Foreign Relations of the United States, 1977–1980, Volume XXX, Public Diplomacy

87. Memorandum From Anthony Hackley of the Planning and Program Advisory Staff, Office of Policy and Plans, United States Information Agency to the Deputy Director (Bray)¹

Washington, August 31, 1977

SUBJECT

• USIA Human Rights Action Proposals

Following is a report on the initial fifty PAO responses to “USIA Human Rights Action Proposals,” dated July 17, 1977.² Major headings in this report identify subject areas which PAOs were specifically requested to address.

SUMMARY

The “USIA Human Rights Action Proposals” were extremely well received in the field. With few exceptions, PAOs assessed the objectives, themes and treatment sections of the proposals as well presented, balanced and realistic in the context of local program options and plans. While posts were generally receptive to and encouraged by the wide range of “global products” and projects mentioned in the proposals, their stated preferences for some products and projects over others were related to human rights sensitivities in the host countries and program options perceived by the posts.

The projects and processes suggested by PAOs indicate that they are attuned to the individual country human rights situation and the most logical and effective direction for policy explication and public diplomacy efforts in the human rights field.

The impressive list of PAO suggestions for media products, programs and Agency initiatives will be of significant value in developing plans and programs that are fully responsive to post requirements.

Recommendations for programs that other agencies might undertake include specific ideas for enhanced roles by State/CU, AID, DOD, Radio Free Europe, the International Visitors Program and the foreign correspondent tour program. The principal emphasis of those recommendations is involvement by other agencies in effective complementary programs.

This report does not include each post suggestion or comment, but is designed to be representative of the range and emphasis of PAO responses.

1. Critique of the overall objectives, themes, and treatment sections of the draft proposals. Is the overall balance within each of these sections right? What do they imply for programs at your post?

Overall, PAOs evaluate the objectives, themes and treatment sections as comprehensive, well balanced and realistic in approach.

Recurring themes in PAO comments are (a) the USIA human rights proposals represent a new and positive direction for Agency programming; and (b) the proposals’ implications for a prominent USIS role in policy explication and public diplomacy are encouraging.

Objectives section

—Universality of human rights should be the “kingpin” of objectives.

—We should present the U.S. as dedicated to the fair application and observance of human rights globally, but within various national contexts.

—Problems may be experienced in implementing objective three—“Providing support and encouragement, where appropriate, to individuals and groups abroad who are actively involved in promoting human rights.” In selected countries human rights activists are regarded as being in opposition to government policies (a view held more by government leaders, but not as often by the populace.) In these countries USIS efforts to contact and offer encouragement to human rights activists could be exploited adversely by various factions within or outside the government, and thus prove counterproductive to our public diplomacy efforts.

This concern lends credence to the “where appropriate” caveat in objective three—which presupposes that initiatives to contact human rights activists may not be prudent in certain countries.

Themes and treatment section

—We should add a theme which directly associates the UN with human rights. Suggested wording is: “All UN members, by virtue of their membership in that body, have a moral obligation to provide and protect basic human rights of their citizens.” The purpose of this theme is to provide an international basis for promoting human rights.

—We should add another theme which is responsive to allegations that we are trying to force our traditions and values upon other nations and cultures. Suggested wording is: “The human rights policy of the Administration reflects a firm belief that the inherent dignity of man, as outlined in the UN Charter, is a universal truth that transcends boundaries of nationality, race, culture, custom, creed and politics.”

—Recommend number 6 in the treatment section be revised to give greater emphasis to the relationship of economic rights and goals in the human rights equation and be supplemented to provide guidance as to the nature of this emphasis.

—Post human rights planning for programs should start with a clear understanding of local human rights perceptions.

2. Usefulness of Washington produced “global” products and projects mentioned in the plan to your specific country program. Do you have any further suggestions for products that would be useful to you?

While “global” products and projects are generally well received by PAOs their assessments of products and projects varied country by country. Variables influencing the degree of utility and value of products and projects are the prevailing local human rights situation, the sensitivities of the government to human rights and the PAOs’ perceived range of program options.

“Global Products” reported as useful in most countries include articles and VTRs on official human rights policy statements by the President, secretary of state and other administration officials. However, these same products were reported to have only limited value at other posts.

Overall, USIA proposed “projects” were assessed as realistic and generally representative of the kinds of proven techniques and processes—media materials, IV grants, speakers—which any serious international communications effort should include. Again, enthusiasm for individual projects varied country by country with preference for selected projects being made on the basis of past experience with similar projects or their perceived utility. For example, USIS Belgrade noted that only well-done commercial programs such as the recent NBC documentary³ and special on human rights have proved programmable.

The utility of “global products” and proposed projects varies with the medium. For example, USIS Tokyo reports that timely videotapes and full texts of speeches are always usable. However, background articles in English and VOA English broadcasts are somewhat less useful.

a. Response to specific Agency proposals

—International human rights conference in 1978 or 1979. Most PAOs thought such a conference could be useful. Those not in favor suggest that an international conference on human rights might be threatening to certain countries or it could turn into an anti-communist sounding board and thus lose all credibility. Also, it was suggested that it would be premature to hold such a conference pending the outcome of the CSCE follow-up meetings.

—Human rights alert service. A majority of posts are not in favor of this service. They regard it as too strident in approach and view it as keeping a “moral police effort” or “doomsday book” on countries around the world. It was suggested that this service might be provided more appropriately by an international human rights society.

—A new Agency publication titled: Problems of Democracy. PAOs generally applaud the idea of this new publication. It is seen as an innovative and potentially effective departure from traditional Agency media output. Foreign language editions are recommended.

b. Do you have any further suggestions for products that would be useful to you?

PAOs suggested:

—quality human rights-oriented books and media products translated in the host country language,

—human rights content in Dialogue and Problems of Communism,

—a study on the role of human rights in non-Western societies,

—information which points up instances (when it occurs) where the U.S. recognizes countries that take positive steps in the human rights field,

—a film/VTR series establishing America’s human rights heritage and tracing the history of civil rights developments in the U.S.,

—VTRs of distinguished non-government figures—both American and foreign—addressing the subject of human rights,

—large (suitable for framing) copies of the U.S. Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for display in libraries and information centers,

—and pamphlets dealing with human rights actions by the UN and other international bodies.

3. What kinds of projects and processes are implied for your post? (e.g., coalition-building efforts, seminars, exchanges)?

—The principle process should be dialogue from personal contacts and informal press lunches to panel discussions and an in-depth seminar for young leaders on East-West relations which will have an important human rights component.

—A presidential speech spelling out the objectives and agenda for expansion and improvement of human rights in the U.S. This would demonstrate our good faith and add credibility to our statements about concern for human rights both at home and abroad.

—More stories on dissent in America and on the USG’s concern for the rights of the individual are needed on the VOA.

—We should identify public and private American leaders in the human rights field who would be available for exclusive interviews with foreign journalists. Such interviews could be conducted either by correspondents based in the U.S. or through telegraphic exchanges of questions and answers.

—Foreign correspondent press center activities are useful. They would be more so if posts were asked to include journalists other than the U.S.-based correspondents for some of the human rights programs that are initiated.

—Lectures are useful but PAOs would prefer that their main announced subject not be human rights. Human rights, however, could be included as part of any lecture.

—The U.S. record on humanitarianism is outstanding and lends itself to demonstrating our concern for fellow humans. Exhibits, magazine articles, IPS output and movies on our record in humanitarian causes would be useful to set the stages for lectures and seminars on human rights themes.

—Updated information is requested on what happened to the more prominent activists in the turbulent civil rights protest days of the 1960’s and early 1970’s.

—Where appropriate, we should develop programs which encourage freedom of speech and expression on the part of local artists and intellectuals. This does not mean we would encourage opposition to local governments, but rather we should play an active role as “patron of the arts” in encouraging young artists to use our facilities to express themselves through exhibits, concerts and seminars.

4. Specific recommendations for programs that other agencies might undertake which would reinforce USIS public diplomacy effort in this field. This involves actions both at the Washington level and at your mission.

—In countries where Radio Free Europe (RFE) is more popular than VOA, suggest more Agency and Department input to RFE on human rights.

—State/CU should develop more multi-regional projects to involve foreign intellectuals, writers, artists, and scientists in a human rights dialogue.

—Suggest to AID-Washington the possibility of their organizing, where appropriate, human rights seminars for selected audiences. Also, AID should include a human rights component in its foreign national training programs and its output on assistance.

—Fellowships and seminars on the study of democratic institutions are suggested. It is in Western democracies where human rights flourish. The propogation of those democratic ideals should be pushed as if our survival depended upon them.

—CU should develop an IV grantee itinerary and program outline specifically tailored to human rights. Listing individuals, institutions, and places, the outline would be extremely valuable in helping field posts to prepare nominations and develop programs.

—Visits by articulate U.S. officials are one of the more effective means of supporting major foreign policies of the Administration. More are requested.

—Based on the model of the Department’s Senior Seminar in Foreign Policy, PAOs suggest a nine-month program for foreign scholars and educators in disciplines such as law, economics, and social sciences to examine and discuss the whole range of human rights issues and to meet U.S. officials and others involved in the human rights field.

—A special program should be established at the East-West Center Culture Learning Institute for Asian scholars and educators on educational aspects of the human rights concept.

—PAOs suggest congressional seminars conducted by the staff of congressional committees most involved in the question of human rights. Participants would be foreign parliamentarians, judges, law professors and leaders in the field of human rights.

It is clearly indicated above that involving PAOs in evaluation of Agency proposals and soliciting their ideas has resulted in the kind of specific information needed to upgrade the focus and responsiveness of Washington-developed human rights products and programs.

This is an interim report. A complete compilation will be made following receipt of the remaining PAO responses. We propose to provide a copy of the final report to area and media assistant directors and all posts.⁴

1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, Office of the Director, Executive Secretariat, Secretariat Staff, Correspondence Files, 1973–1980, Entry P–104, Box 136, 7703620–7703629. Confidential. Sent through Schneidman, who initialed the memorandum. A copy was sent to Reinhardt. Reinhardt and Fraser initialed the memorandum, indicating that they saw it.
2. June 17. See the enclosure to Document 67.
3. See footnote 14, Document 67.
4. Not found and not further identified.