Karen Hughes' Youth Enrichment Camps: Indoctrination at an Early Age?

By John H. Brown, Guest Contributor

Maybe I'm biased. My memories of summer camp are not among my best. Sure, it was fun when I played jokes on the counselors or broke the camp rules without them knowing about it.

But as a kid I couldn't help thinking: why don't these pushy grown-ups telling me what to do get off my back? My parents seemed like perfect role models by comparison.

So, as a former Foreign Service Officer who always welcomed overseas assignments without camp-like regimentation, I approach yet another initiative by Under Secretary of State for Public Affairs and Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes -- her Youth Enrichment Program -- with a grain of personal salt. Here's how Ms. Hughes' new pet project is described by the State Department:

"In the summer of 2007, . . . Karen P. Hughes launched 20 Youth Enrichment Programs (YEP) for more than 6,000 young people in 13 countries and in the West Bank and Gaza. The programs offer a variety of activities and classes that aim to foster tolerance, respect for diversity and a better understanding of the United States. YEP is breaking new ground and reaching out to a new audience at an even younger age than those who participate in traditional exchange programs. Because the majority of the population in many countries is under the age of 25, it is more important than ever before to reach out to this younger age group and introduce them to America."

The Boston Globe (August 18), in an article by Farah Stockman, provides more details about YEP:

"Participants included more than 2,000 girls in Turkey who attended a basketball camp and 80 children from rural schools in Malaysia who learned about Thomas Jefferson and other US heroes on an American-style camping trip with embassy staff and families. ... Iraqi students learned about baseball and the English language for three days this summer in Baghdad."

Hughes -- "who has become the most powerful public-diplomacy czar in decades," according to the Globe's Ms. Stockman -- is all gung-ho about her (in her own mind) ground-breaking way to make America universally loved early on. "I know as a mother that by the time kids get to high school, their opinions are pretty hardened," she told AP's John Thorne (August 17, USA Today). "Children tend to be a lot more open-minded."

Give the Under Secretary credit for not officially calling her beloved camps "camps," given that other American camp (at Guantanamo), which is not exactly Muslim-friendly. And Palestinian refugee camps, last time I heard, are not known to be places where children are especially enriched.

Some Questions

Here are some questions for Ms. Hughes from this camp-skeptic:

--The “US heroes” the campers are being told about -- who are they, aside from Thomas Jefferson (are the kids told he owned slaves and condemned native Americans?). And who is an America hero, anyway? George W. Bush?

--Why this emphasis on American sports at the camps? As someone who played soccer (badly) as a kid, I don't quite understand why you can't love America if you don't play basketball or baseball. (Question to Cal Ripken fans proud that the long-enduring Baltimore Orioles shortstop has just been chosen by Secretary of State Rice as a "public diplomacy envoy," with China reportedly the first place he'll visit: how many Chinese actually play baseball or have even heard of our Hall-of-Famer?).

--How exactly are the kids selected to attend Hughes's camps? And by whom?

--How are camp graduates being viewed by the areas in which they live? Consider this, again from The Boston Globe: "A photo of the [Iraq YEP] group meeting with US Ambassador Ryan Crocker hangs on the door of Hughes's office at the State Department -- but it cannot be publicly released for fear that the children may be harmed by terrorists because of their connection with the United States."

--Don't the Hughes camps have a "Green Zone" quality to them? Aren't they separated from the reality of the societies surrounding them? So how can they be effective in these societies?

--Would it be surprising if non-Americans already suspicious of Mr. Bush's aggressive, unilateral foreign policy viewed the Hughes camps as an expression of an infantile American refusal to deal with other countries on adult terms? Does it require much cynicism, if you live outside the United States, to conclude that Washington, when deigning to engage with the rest of the world in a non-military fashion, prefers to deal with children than grown-ups because children can be manipulated and propagandized far more easily?

--Isn't there something spookily totalitarian about the whole idea of "Youth Enrichment Programs"? Doesn’t "enriching" human beings at an early age remind us of Hitler youth camps or the Soviet Komsomol that focus on changing minds through indoctrination -- rather than opening them through education?

--Finally, aren't some of the reactions of the camp graduates to their experiences more a reflection of Orwellian-lite brainwashing (or of what Bush-voting Americans want to hear about themselves, courtesy of Ms. Hughes) than an indication that young people overseas have even begun to appreciate the complexities of 21st century America? Isn't what the Hughes-camp kids are saying simply the reverse of what America-haters profess about the United States (rather than evidence of a deeper understanding by the campers themselves of the U.S.?). Here are their words, as recorded on the State Department's YEP website:

"Americans have big hearts and they help everybody regardless if they are poor or rich."

"I had another picture of Americans and I learned from them here and have changed that picture."

"Thanks to the camp [note the use of the word "camp"], I have new relationships with Americans."

"They want peace just like we do."

"Americans respect diversity."

"People are good in both countries; we all want to do good things together."

"Americans are generous."

"I learned how to have a relationship with Americans and to learn about myself better."

Karen's Children

Thank you, Under Secretary Hughes, for having children overseas tell us Americans that we are generous, want peace, have big hearts, respect diversity -- as we keep on surgin' 'n killin' throughout impoverished countries distant from our shores, with thousands of our own soldiers dead in this barbaric process, for no clear reason except to "get the terrorists before they get us here in the USA," all of this thanks to our bring'em on Commander in Chief.

Yet I wonder which "children" Karen is really trying to indoctrinate? YEP, you and I living here in the (so-far) Land of the Free.

Author Note: John H. Brown is a Senior Fellow at the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy and a Research Associate at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University. His most recent article on public diplomacy is found at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-brown/the-second-coming-of-kare_b_59851.html. He compiles the tri-weekly Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review which can be obtained free via e-mail by requesting it at johnhbrown30@hotmail.com

Comments

[zenpundit]

Interesting perspective, coming from a former FSO.

I seem to recall, as a child, previous administrations sending forth a variety of athletes, musicians, writers, movie stars and, for a time, astronauts, as goodwill ambassadors. It did little harm and perhaps, some good, for America's image.

Even in the 19th century, former President Grant, while having been a disaster as chief executive here at home, was quite popular on a world tour as a famous American general. The same held true in the early 20th century for Theodore Roosevelt, Charles Lindbergh and other noted Americans. We've been doing this kind of soft power PR for a while. The real problem with the current Bush administration is that they have hardly been doing it at all.

I'm not really certain of Mr. Brown's objection to these(belated and no doubt clumsy)public/cultural diplomacy initiatives, unless perhaps it is to the mere existence of the Bush administration and their having foreign policies to which he personally does not subscribe. Egypt and China have fairly deplorable policies but not too many people are getting exercised over a tour of King Tut's exhibition or Chinese educational exchange programs, even though they hardly give objective presentations of the history of their home country.

Or perhaps the underlying problem for Mr. Brown is the concept that there are some figures in American history who might be considered admirable - or even heroic - as there is some kind of PC equivalent to original sin in the background of every notable American that disqualifies them from consideration ? Perhaps not but the tone of the guest post has that undercurrent.

BTW, I'm not sure a "Jefferson the Slavemaster" travelling circus would really be all that balanced either. There was a bit more nuance to the historical importance of the man than sharp dealings with Native Americans and owning slaves.

[PHK]

Mark: I think you miss John's point. He's writing about the YEP program for 8-14 year olds, not focusing on the two sports celebs - Cal Ripken and Michelle Kwan who are going abroad (Russia and China thus far) to play celebs with all age groups. You are focusing on the the sports celebs. YEP and the sports celebs are not the same. In years past, USIA's Sports America occasionally sent people like Ripken and Kwan abroad - but usually concentrated on US athletes who would conduct sports workshops. Like most else, it was destroyed in the late 1990s thanks to both parties.

There are other problems with YEP that John has not identified - or has only hinted at. Two that cross my mind immediately are lack of sustainability and whether or not political socialization actually takes place among the 8-14 year olds. From what I've read, I'd focus on the 15-25 year olds which is what the Europea Mediterranean Youth program does. And it is an exchange - not a single one-way, in-country shot.

Personally, I agree with John's bottom line: this whole exercise is administraiton pr aimed at the US domestic market. It has little to do with improving the US image abroad. One shot, two week-3 day deals just don't work that way.

[Don Thieme]

This reminds me a lot of the "Young Pioneers" in Germany. I hope that some good songs get written for them to sing!

[zenpundit]

Hi PHK,

I have more or less given up on the Bush administration doing anything clever in diplomacy, even out of self-interest.

While you and Mr. Brown see a program's shortcomings, I'm sure there are many, I am stunned that the administration has tried a positive approach at all ( probably due entirely to Hughes personal clout with the president). Hopefully, it will be kept around in some form, improved and expanded by future administrations but if it is kicked to death right off the bat then it will be killed off come the 2009 budget. And then public diplomacy will be at ground zero - once again.

I agree with you - I think informed ppl across the spectrum realize this now - that the nickel-an-diming of public diplomacy, scientific, cultural and educational exchanges, information and news programs has been an exercise in cutting off our own nose. The best thing we could probably do for America's image overseas is bring hundreds of thousands more foreign exchange students over here, but instead, we are slamming the VISA door shut and kicking out PhD candidates in genetic engineering and higher mathematics.

A reversal of attitude on public diplomacy is not going to come in a sudden wave with a new administration, even a liberal Democratic one ( Congress always shortchanges State) - it has to be built brick by brick with what is available.

[PHK]

Mark: I couldn't agree with you more about the need to rebuild our pd infrastructure - in fact, am working on a post right now that raises this point yet again. I also agree with you about the folly of slamming the visa door shut - although the Department claims we issued more student visas this past year than in a long time. What I've heard, however, is that student visas are still down but short term training visas are up - and its the same visa category. That's what State's success claims are based on. More pr smoke and mirrors so yours and others personal experiences at universities would be really useful.

I'd really like to know more about tossing out PhD students in genetic engineering and higher math. This is new to me: Is this a one-time thing or is it across the board - and what are the criteria and what schools and countries is it affecting - aside from ourselves.

Sadly, I'm not at all sanguine that the Democrats will do any better in rebuilding our broken pd infrastructure than the Republicans. But one can only hope - and also make one's views know that a head-in-the-sand approach to the world is really counter-productive which I know you do.

Two things that trouble me about this latest KH initiative is that 1) it is a one-shot deal with no hope of sustainability beyond its three year life even if pieces are effective; and 2) $6 million could start to rebuild basic pd infrastructure - like libraries and cultural centers overseas that could include programs, books and publications for the 8-14 set that would be sustainable, reach even more kids for longer periods and perhaps be less controversial than 3-day to 2 week summer camps.

In the past, our binational centers supported themselves through English class fees (just as the British Council did) and I did a little calculation when I was CAO in Manila and discovered that a $1 a year membership fee would cover the cost of all our library acquisitions - and that our clientele including students could have afforded it. There was, however, a regulation that would have meant circumventing the law to charge it. In my view, the law was really stupid. In the end, the library was closed, most of the books given to a private university and a small "American corner" was installed behind Embassy walls which few people use.

So the cost to USIS to maintain the library would have been rent, utilities and FSN staff salaries which in the Philippines do not approach those of Europe or Japan.

Anyway, I have more to say re YEP but it's complicated and I'm working on a post now. So stay tuned - and again any info on State's slamming the student visa door and tossing out grad students in math and science would be most useful (that could make an excellent post in itself.)

[john brown]

Many thanks for Zenpundit's comments and Pat Kushlis's equally enlightening remarks. I have little to add to the discussion, except regarding Thomas Jefferson.

A resident of Washington, I am a regular pilgrim to Monticello, and have indeed had the pleasure of reading some of Jefferson's letters in their original manuscript form. I suspect that Jefferson, that admirer of republican virtues (which, I would suggest, includes his recognition of rulers' limitations) would not have approved being labeled a "hero." He was a man full of contradictions, which indeed is what made him human rather than "heroic."

Jefferson, "man of the people," did own slaves and did condemn native Americans. My pointing out this fact upset one of the regular (and respected) readers of my "Public Diplomacy Press and Blog Review" to such an extent that he informed me that, upon my mentioning Jefferson, he stopped reading the above piece, which I had sent to him in draft form.

Of course, to depict Jefferson as a "slavemaster" is to simplify a complex and creative man. But to characterize him as a "hero" is also a simplification he would not have -- I venture to say -- happily accepted.

If the USG is to present American history overseas, even to eight-year olds, may I suggest that it is best not to follow the Soviet-style "heroes in history" mode as pertains to US presidents -- and to the U.S. as a whole.

Allow me to cite what some consider the all-American line from "Some Like it Hot": "Nobody's perfect."

[Jan Scherrer]

I hope they'll do better with these programs than Dina Habib Powell has done with the YES program in high school foreign exchange. The Department of Educational and Cultural Affairs provides federal funding to academic foreign exchange agencies such as AYA to bring high school students to the U.S. for the sake of "good diplomacy." Where they fall short is when many of these kids are placed in "good Christian homes" or when they're placed with sexual predators or homes where the family lacks the resources to feed these kids. Last year, a YES student was thrown out by his host family once they learned he was Muslim. He was subsequently taken in by a gas station attendant who overheard that he needed a home as his agency representative was driving him to another state to find a place to put him. Now we're going after the 8 year-olds? God save them all from this U.S. diplomacy.