Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, National Security Affairs, Volume II, Part 2

103 USIA/3–2353

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (Cabot) to the Acting Administrator of the United States International Information Administration (Johnson)

confidential

[Washington,] March 23, 1953.

• Subject:
• Information and Educational Exchange Program in Latin America.

My attention has been called to anticipated reductions in funds to be requested for fiscal year 1954, particularly as they would apply to USIS operations in Latin America. I have asked members of my staff to furnish me with certain data which are embodied in this memorandum and which I hope you will consider in reaching a decision on the proportion of such funds to be made available by Congressional appropriations for USIS field operations in Latin America. It was my hope to send you soon carefully considered recommendations with regard to the program in the area, but have deemed it necessary to send you this incomplete memorandum in view of the development noted above.

I should like to say first of all that I have every confidence in the information and educational exchange program and consider it an exceedingly important part of our overall effort in the other American republics. It is for this reason that I am particularly disturbed to learn of the proposed action.

The one area of the world which has proportionately suffered the most, in allotment of IIA funds and attention, over the past seven years, has been Latin America. The Secretary recently stated that Latin America compared in some respects to the China of 1930 and the President and he both have stated the intention of the new administration to intensify our efforts in Latin America. I have, in fact, recently discussed with the Secretary a number of possibilities for expanding the program in certain phases, the cultural program and motion pictures in general, and high calibre professors and lecturers to go to the area in particular. The fact is that improvement of our relations with these countries is seriously handicapped because of charges of neglect upon which Communists and ultra-Nationalists play for their own ends. Some of the steps I understand have been proposed would directly contribute to increasing the bases for such charges.

I am informed that the field program budget in Latin America is to be cut 25 percent from present levels. The seriousness of this proposed cut is apparent when some of the program history is observed. Specifically, it is proposed to cut authorized American positions in Latin America from the presently authorized level of 146 to about 110. This cut would put the Latin American operation at a level below that which it enjoyed on June 30, 1946. At that time the entire USIS operation was conducted with an expenditure of about 22 million dollars. On June 30, 1946, there were 122 American USIS positions authorized for Latin America (excluding 11 American librarian positions now included in the proposed 110.) In other words although the total funds available for USIS have increased since June 1946 by almost four hundred percent, USIS personnel authorized for Latin America will have been decreased by over ten percent.

It is my understanding also that the proposal has been made to eliminate support to all bi-national centers in Latin America. This decision, I fear, is being taken without sufficient thought to the nature of these centers and to the effect such a move would have on U.S. foreign policy objectives in the area. (It is worth recalling that no such cut was deemed necessary in 1948 when the entire USIS had a mere 12 million dollars, less than fifteen percent of the money anticipated as being available next fiscal year.)

Our missions in Latin America are almost unanimous in considering the bi-national centers one of the most important phases of their IIA program; several consider the centers the most important of all media. Attached for your information is a copy of a memorandum made available to IIA several months ago which states the Bureau’s views on the subject.¹ Almost all our missions have reiterated the need for increasing cultural activities as opposed to strictly informational if we are to win our battle. Yet this proposed action would eliminate the basic arm of the cultural program.

Budgetary decisions made in haste frequently result in bad judgment. It may also be difficult for some officials to change a point of view which has been allowed to continue for seven years. Yet the realities of the situation, as you so well know, make it imperative that this way of thinking be changed if we are to do everything expected of us in meeting the administration’s increased concern with Latin America.

May I say here that the Bureau has no objection to cutbacks in a great deal of the materials now being sent to the field (many missions have complained about receiving quantities of material which they cannot handle) and even to further cutback in shortwave broadcasts to the area (in view of the fact that, as our Ambassadors have informed us, the most effective work in the radio field is done locally by missions). In other words, I consider it of vital importance to preserve as nearly intact as possible the present field organization in preference to retaining Departmental personnel whose job it is to backstop the field. After all, it does little good to have a large staff to backstop on operation, whereas the field organization can always on its own do a great deal of effective work with relatively little backstopping.

I certainly hope that it will not be necessary to take such drastic action with regard to the program in Latin America as has been proposed. If you consider that such a reduction is necessary, I hope that we can discuss this further before a decision is taken.

Let me reiterate that it is my deep concern for the important role which the IIA program plays in Latin America and my personal desire to see you succeed in this exceptionally difficult undertaking that prompts me to bring the foregoing to your attention. You can count on my full cooperation for any assistance which this Bureau, with its lengthy experience in observing, administering, and now advising the informational and educational exchange program, can give you.

1. A notation at the bottom of the source text indicates that the reference memorandum was dated Jan. 29, 1953, and was from Philip Raine of ARA/P to Elinor Reams of IAE/S. It has not been found.