Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

7. To Expand the Research Program and To Use Its Results More Effectively.

There is some evidence that USIA is starting to expand and utilize its research program. Some Public Affairs Officers (PAO's), area and media directors are beginning to appreciate the need to determine the impact and effectiveness of their programs and products as they relate to the psychological climate in which operations are conducted. Other media and area directors and most PAO's continue to resist efforts to study their products or to use the results of research in the planning of their programs. The magnitude of USIA's research operation remains far below the customarily accepted minima in private communications research and in private industry.

8. To Consider the Need To Consolidate Into One Agency of Government the Related But Widely Scattered Programs in Information, Education and Culture.

This is a proposal which requires overall government action. There is no question but that programs in this area have proliferated all over the government. In addition to USIA, the Department of State, the Agency for International Development (AID), the Department of Defense, the Peace Corps, the Office of Education, and the Departments of Commerce, Labor and Agriculture, among the major agencies, and a number of minor ones, conduct such programs. This has been amply documented in the hearings conducted by Representative Fascell of Florida and the House Subcommittee on Foreign Affairs.43 It is summarized in a committee report entitled "The U.S. Ideological Effort: Government Agencies and Programs", January, 1964." There is need for tightening up, for greater government-wide coordination, and for the elimination of overlapping authorities and responsibilities in the foreign information, cultural, and educational fields presently divided among so many government agencies.

9. To Seek the Advice and Guidance of Local Latin American Practitioners of Mass Communications in Presenting the Alliance for Progress to Latin America.

The Commission has been unable to ascertain the extent to which USIA follows this recommendation. The Commission has not visited Latin American posts this year to conduct independent observations. Nor has it received any information from the Agency concerning this matter.

10. To Confine USIA's Domestic Publications to a Minimum and Limit the Distribution of Its Media Products in the US. in Accordance With the Intentions of Congress.

Although this has been a recurring problem, there has been some reduction and the Agency has been responsive to past complaints both

43 See ante, doc. XIII-1.

"Committee print of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, 88th Cong.. 1st sess., Jan. 3, 1964.

public and congressional. It is important however, to watch and reduce further this activity. The Agency should make a continuous effort to keep Congress informed as to its activities and its programs. The focus of USIA's interest and the time and efforts of its officials should be devoted to its overseas organization, strategy and purposes. The targets are foreign, not domestic. Speeches in the United States by USIA and the exhibition and dissemination of its product in this country should be held to a minimum.

Part XIV

THE ORGANIZATION, FUNCTIONS, AND OPERATIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE

A. Organization and Administration

Document XIV-1

Opposition of the State Department to the Proposed Establishment of a Freedom Commission: STATEMENT MADE BY THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR POLITICAL AFFAIRS (HARRIMAN) BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES, FEBRUARY 20, 19641

I appreciate this opportunity to present the views of the Department of State on the bills pending before this committee relating to the establishment of a Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy.2

3

As the committee knows, the administration last year proposed establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs, a proposal aimed primarily at improving education and training of many thousands of officers and employees of the Federal Government who are already engaged in work directly affecting foreign affairs and national security.

We believe the National Academy of Foreign Affairs proposal is the more appropriate and more effective way to accomplish what we understand to be the basic objectives which we share with the proponents of the Freedom Academy. The administration feels this is the better way to help win the cold war and advance our interests abroad. I have been concerned over the dangers of communism since the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. I have had direct experience in dealing with Communist imperialism—in many forms and in various international and domestic situations-since the twenties. Chairman

1 Department of State Bulletin, Mar. 23, 1964, pp. 462-464.

2 Reference is to the following bills introduced during the 88th Cong.: H.R. 352, Jan. 9, 1963; H.R. 1617, Jan. 10, 1963; H.R. 5368, Apr. 2, 1963; H.R. 8320, Aug. 30, 1963; H.R. 8757, Oct. 8, 1963; H.R. 10036, Feb. 20, 1964; H.R. 10037, Feb. 20, 1964.

3

See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1962, pp. 1553–1555; ibid., 1963, pp. 1309-1314, 1316-1318.

4

Khrushchev told me when I was in Moscow last summer that "there can be no coexistence in ideology; that conflict goes on." Mr. Gromyko confirmed this in his recent speech at the United Nations, when he said there could be no compromise in ideology.

We all know that the Communist effort against the free world is conducted in many ways, that the developing countries are particularly vulnerable to Communist penetration, and that these pose a massive set of problems for the United States. It is clear that we need to train people throughout the Government who can meet these problems, indeed all our national security problems, with all the tools available. However, the administration believes the Freedom Commission proposal would not be an effective answer to our present training requirements. Moreover, it would not provide a practical administrative setup.

While the objectives which have moved the sponsors of the Freedom Commission are certainly worthy, I would not be helpful to this committee if I failed to pinpoint some of our differences in viewpoint and emphasis.

First, the Freedom Commission proposal places great stress upon the mobilization of private citizens, domestic and foreign, to fight the cold war and upon the systematic indoctrination of our citizens against communism. It contemplates that both tasks be undertaken on a large scale by the executive branch of the Government.

The administration believes that in certain circumstances it is useful to train U.S. citizens who are not in the Government, as well as foreign nationals. But what we need first and most is to improve in all possible ways training of Government personnel involved in the conduct of foreign affairs. This training should be conducted on an interdepartmental basis and should be directly connected with research in depth into past successes and failures and possible future courses of action in foreign affairs.

This the administration now seeks to do, with limited resources, at the Foreign Service Institute of the State Department. Establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs would greatly improve our current efforts to give advanced training to officers of the State Department and the many other Government agencies involved with foreign affairs.

Much of this training, of course, depends on the use of classified materials. This creates another problem with regard to the training of outsiders.

I think it is obvious that the use of classified materials would be impossible if private citizens or noncitizens were to be trained on any sizable scale. It is also likely that the freedom of discussion within the classroom would-and properly should-be inhibited by the presence of students from even the most closely allied countries.

'The Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (Harriman) was in Moscow for the conclusion of the nuclear test ban negotiations; see ibid., pp. 977-978. 'Excerpts printed in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1963, pp. 923-929.

219-262-67- -89

Even if this were not a problem, the training of foreign nationals on a large scale by the United States Government in a Federal institution could be self-defeating. If such students returned home and organized anti-Communist movements, as I believe the Freedom Academy proponents contemplate, they would be instantly labeled "Yankee stooges. In those rare but inevitable cases where they returned home and joined the ranks of anti-American subversion, the propaganda possibilities for the Communists would be even richer.

In this respect let us not forget the Soviet failures to win the minds of many of the African students they have tried to indoctrinate at Patrice Lumumba University.

Unquestionably, the American educational system is a magnificent tool with which to develop an understanding of the fundamental human value of freedom. There are 50,000 foreign students now in the United States, taking training in a wide variety of specialties, in all kinds of American schools. The same is true of the military personnel that are over here in our military schools. It is surely better to have foreign students in our schools and homes to see the way we live, rather than try to indoctrinate them in a Government institution. In this way freedom has been allowed to speak for itself to these young people. And freedom is, by definition, its own best advocate. That is our strength. It is always a mistake to adopt the methods of the enemies of freedom.

We have, however, a strong interest to help increase the knowledge and capacity of governments and peoples on how to deal effectively with Communist tactics in their own countries. These efforts are being expanded. In Latin America, for example, we are helping to improve the capacity of governments and peoples to deal with general and local Communist infiltration and subversion, both through the Organization of American States and through bilateral measures. Students and other peoples in that region are becoming increasingly able to deal with Communist efforts to control and manipulate them.

6

All over the world we are also helping to strengthen free labor unions against communism. In the same way we are attempting to strengthen the youth movements against Communist infiltration.

If we consider solely the training of private U.S. citizens, the problems are somewhat different in nature but they are equally great. The United States Government should and does maintain informal links with all sectors of our society. The Department of State, in particular, brings leaders from business, labor, and the academic world together to discuss foreign policy problems. In these efforts the learning process is an invaluable two-way thing.

In addition the Department of State and other agencies of Government produce a steady flow of pamphlets, reports, and other educational material which is of great use to the general public.

Another question raised by the bills before you today involves Federal control. The Freedom Commission, to quote from H.R. 352, would be "authorized to prepare, make, and publish textbooks and other

"See ibid., pp. 239-242, 248-249, 254-255, 271-276, 282, 286; also, ante, docs, III-7, 20, 27, 29, 34.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »