*EPF405 09/14/00
Text: Bader Statement to SFRC on International Exchange Programs
(Cites heads of state who have participated in exchanges) (2080)

William Bader, the Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs, told the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on International Operations September 14 that "the benefits" to "the American government and American society" of all the exchange programs his bureau conducts "are enormous."

"Alumni return to their countries as engines of positive change," Bader said. "Moreover," he said, "we establish contact early on with individuals who will one day shape their countries' future. One of the often cited but still compelling indicators that the right people are participating in our programs is the track record on heads of state -- 46 current and 148 former heads of government or chiefs of state" have participated in these State Department exchange programs over the years.

Following is the State Department text, as prepared for delivery:

(begin text)

OPENING STATEMENT
THE HONORABLE WILLIAM BADER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
BUREAU OF EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS
DEPARTMENT OF STATE

BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
WASHINGTON, DC

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2000 - 9:00A.M.

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to accept the Committee's invitation to participate in today's hearing on oversight of educational and cultural exchanges.

Slightly less than two years ago it was my great honor to appear before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as the President's nominee to serve as Associate Director of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, at the time located in USIA. On that occasion I expressed my deep belief in the importance of exchanges, based on prior experience in government and in the private sector - and indeed based on my own experience as a Fulbrighter. The past twenty-two months as the head of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, now back in the State Department, have confirmed my belief and have deepened my appreciation for the effectiveness of the exchange programs managed by the Department.

The Bureau's mission, as stipulated in the Fulbright-Hays Act, remains "...to increase mutual understanding between the people of the United States and the people of other countries..." In April of this year the President reinforced this mission with a presidential memorandum on international education policy. The main components of our effort are familiar to all -- Academic Exchanges (primarily Fulbright), the International Visitor (IV) program, and Citizen Exchanges. I was familiar with the Fulbright program but knew much less about International Visitors and Citizen Exchanges when I started this job. Since then I have seen first-hand how these programs not only complement and reinforce one another, but also add to the effectiveness of U.S. foreign policy. The President's FY 2001 budget will enhance this effectiveness.

Each year some six thousand Fulbrighters study, teach, and research a variety of academic subjects, enriching themselves and their countries. At the same time thousands of up-and-coming professionals come to the United States under the International Visitor program and engage American counterparts on many of those same subjects but usually with a focus that is more practical than academic. Completing this picture are the scores of Citizen Exchange grants linking local organizations across the United States with overseas counterparts on issues of importance to the United States.

What makes these programs work is the richness, variety, and just plain big-heartedness of grass-roots America. I am delighted that representatives of some of those organizations are appearing before the subcommittee today. Nonprofit organizations in states across the country, including Minnesota, have received millions of dollars to run high-school exchange programs, business training, and International Visitor programs as partners of the Bureau. They and other organizations work with the State Department and the Department of Education to implement the presidential memorandum on international education I cited earlier. In addition approximately fifteen hundred American organizations administer J-visa exchange programs in connection with international exchange programs that they manage. Authorizing organizations to administer J-visa exchange programs is a function the Bureau embraced last year as a result of the USIA-State Department consolidation.

Scores of American voluntary organizations and thousands of volunteers make sure that foreign visitors meet their counterparts -- whether their field is genetically engineered organisms or local government -- and learn to see the United States in a nuanced way. Future leaders encounter American openness at a stage in their lives when they have the energy, the freedom, and the time to learn about us first hand. Later the tyranny of the in-box and, for some, the protective cocoon of senior leadership make it more difficult to have this type of contact. The results are striking. From that point onward both visitor and host will think differently about things international. They will test stereotypes and hearsay against the reality of their own direct, personal experience. This is no small matter. In today's world, decision-making is increasingly decentralized, and decisions made in one country resonate elsewhere. It is in the American national interest that such decisions be made on the basis of accurate perceptions.

Many of the visitors to this country are foreign students. Four hundred and fifty advising centers, working in partnership with American universities, help bring a half million students to the United States each year. These future leaders learn about our country at a formative period in their lives, and American students benefit from their presence. Partnerships between American and foreign universities develop the quality of teaching in the United States and overseas and bring nine billion dollars into American communities annually. I cannot say enough good things about the American volunteers and non-governmental organizations that make these exchanges work. It is not coincidental that time and again visitors are so impressed by the activism, volunteerism, and can-do attitude of ordinary citizens. It is, I think, one of the most important aspects of our society, one many of us take for granted. Our "diplomacy of inclusion" also makes an impression, I believe. In Bureau exchanges we actively encourage the involvement of traditionally under-represented groups, including women, ethnic minorities, and those with disabilities.

The benefits of all these exchanges to the American government and American society are, in my view, enormous. Alumni return to their countries as engines of positive change. Moreover we establish contact early on with individuals who will one day shape their countries' future. One of the often cited but still compelling indicators that the right people are participating in our programs is the track record on heads of state -- 46 current and 148 former heads of government or chiefs of state. These results are often the consequence of decisions made decades earlier. For example the first civilian to become minister of defense in Indonesia was a Fulbrighter at Berkeley in 1969 and a Fulbright scholar at Georgetown in 1985. We must plan now to benefit later.

Our alumni not only occupy important positions, but we know that at times a well designed program in the United States can have a profound impact on events, as in the case of F.W. deKlerk, who credits his IV experience with changing his mind on race relations in South Africa. And right now our alumni are doing important work. Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit for the record a recent Wall Street Journal article on Mr. Zlatko Lagumdzija who leads Bosnia's Social Democratic Party -- the one major party trying to cut across ethnic lines. He was a Fulbrighter in 1988-89. Interestingly his interlocutor as High Representative in Bosnia, Wolfgang Petritsch, was also a Fulbrighter, 15 years earlier. This is an example of delayed impact.

If I may make one additional observation on the Balkans, Mr. Chairman let me note that on occasion the impact will be more immediate. For example we brought representatives of the Croatian opposition parties to the U.S. over the strenuous objections of the Tudjman regime. Within a year they were running the country.

Examples like these are dramatic. More typical are the thousands of other alumni who are making important contributions in less visible ways. They defend human rights, practice sound journalism, counter AIDS, combat trafficking in persons, lobby for good governance, promote the rule of law, and advance reconciliation. In short, they are building civil societies from the bottom up. In addition the broader constituencies reached by Bureau programs increasingly influence and constrain governments. NATO enlargement and food standards are two recent examples. By engaging those who frame the intellectual agenda -- from curriculum designers to television anchors -- we promote comprehension of the U.S. and provide a broader context for understanding our policies.

In addition to case studies and feedback on the actions of specific individuals there are other indicators that Bureau programs are advancing the national interest. In the recent survey on public diplomacy ambassadors urged us to augment existing programs and rated exchanges very highly. The two largest Bureau programs -- Fulbright and IV -- received near perfect scores.

Independent, external evaluations are also encouraging. For instance, a recent survey of the Humphrey program for mid-career professionals substantiated the quality of the exchange, its impact on the careers of participants, and their high regard for the U.S. More surprisingly perhaps, it also revealed that ninety-five percent of alumni continue to collaborate with American colleagues. This is precisely the sort of international networking and multiplier effect our programs seek to foster. We are placing greater emphasis on professional evaluation of our programs, Mr. Chairman, and we would be happy to share the results with you and your committee.

Despite the good news on the impact of our programs, I do not want to suggest that the sky is cloudless. Rapid change in the outside world complicates the adjustment process. The former Soviet Union is now twelve separate countries. Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania are independent. The old Yugoslavia has shattered into five separate states. In these countries security issues and the transition from communism to democracy affect vital American interests. There is no shortage of tasks that we could undertake.

Mr. Chairman, in the NIS it is only additional funding provided under the Freedom Support Act (transfers from USAID) for exchange activities that permits us to conduct the robust public diplomacy required in that part of the world. Young faculty work with U.S. mentors to develop new courses on governance, journalism, and other critical subjects. Entrepreneurs see first-hand how American small businesses create wealth and promote choice. The best and brightest high-school students participate in the Future Leaders Exchange Program (FLEX), targeted at the next generation in the NIS. The cream of the successor generation attend American high schools and experience democracy first-hand in our families, our classrooms, and our communities. There are 50,000 alumni of these programs in the NIS -- potentially an enormous resource. It is no exaggeration to say that in large measure the future of their countries is riding on their shoulders. Needless to say, the nature of their future has profound implications for us.

We are proud of these programs, Mr. Chairman. It is important to note that Bureau appropriated funds (base funds) cover only 21 percent of total Bureau programs in the NIS. The balance is covered by FSA funds. Without FSA funding, we would have to let priorities go unmet or cut back dramatically on Bureau programs in other regions, to continue to meet the need in the NIS.

Mr. Chairman, we need to prepare for the future. Closed societies will open. We don't know the precise "where and when" but we know it will happen. Public diplomacy is an exceptionally flexible instrument. It is deeply subversive to authoritarian systems. It has proven its effectiveness in societies in transition, and it is well suited to new issues that stimulate broad public engagement.

We believe, Mr. Chairman, we have brought into the Department of State assets that greatly fortify traditional diplomatic readiness. Through our programs we help make available to the rest of the world the richness of American life and experience, furthering mutual understanding in the process. In Wall Street parlance we are long-term investors with a special interest in emerging markets.

We look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and the other members of the committee as we plan for the future. I would be happy to address any questions you may have. Thank you.

(end State Department text)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
NNNN