Article
President Tshisekedi is implicating Washington in his pursuit of a third term. Staying silent may prove detrimental to the United States in the long run.
Christian-Géraud Neema
{
"authors": [
"Julie Leighton"
],
"type": "commentary",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Foreign Policy",
"Global Governance"
]
}
Source: Getty
Commentary
Title VIII: A Worthwhile Expense
Title VIII, also known as the Program for Research and Training on Eastern Europe and Eurasia did not receive funding for the 2013 fiscal year. It has been a proven success in the past. If given the proper funding, Title VIII may continue to be so in the future.
By Julie Leighton
Published on Nov 8, 2013
Title VIII, also known as the Program for Research and Training on Eastern Europe and Eurasia, is a State Department initiative that provides American scholars with grants for language training and research opportunities within either Eastern European or Eurasian area concentrations. It did not receive funding for the 2013 fiscal year. Many programs, including those hosted by the Wilson Center, the American Council of Learned Societies, the Social Science Research Council, and the National Council for Eurasian and East European Research, have been either downsized or canceled.
Why is this significant? Title VIII, and the various institutions that support its grant recipients, work to ensure that scholars have sufficient conceptual and strategic knowledge of the former Soviet space. The idea being that these experts will eventually shape America’s foreign policy within the region and should be trained accordingly. That premise is sound: former grant recipients include Michael McFaul, Condoleezza Rice, and Madeleine Albright.
At a time of mass American budgetary constriction, eliminating programs and cutting funding is to be expected. However, the value of Title VIII’s appropriations in 2012 was roughly 3.5 million dollars. A drop in the bucket.
Budgetary debates aside, from a geopolitical standpoint discontinuing this program seems shortsighted. The state of contemporary American-Russian relations leaves much to be desired. With no signs of improvement in the immediate future, is it logical to cancel a program that boasts so many successful Russia experts as its alumni? Given the tensions between the two countries, should not its continuation be an absolute priority?
Title VIII has been a proven success in the past. If given the proper funding, it may continue to be so in the future. And surely even the slightest possibility of improved relations between the two countries justifies the expenditure.
Julie Leighton is an independent Russian researcher. She was a research assistant at Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
About the Author
Julie Leighton
Former Research Assistant, Russia and Eurasia Program
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Will the U.S.-DRC Strategic Partnership Agreement Endanger U.S. Interests in the DRC?
- Affordability Is the Top Issue on California’s November BallotCommentary
Direct democracy is the political wildcard in the state’s midterm election.
Mark Baldassare, Ian Klaus
- Taking the Pulse: Are the EU’s Watered-Down Russia Sanctions Better than None?Commentary
The EU had to compromise to adopt a twenty-first sanctions package against Russia, exposing growing cracks in the union’s resolve. Is this latest, weaker round worth it to keep pressure on Moscow?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- The Hormuz Conflict and the Limits of Renminbi InternationalizationPaper
Potential Strait of Hormuz transit “fees” and Iran’s renminbi use are bringing attention to Beijing’s push to become a “financial power,” particularly in energy markets. Underdeveloped aspects of China’s financial system and its dollar dependencies still constrain the renminbi’s geoeconomic significance, but recent events may spur policy shifts aimed at changing these dynamics.
Robert Greene
- What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear DealCommentary
Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.
Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton
