    [Senate Prints 111-6]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    111th Congress
     1st Session                COMMITTEE PRINT                     S. Prt.
                                                                      111-6
    _______________________________________________________________________

              U.S. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY--TIME TO GET BACK IN THE GAME

                                   __________

                              A Report to Members

                                     of the

                         COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                            John F. Kerry, Chairman

                         One Hundred Eleventh Congress

                                 First Session

                               February 13, 2009

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations

                          Available via World Wide Web
                  http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html

                         U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    47-261 PDF                 WASHINGTON DC:  2009
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
    Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov  Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
    Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001

                         COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS

                     JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts, Chairman
    CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut     RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana
    RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin         Republican Leader designee
    BARBARA BOXER, California            BOB CORKER, Tennessee
    ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey          JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
    BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
    ROBERT P. CASEY, Jr., Pennsylvania   JIM DeMINT, South Carolina
    JIM WEBB, Virginia                   JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
    EDWARD E. KAUFMAN, Delaware
    KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
                          David McKean, Staff Director
                  Kenneth A. Myers, Republican Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Letter of Transmittal............................................     V
    Executive Summary................................................     1
    Recommendations..................................................     2
    Introduction.....................................................     3
    The American Center..............................................     4
    From ``American Centers'' to ``Information Resource Centers''....     5
        Chart: IRC Location and Access...............................     6
    Impact of Security Concerns on Public Diplomacy..................     7
        Graph: Visitors to IRCs On and Off Embassy Compounds.........     8
    The Competition..................................................     8
    Bi-National Centers..............................................    10
    Iranian Cultural Centers.........................................    11
        Chart: Location of Iranian Cultural Centers..................    11
    Other U.S. Government Efforts....................................    11
    Graph: American Corners By Region................................    13
    The American Center in Burma.....................................    14
    Conclusion.......................................................    14
    Site Visits
        Egypt........................................................    16
        Jordan.......................................................    17
        Mexico.......................................................    19
        Dominican Republic...........................................    19
    Appendix
        American Corners.............................................    23
            Chart: American Corners by Country.......................    23
        Arabic Book Translation Program..............................    30
        English Language Fellows.....................................    32
        Regional English Language Offices............................    33
             Chart: RELO Countries of Responsibility.................    33
        Access Microscholarships.....................................    34
        Peace Corps Co-location Exemption............................    36
        Film Series Restrictions.....................................    36
             State Department Cable of Agreement with Motion Picture
              Licensing Corporation..................................    38

                             LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                                  ----------

                                  United States Senate,
                                Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                     Washington, DC, February 13, 2009.
        Dear Colleague: Recent polling suggests that support for
    the United States throughout the world is on a slight increase
    but remains well below the fifty percent mark in many
    countries, even among those nations normally considered strong
    allies. This less-than-positive attitude towards our nation has
    impacts ranging from national security threats, to lost trade
    opportunities, to a significant drop in tourism, to parents
    overseas refusing to allow their children to be educated in
    U.S. universities.
        The sources of this problem are many. Some of these include
    honest disagreements with our policies and our actions. But
    many are based on misrepresentations of our goals, values and
    motives targeted at those prepared to believe the worst about
    us. Yet, in spite of recent actions to counter these
    misperceptions, our efforts to present our point of view have
    not been getting through. It is time to re-think how we conduct
    our Public Diplomacy.
        With this in mind, I sent Paul Foldi of my Senate Foreign
    Relations Committee staff to travel to the Middle East and
    Latin America in December 2008 to discuss U.S. Public Diplomacy
    efforts with our Embassy and local officials. His report
    focuses on the need for greater direct U.S. engagement with
    average citizens overseas who now have virtually no contact
    with Americans. In order to overcome years of mistrust, this
    re-engagement should be on the same scope and scale as
    currently conducted by the British, French and German
    governments, all of which currently offer language instruction
    and information about their countries in their own government-
    run facilities throughout the world. Iran is also dramatically
    increasing its outreach efforts through its network of Cultural
    Centers in Africa, Asia and the Middle East, many of which are
    located in the very locations where we are reducing our public
    presence.
        The United States used to have a similar worldwide program
    through its ``American Centers,'' which taught English, housed
    libraries and hosted U.S. film series, and featured exhibitions
    and lectures by visiting American authors, scientists, human
    rights lawyers, and other speakers. The consolidation of the
    United States Information Agency into the State Department
    along with security concerns resulted in the demise of almost
    all the Centers (the excellent American Centers in Alexandria,
    New Delhi and Rangoon are among the few exceptions) and led to
    their rebirth as Information Resource Centers (or ``IRCs'')
    most often housed inside our new Embassies. These Embassy
    compounds place a premium on protecting our diplomats and often
    convey an atmosphere ill-suited to encouraging the casual
    visitor, with almost half of the 177 IRCs operating on a ``by
    appointment only'' basis. Additionally, usage figures
    demonstrate that our IRCs in the Middle East which are located
    inside our Embassies receive six times fewer visitors than
    similar facilities in the region located outside our compounds.
        This lack of easily accessible facilities, where foreigners
    can read about United States history and government and access
    newspapers and the Internet in an environment free from their
    own government's censorship has hurt us--particularly when over
    80% of the world's population is listed by Freedom House as
    having a press that is either ``Not Free'' or only ``Partly
    Free.''
        Where once we were seen as the world's leader in
    intellectual discourse and debate, we are now viewed as
    withdrawn and unconcerned with any views other than our own.
    While the re-creation of the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) is
    not realistic, a program to re-establish the American Centers
    that uses the teaching of English to offset operating costs
    would go far to demonstrate that we are committed to re-
    engaging in a dialogue with the world.
        Such a program would entail re-locating a small number of
    Embassy officials outside our diplomatic compounds in those
    locations where the security climate permits and where we are
    able to provide them with appropriately secure facilities. If
    we hope to change opinions towards us, we must be able to
    interact with the world. We have learned much in recent years
    about keeping our personnel overseas safe; as such, increased
    accessibility need not come at the cost of security.
        Mr. Foldi's report provides important insights into the
    current state of our Public Diplomacy and offers valuable
    recommendations based on his travels and years of work in the
    field. As the title of his report suggests, we have been too
    long on the sidelines of Public Diplomacy in recent years, and
    it is indeed time for the United States to ``Get Back In The
    Game.'' I hope that you find this report helpful as Congress
    works with the new administration to strengthen our Public
    Diplomacy efforts and look forward to continuing to work with
    you on these issues.
                Sincerely,
                                              Richard G. Lugar,
                                                        Ranking Member.

              U.S. PUBLIC DIPLOMACY--TIME TO GET BACK IN THE GAME

                                  ----------

        On behalf of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations,
    minority staff traveled to Egypt, Jordan, Mexico and the
    Dominican Republic from December 1-12, 2008. The purpose of the
    trip was to examine U.S. Public Diplomacy facilities as
    platforms for engagement with foreign audiences, including the
    role of English language instruction as a vehicle to facilitate
    greater access to information about the United States and
    interaction with core American values.

                               Executive Summary

        It is no secret that support for the United States has
    dropped precipitously throughout the world in recent years.\1\
    Many experts believe this is due not only to various U.S.
    foreign policy developments but also to the method in which we
    conduct our Public Diplomacy. Public Diplomacy requires our
    diplomats to interact not only with Foreign Ministry officials
    but with local journalists, authors, scientists, artists,
    athletes, experts and academics as well the average citizen.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ A February 6, 2009 BBC World Service Poll of more than 13,000
    respondents in 21 countries still showed the United States with a 40%
    positive-43% negative rating. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7873050.stm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The entity created within the U.S. government to deal with
    Public Diplomacy and to communicate with the rest of the
    world--the United States Information Agency (USIA)--was
    abolished in 1999. While the Department of State absorbed
    USIA's personnel and maintained some of its programs, most
    agree that U.S. focus on Public Diplomacy began to diminish
    from this point on. (Nonetheless, re-creating USIA, or
    something similar, is neither feasible nor affordable in
    today's budgetary environment.)
        This lack of focus was also partly due to the belief that,
    with the collapse of the Soviet Union, we had won the ``War of
    Ideas''--a belief that 9/11 quickly shattered. We now find
    ourselves having to focus our Public Diplomacy efforts not only
    on those who ``hate us,'' but also on many former friends and
    allies who now mistrust our motives and actions.
        In order to improve the situation we must address the
    difficulties we now face in conducting people-to-people
    interactions and providing access to information about the
    United States--the core of U.S. Public Diplomacy policy. Both
    aspects of this policy served as the foundations of our best
    Public Diplomacy platforms--the ``American Center''--which
    housed libraries, reading rooms, taught English and conducted
    countless outreach programs, book groups, film series, and
    lectures that enabled foreigners to meet with Americans of all
    walks of life and vocations and hold conversations on issues of
    mutual interest.
        These free-standing American Centers were drastically down-
    sized and re-cast as ``Information Resource Centers'' (IRCs),
    most of which were then removed from easily accessible downtown
    locations due to security concerns following the attacks on our
    embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. Those IRCs that were
    relocated to our Embassy compounds have seen significant
    reductions in visitors--IRCs in the Middle East that are
    located off our compounds receive six times fewer visitors per
    month as those located on our compounds. Thus we have created a
    vicious cycle: frustrated by our inability to connect with
    audiences overseas who no longer trust us, we have in fact
    weakened our efforts at Public Diplomacy by denying them access
    to both American officials as well as uncensored information
    about us.
        The State Department--working with Congress and host
    governments--needs to re-create the American Center system in
    secure facilities outside our Embassy compounds from which we
    can provide foreign audiences with greater access to
    information about the United States through libraries,
    periodicals and an uncensored Internet. At the same time, much
    as the British, French and Germans all offer classes overseas
    in their mother tongues, we must use the teaching English both
    as a draw to bring individuals back into our Centers and as a
    source of funding by using tuition fees to offset the costs of
    running them.

                                RECOMMENDATIONS

         Congressional support is needed for the Department
    of State to create more accessible Public Diplomacy platforms
    by pushing Information Resource Centers (IRCs) out of remote
    Embassy compounds and allowing them to be re-built as stand-
    alone American Centers in more centrally located areas. In
    order to accomplish this, the so-called ``co-location
    requirement'' should be re-visited to allow these new Centers
    to be established as well as to permit those few facilities
    still off-compound to remain as such, as long as appropriate
    security measures are in place.
         IRCs and American Centers should operate six days
    a week and ensure that hours of operation maximize usage by
    local publics.
         The Department of State should engage in the
    teaching of English using American or American-trained teachers
    hired directly by the Embassy, not sub-contractors, and using
    standardized techs appropriate for each region/culture. This
    will ensure that the Department has full control over the
    content and quality of the education, and will go far to
    advancing our Public Diplomacy efforts.
         Charging for this English instruction is
    appropriate and logical in these budgetary times.
         If the security situation in an area deteriorates
    to the point that a stand-alone American Center must be closed
    for a prolonged period of time, the facility should be
    preserved, perhaps re-cast for other use, but not permanently
    closed. These Centers serve as high-profile symbols of
    America's desire for direct engagement with local populations
    as well as our commitment to education and access to uncensored
    information; abandoning them indicates we have given up on
    advancing these ideals.
         In Latin America, rather than create competing
    institutions that offer English language and cultural
    programming, the State Department should examine cost and
    policy implications of formally re-establishing U.S. government
    links with the network of Bi-National Centers (BNCs) in the
    region. BNCs were originally created by the United States but
    are now wholly run by independent local boards.
         American Corners--smaller versions of IRCs--are
    housed in local university or public office buildings. At a
    cost of $35,000 each, and with over 400 already established
    worldwide, the Department of State should take a careful look
    at any requests for additional American Corners to ensure the
    need is truly justified. American Corners are appropriate for
    remote locations that lack any other U.S. presence but should
    not be used as substitutes in capitals for American Centers,
    particularly as American Corners are run by local staffs who
    are neither employed nor managed by U.S. Embassy officials and
    thus represent a literal out-sourcing of American Public
    Diplomacy.
         In those capitals where an American Corner does
    exist, its collection should be combined with the Embassy's IRC
    to form the nucleus of the new American Center's resources.
         The State Department's Arabic book translation
    program is crucial to providing information in local texts and
    should be strongly supported until free-market forces step in.
    The Department should examine potential cost savings by
    consolidating Cairo and Amman operations as long as both are
    able to continue to provide input into the translation
    selection process.
         The term Information Resource Center is cumbersome
    and, for most foreigners, confusing. A return to the simpler
    ``Library'' seems appropriate for those IRCs that must remain
    on embassy compounds.
         Given the disparity between the 11,000 graduates
    of the English language focused Access Microscholarships
    targeted mainly at under-served Muslim youth, and the 300 slots
    available for the State Department's YES exchange program which
    sends Muslim youth to spend a year in American High Schools,
    the State Department needs to ensure that adequate funding is
    available for follow-on programming to keep the vast majority
    Access graduates engaged and using the skills that have been
    invested in them, even if this requires a reduction of the
    portion of the Access program's budget and fewer annual
    graduates.
         The State Department should re-engage with the
    U.S. Motion Picture Licensing Corporation to allow greater
    public awareness of Embassy-run American film series than
    permitted under the current, overly restrictive, Licensing
    Agreement negotiated between the two.

                                  Introduction

        Public Diplomacy is the conduct of diplomacy beyond the
    boundaries and venues of traditional foreign ministries and
    halls of power of a nation and requires interacting directly
    with the citizens, community leaders, journalists and policy
    experts who are the future leaders and current opinion shapers
    of their country. Public Diplomacy also seeks to create a
    better understanding of our nation with a foreign populace as a
    whole by providing them access to American culture, history,
    law, society, art and music that might not otherwise be
    available through standard local media outlets that often
    provide biased reporting about the United States and our
    involvement in the world.
        Visitor exchange programs are an important component of
    Public Diplomacy. These State Department exchanges send experts
    from the U.S. to countries throughout the world and, equally
    important, bring foreigners to the United States to meet with
    their counterparts here. The contacts and professional
    relationships fostered in these programs are one of the
    hallmarks of our people-to-people diplomacy, but they are not
    alone. The Peace Corps and Fulbright Scholarships are equally
    vital to providing long-term access to Americans and America.
    The Voice of America and its affiliates are also a crucial
    element in our policy.
        In spite of these efforts, the fact that U.S. Public
    Diplomacy policy is in disarray is neither a secret nor a
    surprise. The U.S. Government Accountability Office, in its
    November 6, 2008 list of thirteen urgent issues demanding the
    next administration's attention to ensure the nation's
    security, placed ``improving the U.S. image abroad'' fifth.\2\
    Study after study \3\ points to our difficulties in explaining
    our foreign policy to skeptical publics overseas. In short, the
    U.S. ``brand'' has not been doing well in the marketplace of
    world ideas.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ http://www.gao.gov/transition_2009/urgent/.
        \3\ These include: Arndt, Richard. The First Resort of Kings:
    American Cultural Diplomacy in the Twentieth Century. New York: Potomac
    Books, Inc., 2007; Kiesling, John Brady. Diplomacy Lessons: Realism for
    an Unloved Superpower. Washington, D.C. Potomac Books, Inc., 2006;
    Peterson, Peter G. Finding America's Voice: A Strategy for
    Reinvigorating US Public Diplomacy (Report of An Independent Task Force
    Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations). New York: Council On
    Foreign Relations, Inc., 2003; Rosen, Brian and Charles Wolf, Jr.
    Public Diplomacy: How to Think About and Improve It. Santa Monica: RAND
    Corporation, 2004; Rugh, William A. American Encounters With Arabs: The
    Soft Power of US Public Diplomacy in the Middle East. London: Praeger
    Security International, 2006.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This is partly a result of honest disagreements that some
    audiences have with our policies. It is also due to a skewed
    vision that many in the world receive about the U.S. either
    from biased reporting and/or because they are denied access to
    Internet sites that are blocked or heavily filtered.\4\ Denied
    this information, even with our excellent exchange programs,
    the average citizen also has limited or no contact with
    Americans. Offering greater access to our ideas, citizens and
    officials will provide an important antidote to these ills.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Recent revelations have surfaced that China has again begun to
    deny access to various Internet sites it had stopped blocking during
    the 2008 Olympic games (see: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/world/
    asia/17china.html?hp). U.S. facilities with filter-free Internet
    provide a natural magnet for the public in many locations where
    repressive governments try to deny information to their citizens.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         THE AMERICAN CENTER--PUBLIC DIPLOMACY PLATFORMS PAR EXCELLENCE

        For years, our premier overseas Public Diplomacy platforms
    were the American Centers, operated by the United States
    Information Agency as stand-alone facilities located downtown
    in capital cities. The Centers offered reading rooms with the
    latest American and foreign newspapers and housed libraries
    with collections of American history, economics, legal,
    scientific and classic literature.\5\ Center staff coordinated
    book discussion groups, lectures by visiting American experts,
    and model United Nations and American Congress programs with
    local youth. Centers ran American film series programs and
    served as venues for visiting American artists and musicians.
    English language instruction was also a staple of most Centers.
    Importantly, access to these facilities was free of charge and
    buildings were situated in the most vibrant part of city
    centers. All of these services are critical in countries either
    too poor or too repressive to provide any such institutions to
    their own publics.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ As a result of our extensive collections, many foreigners had
    their first exposure to serious research and uncensored information in
    an American Center's library--one reason why the Centers are most
    commonly referred to overseas as the ``American Library,'' in spite of
    the entirety of a Center's offerings.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Americans long accustomed to our daily newspapers, 24-hour
    television news cycle and unfettered access to the Internet
    sometimes forget that many societies still live with state
    control of radio and TV, Internet censorship and no right to
    freedom of speech.\6\ At the same time, many of these same
    governments use their control of the media to espouse distorted
    stories and unbalanced images of the United States. American
    Centers offered a neutral \7\ space for foreigners to access
    information without interference or oversight from repressive
    host governments as well as a welcoming environment more
    conducive to engagement with American officials. Yet, despite
    the significant Public Diplomacy value of these Centers to
    project America's ideas and images, several events occurred
    that led to the rapid demise of all but a handful.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Freedom House's 2008 Global Press Freedom report counts 66%
    (123) of the world's nations as having either a Not Free or only Partly
    Free press. These 123 countries represent over 80% of the world's
    population. http://www.freedomhouse.org/uploads/fop08/
    FOTP2008_Charts.pdf.
        \7\ ``Neutral'' in the sense of a less formal setting than a U.S.
    Embassy, but by no means free from risk as many repressive governments,
    to this day, monitor and track all visitors to U.S. facilities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     FROM ``AMERICAN CENTERS'' TO ``IRCS''

        The American Centers program closed as a result of a
    confluence of several events, including: the end of the Cold
    War, the rise of the Internet, and the absorption of the U.S.
    Information Agency (USIA) into the Department of State. The
    first created the false impression that the great debate was
    over regarding the primacy of democratically elected
    governments. The second created the false belief that we could
    conduct Public Diplomacy primarily through an electronic
    medium. The third resulted in Public Diplomacy officers more
    focused on localized issues related to their Embassy and
    Ambassador rather than global U.S. Public Diplomacy policy. As
    a result, most Centers were significantly downsized in terms of
    material and staff and relocated into Embassies in their
    truncated forms as Information Resource Center (IRCs), many of
    which are now open only by appointment or have hours of
    operation that limit public use. (See chart below.)

                                 INFORMATION RESOURCE CENTERS--LOCATIONS AND ACCESS \8\
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             IRCs with
                                                         IRCs located on   public access     IRCs with no access to
                     Region                   IRC total      embassy       by appointment          the public
                                                             compound           only
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Africa.................................         37         21 (57%)          9 (24%)    0
    East Asia..............................         28         18 (64%)         15 (54%)    3 (Sydney, Singapore,
                                                                                            Hong Kong)
    Europe.................................         55         43 (78%)         30 (55%)   11 (Brussels, Baku,
                                                                                            Berlin, Copenhagen,
                                                                                            Nicosia, Paris, Tallinn,
                                                                                            The Hague, Moscow,
                                                                                            Yekaterinburg,
                                                                                            Stockholm)
    Middle East............................         16         12 (75%)          6 (50%)    2 (Sana'a, Yemen;
                                                                                            Beirut, Lebanon)
    South and Central Asia.................         16          8 (50%)          8 (50%)    2 (Karachi and Lahore,
                                                                                            Pakistan)
    Latin America..........................         25         20 (80%)         19 (76%)    1 (Bogota, Colombia)
                                            ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Total............................        177        122 (69%)         87 (49%)   19 (11%)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Figures provided by the Department of State for 2008.

        The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold
    War suggested to many policy makers that the continued need to
    make the case for American democratic values was finally over.
    As a result of this ``victory,'' funding cuts in Public
    Diplomacy efforts were considered part of a logical ``peace
    dividend,'' and Centers began to see their programming budgets
    reduced and funding for book programs slashed. The attacks of
    9/11 and subsequent events demonstrate that work in this field
    is far from over, as even in Europe many ``natural'' allies now
    regard the United States with distrust.
        The rise of the Internet led many to conclude that more and
    more Public Diplomacy outreach could be conducted just as
    easily through websites and local Internet Cafes as through
    more costly U.S. brick and mortar facilities. There is no
    question that book purchase and shipping expenses are not
    insignificant given the far-flung nature of many of our
    Embassies. Definite cost savings can be achieved through
    uploading information on the Internet. In fact, many IRCs now
    subscribe to vast legal and scientific database services which
    can be accessed at users' homes via many IRCs' websites. Such
    data is no doubt valuable for foreign researchers and generates
    a certain recognition of the U.S. as leader in education and
    freedom of information. However, if enhanced people-to-people
    interactions are judged to be a key component for improving our
    Public Diplomacy efforts, cutting out the interaction with
    Americans seems counterintuitive.
        The 1999 dissolution \9\ of the United States Information
    Agency (USIA), which ran the American Centers, and the
    absorption of USIA's personnel and some of its programs into
    the State Department, continued to chip away at the Centers and
    overall Public Diplomacy funding in light of what State viewed
    as Congressional pressures to continue to reduce spending
    overseas.\10\ USIA officers were re-cast as Public Diplomacy
    (PD) ``coned'' officers in the State Department.\11\ As Foreign
    Service Officers, PD officials in the field report not to the
    Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy in Washington but to their
    Ambassador at post. Quite naturally, many PD officers are more
    concerned with supporting his or her Ambassador's immediate
    press needs rather than worrying if their Ambassador's
    initiatives track with overall U.S. Public Diplomacy
    priorities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ See the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 in
    Division G of the FY2008 Omnibus Appropriations legislation (PL105-
    277), which begins on p. 761. http://frwebgate. ccess.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
    getdoc.cgi?dbname=105_cong_public_laws&docid= f:publ277.105.pdf.
        \10\ See public diplomacy funding figures in CSIS Appendix to
    Armitage-Nye April 24, 2008 Senate testimony; http://www.csis.org/
    media/csis/congress/ts0804024Armitage-Nye_ Appendix.pdf.
        \11\ Foreign Service Officers are career-tracked in one of five
    ``cones''--Consular, Economic, Management, Political or (since the
    absorption of USIA into the State Department in 1999)--Public
    Diplomacy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In the ten years since the Foreign Affairs Reform and
    Restructuring Act took effect, it is clear that the abolishment
    of USIA failed to improve our Public Diplomacy efforts
    significantly. In spite of the wishes of many, however, there
    is neither the political will nor budgetary outlays available
    to recreate USIA, or any other similar stand-alone entity.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ See for example the proposed creations of: ``USA-World Trust''
    in the Brookings report ``Voices of America'' http://www.brookings.edu/
    /media/Files/rc/reports/2008/11_public_ diplomacy_lord/
    11_public_diplomacy_lord.pdf; the Defense Science Boards ``Center for
    Global Engagement'' http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2008-01-
    Strategic_Communication.pdf; Meridian International Center for the
    Study of the Presidency's call for a ``Foundation for International
    Understanding'' http://www.thepresidency.org/FIU/fiu.html; Business for
    Diplomatic Action's ``Corporation for Public Diplomacy'' http://
    www.businessfordiplomaticaction.org/ action/
    a_business_perspective_on_public_ diplomacy_10_2007_approvedfinal.pdf;
    Heritage Foundation's ``Independent Public Opinion Research Center''
    http://www.heritage.org/ Research/PublicDiplomacy/bg1875.cfm; Public
    Diplomacy Council--``U.S. Agency for Public Diplomacy''
    www.pdi.gwu.edu.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                IMPACT OF SECURITY CONCERNS ON PUBLIC DIPLOMACY

        At the same time that budgetary and bureaucratic pressures
    were impinging on public diplomacy efforts, the Department of
    State was reeling from the 1998 bombings of our Embassies in
    Kenya and Tanzania. Responding quickly, Congress provided, and
    continues to provide, the Department of State hundreds of
    millions of dollars annually for Embassy construction to
    replace chancery buildings.\13\ In order to build facilities
    that can withstand blasts such as those that struck Nairobi and
    Dar es Salaam, new embassy buildings must have a one hundred
    foot set-back from the perimeter fence in order to dissipate
    the shock waves of an explosion.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ See Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of
    1999, found in Title VI of Division A of the FY2000 Omnibus
    Appropriations Act (PL106-113), starting on p. 451; http://
    frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
    getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_cong_public_laws&docid= f:publ113.106.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Sites with sufficient acreage to meet these new set-back
    requirements can only be found miles away from the previously
    convenient downtown locations of our original Embassies. Such
    sites by definition tend to be in remote areas poorly served by
    public transportation. These relocations have resulted in
    decreases in both the ease and frequency of locals visiting
    American officials and vice versa--creating a veritable
    diplomatic lethargy in many locations. Equally impacted has
    been the foot-traffic in IRCs that are located on Embassy
    compounds. At the same time, new security architecture has
    created structures that project a Fortress America environment
    that seems to say anything but ``Welcome'' \14\ which has led
    to a similar inertia in our Public Diplomacy efforts in many of
    these locations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ Visiting an IRC in a new US Embassy was likened to ``going to
    jail or getting into Fort Knox'' according to one interviewee in the
    State Department's 2003 ``Changing Minds Winning Peace: A Strategic
    Direction for U.S. Public Diplomacy in the Arab and Muslim World.''
    http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/24882.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The same Act that creates these new Embassy construction
    standards also requires that, ``In selecting sites for new
    United States diplomatic facilities abroad, all personnel of
    United States Government agencies except those under the
    command of a United States area military commander shall be
    located on the same compound.'' This portion of the Act is
    known as the ``co-location'' requirement and is most often
    cited as the mandate for the closure of stand-alone American
    Centers and their subsequent absorption into Embassy facilities
    as truncated IRCs. There is a waiver for this requirement, but
    it has rarely been adopted and only on a case-by-case basis.
    The only blanket exception is for the Peace Corps, which was
    given a Congressional exemption (see Appendix).
        According to data provided by the State Department, those
    IRCs located off the compound receive significantly more
    visitors than those located on the compound. As the chart below
    illustrates, in the Middle East--perhaps our area most in need
    of outreach--with 12 IRCs on Embassy compounds and 4 located
    off, those off the compound received almost six times as many
    visitors per month (843) as those on the compound (139). IRCs
    in Latin America, East Asia, South Central Asia have even
    greater disparities.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.001

                                THE COMPETITION

                      Where is the best place to learn French?
                        The Alliance Francaise run by the French
                    Embassy.
                      Where is the best place to learn English?
                        The British Council.\15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ Staff conversations with several interlocutors in both Egypt
    and Jordan, all of which produced identical results.

        As American Centers began to disappear, our involvement in
    the direct teaching of English declined at the same time, and
    the British have been more than willing to step into the
    breach. Just as American college graduates are often fiercely
    loyal to their alma maters, graduates of the Alliance or
    British Councils form a bond with those nations that lasts a
    lifetime based on their years of exposure to those countries
    through the educational advantages they gained through study in
    each. Having virtually ceased to offer the same educational
    opportunities, the United States is missing out on creating
    similarly supportive lifelong linkages.
        The British Council has locations in some 110 countries
    with over 7,900 staff. A standard British Council facility will
    have 15 or more classrooms that teach English from the morning
    to night. While some funding comes directly from the British
    government, much of their operating budget must come from fees
    generated locally through teaching as well as providing space
    and proctoring of international testing such as the UK
    equivalent of the U.S. ``TOEFL'' (Test of English as a Foreign
    Language) exam that is required of all potential immigrants to
    Great Britain. Additionally, local multinational firms either
    contract with the Council for special training sessions on
    site, or bring instructors to their institutions. To date,
    tuition for British Council language instruction is considered
    prohibitively expensive by most locals, resulting in a
    clientele of primarily the economic and social elite.
        As with American Centers, British Councils house library
    facilities with computers hooked to the Internet. The Councils
    are modern, spacious, well-staffed and, importantly, open six
    days a week to maximize attendance and outreach opportunities.
    Additionally, and uniquely, they provide a well-stocked section
    of children's books which starts the ``bonding'' experience
    with the UK at an even earlier age. Like France's Alliance
    Francaise centers, British Councils routinely contract with a
    local caterer to establish a cafeteria which not only adds to
    students' convenience, and therefore market share, but in some
    countries provides the only common area where members of
    different social groups can interact without fear of arousing
    the suspicions of local political or religious authorities.
    Both French and British facilities maintain sufficient public
    space to host their own cultural events or art shows--some even
    act as galleries and retain a certain percentage of each sale.
    Their facilities also offer sufficient multipurpose rooms/
    auditoriums for film showings or lectures. Except for the
    oldest and most established of our Centers, American IRCs
    rarely have either large conference rooms or dedicated
    auditoriums due to the constant pressure within Embassies for
    the limited chancery space available.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.014

        British Council Cairo, Egypt--complete with Henry Moore sculpture.

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.015

        Entrance to library portion of the building above, including latest
    pop CDs to draw in local youths.

                              BI-NATIONAL CENTERS

        Latin America is the one exception to British Council
    dominance in English language instruction. In this region, Bi-
    National Centers (BNCs) are considered the premiere institution
    in this field. BNCs are, however, a legacy of earlier, closer
    bilateral engagement between those nations and the United
    States. A typical BNC was very similar in structure to current
    British Councils--English Language programs were used to fund
    programmatic and library activities and were initially U.S.
    government facilities run by USIA officers.
        However, as budgetary constraints took hold and later, as
    USIA was absorbed into the State Department, the U.S.
    government began to disengage from day-to-day operations to the
    point that, now, BNCs are completely independent of U.S.
    operational and budgetary support, oversight, and programmatic
    direction. Few locals, however, seem to realize this and still
    consider BNCs to be part of our Embassies. Fortunately, most
    BNCs are well-funded because of their tuition base, and many
    put the local Department of State IRC to shame.

                         IRANIAN CULTURAL CENTERS \16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        \16\ Iranian Cultural Center information can be found at http://
    culturebase.icro.ir/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Not only are our allies engaged in expansive Public
    Diplomacy efforts. Tellingly, Iran is now conducting an active
    outreach program particularly in those predominantly Muslim
    African and Asian countries. Iranian Cultural Centers offer
    Persian language classes and extensive library resources. These
    Centers serve Iran as a mouthpiece to promote anti-American
    propaganda and have been alleged in local media to be extremist
    recruitment centers and covers for intelligence operatives. In
    over half of the locations listed below, the American Embassy's
    Information Resource Center is either not open to the public or
    open by appointment only, which begs the question, how can we
    possibly expect our ideas to compete in these critical
    marketplaces if the average citizen cannot easily access them?

                            IRANIAN CULTURAL CENTERS
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              South Central
        Asia         Africa        Europe      Middle East        Asia
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bangladesh    Ethiopia      Armenia       Egypt         Afghanistan
    China         Ghana         Austria       Kuwait        India (2
                                                             Centers)
    Indonesia     Kenya         Azerbaijan    Lebanon       Kazakhstan
                                                             Pakistan (8
                                                             Centers)
    Japan         Nigeria       Bosnia &      Qatar
                                 Herzegovina
    Thailand      Sierra Leone  Bulgaria      Saudi Arabia  Sri Lanka
                  South Africa  Croatia       Syria         Tajikistan
                  Sudan         France        Tunis         Turkmenistan
                  Tanzania      Germany       United Arab   Uzbekistan
                                               Emirates
                  Uganda        Greece        Yemen
                  Zambia        Italy
                  Zimbabwe      Russia
                                Serbia
                                Spain
                                Turkey (2
                                 Centers)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       OTHER U.S. GOVERNMENT EFFORTS \17\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        \17\ Further discussions of each of these elements can be found in
    the Appendix.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The United States has not been completely idle in Public
    Diplomacy or in the use of English language instruction to
    further those goals:

             Some 20 Regional English Language Officers are
            sprinkled throughout American Embassies, but travel is
            expensive and many RELOs are too constrained by duties
            at their home embassies to engage in sufficient
            regional visits and thus have limited impact.

             There are currently 136 English Language
            Fellows in 76 countries. Fellows work with specific
            institutions on issues ranging from teacher training
            classes for English instructors to teaching English
            directly. These initiatives provide unprecedented
            pedagogical opportunities for the United States to
            impact Education Ministry policies throughout the
            world, but they are largely invisible to the general
            population of each country.

             The Peace Corps is also heavily involved in
            this area as almost 20% of Peace Corps Volunteers
            (PCVs) have ``Teaching English'' as their primary task
            in the field. PCVs are one of the most effective
            examples of people-to-people Public Diplomacy, and they
            invariably depart after their two years leaving nothing
            but a positive impression. PCVs are, however, are only
            in some 60 countries throughout the world and generally
            located in more remote locations in their countries.

             As part of a reaction to the closing of
            American Centers, the Bush Administration began a
            program of establishing American Corners throughout the
            world. To date there are over 400 Corners in municipal
            buildings, university libraries or other public
            buildings in regions that often have no other U.S.
            diplomatic presence. Books related to the United States
            and computers are supplied to each location, but the
            operation, maintenance and programming offered by each
            Corner is in the hands of a foreign national who is
            neither paid nor overseen by U.S. Embassy officials and
            thus amount to nothing less than an outsourcing of U.S.
            Public Diplomacy. The results in terms of U.S. Public
            Diplomacy are therefore mixed; some Corners are vital
            hubs of information, others dusty relics that offered
            little more than a photo-op for an ambassador at their
            opening. None offers direct access to Americans. While
            appropriate for remote regions where the U.S. has no
            diplomatic presence, Corners are too small to take the
            place of American Centers in a capital city.

            [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.002

             Access Microscholarship grants are awarded
            primarily in the Muslim world to lower-income youth to
            provide access to U.S.-sponsored English classes. The
            classes are run by local contractors and vary according
            to local markets. Some offer not only English lessons
            but research on the United States in English on
            computers at their facilities and emphasize critical
            thinking as part of their curriculum. The intent of the
            scholarships is not only to reach the best and
            brightest of a non-traditional audience, but to provide
            them with sufficient language skills so they may
            successfully compete in the State Department's Youth
            Exchange and Study (YES) program that brings Muslim
            high school age students to the U.S. for a year of
            study. (Prior to Access scholarships, too many YES
            participants were from the elite strata of society,
            most of whom already had exposure to the U.S. through
            tourist visits.) Some 11,000 Access students graduate
            each year, but many are concerned that there is no
            further follow-up programming to keep them engaged.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ See a recent review of the program in the New York Times which
    quotes one 15 year old Egyptian girl: ``We don't want it to be two
    years that just passed and then it's over.'' http://www.nytimes.com/
    2009/02/06/world/middleeast/06cairo.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq= access&st=cse.

        None of these options has the Public Diplomacy impact of a
    stand-alone American Center located in the heart of a nation's
    capital. Such Centers are true flagships not only of American
    outreach but also represent our vital and visible commitment to
    the freedom of information, thought and discussion. As such,
    occasionally, they can even play a direct role in the
    democratic aspirations of a repressed nation.

                          THE AMERICAN CENTER IN BURMA

        A recent article in The New Yorker magazine \19\ provides
    ample evidence of the role a U.S.-run facility in fostering
    democratic ideas and actions. As discussed in his well-
    documented August 25, 2008 piece, journalist George Packer
    describes the vital role the U.S. American Center in Rangoon
    \20\--with its James Baldwin Library and Ella Fitzgerald
    Auditorium--played in the cultural and political lives of the
    Burmese people. Mr. Packer discusses how U.S. diplomatic
    officials used the facility to meet with average citizens to
    discuss everything from literature and performing arts to both
    local and U.S. politics.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/08/25/
    080825fa_fact_packer/.
        \20\ http://burma.usembassy.gov/the_american_center.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Embassy Public Diplomacy personnel who ran the Center
    purchased thousands of new books for the Library, and now have
    over 13,000 titles. As a result of outreach efforts, membership
    for the Center tripled. Book clubs sprang up that enabled older
    Burmese dissidents to discuss their past activities with
    younger activists bent on reform. Operating six days a week
    provided additional opportunities for average citizens to use
    the Center and take part in the discussions. Twelve Internet
    stations offered access to information unavailable to even
    those few non-government Burmese who have a computer at home.
    The Center became one of the main focal points for dissidents
    and organizers of the fall 2007 protests against the Burmese
    military dictatorship.
        Portraying our Centers as potential instruments for
    democratic regime change is perhaps the shortest way to ensure
    their closure, but, to date, the Center in Rangoon remains open
    and active. With well over 10,000 visitors a month--making it
    easily our most visited Public Diplomacy facility in the
    world--our Center in Rangoon demonstrates that if people are
    given the opportunity to access ideas and information about
    democracy, the desire for freedom can thrive in even the most
    repressive of regimes.

                                   CONCLUSION

        There is no question that our standing in the world is
    nowhere near where it should be. This may change in the short
    term as the new administration pursues alternative foreign
    policy practices, but what may prove more difficult to overcome
    in the long term is the lingering suspicion that we no longer
    seek to collaborate and cooperate.
        Such doubts about our motives and intentions peaked just as
    America was seen as closing itself off, which only added to
    this climate of mistrust. It mattered little to the world that
    much of this was the result of terrorist attacks against the
    United States, nor that these attacks produced in our own
    country a similar degree of mistrust towards much of the world.
    This led to a foreign policy environment which seemed to put
    security above all other considerations.
        These security concerns, in turn, brought about the closure
    of many American Centers with English classes terminated and
    truncated remains of their library collections brought inside
    our new Embassy compounds as Information Resources Centers. At
    the same time foreign audiences, used to convenience and the
    freedom of access to American Centers, were loathe to submit to
    what they believe are cumbersome appointment schedule
    requirements, hostile security environments and reduced
    resources. As such, not surprisingly, IRC foot-traffic is
    significantly lower for those situated inside our chancery
    compounds.
        Thus, we have succeeded in sidelining some of the greatest
    assets we have in the field of Public Diplomacy by restricting
    access to the very information and individuals needed to
    educate international audiences about who we really are as a
    nation, rather than the images that our detractors continue to
    use to portray us. It is, indeed, time for us to get back in
    the game.
        A new Public Diplomacy approach designed to re-engage with
    the rest of the world is crucial to improving our standing in
    the world. Care must be taken to ensure that any new programs
    are viewed not as mere short-term public relations campaigns
    designed to ``sell'' the image of the United States.
    Sophisticated foreign publics have become suspicious of recent
    attempts to paint the United States in too rosy a picture--what
    some would argue is a classic case of confusing ``Public
    Relations'' with ``Public Diplomacy.'' True Public Diplomacy
    changes will involve long-range efforts to demonstrate a
    renewed willingness on our part to discuss rather than to
    dictate.
        Reinvigorating the American Centers will go far to
    providing this by offering a more neutral location for our
    diplomats and visiting scholars to begin to repair the breach
    that has been created. Ambassadors continue to hear from
    foreign leaders and opinion makers who fondly recall learning
    about the United States and the world outside in our Centers.
    They equally loudly lament the closure of our facilities and
    ask how we can be surprised by downturns in public opinion
    towards us when their citizens have nowhere to go to obtain
    unbiased information. It is now time to turn this argument on
    its head and work with these same governments to provide us
    with appropriate, secure, and hopefully donated space in order
    to re-establish American Centers in centrally located areas,
    using the literary and staffing resources of the Embassy's IRC
    along with the books and computers from any existing American
    Corner in that capital to form the nucleus of the new American
    Center's offerings.
        In the years that have elapsed since the tragic bombings of
    our Embassies, we have developed the security technologies
    needed to keep our diplomats safe and must ensure as many
    measures as possible are properly in place before moving
    forward. To assist in this, Congress needs to provide the State
    Department a clear signal of support for such actions modeled
    on the legislation (see Appendix) used to allow the Peace Corps
    to maintain its offices off U.S. Embassy compounds.
        Equally important in these tight budget times, the
    Department should immediately begin to explore how to
    recommence the teaching of English in order to create the
    needed ``pull'' to bring skeptics of the United States into the
    Centers as well as use the revenues generated to partially
    offset operating costs. English has become the common language
    of not only commerce, but science, industry, and most
    importantly--the Internet. Teaching English will not only
    provide a marketable skill required for advancement in our
    international marketplace, but it will also allow us to re-
    introduce America and American values to much of a world that
    still views us with suspicion.
        None of this offers a quick-fix; rather it portends a long-
    term reorientation of Public Diplomacy requiring years of
    dedication, funding and oversight. But if the United States
    hopes to regain the trust of the world as the leader in freedom
    of information, education excellence, and democratic values,
    such a commitment is essential.

                                  Site Visits

                                     EGYPT

        The United States has two major Public Diplomacy resources
    in Egypt, the free-standing American Center in Alexandria and
    the IRC inside the Embassy in Cairo.
        Of the two, the American Center is by far the more
    impressive for reasons of access, scale, programming space, and
    overall facilities. A former American Consulate, the Center in
    Alexandria is in some respects a true jewel, with a library
    stocked with books in English and Arabic as well as a computer
    center with a dozen stations used for Internet research.
    English instruction is provided by the NGO AmidEast in
    classrooms situated on third floor. Visitors to the Center are
    screened by local guards first at the gate and then through a
    second metal detector at the door of the Center; however,
    AmidEast students are directed up an exterior staircase to the
    third floor and never enter the Center.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.016

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.017

        Interior views of the exceptional American Center in Alexandria.

        Embassy Cairo's IRC is housed inside our well-guarded
    Embassy which is part of a diplomatic enclave that is blocked
    off to vehicular traffic. Walk-ins are welcome during the
    Embassy workweek Sunday thru Thursday 10 am-4 pm, with late
    closing at 7 pm on Mondays and Wednesdays. The IRC is well
    stocked with books on the United States and has an extensive
    audio and visual library for use on site but acknowledges that
    its location on the compound serves as deterrence to attracting
    more visitors. Data provided by the Department of State notes
    that the American Center in Alexandria, a city of some 4
    million, receives on average 1,600 visitors a month while
    Cairo--a city of at least twice that size--receives less than
    an 1,000. Embassy officials who recognize the need to provide a
    more accessible outreach program have begun to look at various
    properties outside the compound but still within the enclave
    that provide both appropriate space and security.

                                     JORDAN

        Our embassy in Amman boasts what could easily be mistaken
    for an American Center. The Embassy's American Language Center
    (ALC) has been in operation since 1989. It currently teaches
    some 2,400 students per year in 14 classrooms, but unlike the
    American Center in Alexandria which out-sources the teaching to
    a contractor--AmidEast--ALC instructors are contracted directly
    by the Embassy, thus saving on the ``middle man'' overhead
    costs implicit in all sub-contracting arrangement.
        The ALC \21\ is a stand-alone building located off a major
    street in downtown Amman, and students are screened twice
    before entering. As pictured below, there is no American flag
    on the front nor a great seal of the Department of State; in
    fact the word ``American'' is not even displayed, only the
    initials ``ALC.'' Also illustrated below is the excellent
    library located in the basement of the building which houses
    several thousand volumes, computer terminals, serves as a Wi-Fi
    hot-spot, and boasts a flat screen TV with Digital Video
    Conference capability. This modern, state-of-the-art facility,
    however, is virtually unused as Embassy security officials will
    not allow general public access; only students registered with
    the ALC may use the facility.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ http://www.alc.edu.jo/web/.

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.019

        The top photo above shows the very discreet American Language
    Center (ALC); its completely empty and unused library is shown in the
    photo below it.

                                     MEXICO

        The Ben Franklin Library \22\ has been in operation in
    downtown Mexico City since 1942 and is a mainstay of our Public
    Diplomacy efforts. In addition to providing an impressive
    collection of 23,000 books on America, U.S. law and economics
    (primarily in English but also Spanish), it boasts 130
    periodicals and over 600 videos on American history and
    culture. It is one of the better-known landmarks in the city
    and projects an impressive image of the United States. A
    significant draw to the library is the ``Education USA'' \23\
    section that counsels Mexican students on selecting and
    applying to American universities. This service is a function
    of the Department of State and is contracted out to different
    NGOs; the Institute of International Education runs the program
    in Mexico while AmidEast does so in Egypt. Some contend that
    this represents another example of ``out-sourcing'' Public
    Diplomacy, while others argue that such activities are
    peripheral activities that would distract or dilute PD
    officers' attention from more ``core'' programmatic activities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \22\ http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/bbf/biblioteca.htm.
        \23\ http://www.educationusa.state.gov/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        An active conference schedule included discussions of
    recently published books, films about American history and
    lectures on the American political process and the recent
    election. The library itself occupies the ground floor of a
    building shared with the U.S. Foreign Commercial Service on a
    busy downtown street. The State Department estimates that some
    1,200 users visit the library every month.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.020

        View of the landmark Ben Franklin Library in Mexico City before
    opening hours.

                                 SANTO DOMINGO

        The Dominican Republic presents a more typical situation in
    the Western Hemisphere. The Embassy runs a small IRC known as
    the ``Ben Franklin Center,'' which offers limited resources
    (some 2,400 titles) and is housed in a single room in a small,
    off the beaten path, bungalow that serves as the Embassy's
    Public Affairs Section. To address their small size, the staff
    has aggressively compiled an impressive list of on-line
    databases \24\ that members of the IRC--which have included
    Dominican Presidents and Cabinet members--use with great
    frequency. The push to more and more on-line services is
    understandable as overall costs are minimal when compared to
    publications. However, from a Public Diplomacy perspective,
    this trend is troubling. If true Public Diplomacy work most
    effectively involves interactions between Americans and foreign
    nationals, then relegating ``contact'' to a mere Internet
    portal to U.S. government documents, however useful, eliminates
    the ``public'' in Public Diplomacy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \24\ http://www.usemb.gov.do/IRC/IRCindex.htm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        At the same time, the IRC must compete with Santo Domingo's
    well-established Bi-National Center \25\ which offers both a
    private K-12 school as well as separate English classes for
    ages 5 to adult. The BNC's library offers a collection of
    13,000 titles in English and Spanish, and boasts a gallery and
    auditorium that seats 300. The BNC is located on a major
    thoroughfare and a few blocks from a major university.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \25\ http://www.dominicoamericano.edu.do/english/index.asp.

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.022

        In the first photo above, Embassy Santo Domingo IRC's library of
    2,400 titles; in the bottom photo, a small portion of Santo Domingo's
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Bi-national Center's 13,000 titles.

        An excellent example of low-cost, high impact Public
    Diplomacy is the Public Affairs Section's partnership with the
    National Museum of Natural History.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.023

        The ViewSpace exhibit in Santo Domingo's Museum of Natural History.
    The flat-screen TV in the darkened room depicts photos and video of
    outer space courtesy of NASA. Underneath the NASA insignia a sign in
    Spanish reads ``Courtesy of the Franklin Center of the United States
    Embassy.''

        Using a service provided by NASA and for less than $200 a
    year, the Embassy provides a ``ViewSpace'' exhibit which offers
    museum visitors a constant stream of recent and historic images
    from American space missions and from satellites such as the
    Hubble Space Telescope. This demonstration of U.S. technology,
    scientific education and space exploration is one of the most
    popular exhibits in the museum.
                                    APPENDIX

                                American Corners

        In part to counter the restricted access of IRCs located on
    Embassy compounds, the Bush Administration established the
    ``American Corners'' program. Corners are created in
    partnership with local municipalities or universities to
    provide space, sometimes literally a corner in a room, in which
    the Embassy supplies, at a start-up cost of $35,000, half a
    dozen computers connected to the Internet and a collection of
    some 800 books. Approximately a third of the titles are
    American fiction with the rest distributed between reference,
    How-To-For-Dummies type guidebooks, biographies, and English
    teaching material.
        If viewed not as a substitute for a formal American Center
    facility but rather as a supplement, the Corners do in fact
    provide Public Diplomacy platforms for U.S. programming to have
    a home--particularly in the more remote areas of larger
    countries where the U.S. lacks any formal diplomatic facility.
    For example in Russia, outside of our Embassy in Moscow, the
    U.S. has consulates in only St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg, and
    Vladivostok, but there are 33 Corners throughout the country.
    Belarus has 12 Corners; Indonesia has 11 Corners, the
    Philippines--14, Afghanistan--7.
        However, because the Corners are not staffed with nor
    overseen by U.S. officials, they lack the same Public Diplomacy
    impact of a dedicated, stand-alone brick and mortar facility in
    a country's capital. Some are excellent projections of American
    Public Diplomacy with dedicated and motivated staffs, others,
    can wither on the vine depending on the level of local interest
    and resources in providing staff willing to push the
    programming boundaries that may be at odds with officials in
    more remote locations. Again, without direct Embassy oversight
    and financial backing, Corners can be too inconsistent in their
    operations. As of February 2009, American Corners can be found
    in the following 414 locations.

                                AMERICAN CORNERS
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Country                                City
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       AFRICA: 83 In Operation 6 Underway
    Angola...................................  Luanda
    Benin....................................  Abomey-Calavi
    Benin....................................  Grand-Popo
    Benin....................................  Parakou
    Benin....................................  Porto-Novo
    Botswana.................................  Gaborone
    Burkina Faso.............................  Bobo-Dioulasso
    Burkina Faso.............................  Fada N'gourma
    Burkina Faso.............................  Zorgho
    Cameroon.................................  Bertoua
    Cameroon.................................  Buea
    Cameroon.................................  Garoua
    Cape Verde...............................  Fogo Island
    Comoros..................................  Moroni
    Congo....................................  Pointe-Noire
    Democratic Republic Congo................  Kinshasa
    Democratic Republic Congo................  Lumbumbashi
    Cote d'lvoire............................  Abidjan
    Cote d'lvoire............................  Tiassale
    Cote d'lvoire............................  Yamoussoukro
    Equatorial Guinea........................  Bata (Underway)
    Equatorial Guinea........................  Malabo (Underway)
    Eritrea..................................  Dekemhare
    Eritrea..................................  Keren
    Eritrea..................................  Massawa
    Ethiopia.................................  Bahir Dar
    Ethiopia.................................  Dire Dawa
    Ethiopia.................................  Harar
    Ethiopia.................................  Jimma
    Gambia, The..............................  Banjul
    Ghana....................................  Accra
    Ghana....................................  Tamale
    Guinea...................................  Kankan
    Kenya....................................  Lamu
    Kenya....................................  Mombasa
    Kenya....................................  Nairobi (Underway)
    Liberia..................................  Buchanan
    Liberia..................................  Kakata
    Liberia..................................  Monrovia
    Liberia..................................  Virginia Township
    Liberia..................................  Zwedru
    Madagascar...............................  Antananarivo
    Madagascar...............................  Antsiranana
    Madagascar...............................  Mahajanga (Underway)
    Malawi...................................  Blantyre
    Malawi...................................  Mzuzu
    Malawi...................................  Zomba
    Mali.....................................  Gao
    Mauritania...............................  Nouakchott
    Mauritania...............................  Nouakchott (ISERI)
    Mozambique...............................  Maputo
    Mozambique...............................  Nampula
    Namibia..................................  Keetmanshoop
    Namibia..................................  Oshakati (MOU not renewed in
                                                2008)
    Namibia..................................  Walvis Bay
    Niger....................................  Agadez
    Niger....................................  Maradi
    Niger....................................  Zinder
    Nigeria..................................  Abeokuta
    Nigeria..................................  Abuja
    Nigeria..................................  Bauchi
    Nigeria..................................  Calabar
    Nigeria..................................  Enugu
    Nigeria..................................  Ibadan
    Nigeria..................................  Jos
    Nigeria..................................  Kaduna
    Nigeria..................................  Kano
    Nigeria..................................  Maiduguri
    Nigeria..................................  Port Harcourt
    Nigeria..................................  Sokoto
    Rwanda...................................  Butare
    Rwanda...................................  Kigali
    Rwanda...................................  Kigali
    Senegal..................................  Louga
    Senegal..................................  Ziguinchor
    Somalia..................................  Mogadishu (Underway)
    Sierra Leone.............................  Bo
    South Africa.............................  Bloemfontain
    South Africa.............................  Pietermaritzburg
    Sudan....................................  Juba (Underway)
    Swaziland................................  Nhlangano
    Tanzania.................................  Pemba
    Tanzania.................................  Zanzibar
    Togo.....................................  Lome
    Uganda...................................  Fort Portal
    Uganda...................................  Mbale
    Zambia...................................  Kitwe
    Zimbabwe.................................  Bulawayo
    Zimbabwe.................................  Mutare

                           EAST ASIA: 59 In Operation

    Burma....................................  Rangoon
    Cambodia.................................  Battambang
    Cambodian................................  Kampong Cham Town
    Cambodia.................................  Phnom Penh
    Fiji.....................................  Lautoka
    Hong Kong................................  Macau, Hong Kong
    Indonesia................................  Bandung
    Indonesia................................  Depok
    Indonesia................................  Jakarta
    Indonesia................................  Makassar
    Indonesia................................  Malang
    Indonesia................................  Medan (at IAIN)
    Indonesia................................  Medan (at USU)
    Indonesia................................  Semarang
    Indonesia................................  Surabaya
    Indonesia................................  Yogyakarta (at UGM)
    Indonesia................................  Yogyakarta (at UMY)
    Japan....................................  Nago, Okinawa
    Japan....................................  Urasoe, Okinawa
    Laos.....................................  Luang Prabang
    Laos.....................................  Vientiane
    Malaysia.................................  Alor Setar, Kedah
    Malaysia.................................  Kota Bahru
    Malaysia.................................  Kuala Lumpur
    Malaysia.................................  Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu
    Malaysia.................................  Melaka
    Malaysia.................................  Sabah
    Malaysia.................................  Sarawak
    Mongolia.................................  Khovd
    Mongolia.................................  Ulaanbaatar
    Philippines..............................  Bacolod City
    Philippines..............................  Baguio
    Philippines..............................  Batac
    Philippines..............................  Cagayan De Oro
    Philippines..............................  Cebu
    Philippines..............................  Cotabato
    Philippines..............................  Davao City
    Philippines..............................  Dumaguete
    Philippines..............................  Iloilo City
    Philippines..............................  Jolo
    Philippines..............................  Manila
    Philippines..............................  Marawi City
    Philippines..............................  Tawi-Tawi
    Philippines..............................  Zamboanga
    Singapore................................  Singapore
    Singapore................................  Singapore
    Singapore................................  Singapore
    South Korea..............................  Busan
    South Korea..............................  Daegu
    South Korea..............................  Gwangju
    Taiwan...................................  Taichung
    Thailand.................................  Chiang Mai
    Thailand.................................  Khon Kaen
    Thailand.................................  Nakhon Si Thammarat
    Thailand.................................  Pattani
    Thailand.................................  Yala
    Vietnam..................................  Can Tho
    Vietnam..................................  Danang
    Vietnam..................................  Haiphong

                      EUROPE: 166 in Operation: 1 Underway

    Albania..................................  Kukes
    Albania..................................  Tirana
    Albania..................................  Vlora
    Armenia..................................  Gyumri
    Armenia..................................  Kapan
    Armenia..................................  Vanadzor
    Armenia..................................  Yerevan
    Austria..................................  Innsbruck
    Azerbaijan...............................  Baku
    Azerbaijan...............................  Ganja
    Azerbaijan...............................  Khachmaz
    Azerbaijan...............................  Kurdemir
    Azerbaijan...............................  Lenkoran
    Azerbaijan...............................  Salyan
    Belarus..................................  Baranovichi
    Belarus..................................  Bobruisk
    Belarus..................................  Brest
    Belarus..................................  Gomel
    Belarus..................................  Grodno
    Belarus..................................  Minsk
    Belarus..................................  Mogilev
    Belarus..................................  Molodechno
    Belarus..................................  Mozyr
    Belarus..................................  Pinsk
    Belarus..................................  Polotsk
    Belarus..................................  Vitebsk
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Banja Luka
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Bihac
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Doboj
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Mostar
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Sarajevo
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Tuzla
    Bosnia & Herzegovina.....................  Zenica
    Bulgaria.................................  Sofia
    Bulgaria.................................  Varna
    Bulgaria.................................  Veliko Turnovo
    Croatia..................................  Osijek
    Croatia..................................  Rijeka
    Croatia..................................  Zadar
    Croatia..................................  Zagreb
    Cyprus...................................  Famagusta
    Cyprus...................................  Nicosia
    Czech Republic...........................  Brno
    Czech Republic...........................  Pilzen
    Denmark (Greenland)......................  Nuuk
    Estonia..................................  Kuressaaare
    Estonia..................................  Narva
    Estonia..................................  Viljandi
    Georgia..................................  Akhaltsikhe
    Georgia..................................  Batumi
    Georgia..................................  Gori
    Georgia..................................  Khashuri
    Georgia..................................  Rustavi
    Georgia..................................  Tblisi (at State Univ.)
    Georgia..................................  Tblisi
    Georgia..................................  Telavi
    Georgia..................................  Zugdidi
    Greece...................................  Athens
    Greece...................................  Corfu
    Greece...................................  Nea Philadelphia
    Greece...................................  Sparta
    Greece...................................  Veroia
    Greece...................................  Xanthi
    Hungary..................................  Debrecen
    Hungary..................................  Pecs
    Hungary..................................  Veszprem
    Italy....................................  Trieste
    Kosovo...................................  Mitrovica
    Kosovo...................................  Pristina
    Kosovo...................................  Prizren
    Latvia...................................  Daugavpils
    Latvia...................................  Liepaja
    Lithuania................................  Siauliai
    Macedonia................................  Bitola
    Macedonia................................  Skopje
    Macedonia................................  Tetovo
    Moldova..................................  Balti
    Moldova..................................  Ceadir Lunga
    Moldova..................................  Ungheni
    Montenegro...............................  Podgorica
    Norway...................................  Stavanger
    Poland...................................  Gdansk (Underway)
    Poland...................................  Lodz
    Poland...................................  Wroclaw
    Romania..................................  Bacau
    Romania..................................  Baia Mare
    Romania..................................  Bucharest
    Romania..................................  Cluj Napoca
    Romania..................................  Constanta
    Romania..................................  Craiova
    Romania..................................  Iasi
    Romania..................................   Timosoara
    Russia...................................   Arkhangelsk
    Russia...................................   Bryansk
    Russia...................................   Chelyabinsk
    Russia...................................   Irkutsk
    Russia...................................   Kaliningrad
    Russia...................................   Kazan
    Russia...................................   Khabarovsk
    Russia...................................   Moscow (Library of Foreign
                                                Literature)
    Russia...................................   Moscow (Parliamentary
                                                Library)
    Russia...................................  Moscow (State Children's
                                                Library)
    Russia...................................   Murmansk
    Russia...................................   Nizhniy Novgorod
    Russia...................................   Novgorod Velikiy
    Russia...................................   Novosibirsk
    Russia...................................   Omsk
    Russia...................................   Perm
    Russia...................................   Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy
    Russia...................................   Petrozavodsk
    Russia...................................   Pskov
    Russia...................................   Rostov-on-Don
    Russia...................................   Samara
    Russia...................................   Saratov
    Russia...................................   St. Petersburg (City
                                                Library)
    Russia...................................   St. Petersburg (Youth
                                                Library)
    Russia...................................   Togliatti
    Russia...................................   Tomsk
    Russia...................................   Tyumen
    Russia...................................   Ufa
    Russia...................................   Vladivostok
    Russia...................................   Volgograd
    Russia...................................   Vologda
    Russia...................................   Yekaterinburg
    Russia...................................   Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk
    Serbia...................................   Belgrade
    Serbia...................................   Bujanovac
    Serbia...................................   Kragujevac
    Serbia...................................   Nis
    Serbia...................................   Novi Sad
    Serbia...................................   Subotica
    Serbia...................................   Vranje
    Slovakia.................................  Banska Bystrica
    Slovakia.................................   Bratislava
    Slovakia.................................   Kosice
    Slovenia.................................   Koper
    Turkey...................................  Bursa
    Turkey...................................   Gaziantep
    Turkey...................................   Izmir
    Turkey...................................   Kayseri
    Ukraine..................................  Chernihiv
    Ukraine..................................  Chernivtsi
    Ukraine..................................  Dnipropetrovsk
    Ukraine..................................  Donetsk
    Ukraine..................................  Ivano-Frankivsk
    Ukraine..................................  Kharkiv
    Ukraine..................................  Kherson (Children's Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Kherson (Research Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Kirovohrad
    Ukraine..................................  Kyiv (Mohyla Academy)
    Ukraine..................................  Kyiv (Public Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Luhansk
    Ukraine..................................  Lutsk
    Ukraine..................................  Lviv
    Ukraine..................................  Mykolaiv (Children's Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Mykolaiv (Research Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Odessa
    Ukraine..................................  Poltava
    Ukraine..................................  Rivne
    Ukraine..................................  Sevastopol
    Ukraine..................................  Simferopol
    Ukraine..................................  Sumy
    Ukraine..................................  Ternopil (Research Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Ternopil (Youth Library)
    Ukraine..................................  Uzhgorod
    Ukraine..................................  Vinnytsya
    Ukraine..................................  Zhytomyr

                   LATIN AMERICA: 22 in Operation; 2 Underway

    Brazil...................................   Brasilia
    Brazil...................................   Fortaleza
    Brazil...................................   Salvador, Bahia
    Chile....................................  Arica
    Chile....................................   Punta Arenas
    Chile....................................   Santiago (at University)
    Chile....................................   Santiago (University of
                                                Talca)
    Chile....................................   Valdivia
    Costa Rica...............................  Limon
    Ecuador..................................   Quito
    Haiti....................................  Port-au-Prince (Underway)
    Honduras.................................   Puerto Lempira
    Honduras.................................   Tegucigalpa
    Nicaragua................................  Managua
    Panama...................................  Panama City
    Paraguay.................................  Asuncion
    Suriname.................................   Paramaribo
    Trinidad and Tobago......................   Scarborough
    Venezuela................................   Barquisimeto
    Venezuela................................   La Asuncion
    Venezuela................................   Lecheria
    Venezuela................................   Maracay
    Venezuela................................   Maturin
    Venezuela................................   Valera (Underway)

                    MIDDLE EAST: 39 in Operation; 3 Underway

    Algeria..................................   Algiers
    Algeria..................................   Constantine (Underway)
    Algeria..................................   Oran (Underway)
    Iraq.....................................   6 ACs
    Israel...................................   Beersheva
    Israel...................................   Karmiel
    Israel...................................   Nazareth (Underway)
    Israel...................................   Yaffo
    Jordan...................................  Amman
    Jordan...................................  Zarqa
    Kuwait...................................  Kuwait City (at University)
    Kuwait...................................   Kuwait City (Gulf
                                                University)
    Kuwait...................................   Kuwait City (American
                                                University)
    Lebanon..................................   Baakleen
    Lebanon..................................   Nabatiyeh
    Lebanon..................................   Rashaya
    Lebanon..................................   Zahle
    Morocco..................................   Marrakech
    Morocco..................................   Oujda
    Oman.....................................   Bureimi
    Oman.....................................   Muscat (College of Bus &
                                                Sci)
    Oman.....................................   Muscat (College of
                                                Technology)
    Oman.....................................  Rustaq
    Oman.....................................   Salalah
    Oman.....................................   Sohar
    Palestinian Territories..................   Gaza City
    Palestinian Territories..................  Jericho
    Qatar....................................   Doha
    Saudi Arabia.............................  Jeddah
    Syria....................................   Damascus
    Syria....................................   Suweida
    Tunisia..................................   Tunis
    United Arab Emirates.....................   Al Ain
    United Arab Emirates.....................  Fujairah
    Yemen....................................   Dhamar
    Yemen....................................   Hadhramout
    Yemen....................................   Sana'a

                 4SOUTH CENTRAL ASIA: 45 in Operation 4 Underway

    Afghanistan..............................  Bamyan
    Afghanistan..............................  Gandez (Underway)
    Afghanistan..............................  Herat
    Afghanistan..............................  Jalalabad
    Afghanistan..............................  Kabul (at University)
    Afghanistan..............................  Kabul (Institute of
                                                Diplomacy)
    Afghanistan..............................  Khost (Underway)
    Afghanistan..............................  Kunduz (Underway)
    Afghanistan..............................  Mazar-E-Sharif
    Bangladesh...............................  Chittagong
    Bangladesh...............................  Jessore
    Bangladesh...............................  Sylhet
    India....................................  Ahmedabad
    India....................................  Bhubaneswar
    India....................................  Bangalore
    India....................................  Chandigarh
    India....................................  Patna, Bihar
    Kazakhstan...............................  Aktobe
    Kazakhstan...............................  Almaty
    Kazakhstan...............................  Atyrau
    Kazakhstan...............................  Karaganda
    Kazakhstan...............................  Kostanai
    Kazakhstan...............................  Petropavlovsk
    Kazakhstan...............................  Shymkent
    Kazakhstan...............................  Uralsk
    Kazakhstan...............................  Ust'-Kamenogorsk
    Kyrgyzstan...............................  Batken
    Kyrgyzstan...............................  Jalalabat
    Kyrgyzstan...............................  Kant
    Kyrgyzstan...............................  Karakol
    Kyrgyzstan...............................  Talas
    Maldives.................................  Male'
    Nepal....................................  Bhairahawa
    Nepal....................................  Biratnagar
    Nepal....................................  Birgunj
    Nepal....................................  Pokhara
    Pakistan.................................  Islamabad
    Pakistan.................................  Karachi
    Pakistan.................................  Lahore (Underway)
    Pakistan.................................  Muzaffarabad
    Pakistan.................................  Peshawar
    Sri Lanka................................  Kandy
    Sri Lanka................................  Oluvil
    Tajikistan...............................  Dushanbe
    Tajikistan...............................  Khujand
    Tajikistan...............................  Kulob
    Turkmenistan.............................  Dashoguz
    Turkmenistan.............................  Mary
    Turkmenistan.............................  Turkmenabat
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Arabic Book Translation Program

              ``The figures for translated books are also
            discouraging. The Arab world translates about 330 books
            annually, one fifth of the number that Greece
            translates. The cumulative total of translated books
            since the Caliph Maa'moun's time (the ninth century) is
            about 100,000, almost the average that Spain translates
            in one year.'' (UNDP 2002 Arab Human Development Report
            \26\)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \26\ Found on page 78 of http://www.nakbaonline.org/download/UNDP/
    EnglishVersion/Ar-Human-Dev-2002.pdf.

        The 2003 Congressionally-mandated report ``Changing Minds
    and Winning Peace--A New Direction for U.S. Public Diplomacy in
    the Arab and Muslim World'' \27\ referenced the UNDP's
    translation statistics and called for a massive increase in our
    translation efforts--up to 1,000 titles a year. This effort was
    viewed as part of an ``American Knowledge Library Initiative''
    that would locate the translations in American Corners and
    local libraries throughout the Muslim world; however, funding
    constraints have prevented any such a large-scale Initiative.
    Instead, the U.S. government has relied on translation programs
    run out of the U.S. Embassies in Cairo, Egypt and Amman,
    Jordan.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \27\ The so-called ``Djerejian Report'' after the former U.S.
    Ambassador who chaired the effort http://www.state.gov/documents/
    organization/24882.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Cairo Arabic Book Program \28\ has existed at the U.S
    Embassy in Cairo since the 1950s and currently translates 8-10
    books a year using a budget of approximately $50,000 from the
    International Information Programs (IIP) section of the bureau
    of Educational and Cultural Affairs. This funding covers the
    costs of copyrights fees, translation and purchased copies.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \28\ A list of books translated by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo:
    http://cairo.usembassy.gov/pa/rbo.htm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Program works with local publishers to select American
    books across a broad range of topics that are of mutual
    interest. Some 3,000 copies per title are published, of which
    the Program purchases 1,000-1,500 copies for local and regional
    distribution while the publisher sells the remaining copies in
    commercial outlets and regional book fairs. The publisher
    submits a draft of the translation which is reviewed by
    translators contracted by the Embassy. The Program and the
    Embassy's IRC send free copies of the books to public and
    university libraries, key contacts, NGOs, and other
    institutions. The Program does not regularly provide copies to
    local school libraries; however, when the Ambassador or other
    high level dignitaries visit a school, they take a quantity of
    age-appropriate books. Until two years ago the program received
    an extra $7,500 for shipping fees but currently regional posts
    either fully pay or split the shipping fees with the Program.
    This loss of shipping funds affects some posts' ability to
    procure books.
        The program sends an annual e-mail within the mission and
    to regional posts to solicit suggestions for new titles. The e-
    mail also contains a tentative list of titles compiled by the
    program officers asking for further recommendation or comments.
    Based on these recommendations the Public Affairs Officer and
    Cultural Affairs Officer and their staffs meet to decide on the
    list of titles to be translated. After securing necessary
    copyrights, the program and the local publisher agree to go
    ahead on the translation of the book. The process of acquiring
    the copyrights, translating, editing and printing one book
    takes between 8-18 months.
        The translation program run by the U.S. Embassy in Amman,
    Jordan \29\ is very similar in scope and $50,000 budget, but
    with slightly smaller print runs of some six books annually,
    usually printed in Amman or Beirut. The publisher sells 1,750
    copies of the 2,500 printed to the public throughout its retail
    shops in the region and the regional and international book
    fairs they attend. 750 copies are retained by the embassy for
    its own distribution to universities, schools, local
    institutions, American Corners and posts in the region.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \29\ A list of books translated by the U.S. Embassy in Amman:
    http://jordan.usembassy.gov/abp_titles_in_stock.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Cairo has organized Digital Video Conferences for Joyce
    Hanson, author of the Captive and collaborated with Embassy
    Amman to program Amy Tan, the author of the Joy Luck Club.
    Cairo also brought the following authors for speaking events in
    Egypt: Walter Russell Mead, author of Special Providence: How
    American Foreign Policy Has Changed the World, Robert Putnam,
    author of Making Democracy Work, and Geneive Abdo, author of
    Mecca and Main Street whose Arabic version is due shortly.
    Embassy Amman also hosted a DVC with Mohamed Nimer, author of
    the book Nonviolence and Peace Building in Islam.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.024

         here 47261A.024U.S. government translations of Walter Isaacson's
    2003 biography of Benjamin Franklin and The Future of Freedom by Fareed
    Zakaria from the American Center library in Alexandria, Egypt.

                      English Language Fellow Program \30\

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \30\ According to the State Department, 136 English Language
    Fellows are currently assigned as follows: Africa: 17; East Asia: 28;
    Europe: 33; Middle East 21; South Central Asia: 13; Latin America: 24.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The State Department's bureau of Educational and Cultural
    Affairs (ECA) English Language Fellow Program currently
    supports 136 U.S. fellows on exchanges in 76 counties
    worldwide. The EL Fellow Program provides foreign academic
    institutions with American professional expertise in Teaching
    English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) by sending highly trained
    American educators abroad on ten-month fellowships. The program
    also affords American TEFL professionals a unique professional
    development opportunity that contributes to their knowledge as
    educators upon their return to the U.S. Fellows work on
    projects and provide training in areas such as the English
    Access Microscholarship Program, TEFL classroom teaching,
    teacher training, in-service and pre-service training,
    curriculum development, workshop and seminar design, testing,
    program evaluation, needs assessment, and English for Specific
    Purposes.
        If the goal is to maximize the number of English speakers
    throughout the world, then this is an excellent program as the
    multiplier effect of American education specialists assisting
    in the preparation of another country's English curriculum
    should result in vastly more students learning English, at much
    less cost, than our Access scholarships. The long-term public
    diplomacy value for such efforts, however, is debatable. Some
    say that the teachers who receive the attention, skills,
    materials and respect from their American counterparts will
    result in these same teachers acting as good-will ambassadors
    for the United States for years to come, with the number of
    students they are able to influence and reach vastly outpacing
    direct, U.S.-sponsored classes.
        Others note that the Program amounts to almost
    ``invisible'' Public Diplomacy as few in the public ever hear
    of these efforts due to the fact that the fellows work from
    within foreign educational systems. If a core component of
    public diplomacy is for a nation to ``get the credit'' for its
    efforts, this may not be the most effective program, but as a
    low-cost pedagogical tool, it is invaluable.

                       Regional English Language Offices

        In addition to English Language Fellows, the Department of
    State also supports a network of 18 Regional English Language
    Offices (RELOs) located in Embassies around the world that
    operate under the supervision of ECA's Office of English
    Language Programs in Washington. Each RELO is a specialist
    Foreign Service Officer with an advanced degree in Teaching
    English as a Foreign Language (TEFL)--many, in fact are former
    English Language Fellows.
        In collaboration with U.S. Embassies, RELOs oversee the
    English Access Microscholarship Program, organize teacher
    training seminars and workshops; consult with host-country
    ministry, university, and teacher-training officials. They also
    oversee ECA's other English language activities, such as the
    English Language Specialists, English Language Fellow, and E-
    Teacher Scholarship Programs. As the attached table of Regional
    English Language Offices and the countries they cover suggests,
    RELOs are over-burdened in the extreme.

                        REGIONAL ENGLISH LANGUAGE OFFICES
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Region                     Post          Countries Covered
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Africa........................  Dakar............  Benin, Burkina-Faso,
                                                        Cameroon, Republic
                                                        of Cape Verde,
                                                        Central African
                                                        Republic, Chad, Cote
                                                        D'Ivoire, Equatorial
                                                        Guinea, Gabon,
                                                        Gambia, Ghana,
                                                        Guinea, Guinea-
                                                        Bissau, Liberia,
                                                        Mali, Mauritania,
                                                        Niger, Nigeria, Sao
                                                        Tome and Principe,
                                                        Senegal, Sierra
                                                        Leone, Togo
                                    Pretoria.........  Angola, Botswana,
                                                        Burundi, Comoros,
                                                        Democratic Republic
                                                        of Congo, Republic
                                                        of Congo, Republic
                                                        of Djibouti,
                                                        Eritrea, Ethiopia,
                                                        Kenya, Lesotho,
                                                        Madagascar, Malawi,
                                                        Mauritius,
                                                        Mozambique, Namibia,
                                                        Rwanda, Seychelles,
                                                        Somalia, Republic of
                                                        South Africa,
                                                        Swaziland, Tanzania,
                                                        Uganda, Zambia,
                                                        Zimbabwe
                                   -----------------------------------------
    East Asia.....................  Beijing..........  People's Republic of
                                                        China, Hong Kong,
                                                        Mongolia
                                    Bangkok..........  Burma, Cambodia,
                                                        Laos, Taiwan,
                                                        Thailand, Vietnam
                                   -----------------------------------------
                                    Jakarta..........  Brunei, Fiji,
                                                        Indonesia, Japan,
                                                        Korea, Malaysia,
                                                        Papua New Guinea,
                                                        Philippines,
                                                        Singapore, Timor-
                                                        Leste
                                   -----------------------------------------
    Europe........................  Ankara...........  Turkey
                                    Budapest.........  Albania, Bosnia and
                                                        Herzegovina,
                                                        Bulgaria, Croatia,
                                                        Czech Republic,
                                                        Estonia, Hungary,
                                                        Kosovo, Latvia,
                                                        Lithuania,
                                                        Macedonia,
                                                        Montenegro, Poland,
                                                        Romania, Serbia,
                                                        Slovakia, Slovenia
                                    Kyiv.............  Armenia, Azerbaijan,
                                                        Republic of Belarus,
                                                        Georgia, Moldova,
                                                        Ukraine
                                    Moscow...........  Russia
                                   -----------------------------------------
    Middle East...................  Amman............  Iraq, Israel, Jordan,
                                                        Lebanon, Syria, West
                                                        Bank/Gaza
                                    Cairo............  Egypt, Saudi Arabia,
                                                        Sudan, Yemen
                                    Manama...........  Bahrain, State of
                                                        Kuwait, State of
                                                        Oman, Qatar, United
                                                        Arab Emirates
                                    Rabat............  Algeria, Libya,
                                                        Morocco, Tunisia
                                   -----------------------------------------
    South Central Asia............  New Delhi........  Afghanistan,
                                                        Bangladesh, Bhutan,
                                                        India, Maldives,
                                                        Nepal, Sri Lanka,
                                                        Pakistan
                                    Astana...........  Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz
                                                        Republic,
                                                        Tajikistan,
                                                        Turkmenistan,
                                                        Uzbekistan
                                   -----------------------------------------
    Latin America.................  Mexico City......  Belize, Costa Rica,
                                                        El Salvador,
                                                        Guatemala, Honduras,
                                                        Mexico, Nicaragua,
                                                        Panama
                                    Lima.............  Bolivia, Colombia,
                                                        Ecuador, Peru,
                                                        Venezuela
                                    Santiago.........  Argentina, Brazil,
                                                        Chile, Paraguay,
                                                        Uruguay
                                    Branch Chief DC..  Bahamas, Barbados,
                                                        Cuba, Denmark/
                                                        Greenland, Dominican
                                                        Republic, French
                                                        Guiana, Grenada,
                                                        Guyana, Haiti,
                                                        Italy, Jamaica,
                                                        Netherlands
                                                        Antilles, Suriname,
                                                        Trinidad and Tobago
                                    Branch Chief DC..  Materials Development
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Access Microscholarships

        The Department of State has developed a two-year
    scholarship intended to provide English language skills
    primarily to Muslim youths aged 14 to 18 who would otherwise
    have little access to such classes. These so-called Access
    Microscholarships grew out of the difficulty the Department had
    in finding non-elite Muslim youths with sufficient English
    language proficiency to participate successfully in its Youth
    Exchange and Study (YES) Program. (YES students spend a full
    high school year in the United States living with a host
    family.)
        According to the Department, since 2004, some 44,000
    students have participated in the Access program in 55
    countries. Funding for Access comes from both the State
    Department's bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA)
    and Middle East Peace Partnership Initiative (MEPI) and has
    consistently risen:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FY2006                                $8.75 million
    FY2007                                $13.5 million
    FY2008                                $17.4 million
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        According to the State Department, more than 22,000 English
    Access Micro-scholarship students in over 55 countries are
    currently studying under the Program. Approximately half of the
    students are in their first year. Access students can be found
    in the following:

               Africa (1,841 students): Benin, Burkina
            Faso, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia,
            Kenya, Mauritania, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal,
            South Africa, Tanzania, Togo
               East Asia (2,077 students): Burma, Cambodia,
            China, East Timor, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia,
            Philippines, Thailand
               Europe (1,606 students): Albania,
            Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cyprus, Kosovo, Russia,
            Turkey, Ukraine
               Middle East (11,070 students): Algeria,
            Bahrain, Egypt, Gaza, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait,
            Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Syria
            (suspended in FY06), Tunisia, United Arab Emirates,
            West Bank, Yemen
               South Central Asia (4,813 students):
            Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
            Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,
            Uzbekistan
               Latin America (749 students): Argentina,
            Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay

        Public Diplomacy officials offer high praise for the Access
    program as it gives the United States inroads into communities
    that have often been traditionally hostile towards the United
    States. However, comments from Access parents such as ``our own
    government doesn't care about educating our children, but the
    United States does'' are not unusual as children with normally
    very little hope of advancement in their societies are suddenly
    offered a language which will greatly enhance their future
    employment opportunities. In addition, many receive computer
    training, intellectual discipline, and research skills that
    their other schoolmates will likely never receive.
        In Alexandria, Egypt Access classes are co-educational and
    students are encouraged to question and challenge far beyond
    the boundaries for normal Egyptian students. In spite of
    concerns of parental backlash against traditional teaching
    methods, only one student has been withdrawn by her parents to
    date. Rather, parents are clamoring for their children to be
    enrolled in the program because they appreciate the benefits
    offered.
        Valid concerns about the program abound, however. In
    Alexandria, the NGO AmidEast (which runs Access in Egypt) runs
    the program for approximately $2,000 per student for the full
    two years. Classrooms are modern, computers are plentiful, and
    English instruction is conducted by American expatriates living
    in the city. However, this is not always the case as in other
    locations, locally hired instructors lack sufficient English
    skills and are not always sufficiently familiar with American
    culture and teaching methodologies to impart effectively these
    crucial aspects of the program.
        Of equal concern is the lack of follow-on programming for
    Access graduates. With only 300 YES slots available each year
    and some 11,000 Access graduates, failure to keep the majority
    of Access graduates engaged with programs related to the their
    studies risks losing the ground gained, particularly as many
    will return to educational systems likely hostile to these new-
    found ideas of academic freedom. Failure to keep Access
    graduates engaged through low-cost, follow-on local U.S.
    programs risks seeing our investments in the education of so
    many wither on the vine and could even create a backlash as
    students once selected for their intellectual abilities and
    achievements feel abandoned by our government.

             Peace Corps Exemption to Co-location Requirement \31\

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \31\ See Section 691 (page 1415) of Public Law 107-228 http://
    frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/
    getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ228.107.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SEC. 691. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE LOCATION OF PEACE CORPS
                        OFFICES ABROAD.

        It is the sense of the Congress that, to the degree
    permitted by security considerations, the Secretary should give
    favorable consideration to requests by the Director of the
    Peace Corps that the Secretary exercise his authority under
    section 606(a)(2)(B) of the Secure Embassy Construction and
    Counterterrorism Act of 1999 (22 U.S.C. 4865(a)(2)(B)) to waive
    certain requirements of that Act in order to permit the Peace
    Corps to maintain offices in foreign countries at locations
    separate from the United States Embassy.

                            Film Series Restrictions

        One of the strongest assets in U.S. Public Diplomacy is the
    use of films to tell America's story to the rest of the world.
    Particularly, films with historical and political themes and
    plots are often the best demonstrations of America's values of
    freedom of expression. They also demonstrate a willingness to
    debate sensitive topics through such a public medium. As such
    American Centers and IRCs typically run film series with
    follow-on discussions.
        However, rather than encourage the widest possible
    broadcast of such showings to the largest audience possible,
    the Licensing Agreement recently negotiated between the State
    Department and the Motion Picture Licensing Corporation
    suggests otherwise. Paragraph 20 of the State Department's
    message regarding the MOU to Embassies worldwide expressly
    notes the following were agreed to:

              ``The films may be screened for audiences of up to
            100 people per screening. They may not be screened for
            larger audiences.
              ``No advertising is permitted. No specific titles or
            characters from such titles or producers' names may be
            advertised or publicized to the general public.''

        Embassy officials report they have been contacted by the
    MPLC when films are announced on the Internet. To avoid this,
    many now simply post the movie showing on a bulletin board in
    their facilities--a perfectly painful example of how, in the
    age of text messaging, our government is forced to operate in
    methods no different from the 19th century.

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.025

        In keeping with the MOU that prohibits advertising, the American
    Center in Alexandria, Egypt is forced to restrict the announcement of
    upcoming film viewings and discussions to its outdoor bulletin board--
    in this case the 1994 film ``Little Women'' in the upper right.
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.003

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.004

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.005

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.006

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.007

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.008

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.009

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.010

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.011

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.012

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7261A.013