121. Letter From the Assistant Director, East Asia and Pacific, United
States Information Agency (Reinhardt) to all USIA Public
Affairs Officers1
Washington, December 11, 1970
Dear
There can be little doubt that you have heard a great deal about what the
Director thinks, or does not think, concerning nation building,2
modernization, and development (and all synonyms for these terms) as
objectives for USIS posts. In Africa and
Latin America there traditionally has been no other objective. In our Area
modernization-nation building has been a central objective for several
posts. So where do we stand now? Why hasn’t the Agency given the posts
official guidance? Isn’t there a legitimate connection between this
objective and so much of the work which we have done recently in Laos,
Viet-Nam, and Thailand? Furthermore, when we assist in nation building,
aren’t we combating the potential enemies of the USG?
These are real questions, for I have heard many of you state them. I really
have no better answers than I did in PAO
Letter No. 16,3 in which I
touched on this subject. What I do have is the attached memorandum which
Barbara White wrote after
sitting in on a discussion between the Director and Bob Amerson, Assistant Director for Latin
America. Bob argued, in effect, that he was out of business in Latin America
if nation building was judged to be out of bounds. The answer to this
argument is set forth in Barbara’s memo.
I believe and have argued that we would all be much better off if we could
get an official IOP guidance paper to the
field on this subject.
[Page 301]
The
Director has answered that he is not ready at this time to commit his views
to paper. He has agreed, however, that this attachment be sent pending
further elucidation.
Sincerely,
John E.
Reinhardt4
Assistant Director,
USIA
(East Asia and Pacific)
Attachment
Notes Prepared by the Deputy Director for Policy and
Plans, United States Information Agency (White)5
Washington, October 10, 1970
SUBJECT
- USIA’s Role in National
Development in Latin America
PARTICIPANTS
- Mr. Shakespeare
- IOP—Barbara M. White
- IAL—Robert C.
Amerson
In connection with questions by Bob
Amerson about USIA’s
role in national development in Latin America, the Director made the
following points:
1) We do not question U.S. policy to support national development in
Latin America, but as a specialized agency USIA has a special role and special priorities.
2) The primary objectives to which USIA
should contribute are keeping the countries of Latin America (a) free
and (b) on the side of the United States.
3) We should make a special point of informing the elites of how freedom
can slip away—salami tactics of how communists take over a free
government.
4) USIA has a special capability to
explain the necessary ingredients of a free, modern society, among them
(a) freedom of information, (b) private enterprise.
[Page 302]
5) Population control is a U.S. objective and USIA may contribute toward it in certain circumstances. The
decisions, to be made country by country, depends on the judgment of the
PAO, whether it is feasible and
desirable for us, as the information service of a foreign government, to
do so in this highly sensitive field. It also becomes a question of
relative priorities with the other demands on USIA resources.
6) He expressed some doubt regarding how much USIA should try to promote democracy, U.S. style. He liked
the wording of the IAL objective in its Area Program Memorandum:
“Stimulating awareness among Latin governments of the need to be
reasonably responsive to the needs and desires of their citizenry,
whether or not the government is representative in a formal sense.” In
other words, we should try to promote the principles of a free society,
but recognize that different solutions will be applicable to different
countries. He asked Bob to look into whether more should be done in
Latin America in publicizing the Mexican experience.
7) He does not give a very high priority to gaining support for U.S.
policies in other areas (e.g., Middle East, Viet-Nam). In general this
is of lesser importance.
8) The four priority countries in Latin America (both for resources and
for calibre of personnel) should be Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and
Venezuela.
The discussion centered on the specific objectives listed in IAL’s Area
Program Memorandum. The fifth should be rewritten to state the political
goal, e.g. development of a viable free society. Modernization is not an
end in itself; our activities should support it only when there is a
clearly defined political or ideological objective.
