeners. Its FY 1982
operating budget is $109 million. VOA broadcasts news, news analysis,
foreign policy commentary, and programs that portray various aspects of
American culture and society. USICA also acquires and produces films and
television programs for viewing by both general and selected audiences. In
1981, 91 programs were produced by USICA and 210 were acquired from
outside sources. Live television programming by satellite is a promising new
USICA initiative.

The Agency’s radioteletype network called the Wireless File sends five
regional transmissions, five days a week, in English and four foreign lan-
guages to 159 posts overseas. Consisting primarily of policy statements and
interpretive materials, the Wireless File is used for media placement, distri-
bution to foreign leaders, and background information for U.S. Mission
personnel abroad. USICA publishes nine magazines and occasional pam-
phlets in 20 languages.° The contents consist of reprints from American
periodicals as well as staff-written and commissioned articles.

§ The principal publications originating in Washington are the following: AMERICA ILLUS-
TRATED, a monthly magazine in Russian distributed in the USSR; TOPIC, published bi-
monthly in English and French for Sub-Saharan Africa; AL-MAJAL, a monthly published in
‘Arabic for Near East and North African countries; DIALOGUE, a quarterly journal of
‘American thought and culture published in several languages; ECONOMIC IMPACT, a
quarterly in English and Spanish; and PROBLEMS OF COMMUNISM, a scholarly bi-
monthly magazine in English.



Lech Walesa enjoys the
explanation given by a guide at a
USICA agricultural exhibit in
Poland.

Cc. PERSONNEL
AND BUDGET

This divided structure survived for 25 years, although several panels and
studies recommended that it be reorganized.” On October 12, 1977, Presi-
dent Carter submitted to Congress his Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977,
which consolidated the functions of USIA and the State Department's
Bureau of Cultural Affairs into one agency. The U.S. International Com-
munication Agency (USICA) came into being on April 1, 1978. Under the
Plan, two previous advisory commissions, one for USIA and one for the
Bureau of Cultural Affairs, were replaced by this Commission.”

USICA is now authorized a staff of 8,184, of which 4,416 are Americans
and 3,768 are non-Americans hired locally in foreign countries. There are
992 Americans assigned overseas at 202 posts in 124 countries, and 3,424
are based in the United States, principally in Washington, D.C. ‘The latter
work at the Voice of America, coordinate the educational and cultural
exchange programs, maintain centers to assist foreign journalists in the
U.S., produce Agency publications, films, exhibits and other support mate-
rials for field posts, recruit speakers to lecture abroad, and provide central
program direction, management and administrative services for the Agen-
cy as a whole.

USICA’s budget, under a continuing resolution for FY 1982, is
$488,966,000. For FY 1983, the ‘Administration is requesting $644 million
for the Agency, an increase of $155 million. Approximately two-thirds of
the increase has been earmarked for the construction of radio transmission
facilities.

—_———————
¥ Of particular importance was the 1975 report of the Panel on International Information,
Education, and Cultural Relations, chaired by former CBS President Frank Stanton.

4 Executive Order 12048, March 27, 1978.



APPENDIX I

SOVIET PROPAGANDA

USICA’s “Soviet Propaganda Alert,” states that Soviet external propaganda has two principal
purposes:

® To represent the Soviet Union as dedicated to peace and detente; and

* To show the Soviet Union as a just, fair, and progressive society, worthy of admiration and
emulation.

For these purposes, according to the Agency’s analysis, Soviet propagandists follow several basic
principles. The first of these is a systematic denigration of the U.S., its culture, society, political system,
and belief structures. The U.S. is portrayed as an unattractive, vicious, exploitative society which has
outlived its time. The Soviet Union presents itself as the only alternative: the near-perfect society which
has found the answers to the many challenges of modern society: A second key feature of Soviet
propaganda is the argument that the U.S, and the West, doomed in their historical decline, present a
dangerous threat to the world order. The U.S. is said to be escalating the arms race, provoking conflict,
and trying to counter Soviet influence in its effort to regain the military-strategic superiority it once
possessed. On the other hand, the Soviet Union is presented as entirely dedicated to the struggle for
peace, and its military might is intended only to defend itself and its allies.

Soviet propagandists employ a vast array of techniques, both crude and sophisticated.

© Disinformation is a widespread technique and is usually very difficult to detect. One form is the |
revelation of false information, usually in a foreign source not directly related to the Soviet
Union. Another form is to draw attention to past covert CIA operations and imply American
complicity in more recent events.

© The technique of indirection includes the inaccurate citation of foreign sources and the citation of
Western and other non-Soviet sources in an item planted by the Soviets and in support of the
Soviet position on a certain issue.

© The most effective technique is imputing false motives to U.S. policy. The Soviets point out
adverse consequences and offensive features to the countries affected by U.S. actions.

® Diversion is used to blunt attacks on the Soviet Union. When the U.S.S.R. is criticized, Soviet
propaganda responds with countercharges in an attempt to turn the accusation against the accus-
ers themselves.

The following is an example of the wide variety of recent Soviet propaganda attacks on the United
States:

© Charges of CIA complicity in and responsibility for the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul
ql.

® Charges of U.S. interference in the internal affairs of Poland, by, among other things, provocative
radio broadcasts, “inhumane” economic sanctions, “slanderous” declarations, and CIA plotting.

61



svn ae 2 1 a othe ey Auuiqeseuna

wat te —— - = eS WON Bulseaioag suoHeIS
eee ee us oo ¢ saulddl|iud PUB B/EAEY @U}
3 —_ P (f Kq paiaaog seaiy YM Sdej18nO
a4 ps en —= SHBWIWSUBIL od paly aBesen0D exuUe WS

SUBA! M¥ OSZ OML'®

suoneis Aejay WOA pasodoid


28

Students in the American
Library in Manila,

East-West Center

Conclusion

The Center for Cultural and Technical Interchange between East and West
was established in 1960 by the Congress to promote better relations and
understanding between the United States and the nations of Asia and the
Pacific through cooperative study, training, and research. The Center is a
separate account in USICA’s budget. In FY 1983 the Agency is requesting
$18.2 million for the Center’s federal appropriation, which comprises ap-
proximately 80 percent of its budget.

The Commission believes that the federal appropriation continues to be
disproportionately large in comparison with the 20 percent of its budget
received from the private sector and other governments. In FY 1981 ap-
proximately $4 million was received from a variety of individual, corporate,
and U.S. Government grants. Asian governments contributed approxi-
mately $0.5 million.

In view of the size of the Center’s budget and its potential for creating
better understanding among the nations of East and West, the Commission
recommends that the Center be comprehensively evaluated by an experi-
enced team of professionals selected from the fields of higher education
and cross-cultural communication. We suggest that USICA coordinate this
evaluation, using the paradigm of university accreditation. A small evalua-
tion team should be given sufficient funds, and its members should be
selected jointly by the Chairman of this Commission and the Director of
USICA. It should be given a year to complete its findings and report to
USICA, the Congress, and this Commission.

It is clear that the United States has allowed its official educational and
cultural exchange programs to erode. As this Commission has stated previ-
ously, the resources needed for American public diplomacy greatly exceed
those available. While the goal should not necessarily be to catch up to the
Soviets, the Commission feels that the United States has been under-
investing in an extremely important field that yields both short-term and
long-term benefits. In order to avoid being misunderstood as a nation and
as a people, the United States should strengthen its official educational and
cultural exchange efforts.


DISTRIBUTION OF 500 KILOWATT TRANSMITTERS
AMONG MAJOR INTERNATIONAL BROADCASTERS

500 KW TRANSMITTERS 500 KW TRANSMITTERS
500 KW OWNERS IN USE UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Albania 1 =
Bulgaria

France

West Germany (FRG)
East Germany (GDR)
Luxembourg

USSR 29 8

Switzerland 1 -

Hy Oo won
1

pan aware

Yugoslavia -

S

Austria ~

BB

Holland
United Kingdom (BBC)

4
3
Denmark = 2
4
6

moe
ae tet

Sweden

a

Algeria
Gabon
Libya

eae

Nigeria
South Africa
China

S
An ee ee wD
\

yoy
oS

Ecuador

XR
Se

Traq

nN
oS

Kuwait

nD

ia

va N
1

Vatican 2 (Eight 250's &
§00’s under const.)

25. Radio Liberty (Spain) 2

26. USA (12 250 KW transmitters at

Greenville have been combined

to operate at six 500’s) 6 =

TOTALS 93 31

48



Program Integrity

Successful implementation of USICA’s educational exchange programs re-
quires close cooperation between the participating governments and their
respective academic communities. Indeed, the Fulbright Program and oth-
er exchange activities would not be possible without the symbiotic relation-
ship between American universities, private program agencies, and the
United States Government that has characterized the exchange programs
for more than a generation.

The Commission believes this to be a healthy relationship which benefits
both the national interest and higher education. However, in the Commis-
sion’s view it is important that foreign grantees and visitors know that their
participation in these programs is funded by the American people through
tax dollars rather than by the private organizations that may schedule or
otherwise assist them.

The Commission has a statutory obligation to include in its reports to the
Congress “assessments of the degree to which the scholarly integrity and
nonpolitical character of the educational and cultural exchange programs
vested in the Director” of USICA have been maintained. The Commission
is further required to assess the attitudes of foreign scholars and govern-
ments regarding these activities."

In carrying out this responsibility, the Commission in 1979 wrote to the
Chairmen of some 42 binational Fulbright commissions abroad as well as to
mission Cultural Affairs Officers in the approximately 75 countries where
there is no binational commission. In 1980, the Commission sent question-
naires to approximately 6,000 members of the Fulbright Alumni Associ-
ation. The Commission has met each year with members of the Board of
Foreign Scholarships, with career officers in USICA, and with representa-
tives of U.S. organizations outside the Federal Government engaged in the
administration of USICA’s exchange programs.

The results of these inquiries indicate that to date the scholarly integrity
and nonpolitical character of the peer review process and other procedures
by which academic exchange program grants are awarded is being main-
tained.’

The Commission believes, however, that actions which are perceived —
tightly or wrongly — to bring the integrity of these programs into question
can also be harmful. Particular care should be taken to ensure that appoin-
tees to the Board of Foreign Scholarships as well as to policy and exchange
program management positions in USICA have the highest professional
qualifications.

Section 8, Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977.

14 This assessment extends only to USICA’s academic exchange programs. It does not include
the American Participant Program through which the Agency sends approximately S00
Americans abroad each year to explain U.S. policies and society to overseas audiences.
Nor does it include the administration of the International Visitors Program. The Commis-
sion will exercise its oversight responsibility in this area.

27



TELEVISION

PROJECT TRUTH

RESEARCH

U.S. ADVISORY
COMMISSION ON
PUBLIC
DIPLOMACY

@ The Commission welcomes increased cooperation between USICA and
the private sector, but it opposes private funding of major programs,
particularly those articulating U.S. foreign policy. (pp.29-30)

The Commission recommends that USICA undertake a major study,
drawing on the expertise of government and non-government specialists,
to ensure that the Agency realizes the full potential of television program-
ming and remains completely abreast of technological advances.

(p. 30)

© The Commission is pleased to note the extensive interagency cooperation
and coordination supporting this-project and recommends that such co-
ordination become the rule rather than the exception for U.S. public
diplomacy efforts. (pp. 31-32)

© The Commission is concerned about the connotations of the name “Proj-
ect Truth” and recommends that the Agency not utilize terminology that
gives rise to suspicions that USICA is engaging in “propaganda.”
(pp- 32-33)

© The Commission recommends that the staff and budget of the Office of
Research be increased to provide the research capability required for
national security and foreign policy needs. It should also have the re-
sources to carry out regular and methodical evaluation of Agency pro-
grams and products. (pp. 34-35)

© The Commission recommends that the President and the Congress en-
sure that appointments to the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public
Diplomacy are made so as to protect the independence, continuity,
genuine bipartisan character, and broad professional composition of the
Commission. (pp. 36-37)

LEER i

=o



The Commission has considered these views with care, and apart from
occasional rhetorical excess, it welcomes public debate on the Voice of
America. VOA’s credibility is its most precious asset. Credibility, however,
is a fragile thing. Actions and policies which are easily misinterpreted and
cast doubt on the organization's commitment to truth can seriously damage
it. VOA news must not only be accurate and objective, it must also be
perceived as such. The Commission recommends that USICA take particu-
lar care to ensure that public perceptions of the Voice of America not erode
the high standing it now has in international broadcasting.

The principles governing the operations of the Voice were enacted by the
Congress and signed into law by President Gerald Ford in 1976. They are
the product of much thoughtful deliberation in both the Legislative and
Executive Branches of the Government and in the Commission's view bear
repeating here.

“The long range interests of the United States are served by communicat-
ing directly with the people of the world by radio. To be effective, the
Voice of America ... must win the attention and respect of listeners,
These principles will therefore govern Voice of America (VOA ) broad-
casts:

“ (1) VOA will serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative source of
news. VOA news will be accurate, objective, and comprehensive.

“ (2) VOA will represent America, not any single segment of American
society, and will therefore present a balanced and comprehensive
projection of significant American thought and institutions.

“ (3) VOA will present the policies of the United States clearly and
effectively, and will also present responsible discussion and opinion
on these policies.”

At this time, neither information brought to the Commission’s attention
nor its own inquiries suggest that VOA’s policy of broadcasting the news in
as accurate and objective a manner as possible has been compromised. This
policy, which flows not only from legislative mandate but from VOA's role
as a proud institution in a free society, is essential to its credibility and
success, The Commission will continue to exercise its oversight responsibil-
ities in this area.

At the same time, VOA is an agency of the U.S. Government, and this
Administration, like every administration, has a right and an obligation to
enunciate and explain its policies through clearly identified Voice of Amer-
ica commentaries. Such policy commentary should be persuasive, thor-
oughly professional, and accurate in its assertions.

? PLL, 94-350.





= SE ae

The Commission previously recommended a substantial increase in the
research budget and believes that recommendation is still valid. It notes
with regret that for FY 1983 funds for the Office of Research have instead
been cut by approximately 16 percent from the FY 1981 level. If USICA is
to have the research capability that our national security needs require and
that the Agency needs to make its own programming more efficient, pres-
ent staff and funding levels are clearly inadequate and should be increased.

eee

+The Office of Research has a total staff of 88, including library personnel and those in media
reaction. Forty-nine are engaged in research, a decrease of 11 positions since the end of FY i
1980. Funds for research studies in FY 1982 are estimated at $581,716, down from $697,509 i
in FY 1981. ‘ 3

35



———

H. THE U.S. ADVISORY COMMISSION ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

Recommendation

© The Commission recommends that the President and the Congress en-
sure that appointments to the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Di-
plomacy are made so as to protect the independence, continuity, genuine
bipartisan character, and broad professional composition of the Commis-
sion,

This Commission and its predecessors have not‘normally discussed their
own role as public trustees in reports to the President and to the Congress.
In view of this Administration’s interest in the greater involvement of the
private sector in matters of public policy, we believe discussion of the role
and purpose of the Commission is warranted.

The U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy was established in
1978 as the successor to two advisory bodies to USICA’s predecessor orga-
nizations — the U.S. Advisory Commission on Information for the U.S.
Information Agency and the U.S. Advisory Commission on International
Educational and Cultural Affairs for the former Bureau of Educational and
Cultural Affairs in the Department of State.! This Commission carries out
the functions of its predecessors as well as additional responsibilities set
forth in the reorganization plan that created the International Communica-
tion Agency.”

In fulfilling its statutory responsibilities the Commission:

@ Recommends policies and programs to carry out the functions of
USICA;

© Appraises the effectiveness of the Agency's policies and programs;

© Reports to the President, the Congress, the Secretary of State, the
Director of USICA, and the public on the programs and activities car-
tied out by USICA; and

© Assesses the degree to which the scholarly integrity and non-political
character of USICA’s educational and cultural exchange activities have
been maintained, and assesses the attitudes of foreign scholars and gov-
ernments regarding such activities.

————
For a list of the past members of these advisory bodies, see Appendix V.

2 Section 8, Reorganization Plan No, 2 of 1977.


Foe

FRANCE



24

A Texas farmer greets
International Visitors selected.by
USICA from Taiwan, the
Philippines, and Indonesia.
Hospitality in private homes and
similar personal contacts are
arranged by a nation-wide
network of local volunteer
organizations affiliated with the
National Council for International
Visitors.

grantees that have risen to national leadership include the late Anwar
Sadat, Helmut Schmidt, Julius Nyerere, Indira Gandhi, and Margaret
Thatcher. Within the French Cabinet and National Assembly, there are 54
members who have visited the United States on IV grants. The same level
of success has been achieved in several less developed countries as well. For
example, in Zimbabwe, former 1V grantees include President Canaan Ba-
nana, 5 cabinet members, 3 members of parliament, 2 ambassadors, and
more than 50 government officials.

The Commission welcomes President Reagan's recently announced plans,
in connection with the Versailles Summit, to initiate a cooperative program
between the United States and its leading allies aimed at expanding inter-
national exchanges of young people. The objectives of this effort, which
will rely heavily on private sector support, are laudable. If well-designed
and properly funded, this initiative could make a significant contribution to
the development of mutual understanding among the pre-university succes-
sor generation youth of the “Versailles Seven” and eventually with other
nations as well. The Commission will follow the work of the President's
Committee on International Youth Exchange with great interest.





MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN

When this Commission began its work nearly three years ago, it was given a unique and
important task by the Congress. We were asked to serve as a bipartisan public trustee for the
newly-created International Communication Agency, to assess its policies and programs, and to
report our findings to the President, the Congress. the Secretary of State, and the Director of the
Agency.

The seven members of this Commission are neither diplomats nor bureaucrats, but concerned
citizens. Our mandate has as its ultimate objective furthering the mission of the Agency in order
to best serve the long-range interests of the United States.

As our understanding of the nature of public diplomacy developed, the Commission unani-
mously reached several conclusions. We believe that public diplomacy is indispensable to our
national security and should be accorded the same urgency and priority we give to traditional
government-to-government diplomacy or to military programs. We also believe that the signifi-
cance of public diplomacy — indeed, the fact that it is carried on at all — has been inadequately
understood afd therefore inadequately supported by the American people. This has relegated the
Agency to a secondary role within the government, thus limiting the Agency's capacity to meet
the full range of its capabilities and responsibilities.

These convictions provided the focus of the Commission’s first report. As an immediate
priority, we urged the Congress and the President to increase substantially the resources this
nation commits to the conduct of public diplomacy. We further recommended that the Agency’s
position within the government be enhanced to ensure that our government adequately under-
stands foreign opinion and culture for policy-making purposes. Finally, we recommended that the
Office of Research, which assesses foreign public opinion, be given increased funds and the
responsibility for evaluating the effectiveness of the Agency’s programs.

We are pleased to note that Congress has approved additional funds for the Agency for FY
1982, and we hope that the Administration’s request for FY 1983 will be approved. We regret,
however, that the resources provided for research were not increased but instead have been
reduced. While we recognize with satisfaction that the Agency is better positioned and currently
plays a more active role within the foreign affairs community than it has for many years, it still
lacks the structural base that would make the present relationships permanent and independent of
changes in personnel and administration. We address this problem in our report.

In the year and a half since our last report, the Commission has met almost every month and has
reviewed the major functions and programs of the Agency. We have met regularly with the
Director and senior officers of the Agency, and we have consulted with officials in the Depart-
ments of State and Defense, the National Security Council, and members of both houses of
Congress. The Commission has also met with members of the Board of Foreign Scholarships and
received testimony from various organizations that are funded by the Agency and whose work
with international visitors and educational exchanges supports the public diplomacy efforts of our
government. Several members of the Commission have traveled abroad to assess the Agency's
overseas operations. This report records the results of these efforts.



ze
pjo819-youely pue ysiuedsS Bam

ysiuedS
sahod + ys6ug
ssiseopeoig eBenBuey

BIquUo|OD

euRind

youal4
uea90 II{JIBd

AQ eweued

PBWIBUBY

en6

spup|s| SONBD PUB SHIN L

yung pues

ue98o0 JURY
oaixay JO IND

(eorewep 0} sjseopeoig 10}
Ayes Pug YS!geISY :aanejuaL) UeWABD Pues)
BISy) UBWARD pueIo
(Aujigey VOR Bulusigeisa) 44nL pues
(sayjiwsues | pamoiog aoe|day
24 VOA Sulysigeysa) endnuy
ayajosgg Buloejdey) uouyesey)  ‘SUOI}EIS

ulseg uBaqqued ebesaaoD UOISSIWISUEs |
SAB \\ WINIpa| pepuedxy eNVewWy JO sd1O/A



MHOMLAN NOILVLS.AVTSYH VOA
zs6l AUVNHESS

f— j
€+ —JBVANVI lus f/
Mooxonve (87 =



Ill. RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISCUSSION

A. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY AND NATIONAL SECURITY

Recommendation

© The International Communication Agency is little known within the
United States and often overlooked, yet its role is vital to our national
interests and the conduct of our foreign policy. Public diplomacy is as
indispensable to our national security as military preparedness, and the
Commission strongly urges that it be treated with the same urgency and
concern.

In FY 1983 the United States proposes to spend more than $221 billion for
national defense. The proposed FY 1983 operating budget for USICA is
$548 million — approximately 0.25 percent of our military spending.

The Commission does not question the need for strong military forces to
assure the nation’s defense. National security, however, does not derive
only from military strength. A recent report of the House Foreign Affairs
Committee stated, “/CA’s product is an important element in the U.S.
national defense ... (Yet) the Soviet Union presently outspends the United
States by about 7 to 1 in international broadcasting and information efforts
around the world.”' We also rank well below some of our Western allies in
funds spent for international information and cultural programs and in
broadcast hours around the world.”

History has repeatedly shown the power of ideas. Who can question that
the strength of our country derives in large measure from the ideas it
represents? It is precisely the task of USICA to present and explain these
ideas to a sometimes skeptical world, and to help ensure that foreign
perceptions of the United States are accurate and that misinformation and
misunderstandings are corrected. Wisely used, public diplomacy can lessen
the possibility of military conflict.

What is needed is a greater sense of commitment by our government to this
vital function. The level of support accorded public diplomacy by the U.S.
always has been woefully inadequate, and in real terms has been declining
steadily for many years. As this Commission pointed out in its first report,
the Agency “has been forced to spread too far, with too little, for too
long.”

1 Report No. 97-480 of April 2, 1982. The Chief Negotiator for the U.S. Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency (ACDA), General Edward Rowny, also has stated: “'I hope that we
remember in the future that the U.S. Information program is a part of the defense effort and
has to be treated with the same urgency as our other national security efforts.” Quoted in
“The Telling of America," THE WASHINGTON QUARTERLY, Winter 1982, p. 144.

2 See pp. 21-22 of this report.

net




APPENDIX IV

SELECTED USIA RESEARCH REPORTS, 1980-82

Soviet Elite Perceptions of the U.S.

West European Opinion on Security Issues

Trends in Perception of U.S. Strength and Leadership in Western Europe and Japan
Alliance Study: West German Elites View on Security Issues

Alliance Study: Italian Elite Views on Security Issues

TV Overtakes Newspapers and Radio as the Dominant Medium in Bangkok
Japanese Perceptions of Defense Issues: A Study of “Defense Influentials””

British Public Largely Opposes Continued EC Membership

French Public Opinion on the Eve of the Venice Summit

Cariadian Public Opinion on U,S,-Canadian Issues

Public Opinion in Major Industrial Democracies on Selected Venice Summit Issues
Soviet Historians’ Views of U.S. Foreign Affairs

Some Europeans Favor Olympic Boycott

Canadians Want Close Relations but See U.S. Inattentive

Visit of FRG Chancellor Schmidt; West German Public Opinion on Major Issues

Alliance Study: Italians Generally Show Limited Concern Over Soviet Threat, View American Role in
World Affairs Positively

Chinese Knowledge of the United States as Reflected in Mass Communication

A Profile of West European ‘Nuclear Pacifism”

Opposition to INF Increases in Britain, West Germany, and the Netherlands

Over 50 Million in Three NATO Countries See at Least Excerpts of President’s Nuclear Arms Address
French and West Germans Have Markedly Different Views from Americans on East-West Relations

The USSR Generally Seen as Promoting Terrorism

63



B. STRUCTURAL RELATIONSHIPS: THE POSITION OF USICA WITHIN THE FOREIGN
AFFAIRS COMMUNITY

Recommendation

© The Commission recommends that USICA’s role in the foreign affairs
community be institutionalized to ensure the regular participation of the
Agency in the formulation and execution of American foreign policy. It
urges that a Presidential Directive be issued implementing Congressional
intent that the Director of USICA serve as a statutory advisor to the
National Security Council and as the principal advisor to the President on
foreign public opinion and the conduct of public diplomacy.

The present level, breadth, and frequency of contacts between USICA, the
State Department, the National Security Council and the other foreign
affairs agencies are probably greater now than at any time in the past.
USICA’s Director or Deputy Director regularly attends the daily morning
staff meeting of the Secretary of State. The Counselor of the Agency
regularly meets with the Under Secretary for Political Affairs. USICA’s
Area Directors meet weekly with the Assistant Secretaries for their regions
at the Department, and desk officers are in constant contact with their
counterparts. In addition, there are numerous functional ties between
USICA and State, including the interagency Project Truth working group,
State’s press spokesman, and the Bureau of Intelligence and Research,

Relations with the National Security Council are less institutionalized than
those with the State Department, but the Director and Deputy Director
consult regularly with the National Security Advisor. Two Agency officers
are now assigned to the NSC staff.

All this, of course, is enormously useful. It greatly increases the likelihood
that foreign public opinion and communications issues will be taken into
consideration when foreign policies are being developed and implemented.
It also ensures that the Agency's programs are coordinated with those
policies, and that USICA has the support and cooperation of other foreign
affairs agencies.

The close relationships and high level entree now enjoyed by USICA are,
however, largely due to the personalities involved. There is no reason to
assume that the present situation will continue beyond the tenure of the
current Administration. USICA’s role in the foreign affairs community
must be institutionalized to ensure the regular participation of USICA in
the formulation and execution of American foreign policy in the future

To achieve this, the Commission recommended in its first report that the
Director of USICA be assigned a permanent seat on the National Security
Council. The need for regular Agency participation on the NSC is not a
new idea. The U.S. Advisory Commission on Information, a predecessor to
this Commission, the Comptroller General, Members of Congress, and
several ad hoc task forces appointed by Presidents Eisenhower and Kenne-
dy have made similar recommendations.

13



I

To the Congress and to the President of the United States

In accordance with the requirements of Section 8, Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, and Public Law
96-60, the United States Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy submits herewith its second report

on the U.S. International communication Agency.

Respectfully submitted,

Leonard L. Silverstein, Chairman

Attorney; Partner, Silverstein & Mullens

President, National Symphony Orchestra Association
WASHINGTON, D.C.

Tom C. Korologos

Vice President and Director
of Legislative Affairs

Timmons and Company, Inc.

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Lewis Manilow

Attorney

Former President, Chicago Museum of
Contemporary Art

ILLINOIS

Jean McKee
Director, Government Relations
General Mills Restaurant Group
NEW YORK

Olin Robison

Professor of Political Science
President, Middlebury College
VERMONT

Neil Sherburne
Chairman, Association of Governing Boards of
Universities and Colleges
Secretary-Treasurer,
Minnesota AFL-CIO (Retired)
MINNESOTA

Mae Sue Talley

Retired Business Executive,
Publisher, and Civic Leader

ARIZONA,


34

G. RESEARCH

Recommendation

© The Commission recommends the staff and budget of the Office of
Research be increased to provide the research capability required for
national security and foreign policy needs. It should also have the re-
sources to carry out regular and methodical evaluation of Agency pro-
grams and products.

USICA has an obligation ‘to ensure that our government adequately under-
stands foreign opinion and culture for policy-making purposes.”' To do
this, the Agency's Office of Research must regularly assess foreign public
opinion on specific important issues and Administration policies, and it
must evaluate possible options. It is equally important that perceptions and
attitudes of influential groups in other countries toward the U.S. be identi-
fied and understood.

Clearly, USICA’s policy research capability can and should be a vital con-
tributor to the nation’s security. The insights gained from such research
should play an integral role in both Executive and Congressional delibera-
tions on foreign policies.

To the extent that its limited resources permit, the Office of Research does
conduct valuable surveys and analyses of foreign public opinion to carry out
this function.”

In its last report, the Commission recommended that the Office of Re-
search be made responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of Agency
programs and products in addition to its policy-oriented opinion studies.
The Commission notes that the Office of Research conducts surveys of
VOA listeners in various foreign countries to determine both audience size
and preferences. It has undertaken a study to help determine whether or
not medium wave broadcasts in English to Western Europe would be
justified. It also has made studies of communication/media habits in a few
key countries that should be of considerable value in developing future
program plans. We understand that it is also now undertaking evaluations
of a number of Agency programs and products. This is all highly useful and
commendable, but more should be done, Regrettably, the shortage of staff
and funds limits the Agency’s research activities.

' Presidential Memorandum of March 13, 1978.

2 For a list of recent research reports, see Appendix IV.


Thai students learn English at §
the Binational Center in
Bangkok.

The Decline of
Exchange Programs

For the period 1976-81, West Germany increased its real expenditures for
these activities by $150 million, Japan $60 million, and Britain $11 million.
By contrast, American real appropriations for this period decreased by $59
million.

France and West Germany both believe that public diplomacy, exchange
programs in particular, represents the “third pillar” of foreign relations
with commerce and politics. The French, who have recently reorganized
their cultural and information programs, often consider cultural relations to
be even more important than politics and trade to certain key national
interests.

The Commission recognizes the Administration’s budget constraints and
consequently is all the more pleased by the recent substantial restoration of
funds for international educational and cultural exchange programs. These
programs are as indispensable to the effective conduct of public diplomacy
as media efforts, and the Commission does not believe that a strong infor-
mation arm should be achieved at the expense of weakened educational
and cultural exchange programs. Indeed, they represent one of the most
valuable tools in the long-term conduct of American foreign policy.

‘The relatively low priority accorded these programs is a matter of concern
to the Commission. A look at the record is instructive.



Americans have traditionally accepted the moral imperative of the Declaration of Indepen-
dence to show “‘a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.” Diplomats, no less than elected
officials, are aware of the power of public attitudes. How well American foreign policies succeed
depends to a large degree on how our actions and intentions are perceived by the rest of the world.
We must make clear where we stand on the major issues of our time, and we must affirm the ideals.
and aspirations underlying our national purposes. We must also understand the attitudes and
aspirations of the other nations and peoples of our global community. This is the substance of
public diplomacy and the task of the U.S. International Communication Agency (USICA)

The International Communication Agency engages in public diplomacy:

® When the Voice of America, despite jamming efforts by the Soviet Union, brings accurate
news to millions of people subject to martial law in Poland;

® When an American Fulbright scholar teaches economics in Honduras;

®@ When USICA telecasts Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger's interview with West
German journalists live by satellite to 8 million viewers in West Germany;

® When a noted American foreign policy scholar speaks to a select group of Japanese govern-
ment officials;

® When USICA representatives in Panama publicly refute Soviet propaganda efforts to blame
the United States for the death of former president General Omar Torrijos;

®@ When Parisians visit the USICA-sponsored exhibit of American Impressionists which is
touring Europe;

® When USICA presents the National Security Council with public opinion polls of West
European attitudes on NATO defense issues;

® When Egyptians read Al-Majal, a USICA monthly magazine in Arabic;

© When USICA representatives assist foreign journalists at the Cancun Economic Summit in
Mexico;

@ When Equadorian students learn English at the Binational Center in Quito;

® When senior government officials brief foreign journalists on Administration policies at
USICA’s Foreign Press Centers in New York and Washington.

These are just a few examples of the many things USICA does to foster a better understanding
of the United States, its people and its policies. By-creating an atmosphere of greater mutual
understanding, it directly contributes to the success of American diplomatic efforts in the cause of
peace and security.



APPENDIX I

2


Secretary of State Alexander
Haig prepares for a live
international telecast with
foreign journalists in USICA's
television studios.

30

learned a great deal from this first experience in global television broad-
casting. We are aware of the short deadline USICA was working under to
complete the show, but the Agency should not expect foreign television
officials, especially in developed countries, to accept programs without first
being able to screen them. Furthermore, it is evident that cooperative
productions offer the most promising way of getting on overseas television.
However, we commend the Agency for its initiative in this creative use of
television as a vehicle for public diplomacy

USICA has made other significant uses of satellite television during the
past year. President Reagan's State of the Union message, the “zero op-
tion” nuclear arms speech, and the President's Caribbean Basin Initiative
address are among a number of major foreign policy statements given
worldwide television coverage by USICA in recent months.

USICA has also experimented effectively with live satellite television trans-
mission of foreign press interviews with senior government officials. Secre-
tary of Defense Caspar Weinberger initiated the first such “video dialogue”
with Germany and Japan late in 1981 to estimated audiences of eight
million viewers in each country. Similar telecasts with other Cabinet level
officials have since been undertaken in this imaginative use of the medium.

The Commission welcomes these promising developments. At the same
time, the Commission believes that USICA must take additional steps to
achieve the full potential of television technology. Greater use of coopera-
tive productions with domestic and foreign producers, systematic evalua-
tion of field use of acquired and produced video programs, fuller use of
USICA’s in-house television studios, and the recruitment of a senior level
professional to direct its Television and Film Service are steps that are
urgently needed.

Finally, the Commission recommends that USICA undertake a major study
of the use of television in cross-cultural communication drawing on the
expertise of the best available specialists in and out of government. The
study should address both programming and technical issues to ensure that
the Agency remains current with the state-of-the-art in this significant
medium,



41

APPENDIX I


A Comparison: U.S,
and Soviet Academic
Exchange Programs

An overall picture of educational exchanges is interesting but some-
what misleading. The Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc nations hosted 63,170
foreign students in 1980, of whom more than half (35,195) were in the
USSR. Virtually all of the foreign students in the Soviet Union are support-
ed by government grants. In.comparison, of the 312,000 foreign students
attending American universities in 1980-81, the U.S. Government support-
ed less than 2 percent, and government support funds continue to decline
rapidly.’ In short, in 1980-81, the Soviet Union spent $175 million to host
35,195 foreign students, while the U.S. officially sponsored 3,455 foreign
graduate students at a cost of less than $30 million.®

Regional comparisons of American and Soviet Bloc educational exchange
activities are enlightening.° In 1980-81, Soviet Bloc grants to Sub-Saharan
Africans amounted to 26,995, while U.S. Government grants totaled
1,398.'° Soviet Bloc grants were available to 40 of the 44 Sub-Saharan
nations; USICA's were limited to 18 of the 44. USICA sponsored 12 Ken-
yan students and AID 87; the Soviet Bloc that same year funded 805
Kenyans. Francophone Rwanda and Congo have no U.S, Government-
sponsored students, while the Soviet Bloc supports 1,650. The disparities
remain wide in every region of the world except East Asia. In El Salvador,
there are 105 Soviet Bloc grants to only 18 offered by the U.S. In India,
Soviet Bloc grants outnumber U.S. Government grants 1,140 to 7. The
differences appear to be greatest in those regions that are among the most
sensitive and important to U.S. national security interests, such as the
Middle East, Southern Europe, and the Caribbean Basin."!

7 Of the 312,000 foreign students in the U.S., 64% are financially independent and pay with
personal funds, 18% are sponsored by foreign goverments, 10% by American universities, 6%
by international organizations and private American sources, and less than 2% are sponsored
by the U.S. Government.

8 USICA sponsored 1,680 foreign students at less that $9 million, while AID sponsored 1,775
at a cost of some $21 million; AID also sponsored 662 other graduate students for technical
training.

9 As seen in Appendix II, Chart 10, approximately 43% of the students trained in the Soviet
Union are from Sub-Saharan Africa, 22% from South Asia, 19% from the Middle East, and
10% from Latin America. On the other hand, the U.S. Government sponsors 34% of its
students from Sub-Saharan Africa,21% from Latin America, 15% ftom Western Europe, 12%
from East Asia, and 9% from the Middle East.

1© In 1980-81, there was a total of 30,870 Sub-Saharan African students in the United States. If
the students from the petro-dollar nation of Nigeria are subtracted from this figure, the
number falls to 13,520.

11 Tn the Middle East, the Soviet Bloc offers forty times more government academic grants than
does the U.S. In Southern Europe, the heart of NATO's “Southern Flank,” Soviet Bloc
grants outnumber U.S. Government grants thirteen times. In the Caribbean Basin in 1980-
81, the Soviet Bloc nations selected almost 5,000 students compared to the U.S. Govern-
ment's 748 (USICA's 14 and AID's 734).



Cultural and Fine
Arts Exhibitions:

Educational and
Cultural Activities:

Mexican President Lopez
Portillo views a USICA-
sponsored fine arts exhibit.

The Agency produces an average of 13 major exhibitions a year, includ-
ing solo exhibits, participation in international trade fairs and special inter-
national promotions. These events annually provide more than 2 million
foreign citizens with perhaps their only public exposure to American cul-
ture. USICA produces and distributes approximately nine smaller displays
a year in multiple copies to posts in more than 100 countries. Under the
Arts America Program, the Agency sends approximately 25 fine arts exhi-
bitions abroad annually. In conjunction with the National Endowment for
the Arts, the Agency also assists qualified artists and performing arts
groups in arranging private tours overseas.

USICA's educational and cultural exchange programs provide citizens of
other countries with a better understanding of the United States. The
Agency has allocated approximately $70.6 million in FY 1982 for these
activities which include the Fulbright Academic Exchange Program, the
International Visitors (IV) Program, the Humphrey Fellowship Program,
and financial support for some non-government exchange programs. The
Fulbright Program involves the annual exchange of approximately 3,800
U.S. and foreign pre-doctoral students, professors, and senior researchers.
The IV Program annually extends invitations to approximately 1,500 for-
eign leaders for short-term visits to the United States, USICA is providing
an estimated $16.9 million in FY 1982 for the Center for Cultural and
Technical Interchange between East and West in Hawaii.



omen — [jbraries in American Centers only
= = = m= = = — Libraries in both American Centers and Reading Rooms



meneame — Overseas Personnel Engaged Fully in English Teaching |
== = = = = — Countries Where USIA Engages in English Teaching



Central to this report is our conviction that public diplomacy must be
treated with the same urgency and concern that we give to military prepar-
edness. The Commission strongly urges that USICA be given the priority
and resources that its responsibilities and our national needs require.

INTERNATIONAL COMMUNICATION AGENCY APPROPRIATIONS
SALARIES AND EXPENSES, 1967-1982

Dollars
(millions)

500) ex — Actual Dollars
== = == = — 1967 Constant Dollars

400 4

300 4

200

o =F T T T T T T T T T T T T T
4967 ‘68 ‘69 '70 ‘71 ‘72 ‘73 “74 "75 +76 ‘77 ‘78 ‘79 ‘80 '81 "82

12