38. Minutes of an International Cultural Strategy Group Meeting1
INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL STRATEGY GROUP
Met 1 PM October 6, 1969. Department of State. Members: Host, John Richardson, Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs; Henry Loomis, Deputy Director, U.S. Information Agency; Bob Osgood, National Security Council; Charlie McWhorter, private citizen. Unable to attend: Leonard Garment, Special Consultant to the President, Frank Shakespeare, Director, USIA and Michael Straight. Executive Secretary: Carol Harford.
[Page 85]DISCUSSION
General
Recognition of existent diversity in international cultural affairs programs, the timeliness of new perspectives, need for new ideas and approaches, the existence of probable bureaucratic slippage, the difficulty of measuring effectiveness, the volatile nature of some artists and their disagreement with Federal policy, need for support from the Secretary of State and the Executive Branch of Government—and consequent hoped-for Congressional support which might follow—were fundamental discussion points. The need to articulate for ourselves and Congress the significance of the vague area of cultural affairs important to world peace and security was also considered. These factors were directed toward the major question of how this group can help to shape contemporary cultural policy which will be instrumental in building a positive future. Integral to these deliberations is the objective of cultural inter-change.
This group will address itself as agreed to in the terms of reference “To secure improved planning and coordiantion of USG actions and programs with direct or indirect cross cultural impacts substantially affecting our capacity to achieve foreign policy objectives.”2
In line with this thought, as an example of how the group might participate in shaping policy, the question was raised as to whether the US has made sufficient effort to maintain communication with Arab countries during this period of interrupted diplomatic relations. Has the approach been primarily negative? Could we break existent barriers? What could be the role of Government cultural programs in this and similar situations?
The value of the military exchange program was illustrated through reference to present military personnel who are serving as heads of state in Latin America.
Discussion of priority determinations centered around the recent Voice of America language study,3 and the upcoming survey on motion pictures, and general research plans of USIA. The development of the [Page 86] management information section over the next 3–4 years for $2–3 million will address itself to determining what information is required by whom to make what decision. The need for research and priority determination is motivated by the realization that what is fundamentally important are methods of communication for a variety of purposes.
Conclusions:
1. CU needs and interests should be a part of USIA’s development of the management information research project.4 Possibly State Department funds could be invested.5
2. Increased attention should be directed toward continuous mechanisms in the grantee process, i.e. continuous stream from selection, through Stateside activities, through return and replacement to home life.
3. This group should recommend appointment to the House Appropriations Committee of a senior Republican who would have genuine interest in State and USIA programs. Charlie McWhorter offered to follow-up after next meeting of this group when candidates can be suggested and discussed.
4. Terms of Reference as discussed are acceptable. If needs change, terms can be adjusted.
5. Luncheon meetings should be held every two weeks, on Mondays. The next meeting, therefore, is scheduled for October 20; place to be determined.6
6. Agenda items should be suggested only if they are important. If there are no agenda items, the meeting should still be held, recurring contact considered important for general as well as specific discussion. (Suggested agenda items or other relevant information can be directed to Carol Hartford, Room 128, Executive Office Building, The White House, Telephone: 456-2775; 2776)
[Page 87]Specific:
1. President Nixon’s reception the morning of October 14 for People-to-People people:7
John Richardson suggested that this might be an appropriate occasion for the President to make brief but cogent remarks regarding the constructive role of cultural affairs in world peace. This could be especially timely in view of the planned October 15 moratorium march.8
People-to-People offers an opportunity to broaden the base of operations through private voluntary groups. The organization is asking Mr. Richardson for suggestions and advice, as to programs and personnel. They are in need of a new chairman, and a treasurer. The point was made that there may be need for review of some aspects of the program.
Recommended candidate for the position of chairman is Lane Dwinnell, former Governor of New Hampshire.
Conclusion:
It was agreed that it would be pertinent to recommend that the President include constructive reference to the role of cultural affairs in internation[al] relations in his remarks to the People-to-People assemblage. John Richardson agreed to draft a suggested statement and send it to group members. The final suggested statement will be sent to Len Garment for onforwarding.
II Cultural Presentations
John Richardson learned that the House Appropriations Committee intended to eliminate the Cultural Presentations program for this year. In view of this, after clearance from White House, State Department and USIA officials concerned, it was agreed that transferring the program from State to USIA would be wise. Congressman John Rooney from New York must agree to the transfer.
Conclusion
1. The Department of State will first talk with Congressman Rooney.
2. USIA will talk with the Congressman following State’s discussion.
- Source: National Archives, RG 306, Director’s Subject Files, 1968–1972, Entry A1–42, Box 1, CUL–1 Policy Plans. No classification marking. No drafting date appears on the minutes. Loomis initialed the top right-hand corner of the minutes and wrote: “IOR note conclusion 1 IOP, ICS fyi HL.”↩
- Under an October 2 covering memorandum, Harford sent Shakespeare, Loomis, Osgood, and McWhorter a copy of “Terms of Reference for a Continuing Consultation on International Cultural Strategy” in preparation for the October 6 meeting. (National Archives, RG 306, USIA Historical Collection, Subject Files, 1953–2000, Entry A1–1066, Box 7, Relations with White House, 1968–1969)↩
- Presumable reference to the “Study of Radio Broadcast Language Priorities,” prepared by a task force headed by Halsema. A copy of the task force’s report, dated October 1, is in the National Archives, RG 306, Executive Committee General Files, Entry UD UP–005, Box 1, A Study of Radio Broadcast Language Priorities, Report of the Task Force October 1, 1969 1 of 2 and ibid., 2 of 2.↩
- Presumable reference to USIA leadership efforts to examine the management structures of the agency and implement improved management techniques. The Agency solicited outside proposals from management consultant firms to design an improved management information and resource allocation system. It subsequently awarded Arthur D. Little, Inc., the contract. For the recommendations, see Improved Management Systems in the United States Information Agency, A Study Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc. (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1970).↩
- Loomis placed three parallel, vertical lines in the right-hand margin next to this point.↩
- Loomis placed a vertical line in the right-hand margin next to this point.↩
- For the text of the President’s October 14 remarks at a ceremony commemorating the establishment of the People-to-People program, see Public Papers: Nixon, 1969, pp. 801–803.↩
- The Vietnam Moratorium Committee had called for a nationwide protest, to take place on October 15, regarding U.S. involvement in Vietnam.↩
- Hanford signed “Carol” above this typed signature.↩