H.R. 13177--FREEDOM COMMISSION EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. BURT L. TALCOTT OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 1966

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 28
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 1, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: March 10, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
March 10, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A1379
warrant an even larger allocation at the end
of the year to each participating electric
cooperative.
So, I speak to you as one who has been
through this and has found this a very ef-
fective way of obtaining money.
I want to thank you for this opportunity
of presenting my views to you today. I again
point out that in my opinion the big issue
for your organization is not on whether or
not you can continue to obtain government
money at a 2-percent interest rate. I believe
you can at about the present level. More
important is whether you can obtain the
necessary expansion capital which will be
needed by your organizations in the next 15
y@ars, if you are to grow apace with the pri-
vate utilities here in America. As I have
indicated, 6,11 of my projections fail to show
adequate funding potential for you at the
2-percent. rate. You alone must know
whether or not a supplementary method of
obtaining financing is needed beyond hav-
ing each individual electric association apply
for its own expansion funds at some local
level. If the experience of other cooperatives
is a criteria, then it would be well for you
to join together in the formation of the Fed-
Too many people hate communism-
almost a kneejerk reaction to the
word-without knowing or understand-
ing communism.
Communism is repugnant to every-
thing I hold dear, my family, my church,
my country, the individual human being,
the free enterprise system of doing busi-
ness, free representative government.
But I cannot oppose it intelligently or
fight it effectively if I do not fully under-
stand it.
Just as we cannot fight a disease if we
do not thoroughly understand it, we can-
not defend ourselves or our institutions
against communism if we do not under-
stand its history, objectives, language,
mechanics, techniques, and methods.
Nowhere at present is there a reposi-
tory of research materials on com-
munism and the insidious subversive
tactics its proponents and followers have
developed. Nowhere can a private citi-
zen who is moving to an overseas post
take a course to equip himself to perceive
Communist activity or to tell the story
of free enterprise and democracy. No
ment policymakers and employees in
Communist theory and practices. Quali-
fied teachers are in short supply. We
actually do not have enough competent
teachers of Communist techniques and
tactics to teach the teachers.
This crying inadequacy has placed the
United States far behind the Com-
munists in the race between freedom and
communism. The tale of the hare and
the tortoise is somewhat analogous ex-
cept that many persons in this country
do not even realize that we are in such a
race. Conversely, too many of our citi-
zens believe that we can retreat into our
shell and be protected from Communist
aggression and subversion. This attitude
should convince even the most dubious
that the free world must shake itself free
from a lethargy which could lull it into
oblivion.
Mr. Speaker, an extensive Communist
program for training agents is well doc-
umented. The State Department has
supplied.the Congress with information
verifying the operation of seven schools
of political warfare in the Soviet Union,
nine in. East Germany, nine in Cuba,
four in Czechoslovakia, three in Hun-
gary, and two in Bulgaria. Meanwhile,
Red China has specialized in training
Latin American and African Commu-
nists. I am not aware of any published
statistics on the Chinese-sponsored
schools. However, the present leader-
ship in Ghana announced the closing of
a Communist school for subversives
which had the blessing of former Premier
Nkrumah. Even when faced with the
fact of these schools which turn out
thousands of operatives trained in mob
Secondly, we must develop counter-
Communist methods. The most creative
minds available should be set to work on
this challenge. Our Foreign Service per-
sonnel, employees of American businesses
abroad, and even tourists could profit
from training in countercommunism.
Many believe that the Voice of Amer-
ica should be sufficient for telling the
world about America and its beliefs.
While no objective tests can measure the
effectiveness of the Voice, the advance of
communism since World War II suggests
that we need many more and better
weapons.
Mr. Speaker, we will lose the struggle
with communism by default unless we
awaken to the danger, arouse our citi-
zenry, and arm ourselves. The major
battlefields will be in the minds of men.
The most effective weapons will be ideo-
logical, buttressed by better methods of
presentation.
For many years, some dedicated Amer-
icans have been working for the estab-
lishment of a Freedom Commission and
Freedom Academy. Its purposes are the
attainment of a thorough and complete
understanding of communism; the de-
velopment of methods to learn about and
combat the effective tactics of the Com-
munists; the dissemination of tech-
nical information on the true character
of communism-both at home and
abroad; and the education and training
of governmental and private individuals
in the new science of countercommu-
nism.
I have introduced a bill, H.R. 13177,
which contains some revisions agreed to
by framers of earlier legislation and some
revisions of my own. I trust my bill will
serve as a springboard to a final version
which will be enacted. . The bill ad-
mittedly needs perfection.
My bill would establish a Freedom
Commission to collect and assemble cur-
rent information and knowledge on com-
munism and its methods and to devise
effective means for countering commu-
nism.
My bill also authorizes the Commission
to establish a Freedom Academy, similar
in some respects to our service academies,
to educate and train persons in the newly
developed science of countercommunismn.
I anticipate that the Academy would be a
specialized graduate institution.
The Academy would be a technical re-
search and training institution. It
would not be a counterinsurgency agency
or an arm of the military or State
Department.
I have introduced this bill partly to
give meaning and purpose to the out-
standing and dedicated work of a group
of Salinas, Calif., Jaycees who have be-
come concerned abo t th
EXTENSION OF REMA
OF
HON. BURT L. TALCOTT
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 10, 1966
Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, pro-
foundly dynamic ideas underlie our gov-
ernmental and economic system. Our
forefathers recognized what individuals
could and would accomplish when they
were afforded the opportunity in a so-
ciety freed from governmental shackles.
The essence of our federal system is the
subordination of governmental power to
that of the individual. Giving the in-
dividual the opportunity and the respon-
sibility for his own development released
the creative capacities of men to an ex-
tent hitherto undreamed of.
Realizing the potential of our eco-
nomic system and democratic form of
Government, we rightly wonder why so
many of the newly independent nations
of the world seem to look to communism
and state socialism as the fastest routes
to material abundance and fulfillment of
their national aspirations. The answer
is obviously threefold: First, the very
aggressive methods used by Communists
to further communism; second, the fail-
ure of the free world to present its be-
liefs in a manner readily understood and
applied; third, the failure of everyone
to recognize the danger posed by the
Communist philosophy.
Despite the increasing loss of men and
countries to Communist dictatorship, it
appears that few Americans, even in high
governmental positions, are sufficiently
aware of the stated goal of copmu-
nism-world domination-and' the
methods designed to achieve this goal.
How many persons know what is meant
by dialectical materialism? How many
realize that words to Communists have
meanings completely different from our
meanings?
u e inadequate
violence, subversion, destruction, and research materials, knowledge, and un-
terrorism too many of us want to carry derstanding of communism and the
on "business as usual." methods and tactics of Communist pro-
The need to understand this godless motion. The Salinas and California
philosophy is so great and urgent that Jaycees have resolved to support the
we should immediately embark on a Freedom Academy concept. I applaud
crash program to systematize our knowl-
edge of it and then convert this knowl- their interest and initiative.
edge into the most effective media for I urge interested Members and persons
instructing all Americans of all ages to scrutinize my proposal and make help-
about this menace. ful suggestions which will strengthen it.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-APPENDIX March 10, 1966
Employees Separated After June 30,1965,
To Receive Severance Pay
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
Or
HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 10, 1966
employees operate with equal cogency in
the case of severance pay benefits for
Federal employees.
Fair play demands that we amend
present law to extend severance pay ben-
efits to all eligible Federal employees
who were separated from their employ-
ment on or after July 1, 1965. My bill
does not enlarge the basis for determin-
ing whether or not an employee is eli-
gible for these benefits. This determi-
nation remains the same.
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I have
today introduced a bill which would
provide a retroactive effective date of
July 1, 1965, for the severance pay pro-
visions of the Federal Employees Salary
Act of 1965. Under the present law,
only those Federal employees who are
involuntarily separated from their em-
ployment on or after October 29, 1965,
the effective date of the act, are entitled
to the benefits of severance pay. Upon
closer observation this humane law,
noble in purpose, turns out to exclude
from its protection many of those whom
it was intended to benefit. I am sure
that the Congress never intended it that
way and it would seem that a change in
the law is in order to give it the intended
effect.
Several instances of injustice under
the severance pay provisions of the Fed-
eral Employees Salary Act of 1965 re-
cently came to my attention. I am told
that there are many other Federal em-
ployees who are similarly affected ad-
versely by the present law. In one case,
a 23-year employee of the New York
Naval Shipyard was separated from his
employment on October 1, 1965, and in
another case an 18-year employee of the
shipyard was separated from his em-
ployment on October 10, 1965. Both
were separated because of a reduction In
force resulting from an order of base
closure. Neither of these employees is
eligible for severance pay benefits under
the present law, while other separated
employees with substantially less years
of service to their credit are eligible for
severance pay because they happen to
have been separated subsequent to Octo-
ber 29, 1965, the effective date of the
law. This is neither fair nor is it rea-
sonable, and I am sure the Congress
never intended the law to operate in
that manner.
Under my bill, all Federal employees
who are otherwise eligible for severance
pay benefits would be entitled to them
if they were separated from their em-
ployment on or after July 1, 1965. My
bill would establish the same effective
date for severance pay benefits as is pro-
vided in the same act for relocation ex-
pense benefits to postal employees.
Under present law, postal employees
who are transferred or relocated from
one official station to another are en-
titled to relocation expense benefits.
These relocation benefits are available
to all eligible postal employees who were
relocated or transferred on or after July
1, 1965. There seems to be no valid
reason why the same July 1, 1965, date
should not also be the effective date for
severance pay benefits. The same rea-
sons that compel a July 1. 1965, effective
date for relocation benefits to postal
They Fight Battles, Too
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. JOHN M. MURPHY
OP NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 10, 1966
Mr. MURPHY of New York. Mr.
Speaker, under leave to extend my re-
marks in the RECORD, I include the fol-
lowing editorial from the New York Her-
ald Tribune of March 8, 1966.
The editorial staff of the Herald Trib-
une is this particular editorial points up
one of the most significant aspects of the
escalation in this combat area. The es-
calation which has been blamed on the
United States should be blamed on the
North Vietnamese and the Vietcong.
The fact that battalion regimental size
units have engaged American troops in
the field certainly points out this is not
just a guerrilla operation.
The editorial follows;
smashed, uprooted from their usual sources
of supply, cut off from the higher command.
When that happens, although there may be
many survivors, they are not effective-
until they can regroup, be brought up to
strength and given new leadership. And if
they are hustled enough, such a reorganiza-
tion may not be possible.
It Is this kind of defeat that the Vietcong
seems to have been suffering, at an accelerat-
ing rate. In the past few months. And It Is
this kind of defeat that can enable the vital
political and social role of pacification to be
undertaken with a chance of success. Vic=
tortes can be won In Vietnam-and they are
being won now, Senator FULBRIGIIT to the
contrary notwithstanding.
Timely Safety Proposal
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. WILLIAM S. MOORHEAD
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, March 10, 1966
Mr. MOORHEAD. Mr. Speaker, in a
recent editorial, the Pittsburgh Press
notes the need for a broad Federal pro-
gram on highway safety. Commenting
on the President's transportation mes-
sage the editorial said "the President
got down to brass tacks. He wants Fed-
eral standards in driver education and
licensing. Better traffic control tech-
niques. Cars designed and engineered
to be safer. Better tires, safer high-
ways."
All of us are concerned with a traffic
death toll which averages a thousand
lives a week.
Much of the reporting of the Vietnamese Under leave to extend my remarks I
war has tended to emphasize the little skir- ask that the Press editorial of March 5,
mish, the role of the individual soldier or 1966 be included at this point in the
the platoon. Many of the headlines have RECORD.
been preempted by air raids over North Viet- TIMELY SAFETY PROPOSAL
nam. Opponents of the American role In President Johnson's message to Congress
southeast Asia talk as if that role consisted on transportation was really two separate
of killing women and children while shower- and extensive proposals which only happened
ing napalm on peaceful villages. But they to fall together.
fight battles In Vietnam, too. One was a long-range plan for bringing
This was Illustrated by the account of the together in one new cabinet department all
success achieved by the Marines and the Government agencies dealing with trans-
South Vietnamese troops against a North portation-by highway, air, rail, and water.
Vietnamese regiment near Quang Na,!. Ap- The President has some justification for his
parently, half the regiment were casualties request; as he says, our transportation sys-
and the rest, in the words of a Marine offi- tem is the web of our Union and it has grown
cer, "Just survivors." And General west- without coordination.
moreland confirmed the picture of real bat- Today the Federal Government spends
ties and real victories when, almost casually, about `6 billion a year on transport
he referred to four regular Vietcong bat- matters and 100,000 Federal employees work
talions destroyed In the last few days. at It, scattered in numerous agencies.
This is an Impressive toll. It has been Probably greater efficiency would follow a
customary to state Vietcong losses in terms consolidation of this effort into one depart-
of "body count"-a grisly method which was ment, but there will be good arguments on
necessitated in part by the guerrilla nature both sides of its creation and the question
of much of the fighting-enemy units dia- is not likely to be quickly resolved.
solving into the jungle to reform-and In But as to the second part of Mr. Johnson's
part by public skepticism over communiques message, there should be little argument as
might tell of routed enemies but were far to the need and urgency. That is for a
from precise about what the rout actually broad Federal program on highway safety.
meant. No other necessity of modern life, said
But In plain fact, It Is possible to win vic- the President, has brought more convenience
tortes, even over guerrillas, and fairly crush- to the American people-or more tragedy-
Ing ones at that. No matter how loose a than the auto. More Americans have died in
military organization may be, no matter to auto accidents than have been killed in all
what extent it normally lives off the coun- our wars.
try, once it gets past the snipe-and-run stage. The President got down to brass tacks.
it must have bases, it must have assembly He wants Federal standards In driver educa-
areas, It must have some kind of command tion and licensing. Better traffic control
and supply organization. The Vietcong are techniques: Cars designed and engineered
mustered Into units, and those units can be to be safer. Better tires. Safer highways.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 :'CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R00.0600080001-7
October 22, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
illness or, disease, in the maturity of years,
or in the fell swoop of catastrophes, his heart
has been rended by the parting. He has not
been satisfied that., they should entirely per-
ish. He has sought to give concrete ex-
pression to the groping, yearning, respect,
and love which he has felt.
. There is much that is genuine and laud-
able in such tribute: for one is easily aware
that there, but for provident circumstances,
is he. And eventually, he knows not when
or how, there he will be. We know that
those persons were human beings such as
we, that they too felt the urge of desires,
the pull of ambitions, the lure of ideas, and
the buoyancy of hope. They were cut off,
some of them, at an unseemly time, and our
way of life is indebted to them for their sac-
rifices.. When we think of the extent to
which our lives are dependent upon what
they have contributed we fain would pre-
serve their memory.
In a farewell sermon delivered by William
Ralph Inge at Cambridge University before
he went to become dean of St. Paul's in
London, he declared, "Believe me the only
promise of a better future for our country is
to be looked for from those to whom her
past is dear."
The person who does not have some re-
spect for the day that has gone before is not
likely to show much for the day which is to
come. But we may say with equal truth that
the past of our country is really dear only to
those who strive to make for her a better
future. Continually looking back to the
dear, dead days beyond recall is not a fit
rememberance. The really worthwhile re-
membrance of the dead is in the contribu-
tion to the bettering of the lot of the living.
We are only worthy of the sacrifices which
the dead have made for us as we give our-
selves, not to smug and blind satisfaction
with things as they are or have been, but
rather to the improvement of what we have
received from them. This is true of our
national and international life and it is true
of our common life in this and every other
community and nation. Only as we are
willing to give of our time and of our energy
and of our possessions to the advancement of
our country and the world at large are we
being fair to those whom we claim to honor.
It is a laudable aspect of this service today
that we represent more than one country
recognizing that the bonds of humanity go
beyond the limits of national boundaries.
One of the lessons which we are learning in
the 20th century, however falteringly and
fragmentarily, is that we cannot rightfully
or safely think of our own country alone.
The narrow, jingoistic attitude which thinks
of one's country to the exclusion of all Others
ought to have died a long time ago and it is
hoped that it is dying now. For John Donne
is right in asserting that "No man is an
island entire of itself. Every man is a part
of the continent, a piece of the main."
John Henry Newman once said that
nothing is easier than to say the word "God"
and not mean anything by it. We have to
confess that that is a habit into which
chronic religion easily slips and from which
it needs to be delivered. Our utterance of
words in remembrance of the dead finds its
real meaning in the extent to which we
honor them by doing our part to make the
present better than the past.
If man is always in memory looking to his
past, he is also ever casting hopeful eyes to-
ward the future. He is like the man singing
in the old slave song, "I keep my eye on the
bright North Star and think of liberty." He
has never been satisfied completely to rest
in what has been. He Is always seeking to
do better in the day which approaches. This
has been the way with man's restless spirit.
He has worked and looked for the dawn of
a new day. He has sought to realize his
dreams In his utopias and his adventures.
A6015
One hundred years ago, Frederick Douglass challenged, the exploitation of self is ele-
escaped from slavery in Baltimore and fled vated into a religion. All of this at a time
to Massachusetts. He attended a meeting in when there is more need for national and
Nantucket where William Lloyd Garrison was international harmony and unity than ever
to give an address. Douglass was introduced before in the history of mankind.
and asked to speak. He said, "I am free, but Somehow there must be another approach
I am branded with the marks of the lash * * * to the problem of human survival. The real
I have not forgotten. Nor will I forget while, problem is that such an approach will only
any place upon this earth, there are slaves." be found In the willingness to common un-
Here is embodied the sort of spirit which derstanding-to give and take throughout
will be required of us if we are to keep faith the whole world-a frame of mind which,
with those who have died and with the gen- unfortunately, is entirely unacceptable to
erations which will come after us. The past the majority of mankind today.
and the future place their obligations The sacrifice of the dead will have been
squarely upon us. To ignore their urgency
is to betray our trust. Thomas Carlyle once
referred to the mystic faculties of memory
and hope through which we are able to sum-
mon both the past and the future and com-
mune with them. We are obligated to see
that both of them are allied in order that
the legacy of the memory and the promise
of the hope may find their fulfillment in a
glorious future.
When Douglass finished speaking, Garrison
Inquired of the people, "Is this a thing-
a chattel-or a man?" From the audience
someone shouted, "He is a man. A man."
Garrison continued, "And to this cause we
solemnly dedicate our strength, our minds,
our spirits, and our lives." It is in this
heroic attitude of life that are met the
honoring of the past and the hopes of the
future.
SPEECH OF THE HONORABLE ALEX CAIRNS, WIN-
NIPEG, MANITOBA, DELIVERED AT THE ANNUAL
CONVENTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WAR
VETERANS' ALLIANCE HELD AT BEMmJI,
MINN., JULY 31 AND AUGUST 1, 1965
It is good for all of us to have these cere-
monies from time to time, for they remind
u 'of the debt we owe to those who fought in
defense of their country. They also give us
an opportunity to reflect on the fact that we
have now entered a strange new world. A
world without national boundaries. It is
now evident that every being has a stake in
the conduct, not only of national affairs, but
of world affairs. A spark ignited in some
small almost unheard of land could again,
If uncontrolled, set the whole world ablaze.
In honoring the men we think of today-
I remember the Gettysburg Address of Abra-
ham Lincoln and how well it applies to those
we honor today-"The world will little note
nor long remember what we say here, but it
can never forget what they did here.
"It is for us, the living, rather to be dedi-
cated to the unfinished work for which they
fought, have so far, so nobly advanced. It is
rather for us to be dedicated to the great
task remaining before us, that from these
honored dead we take Increased devotion to
that cause for which they gave that last full
measure of devotion; that we highly resolve
that these dead shall not have died in vain;
that this Nation, under God, shall have a new
birth of freedom, and that government of the
people, by the people, and for the people,
shall not perish from the earth."
in vain if civilization In fact destroys itself,
The weaknesses of mankind are what lead
to the physical act of war and the destruc-
tion that goes with it. That is what we must
consider when we accept the torch from fail-
ing hands and promise to hold it high. The
decision is that of words--thoughts-honor
and morality against the reeking tube and
iron shard.
. These are troublesome times-with the
world practically divided Into two armed
camps. More than any other group the ex-
serviceman fully appreciates the probable
consequences of war. It Is among these vet-
erans that most ardent advocates of peace
are to be found. There never has been a time
in the world's history when all that they
stand for is more significant and more de-
sirable than today.
In the heart of every war veteran a flame of
memory burns brightly. By its light he can
look back to a time when words like "free-
dom" and "democracy" and "loyalty" came to
mean something very real. Words which In
those days drew forth the best that was in
them though it was, of necessity, in the
worst of causes-that of war and destruction.
Personal and political liberty-freedom of
speech and conscience and belief. Are such
words, and what they mean, empty of all
real content? Have they lost their power so
that instead of being banners and trumpet
calls of an Ideal-they have become as inef-
fectual and as pathetic in their impotence as
the cry of a child in the night?
No, I cannot believe it. In two world wars
men fought and died for those things, and,
they were never more vital to the happiness
of men and women than today. The veterans
organizations stand for the maintenance of
the democratic way of life and the demo-
cratic principles of government that have
been established at so great a cost. They
are the constant reminder that blood and
sacrifice have been the price paid by democ-
racies for the priceless possession of freely
elected government and political liberty.
Sacred possessions of which many of us may
be barely conscious-and fail to value at
their true high worth simply because our
good fortune has spared us any experience
of life without them.
In the world of today, democracy and
peace show themselves, more and more, as
interchangeable terms-the one implicit in
the other-mutually dependent-one on the
other,
The men we honor today also fought for The bitter gales of hate-the winds of
the same principles of liberty, freedom, and propaganda which drive threatening clouds
democracy as those referred to by that great of war across the universally longed-for sun
American President. of peace and prosperity-and so darken the
We are destined to live in a time of fever- whole modern world-do not have their ori-
ish activity, of upheaval and challenge, of a gin in the democracies. They arise in no
world in revolt. The old dams have broken country whose people still possess these
down, and the waters are flooding the land. rights.
The old continents are being submerged, and We are challenged, as with the trumpets
the world is being reshaped before our eyes, of God, to carry Into the highways and by-
We might ask, What ancient fabric has ways of life something of their own self-
fallen? What venerable tradition has been giving spirit. To close our divided ranks
jettisoned? What new gospel has been pro- and be as united in living for the common
claimed? It Is as if we are in a world that weal as they were In dying for it. To take
has awakened from a sleep and has set out on up a task that is even harder than the task
a furious march under sealed orders. We are of making war; namely, the task of keeping
seething with a new and unintelligible life, the peace. Many familiar things that have
Harmony has gone out of music, and beauty been landmarks of our lives for countless
out of art. The Ten Commandments are generations are being changed beyond re-
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 A6016
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX October 22, 1965
call-but-the spirit endures and man can
stUl be master of his fate.
And so today--as for a brief moment we
stand in silent homage to the men who have
crossed the great divide-to join the phan-
tom army of the dead-that marches through
whatever Elysian fields there may be-and
where all men are comrades-let us reflect
on those things-and today-in that brief
space-lot us climb to the high hills. bright
in the sun, and with hands outstretched in
greeting, let us rededicate ourselves to the
great obligation which devolved upon us
through their sacrifice. Let us gaze back
through the wispy haze of memory to those
never-to-be-forgotten days that terminated
with our service. Let us renew our pledge
to them to keep green in the minds of our
generation at least the thought that in two
world wars to end all war-men died to pre-
serve the liberty and freedom we enjoy.
They serve till death why not we?
A quiet solemnity holds our hearts today.
Memory turns back the pages and recalls
the days of stress and anxiety through which
all were called to pass. Wounds, which the
kindly hand of time to beginning to heal,
are just a little touched again-the past sor-
row just a little revived. We would not have
it otherwise. With proud acclaim we bear
once again the rollcall of those whose names
live forever more-a goodly array of martyrs,
a noble army-men and boys. We bow our
heads and hearts in humble thankfulness for
great deliverances wrought on our behalf-
for the preservation of the sanctities of life-
and-for the memory of those who through
suffering obtained the crown of everlasting
life.
Of no previous national deliverance can it
be said that, after such a lapse of years, we
keep the memorial as fervently as we do this
one. There is no abatement of sincerity.
We gather round the lamp of remembrance
today with as much desire. love and grati-
tude In our hearts as we did on that first
anniversary of the day. A day to be proud
of. a day to which we can look back, and
from which we can look forward without any
boastful thought or unworthy motive.
A great cloud of witnesses stands guard
over us today and over the memory of the
past. May we be accounted worthy of such
immortal company.
They grow not old, as we who are left
grow old. Age shall not weary them. nor
the years condemn. At the going down of
the sun, and in the morning we will remem-
ber them.
XTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. KARL E. MUNDT
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Friday, October 22, 1965
Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, it is to
be hoped that early next January the
House will enact the long-awaited Free-
dom Academy bill which once some years
ago was approved by the Senate and
which, this year, has been unanimously
approved by the appropriate legislative
committee of the House. Senate ap-
proval should follow the House action. .
Indicative of the rapidly growing sup-
port for this Important and needed leg-
islation is a recent editorial in the San
Francisco News Call-Bulletin. I ask
unanimous consent that this straight-
forward editorial may be printed in the
Appendix of the Racoan.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
FaEaoou ACADEMY
The cold war goes on, with varying degrees
of temperature, but it does continue and is
a major fact of our lifetime.
If the late President Kennedy was right. It
also will be a major fact of our children's
lifetimes.
This being so, it behooves the United
States to conduct it with all the skills this
country can muster.
A House committee has just voted out a
bill to create a Freedom Academy which
would train Government and private citizens
in the science and art of nonmilitary con-
flict against communism.
It would cover such fields as psychology,
politics, economics, and technology.
We have plenty of know-how In this
country already in this field. They need to
be brought into focus for the purposes of
the cold war.
We hope this measure is pushed through
this session of Congress and not lost as our
Representatives show an increasing concern
to adjourn.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. E. ROSS ADAIR
OF I NDXANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, October 20,1965
Mr. ADAIR. Mr. Speaker, I Join the
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. HAYsl in
urging the House to adopt H.R. 4170, a
bill to provide for adjustments In the
annuities of certain retired Foreign
Service officers. Like the gentleman
from Ohio I too urge adoption with some
reluctance. But given the attitude of
the other body, it seems desirable that
we salvage what we can of this bill.
One of the fundamental purposes of
the bill as It passed the House last year
and again this year was to provide a
measure of equity for the older retired
Foreign Service officers and their
widows. Throughout the consideration
of this measure the subcommittee was
most anxious to relieve the Congress of
private bills for the relief of distressed
widows. Since I have served on the sub-
committee during the past decade, we
have had to consider many such bills.
Our thought was to enact a comprehen-
sive measure that would eliminate such
bills. As a result of the Senate amend-
ments. I anticipate that we may expect
more private bills.
The Senate amendments affect those
Foreign Set-vice officers who retired be-
fore October 16, 1960, and who were
married at the time but who, upon re-
tirement, made no provision for a sur-
vivor annuity. The House bill would
have permitted such individuals to elect
a survivor annuity of $2,400 for which
they would pay $300 a year from Octo-
ber 16. 1960 to the effective date of the
measure and would also pay $300 a year
as the current cost of such an annuity.
The effect of the Senate amendment
is to require these retired officers who
now make such an election to start their
repayments from the date of their re-
tirement which in some cases goes back
20 years and to repay at the old rate of
$1,200 a year. Thus some individuals
would have to pay back about $24,000 in
order to provide a survivor annuity of
$2,400. This approach clearly defeats
the purpose that our subcommittee, the
Committee on Foreign Affairs, and this
House has in mind.
I would expect that any retired For-
eign Service officer who qualified for an
election under the amended Senate lan-
guage would proceed cautiously before
making an election. He should be aware
that his estate will be liable for any
unpaid balances owed the Government.
On the other hand, I would hope the
Government would use restraint in seek-
ing to impose a large liability on rela-
tively small estates.
I am glad the gentleman from Ohio re-
ferred to the mechanics of repayment.
The bill as it passed both Houses author-
ized the Secretary to make arrangements
with annuitants who make an election
to pay the cost of a survivor annuity in
monthly installments. The House ver-
sion made clear that this was to be in
the form of a deduction from the annui-
tant's monthly check. The effect of the
Senate amendment is to leave this mat-
ter unsettled. To require the Secretary
to send out a monthly check and then
have the annuitant send in a monthly
check adds heavy administrative costs
and burdens. I certainly should do noth-
ing to increase paperwork in Govern-
ment. I hope that nothing would be
done to increase paperwork in Govern-
ment.
There are many other commendable
provisions in this bill that were not
touched by the Senate amendments. On
balance I think we have a measure that
will help a number of the older retired
Foreign Service officers and their widows.
Therefore, I am urging my colleagues
to support H.R. 4170 as amended by the
Senate.
Voting Record
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
Or
HON. JAMES R. GROVER, JR.
OF Nzw YORK -
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Friday, October 22, 1965
Mr. GROVER. Mr. Speaker, I am
pleased to submit my voting record on
major substantive issues during the first
session of the 89th Congress. The
record-breaking volume of legislaton is
reflected by the greatest number of roll-
calls in the history of Congress for a
single session which has put considerable
stress and strain on the time and patience
of Members of the House of Representa-
tives. Notwithstanding this pressure, I
am pleased to report that I was in at-
tendance on the floor of the House for
100 percent of the rollcall votes on legis-
lation during this session.
My voting record follows:
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 September 2, 1965 proved For D SENATE 68000600080001-7 21919
cult for most white people to know the feel-
ing of rejection, of being on the very periph-
ery of life, that must be the pervasive force
in the lives of the untrained and unskilled
Negro. Be has been uprooted from a simpler
environment, and lives for the most part
as a rootless and unproductive unit in a large
city. It is not at all strange that strong
emotions, including hatred and revenge, rise
to the surface. It will not be an easy job,
but these people must be trained so that
they too can become part of the productive
world.
WHY WE ARE IN VIETNAM TODAY
Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, dur-
ing the Korean war, Adlai Stevenson
told the story of an American soldier-
from Indianapolis, I believe-who ex-
plained our Nation's presence in Korea
in this way: "Dear Mom, we are fight-
ing today in Korea so that we won't
have to fight tomorrow in Indianapolis."
This helps to explain, I believe, why
we are in Vietnam today. I believe
strongly that the greater number of
Americans accept this and support our
presence in Vietnam, despite the tragedy
of wasted life which war inevitably
brings.
I think it is important for the Nation
to be reminded often of this fact. I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the RECORD this editorial from the Balti-
more News American of August 13.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the Baltimore (Md.) News American,
Aug. 13, 19651
KNOWING THE ENEMY
President Johnson is correct in stating
that "there is no substantial division in this
country * * * and no substantial division
in Congress" over his Vietnam policy.
The American people, in fact, would be
aghast at anything even resembling a sur-
render, a pull-out, a sell-out.
There is a deep national consciousness of
the meaning of the Vietnam struggle. There
is a broad understanding that if aggressive
communism is not halted in Vietnam it will
have to be faced elsewhere-and possibly
closer to home.
This does not imply that there is no dis-
sent in the Nation over Vietnam. There is,
and in this free society it would be surpris-
ing if there were not.
Such dissent was expressed the other day
by protesting marchers who illegally invaded
the Capitol grounds in Washington. They
were, of course, arrested-with consid-
erable mistreatment on the part of police,
as eye-witnessed by a reporter-and their
demonstration collapsed.
The marchers included persons of high
intellectual attainment, as well as those of
the Beatnik and unwashed variety. Can
they not realize that the war in Vietnam is
being fought precisely to preserve their right
to march, to protest, to dissent?
A PROFLIGATE CONGRESS
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, the
Omaha, Nebr., World-Herald on August
28 published an editorial in which the
Congress is taken to task for appro-
priating more money than some of the
executive agencies have required.
We have left ourselves open to this
justifiable criticism by one of the Mid-
west's great newspapers, and I feel it is
time that we do something about it,
With increasingly heavy defense re-
quirements and a never-ending series of
requests from the administration for
funds to finance Great Society programs,
it is imperative that we face up to the
fact that someday the well will run
dry. We must give more attention to
fiscal responsibility and abandon the idea
that deficit financing is not dangerous.
It is dangerous if this country is to re-
main strong and free.
Much has been said in recent weeks,
Mr. President, about having both guns
and butter. I believe we have come to
the fork in the road where we must make
a decision. The national best interest
must be given first consideration, and
part of that consideration must be the
determination to keep the United States
solvent. If this country falls apart at
the seams financially, the whole free
world will suffer along with us.
Last January 19, I introduced again
a Senate joint resolution which I have
been sponsoring for several years, de-
signed to force an end to deficit spend-
ing.
My proposal is Senate Joint Resolution
30. I have been joined as cosponsors
by Senators BYRD of Virginia, HRUSKA of
Nebraska, THURMOND of South Carolina,
and LAUSCHE of Ohio.
Senate Joint Resolution 30 would re-
quire that Congress remain in session
until provision has been made for a bal-
anced budget during the next fiscal year,
and at the same time make a minimum
payment of $500 million toward our na-
tional debt.
I know, Mr. President, that my col-
leagues are as concerned as I about
maintaining the United States in its
present position of strength and free-
dom. I firmly believe that keeping our
country financially sound isa major fac-
tar in this. I hope that Senators serv-
ing on the Judiciary Committee will heed
my plea to bring Senate Joint Resolu-
tion 30 to the Senate floor for considera-
tion.
The rank and file of the country's citi-
zens bear by far the greater share of the
tax burden, Mr. President. It is in the
interest of these millions of Americans
that ' I feel so strongly we must put a
brake on spending and start reducing
our national debt.
One of our illustrious former col-
leagues said just a few days ago, in an
entirely different connection, that the
clock is ticking away. It is ticking away,
too, Mr. President, toward the hour that
we must make a determined effort to cut
back Federal spending and start paying
the bill we now are running up for future
generations.
I ask unanimous consent that the
Omaha World-Herald editorial published
August 28, 1965, be inserted in the REC-
ORD at this point.
There being no objection, the editorial
.was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
A PROFLIGATE CONGRESS This is an extraordinarily pliant Congress,
as its record has made plain. What Mr.
Johnson wants, Mr. Johnson gets.
As for appropriations, Mr. Johnson in fact
has ben getting more than he asked for in a
number of instances.
When the President requested $1,5Q0 mil-,
lion for his antipoverty program, the House
increased that figure by $400 million.
When Mr. Johnson asked for a military
pay increase averaging about 5 percent, the
Congress doubled it.
The White House asked for a little less
than $6 billion for public housing; the House
voted a little more than $6 billion; the Senate
raised the figure to $7,500 million, and the
figure finally agreed on was even more, $7,800
million.
Spending for medicare and increased social
security was originally set at $6 billion. The
House increased this by $200 million. The
Senate made the total $7,600 million, and
the conference committee cut it back to
$6,500 million.
With the Congress acting in such irre-
sponsible fashion, Mr. Johnson was in a po-
sition to play the role of a fiscal conservative.
And this he might have done quite convinc-
ingly if he had announced that the Senators
and Representatives were overreaching
themselves on spending and that he had no
intention of using all the money voted.
But no such word has come from Mr.
Johnson, nor is it expected. The associate
architects of the Great Society are openly
gleeful because Congress has been so gen-
erous, and there is no reason to suppose that
the chief architect, Mr. Johnson, is desolated
by such generosity.
The Tulsa Tribune recently referred to the
lawmakers as "a runaway Congress" that
doesn't have to balance a budget, and seems
to act as if it had a mandate to outspend the
biggest spender in White House history,
namely Mr. Johnson.
All of which makes for a fine political po-
sition for the President, but stores up a lot
of inflationary trouble for the rest of the
country. It also raises some questions about
future Congresses and whether there ever
will be a serious effort by the legislative
branch to hold down spending.
The American Congress is unusual among
legislative bodies In the free world, In that
it has the power to increase spending esti-
mates submitted to it by the executive
department.
In Britain and the Western European
countries, the legislature can grant the
amount asked, can cut it, or can refuse to
appropriate any funds at all, but the legis-
lature cannot appropriate more than the
spenders ask for. -
With the present Congress acting so irre-
sponsibly on spending, and with the Presi-
dent permitting such profligacy, it may be
time to give some serious thought to a con-
stitutional change that would forbid Con-
gress to vote more money than the President
asks.
MRS. AMERICA-UTAH WINS AGAIN
Mr. BENNETT. Mr. President, all of
.us from Utah have known for years
that our mothers are the best in the
Nation and that consistently our Utah
girls will always be at the top of most
beauty and talent contests.
Earlier this year Mrs. Harvey Fletcher
of Provo, Utah, was named the 1965
"Mother of the Year." Just 10 years ago
another Utahan, also was named
"Mother of the Year." I could go on
and list Miss America, Miss Universe, and
any other number of contest winners
down through the years as well.
Now, Utah is honored to have in its
ranks Mrs. America- for 1965. She is
Mrs. Don L.-Alice-Buehner, who won
the contest over the last weekend in San
Diego, Calif. She is the mother of six
lovely children-all who were convinced
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 21920
Approved For Reel ,t / JiC 7B0 06000800 1 7e z er 2, 190
that their mother was the best long be-
fore the judges. proved it to the Nation.
The announcement of her victory de-
serves widespread recognition and I ask
unanimous consent that an article by the
Salt Lake Tribune's Stephanie Smith
interviewing her family after the award
be inserted at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD.
as follows:
[From the Salt Lake City Tribune,
Aug. 30, 1965]
MRS. AMERICA-OUR "BEST" MUM.
U.S. BEST, Too
(By Stephanie Smith)
"We think she's the best mother In the
whole world," Dale Buehner, 10. said Sunday
after a phone call from dad telling him that
his mother, Mrs. Don L. (Alice) Buchner,
had been chosen Mrs. America, Saturday
evening.
When Dad relayed the message, Dale said.
"I think I'm going to faint"
Seven-year-old Gary, who catches squir-
rels and chipmunks near home to the Mount
Olympus wooded area, said only, "Hey, dad,
I've got a new trap."
ONLY GIRL
Lisa, 3 year old, the only girl among the
family of six children, said, "Daddy called
us because mom was too busy having her
picture taken.
"He talked to all of us except Jeff because
I hung up. I thought Jeff already had
talked to him."
Mrs. Walter (Jeanne) Welti, Mrs.
Buehner's mother, said, "I think she deserves
the title, but we certainly didn't expect her
to win."
WHOLE FAMILY
And the whole Buehner family Is con-
vinced their mother is the best, Jeff, 5, re-
ported that the only time she ever became
cross was when he hurt someone. "And that
isn't very often."
Dale commented that "She Isn't grouchy
with us, keeps a house neat and Is a pretty
good cook. Her meatloaf is really good." He
added, "She sings and paints a lot, too."
Gary said he watched the contest on tele-
vision, "But mom was on for just a minute.
Dad was on longer."
SWIM LESSONS
"Mom Is special," Lisa said, "because she
takes me swimming at my friend's all the
time. Fm taking swimming lessons. too."
she remarked.
The 2-year-old, Bobby, when asked where
his mommy was, replied, "She's gone."
The baby of the family, 8-month-old
Donnie, went on eating his canned vege-
tables as if nothing at all had happened.
FOREIGN AID
Mr. BREWSTER, Mr. President,
many years ago it became a cliche to
say that foreign aid has no constitu-
ents,-to assert that because the benefits
of foreign aid are dissipated beyond our
national borders, support for foreign aid
appropriations was difficult to justify.
I am one who believes deeply in the
justice and the necessity of foreign aid.
I believe our national Interest re-
quires this aid-and I believe our na-
tional honor demands it. As President
Johnson said not long ago, "We did not
choose to be the guardian at the gate."
No, we did not choose to be the guard-
ian-but history has chosen us. And
if we are to live up to the -demands of
history, we must be willing to appor-
tion a small part of our vast resources
so that other nations may be assisted In
achieving Internal development, mili-
tary security, and a better life for all.
I was Impressed recently by an ex-
cellent editorial In the Des Moines Reg-
ister. I commend to my colleagues, and
I ask unanimous consent to Insert in the
RECORD, this editorial, published Monday,
August 23: "Foreign Aid Continued."
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,.
as follows:
[From the Des Moines (Iowa) negister.
Aug. 23, 1965[
FOREIGN AID CONTINUED
Differences in Congress over foreign aid
usually center around the amount to vote
for foreign military and economic assist-
ance. This time President Johnson sub-
mitted the lowest request In the history of
the foreign aid program-for $3.38 billion-
and both houses voted to authorize close to
this amount. Nevertheless, the foreign a!d
bill remained tied up In a bitterly deadlocked
House-Senate conference committee for 2
months before agreement was reached last
week on a compromise, which was approved
Thursday In the House.
The deadlock developed over the Sen-
ate's determination to bring about funda-
mental overhaul of the foreign aid program.
The Senate sought to achieve this by au-
thortzing foreign aid funds for a 2-year pe-
riod but stipulating that aid under the pro-
gram should terminate as of June 30. 1967.
The President was directed by the Senate
In the interim to bring in plans by July 1.
1966, for a new program in accordance with
guidelines contained in the Senate authoriza-
tion bill. Provision was also made for a
16-member "Foreign Aid Planning Commit-
tee." to be made up mostly of Congressmen,
to advise and mist the President and to
make its own report by January S. 1967.
The House conferees objected to the 2-
year authorization, terminating the exist-
ing program and requiring the proposed
studies. Senate Members gave up the 2-
month battle after extracting a face-saving
compromise in which the President was
merely urged "to inaugurate a review of
the aid program as presently constituted."
The Senate-passed authorization meas-
ure would have required the President to
submit proposals for separating economic
and military aid progrtnis and providing
for administration of nonmilitary assist-
ance under a single agency. This would
have constituted a valuable reform.
But more harm than good could well
have come from the Senate's insistence that
the entire aid program be scrapped and
started over afresh. One of the major weak-
nesses of the foreign aid program has been
the instability and uncertainty caused by
the succession of overhauls and reorganiza-
tions inSioted by Congress on the adminis-
tering agency.
The authorization measure must still clear
the Senate, and bills providing the actual
appropriations have to be acted on by both
Houses. But the major hurdles have been
cleared, providing assurance that the United
States again fully Intends to honor the for-
eign economic and military assistance com-
mitments It has been responsibly assuming
since the end of World War II in the interest
of world peace and economic progress.
JAMES V. BENNETT, FORMER DI-
RECTOR OF BUREAU OF PRISONS,
SUPPORTS BILL TO COMPENSATE
VICTIMS OF CRIMES
Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. President,
one of the great public servants which
this country has had during this gen-
eration Is James V. Bennett. For 27
years he served as Director of the U.B.
Bureau of Prisons. In his years of serv-
iee in this post, prisoners, lawyers, Rep-
resentatives. Senators, judges, and just
plain citizens grew to admire and respect
this man for his compassion and firm
Will.
Last August, when he retired, speeches
in his praise echoed both in this Cham-
ber and the House. Many of us felt that
his retirement would mean that the
country would, henceforth, be deprived
of his counsel, advice, and wisdom; but,
fortunately, he is still concerning him-
self with problems and issues at the very
forefront of criminal law.
The other day, I was greatly pleased
to receive a letter from him, congratu-
lating me on my Introduction of a bill to
compensate the victims of violent crimes.
He has even gone so far as to offer to ap-
pear at hearings on the bill when they
are held. I can think of few men either
In the United States or in the world at
large who would be more qualified to
testify on such a plan. I hope that such
hearings are held soon and I look for-
ward to hearing Mr. Bennett's testimony.
I ask unanimous consent to have Mr.
Bennett's letter printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the letter was
ordered to be printed In the RECORD, as
follows:
US. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.
BUREAU of PRISONS.
Washington, July 14, 1965.
Hon. RALPH YARBOROUGH,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR: I was delighted at the intro-
duction of your bill to compensate the vic-
tims of certain crimes. It is a proposal that
has been discussed frequently here, in the
United Nations meetings on crime and del-
linquency, and at a number of judicial con-
ferences during my tenure as Director of the
U.S. Bureau of Prisons. It has also been dis-
cussed from time to time by the section on
criminal law of the American Bar Associa-
tion, on which I have served as an officer for
a good many years. I am sure you are also
aware that Justice Goldberg has propounded
the idea.
I am confident that the Introduction of
your bill will crystallize the tremendous sup-
port that I know exists for it. In the event
hearings are scheduled, I would like very
much to appear. The bill Is well drafted,
but I may have some further suggestions as
to details.
With kind personal regards.
Sincerely,
JAMES V. BENNETT.
Consultant.
Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, from far
and near across the land, there is a ris-
ing crescendo of support for enactment
of the so-called Freedom Academy bill,
once passed by the Senate, and recently
unanimously approved by the appropri-
ate legislative committee of the House.
Ali that now delays House action Is the
need to get a rule from the House Rules
Committee which will clear the legisla-
tion for action on the House floor.
Recently, Henry Mayers, chairman of
the Cold War Council, headquartered at
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 September 2,
196,4"Pprovect ftW9"Af,/0p.MpM-RDP,IyAOQ446R000600080001-7 21921
2301 West Third Street, Los Angeles,
Calif., was interviewed on station KNBC-
TV. of Los Angeles on the needs and the
proposed programs of a freedom acad-
emy. I ask unanimous consent that this
interview appear at this point in the
RECORD as a part of my remarks.
There being no objection, the text of
the interview was ordered to'be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
THE FREEDOM ACADEMY
(TV interview with Henry Mayers (excerpts
from transcript), station KNBC, Los
Angeles)
BOB WRIGHT. With us here in the studio
is the man who founded the Cold War Coun-
cil and is now its chairman. Henry Mayers
is a Los Angeles advertising executive. He
was named advertising man of the year for
1957 by the Western States Advertising Agen-
cies Association. During the next half hour,
we will question him closely on the merits of
this new organization. Joining me in the
questioning will be KRCA reporters Bill
Brandt and Bob Brackett. We'll begin the
questioning with Mr. Brackett.
,,Queetlom Mr. Mayers, would you give us
some background on the Cold War Council?
What's its primary purpose?
Answer. The council is a group of citizens
in communications industries. We are pri-
marily concerned with the fact that the
nonmilitary activities of Communists around
the world represent as great a threat to our
security and our survival as the military
capacity of the Soviet Union. In the mili-
tary area we have a $55 billion defense budget
that is insurance against military aggressions
by the Communists in the free world. We
need comparable insurance against nonmili-
tary aggressions in the form of political war-
fare of the type that enabled the Soviets to
put Cuba into the Communist bloc. The
free world lacks the capacity to prevent more
Cubas. We have yet to develop techniques,
strategies, and weapons that can counteract
that kind of Communist activity. In political
warfare their strategy and weapons are to-
day overwhelmingly superior to ours.
Only when we develop what the Cold War
Council calls a freedom offensive to counter-
act the Kremlin's drive for world domination,
will free world nations be assured of se-
curity in the nonmilitary area. If we do not
develop such capacity, Communist political
power may continue to expand throughout
the undeveloped world. We may ultimately
be faced with no other alternatives than
surrender or nuclear war.
Question. Your organization talks a great
deal about a freedom academy. Exactly what
is this, and what is the status of the project?
Answer. That happens to be the only ex-
ampld of what might be called cold war legis-
lation that is before Congress today. Un-
fortunately, it has been before Congress for
3 years, and it has been largely neglected,
pigeonholed in committees. It is opposed by
the State Department, although a Gallup poll
revealed that about 4 out of 5 people who
have an opinion on it, favor the idea.
Question. I think we might like to exam-
ine that. Could you tell us in a very few
words what is the freedom academy?
Answer. A freedom academy is to be set
up by a Commission, under the freedom
commission bill. It calls for a six-man
Commission of three Democrats and three
Republicans, structurally very much like
the Atomic Energy Commission. While they
develop atomic power, this commission
would seek to develop our capacity for non-
military warfare in all phases. It would
conduct research and it would establish an
academy for training American citizens who
work overseas, and also citizens of other
free world nations. That, in its essence, is
the purpose of the freedom commission
bill.
Question. Well, can't all of this be done
through existing agencies like the USIA
and the Foreign Service School, and the
State Department?
Answer. The freedom commission bill
was introduced because, despite the need,
nothing like that has been done. There
has been no coordinated effort and inte-
grated study of the kind that bill recom-
mends. The existing agencies you mention
do not believe that there is necessity for it.
Question. Who would formulate the pro-
gram that would be taught in the school?
What sort of people would you get on your
faculty, as it were, of this freedom academy?
Answer. All over the free world there are
people, mostly outside of government, who
devote full time to the problems of the cold
war. They are very dedicated and very clear
in their basic concepts as to what must be
done to counteract Communist political
warfare. The problem, in our country, is
not finding people or knowing what they
would teach, but having the will to take the
waging of. propaganda and political warfare
as seriously as the Communists do.
Question. Let me ask you specifically.
Would somebody like Dr. Fred C. Schwarz-
who is a self-styled expert in this area, at
least-would he be a welcome addition to
the faculty of the Freedom Academy if it
existed today?
Answer. I doubt it very much. An ex-
pert on political warfare must be more than
an expert on communism. The men whom
I refer to are not identified with any crusad-
ing effort. Some are political scientists, some
are ex-diplomats, some are ex-military men,
some are foreign correspondents.. There's
one group in the University of Pennsylvania
known as the Foreign Policy Research In-
stitute. They write scholarly volumes on the
subject, such as "Protracted Conflict," "A
Forward Strategy for America," and "The
New Frontier of War." These are $5, $6, and
$7 books. One of the purposes of the Cold
War Council is to try to bring the thoughts
of these people down to the grassroots-to
put their views in briefer, more digestible
form, for the average person to grasp. A
Cold War Council booklet that costs us a few
cents relays some of the ideas these $6 books
contain.
Question. Mr. Mayers, aren't their ideas
being used within the present organizations,
like the foreign policy school, the Foreign
Service School?
Answer. Not their basic theory of the neces-
sity for going on a freedom offensive. That
is not being taught, because our present
Government doesn't see the danger as we
see it. Our policymakers go on the assump-
tion that anything that would embarrass the
Soviets or put them in a bad light would be
regarded as provocative and increase tensions
and make negotiations more difficult. This
is what the Soviets love to have them think.
We think just the opposite.
Question-. Are you saying, then, that the
Government has a "no win" policy?
Answer, That's a rather oversimplified
statement. What the world needs is a "no
win" policy on the part of the Soviet Union.
Our policy should be to try to force such a de-
velopment within the Soviet Union, by ac-
tively cultivating opinion behind the Iron
Curtain. There are tensions there, too.
There are the Soviet youth, the scientists
and the manager group-they're not neces-
sarily out for world domination, the way
the present Kremlin leadership is.
Question. Isn't there built into this sort
of a notion, a terrible chance that rather
than embarrass the Soviets, we'd embarrass
our own Government by having State go in
one direction and this new superagency
going in another direction in these coun-
tries?
Answer. The concept that political war-
fare is not necessarily the business of diplo-
mats is basic to the position of the Cold
War Council. The State Department hasn't
built-in authority, under our Constitution
to make foreign policy. Only the President
has that authority. He decides what he
wants the State Department to do, to carry
out that policy. If the President chooses
to set up another organization like a Free-
dom Commission or a strategy board, there's
nothing that necessarily involves any con-
flict. As a matter of fact, there are White
House advisers right now who would in a
sense'be encroaching on the Staite Depart-
ment's area, if that were their exclusive area.
That's the big issue. We feel that diplo-
mats are not necessarily conflict managers.
Question. In a sense, since the Soviets
don't admit their underhanded propaganda,
so to speak-if we would have a person on
the President's staff, wouldn't this be in a
sense admitting that we were doing propa-
ganda?
Answer. By all means, we should admit it.
One of our inhibitions is fear of the word
"propaganda," because it can only mean lies
or underhanded activity. This is a mistake.
We're talking about political communica-
tion. You can use any words you want. But
the truth has to be presented about the na-
tpre and the objectives of the United States,
afid about the fact that we are the only
legitimate revolution in history. We must
also tell the truth about the nature of the
enemy. BOBBY KENNEDY came back con-
vinced by that. He saw that we must do
more than just talk about ourselves. We
must talk about the threat those people are
facing, when. they believe Communist
promises.
Question. Is it possible to sell freedom?
Answer. I don't think you should sell any-
thing but the self-interest of the people
whom we are addressing. That's where the
Communists.are very clever. They identify
themselves with the self-interest of the peo-
ple. Of course, they deceive them. They
promise the laboring groups better condi-
tions, and once they get in control, those
people are slaves of the state. They promise
the farmers more land, but once they get in
control, the state takes over the land. So
it's the deceptions that must be brought out,
so that the Communists do not get away with
the claim that they are the wave of the fu-
ture, when they're really nothing but the
wave of a return to feudalism under state
capitalism.
Question. I'd like to follow the question
Mr. Brandt raised a few minutes ago, about
embarrassing our Government. if we might
take a specific. Suppose we launched the
program you're describing, to try to capitalize
on the unrest' in Communist China. Sup-
pose that due to that program and the cur-
rent food shortage, the revolution did start
in China. Wouldn't the U.S. 'Government
face quite a dilemma? If it went in to sup-
port the revolution, It might lead to a nu-
clear war. If it didn't do anything, as with
Hungary, we'd get an even bigger black eye.
Answer. We could no nothing more foolish
than to create another Hungary anywhere.
But the idea that you arbitrarily barge in and
try to create revolution is not the concept of
nonmilitary warfare. There are antiregime
groups in all of these countries to be guided
in nonviolent channels. If we had been
really alert to the proper cultivation Of such
anti-Communist forces behind the Iron Cur-
tain, we might have prevented the unneces-
sary slaughter of a Hungary. But we were
not in contact with that leadership. In
every one of these satellite countries there
are divisions, there are tensions, there is the
capacity to force concessions from a govern-
ment that is not serving the interests of the
people.
Political warfare is a more sophisticated
form of warfare than military action or civil
revolt. It can slowly weaken a regime. There
are tremendous conflicts between the people
of Russia and, the Kremlin, too., Our con-
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 21922 Approved
For Rqd AL? ~7BOr1k4 0600080FA3'C7e-mber 2, 1965
earn Is to cultivate the potential opposition.
We are fighting the Kremlin, not the Russian
people. We think they're on our side, and
that it's just an accident that communism
and Leninism took hold of Russia.
Question. How do these trained agents of
the Freedom Academy get that information
into Russia? We can't even get our radio
broadcasts Into Russia.
Answer: That's a m1aundersta tiding. The
potential is increasing every day, and It is al-
ready very great, to get news and Informa-
tion Into Russia. There are organizations
such as the American Committee for Libera-
tion, which Is continually broadcasting into
a.Il of the U.S.S.R. countries from Munich.
There is an organization called NTS which is
a completely underground one, which has
not only mobile radios, but all sorts of meth-
ods of bringing literature in by ships, and
by other means. The Iron Curtain is not as
airtight as you Imply. We just haven't got
the will to pursue our opportunities. Inci-
dentally, Mr. Barnoff, being highly skilled In
the technical field of broadcasting, developed
a number of recommendations such as drop-
ping down very inexpensive receiving sets.
There's no communication problem we can't
solve, if we have the will to approach it the
way we approach military problems.
Question. But do we have the people to
do it? This presupposes a large, very skill-
ful, well trained force. Where would these
people come from?
Answer. There are quite a few in America,
and all over the world there are anti-Com-
munist organizations who are working on
these things right now. But they're working
under great handicaps, whereas the Commu-
nists get their guidance, support and all sorts
of aid from Soviet Russia. Most of these
anti-Communist groups are utterly without
support. especially if they happen to repre-
sent what you might call the anti-Commu-
nist left, which doesn't happen to be In power
in the country.
Now the Soviets don't care who is In power.
They not only set up a Communist Party,
they get front organizations to carry out
their line, regardless. We should do the
same. We have to get leaders of the coun-
tries telling their people the story. Not the
story of the United States, necessarily. This
is not a war between the United States and
Soviet Russia, or conflict of two systems of
society, a concept which the Soviets would
love to have us believe. This Is a conflict
between a tremendous totalitarian. Impe-
rialistic power and all the people of the
world whom they would like to put under
state slavery.
Question. Mr. Mayers, If I understand you
right, you're saying that we should use some
of the methods the Communists are pres-
ently using-some of the heavy, under-
handed methods.
Answer. There's nothing underhanded
about telling the free world, anti-Commu-
nist story, or about the methods to be used.
The anti-Communist story has to be told by
natives of each country to the people of
that country. That Is one Communist
strategy we can adopt. We, too, can subsi-
dize the activities of the newspapers and the
radio stations, the authors and the scholars
in those countries. I say subsidize in a per-
fectly legitimate and open sense. There's
nothing cloak and dagger about this at all.
But we have to make the effort that they do.
The best comparison I can make is that we
spend about $120 million a year on an in-
formation agency and they spend $2 billion
a year on all forms of propag nda and politi-
cal activity. They have 500.000 paid agents
around the world doing these things. They
will go Into a small country where we have
an Embassy of maybe 10 or 20 people and
they'll have 150 people in the Soviet Embassy.
What are they doing? They're not taking
care of diplomatic niceties.
Question. Mr. Mayers, most experts in the
field express the thought that the Russians
fear an atomic war as much as we do. They
don't want It any more than we do. Do
you think that if we were to launch a propa-
ganda offensive of this kind that this might
create an atmosphere where a hot war would
be more desirable to them?
Answer. The Cold War Council believes
there is greater danger of a hot war in our
present policies of inaction In the face of
Communist political aggressions. We think
that unless we go on the offensive and con-
vince the Kremlin that they cannot win con-
trol of Latin America, Africa and Asia and
the Near East, they have no reason to aban-
don their designs for world conquest. The
Russian people do fear war. As far as the
Kremlin to concerned, our military are pretty
well convinced that the Soviets won't make
any hasty decision about going to war when
we have the capacity of retaliation that we
have. The Russian people think that the
United States wants to bomb them largely
because the Kremlin spends great sums of
money propagandizing- the Russian people.
Propaganda Is one of the biggest industries
inside Russia, as well as Its greatest export.
If they still have to do that, after 40
Years. you can imagine how vulnerable they
are to a countereffort which doesn't neces-
sarily preach bloody revolution or anything
as superficial as that, but that encourages
the forces within Russia which are going to
change the character of the leadership in
the Kremlin, some day. The policies we
recommend would accelerate that change,
Question. Isn't It true that the basic bat-
tleground you speak of Is in the nonwhite
areas of the world today? Don't you feel
that we have some problems here at home
that we ought to cope with?
Answer. I don't think there's any connec-
tion between the two. Except, of course,
that the Communists will take advantage
of any and every one of our Injustices and
our tensions. They make the most of them
and they also invent them, whether there is
a basis or not. But they have injustices and
discontents and tensions. too, and we have
to make the most of their vulnerabilities.
If your question means, "Do you think we
ought to do nothing until we have solved
our race problem In the South," I'd say ab-
solutely no, because that problem may be
with us for many years. We are facing a
challenge right now which Is not a de-
bating society challenge. We can't afford
to lose a few more countries In Latin Amer-
ica as we've lost Cuba. We haven't a perfect
society and we will not have It a hundred
years from now-but that's no reason why we
shouldn't defend the society we have, right
now.
Question. Mr. Mayers, you've claimed, I
believe, that your group is nonpartisan. And
yet, isn't it true that you have said that
one of the reasons your Freedom Academy
bill has not passed Congress is that Senator
F'ULHRIGHT, a liberal Democrat,, is opposed
to it?
Answer. I haven't said that, although I
believe he Is opposed to it. There are many
reasons why it hasn't passed. I would may
It's chiefly because of the lack of Interest
on the part of the public, or rather, a lack
of awareness of its existence.
Question. Wasn't the bill introduced by
Senator MuwnT, a conservative Republican?
Answer. It was jointly written by Senator
MuNDT, a conservative Republican, and Sen-
ator PAUL Doucl.As, a liberal Democrat. It's
sponsored by 12 Senators of both parties,
and in the House it was Introduced by SYD-
NEY RxRLONG, a Democrat. and WALTzR Juan,
a Republican. No, there's nothing partisan
about the congressional sponsorship of the
Freedom Commission bill. It requires that
there be three Republicans and three Demo-
crats on It; it requires that the Commission
members be approved by both Houses,
Question. Then there Isn't any political
group that's holding up this bill In Congress?
Answer.I wouldn't say it's a political
group. I would say it's the State Depart-
ment chiefly. The history of it Is that it
actually passed the Senate at the end of the
1961 session by a voice vote. It had cleared
the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee
with a very strong endorsement in which
they said It was one of the most Important
bills ever offered the Senate. It was too late
in the session for it to go to the House.
Next session it was reintroduced, but Mr.
FULBRIGHT asked that It be referred to his
committee. That was In February 1961, and
it still Isn't out of his committee. The rea-
son he gives is that he asked the executive
department for their views on It and he
couldn't hold hearings until they gave their
views. He waited 15 months for the State
Department to answer his request. That was
4 months ago.
Question. Would the Cold War Council be
concerned exclusively with the external man-
ifestations of communism? You are not In-
terested In the areas that the John Birch
Society Is, for Instance.
Answer. We are concerned only with the
external threat and what can be done about
it In the field of political communications.
The Cold War Council, you know, was
founded by citizens engaged in advertising,
public relations, and the communications
fields.
Boa WRIGHT. "Sorry, time's up."
Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, in addi-
tion to this fine interview, Henry Mayers
and his widely recognized Cold War
Council have been getting out pamphlets
and brochures explaining the purposes
of the Freedom Academy and the over-
all weakness in America's cold war activi-
ties because of our continuing failure to
tool up our cold war arsenal and effec-
tively to train the necessary personnel to
meet the challenges of modern cold war
techniques.
Among the rapidly growing list of im-
portant American newspapers and mag-
azines which have endorsed the Freedom
Academy legislation Is the San Diego
Union of San Diego, Calif. I ask consent
that an editorial from this fine metro-
politan paper entitled "Freedom Acad-
emy Is Needed" be printed at the con-
clusion of my remarks.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed In the RECORD,
as follows:
Woma TEACH REDS' TALTICs: FREEDOM
ACADEMY Is NEEDED
For 5 years now, House and Senate pro-
posals for the establishment of a Freedom
Commission and Freedom Academy have
been thwarted in Congress even as the United
States continues to suffer hot and cold war
defeats at the hands of atheistic commu-
nism.
Quite simply stated, what Is proposed Is
a West Point for psychological purposes, an
academy to be staged by experts on commu-
nism to teach both Americans and foreigners
the techniques of the enemy.
In the forefront opposing the proposal
has been our own State Department, with a
20-year history of hot and cold war defeats,
telling proponents that Government has
agencies equipped to carry out any psycho-
logical missions required against the enemy.
In response, we would ask when it is going
to begin using them. Russia has 6,000 spe-
cial schools on espionage, subversion, infil-
tration, agitation, and propaganda devoted
to selling atheistic communism in any way
It feels Is necessary.
Perhaps the State Department's objections
could be better understood if this were a
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 September 2, 196APprovedG'C BHES?kMO&O COil&IA- 446R000600080001-7 21923
partisan bill, backed by Republicans or con-
servatives within the Congress. But it has
the stamp of approval of both Republicans
and Democrats, conservatives and liberals.
Objections raised are all-the more startling
when weighed in light of the fact that no
research or educational institution has been
established either inside or out of Govern-
ment devoted to study in depth of continuing
problems raised by Communist techniques.
The Senate approved the proposal on Au-
gust 31, 1960, the House failed to act, and
it has been returned annually to committee
ever since. A ray of hope shone through this
last spring when new hearings were con-
ducted by .Representative EDWIN E. WILLIS,
Democrat, of Louisiana, and his subcom-
mittee- of the Committee on Un-American
Activities.
Part of the blame for delay has been dis-
trust based upon fear that the academy
would become either a fortress of militant
anti-Communists or, on the other hand, be-
come infiltrated with Communists.
With an elite commission of seven, ap-
pointed by the President, subject to ratifica-
tion by the Senate, such assumptions on
both sides of the argument are patently
ridiculous. As a part of the executive branch
of Government, it would be the commission's
job to run the academy along guidelines set
by Congress. -
Senator KARL MUNDT, Republican, of South
Dakota, one of the prime movers, hopes the
proposal, advanced in 8 House bills and
backed by 11 of his Senate colleagues,. will
be put to a House vote soon. We couldn't
agree more concerning the urgency for ac-
tion.
FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVEL-
OPMENT AND EDUCATION
Mr. RIBICOFT'. 'Mr. President, in
view of the increasing concern with the
impact of Federal research and devel-
opment funds on higher education, I be-
lieve that many of my colleagues will
be interested in the cogent analysis of
the problem presented by Mr. Dael Wolfle
in his article, "The Support of Science
in the United States," which appeared
in the July Issue of Scientific American.
I ask unanimous consent to. have the
article printed at this point in the CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE SUPPORT OF SCIENCE IN THE UNITED
STATES
(NoTE.-The sharp and sustained increase
in funds has improved research and has
benefited the investigator. Nevertheless,
serious questions are being raised about the
financing of research in universities.)
(By Dael Wolfle)
This year in the United States nearly $21
billion-3.2 percent of the gross national
product-will be spent for research and de-
velopment. Some two-thirds of the funds
will be supplied by the Federal Government.
"Research and development includes basic
research, applied research and engineering,
design and even the development of proto-
types; it is a broad category, but it does
encompass all forms of scientific. research.
Not long ago the support of science was pri-
marily the business of the colleges and uni-
versities and some voluntary agencies; be-
fore World War II the Federal Government's
contribution was largely in agricultural re-
search and the work of such agencies as the
U.S. Geological. Survey and the Naval Ob-
servatory. It was not until 1942 that the
country's expenditures on science reached $1
billion. A steady growth in the support of
science continued through the war and after-
ward; beginning in 1953 there was a sharp
and sustained rise of huge proportions.
Since 1953 the country has increased its ex-
penditures for science at an average rate
of 13 percent a year. The most striking rise
has been in the contribution of the Federal
Government, which has grown at a rate of
nearly 20 percent a year. Although spend-
ing for development is leveling off, appro-
priations for academic research will continue
to increase at about the present rate for some
years.
The func1,s spent for scientific work during
the past two decades have provided research
opportunities on a scale previously unimag-
ined. All fields of science have benefited
from the better equipment, special facilities,
greater freedom from constraints and larger
number of workers made possible by the in-
creased budgets. The award of Nobel prizes
is one measure of the growing strength of
basic research in this country; in the 1930's
Nobel prizes were awarded to 9 American
scientists, in the 1940's to 13 of them and in
the 1950's to 27. Meanwhile the economy of
the country has gained enormously from the
upsurge in technological research and devel-
opment. In 1953 research and development
accounted for 11 percent of all industrial in-
vestment; in 1962 research and development
absorbed about 25 percent.
The subject is nonetheless surrounded by
disquiet. In Congress and in the executive
branch, in the universities and learned so-
cieties and foundations questions are being
raised about the manner in which science is
financed. Most of the questions deal not
with the adequacy of the national effort but
with the effects of the massive Federal con-
tribution on the course of science and in
particular on the conduct of basic research in
the universities.
Evidence of this concern is found in a
rapidly growing list of policy studies and pro-
gram analyses. The National Academy of
Sciences is midway in a series of reports deal-
ing with various aspects of the scientific en-
terprise. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
has advocated the establishment of a na-
tional review body that would decide on ma-
jor new programs. Two commitees of Con-
gress-the House Select Committee on Gov-
ernment Research and the House Subcom-
mittee on Science, Research and Develop-
ment-have reviewed many aspects of the
Federal program, and their reports have be-
come valuable sources of detailed informa-
tion. Moreover, Congress has begun to in-
sist that executive agencies prepare special
reports on certain areas of investigation such
as oceanography so that the Federal effort
can be examined as a whole instead of in its
budgetary and departmental fragments. The
White House Office of Science and Technol-
ogy has appointed a blue-ribbon committee
of industrial, scientific, and educational lead-
ers to review the policies and programs of
the National Institutes" of Health. The Bu-
reau of the Budget has taken the lead in re-
examining the administrative practices of
the Federal agencies that support basic re-
search. The National Science Foundation
has reorganized and strengthened its staff
sections responsible for studies of scientific
policy, planning and resources. "Science pol-
icy" has become the topic of a number of uni-
versity seminars and analyses.
All this ferment of analysis and reexamin-
ation makes its clear that major changes in
policies governing the support of science are
underway or in the offing. These analyses
have also served to provide reassurance that
many of the past policies and practices are
sound and should be continued. The mag-
nificent achievements of recent decades are
evidence that the support system has been
a fundamentally healthy one.
Support for research and development
comes from many sources; some contribute
only a few dollars, others billions. Some 300
firms provide 80 percent of the industrial
money that goes into research and develop-
ment; another 13,000 firms provide the re-
mainder. Some 200 private foundations
grant significant amounts to science and
medicine. Universities and many colleges
provide research talent, laboratories and
financial help. A number of private re-
serach institutions finance their own in-
vestigations. State and local governments
conduct a variety of research programs.
Four agencies are responsible for 95 percent
of the Federal funds: the Department of
Defense, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, and the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare. In addition to
these giants there are another four agencies
that account for 4 percent of the Federal
total: the Department of Agriculture, the
National Science Foundation, the Depart-
ment of the Interior, and the Federal Avia-
tion Agency. The remaining 1 percent of
Federal research and development funds is
spent by 21 agencies.
In the 12 years from 1953. to 1965 every
major source of research and development
funds increased its support substantially.
Federal funds are five times what they were
in 1963. Industrial support has tripled, and
the universities have done almost as well.
The other nonprofit institutions are con-
tributing six times their 1953 amount.
Just as the amounts of money supplied
by these four sectors vary greatly, so do the
amounts they use. The Federal Govern-
ment supplies two-thirds of the funds, but
Federal laboratories carry out less than 15
percent of the work. Industry contributes
a third of the funds but conducts three-
fourths of all the work (mostly with Federal
funds). The colleges and universties pro-
vide about a tenth of the funds, had the
other nonprofit institutions about a fortieth.
(The universities' contribution is under-
represented in the financial reports, perhaps
by several hundred million dollars a year;
they provide substantial additional support,
in the form of laboratory facilities and
faculty time, that is not budgeted explicitly
for research.)
From 1953 until 1960 about 8 percent of
the Nation's research and development bud-
get was devoted to basic research. The per-
centage has been rising since 1960, reach-
ing almost 12 percent in 1965. As for the
Federal Government's funds, in 1953 less
than,7 percent went for basic research. The
figure has been rising since 1960, to about
11 percent in 1965. The universities are
relatively much more prominent in basic re-
search than in the total research and devel-
opment effort, being responsible for almost
half of all basic research. In contrast the
industrial laboratories, which dominate in
development activity, conduct only about a
fourth of the basic research.
Development activity is directly associ-
ated with identifiable industrial, economic,
military, or other practical objectives. Its
cost and the cost of any associated research
are therefore justified and budgeted in terms
of its expected contribution to the attain-
ment of specific objectives. In the case of
basic research the situation is quite different.
The ultimate beneficiaries of basic research
are many, but they are hard to identify in ad-
vance. As a result the cost of basic research
tend to be shared widely. Some basic re-
search of notable quality is done in indus-
trial laboratories, but most of it is conducted
in universities with support from - public
funds. In some cases this public support
inv6lves Congress directly in decisions on
priorities.. Modern basic research sometimes
calls for large-scale facilities such as par-
ticle accelerators, oceanographic research
vessels and astronomical observatories. Such
big science enterprises are so expensive that
they must be considered individually at top
Government levels, where the cost and
promise of each can be compared with those
of other claimants for available funds.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 Approved For Re l6 IC B8( 6OOO8OOI b 7tember 2, 1965
On the other hand, little science typically
the work of a university faculty member and
his assistants and advanced students, will
continue to be budgeted on an a priori basis
and to be supported by means of a large
number of project grants. Little science,
the principal subject of the remainder of
this article, is an area of central concern to
science as a whole, not least because It In-
volves the education of future scientists. It
Is the kind of science that is most character-
istic to academic research and hence is most
often Involved In Government-university re-
lations. It to also the area in which those
relations are most likely to change.
Sustained scientific work of high quality
requires the effective union of three ele-
ments: a self-renewing population of able
scientists; appropriate research facilities
with the necessary supporting structure for
Institutional management; a source of
money. In a few well-endowed research in-
stitutions all three elements are happily
present in an almost totally self-contained
and self-supporting organization. Such
unity, however, Is rare. More commonly un-
der present conditions there is a scientific
staff, a university with multiple obligations,
and an external source of funds. All three
sides of this triangle are interested in sci-
ence, but their interests differ In detail; ten-
sions arise and compromises become essen-
tial. The scientist must serve three masters:
the internal logic and the opportunities of
his own discipline, the policies and require-
ments of his institution, and the customs
and wishes of his financial supporter. The
university must meet the demands of sci-
ence, of Its many other endeavors and of the
agencies that provide support. The Govern-
ment agencies have an equally complex prob-
lem: In supporting a large number of indi-
vidual scientific projects they must also con-
sider the general welfare of the universities
and be mindful of the wishes of Congress
and the public it represents.
One useful change in the interrelations of
scientists, universities and Federal agencies
would be the simplification and standardiza-
tion of what has grown to be a maze of rules
and regulations governing fiscal and admin-
istrative details and reports. The complexity
of grant administration was summarized last
year by the House Select Committee on Gov-
ernment Research: "One of the ironies of the
research grant is that while It is sometimes
itself a simple one-page (if not a one-para-
graph) document, it is accompanied by a
bulky manual of instructions, explanations,
and amendments. For example, although the
NIH (National Institutes of Health) grant
form Is a one-page Instrument, It Incorpo-
rates by reference the NIH grant manual,
which runs to more than 100 pages."
The National Institutes of Health manual
of course explains only NIH procedures and
requirements; other agencies have adopted
different rules and procedures. Congress
has sometimes added to the confusion by
setting arbitrary limits on the amounts that
some agencies can pay to reimburse an in-
stitution for the indirect costs of conduct-
Ing research. This "overhead" rate varies,
moreover, depending on the agency that
grants the funds. Sometimes overhead can
be paid on some budgetary items but not
on others, or at one rate on some Items and
at another rate on other items. The mul-
tiplication of administrative redtape slows
decisions, harasses both agency and univer-
sity personnel and puts the emphasis on
form rather than substance. Fortunately
these difficulties are widely recognized, and
simplification and standardization would
bring such obvious advantages that they will
surely come about.
Standardization of procedures will be wel-
come, but more fundamental changes are
required. Project grants are nominally
made to a university or other inatltutiom,
but in reality they are awarded to an Indi-
vidual. The scientist and Government of-
f aial frequently deal directly with each
other on both substantive and budgetary
mattters, largely excluding the university ad-
mini tratlon from any important role in
reaching decisions about the research done
in the university. Not all of the cone
quences have been happy ones.
When a faculty member looks outside his
university for the major sources of support
for his work, his interest and loyalty are
likely to go where the dollars are. When
the continuation of his work depends on his
maintaining good relations and an effective
record with private foundations and Wash-
ington agencies, and when his professional
reputation depends primarily on his research
productivity, he is likely to devote more and
more of his Ume to writing project proposals
and reports and to supervising the Increased
number of research assistants that liberal
grants enable him to hire. Correspondingly
less of his interest and loyalty go to the
university that happens to be his home for
the present, and teas of his time is devoted
to teaching and to doing actual laboratory
work with his own hands.
There are many contentions that the in-
crease in research has been bought at the
expense of a depreciation of teaching. The
research programs at most colleges and uni-
versities are not large enough to have an
adverse effect on teaching. In the universi-
ties with large research budgets, however,
complaints are heard that there is a schism
between the teachers and the researchers;
that the ablest graduate students are re-
search assistants, whereas the less able ones
become teaching assistants; that the big-
time research operator has become the ad-
mired model In the eyes of graduate stu-
dents: that in return for the explosive
growth of research we are building up a
deficit In the training of future scientists
and In the general education of other stu-
dents in science. There is a substantial
body of opinion to the effect that whereas
education at the graduate level has Improved
as a result of the availability of better
equipment and larger and more competent
staffs, undergraduate teaching has suffered.
The emphasis on research supported by
outside funds on an individual-project basis
has also tended to strengthen the divisive
forces and weaken the integrative forces that
are always at work on a university campus.
By and large faculty scientists like the
change to off-campus support; it means that
each researcher is judged by colleagues In
his own field of specialization. Physicists
judge physicists, biochemists judge blo-
chemists and geologists judge geologists. A
man can take pride In the fact that special-
Ists from other institutions have judged his
work and found It worthy of support.
Bringing new funds to the campus en-
hances the scientists prestige and gives him
some freedom from local control. He can
buy equipment or hire a secretary, travel to
a national meeting to discuss work with
other people In his field and even Invite a
man from another institution to pay him a
visit-with expenses paid-to consult on re-
search plans. And he can do all this with-
out having to ask his dean or president for
permission, because the grant Is his. (That
is. he can pay for these extras if be has had
the foresight to provide for them in his
project proposal. If not, It may take weeks
for a busy office in Washington to let him
know whether or not he can transfer $100
from one budget category to another.)
The result of all this is what the project-
grant system undoubtedly weakens the sci-
entist's ties with his own university. It
means that many decisions about the re-
search conducted on a campus are made in
Washington instead of at the campus level
and are made piecemeal rather than with full
account taken of all the other programs and
responsibilities of the university. A univer-
sity is not solely a group of individualistic
faculty members. It is a community of
scholars and of students who wish to learn
from them. It includes a central adminis-
tration responsible for the development of
the entire university, not simply the unco-
ordinated expansion of individual units or
empires. Professor X would rather entrust
his research proposal to the judgment of his
professional colleagues on a Washington re-
viewing panel than to what he may consider
the uninformed or biased decisions of his
own dean and president. President Y, how-
ever, would prefer to have a larger measure
of control at the university level, because he
remembers that the university is responsible
for teaching as-well as research, for history
and philosophy as well as physics and bio-
chemistry, for the library as well as the ob-
servatory, and he wants funds that can be
used in the best Interests of the university.
Not only may the institutions in which
research is carried out be changed by the
methods of support; science itself may also
be affected. One cannot help worrying about
what subtle distortions in the course of sci-
entific progress may result from the fact that
nearly all of the Federal support now comes
from mission-oriented agencies. The Na-
tional Institutes of - Health are- interested in
certain diseases, the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion in nuclear energy, the Department of
Defense in weapons systems and counter-
measures. Each supports basic research, but
each selects projects in terms of Its own mis-
sion. Of all the Federal grantmaking
agencies, only the National Science Founda-
tion is free from this necessity. To be sure,
many researchers have secured support from
the mission-oriented agencies for exactly
what they as scientists most wanted to do.
The fact remains that, of all the money spent
for basic research In the United States, only
about $1 in $5 comes from a source that does
not have specific missions in mind. It is still
a matter of opinion whether or not this fact
Is threatening the future health of basic sci-
ence, but there is a widespread feeling that
the National Science Foundation should as-
sume a greatly increased share of the
responsibility for supporting basic research.
Certainly agencies with special missions
will continue to support basic research;
funding decisions will often be controlled by
immediate objectives; projects will continue
to be supported largely on the basis of their
Individual merits and those of the scientists
Involved. Yet basic Improvements in the
system are possible. Now that massive Fed-
eral support is accepted as an obligation, the
moat necessary change is to shift a substan-
tial amount of the decisionmaking respon-
sibility closer to the point of research. The
fact is that decisions that should be made
by the executive agencies are now being made
by Congress. Decisions that should be made
by the universities are being made by the
agencies.
In Great Britain, Parliament avoids poli-
tical and governmental control of science and
education by making block grants to the
University Grants Committee, which in turn
allots funds to the British universities. For
a number of reasons this mode of operation
is not feasible in the United States. Don H.
Price, of the Harvard School of Public Admin-
istration, has pointed out that Congress takes
a very different attitude toward the relation
between ends and means than Parliament
does. Parliament is content to decide on the
ends, authorize the necessary funds, and leave
the details of the means to administrative
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67BOO446ROO0600080001-7
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
Viet Nam? Dominican. Republic?-see page 5
A DILL
Commission and the Freedom
to Freedom
, uduct research to develop an inte-
in the
To create the
know ledge
Acade m. chnolOglcae,
grated body of operational chologic.1. economic,
an"'MI
politic g Psy and other
and organizational areas to ted States e
e Unit
tars capabilities of th freedom and
nations in the global struggle between
train ernluent Per
and communism, ieaucE c tt ens tounderstand and m-
sonnel and private of knowledge, and also
students pr
element this body for foreign
vide education and training under appropriate
in these areas of knowledge
conditions.
The Issue in Brief
Three-point thesis of
Freedom Academy
AD VOCA TES:
1. Communism's major non-military threat
to non-communist nations lies in its poli-
tical warfare against them through
propaganda, infiltration and insurgency.
2. Unless the U.S. can help non-commu-
OOMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-SIXTH CO5GRESE
S. 1689
Sources:
C.W.C. PUBLICATIONS, P.O. DRAWER 7417, WASHINGTON, D.C. 20044
fifty-nine witnesses (members of Congress
or private persons with foreign affairs back-
grounds) in favor of the legislation, two
witnesses (State Dept.) op posed."
SU1t!MAR 1-: Proponents of the legislation
seek more non-military d ,terrent of Corn.
n7unist expansion aims particularly in the
area of political warfare. Its opponents be-
lieve U.S. diplomacy, foreign aid and other
activities of existing goyernrlent agenrirc
provide all the needed deterrent, including
the area of political warfare.
*THE IMBALANCE of pro and con tes-
timony is reflected in this Digest. It does not
give both side "equal time". However, it
gives adequate representation to opposition
statements in the official record, including
a summary statement by State Department
counselor, W. W. Rostow on the legislation,
especially prepared for this publication on
July 15th, 19650 (See question 17).
program to enable both the public and
private sectors of our and other free
world societies to meet the challenge of
communist political warfare. The Free-
dom Commission Bill proposes such a
step, through the establishment of a new
government agency.
OPPOSITION Position:
Department of State spokesmen believe U.S.
response to communist political warfare
must be primarily in the economic area. They
consider that points 2 and 3 are State's sole
responsibility and no other agency could
qualify for training undertakings. They also
see domestic dangers in the legislation.
Pro and con testimony on the legislation at
Congressional hearings is in the ratio of
HEARHIGS RELATING TO HA 352. 011617, HA 5368.
HI. 8320, RA 8757, ILL 10036, HR 10037, 1111.
10077, AND HR 1171& PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF
A FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACAOEIIV
P.tI
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELA'rloNb
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIGHTY-EIORTR GONQRF-95
HYHef seeacou
' oe
8. 15 ud 5. 965
BDa_d'D) mATU,H A NATIONAL AOMDID1i 01003&G~
ATTA168
& 32 HM S. 99
.1L TO HBTSHU.H A 0.8 TO,81Ox ...1111 ACs03N4
Senate and House committee hearings on
Freedom Commission legislation bill fill
more than 1000 pages of testimony, state-
ments and documents. This digest organizes
the essence of that testimony in the form of
answers to questions that have come up in
the hearings or that come up in public dis-
cussions of the legislation. It also includes
quotations from other pertinent printed
material,
nist governments to counteract commu-
nist political warfare techniques more
effectively in the future than in the past,
there will be more Viet Nauss. Also
more expansion of communist political
power without our military opposition,
An essental step toward such more effec-
tive help lies in a research and training
HEARINGS
SUBCOMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE
ADMINISTRATION OF THE INTERNAL SECURITY
ACT AND OTHER INTERNAL SECURITY LAWS
COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
EIGHTYEIGI[TII c9HGRFS9
.TOOFD Bza81:ON
Quotations from the hearing testimony
are identified by code letters A, B, C and
D, which refer to the following hearing
records:
A. 86th Congress: Senate Judiciary Sub-
Committee of the Internal Security
Committee, June 17, 18 and 19, 1959,
181 pages.
B. 88th Congress: Senate Foreign Relations
Conm.mittee, April 4, 5, 29 and May 1,
196, 274 pages (starting p. 1667"),
FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS,
NEWS MEDIA AND EDUCATOR
HEA8JNGS RELATING TO HR. 352,911617, H.R. 5368,
HR. 8320, HR 8757, ILO. 10036, H.A. 10037, 11
10077, AND HR 11718, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF
A FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACADEMY
Putt
HEARINGS
COMMFITEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES
HOUSE OF REPRFSENTATIYFS
i-JGHTS-NINTH CONGRESS
First Sassicn
C. 88th Congress: House Committee on Un-
American Activities, February 18, 19,
20, April 7, 8, May 19, 20, 1964, 439
pages. (2 volumes).
D. 80th Congress: House Committee on Un-
American Activities, March 31, April 1,
28. Nlav 7, 1-1. l ltb . 2_~ pages.
Number following a code letter identi-
fies the page in that hearing record.
The complete he Iiog Iecefr1 are availably:
from the L.S. G,,-e.rllntcnt Printing Office,.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
History of the Legislation
The initial introduction of the
bill in the 86th Session of Con-
gress was preceded by nine years
of research by a bipartisan group
of Florida citizens calling them-
selves the Orlando Committee.
According to its chairman,
lawyer Alan G. Grant, Jr., the
committee, as a result of exten-
sive independent studies in the
area of non-military conflict,
"became convinced that national
capacity to engage in a global
struggle with the Soviets short of
hot war could only be fully de-
veloped in time through systema-
tized, large-scale research and
training program attuned to our
special. needs and requirements."
For a full story of the committee,
see Reader's Digest reprint Let's
Demand This New Weapon for
Democracy.
The Orlando Committee's nine
years of study led to the intro-
duction of the first F r e e d o m
Commission Bill by Represen-
tative Herlong on February 2,
1959. That bill and all subse-
quent ones introduced in the
House were referred to the Com-
mittee on Un-American Activi-
ties. That committee never held
hearings on the bill as long as
Representative Walters was its
chairman.
The Senate version of the bill
was referred to the I n t e r n a l
Security Subcommittee of the
Judiciary Committee of the 86th
Congress. After three days of
hearings and a year's considera-
tion, the committee reported the
bill out in June, 1960, as follows:
"The committee considers this
bill to be one of the most impor-
tant ever introduced in the Con-
gress. This is the first measure to
recognize that a concentrated de-
velopment and training program
must precede a significant im-
provement in the cold war capa-
bilities. The various agencies and
bureaus can be shuffled and re-
shuffled. Advisory committees
interdepartmental committees
and coordinating agencies can be
created and recreated, but until
they are staffed by highly moti-
vated pe,-sonnel who have been
systematically a n d intensively
trained in the vast and complex
field of total political warfare,
we can expect little improvement
in our situation.
The comin-ittee recommends the
enactment of the Freedom Coirt-
pAY.;E TWO
mission bill at the earliest pos-
sible time."
Passed by the Senate: In the
closing days of the 86th Con-
gress, the bill was presented to
the Senate by the Subcommittee's.
vice-chairman, Thomas J. Dodd.
With the support of Majority
Leader Lyndon Johnson, the bill
passed by a voice vote, with no
dissent. Having failed to reach
the House, however, the bill was
reintroduced in both Houses in
the 87th Congress.
Stalled in Foreign Relations
Committee: Reintroduced as
S.414, the Freedom Commission
Bill was referred to the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee at
the request of Chairman J. Wil-
liam Fulbright. Since the De-
partment of State had not offered
any testimony at the judiciary
Subcommittee hearings on the
bill during the previous session,
Senator Fulbright requested its
views on the legislation in Feb-
ruary, 1961.
State Department Delay: Fifteen
months elapsed before the De-
partment of State responded to
Senator Fulbright's request. On
May 22, 1962, he received from
Assistant Secretary Dutton a
three-page letter embodying the
State Department's objections to
S.414. (See question 17).
Naional Academy of Foreign
Affairs Act: That same month
President Kennedy appointed an
Advisory P a n e l of prominent
educators to make independent
recommendations concerning
"the establishment of a new in-
stitution at the national level for
advancing training, education
and research with respect to U.S.
foreign affairs in general and
modernizing countries in parti-
cular." The Perkins Panel's
report to the President in De-
cember, 1962, resulted in an
administration bill, introduced
in 1963 titled the "National
Academy of Foreign Affairs
Act."
In April-May, 1963, e l e v e n
months after the State Depart-
ment's letter to Senator Ful-
bright, he scheduled Foreign Re-
lations Committee hearings on
both the bill to establish a
National Academy of Foreign
Affairs and the bill. to establish
a Freedom Corrimission and a
Freedom Academy. On the latter
bill, a total of 28 witnesses testi-
fied in person. The committee
took no further action on either
bill in 1963, 1964, or the first
half of 1965.
Hearings of the House Commit-
tee on Un-American Activities
were held during seven days of
1964 and five days of 1965, un-
der Chairman Edwin E. Willis
The Committee reported the bill
out on July 20, 1965 with a 20
page recommendation that in-
cludes these paragraphs:
In all, the committee has held
12 days of hearings on the Free-
dom Academy bills, 7 in the 88th
Congress, and 5 in the 89th. A
total of 51 individuals and or-
ganizations have appeared as
witnesses or submitted state-
ments. An outstanding fact of the
hearings was that everyone of
these 51 individuals and organi-
zations supported the Freedom
Academy bills with the excep-
tion of Mr. Harriman, who
testified for the State Depart-
ment in the hearings held during
the last Congress.
Moreover, the committee was
impressed by the caliber of the
witnesses who s u p p o r tie d the
Academy concept and the extent
and depth of their knowledge of
cold war problems. Among them
were four former Ambassadors
two of whom had also served as
Assistant Secretaries of S ' 'ate ,
two who have served abroad
as officials of the Department of
State, USIA, and Agency for
International Development and
have participated in high-level
policy meetings of the govern-
ment; two witnesses who have
served for many years as officials
in the trade union movement; six
university professors who have
spent many years studying, leach-
ing, and writing on the subject
of communism (11 of the wit-
nesses who testified in favor of
the Academy have authored at
least 10 books dealing with the
subject of communism, diplo-
macy, and international rela-
tions); six journalists who have
spent years abroad and dis-
tinguished themselves as coin-
inentators on foreign affairs
reporters, and war correspond-
ents; 13 Members of the House
and one Senator; the President
of the Free Europe Committee;
the founder and President of
Project Hope; and the former
Chief of Naval Operations.
The members of this committee
have favorably reported this bill
by unanimous vote. After exten-
sive study of the facts, the many
pages of testimony, and the ex-
ploration of available alterna-
tives, the committee feels that
the institution to be established
by this legislation is a vital and
much needed agency to assist the
;free world in winning- the, cold
war.
HEARING
WITNESSES
PRO & CON
Testimony or statements by 61
witnesses are printed in the four
volume record of these hearings.
The hearing records include ex-
tensive remarks or statements on
Freedom Commission legislation
by 21 members of Congress, 38
private citizens and two spokes-
men for the Department of State.
The latter, who opposed the
legislation, were Dr. Walt W
Rostow, Chairman of the Policy
Planning Council of the Depart-
ment of State, and Hon. W
Averill Harriman, then Under
Secretary of State for Political
Affairs.
No members of Congress who
testified opposed the bill.
None of the witnesses from the
private sector opposed the bill.
Those quoted in this Digest are
listed below.
JAMES D. ATKINSON
Research Associate, Georgetown Uni-
versity Center for Strategic Studies
ANDREW J. BEIMILLER
Director, Department of Legislation,
.IFL-CIO
ADOLPH A. BERLE
Former Assistant Secretary of State,
.Acting Under Secretary of State, and
Ambassador to Brazil
ARLEIGH BURKE
Former Chief of Naval Operations
DICKEY CHAPELLE
Foreign Correspoulent, Winner of
highest Overseas Press Club Award for
her Viet Nam reporting
LEO CHERNE
Executive Director, Research Institute
of America, For Filer Chairman of Inttr-
natiozal Rescue Committee, Japan Eco-
nomic Adviser to Gcu. Douglas Afae-
Art hier
MICHAEL J. CONLEY
Professor, University of 11aryland,
Lecturer on Soviet History and Foreign
Policy, Organizer of Coantcr-Insurgen-
cy Instructions, U.S. Army School,
Oberammergau
ROBT. FINLEY DELANEY
Writer and Lecturer, 12 years with
Dept. of State and U.S.I.A.
LEV E. DOBRIANSKY
Economics Professor, Georgetown Uni-
versity; Chairman, National Captive
Nations Committee; Lecturer, National
War College
CHRISTOPHER EMMET
Journalist; 25 years moderator of radio
program Foreign Affairs Round Table
ALAN G. GRANT, JR.
Lawyer, chairman Orlando Committee,
Adviser to drafters of Freedom Comm
1uission legislation
ROBERT C. HILL
Formerly Asst. Sec;y of State, U.S. Anr,-
bassador to Costa Rica, Fl Salvador
and tIexico
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 SYDNEY HOOK
Professor of Philosop1:r, Nrqu' York
University
EDWARD HUNTER
Foreign correspondent, author "Brain-
washing in China" and "Brainwashing:
Alen 11 "ho Defy It"
C. D. JACKSON
Formerly Deputy Chief of Psychologi-
cal TI or fare, SHAEF; president,
Radio Free Europe; White House Spe-
cial Assistant on cold war planning;
editor.Life Magazine
PAUL JONES
Foreign correspondent and columnist
for Philadelphia Evening Bulletin,
former O.W.I. officer and history pro-
f essor
WILLIAM R. KINTNER
Dcprtty Director, Foreign Policy Re-
search Institute, U. of Pennsylvania,
former Colonel, U.S. Army; Planning
Board Assistant to National Security
Council; author, The Front Is Every-
where; co-author, Protracted Conflict,
Forward Strategy for America, New
Frontiers of liar
MORRIS I. LIEBMAN
Lawyer, consultant to Pentagon on
education guidance for military and
naval personnel
CHAS. WESLEY LOWRY
Director, Foundation for Religious
,Action in the Social and Civil Order
(FRASCO)
M. H. MANCHESTER
Deputy Director, Reserve Officers
Association
HENRY MAYERS
Public Relations Consultant; Chair-
nnan, Cold War Council
ARTHUR G. McDOWELL
Educational Director, Upholsterers
International Union; Executive Secre-
tary, Council Against Communist
Aggression
EDGAR ANSEL MOWRER
Foreign Corerspondent; Syndicated
columnist on world affairs, author, An
End to Make Believe
GERHART NIEMEYER
Political Science Professor, Notre
Dame; former teacher at Princeton,
Yale, Columbia and Oglethorpe uni-
versities; State Dept. adviser, Office of
United Nations Affairs
CLARENCE A. OLSON
Director, American Legion's National
Legislative Commission
HERBERT A. PHILBRICK
Lecturer, former FBI operative within
Communist Party
STEFAN T. POSSONY
Director of International Political
Studies, Hoover Institute, Stanford U.;
former faculty member, Georgetown
U., U. of Pennsylvania, Nall War
College; author, A Century of Conflict,
Tomorrow's War, Lenin
JOHN RICHARDSON, JR.
President, Free Europe Committee,
Inc. (Radio Free Europe)
JAMES ROBINSON
Founder, Operations Crossroads Afri-
ca; former minister, Presbyterian
Church of Harlem
DAVID SARNOFF
Board Chairman, Radio Corporation of
America
DR. WILLIAM. B. WALSH
Founder and President, Project HOPE
QApproved For Release 2005/07/13: CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
uestions Answered by Testimony
Isn't this just another
"anti-communist" bill? --a
NEGATIVE approach to the
communist challenge?
The phrase "an anti-communist bill" sug-
gests that Freedom Academy legislation
might be classified with bills designed to
control some of the domestic activities of
the Communist Party, U.S.A. There is
little connection. This cold war legisla-
tion, based on nine years of preliminary
research, is concerned with the global as-
pects of the communist political threat,
and with the inadequacy of free world
response to that threat.
The legislation is "anti-communist" pre-
cisely to the extent that the aims of to-
day's communist powers are "anti-free-
dom."
Former Ambassador Adolf A. Berle,
whose testimony occupies seventeen pages
in one hearing record, states that "the
primary task of the academy is to lay out
a standard of possible organization and
action and social approach to which the
countries and the populations of the world
can repair, rather than merely undertak-
ing to say 'We are fighting the Commu-
nist bloc'."-D-1469.
Dr. Stefan Possany says "the term 'nega-
tive' is not correct. The term `defensive'
is the correct term."-B-221.
Senator Clifford Case, an original co-
sponsor of the legislation, explains, "The
Freedom Academy is not designed to be
a vehicle for negative, bellicose anti-com-
inunism. "-B-278.
Another witness: "When you oppose any-
thing dangerous you can be accused of
being negative. A police force is negative
toward crime. The practice of medicine is
negative toward disease. In a free society,
communism is a political disease-a can-
cer."-B.386.
Says the Orlando Committee brief: "We
must never forget that being against an
evil has been as great a motivating force
in history as being for something-and
we can be both.
Recapturing a student organization or a
labor union is a positive accomplishment,
and developing the operational-organiza-
tional know-how to do this should be es-
sential training at the Freedom Academy."
LIFE Magazine has editorialized on the
"negativism" issue as follows:
`7t will be objected that `counteraction'
is too negative and static a concept for the
cause of freedom. But is is surely not a
negative act to collect and disseminate
what knowledge we have about political
infighting. illoreover, while diversity of
belief is a hallmark of free men, a closer
knowledge of their common enemy is
bound to result in wider areas of free
agreement and more constructive policies
to promote freedom.
The communist challenge does not con-
fine itself to conventional areas. As one
good textbook puts it (Philip Selznick's
Organizational Weapon), it tries to make
ALL our institutions political.
The big problem in meeting this total
challenge is to avoid innocence on the one
hand and hysteria on the other. An offi-
cial academy would be the best guardian
of a cool perspective." - C-962
The entire U.S. military establishment,
though a "negative" use of the nation's
resources, is a positive defense against at-
tack.
Question 2
The bill assumes that the com-
munists have overwhelming
superiority in political warfare
training. Do any other sources
document this U.S. weakness
and its effect?
Four separate government reports, each
written independently in the past few
years, document the inadequacy of U.S.
training: (1) the 4,000 word report of
the Senate Judiciary Committee, a few
paragraphs of which are reproduced on
foregoing page two; (2) the report of
the Sprague Committee, appointed by
President Eisenhower to review the U.S.
Information program. That committee
recommended the establishment of an
educational institution "which would pro-
vide concentrated exposure to the study of
communist ideology, techniques and opera-
tions worldwide"; (3) the Herter Re-
port and (4) the Perkins Panel Report.
Both these reports, ordered by President
Kennedy, were sternly critical of existing
U.S. training programs in the area of
foreign operations, and emphasized the
need for comprehensive training in all
aspects of the conflict between free so-
cieties and the forces of communism.
The high price paid by the U.S. for this
lack of training for political warfare was
indicated in the following comments by
Senator Stuart Symington:
"We have a situation in the Far East
right now. We get in trouble with China,
so we split China. That costs us billions
of dollars. Then we get in trouble in Ko-
rea, so we split Korea and that costs us
billions.
Then we get in trouble in Viet Alain, so
we split Piet Nam: and that costs its
billions.
We agree to split Berlin, and that costs
us billions.
Now one of the solutions being proposed
for Laos is to split Laos; and that will
cost us billions more.
I went over the figures myself in recent
days; and they are somewhat staggering.
When we get into a situation where the
requirement is cold war effort, we do not
seem to be able to cope with these people
who so skillfully understand this prob-
lem. I believe a great deal of the reason
is that they have been trained for it."
-B-230.
The staggering figure referred to by Sen-
ator Symington is primarily the cost of the
U.S. military establishment. To this must
be added the cost of the U.S. foreign aid
program, the underlying purpose of which
is "to contain communism." Concerning
this purpose, Col. William R. Kintner
of the Foreign Policy Research Institute
of the University of Pennsylvania testi-
fied "Despite notable efforts to contain
communist expansion, we have made few
moves to counter it in the field of non-
violent conflict and psycho-political war-
fare. Instead, our efforts appear to be
motivated by the pragmatic belief that
ideologies are conditioned by material
conditions."-B-238.
MATERIAL CONDITIONS IRRELEVANT
That "material conditions" are almost
irrelevant was emphasized by Senator
William Proxmire, who told the same
committee that the Communists win "in
spite of a grossly inferior economic sys-
tem. They have won in spite of inferior
military power. They have won without
winning an election. And what is equally
appalling in country after country, they
have held on to power where the misery,
drabness, the hunger, the dismal econo-
mic failure of communism should have
sparked successful revolution." - B-260
The capacity of communist powers to
wage intensive political warfare despite
economic han(licaps, was te,tifie~l to as
recently as J\Iav 1963 by Representative
Hale Boggs. "Last week 1 had an in-
tervicuw with the Assistant Secretary of
State in charge of Latin-Annerican af-
fairs, also in charge of our relations at
the Alliance For Progress, and he said
that they estimated Cuba was spending
almost a billion dollars a year on aetizi-
ties hazing to do with the teaching of
terror, subversion. the overthrow of demo-
cratic governments and so on." - D-192
The Cuban example of communist success
in political warfare led Senator Thomas
Dodd to raise these questions in a speech
in behalf of Freedom Commission legisla-
tion: "How were the cotununists able to
capture a popular revolution so quickly
and so completely? TJ7hy were the Cuban
people so naive about communist opera-
tional methods? Why were the anti-conn-
munists so disorganized and so inept when
the showdown came? T'I'hy were they out-
thought. out-planned. out-organized and
out-maneuvered by the communists from
the very beginning? Why was the large
middle class of Havana, which was solid-
ly behind Castro, unable to cope with the
communist cadres? Where were their
leaders? Thy were they not better
trained? To what extent was our own
negligence responsible for this catas-
trophe?
Once again 1 ask the question: Why
must the dedication and knowhow so
often predominate on the communist side?
Why does it alu?ars seem to be well
trained professionals versus disorganized
amateurs?"-D-1367
REDS _'IOST SUCCESSFUL WEAPON
A good part of the answer to Senator
Dodd's rhetorical questions was given by
Montgomery Greene in a magazine
article published ten years ago: "Perhaps
the most closely guarded secret of world
coinniunisrn, cut off from view by the
Iron Curtain and shrouded in unbeliev-
able security precautions is the system of
colleges for professional revolutionaries
that annually turn out thousands of
skilled agitators to bedevil the free world.
Although this educational program has
been active for thirty years and has gradu-
ated political saboteurs estimated to nunn-
ber a minimum of 100,00, its very ex-
istence is unknown to most people in the
West. The reason for the super-secrecy
with which these schools have been sur-
rounded is that they constitute the most
successful cold u'ar weapon yet developed
by world conurnnnnistn."-A-1
Just how successful that cold war weapon
proved to be was revealed in an extensive
memorandum to President Eisenhower
from Gen. David Sarnoff, Board
Chairman of Radio Corporation of
America. He wrote: "Virtually all heads
of Red satellite states and insurrectionary
movements in Europe, Asia, Africa and
Latin America are products of such in-
stitutions. Tito, dictator of Yugoslavia;
Ho Chi Minh of Indo-China; Rakosi in
Red Hungary; Bierut, president of Red
Poland; Liu Shao-Chi, vice-president of
Communist China, and Gen. Litt Po
Cheng, one of the foremost military
leaders of Red China. The same is true
of many leaders of Communist Parties in
non-cornnnunist countries." - 1-43
LAST 40 YEARS - AND NEXT 40
A thumbnail summation of the enormous
achievement of the communists in politi-
cal farfare was given to the Senate Judi-
ciary Committee by Joseph Z. K o r n-
feeler of Detroit, an ex-communist who
had graduated from the Lenin School in
Moscow: "Only about fifty years ago a
group of ragged Russian intellectuals em-
barked upon certain methods of fighting
existing society from within, now known
as political warfare. It is a method of in-
fighting and of conspiratorial organization
so effective that within a period of forty,
years they were able to create an empire
of 900.000.000 plus an organized subser,
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 sine movement of millions inside the areas
of the West.
If they could do what they did starting
from scratch in the last forty years, they
can with the present means at their dis-
posal do much more in the next forty
years.
We must, of course, have a military
buildup as a safeguard, but even with it
all we will finally lose everything if we
do not meet the Kremlin on this long
neglected front - political warfare." -
.-113-114
Question 3
If more training is n e e d e d,
how big is the gap? How grave
are the U.S. risks, due to lack
of a Freedom Academy?
There is not merely a gap, there is almost
a total vacuum in the area of political
warfare training. Intensive study of all
aspects of government training programs
for U.S. Foreign Service personnel re-
vealed to the Orlando Committee that:
"There has been no over-all, intensive,
systematic effort to develop counter-
action to the Soviets into an operational
science which will meet fully the Soviets'
total political warfare and protracted con-
flict strategy and techniques. During the
past few years a great deal has been
written about Russia, China, and com-
rnunism, but strangely almost nothing has
been written which attempts to develop
an operational science for the West which
will fully meet the total communist
challenge." - A-17
One of the first important segments of
American society to recognize the chal-
lenge is the American labor movement.
The AFL-CIO has urged the passage of
the Freedom Commission act "at the
earliest possible moment." Andrew J.
Beimiller, the director of the legislative
department of the AFL-CIO, told the
Senate, "the AFL-CIO has been among
the first that have consistently pointed to
the threat posed to the free world by the
attempt of world communism to conquer
and dominate the world. The communist
conspiracy works on every level and works
24 hours a day. Its agents are hard-work-
ing fanatics who have been specially
trained at their jobs of infiltration and
subversion. The necessary effort of de-
fense and counter aettack on our part can-
not be successfully achieved by hit or miss,
uncoordinated efforts.
We favor the passage of this bill whose
aim is exactly to provide the means." -
.1-56
The AFL-CIO itself spends millions of
dollars annually in support of a training
project for Latin-American labor leaders.
Stressing the importance of such activity,
Senator J. William Fulbright has stated:
"There is much that we can do to
strengthen the cause of freedom in the
Western Hemisphere, if we have the wit
to do it, and if we get on with the job.
We have neglected the job as long as we
dare.
We can give technical assistance to the
progressive democratic political groups of
Latin America in the technique of poli-
tical organization and action." - B-386
How grave are the U.S. risks? Cold War
Council literature states: "Political war-
fare relentlessly pursued by international
communism represents as much a threat to
free world security as Soviet missiles.
Freedom Commission advocates believe
that U.S. unpreparedness for the non-
military contest is just as serious and far
more obvious than any missile gap.
-"Too little - to late" accounted for
many of our disastrous military experi-
ptces in the past. The phrase is equally
' , PAGE FOUR
Approved For Release 2005/07/13
applicable to the present worldwide non-
military contest which President Kennedy
has described as 'in many ways snore dif-
ficult than war.' " - B-386
The above phrase attributed to President
Kennedy is from a speech he delivered
to the American Newspaper Publishers
Association on April 20, 1961. Stressing
the gravity of the non-military threat,
he said:
"We dare not fail to see the insidious
nature of this new and deeper struggle.
We dare not fail to grasp THE NEW CON-
CEPTS, THE NEW TOOLS, the new sense of
urgency we will need to combat it,
whether in Cuba or South Viet Nam.
And we dare not fail to realize it is this
struggle which is taking place every day
without arms or fanfare in thousands of
villages and markets and classrooms all
over the globe . . . No greater task faces
this nation or this Administration . ,
Too long have we fixed our eyes on the
traditional military needs; on the armies
prepared to cross borders; on missiles
poised for flight. Now it should be clear
this is no longer enough; that our security
may be lost piece by piece, country by
country, without the firing of a single
missile or the crossing of a single border.
We intend to profit from this lesson. We
intend to RE-EXAMINE AND REORIENT OUR
FORCES OF ALL KINDS, OUR TACTICS AND
OUR INSTITUTIONS here in this commu-
nity. We intend to intensify our efforts
for a struggle in many ways more difficult
than war."
Whatever the re-examination and re-
orientation of tactics and institutions Presi-
dent Kennedy had in mind, no changes in
U.S. cold war policies occurred after the
above speech. Two years later, a cold
war specialist told a House Foreign Af-
fairs Sub-Committee:* "Throughout 1962
I reviewed the speeches, writings and press
comments of Secretary of State Dean
Rusk, Under Secretary George Ball and
other State Department spokesmen rele-
vant to the cold war. All of them dis-
cussed the cold war primarily in terms of
an economic scoreboard. Pointing to the
agricultural and industrial failures of the
U.S.S.R. and Red China, they picture the
communist political drive for world
domination as stalled. They conclude that
time is on our side, and that we are win-
ning the cold war through diplomacy,
backed by economic pressures on commu-
nist bloc countries and U.S. aid to non-
bloc countries. In the framework of that
rationale,it is not difficult to understand
why there is only a limited concern for
political and propaganda warfare in the
top echelons of our government.
One top echelon official who has ex-
pressed some concern is former Attorney
General Robert Kennedy. He returned
from a world tour in 1962 to write as
follows: "In every country, well organ-
ized and highly disciplined communist
cadres concentrate their activities in uni-
versities, student bodies, labor organiza-
tions and intellectual groups. Against these
there is no one to question their positions,
their facts; no organization, no cadre, no
disciplined and caclulated effort to present
the other side. And so it is that a small,
able and well trained unit can take over
a meeting or an organization, or even a
government. We are victims of a smart,
articulate,well organized minority which
has kept us continuously on the defensive.
We have permitted it to happen; we have
allowed it to continue. If we do not meet
the problem head on, if we are not our-
selves imaginative, tough, dedicated, will-
ing and self-sacrificing the struggle with
the enemy will not be won by them, but
lost by us." - C-976
The mountain of hearing testimony con-
cerning the scope and intensity of the
global political warfare of the communists
*Fascell Committee Hearings
CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
includes this statement by Dr. William B.
Walsh, founder and president of PROJi:cIr
HOPE: `In virtually every walk of life to
which we (Project Hope) have been ex-
posed on three continents, we have found
that the Soviets are interested in every-
thing we do. In Indonesia, for example,
they didn't feel we had any opportunity
of success initially. But they soon found
that the response of people to a gesture
such as the HOPE was something they
had not bargained for, so shortly after we
arrived the Soviets had a team of ten
follow us through three different ports in
Indonesia, sometimes preceding us, and
attempting to frighten the people away
from coming to the ship.
They distributed pamphlets, they de-
scribed to the local people in Indonesia
that the cameras which the physicians and
nurses carried were for the purpose of
pornographic photography, that we were
there to rape their women, not to treat
them, that we were not really there to
teach these people to help themselves, but
primarily there for some nefarious politi-
cal purpose which was to lead to the
overthrow of the Sukarno government.
I, of course, would not presume upon the
wisdom of this committee to tell you what
form the Freedom Academy should take,
but rather to tell you that I agree 100 per
cent that something is very seriously
needed."-D203
Here is a summation of the problem by
the late C. D. Jackson, former White
House special assistant in cold war plan-
ning: "The communists are the supreme
masters and unrelenting Practitioners of
political warfare. Indeed, it is by the
present and persuasive use of this weapon,
with or without military threats, that the
communists hope to accomplish their ulti-
mate aim of destroying the United States.
Unless we learn to resist and counter their
use of this political weapon, we shall have
no recourse, in the long run, except to
military force.
"Winning the cold war is therefore the
only way to avoid a hot war. But to win
the cold war, to master communism in
political combat, we must have more and
better trained political warriors. Nowhere
in the United States today can this art
be learned in concentrated and systematic
form." - A-60
Question 4
Why can't the proposed
training be acquired in one
of our numerous universities
or existing government
schools?
One of the areas intensively and con-
tinuously investigated by the Orlando
Committee is training programs offered
at government schools and private uni-
versities. Chairman Alan G. Grant, tes-
tified: "We were unable to find a single
government or university training pro-
gram that deals with the difficult and
sophisticated subject of communist politi-
cal warfare, insurgency, and subversion
in depth, much less the means of defeat-
ing it."-C-970
Professor Gerhart Niemeyer of Notre
Dame, previously at Princeton, Yale, Co-
lumbia and Oglethorpe Universities, tes-
tified: "In my contacts with military
people at the National War College, I
have found no one who did not feel that
special training for political warfare was
needed.
I should like to mention what a diplomat,
a high-ranking diplomat of a friendly
embassy, said to me when I discussed this
bill with him. He said, 'If this bill were
passed, this would indeed be a major
breakthrough. It would be an indication
to the world that we mean business.'-
A-70
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
Another cold war authority with wide ex-
perience in academic circles is Dr. Stefan
Possony of Stanford University's Hoover
Institution, who testified that: "Indi-
vidual universities cannot handle the job.
There is lack of funds and personnel.
Special chairs would have to be set up for
this. In addition, there is the problem of
documentation.
Nor could any individual university, how-
ever large, handle the job on a sufficient-
ly broad and sustained basis. There is
also the objective problem. If you go to
one university, you have two or three
professors who may be suitable. Actually
this is an optimistic assumption. These
men have their own opinions, specialties
and hobby horses, and cannot be expected
to provide the wide, broad, all-directional
approach that would be necessary in order
to cover all pertinent problems. Subjects
like communism, democracy and political
warfare are a universal, encyclopedic sub-
ject." - A-90
At a later hearing, Dr. Possony empha-
sized "the number of research personnel
you have to get in order to provide the
proper documentation." The scope of the
research problem was also stressed by
Mr. Leo Cherne, executive director of one
of the nation's largest research organiza-
tions. He told the committee: "The areas
of research required are so large, so un-
charted, so unbegun that I could not
responsibly as an executive of a major re-
search institute, even suggest the dimen-
sions of that uncharted land.
The plain fact is that the United States
has during most of its history found it
altogether unnecessary and unpleasant said
undesirable to be involved in conflict
management. We have not researched in
our organization any but a handful of the
problems involved in countering commu-
nist conflict management.
The entire area of psychological warfare
is one that is almost totally foreign to us
except in the environment of war as we
normally recognize war." - B-405
11Ir. Cherne had previously expressed his
reservations concerning how the needed
research project might fare in a university
setting: "I am concerned . that if
some academic minds are applied to it
(the Freedom Academy concept) we will
find ourselves in still another examination
into what it is that Marx really did say
and how accurate was he and did it work
out. Now these are all useful, but this is
not the heart of a program of understand-
ing the enemy with which we deal to-
day." - A-153
Question 5
Isn't political warfare training
the b
usiness of the Pentagon
or
th
e State Department?
The
U.S
. Military
is concerned
with
shooting
wars, while
the State Depart-
ment is
concerned with preventing such
wars. The cold war falls between the two
and neither department is trained for
it, even though the communists have
been training for it for almost 50 years.
When the Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee asked the Defense Department for
its position on the Freedom Commission
Bill, the Pentagon's response indicated
that it considers political warfare outside
the area of its responsibility. Yet "the
process of studying cold war strategies is
no less important than intensive studies
of military strategies," according to the
testimony of John Richardson, president
of Radio Free Europe His experience, he
said, leads him to believe that: "The
greatest impediment to effective prosecu-
 Cuba? Vier7amii R 2?. 'ominican6??
Five witnesses tell why today's U.S. military
problems grow out of yesterday's neglect
of the communist non-military challenge
"For many years we permitted communist cadres to move into the villages of South-
east Asia and gradually expand and consolidate their hold, while we did almost
nothing. Only recently, after the situation developed to crisis proportions and we
faced the loss of all Southeast Asia did we begin a crash program to develop
counter-insurgency . . . Ten years ago I came to Washington to plead the case for
the Freedom Academy before representatives of State, USIA, FBI, AID, Defense,
and CIA. I pointed out that conventional forms of village development work -
simple engineering, sanitation, and agricultural assistance - were not enough. The
villages must also be won over politically and organized to prevent communist
penetration by having their own intelligence network and protective arrangements.
I pointed out that there must also be a program to win, hold and activate on our
side the student groups, intellectuals, religious groups, labor unions and others in
the cities . . . Of course, this cut across the areas of responsibility of a number of
agencies and it ran head-on into the inhibited, defensive attitude of the State. So
nothing was done.' - C-974, testimony of Alan G. Grant.
"I have had ten years of government service (and have) served as U.S. Ambassador
to Costa Rica, El Salvador and 1\1exico, and as Assistant Secretary of State for
Congressional relations. During that time I have noted the lack of understanding on
how to deal with the communist problem once it has developed . . . The Embassy
in Mexico tried vainly to warn the Government of the United States from 1957 to
1960 of the dangers of Castro and his association with communism.
In my opinion, if the Freedom Academy had been in existence, and the opinions of
experts had been used to analyze the developments in Cuba, Castro would be else-
where today, and Goulart would have been spotted long before he assumed power in
Brazil ... With the support of the Freedom Academy, in alerting the United States,
the present hemispheric tragedy would have been averted." - D-1316, testimony of
Hon. Robert C. Hill.
QUESTION: "Do you think that our position in South Viet Nam would be better
today if we had had this academy ten years ago?"
ANSWER: "Yes, sir, I think so, because I think that we would have under-
stood thoroughly the techniques of the communists in saying `let us have a peaceful
co-existence' - until they build their cadres in various villages and take over, as in
Laos. Instead, we didn't understand. We didn't know we were being conned. We
took them at their word, and now we are in very bad shape because they have built
their strength up in Southeast Asia, and we have not." - D-1434. testimony of former
Admiral Arleigh Burke'
"Previously, Admiral Burke had told the committee of his experiences as one
of the U.S. negotiators of the Korean Armistice: "When we started negotiating
with the communists, it became very apparent in the first few minutes that
they were taking advantage of us. They were skillful propagandists. They were
using the occasion to show the whole world that we had been defeated.
"Our team, five of us, were met by South Korean Chinese troops and there was
a thick cordon of troops around the landing field, white flags all over it. I was
assigned to a captured American jeep, a bullet hole through the windshield,
blood on the seat, a great big white flag, no other identification, in front of the
Lion by the United States of the struggle
for freedom against tyranny is the lack of
a body of knowledge with respect to non-
military conflict, together with a corres-
ponding deficiency in trained personnel.
In recent years, various aspects of guer-
rilla warfare have begun to be studied and
taught by the Armed Services. However,
I am not aware that so far any concerted
effort has been made to do serious research
and provide facilities for instruction of
large numbers of key personnel in the
broad area of non-military confict." -
B-185
Representative A. Sydney Herlong,
the Florida Congressman who introduced
the first Academy legislation in the
House, states there is great support for it
"right in the (Defense) Department
itself, because some of those people see a
real need in exploring the many new
things we can do to win the non-military
part of this struggle." - C-946
Concerning the State Department's train-
ing school, the Foreign Service Institute,
Leo Cherne has testified that this insti-
tute "does not regard conflict management
and counter action as a useful, normal
instrument of the Foreign Service. It
therefore gives no training in that area."
-A-149.
the specific responsibilities of any particu-
lar agency." -B-209
Senator Paul Douglas, one of the authors
of the Freedom Commission Bill, told
the same committee why he believes the
State Department cannot and should not
handle the proposed training: "I don't
think it should be a part of the State
Department apparatus. The State De-
partment is primarily an agency through
which diplomatic representations are made
from our government to other govern-
ments, and from which we get informa-
tion concerning the diplomatic moves of
foreign countries. Now, to combine with
this activity propaganda amongst the
people for democracy and against commu-
nism is somewhat alien to the traditional
principles of diplomacy, and without
making any reflection on the personnel of
the Foreign Service, somewhat contrary
to the training and disposition of the per-
sonnel. It is very hard for them to get
down into the dust and heat of the con-
flict." - B-234
Another point of view on why the
Academy should not be under the State
Department was presented at the same
hearing by Senator Wm. Proxmire:
"I feel that the Academy should be sep-
arated, but I do feel that the Department
of State should be in a very distinct ad-
visory position.
Should it? Stefan Possony states: "It
would be a mistake if the Academy were
placed directly or indirectly under the
supervision of the Secretary of State. I
think the pattern established by the Ato-
mic Energy Commission is the suitable
pattern to follow, simply for the reason
that this type of an operation transgresses
I think the Peace Corps method has
worked extremely well, and it is no acci-
dent that it has worked well, partly be-
cause they have had fine leadership and
fine concepts, but also because it has been
organized administratively properly, and
it has not been directly and completely
pu blic?
"The communist push was (then) centered on Venezuela. The man who really de-
fended the country was President Romula Betancourt (who) earlier had been system-
atically hunted out of the hemisphere by the United States Government as a commu-
nist or an ex-communist,during the days of the Venezuelan dictatorship of Perez
Jimenez. At one time there was no house in the United States to which he could
come except mine.
"Knowing what (the communists) were up to, he was able to score the greatest
single victory we have had in Latin America - unless the Brazilian victory may be
equal - up to now. If we had been well enough instructed in these matters as we
should be, we never would have made the mistake of systematically trying to hunt
Betancourt cut of the hemisphere.
"Jose Figueres fought the first war against the communists in Latin America. This
was in 1947, in Costa Rica. He won, and in a later election became president of
Costa Rica. But during that period every kind of propaganda was made against him
up here, and it was a very difficult period for him. He also was attacked as a com-
munist. Actually he was the best friend we had in Central America. It was he who
kept Betancourt's head above water when he was exiled from Venezuela. I resented
the fact, gentlemen, that . . . the best elements in the (Latin American) situation
were accused of communism by people who didn't know the difference between a
communist and an honest-to-God reformer. The United States can't afford that kind
of foolishness, and there ought to be some place in the country where they really know
the difference. I feel that a Freedom Academy has a place, both for training Americans
and for training foreigners." - D-1472, testimony of former Acting Undersecretary
of State and Ambassador to Brazil Adolph A. Berle.
"We cannot afford to continue the policy of waiting until communist cadres become
so active in a country that a counter insurgency program is clearly called for. Dr.
Walt W. Rostow, in his testimony this morning, talked considerably about U.S.
counter insurgency programs. These are in the area of paramilitary activity, an area
which is completely removed from the purpose of the Freedom Academy. This legis-
lation advocates instruction in non-military warfare long before the situation ever
gets to the point where counter insurgency is called for. When you get to that point,
you have already lost the political battle. That is why we face some of the guerrilla
problems we have, because we did not anticipate the need for political training at
a time when it would have prevented the growth of communist political power to the
point where they can engage their opposition in the paramilitary and full-scale war-
fare." - B-388
"If we had had a Freedom Academy ten or more years ago, there would have been
not only an anti-Batista movement in Cuba before the revolution, but inside that
movement there would have been an alert anti-communist group. The Cuban com-
munist underground would have had less opportunity to infiltrate and steal the
legitimate anti-Batista revolution from the Cuban patriots and from the middle class
that innocently financed Castro." - C-1048. This and the prior statement (B-388)
are from the testimony of Henry Mayers, chairman, Cold War Council.
jeep, and we went up with a military escort of communists through a cordon
of troops clear to the negotiating building, with submachine guns following
each man as we came up. Movie cameras were grinding all the time, (to show)
Americans coming up to surrender at this negotiation.
"We soon found that the communists could lie, did lie, and it did not bother
them a hit. They didn't feel guilty about anything. It is something that an
American just can't realize, that there is no moral base to negotiate on with
people like that. Well, the results of those negotiations are well known." -
D-1421
under the wing of the State Department
or any other agency.
It is apparent that the State Department
simply does not accept the kind of con-
cept that you and I are talking about here,
an all out, full time, big research job and
a big training job for hundreds and hun-
dreds of government officials and thou-
sands of private leaders, and this is what
it is going to take to do the job." - B-
262, -266.
Few can talk with greater authority on
this matter than former Ambassador
Adolf A. Berle, who has represented the
United States on diplomatic missions since
1919. His extensive testimony includes
these words:
"When it comes to meeting issues, the
State Department primarily is the avenue
of contact with other governments. They
have a terrible time when the govern-
ment to which their ambassador is ac-
credited and which they recognize is in-
triguing with, let us say, a communist
power, and they can't, within diploma-
tic proprieties, state a point of view to the
people of the country, because that would
be improper diplomatic intervention. This
has to be done outside formal diplomacy."
-D-1475.
The comments of the above witnesses an-
ticipated the conclusions of both the Per-
kins and Herter committees, in their re-
commendations that an academy should
be an autonomous institution, not coming
under the domination or control of any
one department or agency. Reviewing the
past record of State Department training,
Alan Grant testified:
"State has had seventeen years to adjust
Foreign Service Institute training to the
new forms of struggle, and failed. State
has shown a gross lack of imagination in
seeking solutions to our global problems,
especially as they relate to non-military
conflict, and the whole system at State
discourages initiative in seeking new ap-
proaches. Furthermore, State has been
openly hostile to the idea of providing
academy type training to private citizens
and foreign nationals, or of researching
the possibilities here." -C-973.
Following 1\ Ir. Grant at the above hear-
ing, Dr. Possony stated: "Twelve years
ago I listened to a State Department rep-
resentative telling me that we had won
the cold war already."
Question 6
Doesn't the proposed training
involve U.S. adoption of com-
munist political warfare tech-
niques?
Senator Paul Douglas, one of the bill's
co-authors, told the Foreign Relations
Committee:
"I want to emphasize that the people
trained by the Freedom Academy will not
be revolutionaries, they will not be sabo-
teurs. They will be propagandists and
advocates of the democratic principle." -
B-232
"Prior to the last war there were a great
many people who said 'Well, if you re-
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 sist Hitler you will have to become like
Hitler.' It was alleged that if we resisted
him, the spirit of Hitler would win. We
Houle the choice of resisting Hitler. 1
think we cattle out of it with our liberties
substantially unimpaired.
I believe we can come out of a cold war
propaganda struggle with the communists
with our liberties uninmpaired.
We want to help set up a society equipped
for economic progress, and with free poli-
tical institutions and the opportunity for
its people to decide for themselves.
I think the right kind of effort in behalf
of these principles would transform there
from being the somewhat pale abstractions
which they frequently are in the minds
of many people into being passionately
held realities.
One of our great difficulties is the fact
that all too often, at least in times of
peace, the believers in democracy tend to
be somewhat bloodless and anemic."-B-
236-237.
"I\ ACCORD w'I'IH OUR ETHIC"
The legislation calls for the establish-
ment of a Freedom Commission to devel-
op methods and means "enabling the Unit-
ed States to approach its national object-
ives along every path IN ACCORD
WITH OUR ETHIC." ( Page 5, line
1.)
The groundless fear of a revival of 11Ic-
Carthyism was touched on in Prof. Nie-
meyer's testimony : "It does not take a
Totalitarian Party to fight the Coannu-
nist Party,and it does not take commtu-
nist methods to frustrate the communists
in their designs. It does take, however,
people and organizations and methods
other than we are employing now. The
cold oar is so unprecedented that we still
have to learn how to fight it. The Free-
dottt Academy would be an institution
where this learning could be done." -D-
1277.
At the same hearing Dr. Lev. Dobriansky
told the committee:
"The issue has to do really with an in-
strument that we want, a tool that we
want. And to use the argument that be-
cause the contntunists have political war-
fare schools, therefore we should not have
them, is plainly specious. One could turn
that about and say the communists have
missiles, ergo, we should not have miss-
iles." -D-1291.
Approved For Relese 2)05/~:7g113 ,r6~7,~t~F1(~p~OQ0Q4A
Costa tea. ccorr vt
lose
S
,
ari
lion in
to the Institute's literature, it offered 'in-
struction in strategy and tactics to at-
tain and maintain power. for the purpose
of defending and developing democracy.'
That project attracted students from all
parts of the southern hemisphere.
The training of Latin-Aarericau citizens
for legitimate, peaceful political action is
a worthy objective, but tt is little snore
than all idealist's drednt unless undertaken
on a scale commensurate with the chal-
lenge. Our hemisphere cannot be saved
by one struggling private institution in
Costa Rica that graduates about fifty poli-
tical trainees a year, and that, incidentally,
has recently had to close for lack of
funds." -B-387.
TRUTH PLUS RESOURCEFULNESS NEEDED
The same witness was asked by a Senate
committee member "whether you, in your
capacity as a member of the Executive
Reserve of the U.S. Information Agency,
have ever had the feeling that the United
States Information program is at some-
what of a disadvantage because we do
not emulate the communist
methods?" He replied:
"I believe that the Information Agency
operates under many disadvantages, but
not in the context of your question. There
is serious misunderstanding on this point,
due to the notion that there is some re-
lationship between the effectiveness in
propaganda and the spreading of lies. I
was disappointed to hear our Ambassador
to the United Nations state recently, on a
T.V. program, that `we cannot be as ef-
fective in propaganda as the Soviets are,
because they can lie and we can not.'
This is a complete reversal of the actual
fact. The power of the truth when used
against a lie, is all in favor o the truth,
provided it is used with the same vigor,
the same imagination and resourcefulness
which the Soviets use. We should eton-
late the comtttunist determination in the
use of propaganda, but not in the use of
falsehoods."-B-394.
Question 7
Wouldn't this legislation
"heat up" the cold war and
possibly escalate it to hot
war? Can there be such a
thing as "cold war victory"?
of peace in our little, peace in the Ameri-
can style. According to the Soviets, co-
existence is a strategy. The terns has been
chosen to deceive."-C-7004.
During the same hearing, Admiral Ar-
leigh Burke was asked how he reconciles
a Freedom Academy with the policy of
easing cold war tensions. He replied:
The first thing that should be taught
in this institution is the truth. If the cottt-
tnunists object to the truth, let them. if
they say "this is not true," let theist try
to disprove it.
They teach the destruction of our social
order and how to do us in. If it is iut-
portant that we have a detente with the
Soviets or with the communists, then it
is also important that they stop teaching
what is not true, before we stop teaching
what is true."-D-1431.
The Orlando Committee warns against
being manipulated into an inhibited, de-
fensive attitude by charges that an acade-
me would exacerbate the cold war. Its
comprehensive memorandum on the legisla-
tion states: "Just because our inadequate
programs of the past have permitted all
atmosphere to develop which makes it dif-
ficult for the truth to be believed, is no
excuse for throwing in the oars and drift-
ing with the tide."
On the question of a definition of cold war
victory, the previously quoted witness be-
fore the House Foreign Affairs Subcom-
mittee on "Winning the Cold War" testi-
fied as follows:
-Fuch Americans, rather them the person-
nel of our embassies, are in the best posi-
tion to give advice and assistance to trade
unionists who are striving to prevent conr-
mtnrists front taking over their union, to
teachers and students who are desperately
seeking to break the control that cont-
tttunist elements have established in their
universities, to present leaders who do not
know how to cope ?uitlt the powerful
Propaganda of the Castroite ntovettunt in
Latin ,4nteri(a." (B-410).
"iiHI.RE ARE THE REST OF 'rHE TROOPS?"
Senator Paul Douglas: "I have watched
with admiration and gratitude the remark-
ably effective efforts of the AFL-CIO in
thw'arti'ng communist penetration of labor
unions its Latin America, while at the
same time promoting the much needed
social reforms. They have demonstrated
that the private sector is in a distinctly
superior position to help solve some of our
most perplexing and dangerous cold war
problems. Yet the leaders in this work
are entitled to ask, as one did recently,
'Where are the rest of the troops? Why
aren't our great civic institutions and or-
gmtizations pitching in?'
The opportunities are unlimited, but labor
can't do it all. The Freedom Contntission
Bill emphasizes that a major effort is to
be made first to research the possibilities
of private participation, and second to
provide training so that private citizens
can systematically and effectively partici-
pate." (B-224-25).
Leo Cherne, founder of the International
Rescue Committee, who has been deeply
involved with private organizations abroad,
testified that he is "particularly concerned
with the vast multitude of private A,neri-
can citizens abroad, who are contesting,
in their own u'ay, the unequal effort ttpo't
which the Soviet is engaged.
There is a great interest in. and preoc-
cupation with, conitnunism in the United
States. It is not, belief, nevertheless, that
hardly more than it handful really under-
stand the precise nature of the romntunist,
his contntitment, his 'instructions, his
method of operation and the nrechanisnt
to which he is linked by absolute loyalty.
This failure to understated the dimensions
of the u'ar we must fight has already cost
as a great deal. Yet we have hardly begun
the task of harnessing and organizing the
vast reservoir of talent and brains for the
political warfare we cannot avoid. This
is why I consider the Freedom Comniis-
sion Act to be of such central ineportance
for the developtttent and training which
will assist our whole cold u'ar program
imnreeisurablt'." (A-745)
"The center of the target is the decision-
tnaking leadership in 1lloscow and in Pc-
in,. The present world crisis is the direct
result of the ambitions of these power
hungry men to role the world. It will
continue as long as their dedication to the
guidance and financing of world resolu-
tion seems profitable to them.
The world crisis, its its non-military and
non-economic aspects, will have been
brought to Ili end when Soviet and Red
China leaders no longer consider such
dedication profitable-when they find it
to their self interest to reverse their pres-
ent hostile attitude toward the United
States and the rest of the non-communist
world.
It therefore appears that Chair/natt Fns-
cell's general question "How do we well
the non-military contest with connnun-
isnr?" might be narrowed to the more
specific question, "How do we create po-
litical setbacks, both internal and external,
for expansionist cotrununist leadership in
Moscow, in Peking, and around the
world?" - Fascell Committee hearings
Pages 98-99.
"Winning the Cold War" has been the
,object of hearings conducted by a sub-
committee of the House Foreign Affairs
Committee since 1962. In 1963 commit-
tee Chairman Fascell asked an ad-
vocate of a Freedom Academy whether
aggressive U.S. efforts in the cold war
might risk a hot war. He replied: "The
idea that the Soviets would be driven to
a hot war, just because of irritations, is
not taken seriously by any expert in Soviet
affairs. I f anything ever could have pro-
voked Soviet wrath to the danger point,
it would have been the Cuban blockade.
The men in the Ti retnlin are very cool in
their appraisal of what action to take.
They talk about being provoked-provo-
cation being one of their favorite propa-
ganda words with which to scare the I'Vest
-but they will never go into a hot war
unless they think they have a good chance
of winning it, and if they see that risk
as worth taking, they won't need any
other provocation." -'Testimony of Henry
Mayers at Fascell Committee Hearings-
Page 105.
Because of the military stalemate, the com-
munists lean heavily on the "organiza-
tional weapon." In his book by that title,
Philip Selznick explains that the commu-
nists ""fight everywhere in the social struc-
lure, wherever an increment of power
can be squeezed from control of an in-
stitution or a portion of it." The fight
continues despite the Soviet attempts to
convey the image that they are engaged
in what is known as peaceful co-existence.
Says Dr. Possony, "This is a term which
is very easily misunderstood by Americans.
Dr. Stefan Possony has said : "Orel y fools
refuse to learn front their enemies. There
is no reason why we should not pick up
some of the communists' tricks and use
them, if and when they fit into the frcatte-
work of our own requirements and ,teor-
ality." -- A-17
A member of the Senate committee asked
Col. Wm. Kintner whether the proposed
academy would be similar to the Lenin
School of Political Warfare in Moscow.
He replied:
"The LenI'it academy has a far different
purpose from the Freedom Academy. In
the first place, the loyalty of our Arined
Forces does not have to be assured by
political commissars.
Li the second place, the communists' Len-
in School is designed to destroy opposing
orders in order to substitute the commu-
nist order for them, whereas the purpose
of this academy would be to assist other
people in promoting and defending a vi-
able society which would be one which
they themselves would choose, and not one
imposed by other force or by subversion.,,
-B-245.
A school of the nature of a Freedom
Academy, run by left-of-center groups in
Latin America was described to the same
committee by Henry Mayers:
"This act undertakes, on a significant
scale, the type of program initiated in
7958'by the Institute of Political Educa
Question S
Why should private U.S.
citizens be given training
a Freedom Academy?
Reasons for giving training to a broad
cross-section of Americans outside of gov-
ernment were presented to the Senate For-
eign Relations Committee by three of the
bill's co-sponsors.
Senator Karl Mundt: "We can no longer
ignore the capacity of the private sector
to contribute to the total cold war effort.
This group should be highly represented,
including businessmen, labor officials, pro-
fessional people, educators. agricultural
experts, perforating artists, and scientists."
(B-17,1)
Senator Thomas Dodd: "There are litany
thousands of Americans who spend time
in foreign countries each year as exchange
teachers, as students, as trade union rep-
resentatives, as businessmen.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
"Whether we like it or not, daily (cold
war) engagements are being won, lost, or
stalemated. Every day victories, defeats or
just plain `no shoe's,' and most of the
tittle it is `no shows,' are being registered
by businessmen, labor leaders, social work-
eds, educators, cultural exchange lumin-
aries and a host of other people who play
a critical and, sonretinres, u-hotly um:on-
scious role in the conduct of the cold zuar.
"Some of these apply sophisticated experi-
ence to their tasks. Others, equally well
meaning, are cold war virgins." B-401
'XIr. Cherne, who heads the largest busi-
ness research organization in America,
added: "It is my judgment, on the basis of
concrete information, that business insti-
tutions, among others, will be eager to
avail themselves of the opportunity to
have otenibers of their staffs secure thia
education (at a Freedottt Academy)." -
A-151
The testimony of Dr. Stefan Possony em-
phasized the youth problem in relation to
the cold war. "Otte of the greatest weak-
nesses we ere suffering from today is that
the academic youth which is being brought
up is kept in complete ignorance of the
for-entost security problems besetting our
country and the free world." - C-1022
Arthur G. McDowell, labor leader and
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
"What Shall We Do About It?"
Nowadays many people say, "The problem of how to resist
world communism is so complicated, I just don't know what
we should do about it." Yet there is one simple thing that we
collectively, can do about it right now. We can provide training
for public officials and others in the nature and purposes of the
communist conspiracy.
A bill to this end has been introduced by three senators - two
of them Democratcs, Paul H. Douglas of Illinois, and Thomas
J. Dodd of Connecticut, and the other a conservative Repub-
lican, Karl F. Mundt of South Dakota.
Its object is to lessen one of our chief weaknesses - our
amateurism in the struggle against the enemy's professionals.
The statements of many national leaders indicate woeful ignor-
ance in high places.
We don't have amateur military officers. Nor do amateurs man-
age our huge industries. Yet we have thousands of amateurs who
are trying their untrained best to resist the attacks of the highly
trained professional communists.
Some of the ablest American experts on Red strategy testified
before the Senate Committee for the Freedom Academy bill.
educator, testified on the need for cold
war training for teachers, even in those
states where programs for education on
the communist danger have long been in
cperation. He stated : "I live in Pennsyl-
vania, whose State Department of Public
Instruction. has adopted communist educa-
tion as a policy. Superintendent of Public
Instruction Boehat is a personal friend of
mine. 1 see him about once a year, and
each year since 1956 I .say to him 'What
progress have you made?', and he says
"1I'c haven't made any progress, because
zee haven't trained any teachers in this
subject.' This in spite of the fact that
there are now twenty-two institutions of
higher learning involved in one phase or
another of this subject." - C-1071
Paul Jones, foreign correspondent, colum-
ist and editorial writer for the Philadel-
phia Bulletin, was asked whether it would
he valuable to newspapers to send their
war correspondents to a Freedom Acad-
emy for training. He replied: "I think so.
Of course, it would be on a voluntary
basis, but I uco< Id think that the publish-
ers would be only too glad to send their
rrnen, rather than just plunge them, with-
out any background whatever,into very
complex situations in retnrote areas of the
world - which, of course, is precisely
where the communists are "taking their
best time." - D-1455
expected to know. They see things going
wrong, and therefore sontetinres they ex-
press their an ti-corn in unism in unwise,
gullible, naive, extreme forms."-D-1354
Confirming Mr. Emmet's view, Prof.
Sidney Hook testified that the commu-
nist movement depends to a large extent
"upon the irgnorance and naivety of those
who oppose it as much as of those who are
taken in by it."
Question 9
Why provide for the training
of citizens of
other countries? Is it
practical?
Senator Clifford Case, a co-sponsor of the
Freedom Academy legislation, told the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee:
"There is a limit to what Americans can
do to help other countries struggling to
maintain their independence from corn-
nnunist domination. A greater burden must
be borne by the people of the countries
concerned. Where they desire the training
which a Freedom Academy can provide,
we should be in a position to bring their
leaders and their potential leaders here,
both to teach them and to learn from
them." - B-278
According to Senator Proxmire's testi-
mony, the broadening of private sector
training, particularly among school teach-
ers, would have "a useful side effect. Noth-
ing will do more to end the 'conimanist
racket' of ill-informed extremists and
dennogogues. than to turn this vital prob-
lent over to qualified, informed, Academy
graduates." - B-361
Senator Jack Miller testified to the need
of better education for "the intellectuals
-the philosophers, the thinkers, profes-
sors, scientists and scholars who them-
selves must see that communism is the
deadliest enemy that intellectuals and lib-
eralism ever had." -B-399.
Referring to the many victims of "the
communist racket" mentioned by Senator
Proxmire, radio commentator Christopher
Emmet made the point that "the distin-
guished commission appointed by the Presi-
dent and confirmed by the Senate would
undoubtedly serve to unify and reduce
the areas of the confusion about this issue
and to satisfy a great deal of ignorant,
frustrated and well-meaning anti-commu-
nisrrt expressed by people who can't be
Col. William Kintner related the above
remarks to the U.S. foreign aid program,
pointing out: "Little is to be gained from
furthering the economie development of
pre-industrial countries, if we leave the
manipulation of the `revolution of rising
expectations' in the hands of the contnt-
nists. It is important for us to overcome
our present inability to channel the forces
rampant in underdeveloped countries in
directions compatible with our interests.
We cannot continue indefinitely to deal
with governments mostly by traditional
diplomatic intercourse and let the comnu-
nists destroy the base on which these gov-
ernments rest." - B-240
1-he stitch-in-tithe aspect of the training
was emphasized by lawyer Alan Grant,
who had taught the first school of guer-
rilla warfare in the United States: "We
have to create operational knowledge for
indigenous nationals (so that they) can.
go out into the villages and get the vil-
lagers on their side before the communist
cadres begin to operate and take over and
establish their intelligence and terror
apparatus. Once they have done that, then
what we can do is very limited."-B-333
Gov. Luis Munos Marin of Puerto Rico
has repeatedly, stated that to achieve polti-
cal stability in Latin America. and inci-
dentally to save the Alliance For Progress
from failure, the U.S. most provide polti-
cal aid as well as technical and financial
aid. He also insists that sophisticated
political leadership in Latin America can
only come from the anti-communist
"democratic left" - the groups which
"seek social advances and higher living
standards for all the people in a frame-
work of freedom and consent."
Prof. Sidney Hook warns, however, that
there are "those liberals or democrats who
are opposed to the communists but t, lve
no corresponding know-how in combatting
their techniques. They lack experience,
and by the time they acquire it, it is too
late." - C-957
The potential political leader must there-
fore be trained while he is still young.
"If there is one facet of the cold war
struggle in which communists have been
spectacularly successful," says Senator
Mundt, "it has been in the recruitment of
the young elite in the developing nations.
These young people are extraordinarily
ambitious. They have a great sense of
urgency about the need for modernization
and reform. They desire to lead." But to-
day, it is only the communists who are
eager to teach them, and what they are
taught, the senator explains, are "deceit-
ful techniques of leadership and power
acquisition . . . II/e "rust offset this cap-
ture of young elite in other countries. We
must provide thrill with training directly
related to the problems which confront
them. We "rust train then, in the dynam-
ics of democratic leadership and prepare
them with the skills and understanding
needed to counter the communist political
and psychological subversion of their
governments and their private institu-
tions." - B-174
That such guidance can not come from
conventional U.S. Information Agency
efforts was emphasized by Henry :Mayers,
former member of the USIA Executive
Reserve. He testified: Front long study
of propaganda, I one convinced that we
will never achieve great success in it as
long as we do everything in the name of
the U.S. Information Agency or the
Voice of 1nierica.
Co"mm"unicating Information about the U.
S. viewpoint is important, of course. But
the nno.st effective propaganda for our type
of society is that done by indigenous free-
dan loving people. I unean people who
could probably be trained in a freedom
academy, and who would propagandize in
their own self interest, on behalf of their
own people, not acting as agents for- the
United States. but acting as exponents of
the principles of the free society." - B-
394-395
Concerning the limitations of propaganda
in the name of the U.S., Prof. Sidney
Hook stated: "When an American offi-
cial, even when he is thoroughly conver-
sant with the cold war and the issues, saI's-
two plus two equals four,' the fact that
he is an 4i nericann official already makes
that statement suspect." - B-195
Where would the foreign students come
from? Obviously, the various government
agencies in other countries would send
their people to the Academy on a regular
quota basis, just as they presently send
them to the U.S. Foreign Service Institute,
the War Colleges and the university
centers.
In this connection Col. William Kintner
testified that: "IFe are training foreign
personnel. We train then, at our military
schools . . . We are also training them
under the AID Program (5,766 partici-
pants were trained by AID in the United
States at the end of the last fiscal year
1963) and 2,127 were trained in the
other nations." - II'-1309
Lawyer Alan Grant,, the prime mover in
the drafting of the Freedom Academy
legislation, explained the section that pro-
vides for the bringing in of foreign stu-
dents: "It was adopted, almost verbatim,
from that part of the U.S. Information
Service Act which sets up the student ex-
change programme, and provides the same
safeguard - namely, that students shall
be admitted as tnotr-i"nnrrigrants under such
circurnrstannees and conditions as nary be
prescribed by the regulations of the Corn-
mission, the Secretary of State, and the
Attorney General. They can be deported
at any time if they engage in adverse
political activity." - ,I-33
On the possibility of such adverse political
activity, Dr. Stefan Possony commented;.
"Should a few hardboiled communists
appear among the student group, and
should they, in addition to making trouble,
be utterly resistant to absorbing new
knowledge, the Academy in cooperation
with our security agencies u'ould be free
to repatriate such disturbing individuals."
-C-1031
The training today given to the personnel
of foreign governments by the United
States is too limited, according to the testi-
mony of Henry players, "Our govern--
"rent." he says, "thinks largely in terms
of preventing communist takeovers through
police and military controls. Partly for
that reason, we provide arms and military
training to those countries. The result is
an over-emphasis on the police state. and
the shoving into the background of their
long-range need to develop more democ-
racy through normal political progress.
The contribution the Freedom Commis-
sion Act could make toward such deno-
cratic development has been misunder-?
stood and misrepre.scirted. The act is
completely compatible with Ill(, American
political tradition." - B-381
Alan Grant learned of the eagerness for
Freedom Academy training amongst for-
eign nations, after the Reader's Digest
told of his efforts in behalf of an acade-
my. 't'hat brought him inquiries from the
Philippines. India, Ceylon, Pakistan, and
countries in Africa. He tells this story:
"A year ago a young lady visited lire who
was art exchange student front Argentina,
a graduate of the University of Cordova,
one of the oldest institutions of higher
learning in the western hemisphere. 'On
our campus,' she said. 'the only important
.student organnization.s have been captured
by the cannau"ists. We non-communists
and anrti-connnnunnists have no one in our
group who is equally trained, in many
cases equally dedicated, and we are not
being heavily subsidized by the Cuban
Embassy or the Czechoslovakian Embassy
or the Russian Embassy, as these comniu-
ni.st students an,. 't'here is no place ill
Argentina where I can get training in this
area for our .side. I came to the United
States because I hope that in this country,
the great leader of the free world, train-
ing would be available to rune.'
IFhat happened? They sent her to a saran
school in southern Georgia. The faculty
was very friendly, but there wasn't a
single member prepared to give the type
of training we propose to give at the Free-
dom Academy.
You could see this was a crushing blow.
Phis young lady was highly intelligennt,
very politically sophisticated for her years.
She had all the inherent characteristics we
so desperately need on our side in this
Massive struggle !'or Latin America. She
was begging for training." - B-331
What might be achieved with training
was suggested by former Ambassador
Adolf A. Berle. He had a part in estab-
lishing a Free Europe College in Stras-
bourg, France, for young people who fled
from Iron Curtain countries after the
communists seized them at the close of
World War If. After the Hungarian
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 revolution in 1956. a couple hundred of
refugees from that country came to the
school. He told the Committee: "These
were boys who had never known anything
except communist training, but they had
revolted against the communist regime.
Through our school one of them got his
training in economics. Thereafter he got
a job teaching in the French Congo. Came
thr Congolese revolution and he stayed
there. Exactly six years after we had
picked him up without a shirt on his back
and given him a start at the College
de I'Europa Libre, he turned up as the
economics adviser to the Congolese dele-
gation in the United Nations and was,
perhaps, as sound and as effective a co-
operating influence as one can have in a
difficut situation.
I could duplicate that story twenty times,
but this perhaps gives you the possibilities
of the situation . . . We didn't try to do
the whole job, and maybe the Freedom
Academy, when constituted, can use this
technique." - D-1469
WHEN THEY CO BACK
"What do foreign nationals who have
been trained in the Freedom Academy do
after they have received their training?"
Senator Mundt answered that question:
"They would go back to the country of
which they are nationals and serve either
their government, or their private em-
ployers, or their professions. But they
would be trained to meet the threat of
communism to their particular environ-
ment.
It would not be our thought that they
would be utilized by the American Gov-
ernment, but they would go back home as
trained voluntary workers and trained
operatives for the government to which
they belong." - B-256
Question 10
With obvious shortcomings in
our own democracy, how can
we teach foreign students to
follow our example?
It would be unnecessary, as well as in-
advisable, to teach foreign students that
the inherent forces of freedom are to be
judged only by the achievements of the
American government.
CRITICISM OF U.S. POSSIBLE
Prof. Sidney Hook stated that "the for-
eign alumni of the Freedom Academy
will be encouraged to feel free to criticize
the United States if, in the interests of
our common ideal of freedom, they con-
scientiously believe it is necessary. It will
be proof that the alumni are not wearing
the collar of any government, and when
they speak up for the common ideal, their
voice will have greater weight and
authority." - C-960
Prof. Hook further suggests that in its
research and its teaching of foreign nation-
als, the U.S. Freedom Commission could
be as un-nationalistic as a "National In-
stitute of Health . . . It's function, too,
is to grapple with the problems of pathol-
ogy and prevention - but in the sphere
of public life.
The Freedom Academy is not designed to
recruit foreign nationals to serve the
United States, or to serve any particular
American purpose. What we are trying to
do is to make it possible for those indige-
nous democratic elements in other coun-
tries to preserve their independence, to
fight for freedom in their own way, even
if their economy is different from our
own.
I think we would try to help a socialist
country keep its independence vis-a-vis the
Soviet Union, just as we would try to help
non-socialist countries . . . The issue is
not the issue of economics, or of capital-
ism versus socialism. The issue is one of
freedom, the right to be a person, the
right to choose the economic system under
which one should live. That is not spe-
'~~~~b~t~i17Pbfi?R~P~~?~~? 2oII5~~'~~~
"The cold war," says Henry Mayers, "is
not merely a confrontation between the
U.S. and the U.S.S.R., as the Soviet pro-
pagandists would like the world to be-
lieve. It is a war between communism and
every nation outside the Red bloc. It is a
war that must be fought by citizens of all
nations of the free world who want to
stay free." - C-1037
There is nevertheless a great thirst in the
developing nations for an understanding of
our political structure, and of our success
in having developed the kind of govern-
ment we have. Edward R. Murrow once
said that in a single USIS Library in
Africa there was more demand for the
Federalist Papers in four weeks than there
is at the New York Public Library in an
entire year.
"WE. NOT THEY"
However short we fall of the ideal of
democratic government, the Freedom
Academy can nevertheless communicate to
foreign students a concept of the United
States expressed by Bertrand Wolfe in an
address to the National War College in
July 1959: "We, not they, are the chain-
pions of the right and the freedom of
workmen, the freedom of movement, the
freedom to change jobs, the freedom to
build organizations of their choosing
tinder their own control, the right to
elect their own officials, to formulate and
negotiate their own demands, the right to
strike, the right to vote for a party, a
program and a candidate of their own
choice.
We, not they, are the champions of free-
dom of the human spirit, of the freedom
of the arts and sciences, freedom of con-
science, freedom of belief and worship,
freedom from scarcity and want, and
from the tyranny of irresponsible and
omnipotent officials.
Though in all these things the free world
presents its own imperfections and lapses,
these are the things that the free world
stands for and in good measure realizes,
and these are the things which totalitarian-
ism completely destroys and makes high
treason even to think upon.
In the battle for the future shape of the
world, all the creative and explosive
weapons are in our hands, if we have the
wit and understanding to take them up
... They are vulnerable on every front
at every moment and in every layer of
their society."
Question 11
Wouldn't foreign students be
called "U.S. agents" when they
return home?
Yes. They will be labeled "imperialist
spies" and other communist epithets.
Prof. Sidney Hook, who has spent more
than twenty years as a known anti-com-
munist in almost every major country out-
side of the Red orbit, testified that:
"All foreign students who have studied
in America, at New York University, at
Columbia, under private agencies, when
they return to their countries always face
this charge. Sometimes it is effective.
When is it effective? When these students
have not themselves been trained effec-
tively so as to know what kind of response
to make to that charge.
What would a physician say, in the
Philippines or in Thailand or in Japan, if
he were charged with having studied in
the United States? He would say `Yes,
and I have studied something about the
nature of human health, and I am using
what I have studied to help my own peop-
ple.'
THE EFFECTIVE REPLY
Well, now - let's suppose a trade union
organizer comes from Japan or a church-
CfAt 19 7~(~0446 b 6OO~80` i~9 -
one rom a peace movement conies from
Thailand and he is charged with having
studied in the United States in the Free-
dom Academy. What would his reply be'
`I'es, I have studied in the Fredom Acad-
emy, and what we studied is how to pre-
serve the principles of freedom, not only in
the United States but in our country as
well. I have been studying in your behalf
as well as mine, and the proof is here in
the program which I present to you.' " -
B-191-192
Alan Grant emphasized that through the
Freedom Academy, the student would not
only "know how to handle any accusation
that he is an American spy . . . he will
keep the other side on the defensive." -
A-32
He will know how to demonstrate that
the native communist is loyal to Moscow
or Peking rather than his own country,
how to explain the differences between
the United States and the kind of country
the communist leaders are trained in.
In this the Freedom Academy student
will not be alone. Sidney Hook states that
as a rule he has been sent to the academy
by some "student or farm group, or some
cultural, philanthropic, labor or business
organization with which he is affiliated.
On his return that organization has a
vested interest in his activity. The conn-
munist charge `American agent' would
have to be implausibly directed against
the organization to which he belongs." -
C-959
Along similar lines, Dr. Gerhart Nie-
meyer has testified that "We are quite
mistaken to assume that we do not have
people in other countries who welcome
our alliance, our help, in this cold war,
and who cry out for it. To these People,
who are to be found in all free countries
of the world, someone trained in the
United States in what really is a common
cause would be very welcome." - A-72
Question 12
Would other free world
nations cooperate with the
Freedom Commission?
While it can never be predicted how any
government may react at a given time to
a U.S. proposal, there is ample evidence
that most free world governments, par-
ticularly on the less developed continents,
would welcome constructive political edu-
cation for their people as readily as they
welcome economic and technical aid.
PRECEDENT ESTABLISHED
The concept of a free world political
academy has already been tested. In 1958
the former president of Costa Rica, Jose
Figueres, established there an Institute
of Political Education. Mr. Mayers re-
ports that it attracted students from all
other Latin America nations and trained
them, according to its literature, "for
political action through instruction in
strategy and tactics, to attain and main-
tain power for the purpose of defending
and developing democracy." - C-1037-8
At another hearing, the same witnesses
described "an organization called the
Asian Peoples Anti-Communist League,
-a federation of citizens' political organi-
zations in Thailand, Malaya, Burma, and
all other Free Asian countries. They have
repeatedly passed resolutions at their con-
ventions urging the American Govern-
ment to pass the Freedom Commission
bill.-B-393
The 1964 conference of the APACL in
Formosa unanimously urged the establish-
ment of an Asian cold war educational
institution in Seoul, South Korea, pat-
terned after the U.S. Freedom Academy
concept.
Introducing the APACL resolutions into
the hearing record, Chairman Willis
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
commented that delegates at that confer-
ence included "the former president of
Lebanon, three former or incumbent
speakers of parliaments, two former pre-
miers, seven former ministers, two former
ambassadors, twenty-three incumbent
members of parliaments, seven political
party leaders and three mayors or govern-
ors. In addition, there were college presi-
dents, professors, industrial leaders and
political commentators. More than sixty
messages from anti-comunist leaders in
various nations were received, including
Messages from the president of the Philip-
pines, the Republic of Piet Nam, and the
Republic of Korea." - D-248
Perhaps the most sophisticated inter-
national group urging the establishment
of a U.S. Freedom Academy is the Inter-
national Conference on Political Warfare
which is headquartered in Paris. Under
the leadership of the French political
writer Suzanne Labin, its three-day con-
ferences in Paris and Rome have brought
hundreds of delegates from all parts of
the free world.
Describing its first conference in Decem-
ber 1960, Eugene Lyons wrote that this
"global gathering of `activists' in the
struggle against communism carne from
sixteen countries and included ten Asians,
six Africans and a small American con-
tingent."
The slogan that has animated the Inter-
national Conferences on Political Warfare
is significant: "Communism must kill free-
dom abroad, otherwise freedom will kill
communism at home."
Question 13
Can the tide of global political
warfare be turned, at this late
date, in favor of the
free world?
John Richardson, whose Radio Free
Europe broadcasters are continuously
analyzing the political strengths of the
communist bloc, testified: "In my opinion,
in the present conflict imposed on us by
the Soviet and Chinese communist move-
ments we have most of the advantages
on our side. That we have not succeeded
to a great extent is due, I believe, not so
much to any inadequacies of the demo-
cratic system or the free world alliances,
but rather to a failure to appreciate the
importance of learning how to utilize our
advantages effectively in the political,
economic and psychological struggle.
If we are to make effective use of our
resources, we must urgently seek to
achieve the objectives which are quite pre-
cisely stated in the preamble to the Free-
dom Commission Act. - B-185
Dr. Charles Wesley Lowry, Executive
Director of FRASCO: "There is an ide-
ology of freedom with an unlimited
potency of moral force and psychological
appeal, provided the inheritors of freedom
In this country awake to the realization of
what they have in their hands. Provided,
also, that free men face realistically, be-
fore it is too late, the gigantic scope and
organized character of the counter-offen-
sive launched by the massed forces of total
tyranny." - A-34
In his memorandum to President Eisen-
hower, Gen. David Sarnoff analyzed the
war that world communism "has been
making on our civilization for more than
three decades . . . It has been a war with
campaigns and battles, strategy and tac-
tics, conquests and retreats. Even the post-
war years it should be noted, have seen
Red retreats - in Greece, Iran, Berlin,
for instance - as well as victories. But
such retreats have occurred only when the
West acted awarely and boldly."
U.S. awareness and boldness in establish-
ing a Freedom Commission is a necessary
step, according to Gen. Sarnoff, "to
shatter the `wave of the future' aura
around communism, displacing the assump-
tion that communism is inevitable with a
 deepening certainty that 'the end of com-
munism is inevitable'." But first, says
Gen. Sarnoff, we must realize that world
communism is not a tool in the hands of
Russia - Russia is a tool in the hands of
world comnzunisnt. Repeatedly Moscow
has sacrificed national interests in defer-
ence to world revolutionary needs. This
provides opportunities for appeals to Rus-
sian patriotism." - 4-41 and 48
These opportunities have been enlarged on
by Henry Mayers in an Advertising
Age article on Soviet propaganda:
"Russia's Biggest Industry." It is a gigan-
tic activity internally because, to keep the
Russian people quiescent, they must con-
tinually be reassured of the Soviets' inter-
national righteousness, of the communist
destiny to rule the world, of the in-
evitable decline of the West, and of its
desperate determination to wipe out the
Russian people with atomic bombs. By
thus playing alternately on Russian pride
and national fears, the Kremlin has thus
far been able to partially conceal its basic
conflict with the well-being of the Russian
people.
But the Soviets' forty-year-old effort to
convert Russian humans into biochemical
state tools that can be mass manipulated
and controlled, hasn't succeeded. They are
still human souls with material and
spiritual needs. In conflict with their
human desire for higher living standards
is the Kremlin's policy of diverting a large
part of the national industrial potential to
armaments. In conflict with their human
desire for communication with the west
is the Kremlin's rigid control on travel,
on reading matter, and on broadcasts from
beyond the Iron Curtain. In conflict with
their spiritual yearnings is communist
atheism. In conflict with their desire for
peace and friendly relations and their
natural instinct to like America, is the
Kremlin-induced state of mental war, fear
and hatred."
Still, there is no comfort in all these
Kremlin vulnerabilities unless the West
has the wit to take advantage of them.
Alan Grant writes: "We permit the
communists to monopolize many an ideo-
logical battleground simply because we see
no way in which our present forces could
effectively join battle. Our non-military
conflict forces are still uninobilized and
untrained. What will history say of us if
we continue to lose area by area, without
having made a crash effort to find out our
capacity,to mobilize and train the many
forces available to us?"
Representative Robert R. Barry summed
up the matter: "There is no reason for us
to sit back and bewail the fact that the
communists always seem to have the
initiative on the world scene. We need to
go out and take the initiative. One instru-
ment for that purpose is surely the Free-
dom Academy." - D-1302
Question 14
How would the curriculum for
a Freedom Academy be
developed? Where would the
faculty come from?
In explaining his bill to the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, Senator Karl Mundt
said: "We are not going to be able, at
one fell swoop, to sit down and establish
the curriculum and all the responsibilities
of the Freedom Academy. This is going
to take a full time Commission, a sort of
continuing 'think factory' to develop the
tactics and methods required to meet the
constantly changing pattern of perform-
ance that America confronts overseas. By
the time we learn to master one technique
to reject a particular thrust of the com-
munists, the fertile minds of the commu-
nists are going to come up with something
else." - B-220
Even a man as intimately aware of com-
munist maneuvers as Herbert Philbrick
testified: "I believe that we must enter
into this field admitting that there is a
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
lot we don't know and confessing that in
the beginning it may not be quite what
we would want in the end. But at least
some place we have to make a start." -
D-1374
Commenting on the absence of specifics
concerning curriculum in the legislation,
Henry Mayers testified: "I believe the
most important aspect of the legislation is
the fact that it provides for research to
determine what to teach. It would be a
little presumptuous for the writers of the
bill at this point to be very specific about
the length of the course, the nature of the
curriculum, or anything that could be
criticized as a detailed program, when all
they are fighting for is the principle that
`cold war training' is essential."-B-1099
The subject matter to be taught is ex-
tremely complicated and voluminous,
according to Dr. Stefan Possony. "It can-
note be in toto imparted to any one stu-
dent and should not be. Hence, we have
to split up this complex and tailor the
study courses to the specific needs of spe-
cific types of students. The feasibility of
such an undertaking, in my judgment, is
beyond any doubt." - C-1011-2
It is not the intent of the legislation's
sponsors to build the curriculum around
`"the American way." According to Henry
Mayers, "We should leave ourselves out
of it as much as possible, in the Freedom
Academy approach. The fact that the
communists are focusing hatred against us,
or misinterpreting us, is not relevant to
the job of the Freedom Commission in
training people of other countries in how
to fight politically for their own country,
for their own salvation.
The cold war is a battle between commu-
nists and all the non-communist countries
in the world, but we must be the leaders
in that battle. When we bring people here
to teach them how to fight communism,
we are not teaching them how to defend
America or American foreign policy." -
B-398
Prof. Sidney Hook has written: "The
Freedom Academy must explore the en-
tire gamut of positive democratic propos-
als to meet the problems the communists
exploit. We live in an age in which
global political revolution, the universal
technological paradoxes, have all con-
verged. Even if there were no communist
movement, the free world would have
many grave problems to settle. But it is
the presence of the communist movement
which seeks to convert these problems
into mortal dangers and threats to demo-
cratic survival." - C-961
To the question of who will teach the
students, Prof. Hook replies: "Fortu-
nately, there exists in the United States
men and women who have had intensive
experience in combatting communists in
schools and universities, trade unions and
cooperatives, peace organizations and social
clubs. Many have studied communist
techniques of subversion and have devel-
oped effective measures of defense and
offense against then.
Members of the Freedom Academy staff
can also be drawn from various countries
in which communist strategies have been
repelled by resolute and intelligent lead-
ership." - C-959
Enlarging on the possibilities of drawing
on the experience of non-Americans,
Henry Mayers testified : "In addition, a
U.S.-sponsored Freedom Academy would
atract the support and cooperation of out-
standing anti-conznzunist political leaders
in other nations. It would be hailed by
men who have proved, in their own prac-
tical political experience, that they know
how to meet and defeat communist machi-
nations in their own countries. Dr. Jose
Figueres, who founded the political
academy in Costa Rica, is but one of
them. Romulo Betancourt of Venezuela
and Luis Munoz Marin of Puerto Rico
are other Latin-American examples. In
Asia there is Singapore Prime Minister
Lee Kuan Yew who fought the commu-
nists politically for ten years and success-
fully prevented a takeover in Singapore
and the Malaya Peninsula.
A great potential cooperator in a Freedom
Academy would be George Papandreou,
former prime minister of Greece.
Through his sheer political skill, he saved
his country from an attempted takeover
by Greek communist partisans after
World War H.
In the Near East there is Charles Malik
of Lebanon, one of the free world's most
articulate and inspirational spokesmen in
behalf of Western political ideals. Those
ideas are also forcefully expounded by
Spain's great political writer and former
diplomat, Salvador de Madariaga. He
could have tremendous influence on
Latin-American political trainees.
These men, I believe, would be great
consultants on curriculum. They could
help determine what should be taught and
how it should be taught. In addition,
some would be glad to come as visiting
lecturers." - C-1038
Enlarging on the possibilities of non-
American participation in a Freedom
Academy, Dr. Stefan Possony testified:
"I go so far as to say it has to be an
Alliance-wide effort. Perhaps we have
placed too much emphasis on an American
institution, and we should remember that
NATO is still around and, perhaps, one
of the greatest advantages we can have is
to use this type of facility to cement it a
little more strongly." - B-218
Question 15
What assurances are there
that a Freedom Commission
would not be infiltrated, or
find its aims emasculated by
a faculty that believes in com-
promise with anti-freedom
political forces?
"Some have feared that the academy
could fall into the wrong hands. The
Presidency could also fall into the wrong
hands, and so could every Cabinet post
and every elected and appointed position.
But we do not abolish our public offices.
We are confident we are able to handle
and control the misuse and abuse of
power. A French poet has said that the
desire to possess perfection `is the most
dangerous kind of madness.'
The Academy Bill has many provisions
to handle this particular problem. I think
there should be a bipartisan selection of
the lecturers. I think you should have
provision so that the research staffs are
rotated. So testified Dr. Stefan Possony,
(C-1019). In direct answer to the above
question by a member of the hearing com-
mittee, Henry Mayers stated:
"There are four safeguards. First, the
fact that the Commission would not be
under State Department domination;
second, the fact that the appointments
have to be bipartisan and approved by the
Senate; third, that the Senators who
sponsor the bill - and there are thirteen
of them - would vigorously challenge
any questionable appointment to the
Commission; fourth, citizen groups like
the Cold War Council, which have spent
much time working for the Freedom
Academy Bill, will remain organized to
see that the Commission carries out the
real intent and purpose of the writers of
the bill, and that it is not subverted by
weak appointments or weak administra-
tion, once the bill is on the books." -
C-1046
To the above, the chairman of the com-
mittee added: "Then, too, you might add
two more safeguards. One is that it will
have to meet the Appropriations Commit-
tee every year. And two, under the bill,
annual reports will have to be made to the
President and to the Congress."-C-1046
The latest version of the House bill also
provides for an Advisory Committee com-
posed of representatives from the Depart-
ments of State, Defense, Commerce,
Labor, Health, Education and Welfare,
CIA, AID, USIA, and FBI. Also six
members of Congress representing both
Houses and both parties, and five repre-
sentatives of the private sector.
Question 16
Why cannot the Freedom
Academy concept be
privately financed?
Some of the earliest advocates of an
Academy were leading Americans who in-
vestigated the possibilities of private
financing. After his original rebuffs in
Washington, Alan Grant came to New
York and enlisted the support of
Christopher Emmet who testified that
he and a number of other prominent anti-
communists "met at that time in New
York in an effort to see if we could not
carry out this plan on a private basis with
the support of foundation money. We had
the support of some very distinguished
citizens, including Gen. Clay, former
Governor Dewey, and Henry Luce of
TIME-LIFE, but we failed. The diffi-
culties of financing an operation of this
sort privately are insuperable, because of
the vast area of responsibilities which
private financing must take care of." -
D-1354
Alan Grant came to this conclusion: "I
feel sure that in the present day and age
we might be able to go out and raise a
5-, 10- or 15-million dollar endowment,
and set up some kind of a private training
institution in the academy, but this would
be small potatoes in terms of what we
need. And it could not begin to carry on
the extensive research or training pro-
gram which we would have to have.
May I further add, though, that this is
a critical area of national defense, and the
most basic purpose of all government is
defense.
Certainly we would not turn over our en-
tire defense establishment, and prepara-
tion for it, to the private sector. This is
such a critical area of national defense,
which is the number one responsibility of
the United States government - this is
something we cannot shuck off and tell
the private sector to play this major role
of research and training, (including)
training for government foreign affairs
personnel, as well as private citizens and
foreign nationals." - C-1108
Florida high school teacher William J.
Cunningham suggested that even if financ-
ing by the private sector were possible,
government apathy would defeat the
project. He testified: "Without the
national endorsement and encouragement
of the federal government, those who
speak up become mere voices in the wil-
derness. People feel if Congress, the State
Department and other federal branches
and agencies are not concerned enough to
do something, why should they have to
worry about itf It becomes extremely
difficult to refute this kind of logic." -
C-1091
Summarizing the private agency issue,
Senator Mundt told the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee: "Ideally, such training
and research should be located outside the
organized structure of government. For
two major reasons this is not feasible.
First, some of the materials and data re-
quired for both: reesarch and training are
available only within the structure of gov-
ernment. Second, and perhaps most im-
portant, we arc talking about a sizable
program, which should, when operating at
full capacity, he training several thousand
public and private students each year.
This will require substantial resources not
very readily available to private institu-
tions. If the magnitude of this training
program strikes you as extravagant, let me
just point out that our adversaries have
been at this business of non-military con-
flict training for nearly fifty years. We
are already too late. We cannot afford
also to provide too little." - B-174
PAGE NINE
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
 Question 17
What are the main State
Department arguments in
opposition to Freedom
Commission legislation, and
how are they rebutted?
The opposition is documented in four
statements by Department spokesmen :
1. Letter from Assistant Secretary of
State Frederick W. Dutton to Senate
Foreign Relations Committee Chair-
man Fulbright, sent May, 1962, in
response to the senator's request for the
Department's views.
2. Testimony of Dr. Walt W. Rostow,
chairman of the Policy Planning
Council of the Department of State, at
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
hearings on May 1, 1963.
Testimony of Hon. W. Averill Harri-
man, then Under Secretary of State for
Political Affairs, at House Committee
on Un-American Activities hearings,
February 20, 1964.
4. Letter from Dr. W. W. Rostow to
editor of this Digest, July 15, 1965.
Dr. Rostow's summary of the State
Department's position is printed in
toto below (bottom of Col. 4).
The Dutton letter, in three pages and
1200 words, makes five points:
a. The area of training to develop "all of
the political, psychological, economic
and other non-military means at our
disposal," is the primary responsibility
of the Department of State.
b. The State Department's Foreign Serv-
ice Institute's "existing programs and
facilities for training and research are
impressive and are continually expand-
ing," and do all that is needed in this
training area.
c. Such training cannot be handled by
"a new separate agency 'without oper-
ational responsibilities" in day-to-day
diplomacy and policy formulation.
d. It is "deluding ourselves" to believe
"that the strategy for waging our
struggle against communism could be
formulated into an 'operational
science':
e. Citizens in other free nations would
not cooperate with a Freedom Acad-
emy, and Soviet propaganda would la-
bel it a "cold war institute for espion-
age training."
DUTTON LETTER REBUTTAL
After study of the Dutton letter, Wash-
ington columnist Roscoe Drummond com-
mented, concerning the first of the above
points, "Assistant Secretary Dutton's
letter shows that the State Department is
extremely sensitive over its jurisdictional
authority . . . I think it is overly sensitive
and that Mr. Dutton's rebuff to the
sponsors of the Freedom Academy Bill
rests on a misreading and a misunder-
standing of the project."
The State Department's assumption that
its primary responsibility in foreign af-
fairs gives it exclusivity of decision and
control, must be evaluated in the light of
congressional and presidential action to
establish the Peace Corps as a separate
agency. Also an earlier executive order
rmoving the U.S. Information Agency
from the jurisdiction of the Department
of State.
Concerning point B above, Roscoe Drum-
mond wrote: "The State Department an-
nounces that it is preparing to add a five-
week-course in cold war techniques to the
regular curriculum of the Foreign Service
Institute. A five week course thrown to-
gether by an improvised faculty for a few
government officials is like sending the
of the Foreign Service Institute courses
Marines to Guadalcanal after preparing
them for a game of pingpong."
In a more serious vein, the inadequacy
PAGE TEN
ARPRYCRdAFATa?
ferred,was brought out in both the Her-
ter and Perkins reports, which severely
criticised the F.S.i. programs.
Point C above confuses operations with
training. The Dutton letter suggests that
even though the basic premises and tech-
niques of communist political warfare
haven't changed in fifty years, the coun-
ter-principles to be taught in a Freedom
Academy (see Question 14 re curricu-
lum) are changing from day to day with
the foreign relations situation. Therefore,
according to the State Department posi-
tion, no foreign affairs specialists in the
U.S. private sector,and none of the
successful practitioners of the politics of
freedom in other nations who advocate
the establishment of a U.S. Freedom
Academy, can understand the communist
challenge as well as the day-to-day crisis
handlers in the Department of State. All
pro-Freedom Academy witnesses at con-
gressional hearings, including those with
years of experience within the State De-
partment are, according to the Dutton
letter, deluding themselves. (Point D.)
Rebuttal of State Department opinion
concerning the reactions of foreign na-
tionals to a Freedom Academy (point E),
is found under Question 12, also in parts
of Questions 9, 10 and 11.
There can be no rebuttal of Mr. Dutton's
point that "the Freedom Academy would
immediately be characterized by Soviet
propaganda as a `cold war institute' and 'a
training course for espionage'." It certain-
1y would be so attacked. The communists
have said the same about the Peace Corps.
Red propaganda has attacked the Marshall
Plan, the Baruch Plan, the Alliance for
Progress, and every other U.S. initiative
in the cold war.
Justification for a less defeatist attitude
toward the communist propaganda charges
that would follow the establishment of a
Freedom Academy is found under Ques-
tion 11.
A few secondary points in the Dutton
letter are quoted and rebutted below:
(f) Because "Soviet training of foreign
communist in techniques of organization,
subversion, etc., is conducted in the high-
est secrecy." any training to counter such
communist techniques, "by its very nature
should not be a publicized operation." See
rebuttal under Question 14 discussion of
curriculum.
(g) Various universities offer "pro-
grams and courses of study on commun-
ism," presumably along the same lines
the Freedom Academy would provide.
For rebuttal see Question 4.
(h) The present scattered research and
educational methods by which Americans
in and out of government may achieve
"training for meeting our international
responsibilities" is the best way, "the test-
ed approach." For rebuttal see Question 4.
(i) The best means of fighting com-
munism "lies in foreign aid, the Peace
Corps" and in "building a stronger Unit-
ed States, a stronger economy and a mod-
ernized and reinvigorated educational
system."
The importance of these worthy object-
ives cannot be questioned. What is ques-
tionable is their relevance to the Freedom
Academy issue.
ROSTOW-HARRIMAN TESTIMONY
Secretary Dutton's letter became the
framework around which both Policy
Planning Chairman Rostow and Under
Secretary Harriman built their testimony
at committee hearings on Freedom Com-
mission legislation. However, there was
one exception. Something had happened
at the White House between the writ-
ing of the Dutton letter lauding the
Foreign Service Institute training pro-
grams and the testimony of the State De-
partment spokesmen. When the Herter
and the Perkins Panel reports were stu-
died by President Kennedy, he ordered
the Department of State to develop a
"National Academy of Foreign Affairs"
recommendation and legislation.
This legislation, as written by the De-
partment, merely enlarged and renamed
the Fareign Service. Institute, adding a
attack from officials within the State De-
partment itself. After the assassination of
President Kennedy there was no adminis-
tration pressure whatever for its enact-
ment, or even for hearings in the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs, to which
it had been referred.
However, both Mr. Rostow and 1\Ir.
Harriman leaned heavily on the N.A.F.A.
Act in their anti-Freedom Academy tes-
timony. In the view of at least on sena-
tor, they used it "simply as a backfire,
to confuse the issue and create uncertain-
ties.
"oC r OF DATE"
In addition to covering most of the points
in the Dutton letter, Mr. Rostow's testi-
mony challenged the need for cold war
training for the private sector, indicat-
ing that it is already participating on an
impressive scale:
"We should not underestimate our unions,
business firms, foundations, universities
students, women's organizations, church
organizations, and what others have done
and are doing abroad. They lack neither
initiative nor sophistication,and we in the
government welcome and encourage con-
tacts with them.
When the Freedom Commission idea was
launched about a dozen years ago, there
is no doubt that such private activities
were not as extensive or as competent as
they are now.
But as I read the literature and the tes-
timony of the Freedom Commission advo-
cates, I sometimes feel they are somewhat
out of date. Our private institutions are
now committed to work abroad on a very
large scale, in every quarter of the globe."
-B-284.
For rebuttal see Question 8.
SINGLE TRACK CONCEPT
Concerning the training of foreign citi-
zens, Mr. Rostow somehow concluded
that the Freedom Academy curriculum
would provide an identical course of in-
struction for U.S. foreign service per-
sonnel and for all foreign students. He
warned: "The training of foreign civil-
ians on a large scale raises profound dif-
ficulties. The curriculum would be con-
cerned with political matters of a high
sensitivity. The mere presence of foreign
students would seriously inhibit such stu-
dies, to a point that would defeat the
real mission of the institution. One of the
features of the courses to be presented
would be lectures by and discussions with
high government officials. The privacy of
their remarks could not be ensured with
foreign students in the audience."-B-
284-5.
Refutation of this single-track concept of
how research, curriculum and class instruc-
tions would be handled under a Freedom
Commission is covered specifically by the
testimony of Dr. Passony under Question
14, to which may be added his comment
that "the Academy should be divided in-
to many schools which, of course, is a
standard university practice. You do not
put the dentists together with the veter-
inarians."-B-218.
In the State Department view, foreign
students studying anything from engineer-
ing to medicine in private U.S. univer-
sities are automatically getting construc-
tive political education as well. Mr. Ro-
stow testified : "We now have 50,000
foreign students in the United States. I
am sure that the testimony of foreign stu-
dents, when they return, is better for their
having shared our life, visited our homes,
seen us as we are rather than having been
instructed or indoctrinated in a govern-
ment institution."-B-285.
WHAT STATE MEANS BY
111 NDOCTRI NATION"
The word "indoctrination" crops up re-
peatedly in the testimony of both Mr. Ro-
sow and Mr. Harriman. Under Secre-
tary Harriman injected that negative
word so repeatedly in his testimony
that its use was vigorously challenged by
several members of the hearing commit-
tee. He subsequently had inserted in the
hearing record a letter explaining that he
wished to clarify my use of the word
'indoctrinate'." The letter explained that
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000600080001-7
he used the word in accordance with the
Webster definition of it as "InytractiOn-
in a derogatory sense-to imbue with an
opinion or a partisan or a sectarian point
of vic;< ."-D-1259.
Under Secretary Harriman thus reempha-
sized the unique State Department position
that a partisan or a sectarian opinion is
involved in instructing free world citi-
zens in the nature of democracy and in
how to prevent communist infiltration in-
to their labor, professional, cultural, re-
ligious or social organizations, as well as
their political and civil institutions.
"FEDERAL CONTROL OF LDUCATION"
Another direction in which both the Ro-
stow and the Harriman testimony ampli-
fied the Dutton letter concerned the re-
lationship which the proposed Freedom
Academy might have with the existing
educational system. Both State Depart-
ment spokesmen referred to the bill's au-
thorization to the Commission to publish
and distribute material within the area of
its responsibilities as "federal control of
education" ... "a drastic departure from
our tradtions of the federal government's
role in the field of education" . . . "fed-
eral government in direct charge of edu-
cation of our people," and similar phrases.
In citing the above dangers, Mr. Rostow
apparently saw no inconsistency with his
own testimony that "there is a great flow
of excellent material on problems of com-
munism and our foreign policy coming
out of Washington (from the State De-
partment). These materials, along with
others generated in our free society, are
available for education and information
purposes. But we are sure that it would
run counter to the deeply held traditions
and convictions in our society if an agency
of the federal government were to try to
impose on our educational institutions text-
books and other f ornmal aids."-B-286.
In rebuttal, Senator Mundt stated: "It
is certainly the concept of the authors of
this bill that the material would be made
available upon request. As you use the
words, "it would be imposed," there is no
such desire. I share with you completely
the fact that the federal government
should not impose on citizens educational
materials. It is just that the State De-
partment provides material, and the De-
partment of Agriculture provides mater-
ial. It isn't imposed on people, but sent
out with a circular, saying 'if you are in-
terested in this material, it is available.'
Some take it and some do not. I think
they should have access to the same kind
of service on the nature of the commun-
ism conspiracy, especially as it is encroach-
ing upon us from abroad. If you felt (this
material) was going to be imposed on peo-
ple, that is not correct."-B-300.
SIMILARITY TO ATOMIC ENERGY
COMMISSION
As for the Freedom Commission Bill rep-
resenting "a drastic departure from our
traditions of the federal government's role
in the field of education" (Harriman-D-
1252), the structure of the Freedom Com-
mission, under the proposed legislation
closely parallels that of the Atomic En-
ergy Commission. This Commission is-
sues approximately twenty comprehensive
booklets of 48 or more pages for school
use and more than 150 other printed
items, also available to teachers. The
Commission also produces or distributes
267 different films to schools and col-
eges.
Both the Rostow and Harriman testi-
mony insist that the Freedom Academy
concept is essentially "negative." For re-
buttal, see Question 1. Much of the pro-
Freedom Academy editorial material that
has appeared in the nation's press (See
Question 21) suggests that it is the State
Department's position that is negative.
To update this Digest's discussion of the
State Department position, its editors re-
quested and received from Policy Planning
Council Chairman W. W. Rostow the
following summary of reasons why the
Department is opposed to Freedom Acad-
emy legislation :
I. The President has already given the
 Secretary of State primary respon-
sibility for marshalling the nation's
political, psychological, economic
and other note-military resources to
counter communist political war-
fare against non-communist foreign
states. The value of a new, separ-
ate agency, without operational re-
sponsibility and lacking experience
in foreign affairs and security work,
is questionable.
II. The proposals emphasize the mobil-
ization of private citizens-at home
and abroad-to fight the cold war.
First priority,in the Department's
view, should attach to improved
and expanded training of govern-
ment personnel-both military and
civilian-engaged in the conduct of
all phases of foreign affairs, both at
home and abroad.
III. Finally, there is the problem of
Federal control. The present propo-
sals look to Freedom Commission
"Information Centers" which would
distribute books and other instruc-
tional materials to schools and com-
munities "on such terms and con-
ditions as it shall determine."
The Department doubts the value
of any such effort to standardize
and centralize the dissemination of
information in our country. It has
also noted that the proposal envi-
sions a marked departure from the
traditional role of the Federal Gov-
ernment in the field of political
education.
Item 1 in Dr. Rostow's letter confirms
a major part of the Dutton letter.
Item 2 suggests that priority must be
given to the National Academy of Foreign
Affairs, an enlarged Foreign Service In-
stitute, although there is no evidence that
the Department of State is urging such
priority in any way, or ever mentioning
it in communications to the Congress, ex-
cept as a block to the Freedom Commis-
sion Bill.
Item 3 reiterates the so-called problem of
"federal control." It is to be noted, how-
ever, that in the last paragraph of item 3,
the State Department for the first time
inserts the word "political" in expressing
its concern over the Freedom Academy's
presumed "departure from the traditional
role of the federal government in the
field of (political) education."
A new touch of confusion in this area is
seen in Dr. Rostow's introduction of the
words "standardize" and "centralize."
Question IS
What about opposition from
other executive branches
of the government?
When Senator Fulbright wrote to the De-
partment of State in February 1962, re-
questing its views on Freedom Commis-
sion legislation, he sent similar letters to
each of the other executive departments.
Each postponed its reply for the same fif-
teen month period that the Department
of State took to formulate its views.
Shortly after Senator Fulbright received
the Dutton letter, he received letters from
most of the others. With unique unanim-
ity, all raised the question of "overlap-
ping functions," and all deferred to the
Department of State.
The U.S. Information Agency letter (July
9, 1962) not only raised the issue of
duplication, but echoed whole sentences
of the State Department letter concerning
the adequacy of the Foreign Service Insti-
tute tcaining programs. The USIA letter
also included, verbatim, but without
quotes, the Dutton letter's paragraph on
how the rest of the world would view a
cold war institute*
What Churchill said-
The indifference of some of today's government scr,vants to a global
situation that, others view as critical, is reminiscent of the Euro-
pean situation in the 1930's, 'while England slept." Noting the ever
growing Nazi power, Winston Churchill warned his countrymen:
"If you will. not fight for the right when you can easily win with-
out bloodshed, if you will not fight when your victory will be sure
and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will
have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious
chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may
have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better
to perish than live as slaves."
Why so few listened
A. recent editorial in the LONDON OBSERVER commented, "What
Churchill said then, had it been heeded, could have saved fifty
million lives and untold suffering. What he asked was simple and
his voice was audible. Why could so very few understand and
agree? One explanation offered by some political students is that
Churchill had been wrong on a number of other major political
issues and therefore was discredited." The same cannot be said
today of the senators who sponsor Freedom Commission legisla-
tion or of the many foreign affairs specialists whose testimony
is quoted in this Digest. On the contrary, it is those who oppose
the legislation who have been proven wrong again and again.
The Department of Justice did not join
the other executive branches in respond-
ing to Chairman Fulbright's letter at that
time. It was about the time Attorney
General Robert Kennedy may have been
writing an article that appeared in the
August 1962 issue of the Saturday Eve-
ning Post, stating that communist politi-
cal warfare in Southeast Asia had made
us "victims of a smart, articulate, well-
organized minority which has kept us
continually on the defensive," and which
will win the political struggle there "if we
do not meet the problem head on."
Question 19
What are the major
differences between the
Freedom Commission Bill
and the National Academy
of Foreign Affairs Bill?
According to the brochure "WHAT KIND
OF AN ACADEMY" issued by the Cold War
Council, the two bills "represent different
concepts of horv to meet the world com-
munist challenge in non-military warfare."
The Freedom Commission Act is
specifically a cold war measure."
B390. It is designed to blaze new trails
toward free world security. The National
Academy Act is a "business as usual" pro-
ject of the existing bureaucracy.
The Freedom Commission would be a
completely independent agency, whereas
the National Academy of Foreign Affairs
would be merely a renamed and expanded
Foreign Service Institute dominated by
the Department of State. It would take
over the F.S.I. language training courses.
It would be administered by a Chancellor
working with a part-time Board of Re-
gents according to a strictly academic
pattern, under a budget little larger than
the present Foreign Service Institute bud-
get. The bill details only provisions for
the training of government employees.
According to Deputy Under Secretary
William A. Orrick, Jr., a West Coast
corporation lawyer who had been with the
Department of State less than four
months when assigned. to draft the Na-
ticnal Academy of Foreiegn Affairs Act,
800?1'e7 years.. It is nothing but` a straw
mart corrlparcd to the Freedom zlcaderap
Bill., Many State Departtru it officials
do not want it # ii that bill passed.
Out January 21, 1064, a story appeared
in the New York Times rwporting on '1
letier from Dean flchcson io the Presi-
dent, diaottncirty the National /l aderny
of Foreign