The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs and American public diplomacy during the Reagan years: Purpose, policy, program, and performance

A recurrent tension in American public diplomacy as conducted by the United States Information Agency (USIA) is the proper relationship between the Agency's "twin pillars": informational programs and educational and cultural programs. The dispute involves issues of incompatibility, as these two sets of activities differ in modality and purpose. Because of these disagreements, institutional structures and organizational patterns have been a constant struggle in American public diplomacy. Concern over the integrity of USIA's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs was heightened with the election of Ronald Reagan to the presidency. Observers initially concluded that the Agency was unduly emphasizing information at the expense of culture and education, and at the same time inappropriately politicizing the latter programs. Congress moved to protect the Bureau, and the result was that it experienced what appeared to be a period of unprecedented enrichment. Nonetheless, there continued to be talk of separating the Bureau from the Agency.; This dissertation examines, describes, and evaluates the purposes, policies, programs, and performance of the United States Information Agency's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs during the years 1981 to 1989. More precisely, it seeks to answer three basic research questions: To what extent and in what ways was the Bureau enhanced and/or diminished during the period? What were the essential dynamics at work in this strengthening and/or weakening of the Bureau? What implications do these changes have regarding the optimum institutional location for the Bureau? Based on the evidence, the research conducted herein indicates that: in general the Bureau was enhanced in the areas of budgets, activities, and stature; these changes were the result of a productive conflict that occurred between the executive and legislative branches, at the center of which was the Agency Director, as they negotiated the definition and direction of the Bureau; USIA is presently and for the foreseeable future the best organizational home for the Bureau.