Office of the Historian

87. Memorandum From the Assistant Director, Near East and South Asia, United States Information Agency (Nalle) to the Deputy Director for Policy and Plans (White)1

Washington, June 1, 1970

SUBJECT

  • Educational & Cultural Exchange—FY ’71 Appropriations

State’s FY ’71 Appropriations legislation just out of the House Subcommittee on Foreign Governmental Operations, includes a section (enclosed)2 which I feel may have serious implications for the entire educational and cultural exchange program.

The section states that the Department may not give or loan any money to anyone who has participated (or assisted) in any campus disturbance since August 1, 1969. A number of possible problems arise depending on how State decides to implement the measure. Suppose the Department decided to require recipients (both American and foreign) to sign a statement or affidavit attesting they have not been party to any demonstration. This is a course they are considering. On the face of it this may eliminate some who were actually involved in campus disturbances last year.

A much deeper question arises when we consider how such a statement might appear to someone who has not been in any disturbances, but who (1) might sympathize with the objectives of some of these campus activities or, (2) objects to signing a statement which makes (indirectly) his political viewpoint a criterion for a State Department grant or loan.

From a public affairs standpoint such a statement or affidavit may appear to a foreign intellectual or student wishing to undertake studies in the U.S. with State support as an intrusion into his behavior or political point of view and conclude it is none of State’s business, with the obvious negative side effects.

I understand that State does not plan to appeal the measure. This may be in part a result of the $5.5 million increase CU received this year. While it is altogether likely State is aware of the public affairs implications of the issue, I wonder whether USIA might re-emphasize [Page 219] to State the potential damage such a statement or stipulation might have on its educational and cultural exchange program, as well as the harm it would do to this government’s credibility as a respecter of dissent.3

More parochially the measure directly affects a major packaged program (Youth and Social Commitment) IAN wishes to undertake in FY ’71. Plans call for two young Americans who have made a meaningful contribution to this country’s special advancement to participate as STAG’s in the program. Last week CU and IAN officials and consultants4 jointly hired to advise on the program and to suggest speakers, met to discuss among other things this measure and its possible affect on speakers (STAG’s) for the program. Our consultants bluntly stated that no one they recommended for the program and whom they know personally would agree to sign such a statement whether they had taken part in campus disturbances or not. They added that many young people today would consider such a statement repugnant to their political convictions. (I might add that these are precisely the young people we need for educational and cultural exchange programs who can perhaps broaden the rather narrow picture many of our audiences have of American society these days).

  1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, Office of Policy and Plans, IOP/C Cultural Subject Files, 1955–1971, Entry UD–90, Box 1, CUL 1 General. No classification marking. Drafted by Sigmund Cohen. A copy was sent to Bunce.↩
  2. Attached but not printed is a page containing Section 705 of the Department of State, Justice and Commerce, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill of 1971. (See footnote 4, Document 75)↩
  3. An unknown hand, presumably White’s, underlined most of this paragraph.↩

  4. University Research Corporation

    4801 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

    Washington, D.C. 20008 [Footnote is in the original.]

    ↩