Senator MCCLELLAN. I was just trying to make the record complete. Senator ELLENDER. As you know, Mr. Chairman, I have a lot of faith in the radio programs. We established several stations throughout the world. I do not see why that could not be handled through the State Department just as well.

QUALITY OF PROGRAMS

Senator MCCLELLAN. My disappointment in this Agency has been, I think, that it has put out a lot of trash at times that is useless. In other words, it has not concentrated on the quality, if you want to call it, propaganda for our purposes call it propaganda, that which is calculated to influence other nations and other people in our favor or make a good impression of us.

I think a lot of it in the past has been expended for programs that did not emphasize the positive aspects. I think we would have been better off if we had not done that.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. May I comment on that, Senator?
Senator MCCLELLAN. Čertainly.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. Senator Ellender, it is very difficult to go through chapter and verse about the effectiveness of so many diverse activities, but the chairman has just said that he has some questions about specific things that we have accomplished. You have said that, too. Let me, if I may, just give you one illustration. I grant you it is a

small illustration.

VOICE OF AMERICA

We do two or three things in the Soviet Union. One is the Voice of America, which is the only way the people of the United States can talk directly to the people in the Soviet Union. Anything else we do has to go through a filter over there.

AMERICA MAGAZINE

Second, we put out a cultural magazine called America Magazine with a circulation of 60,000 in a country of 200 million. What good can that do? That is a question I asked myself when I came on here.

INTERVIEW OF SOVIET DEFECTOR

Anatole Kuznetsov defected from the Soviet Union some time ago, a very prominent dissident intellectual in the Soviet Union. He defected to a Russian-speaking English journalist. The BBC had a 1hour interview program between that Russian journalist and Anatole Kuznetsov. It happened that one night at the Watergate, I was watching when CBS used that tape. They did a simultaneous translation in English of these two men, the defector and the English journalist talking in Russian, and it was translated in English.

There were two inquiries in that that sat me up in my chair. I would like to share them with you. In one of them the English journalist said

to Kuznetsov:

When you fled the Soviet Union, you knew what you were leaving behind. You knew the terror and tyranny you were leaving behind. You knew you were leaving your wife and children, but how did you know what you were going to? How did

you know what was out there, that you we re not going out of the frying pan into the fire?

Kuznetsov started his answer by saying:

Well, there is the Voice of America.

Later in the program the journalist asked him, and this was for the English audience, not for the American audience:

Mr. Kuznetsov, how did you know when you were first getting in trouble? In a society like Soviet Union when they start to put the heat on you, the terror on you, how does it start? How do you know?

Kuznetsov started that answer by saying, Well, I can tell you the way it started with me. One night about three or four in the morning the phone rang. I stumbled to the phone. There was a gruff male voice which said, "Kuznetsov, you are a traitor. We know you are a traitor. You have two copies of America Magazine in your apartment."

Now that is a small thing, a defector, but evidences like that that occur from time to time which lead me to believe that many of these services are very valuable.

In the Communist countries we don't have research. I can't tell you how many people listen to the Voice of America in the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe. We can't do market research there. I can't tell you specifically what the exact effect is of an exhibition, but I have gone to see them. I have gone to see the Soviet people, Romanian people, Polish people and Hungarian people as they go through these exhibits.

In my sincere judgment, Senator, these are extremely valuable programs for the American people and very effective. I do not mean to say they are going to change those people from Communists into believers in democracy, but they are a link between our people and those people that I think is useful.

CONGRESSIONAL POLICY: WHETHER TO MAINTAIN SEPARATE AGENCY FOR FUNCTION

Senator ELLENDER. I don't deny that. That is why I favor the radio, but we should not have a separate agency to handle that. That is my point.

Senator MCCLELLAN. It is a matter of policy for the Congress to determine.

Senator ELLENDER. We could accomplish the same thing as we did before. Here you have a separate agency that stands apart and that costs a good deal more.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. I would not debate with you the question of a separate agency. I believe that is a matter of policy. If I may suggest, I think that is less important than the basic point, which is that many of these services are very useful to the Nation.

Senator ELLENDER. I do not deny that some of them are. But for every one you find good, you find about four bad ones. We should spend a good deal more time in trying to deal with people behind the Iron Curtain rather than spend all this money in Europe, as I said, to have programs there for our friends.

In other words, I repeat we are the only country in the world that has a separate agency.

Senator MCCLELLAN. As I said a moment ago, whether it is this agency or an agency that has been established for that purpose, is a matter of congressional policy. The thing I am concerned about is what good do we get out of what we do and if these functions are necessary. At the moment the question is whether to continue funding. Senator SMITH?

EXHIBITS IN USSR AND EAST EUROPE

Senator SMITH. Mr. Shakespeare, I would like, first, to thank you for your very nice letter with respect to my remarks about Willis Conover in the Senate some time ago.

Secondly, would you give us some examples of some of the accomplishments of our exhibits in Russia and Eastern Europe? Mr. SHAKESPEARE. Yes; I will be glad to.

Senator SMITH. Do you want to do that now?

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. Yes; I will be pleased to.

We put on one exhibit in Russia every 2 years, which is arranged for in an exchange agreement between the two nations. The exhibit goes to six cities in the Soviet Union. The present exhibit in the Soviet Union is on "Education in the United States." It has been shown in Moscow, Leningrad, Kiev, and in three new cities where we have never had exhibits before, Tashkent

Senator MCCLELLAN. Will you yield at that point?

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. Yes, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. I wonder if they don't have films of all this rioting over here that they are showing to their people over there. Mr. SHAKESPEARE. Of course they have it. It comes out of their ears over there, Senator.

In addition to that, there are three cities we have never been in before-Tashkent, Baku, and Novosibirsk. I wonder if I could have your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, for just a moment.

We put on this exhibit in Kiev. An incident happened in Kiev which, to me, speaks volumes as to the value of these exhibits. You have these people who are so hungry to hear and see and touch anything that relates to the United States that their reaction never ceases to amaze, at least me. Sometimes a little incident can show that more clearly than all the statistics and briefings in the world.

KIEV INCIDENT: REPORT FROM FIELDMAN

There was a little incident in Kiev, which if I may, Senator Smith, I would like to share with you. I got a report from our fieldman. I will read you part of it because I think it will make clear the importance that I believe the exhibits have.

There was rioting in front of the Education USA pavilion in Kiev on September 14.

The day was Sunday, and in the bright, warm September weather thousands of Kievans began at an early hour to stream onto the grounds of the Exhibition of Advanced Achievements of the Ukrainian S.S.R. Long before Education USA was to open, a long line of expectant visitors had formed before the pavilion. By noon, an hour after the doors had opened, the ranks of the waiters, standing six and eight abreast, stretched out of sight. And even though visitors were flowing into the pavilion at the rate of 1,100 an hour, the advance of the line was

imperceptible. During the early afternoon, visitors were complaining that it had stood motionless for more than an hour.

Tension mounted rapidly during the afternoon. Groups of visitors, released to enter the hall, surged forward in thundering waves. Policemen began to lose their tempers. Bouts of shoving and pushing flared and as quickly subsided. Boys at first, and then young men and adult men and women sporadically attempted to crash the line, and many succeeded. At one point the police momentarily lost control, and a group of 200 or more waiters broke through almost to the pavilion door.

In the rear, the line stretched out interminably. At 5 p.m. the Exhibit Director estimated that as many as 7,000 people were still waiting to be admitted to the pavilion; the hall was not large enough to contain more than 2,000 of them during the remaining display hours.

And then at 5:30 p.m. the dam broke.

There was a sudden surge, and as police moved forward to block the crowd's advance, a small leak sprang on their flank. Within seconds it had become a pouring torrent that washed and surged to the exihibit door. A hundred or so visitors broke through and into the hall before the entrance could be blocked; others began to rush into the building through the exit.

The great crowd, now released, marched forward; rank upon rank, they pressed into the square before the pavilion, elbowing, jostling, crushing forward to the building. By now, fist-swinging policemen had reached the doors and were barring entry. At 5:40 p.m. their captain bawled into a bullhorn that the doors were locked and the exhibit closed.

Then gradually police began to restore control. Slowly at first and then at a quickening pace, they propelled the crowd backward from the exhibit doors. Disappointed visitors, recognizing the hopelessness of their position, began to drift away. The shouting and the cursing subsided, and by 7 p.m. when the exhibit staff entered their bus to return to their hotel, only quiet knots of humanity still lingered in front of the hall.

Senator MCCLELLAN. How long was that open?

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. That was opened for 30 consecutive days. Each day we had lines of people outside ready to go into the pavilion. The desire of these people to see something, anything, that talks about the West and particularly the United States is awesome.

There are only two ways that we relate to the Soviet people directly. One is through the Voice of America and the other is through these exhibits. Anything else we do goes through a filter.

AGREEMENT WITH THE SOVIETS

Senator MCCLELLAN. If these things are so effective and I am not arguing, I have a little problem understanding it- if these things have such an impact upon the Russian people, the Russians are bound to know it. Why do they permit us to do it?

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. That is an excellent question, Senator. This agreement with the Soviets is a 2-year agreement, renewed each 2 years.

Now this agreement is an exchange that covers many arrangements between ourselves and the Soviet, technical exchanges, scientific exchanges.

(Discussion off the record.)

Senator MCCLELLAN. Are there any further questions?

RUSSIANS VIEWING EXHIBITS

Senator SMITH. Yes.

Mr. Shakespeare, with regard to the crowds that go to this exhibit, is there any check made as to what happens to these people who make

so much of the visit as far as the Soviets are concerned? In other words, are they sacrificing in anyway?

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. I would have to answer only in general terms, Senator Smith. When an exhibit is publicly announced in the newspaper and when posters are put up, it means to them that it is officially approved and that they may go. Therefore, they go in enormous numbers.

My judgment would be because of that, that there is no deleterious effect on the people who go.

Now going to our embassy, of course, is another matter. In our embassy there are guards in front of it and they check your credentials and all that sort of thing. I am sure they keep a very specific list of anyone who tries to go into the American Embassy, which means the small libarry we have in Moscow is for all practical purposes useless. It is just for our own people, the diplomatic people.

EXHIBITS IN OTHER EAST EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

Senator SMITH. Mr. Chairman, rather than take the time now, I would ask that Mr. Shakespeare be permitted to tell us something of the exhibits in other parts of Eastern Europe, not at this time, but for the record.

Senator MCCLELLAN. File a brief statement outlining specifically some of them.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE. I will do that.

(The statement follows:)