Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume VI, Public Diplomacy, 1961–1963

106. Memorandum From the Special Assistant to the Deputy Director, Office of Policy, United States Information Agency (Battey) to the Acting Director (Wilson)¹

Washington, January 14, 1963.

SUBJECT

• Information Cooperation with our Allies

With the U.K.:

—We meet annually (alternating Washington-London) to review information policy and operating problems on the management level. Initiative and preparation for these meetings, formerly in the Public Affairs Bureau of State, is now in USIA. Pierre Salinger and Ed Murrow head some of the sessions. Tom Sorensen is USIA’s organizer and permanent chairman at these meetings, and keeps in touch with the U.K. Embassy for follow-up. Assistant Secretary Manning and members of his staff represent the State Department. The U.K. is represented at the Deputy Under Secretary level. (Background paper on organization of U.K. information machinery attached.)²

At these meetings, we:

—Trade information on major programs in which overlap, duplication, or competition may be problems: Book translation and distribution, textbook programs, English teaching, selection of grantees (including technical trainees in mass media.) (Sample of what they give us attached. U.K. SECRET classification.)

—Look into gaps in exchanges of material in Washington, London or field posts. In our June 1962 meeting,³ for example, we spotted need for better exchange of information of communist propaganda activities at our posts, better flow of our IRS studies to U.K. Embassy here. U.K. informed us of worldwide study of effectiveness of their programs which they are undertaking and will make available to us when complete.

—Check on information progress and problems in regional cooperation arrangements such as NATO, OECD, CENTO, SEATO. Example: “Canberra” group (US-UK-Australia-New Zealand) now has formal operating committees in Vietnam, Thailand and Laos which pool intelligence, experience and resources to meet special⁴ information program needs in those insurgency situations.

In Washington, we pass copies of selected News Policy Notes, Potomac Cables and other information policy guidances to U.K. Embassy here. They provide us their comparable “Intels”, lots of IRS-type material on upcoming communist front organization meetings, reports on radio reception and psychological situation in countries where we don’t have diplomatic representation, and copies of pilot pamphlets (frequently the unattributed variety like their recent Khrushchev’s Crisis, on Berlin) which keeps us up to date on what our PAOs are getting from their U.K. counterparts in the field.

Both in Washington and Bonn, the U.K. is represented on informal four-power groups which handle Berlin information problems.

Coordination of broadcasting frequencies, schedules, and use of leased facilities takes place largely through USIS London with BBC. (See attached paper by Klieforth for more on this and other radio matters needed.)⁵

At our field posts, USIA officers work closely with their U.K. counterparts to see that our information and cultural programs reinforce one another on common policies and minimize damage when real or seeming policy conflicts come up.

Where we have access to local newsreels or other mass media, we place selected U.K. materials and they do the same for us.

English teaching is coordinated with the British Council.⁶ Selection of grantees and placement of U.S. and U.K. teachers in local schools is worked out to make our programs cover maximum ground.

With the Federal Republic of Germany:

—We meet twice a year at the management level, same U.S. representation as at U.K. talks. At most recent (October 1962) meeting Pierre Salinger arranged final day and a half of sessions at Camp David.⁷ The FRG is represented at the State Secretary (Federal Press Chief) level (list of Camp David participants, conference memorandum attached.)

Impetus for greater frequency of U.S.-FRG information talks began with planning for the anticipated Berlin crisis in 1961. Success of cooperative effort with FRG on Berlin Wall campaign (Springer pamphlet⁸ 2.2 million copies in 15 languages, over 125,000 foreign visitors to Berlin during 1962 with much USIS cooperation on selection) has led to improved headquarters and field relationships. We want to keep the momentum.

Other factors in close U.S.-FRG cooperation:

—Divided status, EEC membership, role in NATO, and cautiously-developing bloc trade and cultural relations make for information policy problems not present in U.S.-U.K. operations.

—FRG very active in technical assistance to mass media, training of media technicians in developing countries, especially Africa. We need and are getting full information to assure country-level coordination of multilateral efforts.

—With low “colonial image” liability, FRG has high information program potential in developing areas.

—FRG invitation seminars for Latin American professors of political science and history (ostensibly on academic aspects of Marxism as a waning economic theory) have been very successful. Next phase will bring artists and writers to FRG for meetings with counterparts. Berlin Wall visit is part of the program.

—FRG interest in overseas broadcasting is strong. They are looking for a relay station lease or base in the Middle East or South Asia and have approached nine countries so far in the hunt. Their Swahili broadcasting to East Africa is an increasingly important voice for that area.

—FRG now pays over half the costs of operating nine of our 20 Amerika Haeuser in Germany.⁹

—Current FRG-financed TV documentary on racial progress in the U.S. south is close cousin to “something for nothing” in information cooperation. Results partly from good relations our ITV people here have established with FRG-TV correspondents (Peter Von Zahn,¹⁰ for example.) This FRG-financed documentary will get distribution in Latin America (Spanish and Portugese versions.)

Bryan M. Battey¹¹

1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, DIRCTR Sub Files, 1963–69, Bx 6–29 63–69: Acc: #72A5121, Entry UD WW 257, Box 7, Director (Personal)—General, 1964 (Two folders). Confidential. Wilson initialed the memorandum indicating that he had seen it. The memorandum is attached to a March 15 note addressed to I/W stating that the attachments were returned to IOP.
2. None of the attachments were found attached.
3. No record of this meeting has been found.
4. An unknown hand struck through the word “critical” following the word “special.”
5. An unknown hand inserted “, if” between the words “matters” and “needed.”
6. The British Council was founded in 1934 as a public body that receives United Kingdom Government grants, but does not operate on behalf of the government.
7. No record of this meeting was found.
8. Not found and not further identified.
9. Reference is to the libraries and cultural centers established across West Germany by the U.S. Government after World War II to enable German citizens to learn more about the United States, to promote cultural understanding, and to improve relations between the two countries. (Kathleen McLaughlin, “U.S. Zone May Drop Cultural Havens,” The New York Times, August 21, 1948, p. 4)
10. A West German author and journalist who worked in the United States.
11. Battey signed “Bryan” above his typed signature.