Bilderberg Group - 2014 Attendees

AUSTRIA Bronner, Oscar – Publisher, Der STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H. Rudolf Scholten – CEO, Oesterreichische Kontrollbank AG BELGIUM Etienne Davignon – Minister of State Thomas Leysen – Chairman of the Board of Directors, KBC Group CANADA W. Edmund Clark – Group President and CEO, TD Bank Group Brian Ferguson – President and CEO, Cenovus Energy Inc. Heather Munroe-Blum – Professor of Medicine and Principal (President) Emerita, McGill University Jason T. Kenney – Minister of Employment and Social Development Stephen S. Poloz – Governor, Bank of Canada Heather M. Reisman – Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc. CHINA CHN Huang, Yiping Professor of Economics, National School of Development, Peking University CHN Liu, He Minister, Office of the Central Leading Group on Financial and Economic Affairs DENMARK Flemming Besenbacher Chairman, The Carlsberg Group Søren-Peter Olesen – Professor; Member of the Board of Directors, The Carlsberg Foundation Henrik Topsøe – Chairman, Haldor Topsøe A/S Steffen Kragh – President and CEO, Egmont Jørgen Huno Rasmussen – Chairman of the Board of Trustees, The Lundbeck Foundation Ulrik Federspiel – Executive Vice President, Haldor Topsøe A/S FINLAND Matti Alahuhta – Member of the Board, KONE; Chairman, Aalto University Foundation Matti Apunen – Director, Finnish Business and Policy Forum EVA Henrik Ehrnrooth – Chairman, Caverion Corporation, Otava and Pöyry PLC Jorma Ollila – Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell, plc; Chairman, Outokumpu Plc Risto K. Siilasmaa – Chairman of the Board of Directors and Interim CEO, Nokia Corporation Kari Stadigh – President and CEO, Sampo plc Björn Wahlroos – Chairman, Sampo plc FRANCE Castries, Henri de Chairman and CEO, AXA Group François Baroin – Member of Parliament (UMP); Mayor of Troyes Nicolas Baverez – Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP Pierre-André de Chalendar – Chairman and CEO, Saint-Gobain Fleur Pellerin – State Secretary for Foreign Trade Natalie Nougayrède – Director and Executive Editor, Le Monde Emmanuel Macron -Deputy Secretary General of the Presidency GERMANY Paul M. Achleitner – Chairman of the Supervisory Board, Deutsche Bank AG Josef Ackermann – Former CEO, Deutsche Bank AG Jörg Asmussen – State Secretary of Labour and Social Affairs Mathias Döpfner – CEO, Axel Springer SE Thomas Enders CEO, Airbus Group Norbert Röttgen – Chairman, Foreign Affairs Committee, German Bundestag GREECE George Zanias – Chairman of the Board, National Bank of Greece Alexandra Mitsotaki – Chair, ActionAid Hellas Loukas Tsoukalis – President, Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy HUNGARY Gordon Bajnai – Former Prime Minister; Party Leader, Together 2014 ITALY Franco Bernabè – Chairman, FB Group SRL John Elkann – Chairman, Fiat S.p.A. Mario Monti – Senator-for-life; President, Bocconi University Monica Maggioni – Editor-in-Chief, Rainews24, RAI TV INTERNATIONAL Philip M. Breedlove – Supreme Allied Commander Europe Benoît Coeuré – Member of the Executive Board, European Central Bank Christine Lagarde – Managing Director, International Monetary Fund Anders Fogh Rasmussen – Secretary General, NATO Ahmet Üzümcü – Director-General, Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons Viviane Reding – Vice President and Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, European Commission IRELAND Simon Coveney – Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine Peter D. Sutherland – Chairman, Goldman Sachs International; UN Special Representative for Migration NETHERLANDS Victor Halberstadt Professor of Economics, Leiden University Ben van Beurden – CEO, Royal Dutch Shell plc Paul J. Scheffer – Author; Professor of European Studies, Tilburg University Edith Schippers – Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport Gerrit Zalm – Chairman of the Managing Board, ABN-AMRO Bank N.V. H.R.H. Princess Beatrix of the Netherlands NORWAY Svein Richard Brandtzæg – President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA Leif O. Høegh – Chairman, Höegh Autoliners AS Westye Høegh – Senior Advisor, Höegh Autoliners AS Eivind Reiten – Chairman, Klaveness Marine Holding AS Christian Rynning-Tønnesen – President and CEO, Statkraft AS Jens Ulltveit-Moe – Founder and CEO, Umoe AS PORTUGAL Francisco Pinto Balsemão – Chairman, Impresa SGPS Paulo Macedo – Minister of Health Inês de Medeiros – Member of Parliament, Socialist Party SPAIN García-Margallo, José Manuel Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation Juan María Nin Génova – Deputy Chairman and CEO, CaixaBank H.M. the Queen of Spain Juan Luis Cebrián – Executive Chairman, Grupo PRISA SWEDEN Carl Bildt – Minister for Foreign Affairs Buskhe, Håkan President and CEO, Saab AB Wallenberg, Jacob Chairman, Investor AB Wallenberg, Marcus Chairman of the Board of Directors, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB Lifvendahl, Tove Political Editor in Chief, Svenska Dagbladet Svanberg, Carl-Henric Chairman, Volvo AB and BP plc SWITZERLAND Kudelski, André Chairman and CEO, Kudelski Group Vasella, Daniel L. Honorary Chairman, Novartis International TURKEY Göle, Nilüfer Professor of Sociology, École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales Koç, Mustafa Chairman, Koç Holding A.S. Çandar, Cengiz Senior Columnist, Al Monitor and Radikal Oran, Umut Deputy Chairman, Republican People’s Party (CHP) Taftalı, A. Ümit Member of the Board, Suna and Inan Kiraç Foundation UNITED KINGDOM Marcus Agius – Non-Executive Chairman, PA Consulting Group Helen Alexander – Chairman, UBM plc Edward M. Balls – Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Cowper-Coles, Sherard Senior Adviser to the Group Chairman and Group CEO, HSBC Holdings plc Dudley, Robert Group Chief Executive, BP plc Mandelson, Peter Chairman, Global Counsel LLP Micklethwait, John Editor-in-Chief, The Economist Kerr, John Deputy Chairman, Scottish Power Greening, Justine Secretary of State for International Development Flint, Douglas J. Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings plcNLD Samsom, Diederik M. Parliamentary Leader PvdA (Labour Party) Sawers, John Chief, Secret Intelligence Service Osborne, George Chancellor of the Exchequer Wolf, Martin H. Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial Times UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Keith B. Alexander – Former Commander, U.S. Cyber Command; Former Director, National Security Agency Roger C. Altman – Executive Chairman, Evercore Nicolas Berggruen – Chairman, Berggruen Institute on Governance Robert B. Zoellick – Chairman, Board of International Advisors, The Goldman Sachs Group Li, Cheng Director, John L.Thornton China Center,The Brookings Institution Greenberg, Evan G. Chairman and CEO, ACE Group Feldstein, Martin S. Professor of Economics, Harvard University; President Emeritus, NBER Jackson, Shirley Ann President, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Jacobs, Kenneth M. Chairman and CEO, Lazard Johnson, James A. Chairman, Johnson Capital Partners Karp, Alex CEO, Palantir Technologies Katz, Bruce J. Vice President and Co-Director, Metropolitan Policy Program, The Brookings Institution Kravis, Henry R. Co-Chairman and Co-CEO, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. Kravis, Marie-Josée Senior Fellow and Vice Chair, Hudson Institute Schmidt, Eric E. Executive Chairman, Google Inc. Shih, Clara CEO and Founder, Hearsay Social Kissinger, Henry A. Chairman, Kissinger Associates, Inc. Kleinfeld, Klaus Chairman and CEO, Alcoa Donilon, Thomas E. Senior Partner, O’Melveny and Myers; Former U.S. National Security Advisor Gfoeller, Michael Independent Consultant Rubin, Robert E. Co-Chair, Council on Foreign Relations; Former Secretary of the Treasury Rumer, Eugene Senior Associate and Director, Russia and Eurasia Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace McAfee, Andrew Principal Research Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Mundie, Craig J. Senior Advisor to the CEO, Microsoft Corporation Murray, Charles A. W.H. Brady Scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research Hockfield, Susan President Emerita, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Hoffman, Reid Co-Founder and Executive Chairman, LinkedIn Perle, Richard N. Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute Petraeus, David H. Chairman, KKR Global Institute Reed, Kasim Mayor of Atlanta Thiel, Peter A. President, Thiel Capital Summers, Lawrence H. Charles W. Eliot University Professor, Harvard University Spence, A. Michael Professor of Economics, New York University Warsh, Kevin M. Distinguished Visiting Fellow and Lecturer, Stanford University Wolfensohn, James D. Chairman and CEO, Wolfensohn and Company SOURCE -  The Vigilant Citizen - here.

UKRAINE and US 'boy scouts'

California has worked with Ukrainian troops Guido J. Portante Jr., Special to The Desert Sun 6:43 p.m. PDT July 26, 2014 After the breakup of the Soviet Union between 1989 and 1991, the leadership of our country in the Defense Department and the administration saw an opportunity to keep those countries that were once a part of the Soviet Union and newly independent on the path to democracy. Further, they wanted to minimize instability in the region by supporting the principals of responsible government within those countries. In the early 1990s, a national program called Partnership for Peace, now called State Partnership Program, was established by our government. The State Partnership Program is an innovative program managed by the National Guard Bureau given to each participating state to execute. The State Partnership Program is an extraordinary effort by the U.S. to familiarize newly independent countries with American values and principles, to include law, public safety, agriculture, business, and military capabilities and training. Further, helping to build long-term national security strength for the newly independent nation’s we partnered with. In this process, we strengthened the national security of the United States. And, we built a coalition of forces that are mutually supportive to each other. California has been aligned with the country of Ukraine since 1993. Many states throughout our country and their National Guards are aligned with countries such as Alabama with Romania, Georgia with Georgia. There are currently 48 states that are aligned with countries of the old Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact countries and the debunked country of Yugoslav. [Debunked Yugoslavia?] Countless exercises revolving around peace keeping, homeland defense, military and cultural exchanges have been conducted. The National Guard’s dual federal and state mission make this program ideal for guard units to promote democratic institutions at the national, state and local levels of governments. The National Guard of each state is responsible to the federal government in time of war and national emergency. It also is responsible to each state governor for state emergencies such as natural disasters or civil unrest. The latter is important in working with partnered countries. I had an opportunity to train with the military members of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and with Ukraine’s political leaders. We developed programs that were conducted both in the Ukraine and in California. Integrated into these military exercise, were cultural exchanges between the two partners. These exercises shared lessons learned, ideas and concepts of both cultures. They promoted the American way of life, while taking into consideration those issues facing a new independent country on the road to democracy. The success of this program lies in the partnered nation’s participation when fighting alongside of us in Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost to partner in the State Partnership Program has been low and has paid dividends. With our continued sharing of interpersonal relationships with each partnered country, we can enhance each newly independent nations chance to succeed at democracy, freedom and the ability to prosper as a people and a nation. When individuals get to know each other while sharing the belief for freedom and democracy we begin to find out that as people we are all cut from the same mold. Getting along becomes much easier. For those who might want to tear us apart, the job becomes harder. Guido J. Portante Jr. of Rancho Mirage is a retired U.S. Army brigadier general. http://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/2014/07/26/california-worked-ukraine-troops/13227433/

PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

Partnership for Peace
[wikipedia]

Blue      = NATO (1994)
Orange = Partnership for Peace (PfP)
Green    = Current NATO members (former PfP members)
Red        = aspiring PfP states [wikipedia]

The Partnership for Peace (PfP) is a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) program aimed at creating trust between NATO and other states in Europe and the former Soviet Union; 22 states are members.  It was first discussed by the Bulgarian Society Novae, after proposed as an American initiative at the meeting of NATO ... in 1993, and formally launched ... January 1994 (NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium). [wikipedia]

Partnership for Peace is now:  the State Partnership Program (SPP) - here.


Following is a list of other partners to the US State Partnership Program:

(transcribed from Wikipedia)

Bahamas (C'wealth) Bangladesh Belize Bolivia Botswana Cambodia Chile Columbia Costa Rica Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Ghana Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Indonesia Jamaica (C'wealth) Jordan Kazakhstan Kyrgyz Republic

Liberia  Mongolia Morocco Nicaragua Nigeria Panama Paraguay Peru Philippines Senegal South Africa Suriname Tajikistan Thailand Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands

---------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT

Partnership for Peace (now 'State Partnership Program') sounds like an altruistic US government sponsored 'boy scouts' mission spreading the message, getting together to grow, share, develop and commune with underprivileged and unenlightened 'boys' from all over the world.

But, hey, there's dividends to be had by the US, at a bargain basement low outlay.

I'd wager that these US dividends are enormous.

The Program is seen to:

• Strengthen national security of the US.
• Build a 'coalition of forces' for mutual support.
• Be ideal for promotion of 'democratic institutions' at NATIONAL, STATE and LOCAL levels of external participating governments.

The Program also happens to:

• Provide MILITARY connections.
• POLITICAL leader connections.
• Afford promotion of 'the American way of life' -- and, let's be real -- whatever the US agenda wishes to promote.

The article indicates involving participating nations in supporting US military causes and actions is key to the success of the Program.

And there's plenty to be said for making individual connections that the Program affords.

It looks like the US has been dabbling (with this single arm of the worldwide dabbling machine) in Europe since the early 1990s -- and in Ukraine since 1993.

Is anybody else blown away by that?  

It means that the US (and its agenda) has had 20 years to gain -- and execute -- influence at a military, political, individual or personal, cultural, government, national, state and local level, in the Ukraine.

It looks like there's something to be said for these evangelistic 'boy scout' missions beyond borders and, yes, they most definitely pay dividends given enough time communing around 'Camp US Love-in'.

MH17 - Is Tony Abbott gonna be a hero in eastern Ukraine?

Abbott's mission to Ukraine branded 'nuts' Date July 27, 2014 Prime Minister Tony Abbott's announcement of Australia's intention to send 190 armed Australian Federal Police and an unknown number of ADF [Australian Defence Force] personnel  ... [... extract only ...] The senior defence figure, who did not wish to be named, said it was a poor idea for Australia. ''They can't secure the site,'' he said. ''It's kilometres long and wide. They could escort Australian officials and provide close protection, but this is a civil task rather than a military task and it's a terribly volatile area. ''We don't have the language skills or knowledge of the area. ''For any military deployment, you have to look at a status of forces agreement with the government and, given the area the aircraft is in, I don't think there is anyone to make that agreement with. What I've heard is the rebels don't want more than 30 investigators there.'' Mr Abbott confirmed on Saturday that 230 Australian officials would be sent to help with the recovery. This, he said, would include a small number of defence personnel. ''That is our mission, to secure the remains, to assist the investigation and to obtain justice for the victims and their loved ones,'' Mr Abbott said. ''It is, I stress, a humanitarian mission. Others can get involved if they wish in the politics of eastern Europe.'' Mr Abbott said that, despite the dangers, armed personnel are needed to secure the site. ... Source - SMH - here.

---------------------------------------------
COMMENT

From the headline, I thought: Hey, someone's been reading social media.

SMH gives "Peter Dean, director of studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University", the megaphone -- after conveying the contrary views of some faceless, unnamed 'senior defence figure'.  

The academic conveys:

''It really depends on the diplomacy undertaken around this,'' Dr Dean said. ''If our government can make its intentions clear and be accepted on those grounds I think this [Mr Abbott's goal] can be achieved.''

Dr Dean said Australia's status as a non-NATO member would play in its favour and its geographical distance from Europe would also help.

''I think we see it through a different lens than the European commentators,'' he said. [Yeah, through the US lens.] 

 ''We are not sending the army over there to take on the Russians or separatists. It's not a European country interfering in another European country's business. It's a country from the outside that has experienced a significant loss of life of Australian people and permanent residents.

''The Prime Minister is wanting to send people to provide security. I don't think Australia is necessarily mad for wanting to do that.''

So who are you going to listen to: faceless, unnamed source in the military -- or an impressive academic specialist?

Hmmm ... looks to me like the academic is justifying Abbott's decision:

''We are not sending the army ...to take on Russians or separatists."

''The Prime Minister is wanting to send people to provide security. I don't think Australia is necessarily mad for wanting to do that.''

Anyone who has watched their own people being slaughtered around them and anyone who has put their own life on the line to defend their nation, their people; their pulverised town; their land; their national identity; their beliefs; their aims; their future and the future of generations ahead; is -- I'm guessing -- likely to be, at the very least, uneasy with foreign military presence on their blood-soaked soil, whatever the rationale offered.

Noticed Peter Dean happens to be a Fulbright Professional Scholar:

Fulbright Professional Scholar

Fulbright Professional Scholarship in Australian-United States Alliance Studies, sponsored by DFAT.

Peter Dean is currently Fellow and Director of Studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, College of Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University. He will study at Georgetown University, Washington from August to November 2014, focusing on Australia-United States strategic relations, and how that strategic relationship has evolved and changed over time.

He will also visit the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, the leading global think tank for security and strategic issues.

and that this scholarship is sponsored by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade.

THE FULBRIGHT PROGRAM

The Australian-American Fulbright Commission is a non-profit organisation in Australia, established in 1949 to further mutual understanding between the U.S. and Australia through education and exchange.

... It is part of the world-wide Fulbright Program, administered by the U.S. State Department.

Maybe I'm one-eyed, but this looks to be yet another US-NGO linked (however tenuously) to the affairs of a foreign nation -- in this case, an ally, Australia. [See addendum below. Not NGO. Govt. org.]

The name of the game with NGOs [and GOs] appears to be networking, education and undoubtedly influence, whatever the noble, stated organisational aims.

The views of respected academic authorities are always very impressive. 

Nonetheless one is bound to question:   how independent and unbiased are the views of such authorities?

SMH reports:

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte told parliament in The Hague on Friday he was too concerned about possible ramifications to send troops to Ukraine.

SMH quotes some American think tank nobody's ever heard of, based in Washington:

Joerg Forbrig, senior program officer for central and eastern Europe at the Berlin bureau of the German Marshall Fund of the US, said of the Australian plan: ''They must be nuts. It's a very dangerous proposal and will be seen as a provocation by the separatists and the Russians.''

 

Unknown think tank says Abbott's plan's nuts.

So why isn't think tank backing Abbott? Come on, what's going on?

Oh, I get it. Readers will see "eastern Europe" and "Berlin bureau" and "German", and they'll dismiss the statement.

The German Marshall Fund is a US NGO promoting 'democracy'.

Like all these NGO 'think tanks' it has tentacles all over:

"GMF has offices in Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, Bucharest, and Warsaw. GMF also has smaller representations in Bratislava, Turin, and Stockholm"

-- and it puts out surveys.

So it would appear it is a US group with an agenda and a stake in interfering in Europe.  And even this group is saying armed troops could be seen as provocative.

Netherlands is sending:

a separate mission of 40 unarmed military police to the site to help complete the forensic work and gather evidence, Mr Rutte said.

UK plays it smart at the sidelines:

Britain has sent one forensics specialist to Kiev and nine scientists are working in the Netherlands to help identify bodies and secure evidence.

... would ''offer logistical support and is keeping in close contact with the Australians and Dutch over how it can assist, though it won't be putting be sending police or technicians to Ukraine''.

''We believe a UK armed presence in eastern Ukraine would not be appropriate,'' the Foreign Office said in a statement. ''The UK stands ready to provide constructive support to the mission.''

But SMH had stated:

Malaysia, Germany and Britain are the other three nations that are expected to contribute to the security force.

It's unclear how UK is 'expected to contribute to the security force' if the UK Foreign Office believes a 'UK armed presence in eastern Ukraine would not be appropriate."

CONCLUSION

Is this Tony Abbott trying to play the hero in eastern Europe, to ass-kiss his big-boy buddy, USA?

And is this more likely a sly US attempt at getting a foothold in the eastern Ukrainian territory -- via a 'naive' but willing, Australian ally -- than it is about a 'bring them home' mission?

-----------------------
Addendum - Further info and Comment

Fulbright Program

The Fulbright Program operates in over 155 countries around the world. In each of 50 countries, a bi-national Fulbright Commission administers and oversees the Fulbright Program. In countries without a Fulbright Commission but that have an active program, the Public Affairs Section of the U.S. Embassy oversees the Fulbright Program.

The U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs sponsors the Fulbright Program from an annual appropriation from the U.S. Congress. Additional direct and in-kind support comes from partner governments, foundations, corporations, and host institutions both in and outside the U.S.

The program is coordinated by the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) of the U.S. Department of State under policy guidelines established by the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board (FSB), with the help of 50 bi-national Fulbright commissions, U.S. embassies, and cooperating organizations in the U.S.

The U.S. Department of State is responsible for managing, coordinating and overseeing the Fulbright program. Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs is the bureau in the Department of State that has primary responsibility for the administration of the program.

Bi-national Fulbright commissions and foundations, most of which are funded jointly by the U.S. and partner governments, develop priorities for the program, including the numbers and categories of grants. More specifically, they plan and implement educational exchanges, recruit and nominate candidates for fellowships; designate qualified local educational institutions to host Fulbrighters; fundraise; engage alumni; support incoming U.S. Fulbrighters; and, in many countries, operate an information service for the public on educational opportunities in the United States

In a country active in the program without a Fulbright commission, the Public Affairs Section of the U.S. Embassy administers the Fulbright Program, including recruiting and nominating candidates for grants to the U.S., overseeing U.S. Fulbrighters on their grant in the country, and engaging alumni.


Related organizations

The Fulbright Association is an organization independent of the Fulbright Program and not associated with the U.S. Department of State. The Fulbright Association was established on Feb. 27, 1977, as a private nonprofit, membership organization with over 9,000 members. The late Arthur Power Dudden was its founding president. He wanted alumni to educate members of the U.S. Congress and the public about the benefits of advancing increased mutual understanding between the people of the United States and those of other countries. In addition to the Fulbright Association in the U.S., independent Fulbright Alumni associations exist in over 75 countries around the world.

The Fulbright Academy is an organization independent of the Fulbright Program and not associated with the U.S. Department of State. A non-partisan, non-profit organization with members worldwide, the Fulbright Academy focuses on the professional advancement ... individual and institutional members, Fulbright alumni associations and other organizations interested in leveraging the unique knowledge and skills of Fulbright alumni.

[Source - wikipedia]

Further Comment

If I have this straight, the Fulbright Program is sponsored by US and Australian government (or other governments, as the case may be) and it is coordinated by US government, its Fulbright Commissions around the world and US embassies, in cooperation 'with organisations in the US'.

Although the Fulbright Program is related to what appear to be NGOs (the Fulbright Association and the Fulbright Academy), the Fulbright Program itself and the Fulbright Commissions -- and therefore Fulbright Scholarships - arise from US (and partner) government funding.

The Fulbright Program (from which scholarships arise) is therefore not an NGO (as initially appraised by the blogger) - it's a full US government (and partner government) org -- although foundations, corporations and host institutions -- both in US and wherever program is hosted -- may also contribute to funding.

And if you look at the picture from a cynic's point of view, the entire thing looks like an indoctrination scheme and pyramid 'selling' scheme (er, educational, cultural, networking initiative) that reaches out around the globe -- selling the US, its perspective and its agenda, creating contact points for the US and surely quietly influencing on behalf of the US, with cooperative governments -- and I'm guessing any sponsoring CORPORATIONS in the US and beyond.

Anyway, that's my opinion.  

But, hey, I could be sitting here wearing tin foil on my head, so make up your own minds.