(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Hearings relating to H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 5368, H.R. 8320, H.R. 8757, H.R. 10036, H.R. 10037, H.R. 10077, and H.R. 11718, providing for creation of a Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy, Eighty-eighth Congress, second session"

HEARINGS RELATING TO H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 5368, 

H.R. 8320, H.R. 8757, H.R. 10036, HJl. 10037, H.R. 

10077, AND H.R. 11718, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF 

A FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACADEMY 

Part 1 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

EIGHTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 



FEBRUARY 18 AND 19, 1964 
(INDEX IN PART 2) 



Printed for the use of the 
Committee on Un-American Activities 




""''n^^i^B/ the' '^ 

unitedItSTS government 

DEC IS 1964 



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
30-471 O WASHINGTON : 1964 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 
Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price $1.00 



COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES 

United States House of Representatives 
EDWIN E. WILLIS, Louisiana, Chairman 
WILLIAM M. TUCK, Virginia AUGUST E. JOHANSEN, Michigan 

JOE R. POOL, Texas DONALD C. BRUCE, Indiana 

RICHARD H. ICHORD, Missouri HENRY C. SCHADEBERG, Wisconsin 

GEORGE F. SENNER, Jr., Arizona JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio 

Francis J. McNamaea, Director 
Frank S. Tavenner, Jr., General Counsel 
Alfred M. Nittle, Counsel 
William Hitz, Counsel 



CONTENTS 



Page 

Foreword ^33 

February 18, 1964 : Statement of— 

Hon. A. Sydney Herlong, Jr 937 

Alan G. Grant, Jr 965 

Afternoon session : 

Alan G. Grant, Jr. (resumed) 983 

Stefan T. Possony 1003 

Hon. Don H. Clausen 1031 

February 19, 1964 : Statement of — 

Henry Mayers 1035 

Hon. Hale Boggs 1041 

Henry Mayers (resumed) 1046 

Arthur Gladstone McDowell 1055 

Afternoon session : 

James D. Atkinson 1082 

William J. Cunningham 1087 

Appendix A — Proposed bills for creation of a Freedom Commission and 

Freedom Academy and letters from certain executive agencies 1111 

Appendix B — Excerpts from the "Green Book" 1191 

(Index in Part 2) 

III 



Public Law 601, 79th Congress 

The legislation under which the House Committee on Un-American 
Activities operates is Public Law 601, 79th Congress [1946]; 60 Stat. 
812, which provides: 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
oj America in Congress assembled, * * * 

PART 2— RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESEKTATIVES 

Rule X 

SEC. 121. STANDING COMMITTEES 

* • * ■!> <t> * • 

17. Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members. 

Rule XI 

POWERS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 

* * * * ^i 

(q) (1) Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(A) Un-American activities. 

(2) The Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommit- 
tee, is authorized to make from time to time invest iajations of (i) the extent, 
character, and objects of un-American propaa;anda activities in the United States, 
(ii) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American propa- 
ganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and attacks 
the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitution, and 
(iii) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress in any necessary 
remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the Hou.se is not in session) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such 
times and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, 
has reces.sed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any person 
designated by any such chairman or member. 



^ Rule XII 

LEGISLATIVE OVERSIGHT BY STANDING COMMITTEES 

Skc. 136. To assist the Congress in appraising the administration of the laws 
and in developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem neces- 
sary, each standing committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives 
shall exercise continuous watchfulness of the execution by the administrative 
agencies concerned of any laws, the subject matter of which is within the jurisdic- 
tion of such committee; and, for that purpose, shall study all pertinent reports 
and data submitted to the Congress by the agencies in the executive branch of 
the Government. 

IV 



RULES ADOPTED BY THE_88TH CONGRESS 

House Resolution 5, January 9, 1963 
• •••••• 

Rule X 

STANDING COMMITTEES 

1. There shall be elected by the House, at the commencement of each Congress, 
(r) Committee on Un-American Activities, to consist of nine Members. 

Rule XI 

POWEBS AND DUTIES OF COMMITTEES 



18. Committee on Un-American Activities. 

(a) Un-American activities. 

(b) The Committee on Un-American Activities, as a whole or by subcommittee, 
is authorized to make from time to time investigations of (1) the extent, char- 
acter, and objects of un-American propaganda activities in the United States, 
(2) the diffusion within the United States of subversive and un-American prop- 
aganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic origin and 
attacks the principle of the form of government as guaranteed by our Constitu- 
tion, and (3) all other questions in relation thereto that would aid Congress 
in any necessary remedial legislation. 

The Committee on Un-American Activities shall report to the House (or to the 
Clerk of the House if the House is not in session) the results of any such investi- 
gation, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable. 

For the purpose of any such investigation, the Committee on Un-American 
Activities, or any subcommittee thereof, is authorized to sit and act at such times 
and places within the United States, whether or not the House is sitting, has 
recessed, or has adjourned, to hold such hearings, to require the attendance 
of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, and 
to take such testimony as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under 
the signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or by any 
member designated by any such chairman, and may be served by any person 
designated by any such chairman or member. 



27. To assist the House in appraising the administration of the laws and in 
developing such amendments or related legislation as it may deem necessary, 
each standing committee of the House shall exercise continuous watchfulness 
of the execution by the administrative agencies concerned of any laws, the subject 
matter of which is within the jurisdiction of such committee ; and, for that 
purpose, shall study all pertinent reports and data submitted to the House by 
the agencies in the executive branch of the Government. 

T 



FOREWORD 

Nine bills to establish a Freedom Commission and Academy were 
referred to the Committee on Un-American Activities during the 88th 
Congress. They are H.R. 352, introduced by Mr. Herlong on Jan- 
uary 9, 1963; H.R. 1617, by Mr. Gubser on January 10, 1963; H.R. 
5368, by Mr. Boggs on April 2, 1963 ; H.R. 8320, by Mr. Taf t on Au- 
gust 30, 1963 ; H.R. 8757, by Mr. Schweiker on October 8, 1963 ; H.R. 
10036, by Mr. Ashbrook on February 20, 1964; H.R. 10037, by Mr. 
Clausen on Februaiy 20, 1964; H.R. 10077, by Mr. Schadeberg on 
February 24, 1964; H.R. 11718, by Mr. Talcott on June 24, 1964. 

All of these bills, though they vary somewhat in detail,^ have the 
same purpose — to provide for the establislmient, under Federal 
auspices, of a cold war educational and research institution which 
would be run by an independent seven-man commission, whose chair- 
man and members would be appointed by the President, subject to con- 
firmation by the Senate, and which would operate under the general 
supervision of the Congress in the sense that it would have to report 
to it regularly and would be dependent upon it for its appropriations. 

The purpose of the Academy would be to improve the ability of the 
United States, and the free world generally, to wage the cold war in 
which it is presently engaged with the international forces of com- 
munism. It would accomplish this in two ways : First, by instructing 
its students on the subject of communism generally, its strategy and 
tactics, and the weapons and devices it is using in all parts of the world 
to subvert free nations and replace them with Communist dictator- 
ships; secondly, by conducting research to develop new techniques 
which the United States and other non-Communist nations can utilize 
in resisting and defeating all types of Communist "cold" warfare. 

The cold war, as waged by the Communists, in the view of advocates 
of the Freedom Academy concept, has many different aspects. It 
includes traditional military or "hot" warfare and guerrilla warfare 
(i.e., Korea and South Vietnam) and also conventional diplomatic 
maneuvering. But it also includes economic, political, and. psycholog- 
ical warfare; subversion; and numerous other unconventional forms 
of conflict. 

The free world, according to the Freedom Academy concept, is do- 
ing a more or less adequate job of study and training only in the tradi- 
tional fields of military operations and diplomacy. Little or no 
training and research is being undertaken in tlie various unconven- 
tional aspects of cold warfare which are just as important as, and may 
be more decisive in the long run than, traditional military operations 
and conventional diplomacy. 

The Communist bloc, on the other hand, beginning with the estab- 
lishment of the Lenin School in Moscow in the twenties, has been train- 
ing specialists in all forms of cold or unconventional warfare for 



1 See Appendix A, pp. 1111-11714. 

933 



934 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

almost 40 years. At the present time, scores of such schools exist in all 
parts of the Communist world — not only behind the Iron Curtain, but 
m Red China, in Cuba and, on a limited and covert scale, even within 
the borders of free nations. Many thousands of graduates of these 
schools, professionals in varied forms of unconventional warfare, are 
daily working in all parts of the globe to undermine non-Communist 
nations and promote Communist aims. The free world does not have a 
trained counterforce on all levels of public and private life to engage 
and defeat these Communist "troops." 

Advocates of Freedom Academy legislation believe that the free 
world needs such a force and that their Academy proposal offers an 
effective means for developing one. 

The bills referred to the committee provide that a broad range of 
students would attend the Freedom Academy. They would fall into 
three general categories : 

1. Officials of the U.S. Government whose agencies are in any way 
involved in the U.S. effort to resist communism. 

2. Leaders from all walks of civilian life in this country (broad 
comprehension of the nature of the conflict in which we are engaged — 
and also citizen participation in it — are essential to the U.S. effort to 
preserve and strengthen freedom and resist communism). 

Students in this category would come from the ranks of management 
and labor, education, religion, the arts and sciences, and also civic, 
veterans, women's, fraternal, professional, and similar groups. 

3. Leaders and potential leaders from all walks of life, govern- 
mental and private, from foreign countries. They would include 
representatives of our NATO and SEATO allies, as well as the newly 
independent nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, where the 
knowledge of the real nature of communism and the cold war is es- 
sential if the United States is to be successful in resisting further 
Communist encroachments and thus the weakening of freedom and 
its own position in all parts of the world. 

The Freedom Academy would be purely a research and educational 
institution. It would not engage in operational activities of any 
kind. Its students, however, whether citizens of this or foreign coun- 
tries and whether Government officials or privately employed, would 
utilize the knowledge gained at the Academy to improve measures now 
being utilized to resist communism and to develop new operations, 
governmental as well as private, to aid in this effort. 



HEARINGS RELATING TO H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 
5368, H.R. 8320, H.R. 8757, H.R. 10036, H.R. 10037, H.R. 
10077, AND H.R. 11718, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF 
A FREEDOM C0M3IISSI0N AND FREEDOM ACADEMY 

Part 1 



TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1964 

United States House of Representatives, 

Committee on Un-American Activities, 

Washington, D.C. 

PUBLIC hearings 

The Committee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to call, 
at 10:10 a.m. in the Caucus Room, Cannon House Office Building, 
Washington, D.C, Hon. Edwin E. Willis (chairman) presiding. 

Committee members present: Representatives Edwin E. Willis, of 
Louisiana; Joe R. Pool, of Texas; Richard H. Ichord, of Missouri; 
George F. Senner, Jr., of Arizona; Donald C. Bruce, of Indiana; 
Henry C. Schadeberg, of Wisconsin; and John M. Ashbrook, of 
Ohio. 

Staff members present: Francis J. McNamara, director; Frank S. 
Tavenner, Jr., general counsel ; and Alfred M. Nittle, counsel. 

The Chairman. The committee will please come to order. 

The committee is meeting today to consider certain bills referred 
to it which would establish a Freedom Commission and Freedom 
Academy as an independent agency of the United States Government. 

The purpose of the Academy would be to conduct research to assist 
in the development of the methods and means which we in the free 
world can employ, in both the Government and private sectors, to 
defeat all forms of Communist political warfare, subversion, and in- 
surgency, while seeking to preserve and build free and viable societies, 
and to provide training in this area for Government personnel, private 
citizens, and foreign nationals. 

There are five bills before the committee : H.R. 352, introduced by 
Mr. Herlong on January 9, 1963 ; H.R. 1617, introduced by Mr. Gub- 
ser on January 10, 1963; H.R. 5368, introduced by Mr. Boggs on 
April 2, 1963; H.R. 8320, introduced by Mr. Taft on August 30, 1963; 
and H.R. 8757, introduced by Mr. Schweiker on October 8, 1963. 

These bills are substantially the same in relation to their purpose 
and provisions, with one significant exception. H.R. 352, H.R. 5368, 
and H.R. 8320 make provision for an Advisory Committee to the Free- 
dom Academy composed of representatives from executive agencies 
concerned with the Academy's objectives, to insure cooperation be- 
tween the Academy and these agencies, as well as to review the opera- 

935 



936 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

tions of the Commission and report its findings annually to the Presi- 
dent and the Congress. 

H.R. 1617, on the other hand, provides for a Joint Congressional 
Freedom Committee to supervise the activities of the Commission and 
to study and hold hearings on matters related to its o!)jectives. H.R. 
8757 provides for neither an Advisory Committee nor a Joint Congres- 
sional Freedom Committee. 

The establishment of a Freedom Connnission and Freedom Academy 
was first proposed by Mr. Herlong when he filed the bill H.R. 3880 
on February 2, 1959. H.R. 3880 was referred to this committee, which 
asked the Departments of State and Justice for their views on the 
measure. In a letter dated July 23, 1959, the Department of State 
advised the then chairman of this committee that although it was in 
agreement with the basic objective of the bill, to increase knowledge 
and understandiing of the international Communist menace, the De- 
partment felt there was no need to create a new agency to accomplish 
this objective. It stated that existing agencies could be used with less 
risk of confusion, overlapping of responsibilities, and duplication of 
effort. The Department of Justice expressed the same view in a 
letter dated May 18, 1959. 

On April 15, 1959, S. 1689, a companion bill to H.R. 3880, was 
introduced in the Senate by Messrs. Mundt and Douglas. The Sen- 
ate Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Com- 
mittee held hearings on this bill in June of that year. The bill was 
subsequently reported out by the Senate committee and passed the 
Senate on August 31, 1960, with no opportunity for action on the bill 
in the House, m view of the adjournment of Congress 1 day later. 

Several Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy bills were 
introduced in the 87th Congress and referred to this committee. The 
Department of State was again requested to present its views. On 
June 7, 1962, the Department advised the committee that plans were 
currently under way to expand the Foreign Service Institute and to 
broaden its training responsibilities to meet the needs of the changing 
times and that, for this and other reasons set forth, it opposed the 
Freedom Academy bills. 

As has been noted, five bills have been offered in the House during 
the 88th Congress to create a Freedom Commission and Freedom 
Academy. In addition, S. 414, with provisions identical to H.R. 5368, 
one of the House bills we are now^ considering, was introduced in the 
Senate on January 22, 1963, by Mr. Mundt, for himself and Messrs. 
Douglas, Case, Dodd, Smathers, Goldwater, Proxmire, Fong, Hicken- 
looper. Miller, Keating, Lausche, and Scott. 

In April and May of 1963, the Senate Committee on Foreign Re- 
lations, to which S. 414 was referred on request of its chairman, held 
consolidated hearings on the bill and on S. 865, a bill to establish a 
National Academy of Foreign Affairs. No report on these bills, 
however, has been made. 

This committee has requested the views of various agencies of 
the executive branch on the Freedom Academy bills now pending 
before it. The executive departments have been unanimous and uni- 
form in their response. The Department of State, in a letter of 
April 8, 1963, the United States Infonnation Agency, in a letter of 
April 19, 1963, and the Department of Defense in a letter of March 29, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 937 

1963, all opposed the establishment of a Freedom Commission and 
Freedom Academy, on the new ground that the proposed creation of a 
National Academy of Foreign Affairs is, in their opinion, the most 
practical and realistic approach to the basic purposes of H.R. 352. 
These views and the views of others will be explored in the course of 
these hearings. 

As a matter of information, the proposed National Academy of 
Foreign Affaii-s would be an institution for, and limited to, the educa- 
tion and training of officials engaged in the conduct of this comitry's 
foreign affairs. 

I now direct that the bills, H.R. 352, 1617, 5368, 8320, and 8757, and 
that all letters received from the various executive agencies expressing 
their views on the Freedom Academy bills be printed in full in the 
record.^ 

We are very fortunate, indeed, to have with us this morning the 
gentleman who introduced the first bill on this subject and who has 
been the sparkplug in its consideration and we will be glad to hear 
from him. Mr. Herlong, of Florida. 

Syd, we are very glad to have you. We know of your deep interest 
in this. 

STATEMENT OF HON. A. SYDNEY HERLONG, JR., U.S. 
REPRESENTATIVE FROM FLORIDA 

JVIr. Herlong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the com- 
mittee. 

I want to first express my appreciation to you for holding these 
hearings and tell you that I think you are doing a real service to our 
comitry' in holding hearings, which I hope will result in some action 
on this legislation. I appreciate the review that you gave to the com- 
mittee of what has happened up to now. 

To ref rash the memory of the members of the committee, and I hope 
not to be too repetitive, I would like to say that originally. Dr. Judd, 
our former colleague from Minnesota, and I introduced this legislation 
on February 2, 1959. In that same year. Senator Mundt and Senator 
Douglas, joined by a number of other Senators, introduced a com- 
panion bill in the Senate. The Senate Internal Security Subcommittee 
held extensive hearings on the bill and finally, in 1960, actually passed 
the bill, but it was too late to do anything about it in the House, and 
no hearings were held, and no action was taken in the House. 

The. Senate did, in its consideration of the bill, amend it in a num- 
ber of respects, which did not change the substance of the bill at all, 
but it did greatly improve the language, and we supported those 
improvements. 

(At this point Mr. Schadeberg entered the hearing room.) 

Mr, Herlong. Now, in the 87th Congress, I introduced the bill 
again and instead of using the original version that I had used, I used 
the version that passed in the Senate. And nothing was done, either 



i^Since the date of these hearings, four additional bills regarding establishment of a 
Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy have been introduced. Thev are : H.R. 
lOOHf), introduced by Mr. Ashbrook February 20. 1964 ; H.R. 10037, introduced by Mr. 
Clausen February 20, 1964 ; H.R. 10077, introduced by Mr. Schadeberg February 24, 1964 ; 
and H.R. 11718, introduced by Mr. Talcott June 24, 1964. For all of these bills and letters, 
see Appendix A, part 1, pp. 1111-1190. 



938 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

in the House or in the Senate, in the 87th Congress. In the 88th Con- 
gress, I have again, along with my colleague from California, Mr. 
Gubser, introduced the same bill that passed the Senate in 1960. 

Prior to our introduction in the 88th Congress, there was extensive 
work done on revision of this bill, and the new copy was not available 
for me at the time I introduced H.R. 352 in the 88th Congress, but 
shortly thereafter it was available and was introduced in the House 
by my colleague from Louisiana, Mr. Boggs, as H.R. 5368 and by my 
colleague from Ohio, Mr. Taft, as H.R. 8320. 

These are two of the bills that the committee has before it at this 
time, and I want at this time to make it crystal clear to the commit- 
tee that there is no conflict between any of us who have introduced 
these bills. The ones which Mr. Boggs and which Mr. Taft have 
introduced, we think, are very much the best bills of the lot. They 
are stronger and better worded and they are the bills which I intend 
to support and they are the ones which I hope the cx^mmittee will start 
on in an effort to work out some legislation ni this field. 

The Chairman. Well, this is further proof of your deep interest 
in this thing. You are not playing around w ith pride of authorship ; 
what you want is sound, good legislation. 

Mr. Herlong. Mr. Chairman, I have always tried to operate under 
the theory that there is no limit to how much good you can do, if you 
do not care who gets the credit. 

H.R. 8757, which was introduced by Mr. Schweiker, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania, was the original bill. It was the same bill that 
was introduced by Dr. Judd and me on February 2, 1959. There is 
still no conflict between the various concepts or between the Members 
who have introduced these bills. We just think that more work was 
done on these latter two bills and we think that you can find them a 
better version on which to work than either of the other three bills. 

Mr. Chaii-man, before I get into a discussion of the bill, there are 
several important witnesses who are not scheduled for appearances 
before the committee this week because they could not adjust their 
personal schedules in order to be present. And I believe if these peo- 
ple could be afforded an opportunity to either present statements for 
the record, or to testify in person at a later date, it would add a great 
deal to this committee's understanding, not only of this particular 
measure, but, in fact, of the whole area which is under discussion. 
Among these persons I would like the committee to hear are our 
former colleague. Dr. Judd of Minnesota, who introduced the original 
bill with me; Herbert Philbrick, who I am sure needs no introduc- 
tion to the members of this committee; Dr. Leo Cherne, executive 
director of the Research Institute of America and former chairman 
of the International Rescue Committee; and Admiral Arleigh Burke, 
who now heads the Center for Strategic Studies at Georgetown. 

I hope it will be possible that the record of these hearings be kept 
open for a sufficient length of time in order that these and several 
other important witnesses might submit written statements. It would 
even be better, Mr. Chairman, if they could testify in person at a later 
date, so that the members of this committee might have the opportu- 
nity to question them. 

Now, I realize that your committee is already heavily burdened, but 
I would hope, because of what I feel is the paramount importance 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 939 

of this proposed legislation, that you will make it possible for these 
people to be heard at a later date or, if you cannot do that, certainly 
see that their statements are included in the record of the hearings. 

The Chairman. I might mention that we discussed this vei-y ques- 
tion this morning in executive session and we were advised along the 
lines you indicated, that other people scheduled to appear this week 
could not come. I am quite sure that what you request is the course we 
will follow because we do want all the information we can possibly get 
on this subject. And we want to have the views of the best minds in 
the country interested in the objectives of all these bills before we come 
to a final conclusion. 

Mr. He'Rlong. I thank the chairman very much. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, only a short distance off the shores of my 
own State of Florida, on the island of Cuba, Communists are operat- 
ing. They are also operating in Cuba a number of schools, teaching 
the many strategies and tactics of subversion and revolutionary war- 
fare. Thousands of Communists from all of the countries of Latin 
America, as well as from a number of the new African nations, have 
been intensively trained in these schools. 

In addition, thousands of Latin Americans have attended advanced 
training schools in Prague, Moscow, and elsewhere behind the Iron 
Curtain, where they have received up to 3 years of training in all of the 
arts of nonmilitary warfare. The graduates of these schools are now 
engaged in a massive program designed to subvert all of Latin America 
and bring it within the Communist orbit. 

Where, Mr. Chairman, can Latin Americans obtain training in their 
countries, or in this count ly, to prepare them to understand Com- 
munist subversion and political warfare and methods and means of de- 
feating it, as well as trying to help them strengthen their own free 
institutions and society ? The answer is, of course, nowhere, because 
nowhere is this training available in any significant degree. The re- 
sult is that the Communists are having great success in penetrating 
and manipulating all sorts of institutions and organizations throughout 
Latin America because we and our Latin American friends have not 
trained our people to fight back with equal skill, with equal know-how, 
or dedication. 

Mr. Chairman, the Soviets and their allies have for more than four 
decades now operated a very large system of basic, intermediate, and 
advanced training centers which have graduated tens of thousands of 
dedicated and well-trained cadres who are now operating with great 
skill in every area of the free world. It would be an understatement 
to simply say that this was a great advantage to the Communists. 

Unless Latin Americans, Africans, and Asians as well as Americans 
can be trained and motivated to fight back with equal skill and dedi- 
cation, using our methods and means, many more areas of the free 
world will be lost in the coming years. I believe that the greatest 
single task which we now face is the establishment of a training pro- 
gram which can prepare not only Government foreign affairs per- 
sonnel, but also private citizens and foreign students, to understand 
Communist political warfare and subversion and to give them the 
capacity to organize all of the methods and means which free men can 
properly employ to defeat Communist subversion and political war- 
fare, while seeking to build and preserve free and independent coun- 
tries. 



940 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The bill before you, the Boggs-Taft bill we will call it, is the first 
comprehensive proposal to establish this type of training program. 
I believe that if the Freedom Academy had been established many 
years ago, the course of the cold war would have been much different 
than it has been. It is now late in the ball game. And I urge that 
this committee move forward with a sense of urgency and produce a 
bill which will help us to close this vital gap in our cold war defenses. 

I hope you will permit me, Mr. Chairman, to quote briefly from the 
report of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee on the Freedom 
Academy bill. This report was later adopted by the full Judiciary 
Committee of the Senate, and they said, and I quote : 

The committee considers this bill to be one of the most important ever intro- 
duced in the Congress. This is the first measure to recognize that a concen- 
trated development and training program must precede a significant improve- 
ment in our cold-war capabilities. The various agencies and bureaus can be 
shuffled and reshuffled. Advisory committees, interdepartmental committees, 
and coordinating agencies can be created and recreated, but until they are 
staffed by highly motivated personnel who have been systematically and inten- 
sively trained in the vast and complex field of total political warfare, we can 
expect little improvement in our situation. 

This one lone Freedom Academy, costing a fraction of the Cuban sugar 
subsidy, can lay the foundation for a major breakthrough. Properly staffed 
and funded, it will stand as a symbol of our determination to win the cold war. 
It will give courage to our friends and dismay our enemies. It is a practical, 
fundamental approach to our national survival. The committee recommends 
the enactment of the Freedom Commission bill at the earliest possible time. 

You can see from the above, Mr. Chairman, that it would be difficult 
for anyone to write a stronger endorsement of a plan than that com- 
mittee wrote. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like at this time to ask permission of the 
committee to include in the record of the hearings following my state- 
ment the following documents. First, an article from the May 1963 
edition of Reader's Digest^ which is entitled "Let's Demand This New 
Weapon for Democracy." ^ This article is written by Eugene H. 
Methvin. And in this article he describes the remarkable 13-year 
effort made by a group of central Florida citizens, which has become 
known as the Orlando Committee for a Freedom Academy. The work 
of this dedicated group of men has been acclaimed by many of the 
foremost authorities in this field, and I commend this inspiring article 
to you and the committee for your thoughtful reading. 

Mr. Pool. Can I interrupt right there, Mr. Chairman ? 

Can you tell us more about the committee, the Orlando Committee ? 

Mr. Herlong. I can tell you more about it. The next witness, Mr. 
Pool, is going to go into that in some detail, because he is the origina- 
tor of this committee, and he will tell you about it in a few moments. 

The Chairman. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. On the record. 

Mr. Herlong. The second article I would like to have included is an 
article entitled "Why the U.S. Needs a Freedom Academy," ^ 
which is an article that appeared in the September 1963 issue of the 
IBM house organ Think. This article is written by Dr. Sidney Hook, 



1 See pp. 948-954. 
a See pp. 955-961. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 941 

who is chairman of the Department of Philosophy of New York Uni- 
versity. Dr. Hook is a top authority on communism and Soviet polit- 
ical warfare, and he has been a supporter of the Freedom Academy 
plan since 1955. 

This article is especially significant because it points out the urgent 
need to provide Freedom Academy training to foreign students. 

The third article is an editorial from the February 16, 1959, issue of 
LIFE magazine,^ supporting the Freedom Academy bill. I will have 
to supply that for the committee. I didn't have it available as I left 
the office this morning. 

The Chairman. The material referred to will be inserted in the 
record in the order listed. 

Mr. Herlong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Next I would like to have an editorial from the February 18, 1961, 
edition of the Saturday Evening Post entitled "The Freedom Academy 
Bill Should Pass ! " ^ So, if you would 

The Chairman. All of these will be inserted in the record following 
your statement, in the order you listed them. 

Mr. Herlong. I thank the chairman. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, it has not been my purpose in this brief state- 
ment to attempt to make any dramatic appeal to you in urging that 
you approve this legislation along the line that has been introduced. 
As I have said, I am simply, along with you, a vehicle to help to get 
this ball started rolling. 

While I yield to no man in my intense interest in this subject matter, 
I am not a technical expert on these bills. I have worked very closely 
during the last 5 years with this Orlando Committee. We have 
burned many gallons of midnight oil together and we are fortunate 
to have with us, however, today the originator of the Freedom Academy 
concept, Mr. Alan Grant of Orlando, Florida. 

Mr. Grant is an expert in this whole area which is the subject of 
these bills, and if the committee has any questions dealing with the 
teclmical aspects of the program or any background material, I would 
suggest that you can get better answers by addressing tliem to Mr. 
Grant at the conclusion of his statement. 

Again, I want to thank you for the privilege of appearing before 
you and this distinguished committee. In my judgment, as I said at 
the outset, you are doing a gi-eat service for our country in holding 
these hearings. 

The Chairman. Well, I certainly want to commend you for the 
work you have done on this proposal. I like the way you presented 
the argument for it. I will defer making a judgment until we hear 
from everyone, particularly the Government agencies, but I was im- 
pressed with the fact, of which I am aware, of how little we do in this 
area of fighting the cold war as compared to our enemies, the Com- 
munists. 

It has been my experience, and I have so stated many times, that we 
have tended too much, in the past, to fight back on the basis of intui- 
tion and emotion rather than on knowledge. Whatever happens to 
this bill, it is a fact, I think, that knowledge of any problem is the 



1 See p. 962. 

2 See pp. 963. 964. 



942 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

first essential step in trying to lick it, and this is a very serious 
problem. 

Even the teaching of communism becomes controversial, because 
there are some who talk about indoctrination and place overemphasis 
on the idea that we should have no indoctrination, that we should 
merely recite the facts. But sometimes, you know, unless you have 
some teaching of the problem in a principled way, the student just 
becomes confused. Unless the adults can teach principle, unless 
parents are willing to discuss these things and to make both sides of 
the coin available, the student is confused — and by "student" I mean 
adults as well as youth, all people who want to know. 

I don't know whether this bill is the solution, but I am deeply im- 
pressed with the fact that these hearings are important, and we should 
listen to the testimony and try to come to grips with the problem and 
find a solution. Here in America, the very word "propaganda" is a 
dirty word. Therefore, we tend to shut our eyes to that problem, 
whereas that problem is a hammer mill, hitting every minute, every 
second of the day, across the world. 

We are glad to have had you appear and look forward to the appear- 
ance of the others, particularly, I will say. Admiral Burke and those 
who are in a position to know that something needs to be done. We 
certainly are going to try to make a record, to analyze what this thing 
is all about, and try to provide a solution. 

Mr. Herlong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would say this, if you 
please : that we don't have anything to fear as long as our people know 
the truth, but too often they don't get the truth, and the purpose of this 
is to supply an instrument by which our people and our friends can get 
the truth, get it objectively, and then we will be well on the way, as 
you said so well, to winning the battle. 

The Chairman. Now we are not going to go into detail with you as 
to the structure of the Academy and the courses and so on, but I take it 
from what you have said that your idea would be that this institution 
would be available to key leaders in Government and business and 
labor, across the board, for the general information of those interested 
in fighting these problems. 

Mr. Herlong. This is correct. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Any questions ? 

Mr. Pool. I want to congratulate Congressman Herlong for his 
endeavor in this field. I have been dubious about whether or not we 
can, but I think it is a fact that, as the chairman said, we should make 
every effort to try to arrive at a proper vehicle to do this job; and, of 
course, there are lots of pitfalls, as you know, that we have to worry 
about in setting up something like this. 

Some people have said that it will probably do more harm than 
good, but we just have to dig into it, and that is what I intend to do. 
I don't have any opinion on it. 

Mr. Herlong. Well, let me ask the gentleman this question, in view 
of his statement there. Could we be much worse off than we are to- 
day ? Aren't we losing the cold war pretty rapidly ? 

Mr. Pool. That is why we certainly should look into it, and we will, 
but we have those problems, and I am going to try to keep my eye on 
that through all these hearings. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 943 

Mr. Herlong. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend Congressman Her- 
long for his efforts in establishing this means of fighting communism 
abroad. I, like the chairman, however, have considerable question in 
my mind as to whether this is the right approach. 

However, I have studied the reports of the Department of State 
and the Department of Defense in opposition to the bill. I consider 
those reports very weak arguments against the bill. I think they attack 
the bill as being — they say that your objectives are praiseworthy and 
unexceptionable, but they feel that the Academy of Foreign Affairs is 
the right approach. 

I would like to ask you, Congressman, when did this Academy of 
Foreign Affairs come into the picture, as proposed by the Department 
of State? 

Mr. Herlong. Mr. Grant has that inforaiation, and he will give it 
to you in just a few minutes. 

Mr. IcHORD, I am wondering whether this was proposed by the 
Department of State after the Freedom Academ.y was proposed. 

Mr. Herlong. It is my understanding that it was, years later. 

The Chairman. Considerably after. 

Mr. Herlong. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IcHORD. Thank you. 

Mr. Herlong. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IcHORD. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. Semier ? 

Mr. Senner, I have no questions, Mr. Chairman, but I thank my 
colleague for his appearance here this morning. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. I, too, would like to thank Mr. Herlong for com- 
ing here. It is a real privilege to have you before the committee and 
to have you as our colleague, and we all feel a little bit taller. 

I, too, like your statement that we have nothing to fear with the 
tnith, because fear is the only thing that keeps us from making prog- 
ress, and we only fear what we don't know. If you w^ant to put it m 
the words of the Scripture, it says, "Know the truth, and the truth shall 
make you free," and this is what we are after very much. 

Mr. Herlong. Thank you, sir. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this question, because it has been 
bounced around, and I am not pointing a finger at either side on this 
issue. I have heard it said that perhaps the reason for the new 
objection to your and other proposals on the part of the Department 
of State and other agencies desiring, in lieu of your approach, to create 
a National Academy of Foreign Affairs, is perhaps sort of a counter- 
movement to halt yours. 

Have you any thoughts on that ? 

Mr. Herlong. Well, Mr. Chairman, I don't want to point my finger 
at anyone, of course, but I just know that there is no single agency 
in this Government today where all of this information can be coor- 
dinated. We have a number of agencies going out in different direc- 
tions and doing a part of the job, but there is no coordinated assault 
on the research and training problem, and until the cold war research 
and training gap is closed, we cannot develop our full national capacity 
to defeat the Communist attack. 

30-471 0—64 — ^pt. 1 2 



944 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. Well, of course, these agencies would not be ignored 
under your proposal ; would they ? 

Mr. Herlong. They would not be ignored, but there would be a co- 
ordinating agency — for a coordinated attempt to close the research 
and training gap. 

The Chairman. Exactly, and the executive agencies would be con- 
sulted in connection with the development of a program, would they 
not, under the general structure of the bill ? 

Mr. Herlong. I think there is no question but what they would be 
consulted, and they certainly should be, but at the same time we are 
going around sending amateurs to do a man's work in a professional 
field. 

The Peac« Corps has done a fine job, as far as it goes, but here we 
have amateurs dealing with professionals, and we need more trained 
professionals. I think the Peace Corps has done a fine job as far as 
it has gone, but we need people who are trained in the art of recogniz- 
ing Commmiist subversion and the many comitermeasures, not just in 
the arts of helping people. 

This is wonderful, as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. 

The Chairman. Well, the same could be said with our AID pro- 
gram ; could it not ? 

Mr. Herlong. Right. 

Tlie Chairman. In other words, as I catch what you have in mind, 
we can and do meet, and probably can overwhelm, our enemy in the 
military, in the force end of this struggle, if force comes, but we are 
lagging in ammunition so far as education and knowledge of the non- 
military part of the problem is concerned. 

Mr. Herlong. Mr. Chairman, those people who advocate conven- 
tional methods of continuing with our program in educating the peo- 
ple of the world lose complete sight of the fact that we are losing by 
using conventional methods, and so many of these people — and the 
State Department is among them — seem to think, based on their 
action, that the answer to all of our problems is spend a little more 
money. What we are asking for can be done with a fraction of the 
cost of the rest of the programs that they are doing, and a very minute 
fraction of the cost. In my judgment what we are asking for will be 
immensely more valuable. 

Mr. Senner. Mr. Chairman, if I may ask my colleague 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Senner. — I understand also that the John Birch Society is 
opposed to this legislation, and it is not usual that you find the Jolin 
Birch Society and the State Department on the same side. 

Could you give us your opinion of why the Jolui Birch Society is 
opposed to this legislation ? 

Mr. Herlong. I don't know, unless it would be that they might be 
afraid that they couldn't control who was named to the Commission, 
maybe something like that. I don't know. They are against commu- 
nism, they say. I am not familiar with the organization, so I don't 
know too much about it, but they say they are against communism ; 
and if I am agamst something, I am going to use eveiy tool that I 
have to fight it, and this is a tool that we don't have that I want us to 
start fashioning right away. I don't know why they would be opposed 
to it. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 945 

You have mentioned the State Departmeait and the John Birch 
Society. Can I mention also the fact that Senator Mundt and Senator 
Doughis were the first two in the Senate to introduce the bill ? Now 
this is a liberal -conservative coalition on both sides. 

Mr. Senner. But apparently you haven't received any correspond- 
ence indicating their displeasure or reasons for opposing it? 

Mr. Herlong. I have not; no. Or their reasons why they are 
opjX)sed to it. 

The Chairman. Let me suggest along the same lines that Mr. Sen- 
ner developed, we find some opposition at the other end of the line, 
the Washington Post is against this, the New Repuhlic, The Reporter 
magazine. So it seems tliat the opposition, thus far at least, comes 
from perhaps extreme views. 

Mr. Herlong. Extremes of the left and right. 

The Chairman. Well, it is better for you to say it than for me, 
but you do have authors of these bills, and you named two of them. 
Here we find Douglas, Lausche, Mundt 

Mr. Herlong. Mr. Proxmire and Mr. Goldwater. 

The Chairman. — Proxmire and Goldwater. So the proponents 
of this legislation are in pretty good company from the point of 
view of conservatism and liberalism in our society, and this is to the 
good. In other words, it is not any particular group's pet project. 
There is a wide range of support from all sides, and I am curious to 
know exactly what the views of the Government are. 

We received a number of letters. One agency defers to another, 
another agency defers to another, another agency defers to a fourth, 
and it looks like they are all depending on the State Department to 
carry the ball in opposition, and we will gladly hear what they have 
to say. 

Mr. Herlong. I will be glad to hear it myself. 

Mr. Ichord. Mr. Chairman, the State Department has criticized 
your bill, Mr. Herlong, as tending to create confusion resulting from 
overlapping of duties and duplication of fmictions. Just what do 
you intend to do ? 

Now definitely, there is going to be, some type of duplication. The 
State Department is already performing these functions. Are you 
going to replace the State Department ? 

Mr. Herlong. This is the question, Mr. Ichord. The State Depart- 
ment is not providing cold war training in depth. This is what Mr. 
Grant is going to discuss and show you where they are not performing 
these research and training functions ; and if you think there is over- 
lapping and duplication in this, there is more overlapping and dupli- 
cation, and no coordination, today. 

Mr, Ichord. And the work is scattered around various agencies of 
the State Department. 

Mr. Herlong. Tliat is right, and it couldn't be any more confusing 
than the situation as it is today, and certainly it will be more effective, 
once we get this operating. 

Mr. Ichord. Then your desire is to coordinate tho, work of the 
various agencies, rather than duplicating the work of the State Depart- 
ment? 



946 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Mr. Herlong. We don't intend to do away with the State Depart- 
ment, or anything like that. The Freedom Academy is a training 
and research institution, not an operational agency. It will provide 
ideas, not make policy. State operates in conventional diplomatic 
fields. They don't operate in many cold war fields. While the I)efense 
Department came out with a statement in opposition to this, I would 
suggest, respectfully, to the gentleman that there is more support 
for this bill than the Defense Department acknowledges, right in the 
Defense Department itself, because some of those people see the need. 
They see a real need for some coordination in exploring the many new 
things we can do to win the nonmilitary part of this struggle. 

There is no provision for teaching people of foreign comitries the 
type information they will acquire at the Freedom Academy under 
any of the existing plans that we have, and this definitely needs to 
be done. You can't send Americans over to another comitry and 
have them think with the mind of the people of the other country 
and convince them that someone else of another country is trying 
to take them for a ride down the road to communism. You can't 
do that. 

You have got to have some of their own people tell them, people in 
whom they have more confidence than they do in us. We are suspect 
in a lot of areas of the world. 

Mr. IcHORD. Well, I want to reserve the technical questions for the 
next witness, but I think it would be appropriate at this time if you 
would briefly explain the difference in the approach of the Academy 
of Foreign Affairs and the Freedom Academy. 

Mr. Herlong. As I said a while ago, Mr. Grant is going to explain 
that, and I have not gone into this because I knew I wasn't going to 
discuss it. 

Mr. IcHORD. I will reserve those questions. Thank you. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask about the cost question. 
Is somebody else going to testify to that? 

Mr. Herlong. They are going to testify about the cost. I think it 
is some $35 million. 

Mr. Pool. You think that would be effective, though, is what I am 
asking you. 

Mr. Herlong. I would hope that the Congress would spend what- 
ever is necessary in order to do an effective job. Goodness knows, it 
is going to save billions of dollars, plus it will put us on the way to 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 947 

winning the cold war. It doesn't make any difference what you 
spend — if you lose, it is all wasted. 

The Chairman. 1 think some of the bills contemplate that the di- 
rectors, or whoever might head this institution, would have to be con- 
firmed by the Senate. 

Mr. Herlong. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And that periodic reports would have to be made to 
Congress and to the President. 

Mr. Herlong. This is a part of the bill. 

The Chairman. And I think some of the opposition stems, let's 
face it, from the fear or concern that this thing might be "taken over" 
by the State Department, and so on. Certainly in the establishment 
of existing academies — Naval, Air Force, West Point — C(5ngress has 
found ways to make them respectable institutions, among the finest 
in the world, and I don't know that that objection has much merit. 
How do you feel about it ? 

Mr. Herlong. I am in complete accord with the chairman on that 
statement. I don't think that there is any question but what the 
Congress could maintain control of this, and I would think that also, 
if the State Department thought they were going to maintain control 
of it, or take it over, as you suggest, that they might, that some people 
might object to it on that ground. 

I would say that possibly we wouldn't have as much opposition from 
them if they thought they could take it over. 

The Chairman. On the other hand, we must understand, in respect 
to ideas — be devoted to the idea that the State Department is concerned 
with foreign policy, and certainly they wouldn't be ignored in any 
plan that we would be party to in the functioning of this institution. 

Mr. Herlong. Right ; I couldn't agree with the gentleman more. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I have one more question. 

Wliat is your opinion of the State Department trouble ? Why are 
they having trouble in getting things done? 

Mr. Herlong. You are getting into an area now that is going to 
take all the rest of the day, Mr. Pool, for discussion. 

Mr. Pool. You don't have a short statement on that ? 

Mr. Herlong. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Any further questions ? 

Thank you ever so much. 

Mr. Herlong. Thank you. 

(Documents submitted by Mr. Herlong follow :) 



948 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



(The Reader's Digest, May, 1963) 

For 18 years a group ol private citizens and legislators has 
battled to establish a Freedom Academy for training leaders 
in cold-war techniques. You will be inspired by their ded- 
icated efforts, dismayed by the frustrations that still 
— incredibly— beset them 



Let's Demand This New 
Weapon for Democracy 



By Eugene H. Methvin 



L 



ATE ONE afternoon in March 
1954, a lean young man 
named Alan Grant walked 
into the post office in Orlando, Fla., 
and stood fingering a hefty brown 
envelope. He looked at the address 
label with the boldly typewritten 
words "THE WHITE HOUSE, 
WASHINGTON, D.C.," and won- 
dered whether anyone would read 
what was inside. Then, with a 
shrug, he dropped it into the box. 

When the packet fi-om Orlando 
was sorted out fi^om the mounds of 
White House mail and routed to 
Brig. Gen. Robert T. Cuder, Special 
Assistant to the President for Na- 
tional Security Affairs, he looked 
skeptically at the accompanying let- 
ter. Its letterhead said unpretentious- 
ly: "The Orlando Committee." Yet 



as he read the enclosed 51-page 
study, he began to get excited. Few 
ideas as fi^esh and stimulating as 
this Orlando Plan had ever come 
across Cutler's desk in Washington. 
With clarity and force it analyzed 
Moscow's political-warfare machine 
and showed how communism was 
assaulting freedom with an arsenal 
of weapons perfected in 60 years of 
revolutionary experience. Then in 
detail it proposed a new counter- 
weapon for democracy: a national 
academy where top experts could 
instruct free-world representatives, 
from labor leaders to diplomats, in 
communist strategy and techniques. 
The goal: to teach men and women 
how to defeat communism's destruc- 
tive tactics and how to build strong 
free societies. This "Freedom Acad- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 949 



emy," the proposal made clear, was 
to be privately financed, but obvi- 
ously it needed official backing by 
Washington. 

For 13 months Cutler had fought 
a losing battle to overhaul our creaky 
cold-war machinery and install more 
effective policies to stop Moscow's 
many-sided offensive. Now he was 
astounded to find grass-roots Amer- 
icans laying a finger on the heart of 
complex problems. 

He fired back a letter whose 
White House seal made Alan 
Grant's heart thump. "There is no 
doubt that you have identified and 
clearly analyzed a most important 
aspect of the Soviet threat," Cutler 
said. Would the Orlando Commit- 
tee send a representative to Wash- 
ington to explain the Freedom 
Academy plan to a selected group 
of government officials? 

Would they! 

For more than three years they 
had worked constantly— studying, 
researching and formulating the 
Freedom Academy concept. Now at 
last they, ordinary small-town Amer- 
icans concerned about their coun- 
try's future, were to have a hearing 
in the nation's highest councils. 

The Orlando Plan had a modest 
beginning back in September 1950. 
Alan Grant, then a 28-year-old at- 
torney just months out of Harvard 
Law School, paid a visit to Or- 
lando's high-school principal, Joseph 
Boone, and asked him if his school 
was giving its students any courses 
about communism and its tech- 



niques. "I'm afraid we aren't teach- 
ing a thing on communism," Boone 
replied. "Why do you ask?" 

Grant explained that before he be- 
came a World War II paratroop 
commander, he had organized and 
taught a course in guerrilla warfafe 
at Harvard based on writings of 
Mao Tse-tung, then an obscure com- 
munist guerrilla. This experience 
had taught Grant to respect the 
tactics and leadership if not the 
principles the communists were ap- 
plying around the world. As he 
watched their progress after World 
War II in Czechoslovakia, China 
and elsewhere, he grew more wor- 
ried. Now, in 1950, every day's head- 
lines carried news of U.S. soldiers 
dying in Korea to keep Red armies 
from pushing them into the sea. 

"It looks as if we're in for a long- 
term struggle with communism," 
Grant said. "Don't you think we 
ought to be teaching our young citi- 
zens what they're up against?" 

Boone agreed. So Grant per- 
suaded the school board to sponsor 
a series of "Know-Your-Enemy" lec- 
tures. Next he hand-picked 17 
young lawyers, businessmen and 
educators as speakers. But before 
any public announcement was 
made, he resolved, they must all 
know absolutely what they were 
talking about. 

For six months he and his re- 
cruits met nightly in Grant's clut- 
tered law office. Dividing them- 
selves into five research teams, they 
pored over case histories of com- 
munist coups, analyzed Red riots, 



950 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Strikes and guerrilla movements. 
Each man had to read 15 to 50 care- 
fully selected books on communist 
strategy, history, Party organiza- 
tion, recruiting and training 
methods. Finally, in February 1951, 
Orant felt ready to unveil the pro- 
gram to Orlando's high-school stu- 
dents. What they received was one 
of the most comprehensive presen- 
tations on communism to be found 
anywhere in the country. 

At one point in the lectures the 
speaker assigned to cover Lenin's 
life was called out of town. Grant 
lined up a University of Florida 
political-science professor to pinch- 
hit. To everyone's dismay, after only 
a few words about Lenin, the pro- 
fessor launched into a flag-waving 
speech full of emotion but empty of 
information. When he finished, he 
apologized to Alan. "I sat down last 
night to write my speech and after 
three sentences realized I'd run out 
of gas. I hate to admit I know so 
little about the most influential po- 
litical leader of the 20th century!" 

Grant was appalled. Like most 
Americans, he had always assumed 
the universities were centers of ex- 
pertise about such vital matters as 
the history and techniques of com- 
munism. But on investigation he 
was shocked to find the nation's en- 
tire educational system being run 
as if the communist challenge did 
not exist. He could find only two 
colleges in the United States that 
offered even one course on commu- 
nist subversion methods. 
'Slowly an idea began to crystal- 



lize in Grant's mind. Why not a 
school to train our people in uncon- 
ventional warfare and nonmilitary 
conflict, just as we train military 
men in the arts of conventional war 
at the service academies and ad- 
vanced war colleges ? On October 3, 
1952, Grant made a speech to the 
Junior Chamber of Commerce in 
Sanford, Fla., proposing such a 
school — a Freedom Academy. 

"Military weapons are not 
enough," Grant said. "Man is the 
ultimate weapon — and nobody un- 
derstood it better than Lenin. When 
he and his followers captured Rus- 
sia, they immediately established a 
training system that today numbers 
6000 special schools in the tactics of 
espionage, subversion, infiltration, 
agitation and propaganda. Today 
graduates of these schools staff 75 
communist parties throughout the 
non-communist world. 

"But where," he asked, "can a 
young African, Asian or Latin 
American learn how to organize a 
democratic political party or labor 
union, draw up and execute effective 
social reforms and fight back against 
the disruptive tactics of the trained 
communist professionals? Worse 
yet, there is nowhere our own 
officials and students can go for a 
thorough course in the tactics of 
communism, let alone the sophis- 
ticated techniques for defeating it." 

Grant's idea struck his listeners 
as so urgent that his friends pressed 
him to develop it, and volunteered 
to help. He assembled a four-man 
team; for 18 months they labored 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 951 



putting together the 51-page study 
that so impressed General Cutler. 

When Grant arrived in Washing- 
ton on July 22, he went to the 
headquarters of the Operations Co- 
ordinating Board across from the 
White House. In the second-floor 
conference room, seated around a 
long table, the 25 top officials Cutler 
had called together from the Penta- 
gon, State Department and other 
cold-war agencies greeted Grant 
stiffly and extolled his "patriotism" 
and "interest" in coming to Wash- 
ington to "help." Grant sensed a 
patronizing attitude. 

Undaunted, he gave them the de- 
tails about the proposed Freedom 
Academy. The Orlando Com- 
mittee's thorough study. Grant 
explained, convinced them the pro- 
gram must encompass two levels. 
One would give career officials in 
government two full years of train- 
ing in cold-war strategy through ad- 
vanced study of democratic methods 
and communist tactics. The other 
would brace up democratic anti- 
communist defenses outside of gov- 
ernment, by offering basic short 
courses to labor leaders, journalists, 
agricultural technicians, civic and 
school leaders, from the United 
States and abroad. 

When Grant finished, he felt hos- 
tility in the questions that followed. 
"Won't foreign governments resent 
the idea of their citizens being 
trained in a school run by the United 
States.''" one official objected. 

"Dozens of nations have been 



sending their own citizens into An- 
napolis and West Point for years," 
Grant replied. "We also have 7500 
foreign students from 70 countries 
in our numerous nonmilitary 
schools right now, and they'd send 
more if we'd let them." 

"But Soviet propaganda is bound 
to brand this an 'imperialistic plot' 
for training spies," said another. 

"They tried to do the same thing 
to the Marshall Plan and it didn't 
stop us," said Alan. "I don't think 
the time has come when we must 
give communist propagandists a 
veto power over the U.S. govern- 
ment, do you?" 

For four hours the questioning 
continued. After the meeting one 
intelligence official, Dr. Stefan T. 
Possony, an internationally known 
authority on psychological warfare, 
introduced himself. "Mr. Grant, 
the government will turn down 
your proposal, brilliant as it is. Have 
you ever heard of that obscure 
bureaucratic disease, NMH?" 

Grant admitted he had not. 

"It's shorthand for 'not made 
here.' To ask an agency to adopt a 
new idea it didn't think up is to ask 
it to confess its own shortcomings." 

Weeks dragged by until August 
20, 1954. Another letter bearing the 
White House seal arrived in the 
morning mail. Grant tore open the 
envelope. His eyes widened in dis- 
belief. "You are aware, I am sure, 
that ideas of this nature sometimes 
generate a wide divergence of opin- 
ion within government circles," 
said Operations Coordinating Board 



952 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



executive officer Elmer Staats. "The 
variance of opinion with respect to 
your plan prohibits any concerted 
effort" by the government! 

But as Grant and his group reeled 
from this brush-off, an astounding 
thing happened. A delegation of 
Pentagon and National Security 
Council officials, indignant over the 
rejection of the plan, flew to Or- 
lando. Grant's team learned that 
the rejection letter had actually been 
written by senior State Department 
officers who had blocked a favor- 
able recommendation by persuad- 
ing Staats to reject the plan. 

"Don't quit now," the Orlandans 
were told. Heartened, the Orlando 
Committee launched an alternate 
attack. They wrote i6o organiza- 
tions and prominent people, repre- 
senting many viewpoints, Who had 
shown responsible interest in cold- 
war problems, appealing for help. 
The response was overwhelming, 
particularly from the academic 
world, and in the spring of 1955 it 
looked as if the Freedom Academy 
might open for the fall term. 

Then came a shattering blow. 
President Eisenhower announced he 
would meet with Stalin's successors, 
and the euphoric "Spirit of Geneva" 
enveloped the nation. The word 
went out from Washington: Stop 
all activity that might irritate the 
communists. Suddenly prospective 
financial support for the Freedom 
Academy disappeared. 

In 1958 the Red-managed stoning 
of Vice President Nixon in South 



America jolted the nation. New 
members joined the Orlando Com- 
mittee, and Grant tried again, this 
time through Congress, In 1959 
Rep. A. Sydney Herlong (D., Fla.) 
introduced legislation to establish a 
Freedom Academy. Rep. Walter 
Judd (R., Minn.) enthusiastically co- 
sponsored the bill. On the Senate 
side Karl Mundt and Paul Douglas 
enlisted a dozen co-sponsors for a 
comparable bill. 

All Orlando pitched in to launch 
a national drive. Letters from the 
Orlando Committee for a Freedom 
Academy went to every one of the 
nation's 1745 daily newspapers. 
Members of the Orlando Business & 
Professional Women's Club wrote 
and phoned other clubs across the 
nation, and brought their national 
officers to Orlando for briefings. 
Result: the national federation, 
representing approximately 175,000 
members in all states, endorsed the 
bill. The Orlando Jaycees won na- 
tional endorsement of the U.S. 
Junior Chamber of Commerce 
convention representing 50 states 
and 215,000 members. The national 
AFL-CIO added its backing. Sup- 
port for a Freedom Academy 
swelled across the nation. 

One Friday early in June 1959 the 
news hit Orlando that the Senate 
Judiciary Committee would hold 
hearings on the Freedom Academy 
bill with several other anti-commu- 
nist measures. By the following 
Monday morning Grant and his 
team had such an imposing array 
of witnesses waiting to testify that 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 953 



the Senators set aside three days for 
hearings on the Academy alone. 

The Senate overwhelmingly 
passed the bill on August 31, i960. 
Then, tragically, late in the session it 
bogged down in the House. This 
meant starting all over again with 
a new Congress in 1961. 

Meantime, behind the scenes. 
State Department officials were try- 
ing to sell the idea that our cold-war 
training was adequate. They an- 
swered citizens' letters urging an 
Academy by claiming existing fed- 
eral and private institutions were 
doing the job. But when pressed for 
evidence, State admitted that one 
official who signed such letters 
"doesn't know anything about the 
bill." 

With the new administration in- 
stalled in Washington, the Orlando 
group redoubled its efforts. Circum- 
stances favored them, for the New 
Frontier was soon facing dismaying 
cold-war realities. When Attorney 
General Robert Kennedy returned 
from a trip around the world he re- 
ported, "In every country well- 
organized and highly disciplined 
[communist] cadres concentrate 
their activities in universities, stu- 
dent bodies, labor organizations and 
intellectual groups. Against this, as 
I saw repeatedly, there is no one to 
question their positions, their facts. 
There is no organization. There is 
no cadre. There is no disciplined 
and calculated effort to present the 
other side. And so it is that a small, 
able and well-trained unit can take 



over a meeting or an organization 
or even a government." 

Gradually, the vital need for the 
Orlando Plan gained wider recog- 
nition. A Gallup Poll showed that 
the American people supported the 
Freedom Academy bill 4 to i. In 
Latin America 17 liberal political 
parties from 14 countries joined un- 
der leadership of former Costa Ri- 
can president Jose Figueres and 
started an Institute of Political Edu- 
cation at San Jose, Costa Rica. In 
May 1962 the Asian People's Anti- 
Communist League, representing 21 
nations, appealed to Congress to 
pass the Freedom Academy bill 
even as the league went ahead 
without U.S. help to found its own 
"Freedom Center" in Seoul, Korea. 

Finally President Kennedy ap- 
pointed his own White House com- 
mittee, headed by Dr. J. A. Perkins, 
now president of Cornell Univer- 
sity, to look at the situation. Last 
December the White House report- 
ed its findings: "Existing public 
programs of training, education and 
research in United States foreign 
affairs fall dangerously below" what 
the country should be doing and 
must be renovated by creation of a 
"National Academy of Foreign Af- 
fairs" independent of any depart- 
ment, paralleling the Orlando Plan 
in significant detail. 

President Kennedy immediately 
accepted the recommendation and 
promised to "move forward with 
this basic idea as soon as possible." 
Then the drafting of legislation was 
turned over — to the State Depart- 



954 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



merit! Not surprisingly, the draft 
finally sent to Congress was a lame 
substitute for the Orlando Plan. It 
proposed to train primarily govern- 
ment career men in the same old 
conventional diplomatic techniques. 

Advocates of the Freedom Acad- 
emy idea are fi^ankly dismayed by 
the State Department substitute. 
The proposed Academy of Foreign 
Aflfairs, they argue, makes no solid 
provision for developing the whole 
new range of policy tools, govern- 
mental and non-governmental, nor 
for training non-American special- 
ists for the common struggle, as 
originally envisioned. The State De- 
partment plan, they believe, might 
well kill the chance of establishing 
a genuine graduate-level "West 
Point" of political and psychological 
warfare. Some critics, indeed, charge 
that official opposition to the Free- 
dom Academy reflects policies 
geared to stalemating the cold war 
rather than "winning" it. 

Despite covert State Department 
efforts to dissuade them, the original 



'Republicans Mundt of South Dakota, 
Pong of Hawaii, Goldwater of Arizona, 
Hickcnlooper and Miller of Iowa, Keating of 
New York, Scott of Pennsylvania, and Case 
of New Jersey; Democrats Dodd of Connecti- 
cut, Lausche of Ohio, Proxmirc of Wisconsin, 
Smathers of Florida, and Douglas of Illinois. 



sponsors, eight Republican and five 
Democratic Senators,* have there- 
fore introduced their own Freedom 
Academy bill again. "With White 
House backing, some plan for a 
cold-war research and training pro- 
gram may be enacted at long last," 
says Senator Dodd. "At stake is 
whether Congress will shape the 
legislation so that the new insti- 
tution will actually pioneer new 
democratic methods for defeating 
communism and strengthening free- 
dom, or whether it will be watered 
down into a propaganda center for 
more foreign aid and conventional 
methods." 

Today, thanks to the sacrifice, 
bold thinking and unremitting ef- 
forts of Grant and his Orlando col- 
leagues, the nation is vastly more 
alert to the education gap in the free 
world's cold-war defenses. Their 
dedication is heartening reinforce- 
ment to the sagging principle that 
individual citizens can and must 
participate in the vital process of 
government, even in the face of 
overwhelming odds and a massive 
and lethargic bureaucracy. Their 
performance presents a clear chal- 
lenge to Congress and the Amer- 
ican people to see that the Freedom 
Academy opens its doors— and 
soon. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 955 



(Think, September, 1963) 

Whw ill© U. E. 



B&im & Fr« 



'fhtrp /c HO"'- b^icrf Con-^ress a bill proposing the Cytahiish- 
fAzfnl of a iiiidoT'i Acadifmv in ikc- Lhiired Stau"-. Such o.n 
I'lSiitutlon, liesig/iod lo counter Convpumsi propafanaa, 
y'ouhi be open to private cUlzens. f'ov/'rnrrrtnt oijuiaf.^ 
ufid yiudents o) fcr^i^n ndiions. ThK auihor head of A'cv* 
York University s philosophy depunment explams hov^ it 
y^ould y/>^ork and ¥'hv y^^e need it. 



|KV->K£. V*.HO MaM£.S A CANOIO 
■i,'«ESSM»i.NT <W the prOSpC- ?:. 

of f •ntx'^dom in the woHd todav 
w-.i uiid ihcto <ih^n:tir^.. By "ihe 
piospe^.ts ol hiAsdoiTi" i c" no' 
mean iht fuiure ct ihc Araerican 
business 8ys\cm, Altiiof.gh Messrs. 
K^irust-cri^v jind Mao charge the 
I'.S. \>:iih rtt(v»iiptuic to ■ np<;)sc ihis 
sys.e.in <i;i tiic rectpifila cJ Ameri- 
can told, Tito, G'.p.ialka md Su 
Kjrno, who have i>cnena-d isn- 
r\e:o;^ly from Americap 'argessc, 
knew ho%' false tiist charge is. 

Py "the pro^p»L•ts Oj' fre-aom" .«!< 
tl-is coaitH i mean re->p2ct iov 
i(ber:il institutions v/hich fnat;ie 
chos-; who J.-ve .'nd 'vork in their 
.".ommur.iiics to express tiicir needs 
•JtKl cx.ccisc their uncoercet? thcice. 
Only a "libtral center ' can t>e re- 
lied uj)OP lo introduce '^ neces»ar> 



siKi-iJ relo-ms withoui U>r.h bank- 
iuptuif. ?. couniiy fccMoai'^i'lIy i^nd 
at tr!-:.' -a/in* time dt*8troyinj whul 
evc: eff!:'iry. nic i'lS'dtotif'ns of iic- 
f!K«;r?ey esjst. B;u -t "isfjcral c^^n- 

in3tiiU;;0i'r.. 

One. oi' The ssd ?''.i.Ts ,>i" -clfe co'-. 
ternpofan.' ffOiiiicd.; ^c-^nc •?; Jhr dir. - 
paypyftkm betweiTi vh;; mHSsive eco- 
nomic ana edacalj..:;!:?' -iic '.v;u'.n 
?he Un^t«•v? 'writes has gnc::: :.'•%' icl-i 
tivdv i:«d»rH'evTJOp<>f couiitries in 
/\sfa. .-\f;f.:a And Lais?! '"^nterlca, t;.^u 
the prcspect-- of freedom in these 
countrse; It would require volumes 
to present an adequaie account of 
v,hy ihh >i- so. The rcsponsibiJii) of 
cenam n.^j/ve vested i»}fere:-t: , whoiiC 
soci&i pMlosophy i? ILm'tcd to the 
prc;>crvatn)n of the stutus qui) at a!l 
cc!,is, is often heavy. Although they 



956 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



do not explicitly anncmnce, "Apres 
nous, le deluge,' this attitude is a 
consequence of refusing to recog- 
nize that there is no status quo in a 
world of vast technological and po- 
litical change, and thai either the 
legitimate aspirations of the people 
will be met by a dynamic expanding 
economy, or else Communist dem- 
agogy and terror will triumph. 

But the tragic fact? are that even 
in countries where attempts are be- 
ing made Jo achieve progress to- 
wards a liberal center, the obstacles 
and setbacks to the cause of free 
dr>m are many, .\rnong the prime 
reasons for this {^ the sk'llfui politi- 
cal warfare being waged by strate- 
gically placed Ccmn.'anist groups in 
airno'st every sector of their national 
life. The ultimate strntrgy of these 
groups is the conquest of p«3litical 
power. But their day-by-day tactics 
is to demoralize ihe efforts made bv 
liberal groups and governments to 
achieve stability and progress. They 
sc; oni a- i'rvsl'tiie, S'jretiit>e?; by 
iniik;'jt::;u?j -i^l ■\^'Af.umc-:i hv vso- 
lence, movements of reform. T^ey 
make special efforts to capture the 
allegiance of the idealistic elements 
in a culture, particularly the youth 
and professional groups. They seek 
to narrow the choice before the 
country between what they call, on 
the one hand, a "Fascist solution" 
identified with the existing govern- 
ment or any other group friendly 
to the West, and what they tall, on 
the other hand, the truly nationalist 
or "revolutionary" solution. The 
latter is the thinly disguised program 
of initial demagogy and ultimate 
total political terror, wielded "in the 
interests of the masses" by the Com- 
munist Party. . 



Long before the Communists be- 
come a menace in the m.ilitaty way, 
they conduct full-scale political cold 
war against communities which are 
woefully ill-prepared to defend 
themselves or even to recognize ac- 
curately the nature of the struggle 
being waged against them. Any 
knowledgeable American who has 
traveled extensively abroad, will hnd 
striking evidence of the activity anc 
■success of these sustained cold war 
campaigns against the pnnciples of 
freedom and the solutions based 
up<)n them. One wiJ? find the evi~ 
denct, iVi stiideni niiOvcmenJi, ac^ vveil 
3S rea:,ant .ou3vemcnts, jn trade 
•mionv ni'id k\ c^.'Cf^rativ£s, \-i peace- 
organizations and cultural scKieties, 
in schcK/ls, theaters, the press, and 
sometimes even in churches. 

Three things account for their 
success. 

First, having learned from experi- 
ence that they are rejected when 
they straightforwardly present the 
real party program, the propaganda 
of Communists today is based on 
the tactical appropriation and ex- 
ploitation of the rhetoric and slogans 
of democracy, and the skillful use 
for ultimate Party purposes of the 
language and ideals of social reform. 
Communists not only win a hearing 
but a considerable following by pos- 
ing as partisans of peace, or as 
knights of national independence, 
defenders of civil rights, or fighters 
for progress. 

Second, Communists have mas- 
tered the techniques of organiza- 
tional penetration and capturing of 
control. In hardly an> of the or- 
ganizations in which they have won 
control do the Communists consti- 
tute a majority. On the contrary, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 957 



they arc comparatively tew in num- 
ber. Nonetheless, they are en- 
sconced in strategic posts of com- 
mand, in a position to mobilize mass 
sentiment, able to organize demon- 
strations, organize riots, and manip- 
ulate public opinion in accordance 
with instructions received from their 
masters abroad. The) are adept in 
the use of an entire repertoire of 
stratagems in capturing meetings, 
planting key personnel in executive 
posts and directing committees, and 
seeding schools, new: papers and 
other medij of communication with 
trusted agents. 

Third those liberals and demo- 
crats who are opposed to them have 
no corresponding know-how in com- 
bating tliesc Techniques. They lack 
experience, and by th e time they 
acquire i t, it js Jkxj late.^ For all 
their sincerity and dedication, they 
do not know how to expose in- 
cisively anu persuasively the Com- 
munist "degradation of the word." 
how to prevent parliamentary rules 
from being used by the Communist 
caucus to forestall key votes pend- 
ing against them, and, finally, how 
to use in the interests of decency 
counter-techniques to Communist 
infiltration which have been devel- 
oped over the years. 

Is this picture of Communist ac- 
tivity and success in mobilizing pub- 
lic opinion, and channeling it for 
iheir own political purposes, over- 
drawn? 

We have the eyewitness testimony 
of one formerly doubting Thomas 
who visited several Asian countries 
*and was appalled at what he found 
in Japan, Indonesia and elsewhere. 
Attorney-General Robert Kennedy, 
upon his return from Asia, said: 



"In every country, vveil or;.'ani/Ld 
and highly disciplined Communist 
cadres concentrate their activities 
on unive^,^i(ies, student bodies, 
labor organizations and intellectual 
groups. Against these there is no 
one to question their position, their 
facts; no organization, no cadre, no 
disciplined and calculated effort to 
present the other side. And so it "s 
that a small, able and well-tramcd 
unit can take over a metting or an 
organization or even a govcrn.ment." 

What can we (.io to counteraci 
this formidable arm of ih.- Commu- 
nist mo\'emenl whose activities are 
paying such rich political dividends 
— with more of the same in sight? 

"If we do not meet the problem 
head-on," says Attorney-General 
Kennedy, "if we are not ourselves 
imaginative, tough, dedicated . . . 
the struggle will be lost by us." 

One thing should be clear at once, 
if Attorney-General Kennedy is 
right. We cannot combat the ac- 
tivity of Communists in foreign 
countries by American nationals, 
whether they are American Foreign 
Service officers, exchange profes- 
sors, visiting dignitaries, or busi- 
nessmen. E\en with the best will in 
the world, this would be construed 
by non-Communists in those coun- 
tries as interference. I have found 
in most foreign countries I have 
visited that when an American offi- 
cial says that twice two is four, the 
statement is greeted with suspicion 
and distrust. After all, the Soviet 
Communists do not play a conspic- 
uous public role in these countries. 
It is exclusively the native elements, 
indigenous to the culture, idiom and 
language, who are the banner- 
bearers for the Communist idea. 



958 PROVIDING FOR CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Native Communist propaganda 
aiid subversion musi be resisted by 
nati\c nun-Commanists, liberal ele- 
ments. SVhai: the United States 
shouki do is to establish an educa- 
tional training center — a Freedom 
Academy — in which those who 
wish to preserve the freedom of 
their country from a Communist 
takeover can master the techniques 
of ideological and organizational de- 
fense and offense. Without this kind 
of help to the countries of Asia, 
Africa and Latin America, all our 
other forms of aid may prove m- 
effectual. 

Under Secretary of State George 
B. Ball, testifying before the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee, 
properly stressed the fact that "the 
Communist powers have devised a 
whole new system of aggression — 
the subversion of men's minds by 
subtle means ot propaganda, em- 
ploying the most sophisticated meth- 
ods of communication; the corrup- 
tion of governments; the employ- 
ment of new techniques of infiltra- 
tion and espionage; the exploitation 
of weakness; systematized terrorism 
and urgency; utilization of economic 
welfare." 

Freedom from Within 

It li difficult to understand how 
diplomatic activity, even if supple- 
mented by private American agen- 
cies, could combat these tactics with 
any hope of success. Freedom can- 
not be brought to a country from 
without, h nTusf^bc won afl^Tlle- 
f endecTBy th'ol^^ "wh fi [iFn ^^'^p" At 
most, the US can prevent inva- 
sion and overt aggression by Com- 



muni>t powers. But over the long 
run» only tliose who are willing to 
fight for freedoni in their own coun- 
'.ry can win it or keep it. But they 
must know /low to fight toi it. This 
the Freedom Academy should un- 
dertake to reach them -- openly and 
proudly and before the eyes of the 
world. The Communists are com- 
pelled to conceal the character of 
their schools of subversion and the 
curriculum within them.. We need 
not conceal what we teach. 

Where will the students of the 
Freedom Academy come from? 

There will be some American cit- 
izens among them, but miaiiiiy they 
will be individuals nom.inated and 
recommended by non-Communist 
student groups, free trade unions, co- 
operatives, peasant unions, liberal 
political associations and a multi- 
plicity of other organizations whose 
non-Communist bona fides have 
been established. They will receive 
fellowships adequate to cover trans- 
portation and costs of residence at 
the Freedom Academy. 

Who will teach the siudentb? 

Fortunately, there exist in the 
United States men and women who 
have had intensive experience in 
combating Con^.munists in schools 
and universities, trade unions and 
cooperatives, peace organizations 
and social clubs. Many have stud- 
ied Communist techniques of sub- 
version, and have developed effec- 
tive measures of defense and offense 
against them. They know how to 
prevent, for example, a cell of 10 
Communists in a university from, 
manipulating democratic rules, and 
sending all 10 as delegates to the 
central student body as presumably 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 959 



'representatives of 10 different or- 
ganizations, thus taking over the 
central student office, including the 
student newspaper. They know how 
to expose, say, extreme demands 
of a Communist faction in a peasant 
organization, demands presented 
not because they are viable, but to 
discredit the democratic leadership. 
Members of the staff can also be 
drawn from various countries in 
which Communist strategies have 
been repelled by resolute and intelli- 
gent leadership. 

The chief objection which has 
been raised against the Freedom 
Academy is that its alumni, who re- 
turn to their own countries, will be 
marked men, subject to the deroga- 
tory epithets of "American agent," 
or something equally unsavory. Un- 
doubtedly, the Communists will 
seek to discredit those who have 
studied at the Freedom Academy 
and will watch their behavior closely. 

This, however, will be far from 
fatal, providing only that the parti- 
sans of freedom have been properly 
trained. First of all, it is not to be 
expected that most of the students 
will be public figures coming from 
the limelight of political life and 
returning to it. They will be drawn 
primarily from those social, cultural 
and educational areas in which 
Communists are always active in <-<. 
cruiting support for their political 
six)kesman of the moment. As a 
rule, those who come to the Free- 
dom Academy will be members of 
groups and associations of a broad 
democratic range. Normally, nomi- 
nations will be made by the student, 
farm, cooperative, cultural, philan- 
thropic, trade union or business or- 
ganization with which the individ- 



ual is affiliated. To some extent, 
therefore, the organization which 
nominates the candidate for the 
Academy will have a vested interest 
in his activity. He will have a nat- 
ural audience on his return, an audi- 
ence with whom he can remain in 
some communication while at the 
Academy. The Communist charge, 
"American agent!" will have to be 
implausibly directed against the or- 
ganization to which he belongs. 

Upon his return to his own coun- 
try, the graduate of the Freedom 
Academy may at first resume his 
original employment. If there is a 
continuing need in the organization 
which nominated him, for the serv- 
ices of someone thoroughly sophis- 
ticated in his understanding of com- 
munism, he will be a logical person 
for the post. Presumably, he will 
have ideas and plans about how to 
further the prospects of freedom 
which he will lay before the mem- 
bership. 

Nor is this all. The alumnus of 
the Freedom Academy is a poten- 
tially valuable asset to a newspaper 
or magazine of general interest. He 
knows how to spot political crises in 
the making — if the Communists are 
behind them. He can become a 
commentator for radio and televi- 
sion stations. The field of education 
is wide opea to him, and here he 
will have some of his toughest bat- 
tles. Indeed, any agency or medium 
of communication which recognizes 
its responsibility to keep public 
opimon informed and alert might 
use his services. Different situations 
will suggest to the returning alumni 
of the Freedom Academy different 
opportunities for action. If they have 
been properly trained, they will cre- 



30-471 O— ,64!— pt. 1 3 



960 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



ate their own opportunities. 

The foreign alumni of the Free- 
dom Academy will be encouraged to 
feel free to criticize the United States 
if, in the interests of our common 
ideal of freedom, they conscientiously 
believe it is necessary. Such criti- 
cism should not be resented by us, 
even if it seems a bit exaggerated. It 
v/ill be proof that the alumni are not 
wearing the collar of any govern- 
ment, and when they speak up for 
the (x^jimon ideal of freedom, their 
voice will have greater weight and 
authority. 

Occasions for criticism of some 
American policies will not need to 
be manufactured. After all, Ameri- 
cans themselves at home engage in 
such criticism vigorously. There is 
still sufficient disagreement among 
free men and among the free na- 
tions of the world to make such 
critical discussion, now and then, 
not only inescapable but healthy. 
One sure sign of the Moscow- 
trained Communist who will prob- 
ably be shouting, "American Agent!" 
is his eloquent refusal to criticize 
any of the policies of the Kremlin 
(or, if he has been trained in Peking, 
of Red China). This is a situation 
made to order for a well-trained 
alumnus of the Freedom Academy.* 
The Communist curriculum of stud- 
ies, of stratagems and deceits, can- 
not be made public without becom- 
ing self-defeating. But the more 



♦Founding of the Academy has been 
proposed in the Freedom C^ommission 
Act, now before Congress, with biparti- 
san legislative blessing, in Senate Bill 
414. This is not to be confused with the 
National Academy of Foreign Affairs, 
an organization proposed in another Bill, 
S. 865. The latter merely broadens pres- 
ent educational programs of the Foreign 
Service Institute. 



publicity about the methods of coun- 
tering Communist stratagem, the 
greater its educational effect. 

The time has come to expand our 
horizons in the struggle for the sur- 
vival of freedom. It is not enough 
for us to know the truth about com- 
munism. Other countries must know 
it, too, and learn how to use the 
truth effectively. The general staff 
of the Communist movement no 
longer believes that it will win the 
world by military conquest, for in 
the mushroom cloud of the hydro- 
gen bomb, it sees intimations of its 
own mortality. That is why it has 
redoubled its efforts everywhere to 
take over the countries of the world, 
piecemeal, from within, with a com- 
bination of stealth and daring. 

The historical evidence shows 
that it is making gains on every con- 
tinent — including North America, if 
Cuba is considered part of our con- 
tinent. It is aided almost as much 
by those who fear it without under- 
standing it and who fight it with 
wrong weapons, as by those who, 
tender-minded and sentimental, ally 
themselves in a common or popular 
front with Communists, brashly 
confident, in their total ignorance of 
Communist ideology and history, 
that they can control the Commu- 
nists. There is no program or cur- 
riculum of studies which adequately 
explores the relevant problems posed 
by the advance of communism, or 
which seeks to develop the appro- 
priate measures to meet them This 
is the task of the Freedom Academy 
which Senate Bill S. 414 seeks to 
establish. 

In the nature of the case, to per- 
form this function well, the Freedom 
Academy must go beyond it. It 



PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 961 



must continue research and experi- 
ment to discover new means of 
meeting the new techniques of at- 
tack which the Communists are sure 
to launch as their old methods and 
stratagems are exposed. 

The Freedom Academy must also 
explore the entire gamut of positive 
democratic proposals to meet the 
problems the Communists exploit 
We live in an age in which the 
global political revolution, the uni- 
versal technological revolution, and 
the revolution of rising expectations, 
with its psychological paradoxes, 
have all converged. Even if there 
were no Communist movement, the 
free world would have many grave 
problems to settle. But it is the pres- 
ence of the Communist movement 
which seeks to convert these prob- 
lems into mortal dangers and threats 
to democratic survival. That is why 
the Communists must be repelled 
on every front of the cold war as 
the democratic community develops 
viable solutions to its problems. 

A Vital Investment 

The United States is making an 
investment in order to safeguard not 
only the freedom of other countries 
but also its own freedom. It is mak- 
ing an investment also to safeguard 
its vast philanthropic investments. In 
some countries, we provide the means 



to build schools, and the Commu- 
nists staff them; in other countries, 
we send food to sustain life, and 
sometimes the Communists get the 
credit; in still other countries, we 
help domestic programs to abolish 
illiteracy, and then the Communists 
move in with simple, vejy cheap, 
political-propaganda reading mate- 
rial on a massive scale. Situations 
of this kind cannot be corrected 
from the outside. Only the foreign 
nationals who believe in freedom 
can effectively combat the foreign 
nationals who do not. 

For these and many others rea- 
sons, I am convinced that the organ- 
ization of a Freedom Academy is an 
experiment worth trying. At pres- 
ent, no matter how innocent a per- 
son's studies in the United States, he 
is sure to be denounced as "an 
agent of American imperialism" by 
Communists on his return home. 
This has been true of physicians, 
agriculturalists, even men of the 
cloth. The victims are politically 
untrained and sometimes become 
demoralized. Communist denuncia- 
tions will not cease vhcu graduates 
of the Freedom Academy return 
home. But those attacked will be 
well-trained, capable not only of 
making effective retort but of taking 
the offensive. This may result, in 
some countries, in changing the po- 
litical complexion of things. • 



962 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Vot. 4«, No. 7 



LIFE 



Fabcuary 16. 1859 



FOR A POLITICAL WEST POINT 



There slipped quietly into the congressional 
hopper last week a bill which deserves long, 
loud and public debate. We hope it survives 
this debate and in some form becomes law. 
Its sponsors, Representatives Herlong of 
Florida and Judd of Minnesota, are trying 
to close a gap — larger than any missile gap — 
in the range of weapons with which we are 
fighting the cold war. 

The gap lies between our military pre- 
paredness at one end and our conventional 
diplomacy at the other. On this wide and 
surging central front we presently deploy a 
few smidgens of propaganda, economic aid 
and covert intelligence activities. To the 
Communists, on the other hand, this is the 
most important front of all. Throughout it, 
and in depth, they deploy all those tech- 
niques of political warfare, both overt and 
covert, which are the day-and-night work 
of the world's Communist parties and which 
were known to Lenin, their inventor, as "the 
organizational weapon." 

• 

This weapon, with and without the help 
of military threats, is chiefly responsible for 
all the gains the Communists have made 
since World War II. It becomes more po- 
tent withjheir rising capacity for economic, 
technical and cultural exports. Neither the 
Red army nor straight Marxist propaganda, 
with all their power, could alone have creat- 
ed student riots in Venezuela, frustrated the 
parliamentary system of Italy, won an elec- 
tion in the most literate state in India (Ker- 
ala), retained key footholds in the British 
and American labor movements, ridden the 
street whirlwinds of Baghdad to the edge of 
power, dazzled the opening mind of Africa, 
or poisoned strategic corners of press and 
university opinion from Paris to Tokyo. 
These are organizational successes, the fruit 
of long and rigorous training of dedicated 
individuals in a conspiratorial technique. 

Lies and terror, as well as bribery and 
argument, are parts of this technique. But 
that is not the reason the free world has 
failed to counter it. Apathy and ignorance 
are the reasons. Given the will, the Commu- 
nist political war can be countered by open 
and ethical methods which will uphold the 
values as well as the institutions of freedom. 

The Herlong-Judd bill attempts to focus 
and organize this potential counteraction. 
It sets up what is tentatively called a Free- 
dom Academy but what is really a West 
Point of political war. To selected candidates 
from the U.S. and all free countries, it would 
offer intensive courses in Communist po- 
litical techniques and how to reverse or re- 
sist them. A graduate — whether American 
oil man, Indian peasant leader, African na- 
tionalist, Mexican labor boss, Japanese may- 
or or Indonesian bookseller — would be thus 
better equipped to meet the Communists, 
technique for technique and argument for 
argument, on his home ground. It sounds 



like a tall order. It is. The Soviets have 
scores of academics for training Communists 
in this operational science. They are way 
ahead of us. But the makings of a counter- 
science exist. 

Among the first on our academy's faculty, 
for example, could be some U.S. and British 
labor leaders, who, since Marx and Lenin 
made unions a prime Communist target 
area, are veterans of many years of front- 
line Communist-fighting. In a recent New 
Leader, John Herling describes Mikoyan's 
recent lunch with Walter Reuther, James 
Carey and other U.S. unioneers and quotes 
the irritated Soviet deputy as saying: "The 
American trade union leaders are more an- 
tagonistic toward the Soviet Union than 
were the American capitalists whom I have 
met." To which Reuther replied that they 
understand the Communists better. 

A similar sophistication is not beyond 
our grasp in other target institutions which 
need defending. A national academy would 
at least be cheaper and quicker than the 
very dear school kept by experience. 

The Herlong-Judd proposals were not just 
dreamed up overnight. The gap in our ar- 
mor has been long evident. The chief spark 
plugs behind the present bill, four dedicated 
young citizens of Florida, have been work- 
ing at their plan since 1952. Besides an 
academy they propose a commission to act 
as a source of public intelligence on the 
political war, and to develop other forms 
of counteraction, both public and private, 
which are now neglected. 

It will be objected that "counteraction" 
is too negative and static a concept for the 
cause of freedom. But it is surely not a neg- 
ative act to collect and disseminate what 
knowledge we have about political infight- 
ing. Moreover, while diversity of belief is a 
hallmark of free man, a closer knowledge 
of their common enemy is bound to result 
in wider areas of free agreement and more 
constructive policies to promote freedom. 

The Communist challenge does not con- 
fine itself to conventional arenas. As one 
good textbook puts it (Philip Selznick's Or- 
ganizational Weapon), it tries to make aU 
our institutions political and fights not only 
at the top but "everywhere in the social 
structure, wherever an increment of power 
can be squeezed from control of an institu- 
tion or a portion of it." The big problem in 
meeting this total challenge is to avoid in- 
nocence on the one hand and hysteria on 
the other. An official academy would be the 
best guardian of a cool perspective. Thus the 
debate on the Herlong-Judd bill should cer- 
tainly not divide the country along partisan 
or liberal-conservative lines; men of every 
political color except one can unite behind 
this proposal. It should be supported by 
all who take the Communist threat as se- 
riously as the Communists intend it. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 963 



(Saturday Evening Post — Feb. 18, 1961) 

Editorials 



The 

Freedom 

Academy 

Bill Should 

Pass I 



Nowadays many people say, "The 
problem of how to resist world Com- 
munism is so complicated, I just don't 
know what we should do about it." 
Yet there is one simple thing that we, 
collectively, can do about it right now. 
We can provide training for public of- 
ficials and others in the nature and 
purposes of the Communist conspiracy. 

A bill to this end has been introduced 
by three senators — two of them Demo- 
crats, Paul H. Douglas of Illinois, and 
Thomas J. Dodd of Connecticut, and 
the other a conservative Republican, 
Karl E. Mundt of South Dakota. In 
the House substantially the same bill 
has been introduced by Rep. Walter 
Judd (Rep.) of Minnesota and Rep. 
A. S. Herlong (Dem.) of Florida. Unan- 
imously the Senate Judiciary Commit- 
tee has approved the bill, calling it 
"one of the most important ever intro- 
duced in the Congress." 

It should be adopted in this Con- 
gressional session without delay. Its 
object is to lessen one of our chief weak- 
nesses — our amateurism in the struggle 
against the enemy's professionals. The 
statements of many national leaders 
indicate woeful ignorance in high 
places. 

We don't have amateur military of- 
ficers. Nor do amateurs manage our 
huge industries. Yet we have thou- 
sands of amateufs who are trying their 
untrained best to, resist the attacks of 
the highly trained professional Com- 
munists. If you wish to know what a 



964 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



professional Communist is, take a look 
at the No. 1 example — Khrushchev. 
In his youth he went through Lenin's 
colleges of Bolshevik leadership. 

Against that training system we need 
one of our own, and therefore Congress 
should pass the Freedom Academy bill. 
The President would then appoint a 
commission of seven members, ap- 
proved by the Senate. They would es- 
tablish an advanced training and de- 
velopment center, the Freedom Acad- 
emy, which would educate leaders 
about Communism. 

Certain Governmental employees 
and other key men and women, in- 
cluding some from abroad, would be 
chosen as students. They would be 
taught something of the know-how that 
Khrushchev has — the strategy and tac- 
tics of political warfare — of influencing 
and organizing large numbers of peo- 
ple. The 500,000 members of the Teach- 
ers Union of Japan are managed by 
1500 professional Communists, who 
give all their time to that work. We 
have no idea of managing the masses in 
the same way, but it is important to 
know the symptoms of Communist 
mass management — as in the San 
Francisco rioting at the hearing of a 
Committee of Congress. 

It was estimated in the Senate com- 
mittee hearings that more than 100,- 
000 Reds from all over the world have 
been graduated from political colleges 
and postgraduate universities in the 
Soviet Union, Red China, Czechoslo- 
vakia, -Poland, Romania and other 
Communist realms. Many a profes- 
sional Red operator in Cuba and the 
Congo received training in Moscow, 
Leningrad, Prague or Peking. Our com- 
mission of seven members will have no 
simple task. On the contrary, the 
commission must develop complex sys- 
tems of training to off'set the many 
Communist educational institutions 
that have decades of experience. And, 



as time passes, the commission will 
need vigilance to prevent infiltration 
by the Communists themselves! 

Sixty years ago, when he was only 
the leader of a small, power-hungry 
sect, Lenin originated the fundamental 
organizing rule for sabotaging and con- 
quering Russia and all the world. It 
was that the party must be as profes- 
sional and disciplined as an army. It 
must be staffed by persons who would 
give to the revolution "not their spare 
evenings but the whole of their lives." 
They would be professional revolu- 
tionaries. Lenin began organizing such 
a staff at once. A few years later, while 
still living outside Russia, he set up 
three training schools in Italy and 
France. After the Bolsheviks seized 
power in Russia, thousands of Reds 
from other countries — including the 
United States — went to Moscow for 
years of training in the "Lenin School." 

Today one of the chief Communist 
political universities is the one in 
Prague, Czechoslovakia. It specializes 
in teaching Latin Americans how to 
unsaddle their home governments. 
Hundreds of Latin Americans have 
also gone to Red China for training as 
conflict managers. They learn the nice- 
ties of sabotage, propaganda and 
blackmail. 

Some of the ablest American experts 
on Red strategy testified before the 
Senate Committee for the Freedom 
Academy bill. One of them is Prof. 
Stefan T. Possoijy, author of a brilliant 
article in the Ai>vei^tti«f.s of TtiP 
Mind series, published in The Post on 
July 9, 1960, showing how the Com- 
munists successfully use a rubber vo- 
cabulary to fool us, foster wishful 
thinking and slow us down while they 
prepare history's greatest knockout 
blow. Professor Possony told the Senate 
committee that the Freedom Academy 
is urgently needed. We think he is 
right. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 965 

The Chairman. Our next witness is the gentleman referred to by 
Mr. Herlong, Mr. Alan G. Grant, Jr., an attorney, of Orlando, Flor- 
ida, who is the initiator and prime mover of the Freedom Academy 
concept. He represents the Orlando Committee for a Freedom Acad- 
emy, a group which has been promoting the Freedom Academy idea, 
originally as a privately financed institution, since way back in 1951. 

I might mention that I had the privilege and honor of appearing 
in his great State to address the Committee on Cold War Education 
of the Governors' Conference, presided over by Governor Bryant of 
Florida, and I found this gentleman to be not only interested, but 
very knowledgeable on this subject. 

So, Mr. Grant, we are glad to have you testify. 

Would you please, first of all, tell us a bit about your background — 
educational, and so on — and about the Orlando Committee. 

STATEMENT OF ALAN G. GRANT, JR. 

Mr. Grant. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You want the history of the Orlando Committee in ? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir, and of yourself . 

Mr. Grant. Well, I hate to go back quite that far, but I became 
interested in communism . 

The Chairman. Just a thumbnail sketch. 

Mr. Grant. Well, just briefly, in the fall of 1950, we organized a 
group of Orlando citizens to teach a course on communism in our local 
high schools. We got a broadly representative group of citizens to- 
gether, just as we have gotten a representative group of Senators to- 
gether on the bill, because we knew the problem of getting communism 
in the classroom would present all sorts of problems, but anticipating 
this, we had a leading member of B'nai Brith, a member of the Knights 
of Columbus, a member of the Ministerial Association, a prominent 
Democrat, a prominent Republican, the chairman of the principal 
labor organizations in town, and so forth, were all brought in on this, 
so I think the general public decided if all these people could agree 
this was a proper approach to the problem, it would be acceptable, even 
if not the best. 

This developed into a 17-lecture course which covered the history 
of communism in 2 hours ; 4 hours on the Soviet Union, covering agri- 
culture, the secret police, the slave labor camps, the arts and sciences 
in the Soviet Union, etc.; 2 hours on the satellite countries, concen- 
trating particularly on Poland; 7 hours on Conununist strate^ and 
( actics generally ; and 2 hours on the general Soviet threat, military, 
industrial, scientific, and so forth, and the duties and responsibilities 
of the individual in the challenging years ahead. 

During the course of that program, it became painfully apparent 
to us that nowhere could we turn for help and assistance in this sort 
of thing. There wasn't even a bibliography back in those days. A 
great deal of material is available now. From this start we became 
interested in the Government training programs and we began check- 
ing on what was being taught and not taught at the War Colleges, the 
Foreign Service Institute, and the university centers, and we were 
amazed at the superficial training at these centers in the new forms 
of struggle. There wasn't even an adequate explanation of opera- 



966 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

tional communism, much less the whole new range of things we would 
have to do to meet it, plus all of our other problems. In 1953, we dis- 
continued this school program so several of us could go to work full 
time on this Freedom Academy concept. We originally thought of 
this as a private 

Mr. Pool. Can you name some names right along about there, who 
some of the people were ? 

Mr. Grant. They were all local citizens in the Orlando -Winter 
Park area: Dwight Devine, a West Point graduate, who was Hap 
Arnold's original contact with the Rand Corporation; Charles V. 
Silliman, a former law professor of the University of Florida, who was 
an attorney in Orlando ; Rex Huffman, an insurance man in the area. 

We were later joined by a number of other people, primarily busi- 
ness, professional, service people in the Orlando-Winter Park area. 

Mr. Pool. Can you give us a brief thumbnail sketch on yourself, 
now ? I think we have gotten something on that. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir, I am a graduate of Plarvard College and Har- 
vard Law School. The last 14 years, now, I have been practicing law 
in Orlando, Florida. 

World War II, I served with the 515th Parachute Infantry Regi- 
ment, 13th Airborne Division. 

I taught probably the first guerrilla warfare school in this country 
during my sophomore year at Harvard University and wrote my 
thesis on the subject of "Guerrilla Warfare, Revolutionary Warfare," 
trying to advance the art as developed by T. E. Lawrence. By the 
time I was 20, I had read the principal works of Mao as they were 
available in this country at that time, Lenin, and fortunately several 
strongly anti- Communist works like Eugene Lyons' Assignment In 
Utojyia and William Henry Chamberlain's Russia's Iron Age, 

After World War II, knowing something of Communist operational 
thinking, I frankly felt that we faced a decisive test, that the Soviet 
Union, if it played its cards correctly and did not make the mistakes 
that Hitler made, might win. 

To my way of thinking, Soviet operational technique was much more 
sophisticated than the Nazis'. In fact, the Nazis borrowed quit« a bit 
from the Commmiists, but they never developed their operational 
thinking to the degree that the Communists did. I then decided to 
devote the rest of my life to the problems of stopping Soviet penetra- 
. tion into the free world, that is, all of my time outside of my pro- 
fession of law. 

This is what led me to form that group in 1950 to teach a course 
on world communism in the high schools, and it led to the develop- 
ment of the Freedom Academy concept. 

Let me say that we spent 2 years developing the Freedom Academy 
concept, from 1952 to 1954. We reduced it to a 51-page report. We 
sent this report up to Mr. Robert Cutler, who was then head of the 
Planning Board of the National Security Council, and Mr. Cutler 
circulated it among the various agencies. In July 1954, a conference 
was set up by the old Operations Coordinating Board, across the street 
from the White House, which all these agencies attended to discuss the 
Freedom Academy proposal. There was a wide divergence of opinion. 

Dr. Possony, one of the witnesses this morning, was at that con- 
ference as the Defense Department representative — one of our sup- 
porters there, I might add. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 967 

But unfortunately, we ran into the usual defensive, inhibited, do- 
nothing State Department attitude, and we did not get the type of 
action report we wanted. We had strong support from the Defense 
Department, the Planning Board of the NSC, and the OCB. 

Following our turndown in Washington, we revised our proposal 
and sent it to about 150 persons, including leading experts on com- 
munism and nonmilitary conflict. In the winter and spring of 1955, 
we held three conferences in New York City, attended by a representa- 
tive group of conservatives, moderates, and liberals who had shown 
special interest in the problem of stopping Soviet political warfare. 
Considerable progress was made toward activating the Academy as a 
private institution, but it fell through because the foundations and 
other financial sources had no interest in the new forms of struggle. 

By the fall of 1958, the Orlando Committee felt the research and 
training gap had been neglected so long that it would take heroic 
efforts to close it — that anything short of a major national effort 
headed by the Federal Government was unrealistic. We then drafted 
the original Freedom Academy bill. I believe the history of our 
committee and the bill during the last 5 years is most informative, 
but I will not go into that now unless the committee wants me to. 

I hope a reading of the "Green Book" ^ will convince you the Orlando 
Committee has done its homework and is entitled to be heard. 

Mr. Pool. Are any of the people in that group former State De- 
partment employees, or anybody like that in there, who were disen- 
chanted with the way that it is run, and joined your group ? 

Mr. Grant. No member of the Orlando Committee is, but we have 
cooperated with many experts around the country, some of whom were 
formerly with the State Department, with the Operations Coordi- 
nating Board, or the old Psychological Warfare Board ; USIA; AID; 
and so forth. We have also had assistance and advice from persons 
who are presently members of the agencies. 

Mr. Pool. I believe that is all. 

Mr. Grant. That summary is set forth much more coherently — at 
the beginning of the hearings in 1959 before the Senate Internal Se- 
curity Subcommittee. 

Mr. Chairman, I wish to thank you and the committee for giv- 
ing me the opportunity to appear before you this morning on 
the subject of the revised Freedom Academy bill, H.R. 5368 and H.R. 
8320, introduced by Congressmen Boggs and Taft, as well as the 
earlier versions of the bill, H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, and H.R. 8757, intro- 
duced by Congressmen Herlong, Schweiker, and Gubser. 

Our committee has been the principal organizational center for the 
development of this idea in the intervening years. We have been as- 
sisted by many leading experts on political warfare and related sub- 
jects from all parts of the country. The three versions of the bill 
presently before the committee were drafted in my law office. 

Mr. Chairman, the Freedom Academy bill presents your committee 
with a great challenge and opportunity — perhaps the greatest in the 
committee's history. 



1 "The Freedom Academy Bill," a 118-page exposition on proposed Freedom Academy 
legislation prepared by the Orlando Committee. 



968 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Today the Soviet Union, Red China, and the whole international 
Communist apparatus are employing an extraordinary variety of con- 
flict instruments which enables them to outflank, envelop, or smother 
the more limited and hesitatingly applied instruments of our policy. 
In many arenas of the cold w^ar — in peasant villages, classrooms, 
marketplaces, in labor unions, intellectual groups, student organiza- 
tions, and in mass communications systems — tlie Communists are able 
to move ahead without substantial opposition because the free world 
lacks the means to oppose them. 

We lack the means because in this, the 19tli year of the cold war, 
we have yet to establish a research and training program which can 
give us the operational knowledge and the trained, motivated people 
we will need to master the new forms of struggle. 

The Freedom Academy bill presents this committee with an un- 
usual opportunity — because in this bill, for the first time, the nature 
of this research and training gap is clearly defined and a realistic pro- 
posal is made for closing it. 

This gap is something no House committee has investigated in depth 
until now. During the years I have been coming to Washington on 
the Freedom Academy, I have found Members of Congress have little 
knowledge about the nature and extent of this gap — in fact even those 
who are w^ell informed about communism and foreign affairs have sel- 
dom looked into this part of the problem. 

Mr. Chairman, the members of this committee and its staff are in 
for some hard work and study if they are to master this legislation. 
For example, you will need to know the substance of the training pro- 
grams at the Foreign Service Institute, the War Colleges, and at our 
university centers in order to understand how superficially we train 
our foreign affairs personnel in the new forms of struggle. You will 
need to acquire some understanding of the wliole new range of policy 
tools that can be made available to us with proper research and train- 
ing; and you will need to understand the major role the private sector 
could play in the global struggle, with adequate research and train- 
ing, and the magnificent opportunity we have for training foreign 
nationals. 

To assist the committee, I respectfully ask the Chair to have the fol- 
lowing documents inserted in the record following my statement: 

1. The foreword and parts I, II, III, IV, and V of the "Green 
Book." This was prepared 2 years ago by the Orlando Committee to 
get the essentials of the Freedom Academy concept between two covers. 
Part I summarizes the Soviet research and training program in politi- 
cal warfare. Since this was written, additional information has come 
to light on the Cuban schools for guerrilla warfare and subversion. 
Part II summarizes the U.S. cold war research and training program. 
I believe this is the first analysis of the training programs at the For- 
eign Service Institute, the War Colleges, and our university centers in 
terms of how well they prepare the student to understand nonmilitary 
conflict. I depart from my prepared statement here to say there have 
been studies in the past, but these went into such collateral matters 
as how good language training was, for example, but did not inquire 
into how well the student was prepared to understand political war- 
fare and nonmilitary conflict. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 969 

Part III is a brief explanation of each section of the bill. This 
was written before the bill was extensively revised and reintroduced 
in the 88th Congress by Congressmen Boggs and Taft. Over the 
years the Orlando Committee has acquired some definite ideas about 
the type of research and training program the Academy should foster, 
and we have set out some of our ideas in part IV. Part V answers 
some of the objections which had been raised as of 2 years ago. Of 
course, new objections have come up since then. 

2. Supplement No. 1 to the "Green Book." Prepared a year ago by 
the Orlando Committee, this is an analysis of the principal differences 
between the Freedom Academy bill and the administration's grossly 
inadequate proposal to establish a National Academy of Foreign Af- 
fairs. While the latter proposal is not before the committee, I believe 
this paper will prove helpful in deepening the committee's understand- 
ing of the Freedom Academy concept. I certainly hope that the ques- 
tions that were raised earlier with Congressman Herlong as to the 
difference between the National Academy approach and the Freedom 
Academy approach will be asked me, because we have spent a great deal 
of time precisely on this, in analyzing the very critical differences. 

3. The favorable report of the Senate Judiciary Committee on the 
Freedom Academy bill of June 30, 1960, in which the committee calls 
this legislation "one of the most important bills ever introduced in the 
Congress." 

4. Gallup Poll on the Freedom Academy dated May 4, 1962, which, 
incidentally, showed overwhelming support for the idea; and the 
favorable opinion was almost evenly divided among Republicans, 
Democrats, and independents, which I thought was quite interesting. 

If the committee is interested in the long and frustrating history of 
this proposal, an outline can be found in my testimony before the Sen- 
ate Internal Security Subcommittee on June 17, 1959, pages 10 through 
22, in the foreword to the "Green Book," in the first section of Sup- 
plement No. 1 to the "Green Book," and in the May 1963 Reader's 
Digest article entitled "Let's Demand This New Weapon for 
Democracy." 

Perhaps the best approach to the Freedom Academy bill is to 
examine our present research and training programs dealing with 
the nonmilitary part of the global struggle to understand what is 
being done and, more important, not done. 

Last September, Senator Young of Ohio, in a floor speech, pointed 
out we already have a Foreign Service Institute, five War Colleges, a 
Special Warfare School at Fort Bragg, a Russian Research Center at 
Harvard, and various area study programs at our universities — so why 
do we need a Freedom Academy ? He felt the Academy would simply 
duplicate what is already being done. The Senator's arguments sound 
reasonable and convincing until you examine what these schools and 
universities are in fact doing, as well as the wide range of research 
and training attuned to our global operational needs which they are 
not covering and are not adequately organized or staffed to cover. 

For some years now the Orlando Committee has kept abreast of 
training programs offered at the schools mentioned by Senator Young, 
as well as the intradepartmental training at USIA and AID (and its 
ICA and FOA predecessors) . Some of our findings are listed in part 
II of the "Green Book." 



970 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

In substance we found : 

1. In general — and you will pardon me, Mr. Chairman, I will get 
more specific later on, but I have to cover this in very generalized 
language first- In general, the training, especially as it deals with 
nonmilitary conflict, tends to be skimpy, superficial, or nonexistent 
and provides the student with little motivation. Nowhere is there 
true professional training in depth which can produce rounded ex- 
perts, conflict managers, if you will, who not only understand the 
spectrum of Soviet political warfare, insurgency, and subversion, 
but also are familiar with the many policy instruments potentially 
available to us in both the Government and private sectors and are 
capable of organizing and programing these instruments over long 
periods in an integrated strate^ to achieve our twin objectives of 
defeating all forms of Communist attack while seeking to build and 
preserve free and viable nations. 

2. Not only is this type of upper level professional training un- 
available, there is inadequate intermediate-level training to produce 
the operational personnel who can implement an advanced, integrated 
strategy. 

3. We were unable to find a single Government or university train- 
ing program that deals with the difficult and sophisticated subject of 
Communist political warfare, insurgency, and subversion in depth, 
much less the means of defeating it. 

4. Nowhere is there a centrally directed research effort to explore 
the wide range of new instruments the Government might utilize in 
the global struggle and the manner of interrelating and programing 
these in a farsighted strategy. Bits and pieces of the problem are 
being worked on in the agencies and at university centers. But a 
broad range of organizational forms and operational techniques 
which we must master, if we are to solve the unprecedented problems 
raised by the Sino-Soviet penetration of the free world, the newly 
emerging nations, and the chaotic conditions in Latin America and 
elsewhere, are not being studied at all, or in an inadequate fashion. 

5. There is little interest in, or understanding of, the major role the 
private sector could be playing in solving our global problems — 
especially the defeat of Communist political warfare, subversion, and 
insurgency and the building of free and viable nations. 

a) Nowhere is there a comprehensive research effort to explore, 
develop, and catalog the many things the private sector could be do- 
ing — not just the things corporations, businessmen, labor leaders, 
students, or journalists living or traveling overseas might do, but 
the major role that our great civic organizations and private citizens 
in this country might play in achieving our global objectives. 

b) Nowhere is a training program available to private citizens to 
show them these many things or how to go about them intelligently, 
systematically, and discreetly, or to motivate them to do so. 

6. Nowhere, with a few limited exceptions, have we developed in 
or out of Government an educational program for foreign nationals 
to provide them with the knowledge and motivation necessary to 
understand and defeat all forms of Commimist political warfare, sub- 
version, and insurgency, while building free and viable institutions and 
societies. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 971 

7. No existing center or combination of centers in or out of Govern- 
ment has the necessary staff, research facilities, including library, or 
clear directive to fill these gaps, so even if the necessary motivation 
was present at the State Department and elsewhere to close the gap, 
we lack the organizational means to do so. 

Most disturbing to the Orlando Committee has been the bland in- 
difference of some Govermnent officials, especially at the Department 
of State, when the above research and training gaps are pointed out. 

Perhaps nowhere can we see more plainly the failure of the Gov- 
ernment training program to adjust to the whole new set of problems 
we have faced sinc^ the beginning of the cold war than at the Foreign 
Service Institute. Established in 1947 under the Department of 
State to give in-sei"vice training to foreign affairs personnel, FSI was 
to be the professional traming center for the various departments and 
agencies dealing with' foreign affairs. 

The Foreign Service Institute is divided into a language school, 
which gets about 60 percent of the $5.7 million budget, and a foreign 
affairs school. By and la,rge, the language school is well run though 
it was inexcusably slow in emphasizing the hard languages of the 
underdeveloped areas. By contrast, the offerings at the foreign af- 
fairs school are remarkably superficial and there has been only a 
minimal effort to reorient training to meet the new challenges we have 
faced since 1945. 

Let me be more specific. 

A newly appointed Foreign Sei-vice officer, fresh from an under- 
graduate campus,, takes the A-lOO Basic Officers Course at FSI. 
Usually this is his only training, other than languages, befoi-e assign- 
ment to his first post. This is an 8-week course mainly concerned with 
general orientation — history of the Foreign Service, relation of State 
to other agencies, how a consulate is run, trade promotion, administra- 
tion, and the do's and don'ts for Foreign Service officers and their 
wives overseas. 

Just 6 hours, less than 1 day out of 8 weeks, is given to study of the 
Communist enterprise, and in this time they try to cover everytliing — 
the Communist bloc, as well as Soviet external political warfare, sub- 
version, and insurgency. This is a joke. One would suppose that at 
the beginning of his career an officer should receive serious training 
concerning the nature, strategy, and tactics of the principal enemy of 
the United States and the method we intend to employ to defeat that 
enemy. State apparently has great faith in virgins. 

On reaching the rank .of FSO 4 or 5, the career officer, then in his 
thirties or forties, becomes eligible for the A-200 Mid-Career Course 
in Foreign Affairs at the Institute. In going over this course in 1961, 

1 could find only 6 hours which seemed to relate directly to Communist 
strategy and tactics. Other parts had an indirect relation, but they 
presume an understanding of the problem which no prior training at 
least provided. So even in mid-career, FSI is careful not to compro- 
mise the amateur standing of its graduates. I think we can assume, 
Mr. ChaiiTTian, that after 15 years in the field, their cold war maiden- 
heads have been rended here and there ; but by and large, nowhere in 
the training programs have they had serious training in this area. 

On reaching the late forties or early fifties and the rank of FSO 1 or 

2 (occasionally 3), the officer becomes eligible for the Senior Officers 



972 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Seminar in Foreign Policy. This is a 9-month course at FSI and, for 
the first time, there is time for serious professional training. Again 
taking just one facet of training, the course provides only 1 week on 
Communist strategy and tactics. In this week these are just four hour- 
and-a-half lectures, each given by a different expert. The rest of the 
week is taken up by round-table discussions, optional films, and some 
reading. This does not begin to approach professional-level train- 
ing in a difficult and complex subje<*t. 

In June 1962, FSI inaugurated the A-700 Interdepartmental Coun- 
try Team Seminar. This is a 5 -week quickie course supposed to de- 
velop better coordinated team operations among the various agencies 
operating under an ambassador in "modernizing" societies and coun- 
tering insurgency in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Five weeks 
isn't enough time, regardless of the caliber of instruction, to give in 
depth understanding of the range of Communist subversion and insur- 
gency, the wide range of countermeasures potentially available to us 
or to acquire truly professional-level ability to organize and program 
these many instruments. Countering a Mao-type revolutionary move- 
ment is a serious, complex business and one of the great challenges we 
face. But the training at FSI is designed for dilettantes, and we are 
seeing the results in Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and elsewhere. 

For some years now, FSI has offered a 2-week seminar on com- 
munism. The Orlando Committee has interviewed a number of grad- 
uates of this course, and all have made the same comment in almost 
the same words — "Just as we are really getting interested and start- 
ing to understand a little about the subject, the course ends." All 
agreed the course is well run, but superficial. For example, such an 
involved, encyclopedic subject as subversion is covered in a single 
hour-and-a-half lecture-discussion period. In Jime 1962 I made my- 
self unpopular at FSI by telling the Director this course would be 
about right for the good ladies of the DAR before they got down to 
some serious reading, but for our career professionals it is ridiculous. 
And, of course, it deals with explaining communism, not what to do 
about it. 

FSI also runs several 3-week area study courses. Again this is not 
serious, professional training in the new dimensions of struggle. 

In short, Mr. Chairman, FSI I'uns a number of quickie courses de- 
signed for the amateur or dilettante. Nowhere is there serious, in- 
depth, professional -level training concerning the spectrum of Com- 
mmiist political warfare, the range of countermeasures potentially 
available to defeat it, and the building or preserving of free and viable 
nations. Yet this would appear to be the greatest single task of our 
foreign affairs personnel. 

The programs at the War Colleges and our leading univereity cen- 
ters are smnmarized in part II of the "Green Book" and, in the inter- 
est of time, I will not go into them now. I will simply point out they 
do not fill the gaps which I have mentioned. 

In sharp contrast, the Soviet Union, Red China, and the world 
Communist enterprise have operated an extensive system of basic, 
intermediate, and advanced schools covering the whole spectrum of 
nonmilitary conflict in depth. In addition they have a remarkable re- 
search program attuned to the requirements of nonmilitary conflict, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 973 

which the Orlando Committee has simimarized in part I of the "Green 
Book." 

"What it boils down to is that the Communists have systematically 
prepared tliemselves to wage the type of global struggle we are now in, 
while the United States has not. 

The Freedom Academy bill provides the most logical means for 
closing the research and training gap. 

First, the Academy is taken out from under the smothering in- 
fluence of the State Department and placed under the direction and 
control of an independent, full-time Commission. State has had 17 
years to adjust Foreign Service Institute training to the new forms of 
struggle and failed. State has shown a gross lack of imagination in 
seeking solutions to our global problems, especially as they relate to 
nonmilitary conflict, and the whole system at State discourages initia- 
tive in seeking new approaches. Furthermore, State has been openly 
hostile to the idea of providing Academy-type training to private 
citizens and foreign nationals or of researching the possibilities here. 

The Chairman. Wliy ? 

Mr. Grant. Sir? 

The Chairman. Wliy? 

Mr. Grant. I would like to answer that in depth. I am going to 
get to that very shortly, Mr. Chairman. 

To subject the Freedom Academy to this atmosphere would insure 
its ultimate defeat. It may fail under the Conuuission, depending on 
the appointments, but at least it would have a chance. 

Second, the Freedom Academy bill, in section 2, clearly defines the 
nature of the research and training gap and sets out specific goals for 
the Academy program. These pretty well cover the gaps I have out- 
lined. The bill states the need to close these gaps in urgent language 
and gives the Commission a clear directive to get on with the job. 
This is what the Foreign Service Institute Statute (22 U.S.C.A., sec- 
tion 1041 et seq.) notably fails to do. While the mere presence of this 
language does not insure that the Freedom Academy will be properly 
implemented, it puts the Commission on notice of congressional intent 
and provides a yardstick to measure performance. In view of the 
history of the Foreign Service Institute and the attitude at State, I 
suggest any bill establishing an Academy may be sadly defective if it 
does not contain similar strong and specific congressional findings of 
fact and statement of policy. A glorified version of the Foreign 
Service Institute will not do. 

Third, the Academy provides a center where, for the first time, we 
can bring together in permanent association the necessary range of 
experts to make an organized assault on the problems of nonmilitary 
conflict. Up to now, strategy and tactics have usually been devised 
by ad hoc task forces set up in response to specific crises or problems. 
Research in the departments and agencies has been limited by paro- 
chial attitudes and jurisdictional walls. Nowhere could nonmilitary 
conflict be considered as a whole. Each agency was w^rapped up in its 
own limited problems. Whole areas of vital cold war operational 
knowledge were ignored, because they didn't fall squarely within 
the jurisdiction of a particular agency or because they went beyond 
the conventional, traditional way of doing things. One result has 
been the gradual expansion of manageable problems into major crises 



974 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

and setbacks all over the world, because over the years we have lacked 
the operational tools which might have been employed systematically 
and in time. 

For example, for many years we permitted Communist cadres to 
move into the villages of Southeast Asia and gradually expand and 
consolidate their hold, while we did almost nothing. Only recently, 
after the situation developed to crisis proportions and we faced the loss 
of all Southeast Asia did we begin a crash program to develop counter- 
insurgency; and even this program, which I am generally familiar 
with, is far too limited. 

Mr. Chairman, 10 years ago I came to Washington to plead the case 
for the Freedom Academy before an interdepartmental committee 
composed of representatives from State, USIA, FOA (AID) , Defense, 
and CIA. One of my principal arguments for the Academy was that 
here, at last, we could develop the operational knowledge and train 
the personnel and provide them with the intense motivation necessary 
to go into the villages, or train others to go into the villages, and win 
the peasants and so surround the Communist fish with an mifriendly 
sea. I pointed out that conventional forms of village development 
work — simple engineering, sanitation, and agricultural assistance — 
were not enough. The villagers must also be won over politically and 
organized to prevent Communist penetration by having their own in- 
telligence network and protective arrangements. Otherwise, dedicated 
and highly trained Communist cadres, through terror and superior 
agitational and organizational techniques, would surely win out. And 
I went on to point out that a peasant program alone was not enough. 
Tliere must also be a program to win, hold, and activate on our side 
student groups, intellectuals, religious groups, labor unions, and others 
in the cities and to convince friendly governments of the need for all 
this. I emphasized this would require a whole new range of opera- 
tional thinking and organizational forms and a new type training 
program. 

Of course this cut across the areas of responsibility of a number of 
agencies and did not readily fit in with our traditional instruments of 
economic aid, military assistance, and diplomacy, conventionally ap- 
plied, and it ran head on into the inhibited, defensive attitude at State. 
So nothing was done, and today the problem has grown to where this 
Nation faces the possibility of a major political, as well as military, 
defeat. 

Another example is the massive Communist j)enetration and manip- 
ulation of the university and student organizations in Latin America. 
This has been going on for many years and is a serious, long-range 
problem for the United States. Yet today this Government has only 
limited means available to deal with this problem. 

A USIA library in Caracas does not compete successfully with scores 
of well-trained and well-financed Communist organizers in the Central 
University — nor does a Voice of America broadcast or government- 
to-government diplomacy or even the Peace Corps, which is sent 
nowhere near this highly explosive political center. So the problem 
is swept under the carpet, and each year thousands of new students 
are indoctrinated with hatred for the United States, and we will reap 
the harvest for decades to come. Yet over the years there are a 
thousand and one ways we could have successfully countered the Com- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 975 

inunists in the Latin universities. I hope to ^et to this in the question- 
and-answer period. Again, this would require a whole new range of 
operational thinking and planning and was outside the traditional 
policy channels and beyond the research and planning functions of 
any one of the agencies. 

At the Freedom Academy, at least, we can consider nonmilitary 
conflict as a whole. The various substrategies in the political, ideologi- 
cal, psychological, economic, and organizational spheres can be con- 
sidered together with a maximum exchange of ideas among many 
experts working in close association. There will be no artificial bar- 
riers inhibiting new lines of operational thinking. Their time and 
energy will not be dissipated by working on the day-to-day problems 
and crises which plague the agencies. They will have the necessary 
research tools at hand, particularly a large and specialized library — 
and I know Dr. Possony will go into that — and Government files on 
past operations. The latter, incidentally, should prove a major draw- 
ing card in attracting top research talent to the Academy. They will 
have a clear directive to get on with the job. And most important, 
they will be stimulated by the knowledge they are attacking some of 
the most vital and perplexing problems of our times and by the ex- 
pectation that the results of their labors will be made known at the 
highest levels of Government. 

Mr. Chairman, I am sure w^e will be deeply impressed by the results. 
We are going to find there are answers to cold war problems which 
have defied solution until now. 

Fourth, the Freedom Academy bill recognizes the private sector can 
play a major role in the global struggle between freedom and com- 
munism. A number of our more difficult problems, like the Commu- 
nist penetration of Latin universities, are more susceptible to solution 
through programs initiated by the private sector than by Govern- 
ment action. Actually, there are unlimited possibilities for private 
participation, but today many of our great service organizations and 
most of our citizens are unaware of these things. Every day unique 
opportunities are slipping by, some lost forever. 

Let us be realistic. There are three preconditions to systematic, 
large-scale private participation : 

1. A research program with the necessary staff and funding to 
think through the full range of possibilities for private participa- 
tion. 

2. A training program where private citizens can be motivated to 
participate and can learn about these things and how to go about 
them systematically and discreetly. 

3. A recognized information center where private organizations and 
individuals who want to help, say in Latin America, can readily ob- 
tain information in the most usable form on what they can do. 

The Freedom Academy bill explicitly meets these three precondi- 
tions. It thereby makes it possible for a huge reservoir of ingenuity, 
talent, and organizational strength in the private sector to be effec- 
tively mobilized and directed toward solving the life-and-death prob- 
lems of global struggle. 

Mr. Chairman, I hope I will be ^iven an opportunity in the ques- 
tion-and-answ^er period to give specific illustrations of the truly excit- 
ing possibilities for private action; what is being done; and, more 

30-47.1 O— 64— pt. 1 4 



976 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

important, the things that could be done. There is almost no under- 
standing of these possibilities in the Congress, within the administra- 
tion, or even among many experts on communism or nonmilitary con- 
flict. 

Fifth, the bill recognizes the need to train foreign nationals and 
provides the means to do so. Regardless of how well we train our 
foreign affairs personnel, regardless of the extent of private participa- 
tion, the main burden of the struggle in Latin America, Africa, and 
the East will be borne by the nationals of those areas. Today the 
greatest single advantage of the Soviet Union and Red China, as 
Congressman Herlong pointed out a few minutes ago, is the exist- 
ence of an indigenous Communist Party in each country whose mem- 
bers have been intensively trained in all of the arts of subversion and 
insurgency. 

Attorney General Robert Kennedy summarized the problem on his 
return from a world tour in 1962 : 

In every country well-organized and highly disciplined Oommunist cadres 
concentrate their activities in universities, student bodies, labor organizations 
and intellectual groups. Against these there is no one to question their i)ositions, 
their facts ; no organization, no cadre, no disciplined and calculated effort to 
present the other side. And so it is that a small, ahle and vpell-trained unit 
can take over a meeting or an organization or even a government. 

Today Army Special Forces is providing counterinsurgency train- 
ing to Latin American military personnel, policemen, and a few 
others. This is a good thing, and when I was at the Army Special 
Warfare School at Fort Bragg last December, I was impressed by the 
dedication and drive of some of our officers there. What we need 
even more, however, is a center where we can give some in-depth train- 
ing to peasant leaders, labor leaders, newspapermen, politicians, busi- 
nessmen, and intellectuals so they can prevent subversion from de- 
veloping to the point of open insurgency. Certainly we want no 
Vietnam in Latin America, but where is this training available ? This 
is the type of problem State sweeps under the carpet, or meets only 
superficially, as in the case of our mobile training teams in Latin 
America, the training at Fort Gulick in the Canal Zone, and so forth. 

For years now State has been openly hostile to the idea of training 
foreign nationals in a Freedom Academy. The Department has be- 
come quite skilled in explaining all the things that could go wrong — 
Academy graduates would be branded CIA agents on their return and 
would be effectively isolated, etc. 

Of course, as one AFL-CIO official with 9 years' experience in Latin 
America said to me, every Latin student who comes to this country is 
branded an agent of Yankee imperialism on his return, if he shows 
any pro- Western sentiments — whether he attends Georgetown, Har- 
vard, or LSU. The trouble is that he gets tarred and feathered with 
this, but he has not received the training. 

Thousands of Latin Americans have now traveled to Havana, 
Prague, or Moscow for training. But this hasn't caused them to 
be isolated. They have a simple answer — "Don't judge me on where 
I was trained, but on what I do." And ultimately Academy graduates 
will be judged on their performance. Certainly there are problems, 
but with wise planning and foresight most of them can be overcome. 
Furthermore, Academy graduates will be trained to answer Commu- 
nist charges. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 977 

In any event, the absence of trained, dedicated people to oppose 
the Communists in so many parts of the free world is a problem we 
have to lick, regardless of the difficulties. At the Freedom Academy 
this problem will no longer be swept under the carpet. There will be 
an intensive, comprehensive effort to research the possibilities and jjro- 
vide the most effective type of training. You will note the bill specifi- 
cally provides the conditions for admission of foreign students and 
authorizes the Commission to pay their expenses, where desirable. 

Mr. Chairman, this statement is already too long. The subject 
before you is an involved one. There are dozens of additional points 
I would like to cover and which should be covered in detail, but 
perhaps it would be better to stop here, so the committee can inquire 
into those matters which it finds of greatest concern. 

I will be most happy to answer your questions. 

The Chairman. Well, I have quite a few questions I would like to 
propound. 

There has been some intimation, or expression of apprehension,, that 
this Academy could develop into a cloak-and-dagger institution, 
might lead to a revival of so-called McCarthyism, and so forth. We 
have to face that situation. What do you have to say about that? 

Mr. Grant. Well, Mr. Chairman, of course the opposition can al- 
ways dream up all sorts of things that can go wrong, but I think 
that this bill provides as good protection as you are going to find. 

First of all, let me point out that the Freedom Academy and Com- 
mission are not involved in operations. The Freedom Academy is 
entirely a research and training institution. The Freedom Academy 
and the Freedom Commission are not going to be part of the country 
team operating in Vietnam or India, or Venezuela or Brazil, They 
are not going to be making policy or implementing policy. It is en- 
tirely a research and a training effort. So the possibilities of develop- 
ing into a cloak-and-dagger operation, since they are not in operations 
at all, I would say was most minimal. 

But secondly, what do we have here ? 

Look at the control. We have a Commission, appointed by the 
President, with the usual advice and consent of the Senate. I have 
sufficient faith in the President to believe he is not going to appoint 
the type of people who would cause this to be turned into that sort 
of an institution. We also have a clear policy statement and a di- 
rective from the Congress. Each year, the Freedom Commission will 
have to come before Mr. Rooney, I presume it would be, in appropria- 
tions, and reading the way he goes over the State Department 
budget each year, I would presume he would give the Freedom Com- 
mission an equally careful going over or raking over. In the extremely 
unlikely event there was some unauthorized inclination to turn the 
Freedom Academy into that sort of institution, the mere thought of 
having to justify this to Mr. Rooney and his subcommittee should end 
the matter. 

We also have an Advisory Committee, section 13 of the bill, to keep 
the Congress aware of the activities of the Commission and Academy. 

Those who relate the Freedom Academy to a cloak-and-dagger in- 
stitution simply have not read the bills or the considerable literature 
prepared by the Orlando Committee and other supporters. Actually, 
this is another red herring to avoid a debate on the real issues raised 
by this legislation. 



978 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. I would like you to go into that a little bit, the 
function of the advisory group to the members of the Commission, 

Mr. Grant. Well, the Freedom Commission itself is, of course, in- 
dependent of any one existing agency. We thought it would be a great 
mistake, for the reasons I have already indicated, to put this under 
the State Department alone or under the Department of Defense alone 
or AID alone, because the jurisdictional walls, the parochial attitude 
of one of those agencies might predominate. 

The Chairman. The Commission itself would be an independent 
agency. 

Mr. Grant. Right. We thought it should be an independent agency 
so as not to be inhibited or tied down with what any one agency 
was doing. But we also thought that the Freedom Academy and 
the Freedom Commission should be made aware, on a continuing 
basis, of the concrete operational needs and training which the vari- 
ous agencies and departments of Government think will be neces- 
sary for their personnel at the Academy. So we think that the 
Advisory Committee gives the necessary linkage with the opera- 
tional agencies. But by putting the Freedom Academy under a sepa- 
rate Commission, it will not be dominated by any individual agency 
or department of Government, and above all, we get it out from 
under the smothering influence of the Department of State. 

I might add, Mr. Chairman, that I think that the extent to which 
the Peace Corps has been successful is because Mr. Shriver had a 
knock-down, drag-out fight with the Department of State. You 
know, the Department of State wanted to put the Peace Corps under 
State, and Shriver said, "No, you will smother and bureaucratize 
a very forward-looking, idealistic concept." He was successful in 
that fight, and I think a large part of the Peace Corps' success is 
because it didn't go imder an Assistant Secretary of State, but went 
under Mr. Shriver and an independent setup. 

The Chairman. But there would be a linkage betw^een the Com- 
mission and the agencies ? 

Mr. Grant. Very much so. 

Tlie Chairman. And that is proper, is it not? 

Mr. Grant. It is very much so; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Now distinguish between the Academy and the 
Commission. 

Mr. Grant. Well, the Commission is the group which actually 
will operate the Academy. Now you have six commissioners and 
a chairman appointed by the President with the usual advice and con- 
sent of the Senate. The part of the Freedom Academy bill setting 
up the Freedom Commission was adopted from the old Atomic 
Energy Act and follows it also almost verbatim, because that Act 
apparently has worked out quite well. Policy control and direction 
of the Freedom Academy would be in the hands of the Freedom 
Commission. 

Now if I may go beyond your question a little bit, Mr. Chairman, 
I think it is very important that policy direction and control not 
be placed in the hands of a part-time board of trustees as has been 
proposed for the National Academy of Foreign Affairs. Because 
these research and training problems are so new, they are so complex, 
that if policy control is put in the hands of a part-time board of trus- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 979 



tees headed by an over-extended person like the Secretary of State 

The Chairman, Well, the Commission would be a full-time func- 
tion. 

Mr. Grant. That is right, a full time Commission, because a part- 
time board of trustees simply does not have the time to give the 
policy guidance which is going to be necessary in explormg this 
whole new range of operational knowledge. 

The Chairman. Now the Commission, I take it, then, would have 
the authority, necessarily, to staff the Academy. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir, that is right. 

The Chairman. Wliat would be your idea as to staffing ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, let me say this, Mr. Chairman : If you mean in 
terms of specific individuals to appoint 

The Chairman. Individuals, the number and the range and the 
course and so on. 

Mr. Grant. We have to keep in mind we have a double function. 
One is a research function. The other is a training function. For 
the research function 

The Chairman. Well, speak on one at a time. 

Mr. Grant. All right, I will cover the research function first. 

In order to cover research, we are going to have to bring together at 
the Academy a very wide range of expert knowledge. For example, 
w© will have to have experts on propaganda or information programs, 
experts on the village development, experts on mass communications, 
experts on communism, experts on psychological conflict, ideological 
conflict, political conflict, and so forth. A wide range of experts will 
have to be brought together at the Academy, if we are to really explore 
all the possibilities, Government and private, for meeting the full 
range of Communist subversion and insurgency in these countries and, 
of course, strengthening free societies in these various areas. 

So I think we are going to have to have a fairly large research staff, 
but we don't want to make the mistake that the CIA did when they 
were originally set up. They set up too rapidly, and time-servers 
from the other agencies who were out of jobs after the war flocked in, 
and I think it took them years to get quality instead of quantity, and 
we must have quality at the Freedom Academy, but there still has to 
be a rather wide range of expert knowledge to consider nonmilitary 
conflict as a whole. 

The Chairman. Well, now it seems to follow that the research de- 
partment or section would put out literature, documents, and so on. 
Is that right? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir ; and of course we have the information center. 
Tliere is no point in carrying on all this research, Mr. Chairman, 
unless the results of the research are made known. 

Now, of course, the research in the Government area, much of this 
will be kept confidential. 

The Chairman. I was leading to that very question. How would 
it be possible, if it is advisable, to have the publications not part of our 
Government policy ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, you understand, Mr. Chairman, as I stated, the 
Freedom Academy will not be making or carrying out policy, but the 
result of its research has to be made known to the agencies that would 
benefit from it. The Commission will make policy proposals, sugges- 



980 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

tions to the agencies about new operational techniques which they can 
employ, but it is going to be up to the President or the National Secu- 
rity Council or a particular agency involved to decide whether or not 
they will, in fact, adopt these suggestions. The Freedom Commission 
can simply pass on these suggestions. 

The Chairman. I am glad to hear that. In other words, their prod- 
uct would not, could not, be accepted by foreign governments as being 
United States foreign policy. 

Mr. Grant. Certainly not. Furthermore, much of this would be con- 
fidential communications from the Commission and Academy to the 
agencies. 

The Chairman. Well, I wish you would develop that, because the 
question is bound to bother some people. 

Mr. Grant. Well, Mr. Chairman, when you said publications, there 
is publication 

The Chairman. Or the material ? 

Mr. Grant. There is publication in two senses. Number one, publi- 
cation for general distribution and, secondly, merely the printing of 
reports, often confidential, which would go to the President, to the 
National Security Council, to the various agencies, making specific 
suggestions for them. I think there is a distinction between the two. 

Now in terms of private citizens and the private sector and what 
they can do, these publications will not be dealing primarily with Gov- 
ernment policy or making statements about Government policy. As I 
indicated, what we need for the private sector is to research and catalog 
all the possibilities for private participation in the global struggle and 
then to print this and make it available, on request, to private institu- 
tions and organizations and individuals who want to become involved 
in these things, but don't know what they can do or how to go about it 
intelligently and systematically and discreetly. 

The Chairman. Now go on with the other function. You discussed 
research. You said there would be two functions. One research and 
the other training. 

Mr. Grant. Training. 

The Chairman. Wliat would be the course of training ? Let me ask 
two or three questions in one, and then you can develop your thoughts. 

Who would be prospective participants ? 

What educational background would be requisite ? Would they be 
under scholarship ? Would they be paid like people attending the other 
academies ? AYlio would they be ? 

Mr. Grant. All right, Mr. Chairman, we are dealing with three 
types of students: Government foreign affairs personnel, private citi- 
zens, and foreign nationals. Let me take them in order. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. What about military ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, just as the State Department sends people to the 
National AVar College — on a much too small quota basis, in my opin- 
ion — I am sure the Department of Defense would send people to the 
Freedom Academy also. It is very important that our military per- 
sonnel become aware of the wider aspects of national security. 

First of all. Government employees. These would come from all 
the agencies and departments that have some relationship to the cold 
war and our foreign operations. The State Department, USIA, AID, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 981 

even the Department of Agriculture has important overseas functions, 
as you know, Mr. Chairman. 

These students, of course, would be paid by their particular depart- 
ment or agency when they were there. And they would be assigned 
on a regular quota, just as the departments and agencies assign their 
officers and employees to the National War College, the Foreign Service 
Institute, or one of the university centers. 

Now as to the type of training they would receive, there would be 
basic-level training, intennediate-level training, and advanced train- 
ing. At the advanced level I am thinking of up to 2 years of very 
intensive, professional training to produce rounded experts or conflict 
managers for our side in the new forms of struggle. This would be 
a prestige course. At this level, the Academy would be roughly a 
National War College for nonmilitary aspects of the problem or 
nonmilitary conflict. 

It might be helpful to read a few short paragraphs from the "Green 
Book" describing the general nature of this advanced-level training. 

The Chairman. By the way, I didn't nile on your request to make 
the material you suggested part of the record. That material will be 
received temporarily for our files, and then we will use our judgment 
as to what, if any, portions will be printed as part of the record.^ 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

May I quote from the "Green Book" on that training : 

At advanced levels, we would be seeking to train a rounded cold war strate- 
gist — a conflict manager for our side in the new forms of struggle. This is going 
to take considerable time, and the curriculum will be inadequate until we begin 
to get some results from the research side. At this level, the students will be 
mature individuals, many of whom already have considerable operator experi- 
ence in some phase of the cold war. Two years is probably a minimum estimate 
of training time, with three years preferable for at least some advanced stu- 
dents. This may be cut down later when the basic material is given more ade- 
quate treatment at our universities and other government training programs. 

This should be a prestige course. At this level, the Freedom Academy will 
be operating as a National War College for non-military conflict. The graduate 
in the breadth of knowledge attuned to non-military conflict should be well 
ahead of almost any one we now have. 

The Chairman. You are going pretty fast. 
Mr. Grant. All right. 

He should have deep knowledge of Communist conflict doctrine, a thorough 
understanding of political, ideological, psychological, sociological, economic 
conflict in all its dimensions; a knowledge of the wide range of tools in the 
government and private sectors which can be developed and utilized ; a con- 
ceptual framework for non-military conflict 

And this is extremely important 

— so that these many tools can be employed flexibly yet systematically with 
clearly understood purpose; a grasp of the infinite variety of organizational 
form.s and operational techniques inherent in a global struggle between Free- 
dom and Communism ; a grasp of the systematic revolution sweeping the 
world and an understanding of the range of programs, many still to be re- 
searched and developed, which can be programmed and coordinated over long 
periods to assist the new nations toward freedom, national independence and 
self govermnent. No existing training program or combination of training pro- 
grams can even approximate these objectives. 



1 For material submitted by Mr. Grant and made a part of this record, see Appendix B, 
part 1, pp. 1191-1242. 



982 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Let me further state here, Mr. Chairman, that the training at these 
advanced levels should cover the spectrum of foreign policy, but it 
will be directly related to the central problems of nonmilitary con- 
flict, it will be brought within a conceptual framework for nonmili- 
tary conflict attmied to winning this global stniggle w^e are now in 
with the Soviet Union and Ked China and the problems of creating 
free and independent and viable countries. So much of what we are 
presently doing, our aid program, for example, is often operated as 
though we weren't in a global struggle with communism and is often 
inefl'ective or even counterproductive because it is not attuned to the 
conflict environment. 

Now below the top-level courses, we would have intermediate-level 
courses, 6 months to a year in length. We can't train rounded cold 
war professionals in that length of time, but the student can acquire 
a working knowledge of operational communism ; a conceptual frame- 
work for multidimensional, multidirectional strategy in nonmilitary 
conflict, an eye-opening exposure to the exciting range of measures 
potentially available to us, and practical, operative, usable knowl- 
edge in a wide range of conflict situations with some detailed case 
studies. 

The Chairman. It is now about 10 minutes to 12. The bells have 
rimg for the convening of the House, and I think it is a good time to 
give the reporter a break. We will recess at this point. 

Mr. Grant. May I have the permission to get back to finish this 
question ? It is a very vital one you just asked me. 

The Chairman. Yes, but we will come back to it. I know it is 
important. We will come back to it. 

Mr. Grant. I know in the Senate hearings we were promised 3 
days. They cut us to 2 days and then they took up half of our time 
to go into the administration's bill, and there was no time to get to 
the really important questions, and we were cut off in our answers 
before we really got to the gist of it. 

The Chairman. We will try to squeeze all the juice out of your 
lemon before we let you go. 

Mr. Grant. All right, sir. 

The Chairman. We will stand in recess until a quarter to two. 

(Whereupon, at 12 noon, Tuesday, Februaiy 18, 1964, the commit- 
tee recessed, to reconvene at 1 :45 p.m. the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION— TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1964 

(The' committee reconvened at 2 p.m., Hon. Edwin E. Willis, 
chairman, presiding. ) 

( Committee members present : Representatives Willis and Ichord. ) 

The Chairman. The'committee will please come to order. 

Mr. Grant, before the noon hour we were talking, first, about the 
research function of the institution it is proposed we create, then 
the course of studies, the type of people who would participate, and 
soon. 

Will you pick it up from there, please ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 983 

STATEMENT OF ALAN G. GRANT, JR.— Resumed 

Mr. Grant. As I recall, I just finished mentioning something about 
the types and lengths of courses for Government foreign affairs per- 
sonnel. I mentioned the advance courses up to 2 years in length, the 
intermediate-level courees of 6 months to 1 year, as well as some basic 
training, and indicated the content. 

In addition to that, we will be bringing private citizens to the 
Freedom Academy. These private citizens and the type of training 
we want to give them, in many instances, the emphasis, particularly, 
will be quite different from that of Government foreign affairs per- 
sonnel. I would rather suspect that you might very well end up 
with three schools under the Freedom Academy : One school con- 
centrating on U.S. Government foreign affairs personnel, one spe- 
cializing on research and training in the private sector, and one upon 
foreign nationals' training. 

(At this point Mr. Bruce entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Grant. In the Government training program, heavy emphasis 
would be at intermediate and advanced levels. In the training of 
private citizens, I believe we would be bringing in a large number 
for short courses of 2 weeks or 1 or 2 months in length. 

The Chairman. They will come from management ? 

Mr. Grant. They will come from across the board, and particularly 
those institutions and organizations which are in the best position 
to play an important role in winning the global struggle. There will 
be no limitation. People from the Kiwanis Club, the League of 
Women Voters, Rotary, the universities, labor, business, and so forth. 
There would be a wide cross-section of Americans who have a role 
to play, who will be trained. 

The Chairman. You said that those you would draw from Govern- 
ment agencies would retain their status as Government employees and 
draw pay, regular pay. Wliat about those you now talk about? Did 
you envisage their tuition being paid by the Government, or at least 
their receiving a stipend of some kind, to take the course ? 

Mr. Grant. It will vary. Some of the most desirable foreign 
students and private citizens we will want to bring to the Academy 
for training will not be able to come unless we provide some sort of 
per diem and pay their expenses while at the Academy. 

The Chairman. I see nothing wrong with that, but I want the 
record to reflect your thinking on it. 

Mr. Grant. Let me point out that the National Defense Education 
Act of 1958 authorizes summer training for high school teachers. 
They recognized that few high school teachers can afford to attend 
summer school, even with tuition paid, unless living expenses are also 
provided. So specific provision is made for this. 

The Freedom Academy bill does not make the payment of per diem 
mandatory, because many private citizens can come at their own ex- 
pense. After all, the Freedom Commission will want to get the maxi- 
mum mileage out of every dollar which Mr. Rooney and the Congress 
give them, so the bill simply authorizes grants to students and pay- 
ment of expenses at the option of the Commission to get desirable 
people to come to the Academy. 



984 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

In the case of foreign students, this can cover travel expenses to and 
from the Academy, as well as living expenses while here. 

The Chairman. Foreign students? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by that ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, any non-national of the United States. For ex- 
ample, students or labor leaders, businessmen, student leaders, peasant 
leaders might w^ant to come up here from Venezuela or Colombia to 
take training at the Freedom Academy. 

One of the things the Freedom Academy research will delve into 
will be the type of training which will be most eflfective for these 
people in order to go back and achieve our twin objectives of defeating 
'the Communist w recking operation, Commimist insurgency and politi- 
cal warfare, and subversion, while helping to strengthen their own 
free institutions and societies. 

Many of these foreign students would not be able to attend unless 
we provide so'me help and assistance. 

The Chairman. That w^ould be true also of American nationals, 
wouldn't it? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. I didn't intend to limit my answer. I meant 
that the Freedom Commission can provide financial assistance for 
American nationals wherever it is necessary, but many will be able to 
attend wnthout that assistance. The bill does not make it compulsory. 
It merely gives the Commission authority to extend assistance if it 
finds it is necessary in order to get desirable students to attend the 
Freedom Academy, 

The Chairman. Not only expenses, but they might have to be paid 
enough to support their families; wouldn't they ? 

Mr. Grant. They would. Let me add something. 

The Chairman. Again, I want to know the plan. Let me give you 
this illustration : Just last week, a few days ago, we passed a bill that 
I was opposed to, the Civil Rights Bill. One feature of that bill con- 
templated training of teachers or experts to inculcate the idea of 
integration. 

That bill authorizes summer courses for teachers. The word used 
was "stipends," that they be paid something, their expenses to these 
institutions, plus some kind of a salary. This would be along that line, 
I take it. 

Mr. Grant. It would, except that everybody who attends does not 
automatically get the stipend. Wliether to give them help financially 
will be up to the Commission and can be considered on an individual 
student basis. 

The National Defense Education Act has every high school teacher, 
regardless of whether a millionaire or pauper, getting $75 a week plus 
$15 for each dependent. I don't think that is the correct approach 
for the Freedom Academy. Many of these people will be able to attend 
the Academy without financial help. On the other hand, many desir- 
able people will not be able to come without some help. It will have 
to be worked out on an individual basis. That is the way the bill 
leaves it to the discretion of the Commission. 

The Chairman. I know you can't go — or can you — into the details 
of the educational and other background requisite to attendance in 
the first place, to be a student or a participant in the Academy? I 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 985 

don't know how much you have thought about it. In other words, if 
this bill hits the floor, those are things that we should be prepared to 
answer. You might as well put that into the record. 

Mr. Grant. The bill does not specifically list the requisites and re- 
quirements which we would want in a student. I think this would be 
almost impossible to spell out in legislation. This is something that 
we have to leave to the good sense and judgment of the Freedom Com- 
mission in view of the problem. 

We do say in section 7, Academy students, other than Government 
personnel, shall be selected, insofar as is practicable and in the public 
interest, from those areas, organizations, or institutions where trained 
leadership and informed public opinion are most needed to achieve the 
objectives set forth in section 2(a)(7) IV and V. 

You will recall that, in the congressional statement, section 2, are 
set forth five specific objectives for training — four and five dealing 
with the private sector. So this is the general directive which the 
Congress has given, and I think it is gomg to be very difficult, Mr. 
Chainnan, to be any more specific than that in instructions from the 
Congress in the general legislation insofar as it concerns the selection 
of private students. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Mr. Chairman, who makes the selections ? 

The Chairman. I suppose it would be the Commission. 

I will turn the question over to Mr. Grant. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir; it would be the Freedom Commission. Please 
let me modify that to prevent a confusion here. 

The Commission, I am sure, will make the selection as to private 
citizens and foreign students, but they obviously will be assisted by 
many Government agencies operating overseas and other places who 
come across people who would like to attend the Freedom Academy. 
In terms of training Government cold war personnel, obviously the 
agencies themselves, on an annual quota basis, will select who will 
attend the Academy and whether they take the basic, intermediate, or 
advanced courses. 

The Chairman. I can easily follow you as far as Government agen- 
cies involved in the cold war, subversion, and all the rest of it are con- 
cerned. They will select the numbers and the quality and everything 
else. But I was talking about the private sector. I suppose that is 
what Mr. Schadeberg has referred to. 

Mr. Grant. The bill gives the Freedom Commission specific direc- 
tives for the private sector in the congressional statement of policy and 
findings of fact. I think within this general authority they have spe- 
cific goals to aim for in the selection of private citizens. 

The Chairman. We are talking in terms of the Freedom Academy. 
To me, the people there must be related to things that you can see or 
visualize. We talk about West Point, about housing, about buildings, 
and so on. We have created, since I have been in the Congress, the 
Air Force Academy, for which we built suitable quarters out West. 
What do you visualize the Academy being like? What do you have in 
mind ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, Mr. Chainnan, we have given a lot of thought to 
thequestion of location. 

The Chairman. Well, location plus facilities; what facilities are 
involved ? I know it is a tough question, but if we create an Academy, 



986 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

people are goiiij; to relate it to an academy they know about, the Air 
Force, the Naval Academy, West Point, and so on. 

What we are talkinfj about is physical facilities, its size, number of 
students or participants. You must have been thinking about it. 
Those questions have just come into my mind. If we adopt the 
bill, we must settle it. Most of all, we must know about it, the mem- 
bers of this committee. 

Mr. Grant. Mr. (^hairman, next month I have to go to the Univer- 
sity of Florida at Gainesville and sit on an evaluation board of the 
architectural school because one of the students there has selected 
the Freedom Academy as his architectural thesis. I have been in con- 
sultation with him and I wish I had some of his drawings with me 
today. Jjet me say, fii-st of all, that I think that the Freedom Academy 
should be located in the Washington, D.C, area. This is, I think, 
almost mandatory, because one of the major sources for research will 
be the operational tiles of the U.S. (lovernment on past operations. 

If the Freedom Academy is established in any otfier part of tlie 
countiy, it is going to be very inconvenient and cumbersome to do 
this type of research. I have heard the Atomic Energy Commis- 
sion made a big mistake when they went out 25 or 30 miles in the 
country and Hnd they are spending half of their time now commuting 
back and forth to Washington. 

As to physical plant, the most important central thing we have to 
have is a library. Dr. Stefan Possony, who is with the Hoover In- 
stitution on War, Revolution, and Peacej at Stanford, which has the 
best private library in the counti'y deahng with this whole area of 
communism and nonmilitaiy conflict, has many thoughts on the li- 
brary and he is going into that as your next witness. But it has to be 
a specialized library and a substantial library. 

In addition to that, we will have to have administration buildings 
for the Commission. In addition to that, we will have to have con- 
ference rooms, lecture halls, dining halls. 

As far as dormitories go, I think most of the Government students 
will be able to find housing in the Washington area, just as Govern- 
ment employees do who attend the Foreign Service Institute. 

But for private citizens brought in for 2 weeks or 2 months, it may 
be desirable to have what is called in the Army a BOQ, setup, where 
they can stay at the Freedom Academy temporarily while attending 
some of the shorter courses. 

Most of the faculty will not require residences at the Academy be- 
cause they can live in the general AVashington, D.C, area. 

The main things are the libraiy, the central place for the Commis- 
sion to meet, and offices, the necessary research facilities, conference 
rooms, lecture halls, and so forth. 

If you would like me to hit budget at this point, Mr. Chairman, I 
would be happy to. 

The Chairman. In talking about facilities and all, you are talking 
about money. You might as well go ahead. 

Mr, Grant. We have kicked budget around for years. 

The Chairman. I^t me say that the cost doesn't bother me. Secu- 
rity doesn't come cheap. If you do it cheaply, you are not going to 
have anything worthwhile. We might as well be perfectly frank 
and ffenerous as to what we are talking about. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 987 

You are talking about annual appropriations? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir; the annual operational budget, not the budget 
for plant. It will take time for this Academy to get started. If we 
really have a sense of urgency here, I think within 6 montlis of the 
time this bill is passed we can begin some ti"aining, but on a limited 
scale. I think it will be the beginning of the third academic year be- 
fore the Freedom Academy really hits its stride and begins to i-equire 
its maximum sustaining annual operational budget. 

We estimate this at $35 million. We consider this a minimum 
satisfactory budget. Under this, we could bring in up to 10,000 
private citizens a year for the short, courses. We could have ap- 
proximately 500 Government personnel, plus 500 from the foreign 
and private sector combined taking the advanced courses, and a 
sizable number for the inteiTnediate-level courses, and still have suffi- 
cient for a substantial research effort. Thirty-five million dollars is 
the figure arrived at by the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1960. 

If these figures sound a little bit upsetting, let me read something to 
you. I have in front of me a press release from the Agency for In- 
ternational Development on the subject of the recent appointment 
of Robert W. Kitchen, Jr., as chief of AID's International Training 
Office. Let me read you one paragraph from this AID release : 

In his new assignment, he [Mr. Kitchen] will be responsible for supervising 
the AID central oflBce which specializes in training citizens of friendly foreign 
nations. The participants training program, as it is called, involves the annual 
expenditure of some 40 million dollars and ties directly into the Agency's efforts 
to provide the trained manpower needed to achieve the goals which U.S. assist- 
ance seeks in these less developed countries. In the year ending on June 30, 
5,766 participants from overseas were trained in the U.S. and 2,127 were trained 
in other developed nations under AID auspices. 

The Chairman. Would you say that again ? 

Mr. Grant. The figures ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Graiw. 5,766 participants from overseas were trained in the 
U.S. 

The Chairman. About 6,000 people being trained under the AID 
program in the United States 

Mr. Grant. In this country and about 2,000 at overseas posts. 

The Chairman. So 2,000 foreign nationals plus about 6,000 foreign 
nationals are trainees under this AID program, meaning some 8,000 
are being trained to do something with reference to our foreign aid ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Grant, That is correct. 

The Chairman. In what are they trained? How to give away our 
money or how to conserve it or what? 

Mr. Grant. On the AID program or the type of training at the 
Freedom Academy? 

The Chairman. What you were reading from there. 

Mr. Grant. What I was reading from was a press release of the 
Agency for International Development, showing that they alone 
spend $40 million on training foreign nationals, mostly in the U.S. 

The Chairman. Read the sentence again about some 5,700 people 
doing what? Read that passage. 

Mr. Grant. That AID is bringing 5,766 foreign nationals to the 
United States every year for training. 



988 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. For training in what ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, it covers a whole long line of things, everything 
from how to run an Internal Revenue Service to agricultural mat- 
ters, to technical matters in relation to engineering and village de- 
velopment ; a whole line of technical things. 

The Chairman. I am not being facetious, but I think it is an inter- 
esting comparison. Close to 6,000 people, foreign nationals — or are 
they foreign nationals ? Is that what it says ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. They are brought into this country to learn and to 
be taught how, according to our Government, to efficiently distribute 
aid under our foreign aid program, meaning, I suppose, that if we sent 
some funds for agricultural improvements in a foreign country, we 
want to know that the technicians are over there who understand the 
operation of tractors, fertilizing, and farming practices, and so on. 

If the aid is extended to another purpose, then they must understand 
how, as economically as possible — and giving them the benefit of the 
doubt — to spend our dollar. I am a bit inclined to say how to give 
away our dollar, but we will forget that. That is what this bulletin 
is all about ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And you take the position, therefore, that I 
shouldn't be shocked, and I am not, about the fact that perhaps we 
should spend $35 million, all told, on this Academy each year and have 
an equal number of foreign nationals coming to this institution to 
learn about our side of this cold war. Is that the general idea ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. May I add at this point, Mr, Chairman, that 
on the proposed budget for the State Department's bill, the adminis- 
tration's bill, to establish a National Academy of Foreign Affairs, they 
say by the 5th year — it will take them 5 years to reach their maximum 
operation — they plan to spend only $6.7 million. I think you can 
see what an inadequate effort that will be just in terms of their budget. 
I will get into that later on, I hope, in some of the other questioning. 

The Chairman. I don't want to monopolize the questioning. 

Mr. Ichord ? 

Mr. IcHORD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have several questions. 

Mr. Grant, first of all, I would like for you to elaborate on the 
differences between the Freedom Academy and the National Academy 
of Foreign Affairs. First I would like to ask you : Did the National 
Academy of Foreign Affairs proposal come into being after the pro- 
posal was made for the creation of the Freedom Academy ? 

Mr. Grant. Long afterwards. I would like to give you a little 
history on that, if I may. 

Mr. Ichord. I would like to have that. 

Mr. Gr.vnt. In the spring of 1961 — of course, this was 2 years after 
the Freedom Academy bill was originally introduced in the House and 
Senate — just after we had reintroduced it in the 87th Congress, I 
heard reports that the State Department was attempting to 

Mr. IcHORD. This was in the spring of 1961 ? 

Mr. Grant. 1961. I heard reports that the State Department was 
attempting to scuttle the Freedom Academy bill with the new admin- 
istration by putting out word that all the training we proposed here 
was being adequately covered at the Foreign Service Institute, at the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 989 

War Colleges, and our university centers, or could be with just a little 
more money being spent on those institutions. 

To overcome this, in May 1961, the Orlando Committee sent to the 
White House a 31 -page letter. I have the office carbon copy with me. 
In this letter, for the first time— and mind you, this is the first time 
this had been done and a small group in Orlando, Florida, had to do 
it — we went through, with considerable help from the Library of 
Congress, the training programs, course by course, at the Foreign 
Service Institute, the War Colleges, the intradepartmental training 
programs of USIA and AID, as well as what was going on in our 
principal university centers like Johns Hopkins, MIT, which are con- 
cerned with international affairs. 

Mr. IcHORD. Were they conducting training in political warfare? 

Mr. Grant. It was to show just how little of what we are talking 
about for the Freedom Academy, what we want to give at the Free- 
dom Academy, is in fact presently being given either in Government 
training programs or in our universities. 

We sent this to the Wliite House. The White House apparently 
was impressed, from what they told me. They wanted to do some- 
thing, but there were so many problems this was pushed to the back 
burner. Finally, in the spring of 1962 the President appointed a 
panel under the chairmanship of Dr. James Perkins, then the execu- 
tive vice president of the Carnegie Foundation and now the new 
president of Cornell. 

This five-member Presidential panel was directed to investigate the 
Government foreign affairs training programs at FSI, the War Col- 
leges, and so forth, to see how effective they were. In November 1962 
the Perkins panel reported back and they confirmed, as far as they 
went, everything the Orlando Committee had been saying for these 
many years, but their inquiry only concerned the training of Gov- 
ernment foreign affairs personnel. They did not go into private- 
sector training and foreign nationals' training, nor did they have much 
to say about research. The report was generalized, not specific. Also, 
no member of the panel, to my knowledge, was an expert on Soviet 
political warfare or nonmilitary warfare. They failed to contact any- 
one closely connected with the Freedom Academy bill, though I un- 
derstand each panel member was furnished with a copy of the "Green 
Book." To me, the report reflected too much the attitude of the pro- 
fessional educationist — rather than those deeply immersed in the 
problems on nonmilitary conflict. 

In mid-December, the White House issued a statement saying the 
President approved of the report and legislation would be prepared. 

The job of drafting the bill and organizing the presentation to 
Congress was then turned over to the Department of State and assigned 
to Mr. Orrick, Mr. Orrick from 1946 to 1961 was a San Francisco 
lawyer with one of the larger firms out there, specializing in corporate 
matters and municipal bonds, and, as far as I know, had no special 
interest in foreign affairs or the cold war. 

At the beginnmg of the new administration in 1961, he was brought 
into the Justice Department as an Assistant Attorney General in charge 
of the Civil Division, and I don't know how you can get much further 
from the cold war than that. Just a few months before getting the 



990 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

assignment to draft the bill, he was sent to the State Department to 
become Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration. 

One of the first things dropped in his lap was preparing the ad- 
ministration bill to establish the National Academy of Foreign Affairs. 
This legislation was introduced in the Congi-ess in February 1963. 

Now, to get down to your main question : Wliat are the primary 
differences between the bills? The Orlando Committee in February 
1962 prepared this 27'page briefing paper in which we made a detailed 
comparison between the Freedom Academy bill and the National 
Academy bill. Mind you, this was prepared before any hearings were 
held before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. 
■ But I think everything we said in here was quite accurate and 
turned out to be quite true at the hearings. Let me briefly summarize 
what we think are the main differences. 

The Chairman. Will you yield at that point ? 

Mr. IcHORD. Yes. 

The Chairman. I think the point you are trying to make, or 
maybe should make from your point of view, is that the very fact 
that the President appointed the commission and the very fact 
that the commission made a report, and suggested a new approach 
is an acknowledgement that something should be done, that there 
were deficiencies from agency to agency in this broad field. Is that 
the point ? 

Mr. Grant. And completely repudiated the State Department's 
position, up to that time, that everything was being adequately handled 
at the Foreign Service Institute, the War Colleges, and the university 
centers, something we knew was completely wrong. For the first 
time, we got somebody's attention higher up. 

The Chairman. In other words, up to that point, the position of 
the State Department with reference to the bills introduced in the 
Congress was: "You don't need it. The thing is being adequately 
handled"? 

Mr. Grant. "Everything is under control. We don't need this." 

The Chairman. And then there was at least an acknowledgement 
that there has been a certain amount of deficiency in cold war train- 
ing and, as a result of the Presidential commission's findings, a sug- 
gestion was made that something should be done, and therefore their 
first and totally negative position was demolished. 

Mr. Grant. Yes. sir. You see, Mr. Chairman, when we sent this 
letter on May 10, 1961, to the White House, this was the first time any- 
body had analyzed these schools in terms of nonmilitary conflict. 
I mentioned earlier today that Dr. Wriston, president of Brown, in- 
vestigated the Foreign Service Institute in 1954, but he is a profes- 
sional educator, not an expert on nonmilitary conflict. He looked at 
the school in terms of what kind of language studies they offer, area 
studies, and so forth. 

He didn't analyze the Foreign Service Institute in terms of the new 
forms of struggle. The Orlando Committee's letter gave the White 
House facts with which to talk back to the State Department : "Is it 
true that, in the basic officers course, FSI only devotes 6 hours to 
Communist strategy?" and so forth. 

I still haven't gotten to the differences between the two bills, the 
principal question asked. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 991 

First of all, the administration has made it very clear that at the 
National Academy of Foreign Affairs they are going to concentrate 
solely on training Government foreign affairs personnel. 

Mr. IcHORD. And they would also conduct research ? 

Mr. Grant. Right. And while there is authority in the bill to 
train private citizens and foreign nationals, they made it very clear 
they have no interest in that and that this authority is just an escape 
clause. Furthermore, they didn't put in the administrative authoriza- 
tions in terms of paying the expenses of these people, and so forth, to 
make it possible to train private citizens and foreign nationals in sub- 
stantial numbers. So, number one, the great function which the 
Freedom Academy can perform in activating the private sector and 
training foreign nationals is entirely out in the National Academy of 
Foreign Affairs. That is the first point I want to make. The second 
point is 

Mr. IciiORD. You emphasized the private sector in the Freedom 
Academy. 

Mr. Grant. We emphasize it, but no more than professional train- 
ing of Government foreign affairs personnel. The State Department 
has tried to confuse the record on that. 

Secondly, when it comes to giving professional training to Govern- 
ment foreign affairs personnel, the Freedom Academy bill goes way 
beyond their bill. I have carefully read everything that Mr. Rostow 
has said, that Mr. Perkins has said, what Mr. Rusk and Mr. Ball have 
said, the executive communications on this; and, as far as I can deter- 
mine, all they intend to do is simply give more people the same inade- 
quate courses presently offered at the ForeigTi Service Institute that 
I was telling you about this morning. More people are going to take 
that little 12-week mid-career course, the 5-week quickie course in 
interdepartmental training, and so forth. But I cannot find any in- 
dication that there is going to be a major revision in the courses. 
Simply more people are going to take what is already being offered. 

Mr. IcHORD. Then you are testifying that it is not only desirable 
and necessary to have a new approach to fighting the cold war, but 
also to get some new blood into the game ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, some new blood and a whole new range of train- 
ing programs brought in so that, for the first time, we can give really 
professional training in nonmilitaiy conflict. That is not what you 
will get at the National Academy of Foreign Affairs, as I understand 
the bill and the State Department's interpretation of the bill. It is 
still far from training cold war experts. Even Government foreign 
affairs personnel will not get that, and the private sector and foreign 
students are completely left out. 

Mr. IcHORD. Does the National Academy of Foreign Affairs con- 
template doing research? I didn't understand your answer. 

Mr. Grant. They say it does. But look at their proposed budget. 
Look at the current budget for the Foreign Service Institute. For 
many years the FSI budget has run between $5 million and $6 million. 
It is currently $5.7 million. Wliat is the proposed operational budget 
for the National Academy of Foreign Affairs ? It is $6.7 million. 

And keep in mind the National Academy of Foreign Affairs will 
absorb and replace the Foreign Service Institute. The Freedom 
Academy will not, because we thought it shouldn't be tied down or 

30-471— 64— pt. 1 5 



992 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

its efforts diffused by being responsible for such intradepartmental 
training as the basic or mid-career officers course or the language 
school. Let State keep control of the conventional, diplomatic train- 
ing, and since the language school is well run, let it continue where 
it is. 

By 1968, and once again this shows a very casual, leisurely approach, 
they propose to increase the budget to $6.7 million. Let me be com- 
pletely fair. The $5.7 million budget of the Foreign Service Institute 
includes the salaries of the instructional staff. The proposed $6.7 
million budget of the National Academy' of Foreign Affairs does not 
include that. So it is really an increase of from about $4 million to 
$6.7 million, roughly, a 40-percent increase. Mr. Eostow, in his testi- 
mony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, made it very 
clear that most of this 40-percent increase is going to be used to pay 
for the additional step-up in training, so there will only be a very 
small amount of money left for research. They talk about setting up 
a center there for Communist studies, and so forth. But obviousl}^, 
this is going to be small potatoes in view of the budget, and they can't 
possibly bring in the wide range of expert knowledge which we are 
talking about for the Freedom Academy to really do an expert, com- 
prehensive job on this whole, vast, neglected field of nonmilitary 
conflict. 

And their proposed operational budget does not even begin to pro- 
vide the funds necessary to maintain the type of library which will be 
required to consider the problems of communism and nonmilitary con- 
flict as a whole. I believe you will understand this better after you 
hear the next witness, Dr. Possony. 

Mr. IcHORD. Does the National Academy contemplate taking in 
foreign students ? 

]Mr. Grant. There is authority, but they have made it veiy clear 
that they have no interest in that and do not intend to do it, and there 
are no funds in that $6.7 million budget for this. Tliey have made 
tliat very clear. JMr. Rostow answered that way in answer to a spe- 
cific question from Senator Symington, who introduced the National 
Academy of Foregin Affairs bill in the Senate. 

Mr. IcHORD. You have three fmictions of the Freedom Academy, 
or of the Commission — training, research in the Freedom Academy, 
and also this function of chamieling information to the public. I 
didn't quite understand how they were going to perform that func- 
tion. 

Mr. Grant. Congressman, excuse me, but can I go back to your 
previous question and hit one or two more main differences between 
the Freedom Academy bill and the National Academy ? 

Mr. IcHORD. Yes. 

Mr. Grant. You just asked an extremely important question, but 
I would like to go back to the other for a moment. 

Mr. IcHORD. All right. 

Mr. Grant. There are several additional points. On the matter 
of control, the National Academy of Foreign Affairs bill places con- 
trol in a 10-man, part-time board of trustees, half of whom will be 
private citizens — and they are obviously talking about VIP's, like 
college presidents or George Meany — and half Government officials, 
with the Secretary of State as chairman. With a part-time board 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 993 

of trustees and as the chairman one of the most over-extended men in 
this town, you can see how little time they will be able to devote to 
policy planning and guidance in this whole new complex area that 
they will have to go into. 

They will be fortmiate if they can obtain a quorum of these VIP's 
two or three times a year. The result is tliat the trustees will not 
have time for the in-depth study required for dynamic policy guid- 
ance and control of the Academy. There will be a strong tendency, 
I am afraid, to follow the traditional, conventional way of doing 
things both as to research and training. Such a board of trustees 
works fine for a miiversity where there is already a consensus as to the 
general outlmes of what a university should be. But the Freedom 
Academy, especially in the beginning, faces a long list of tough 
questions as to the nature and extent of the research and training 
program, and there is no precedent in the free world, and we do not 
want to copy Communist training programs for obvious reasons. 

Furthermore, I think for all practical purposes, this puts the Na- 
tional Academy right back mider the State Department where the 
Foreign Service Institute has been. I think the most you are going 
to get is a modest extension of the Foreign Service Institute. 

The Orlando Committee, in preparing legislation for the Freedom 
Academy, reviewed all existing cold war legislation, and one of the 
things we studied very carefully was the sections at 22 U.S. Code 
Amiotated, 1041 et seq., setting up the original Foreign Service Insti- 
tute. When we read the new bill setting up the National Academy 
of Foreign Aifairs, the w^ording seemed familiar. On checking, we 
fomid the key operational language m the National Academy bill had 
been copied, without hardly changing a word from the old Foreign 
Service Institute statute. Where is a whole new approach ? We have 
made a comparison in Supplement No. 1 to the "Green Book," compar- 
ing the language of the old Foreign Service Institute statute, which has 
been on the books since 19-16, and the new bill, and showing — of course, 
there is a lot of window dressing and administrative detail — that, in 
the key language setting up the research and training f mictions and the 
duties of the chancellor, they have, for all practical purposes, copied 
verbatim the old Foreign Service Institute statute. 

We say that even this might be satisfactory if, at the begimiing of 
this bill, they had included a iiard-iiitting, comprehensive, specific 
statement of policy by the Congress such as we have m section 2 of the 
Freedom Academy bill. After all, the old language of the Foreign 
Sei^ice Institute was rather generalized, and it can cover anything 
or nothing, depending upon the person who administers the program 
and carries it out. But to reincorporate that same language and 
once again have a very wishy-washy statement, congressional state- 
ment and findings of fact at the beginning, to us is completely 
miacceptable. 

I can go on and talk about this for a long time, but I think I have 
hit here some of the principal reasons why the Orlando Committee 
has been unable to accept the administration's bill. Let me say this : 
You heard this morning Congressman Herlong's testimony, in which 
he is now going to refer to this as the Boggs-Taft bill, even though 
he w^as author of the original bill in 1959. We feel the same way 
in Orlando. If the administration would come up with an acceptable 



994 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

bill and a realistic budget, we would forget all about the Freedom 
Academy bill. This is a matter of life and death for this country and 
should be above partisan politics or pride of authorship. We were 
hopin,g the administration would write a bill we could support. But, 
for the reasons I have mdicated, we think their bill is grossly 
inadequate. 

Mr. IcHORD. Now I would like for you to elaborate on the function 
of channeling information to the public, and particularly in light of 
the criticism of the State Department that this would overburden the 
Commission by having to carry on both the function of training and 
research and also disseminating this information to the public. 

Mr. Grant. Your question, I gather, is directed to section 8 of the 
bill, which provides for an information center. 

Mr. IcHORD. Yes, right. 

Mr. Grant. The opponents of the Freedom Academy bill, and par- 
ticularly the State Department in its communications and Mr. Rostow 
in his testimony before the Foreign Relations Committee, snatched 
out one or two phrases from section 8 where the Commission has au- 
thority to publish textbooks and training films and disseminate 
them, to try to make it look like the Freedom Commission would be 
interfering in public education. Of course, there has been a long- 
standing policy in the Congress that the Federal Government should 
not overinject itself into public education at the State level. Taking 
advantage of that, they tried to indicate that the whole purpose of 
the information center was to indoctrinate the American public. They 
keep throwing out this dirty word "indoctrination" a^ain and again in 
their discussion. Just read the Freedom Academy bill and then read 
the administration's bill. Wliy you have to apply the dirty word, par- 
ticularly among educators, "indoctrination," to our bill and not to their 
bill is totally beyond me. But they have taken this one little sentence 
and tried to twist it so that they can throw the expression "indoctrina- 
tion" at us. Incidentally, the Senate sponsors of the Freedom Acad- 
emy bill agreed to change "textbooks" to "educational materials" to 
avoid this charge, or even to drop that one sentence altogether, and I 
would agree if for no other purpose than to force the State Department 
to discuss the real issues. 

Let me set forth the real purpose of the information center and 
what the Orlando Committee had in mind, which I think I have al- 
ready indicated in previous testimony. The big thing is to make the 
private sector effective in the global struggle. There are major proj- 
ects which the citizens of Florida, the citizens of Missouri, and the 
citizens of Louisiana can undertake which can have a major impact 
in Latin America, in Africa, the Middle East, and the Far East. But 
we have to make information available to these citizens so they know 
what they can do. This is not indoctrination. This is not Federal 
interference in the private sector. Here Academy research will simply 
show them many things the private sector can do, and upon request the 
information center will furnish this information to interested groups 
in the private sector. 

If the Commission is adequately staffed and funded, I cannot see 
why the information center would be such a burden. Nothing would 
be more frustrating to the research staff than to develop the possibil- 
ities for private participation and then have no outlet. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 995 

Mr. IcHORD, You are indirectly going to make that information 
available to them when you pick up the private citizens and send them 
through school for the period of time outlined ? 

Mr. Grant. That way also. But many organizations who cannot 
send people for training will also want to become involved. There are 
many types of projects which can be carried out even though the per- 
sons in that particular organization have no specialized knowledge. 
For example, last month I received a letter from an electronics engi- 
neer in Bombay, India, in response to the Reader's Digest article in- 
serted in the record by Congressman Herlong. This article is now 
appearing in the overseas editions. First I got letters from the Phil- 
lipines and Japan and then Africa. Now they are coming from India, 
Ceylon, and Pakistan. 

This man is urgently seeking information about communism, the 
organization of the party, its operational methods, history, etc. Books 
on this are unobtainable in Indian libraries, and USIA libraries have 
little that is helpful. He wants to organize a Freedom Academy for 
India. From his letter, he appears intelligent and well motivated. 
The question of internal security and the degree of danger in this coun- 
try is a subject, as this committee knows, of great disagreement among 
people. But I don't think anybody would claim that communism is 
not an internal threat or major threat in India today. Private citizen 
groups could work up an excellent library and send it to this man. 
This is the type of project that they can carry out, even though no one 
in their club has any expertise in this matter, if they only knew about 
this man and there was an information center to supply a list of books. 
I have been told the number one expert on communism in India today is 
a railroad porter working, until recentlj^, at a station in New Delhi. He 
doesn't even own a pair of shoes. He has been hounded out of the uni- 
versities by planned Communist agitation. Here is a man who could 
put a little money and a little organizational support to good use, and I 
am sure some private group in this country, if they were made aware of 
the problem, would jump to help him, and a few dollars here might 
get more mileage than any Government action. 

The public too often doesn't know about these things, the great op- 
portunities which exist. But the information center will make this 
information available to the private sector in the most usable form. 

That is the main thrust of the information center, not to inject itself 
into public education in the private sector at the State level. How- 
ever, we can be sure the State Department will continue to ignore this 
main purpose and instead will continue to shout "indoctrination." 

The issue before the committee is this: Do we take a complacent 
attitude toward the unlimited possibilities for private participation? 
Do we say, as Mr. Rostow said at the Senate hearings, that the private 
sector, the foundations, universities, mission groups, and labor are 
already carrying on many intelligent and sophisticated projects over- 
seas and, therefore, there is no need for a major new effort to activate 
the private sector? Or do we say that the successful projects so far 
initiated, like the AFLr-CIO training school in Washington for Latin 
American labor leaders, merely scratch the surface — and having said 
this, do we then provide the three preconditions of research, training, 
and an information center which can make intelligent, organized, 
large-scale private participation possible ? 



99G PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Orlando Committee is appalled by the complacent attitude at 
State as reflected in Mr, Rostow's statement. 

Mr. IcHORD. But I take it the most important function of the Com- 
mission will be to set up, direct, and operate the Freedom Academy. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IcHORD. I believe it was the Department of State which crit- 
icized the Freedom Academy by saying that here you are establishing 
an open institution and an institution such as this, providing training 
in political warfare and subversion, should be conducted in secret. I 
would like for you to comment upon that criticism. 

Mr. GR.\]srT. Well, I think there are actually two aspects of that, two 
parts to the criticism. One part of the criticism was to the effect that 
we can't train foreign nationals at a Freedom Academy, because they 
would be trained with Government foreign affairs personnel and many 
of the classified things we would want to go into we couldn't go into, 
if foreign students were present. They say, for example, "Handling 
Charles de Gaulle is one of our toughest problems. Do you mean to 
say we are going to have a confidential briefing by the Secretary of 
State at the Freedom Academy, advising our people on strategy and 
tactics for handling de Gaulle, and there are four or five French citi- 
zens sitting in ?" State always assumes we will go about it in a foolish, 
instead of a wise, way. 

I indicated earlier there would be three schools at the Academy, one 
for Government persomiel, one for private citizens, and one for for- 
eign nationals. Obviously, foreign students wouldn't attend these 
classified briefings for Government personnel. There will, however, 
be many joint seminars and lectures where the training program would 
be enriched by bringing Government students in close association with 
these interested foreign nationals from all over the world. 

As to the overt versus the covert part of the problem, the Central 
Intelligence Agency is primarily responsible for covert operational 
programs of the United States Government as distinguished from 
intelligence gathering. I just hope, as a result of the Bay of Pigs and 
all the other things they have been hit with in the last few years, that 
they don't become so inhibited that they refrain from doing many 
things they should be doing. The Communists seem to be in the midst 
of a major propaganda effort right now to inhibit CIA thinking in 
terms of covert operations. However, the Freedom Academy will 
emphasize the overt part of the problem, in terms of training and 
research. It is the overt aspects of nonmilitary conflict or political 
warfare which have been even more neglected by this Government 
than have the covert aspects of the problem, which CIA is working 
on overseas or the FBI in terms of internal security. 

So this business about having to do all of this secretly and every- 
thing, I think, is a red herring by those who have not thought through 
the problems or want to confuse Members of Congress who they think 
have not thought through the problems or read the bill. 

Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Grant, so many people in the world and in the 
United States particularly view the battle against the spread of com- 
munism over the world as purely a battle between democracy and 
communism. I think to really understand the successes of commu- 
nism, the successes that they have had, you have to compare what, 
for example, the Russians, the Russian people, have under communism 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 997 

today with what they had under the Czar; with what the people in 
Communist China have today under the Communist regime with 
what they had imder Chiang Kai-shek ; and, getting closer to home, 
with what the people in Cuba have today under Castro with what 
they had under Batista. That is, it is not a matter of choice between 
good and bad, in many instances, but it is a choice between evil and 
less evil. 

I notice one of the statements referred to Cuba by saying that if we 
had this Freedom Academy we would have had people trained who 
would have seen what was going on in Cuba. I believe reference was 
made toward perhaps staging a revolution in Cuba against Batista 
before the Castro revolution came along. There is no doubt about it, 
Castro wouldn't have been successful in Cuba if it had not been for at 
least the very friendly and tolerant attitude of people in the United 
States and even our administration, at the time. You don't contem- 
plate any cloak-and-dagger activity conducted by the Freedom Acad- 
emy, do you ? 

Mr. Grant. Absolutely not. 

Mr. IcHORD. You are only dealing with training of people to j&ght 
political warfare. 

Mr. Grant. As I emphasized this morning, the Freedom Commis- 
sion and the Freedom Academy are entirely in the area of research 
and training, except to the extent where, upon request by private cit- 
izens and gi^oups who want to participate in this area, in overt type 
programs, the information center will provide information. 

Mr. IcHORD. I will yield, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Schadeberg. I have a few questions to ask you. 

Assuming, and I am going to very frank and I hope we can be — 
assuming that the State Department policy has been, through the 
years, through Eepublican and Democrat administrations, anything 
but successful in effectively combating the spread of communism, due 
probably to its adherence to traditional diplomatic procedures, how 
could we prevent this irritation or difficulty that would exist between 
the State Department personnel or Government personnel that were 
taught in the Freedom Academy and then proceeded to carry out the 
policies of the State Department ? 

There would be a conflict. 

Mr. Grant. That is a very good question, veiy perceptive, Mr. 
Schadeberg. We have thought about that. I suppose it could even 
get to the point where you had one attitude at the Freedom Academy 
and another at the State Department, and I suppose some career-wise 
or career-building individuals might consider it contraiy to the inter- 
ests of their career to even go to the Freedom Academy. That is 
possible. I think you understand this. 

But I think that what we are going to have at the Freedom Acad- 
emy, what it is going to bring about, is a gradual change in the oper- 
ational thinking of the United States Government, particularly if 
the Freedom Commission and Freedom Academy go about their func- 
tions wisely and diplomatically, particularly in relation to the Wliite 
House, the State Department, and so forth. I have been rather tough 
on the State Department today, because I think it is about tims some- 
body was very blunt in their testimony in this area, rather than trying 
i o soften some of these points. 



998 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

But I think the Freedom Academy is going to do its best to try to 
work with these existing agencies and departments in every way it can. 
I believe the President would appoint people to the Freedom Com- 
mission who would attempt to create a friendly liaison back and forth. 

Again, as to Academy research, when we begin to realize that many 
of these seemingly insoluble cold war problems that we have had — 
like the massive penetration and takeover of the student organizations 
in Latin univereities where we have almost no instrmnents to presently 
deal with the situation — when the Freedom Academy starts coming 
forward with concrete proposals to solve these problems which tie 
into all the rest of our programs, I think gradually the Commission 
is going to get a more and more receptive attitude at State. And I 
should think that the White House would be tremendously interested 
in these things and seeing that these types of programs are carried 
out. But, initially, you may have people at the Freedom Academy 
who are so far ahead of some people at the State Department in the 
area of nonmilitary conflict that there might not be a complete meet- 
ing of the minds. That can be a problem. The Academy will be up 
against a built-in prejudice toward new operational ideas. However, 
I believe the President will eventually lean toward proposals which 
give us real hope of victory even if it means setting aside some of the 
comfortable, conventional ways of dealing with cold war problems. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. I think it would go without saying that there 
would be some diffculties which would have to be ironed out. 

Mr. Grant. I might add here that I think Mr. Henry Mayers has 
made a very excellent comparison or analogy between Billy Mitchell 
and the battleship admirals in the 1920's, and the Freedom Academy 
supporters and the State Department in the 1960's, in which he said 
that many of the battleship admirals probably understood almost 
instinctively that this new upstart aerial warfare was about to make 
them obsolete, and they had spent their careers learning to operate a 
line of battleships. Here this fellow comes up with an aviation 
theory which can make them obsolete, and they resent it. 

I think in the area of nonmilitary conflict, many of the people in the 
State Department realize that they have not been trained in this area 
as they should have been and that they do not have the background 
in this area they should have, with many new operational techniques 
and organizational forms now coming to the fore in which they have 
not been adequately trained or prepared, and they worry about becom- 
ing a little bit obsolescent in their field or specialty. I am an attor- 
ney at law, and many people are moving in on that profession right 
now. We have a smaller and smaller area in which we have exclusive 
practice. It makes us feel a little obsolete sometimes. I can under- 
stand that feeling at the Department of State, which I am sure exists, 
with relation to nonmilitary conflict and Freedom Academy-type 
training. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Another question, which deals with an area which 
is hard to define. I think some of us know well enough that when 
the committee does a particularly good job in combating subversion, 
immediately the propaganda wheels start moving to blacklist it and 
blackmail and blacken at least its reputation. This we would have to 
face also with the Freedom Academy doing its job. Just how could 
we counteract this sort of counterpropaganda ? 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 999 

Mr. Grant. Do you mean attacking the Freedom Academy itself ? 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Yes, not as a legitimate institution of the Govern- 
ment. 

Mr. Grant. Well, I certainly hope that the President will appoint 
to the Freedom Commission not just scholars and professional edu- 
cators, but experts on nonmilitary conflict and persons who are suf- 
ficiently good politicians to know their way around and how to handle 
that sort of situation. I think it can be handled, but I think it will 
depend very much upon the caliber of appointments to the Com- 
mission. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. That brings me to the next question. I realize 
you said the Commission would select these, but is there anything that 
would prevent infiltration, for instance, in the area of teaching m the 
Academy ? Wlio would be responsible ? 

Mr. Grant. This committee is more expert on security legislation 
than I am. However, the Freedom Commission bill has one rather 
lengthy section dealing with the security checks which will be made 
upon members of the faculty and staff and, permissively, upon stu- 
dents where it is desirable. Part of that was copied from the Atomic 
Energ}^ Commission Act, which has rather stringent security regu- 
lations. I have gotten some kickbacks from some liberals, because 
they think that the security provisos we have in this bill are too 
stringent. I don't think so. I think the Commimists and the Soviet 
Union will recognize that this Freedom Academy represents the 
greatest threat to the expansion of world communism they have faced 
up to this time, and I think they will make every effort to discredit 
this school and, if they can't completely discredit it, to infiltrate it. 
If they didn't do that, I would be insulted, because it means that we 
haven't set up as effective an institution as we should have. 

I think the Freedom Academy might even rate a higher priority 
for infiltration than, for example, the CIA. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. What about the students? Would you invite a 
student — let's assume, for instance, one of the Cuban students who was 
involved would wish to attend the school ? 

Mr. Grant. Well, as I say, the security check on students is permis- 
sive. We did it for this reason. If you are bringing in 10,000 pri- 
vate citizens a year to give them a 2-week quickie course, you can't 
run a full FBI field investigation on each of them, obviously. It is 
administratively impossible. Most of these people, even if there are 
a few sour apples who get a few weeks of training, are not in a posi- 
tion to hurt us very much anyway. On the other hand, if you bring 
in people for 2 years of training, I think they should be given a very 
careful security check. 

There will be no problem as to Government employees and private 
citizens in this country. I presume we will run into something of a 
problem here in training foreign nationals. I will not attempt to 
spell this out, but I think it is something we have to leave up to the 
good sense of the Freedom Commission. I think we have plenty of 
authority there for them to run a stringent security check to the 
extent they feel it is necessary. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. IcHORD. Let's take a hypothetical case as to how you envision 
fighting the cold war against communism in a given country X. Of 



1000 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

course, in the battle against communism, there may be some of our 
allies who might not have what we consider the most desirable form 
of government. And this, I think, is oftentimes the case. 

In country X, where they have a rather despotic regime, the Com- 
munists are threatening to "take over. How are we going to go about 
fighting political warfare in such a country? It does not do any 
good to go down and tell the people, "Look at it from our side. You 
want freedom, liberty, dignity of the individual." They do not even 
have that to begin with. It is a matter of choices that they are mak- 
ing, right there on the spot, between, let's put it this way, evil and 
less evil. 

How do we go about fighting political warfare in sucli a country ? 

Mr. Grant. How do we or how do the nationals of that country ? 

Mr. IcnoRD. Well, how do we help the nationals? Are we going 
to sell them on the idea of supporting their own government ? Most 
of the people might not be behind their own government. Now, we 
do have situations like that, you will agree ; do you not ? 

Mr. Grant. I think so, and since this record will be printed, I would 
not mention specific illustrations. I am sure the members of the com- 
mittee could. 

To make your question even more explicit, country A in Latin 
America is ruled by a man we consider a dictator, or at least a benevo- 
lent dictator. Now, what do we teach students who come from that 
country, first of all, at the Freedom Academy ? 

Mr. IcHORD. Yes. 

Mr. Grant. First of all, we teach those students all about world 
communism and, particularly, Communist conflict doctrine. No 
problem there. 

Number two, and now mind you I am expressing my personal opin- 
ion — and what the opinion of the Freedom Commission will be if the 
Ijill goes through, I don't know — is that we teach them the operational 
techniques and the organizational forms to prevent the Communists 
from taking over all sorts of organizations — student organizations, 
peasant organizations, intellectual groups, and so forth — and to coun- 
ter the effects of Communist propaganda and psychological warfare. 
And in those instances where the Communists have already captured 
these organizations, we teach them the operational devices, the opera- 
tional techniques, by which they can be recaptured. 

Now, we can still go into that without necessarily running head on 
into your problem here as to whether we are going to do anything 
that "in effect would be implied as deliberately undermining the head 
of state who is friendly to us, although we are not completely in agree- 
ment with the form of government. 

Number three, I think that we would teach them about free insti- 
tutions, free labor unions, peasant organizations; how to set up and 
run a student organization; and certain things, ideas which could be 
specially significant in strengthening the economy of their country, 
like settingup of a savings and loan association. There are endless 
possibilities. 

We can go into many of these things without running head on into 
your problem. I think it would be very poor policy at the Freedom 
Academy to carry on training where we consciously set out to over- 
throw an existing head of state in a particular country — especially one 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1001 

who is friendly to the U.S. We must also recognize that in some 
underdeveloped areas the people do not seem ready for democracy as 
we know it in this country. 

Now, this is going to be something that is going to have to be worked 
out, and a great deal of thought is going to have to be given to it, but 
I think that the very fact that this training is available and some 
of the dictator's own people can be brought in, we can do much to 
make sure this is a benevelent form of dictatorship which has the 
best interests of the people in mind, rather than an extremely repres- 
sive dictatorship which does not have the best interests of the people 
in mind. There is all the difference in the world between a benevolent, 
autocratic ruler and a Communist ruler. There is the difference be- 
tween daylight and darkness for the people who live there. I think 
the very presence of the Freedom Academy and the type of free insti- 
tutions we propose will tend, I think over the long haul, to cause some 
autocratic rulers to gradually modify their rule and bring in more and 
more free institutions and to carry out significant land reform while 
frustrating attempted Communist leadership of peasant groups, stu- 
dents, etc. I think that the Freedom Academy will lead in that direc- 
tion. 

Finally, the student, being thoroughlj^ familiar with Communist- 
conflict doctrine, will know how to prevent the leadership of reform 
movements or revolutions from falling into Communist hands as 
happened in Cuba, and he will be motivated to act. 

There is a problem as to what extent we should discuss at the Acad- 
emy an ideologj^ of freedom. Frankly, I feel we have been too defen- 
sive and inhibited about this. Ours is a pluralistic society, but there 
is a rather broad underlying consensus. I believe this should be 
thoroughly argued out in the seminars without any attempt to impose 
a school solution. This is already being done at the War Colleges. 
And I believe foreign students should have ample opportunity to go 
into this also. Again, I believe this will lead toward a peaceful evolu- 
tion in the case of your Latin dictators. 

This is an involved question, and I am only projecting a few ideas. 
Mr. IcHORD. Now, in your statement, you referred to three versions 
of the bills before the committee being drafted in your office. . We have 
five bills before the committee, and I see that Mr. Boggs' bill and Mr. 
Taft's bill are identical. 

Mr. Grant. That is the bill I am supporting today, sir. 
Mr. IcHORD. You are supporting Mr. Boggs and Mr. Taft? 
Mr. Grant. The Boggs-Taft bill, that is correct, and that is the 
bill that Congressman Herlong is supporting. 

INfr. TcTiORD. Yon drafted the Herlong bill ? The Herlong bill was 
drafted in your office, too? 

Mr. Grant, Yes, sir. And also most of the language in the other 
bills. When Congressman Schweiker last October decided to in- 
troduce the Freedom Academy bill, inadvertently then, I suspect, but 
T cannot speak for the Congressman — it may not have been, but I 
believe inadvertently somebody sent him the original bill introduced 
back in 1959 and he reintroduced that, which is the identical bill which 
Herlong and Judd introduced in 19,59; and Mr. Herlong explained 
that this morning, but T think the language has been greatly improved 
and strengthened in the intervening time, and the final bill, the final 
revised bill, is the Boggs-Taft bill. 



1002 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Mr. IcHORD. Now, in the Boggs-Taft bill, you do have foreign stu- 
dents being trained in the Freedom Academy only with the approval 
of the Secretary of State. 

Mr. Grant, Yes, sir. 

Mr. IcpiORD. That is where you get into the broad policy matters 
there. 

Mr. Grant. That is in the Boggs-Taft bill. By requiring the ap- 
proval of the Secretaiy, we get away from the idea of the Freedom 
Commission making policy. 

Mr. IcHORD. The Herlong bill did not provide for a security check 
on the members of the Commission. What kind of security check do 
you have in the Boggs bill ? 

Mr. Grant. None of the bills do, and for this reason : I could not 
find any legislation where any conunission appointed by the Presi- 
dent, where the membei^ of the commission, by the specific provisions 
of the bill, have to have a security check. That is always done for the 
employees, but not, for example, for a Commissioner of the ICC or 
member of the CAB ; nor for any of the boards and commissions we 
have in Washington is that required, but I understand that it is au- 
tomatic procedure that every Presidential appointeee to a Federal 
board or commission gets a full FBI investigation. 

If we had provided for a mandator}^ investigation here, it would 
have been the only existing legislation that did that and we thought 
that might have subjected us to a lot of criticism and would have been 
an indirect reflection upon the President himself. Now, this commit- 
tee may think that is necessary, and I had one member of this commit- 
tee who is not here today tell me back 5 years ago he very much wanted 
that in there. 

Mr. IcHORD. Well, it was my thinking that when I came to the 
committee that we would probably be hearing principally the Herlong 
bill and I did not read the Boggs bill in its entirety. 

Mr. Grant. You will find the security is identical in both bills. 

Mr. IcHORD. In the Boggs bill, whom do you have making reports 
to Congress? I know in the Herlong bill the Advisory Committee 
makes the report to Congress. 

Mr. Grant. It is the same in the Boggs bill. 

Mr. IcHORD. Why do you have the Advisory Committee making the 
report to Congress rather than the Commission itself? 

Mr. Grant. Well, the Conunission itself will be reporting to Con- 
gress every year at appropriations time anyway. We thought if the 
Advisory Committee reported to the Congress that would be somebody 
independent of the Freedom Academy or of the Freedom Commis- 
sion, but througlily familiar with their work and they could make an 
independent, critical analysis of what the Commission and Academy 
are doing to Congress every year. I think it is much better to have 
an independent, critical analysis made than have an evaluation pre- 
pared by people who, in effect, are evaluating themselves, which I do 
not think is too satisfactory. 

As I say, when the Freedom Commission goes before appropria- 
tions, there is going to be a very thorough inquiry anyway, and the 
Commission and Academy will be making continuing reports, I 
imagine, all the time, if requested by the Congress and the White 
House. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1003 

Mr. IcHORD. Now, the only control that Congress is going to have 
over the Commission is through the appropriation process. The Gub- 
ser bill sets up a joint committee of the Congi-ess to act pretty much 
as a watchdog of the Commission. Wliat do you think about the 
Gubser bill provision ? 

Mr. Grant. I think that is very desirable, but I understand that the 
Republican and Democratic leadership was very much opposed to set- 
ting up any more of these joint committees of the Senate and House 
and, therefore, we left it out of the bill because we thought it would 
be a millstone around the bill's neck. 

Mr. IcHORD. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. I miderstand you will be around during the rest 
of these hearings. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. The chances are we will be 
calling on you some more. 

Is Dr. Possony with us ? 

Dr. Possony is director of the International Political Studies Pro- 
gram, Hoover Institution on War, Revolution, and Peace, at Stanford 
University. It happens that in 1959 this committee had a consultation 
with Dr. Possony which was subsequently published under the title 
Language as a GommMnist Weapon. We have quite a biographical 
account of you. Doctor. 

Dr. Possony is the author of A Century of ConfUct, T onioi^roiD' s 
'War., Strategic Air Power., Lenin., International Relations (with Dr. 
Robert Strausz-Hupe) , and Geography of Intellect (with Nathaniel 
Weyl, and a contributor to A Foriuard Strategy for Amer'wa. 

He was on the faculty of Georgetown University from 1946 to 1961. 
He was born in Austria, educated there and in Germany and holds a 
Ph. D. degree from the University of Vienna. 

After the Anschluss, he made his way to Paris and worked for the 
French Foreign and Air Ministries. He came to the United States 
in 1941, and joined the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton on 
a Carnegie Fellowship. He later served with the Pyschological War- 
fare Branch, Office of Naval Intelligence, where he headed the Ger- 
man and Italian Sections. 

In 1952 he served on the faculty of the National War College in 
Washington, D.C., and in 1955 he became an associate of the Foreign 
Policy Research Institute at the University of Pennsylvania. He has 
taught courses on communism, psychological warfare, geopolitics, po- 
litical philosophy, and on strategy and revolution in the 20th century. 

He has served as a trustee of the American Military Institute and a 
member of the editorial board of Air Power Historian. He is a mem- 
ber, editorial board, of Orhis., a quarterly on world affairs published 
by the Foreign Policy Research Institute, University of Pennsylvania. 

This is quite a sketch. Doctor, that we have in our record and with 
that background, we welcome you. 

STATEMENT OF STEFAN T. POSSONY 

The Chairman. Where are you located now, Doctor? 

Dr. PossoNT. In Stanford, California. I am director of Interna- 
tional Political Studies at the Hoover Institution. 

Mr. Ichord. Mr. Chairman, do we have prepared copies of the doc- 
tor's statement ? 



1004 PROVIDING FOR CREATIOISr OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman". Yes. I have, however, only one copy and I had to 
give it to the reporter for the record. 

Dr. PossoNY. Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to read the entire 
statement. To save time I will summarize it. 

The Chairman. Well, that is most satisfactory with us, as a matter 
of fact. 

' Dr. PossoNY. The first few pages say that both political parties in 
the counti-y have not, in my judgment, taken the Communist threat 
seriously enough and usually throw out a few arguments during elec- 
tion time, but otherwise consider the threat as a relatively minor 
problem. In my judgment, the extremism we have at the present 
moment, both on the right and the left, is in part attributable to the 
fact that the country basically remains quite poorly informed about 
communism. 

It is very difficult to inform the average American citizen or the 
busy decision-maker about communism because learning about com- 
munism is a full-time job. Certainly we do not want to transform 
every American suddenly into a full-time student of communism. It 
would be a fast way to lose the struggle. 

On the other hand, part-time students are handicapped. I think 
one of the main features of the Freedom Academy would be to make 
it possible for the man who has other obligations to acquire the in- 
formation that he needs as a citizen and as a person who may be called 
upon to defend this country in battle. 

The understanding of communism on the part of the American 
people is not going to improve by itself. The Communists are doing 
a great deal of work in what they call misinformation. At the same 
time, the world Communist movement which no longer has the simple 
setup that it had in the period when Moscow was the only controlling 
center of monolithic communism is a matter of the past. We have 
a "split" of sorts, or several "splits," throughout the Communist world 
movement. I do not mean to imply that this split will lead to conflict 
between the Communist states, but we certainly have a divergence of 
view among at least three wings in the Communist world movement. 
We have a left radical wing ; we have a center wing, which is the one 
located in Moscow ; and we have reformist parties in the Communist 
movement ; and these people 

The Chairman. That would be what country ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Poland and Yugoslavia, for example. I think there 
are some elements in the Soviet Union, too, which would be re- 
formist. There is a strong reformist wing in Hungary, for example. 

So we no longer have the old, simple, and single monster we had 
under Stalin. It becomes, of course, much more difficult to study all 
these variations. 

I think at the present moment you have a major attempt by the 
Soviets to convey the image that they are engaged in what is known 
as peaceful coexistence. This is a term which is very easily misunder- 
stood by Americans. We consider coexistence to be a program of 
peace in our time, peace in the American style. According to the 
Soviets, coexistence is a strategy ; the term has been chosen to deceive. 
Yet there are many complications about peaceful coexistence inside 
the Communist camp- The Chinese are attacking the Soviets for 
"reformism." It is certainly true that the peaceful coexistence strat- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1005 

egj is a long way from the more militant strategy which Lenin pro- 
posed and which Stalin pursued at critical junctures. 

The long and short of it is that, at the present moment, the enemy 
has succeeded in creating confusion in the minds of many Americans 
and throughout the Western alliance. We also suffer from intellec- 
tual weakness and laziness. The study of communism for the sur- 
vival of all of us is just about as important as the study of physics 
or medicine. If you were to organize our study courses on physics 
like we have conducted the study of communism, we would hardly 
have running water in our homes. We would still be in the caves, and 
faucets, of course, would not be "cost effective," according to the pres- 
ent nomenclature of the Defense Department. But we also would 
have no cars, no planes, and no spacecraft. 

If the study of medicine were organized like we have organized the 
study of the greatest threat this Nation and world freedom have ever 
been facing, the Black Death of the Middle Ages still would be with 
us and our life expectancy would be that of the Troglodytes. 

Now, I would like to turn to two specific points in the Freedom 
Academy bill. First, I would like to talk about the library. 

In my judgment, the Freedom Academy should include a library, 
collecting the materials that are indispensable to the study of the 
Communist threat. It will surprise many Americans to learn that 
such an adequate repositoiy of documentation does not exist. By the 
end of World War I, Herbert Hoover, who later became President of 
the United States, was one of the few men who correctly diagnosed 
the Communist danger. He foresaw the impact of communism on 
world peace and he also realized that university and public libraries 
do not have the materials needed for the study of revolutionary 
movements. 

Accordingly, he established what was later to become the Hoover 
Institution for War, Revolution, and Peace. The institution possesses 
the country's foremost collection of the required documentation. I 
may add that the present value of Hoover Institution holdings is esti- 
mated at something like $25 million. If we at the institution were to 
put our holdings on the market we would probably fetch this much. 
Of course, it never cost that much to acquire, but it took over 40 years 
to collect these holdings. 

We are very proud of our collections, which are continuing to grow. 
We are also proud of the fact that we were the academic institute which 
pioneered the systematic study of communism, not just in this country 
but, if I am not mistaken, anywhere in the world. There are, nat- 
urally, other libraries such as the Library of Congress and a few Euro- 
pean libraries and archives which possess substantial holdings, but the 
total number of such libraries is small and access to archives leaves 
much to be desired. Documentation has great and serious gaps and 
valuable source materials are lost everj^ day because many knowledge- 
able people do not know how to preserve their own private collections 
for the purposes of the researcher and historian. 

A case is known of an ambassador of a country which became a satel- 
lite — tliis man did not know what to do with his collection and file and 
turned the documents over to a village priest. The village priest did 
not know what he had in hand, and one fine day this invaluable ma- 
terial was sold as old paper. 



1006 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Library capabilities have not been keeping pace with the growth of 
research requirements. Let me illustrate with one example. There 
is in this country no complete set of Latin American newspapers and 
magazines. In fact, we do not have in all the American libraries put 
together a complete run of just Communist newspapers published in 
Latin America, a far smaller requirement. Only a few of the im- 
portant South American newspapers are to be found in U.S. libraries 
and frequently, of those Latin American papers that are being bought, 
only random issues are available. 

(At this point Mr. Ashbrook entered the hearing room.) 

Dr. PossoNY. My judgment would be that over the last 30 years we 
obtained nationwide, at best, 10 percent of the newspapers published 
in Latin America. The Castro catastrophe must in part be ascribed 
to our dearth of documentation. Needless to say that with respect to 
African and Asian newspapers, brochures, and books, the situation 
is even worse. 

It is quite clear why these gaps exist. The average library does 
not have the funds to buy large groups of papers nor the incentive 
to do so, nor the funds to microfilm or house these bulky holdings. 
There is little interlibrary coordination in acquisition programs. 
There are, I know, purchasing organizations through which materials 
tliat are hard to acquire can be obtained, but the efforts are small. A 
worldwide newspaper acquisition program, even a more limited pro- 
gram for the acquisition of Communist periodicals, the establisliment 
of a complete library of Communist materials, is beyond the resources 
of private libraries as presently funded. 

Although better coordination of library acquisition programs is 
feasible and desirable, a special institution with ample finances seems 
required. 

Given our present library resources, the study of world communism 
is not easy. Sometimes it is quite impossible. Only last week two 
of my students had to change their topic. One was unable to find 
documentation on the present disputes between the Soviet and Chinese 
wings in the Communist Party of India. The other student did not 
have enough data to determine the French Communist Party line with 
respect to the Spanish Civil War. 

There is no doubt that several weeks of library research might have 
provided considerably more information. The point is, however, that 
2 weeks of bibliographic research in three major libraries on the West 
Coast, plus the Library of Congress catalog, plus the Union catalog, 
did not yield a supply of primary source materials that would have 
been adequate for a good study. 

If documentation is to be of use in decision-making, it must permit 
fast research. Only an adequately supplied library facility will per- 
mit both fast work and research in depth. Hence, the Freedom 
Academy needs a library of a special type. 

The function of this library would not be to duplicate existing hold- 
ings although, of course, it must acquire a substantial nmnber of 
books and brochures. The primary function of this library, as I see 
it, should be : 

(a) to establish a specialized U.S. and NATO-wide catalog of 
pertinent materials ; 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1007 

(b) to supplement existing library holdings with materials for the 
collection of which funds usually are lacking in universities — for ex- 
ample, newspaper series ; 

(c) to enable persons who have had experience in operations, in- 
cluding refugees and former Communists, to write down their experi- 
ences ; 

(d) to engage the services of a whole battery of translators, so that 
foreign language materials can be exploited effectively ; 

I don't suggest translators for the major European languages, but 
there are many exotic languages which have to be handled in one way 
or the other, and you just simply do not have the language facilities 
on any campus or in the Government. You have to have this trans- 
lating staff. 

(e) to provide cleared researchers — this would be Government 
security-cleared persons — both classified and unclassified documen- 
tation. 

One of the great difficulties I found when I was in the Government 
is that the classified is kept separate from the unclassified documen- 
tation. There is a perfectly good reason why you separate the 
classified mf ormation ; but if you look for data and you are restricted 
by the geography and regulations of your place to using, by and large, 
only classified information, you do not really get the whole story. 

This library should become a national research center where non- 
Government people can do research work and some people are able 
to integrate the various types of information. It should support pri- 
vate research organizations which presently are grappling with these 
problems. 

On this point, I would add that we have in this country about 
a dozen or so academic institutions and another dozen operations 
analysis groups which, in terms of library logistics, are hanging in 
thin air. That is, they all, in one way or the other, rely on the Library 
of Congress and some of the libraries in the New York and Boston 
areas, plus the Hoover Institution. Much of the data which they 
really need in order to make valid findings on such things as Com- 
munist strategy, for example, just are not available, certainly not 
available in an easily accessible manner. 

The library, perhaps in cooperation with the National Archives, 
could assume the function of organizing the gradual declassification 
of pertinent information held by the Government. There is a large 
amount of information which is 10 to 20 years old and which would 
have an enormous bearing on the understanding of current operations. 
But it is not being declassified, largely because there is no proper 
mechanism, that is, there is a procedure but no machinery to get the 
work done in the proper quantity and speed. I am sure you gentle- 
men know all about this. 

A not inconsiderable fund is needed to assure that adequate resources 
will be available to the library as soon as the Academy starts func- 
tioning. The library ultimately will handle enormous masses of 
materials, classified and unclassified, in many languages, pertaining 
to all countries, operational techniques, and ideologies, and will co- 
operate with an international network of libraries. It would be a 
waste of time and money to have the students search endlessly for 
books and reports, but precisely this would happen if there were an 

30-471— 64— pt. 1 6 



1008 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

old-fashioned catalog. Therefore, I propose that the bill provide for 
an electronic data-handling system and for substantial reproduction 
facilities. 

There should, for example, be a file on case studies, a file on special 
techniques, and a biographic file, among others. If you want to go 
today and start researching on a subject like defeatist propaganda, 
or something like that, you will have to spend 6 months getting a 
satisfactory bibliography together. There is no need for this inef- 
ficiency in 1964. 

If the data are properly catalogued and you tie the titles and descrip- 
tions into any of a number of electronic data-handling systems, you can 
get the material out fast and you are really able to "interrogate" the 
system. There are quite a number of specialized libraries in Wash- 
ington today which use data-handling systems most successfully. If 
you do not have such a capability, essentially what you do, you pay 
something like three quarters of a researcher's salary for having him 
search library stacks. This is one of the greatest wastes of money 
imaginable. A researcher should spend 90 percent of his time re- 
searching, that is, reading and writing. 

In order to work up speedily the enormous liistorical and documen- 
tary backlog, provisions should be made for a research staff which, ini- 
tially and temporarily, must be fairly large in size. Research findings 
must be made promptly available to ensure the effective functioning 
of the Academy. 

This, of course, is a matter of publications. There are many ways in 
which we can publish. I think that if you have researchers, many will 
publish through the normal, private book-publishing arrangements. 
Others will have access to magazines. I think the library of the 
Academy might do well to publish a sort of a magazine, or a set of 
monographs which can be reproduced in one way or the other. Of 
course, publications that are of a classified nature would not be put on 
the market. But it is important that there be a stream of written 
materials coming out of the Academy. 

I now want to go to the next point and discuss teaching and cur- 
riculum. I would like to suggest that the Academy pattern its in- 
structions after the medical model; that is, premedical in basic sci- 
ences, specific medical education, practical training and internship, 
and, ultimately, specialist training. 

The preparatory education to be provided by the Freedom Academy 
should include such subjects as modem history, geography, physical 
and cultural anthropology, economics, government, sociology, politi- 
cal philosophy, political psychology, international law, elementary 
teclinology, and so forth. These subjects should be taught generally 
in the normal academic manner, except that all the sciences that relate 
to freedom and strategy would be taught according to an integrated 
plan. Thus, the Freedom Academy's curriculum would list the totality 
of the politically relevant sciences, not just isolated portions of indi- 
vidual sciences. 

If you look over the curricula of most universities today, you will 
find that in one way or the other they intimate that they teach all 
tlie sciences, but, unfortunately, most curricula have wide gaps. Many 
subje<;ts are just presented in survey courses. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1009 

If yon deal with strategy seriously, there is no science which at one 
time or the other you will not have to tackle and use at some depth. 
The problem is about the same for a Congressman or a patent 
lawyer, but strategy really is the broadest of all universal disciplines. 
A person may be a specialist in economics, but this does not mean that 
he would know anything about strategy. A few economists may be 
fine strategists, but every strategist must know about economics. 
Strategy is a universal encyclopedic science, and the curriculum and 
the basic instruction of the Academy must be responsive to this fact. 

An important difference between a normal college and the Academy 
would be that the various interpretations of the different schools of 
political thought should be brought out sharply, rather than being 
fuzzed over. For example, economics should be studied with a clear 
realization that there are free enterprise, interventionist, and collec- 
tivist schools and models, with subgroups in each category. It is 
particularly important if you deal with commimism that you under- 
stand the various assumptions and interpretations that are at the 
bottom of these cleavages. There also should be instruction in the 
rules of evidence, in political nomenclature and semantics, in the 
techniques of critical interpretation of political texts, and in scientific 
methodology. 

On the critical interpretation of political texts, I would add that 
lack of interjDretative skill is one of the great failings we have in this 
country. For example, Mr. Khrushchev makes a speech. That speech 
makes headlines in the Ajnerican press, and you can be fairly certain 
that one line will be pulled out of context and it will be mostly that 
line which the United States likes to hear most. That is, if that line 
were the total meaning of the Khrushchev policy, America would be in 
excellent shape, there would be "lasting peace." 

But unfortmiately, there are in most of these speeches a few other 
lines which break into print only very rarely. This sort of selective 
reading creates the wrong impression. Many of the key passages that 
the press leaves out should be memorized by Americans. Those texts 
are more important than happy news. 

In order to study Communist speeches, you have to apply a tech- 
nique like they used to do in the Middle Ages when there were special- 
ists in the exegesis of the Scripture. The Communists are great 
masters in the use of language. They have a specific vocabulary of 
their own. The vocabulary changes ; different terms are used depend- 
uig on the audience ; meanings vary with the position in the text, the 
type of argument, the type of quotation, and the historical reference. 
So all this has to be understood. Communist semantics are not par- 
ticularly difficult once you apply yourself to the problem. The so-called 
Aesopian language is not fundamentally different from the normal 
way in which diplomatic notes are written and which, incidentally, 
whenever the State Department receives one, are carefully analyzed. 
But this interpretative skill is not acquired by osmosis, but results 
from training and practice. A great deal of attention must be given 
to precisely this type of challenge. 

Now, all this still is introductory training. Then follows the main 
instruction course, which I will not bother to read from my prepared 
statement. I liave broken this course down into 10 major areas. I 
will just read the headings. They are: History, ideology, organiza- 



1010 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

tion, states, conflict tecliniques, capabilities, strategy and tactics, coun- 
terstrategies by the freedom systems, vulnerability patterns, and im- 
provements of freedom strategy. 

Now, all this instruction would be instruction on operational mat- 
ters. For example, to read you a few items under conflict techniques : 
Intelligence, propaganda, diplomacy, political warfare, economic 
warfare, subversion, technology, terror, guerrilla, insurrection, dis- 
armament, limited war, blackmail, war, and countermeasures to all of 
these tecliniques. 

Let me read the items under strategy and tactics. It is a shorter 
list. We would study the doctrines of strategy and the tactical doc- 
trine and undertake case studies. We would have case studies on 
special techniques like terror or case studies in an integrated operation 
like, well, the second front in World War II or the war in Korea. 

Now, this would not be cloak-and-dagger, but it would be strictly 
instruction. The operating art or the art of strategy, or the facts of 
strategy, or the history of war, history of conflict, all of those are 
subjects suitable for study. In fact, this is nothing particularly new, 
except that during the last two or three generations, the study of war 
has been eliminated, by and large, from university curricula. Lately, 
the topic has encountered renewed interest. Certainly, you can study 
conflict like any other subject. Actually this is a subject which must 
be investigated by all alert citizens. Study does not imply that you 
prepare yourself for operational assignments. This is a matter of 
knowledge. The Academy is designed only to provide the knowledge 
necessary for, and prerequisite to, the proper conduct of operations 
within the framework of a strategy of freedom. 

When we study vulnerability patterns, I suggest that we study the 
vulnerabilities both of the Communist states and parties and of the 
democratic states and parties. It is important to balance these respec- 
tive vulnerabilities, which are a little different in each case, and under- 
stand them properly. There is no particular reason why we should 
live with unnecessary vulnerabilities. Many of them are perhaps 
intrinsic to our or any democratic system, others are not and could be 
eliminated. 

We should devote a great deal of attention to the improvement of 
freedom strategy. For example, the proposed curriculum includes 
the study of internal security. This committee certainly is the most 
knowledgeable about this subject. I am sure I do not tell you a secret 
if I say that the country at large, and the academic community in 
particular, does not understand the internal security problem. In 
fact, it behaves like Ulysses when he passed the dangerous waters and 
plugged up his ears. When it comes to a point where a President of 
the United States is assassinated, I think it might perhaps be useful 
to open our ears and eyes and consider internal security realistically. 

There is a great deal of argument in the country today whether you 
can avoid war, or must or should surrender. Well, I think this dis- 
couraging debate in part is derivative of the fact that we do not really 
understand the operational arts. I am not implying that it is exactly 
clear that communism can be superseded by peaceful means, but I do 
mean to say that there is a great possibility that this could be done. It 
certainly does not serve the national interest to discuss what every- 
body knows is not going to evaporate as a threat — one fine morning, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1011 

communism will be gone — to discuss this continuing threat like high 
school students would discuss a cure of cancer: "Eesolved that the dis- 
ease of cancer is detrimental to human welfare." 

On strictly logical grounds, three denouements are conceivable: 
One is war, which none of us wants. The other is surrender, which 
none of us wants either. So you are confronted with the conduct of 
the cold war which means, essentially, that we would be aiming at the 
peaceful superseding of communism. 

Now, whether that can be done or not, I do not know, but this 
strikes me as being the foremost problem of the world today. A prob- 
lem of that complexity and significance will have to be studied objec- 
tively, thoroughly, and on a very advanced level. 

The curriculum I indicated here looks very full and it is very full, 
but the actual instruction time can be cut down considerably, for 
example, through effective textbooks, which would have to be put 
together in the Academy, and a flow of case study materials. 

Furthermore, students who are accepted by the Freedom Academy 
could be selected on the basis of achievements in a preliminary corre- 
spondence course. 

Since I mentioned a correspondence course, I would make the sug- 
gestion that full use be made of this flexible technique. The Indus- 
trial College of the Anned Services has pioneered in this within the 
Government and it has been extremely successful. It is not absolutely 
necessary that the student take a long vacation from his job, repair to 
a particular facility, and sit through a large number of lectures. A 
great deal can be done in a correspondence course. 

After mastering the subject matter, the student could be assigned 
to the special study of problems that are of professional concern to 
him. For example, a newspaper man might analyze the contents of 
the paper with which he is connected and formulate an improvement 
plan. A business man might analyze how his export trade is related 
to the cold war. A priest might reread his sermons and a Congress- 
man might reevaluate his speeches and votes. All might contemplate 
how the flow of information through the country, the business world, 
the universities, the public opinion media, and the Government could 
be improved. We need a larger stream and one that is less polluted. 

Graduate, postgraduate, and refresher study should be tailored to 
meet the specific requirements of the individual. But provisions 
should be made to develop special skills in all the major topical areas, 
both among instructors and graduates. 

I may add at this point that the Air University at Maxwell Air 
Force Base, Alabama, has pioneered in developing an installation 
which I think could very well serve as a model for the Freedom 
Academy. The Air University comprises many parts, many different 
schools, including schools for "generalists" and "specialists." It has 
a fairly large body of students, in fact, a very lar^e body, and it 
operates both for American citizens who are in the Air Force as well 
as in the other services and in the State Department. It also handles, 
under various arrangements, foreign students. It does operate at 
different levels of classification. 

In other words, you have an organization at Maxwell which several 
years ago had to face problems similar to those which we are facing 
today with the Freedom Academy. The subject matter to be taught is 



1012 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

extremely complicated and voluminous. It cannot be in toto imparted 
to any one student and should not be. Hence, we have to split up this 
complex and tailor the study courses to the specific needs of specific 
types of students. A mission of this sort requires substantial staif work 
and readjustments of academic and governmental routmes. But the 
feasibility of such an undertaking, m my judgment, is beyond any 
doubt. 

I wholeheartedly recommend the establisliment of the Freedom 
Academy at the earliest practical moment. 

This concludes my formal statement, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Thank you, doctor. I would like to ask you just 
two or three questions. 

I can see very well the attitude of the State Department, of the Gov- 
ernment, toward this bill. I do not want to imply or impute any bad 
motives to the State Department in its opposition to this bill. I am 
trying to develop information. So let me ask you two or three 
questions. 

In a totalitarian state— let's say in the Iron Curtain countries — they 
are specialists in propaganda and they have propaganda ministries; 
but there the schooling, the teaching, the indoctrination, the knowledge 
set out for whoever attends these seminars and schools is given under 
government control. 

Xow here, this bill — and I am being very frank and I am raking the 
other side of the issue — in a way, would divorce the institution from 
government. How can that be done, in a democracy ? To have this 
Commission and Academy not part of government, how can that 
work ? I am taking the other side of the coin. You taught political 
philosophy. Do I make myself plain ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Yes, I think so. 

The Chairman. How can that work ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, it should not be a divorce a vinculo or even a 
niensa et thoro. 

The Chairman. Well, I am not talking about ending matrimony 
novr, but sort of a separation from bed and board here. 

Dr. PossoNY. Separation of policy and knowledge. Well, I don't 
see that this is any more difficult than the establishment of a State 
university. It is a specialized university, certainly, but it is a univer- 
sity which is autonomous, and the Government comes in essentially 
on two points. One is that the resource question has to be handled 
through the Federal purse, unfortunately. Maybe this is not entirely 
true. Maybe there can be other arrangements, such as private grants 
and endowments, but most of it certainly will have to come through 
the Federal purse. The second is that much of the information would 
come from G-overnment sources. 

The Chairman. Would the provision of the bill dealing with the 
Advisory Committee be a partial answer to that, that there would be 
a link with government agencies? Would that be a partial answer 
to my worry-wart question ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, the Advisory Committee should include private 
])eople, I would think, and would consist both of public and private 
individuals — Government experts, private experts, and acadenic 
persons. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1013 

The Chaikim^vn. Well, the committee as explained would be com- 
posed mostly — and if I am wrong, I wish somebody would correct 
me — of people from Department of State, Department of Defense, 
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Central Intelligence 
Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, International Cooperation 
Administration, United States Information Agency. The advisory 
group, the group advising the Commission, would come from these 
agencies, and therefore there would be a link with the Government. 
Would that answer this criticism which probabl}?^ will be advanced 
by the Government agencies against this bill ? 

Dr. PossoNY. I don't know whether it answers the criticism, I have 
no doubt that a strong — 

The Chairman. Well, we have been told, and we have letters, that 
the Government agencies, for lack of a better word, are against this 
bill. 

Dr. PossoNY. All right. 

The Chairman. And assuming that they are against this bill on 
the sincere premise that you can't divorce, you can't separate an 
agency of this kind from the Govermnent, they will advance the argu- 
ment, I expect, and I want to be able to examine them just as I am 
examining you. 

Dr. PossoNY. I don't see the argument being too valid. Let's look 
at the Department of Defense and the service academies. Or the 
Department of Health, which certainly does not run all the medical 
schools. 

In other words, you have in such areas as Defense, a college-type 
institution, Annapolis or West Point. Those are training organiza- 
tions exactly like the Freedom Academy. There are many more 
schools at a higher level. These schools do not make policy and they 
don't carry out military operations and, to a large extent, they are 
academically autonomous. They do not, and certainly should not, 
teach a "party line." They train people, and the trained men go 
into the service, where they participate in operations and policy- 
making. 

In the Department of Health, there is the reverse situation. The 
Health bureaucracy needs physicians, and they get the doctors from 
the private sector and from the universities. 

The Chairman. I know I haven't made my point clear. Appar- 
ently, the Government agencies, those I have named, particularly 
the State Department, take the position that instead of having a 
Freedom Academy and a Freedom Commission, as proposed here, 
there should be instead an Academy of Foreign Affairs 

Dr. PossoNY. Yes. 

The Chairiman. — under the domination, let us say, of the State 
Department. Because I suspect they will say, "You can't deal in these 
sensitive areas without the Government being at the head or centrally 
involved in it." 

Wliat I was asking was : Would the fact that— though this would be 
separated from the Government and would be a Freedom Academy 
and a Commission extending out as an independent agency — would 
the fact that part of that Academy or Commission, that they be 
obligated to have an advisory group connected with Government, be 
an answer to their opposition — that is the point I am trying to make — 
or a partial answer? 



1014 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, the only answer I can give to that, Mr. Willis, 
is that I should certainly hope so. It is, after all, a fact that unless 
you do have the support by the Government in terms of information, 
in terms of exp^ei-ience, in terms of lectures, tliis Freedom Academy 
isn't going to be very successful. Conversely, a significant and per- 
haps the most significant part of the student body will be Govern- 
ment people who have to be trained, or given additional training. 

So the fact is that there has to be a very close link between the 
Government and the Freedom Academy, and that link could be pro- 
vided in this fasliion. 

The Chairman. Through this advisory group. 

Dr. PossoNY. Through this advisory group. Furthermore, it can 
be provided through many other links. But there should not be Gov- 
ernment domination, and there should be no party lines and no censor- 
ship of nonconformist viewpoints. There must be broad exposure 
to various interpretations and ideas. 

The Chairman. Now let me ask a few questions along that line, 
and they are sensitive questions. I am assimiing that the agencies of 
Government, the State Department, will send one or more witnesses 
here, and say, "Wo are opposed to this approach. We think the right 
approach is the National Academy, under the closest supervision" — 
I call it domination — "of the State Department." 

And I have asked you whether a partial answer to that rigid posi- 
tion of opposition would be the fact that we can say, "Well, now hold 
on. We are not snubbing you. You are to be part of this, you are 
to have an advisory group from State. You are to have, probably, 
lecturers among this Academy faculty." 

I expect that they will still maintain a position of opposition. Can 
you suggest any other means to sell this institution, somewhere down 
the line, so it will be acceptable? Because, you see, you are reason- 
ing as a philosopher, and on the idea that this Academy must be, 
that we should have it. But our problem is that we have to try to sell 
it. There are some people in this country who — let's be rough about 
it — don't want the National Academy, because they don't trust, let's 
say in quotes "trust," the State Department, and they won't buy it, 
though they feel that something should be done. 

Therefore, they want this Freedom Academy approach, and they 
even have some distrust of this approach. 

Now, how do we resolve that? How do we work out something? 
If you can become a politician now, instead of a philosopher, do you 
have any thoughts on that ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Yes, sir. This philosopher has been in Washington 
for 18 years. 

The Chairman. Well, you catch what I mean. 

Dr. PossoNY. Yes. The point, I think, is this : The State Depart- 
ment, as a service, has a requirement for an upper level school for 
their own people. I would not dispute this for one minute. In fact, 
they do have this Foreign Service Institute, which is modeled, to 
some extent, after the National War College and the service col- 
leges. Now what they are proposing is essentially an enlargement 
of this upper level Foreign Servdce Institute. This is their substitute 
for the Freedom Academy. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1015 

But these are two entirely different animals. The Foreign Service 
man ought to get his training on the broad problems of the State 
Department. The experience, of course, has been that training "vvas 
given short shrift in the State Department. The curriculum _ of 
the Foreign Service Institute is quite weak in the areas which I think 
must be studied most if we are not to lose the cold war. The same 
weakness exists in the National "War College. When I was there, we 
had one 6 weeks' course dealing with the Soviet bloc, largely a matter 
of political structure, economics, geography, and current events. Op- 
erational questions were discussed, but treatment was short and super- 
ficial and not based upon adequate documentation. 

Now, one point the State Department, I think, does not even con- 
template, which I think is one of the most important elements here, 
is the need for fundamental research. 

What you get in the service colleges and in the State Department 
school is tlie elder statesman, the higher ranking officer, the "super- 
grade" telling the student body what is on his mind now — current 
problems, with very little depth. Twelve years ago I listened to a 
State Department representative telling before the Christmas vaca- 
tion that we had won the cold war already. You need time out for 
comic relief, but the serious study is not serious enough. 

You would have to get at an entirely different type of research, 
with a great deal of output in terms of textbooks. I discussed this 
when I talked about the library. The Freedom Academy will be 
an entirely different operation, to start out with. 

The other point which the State Department does not cover: you 
can't put private citizens into the State Department school. You 
can certainly not put foreign citizens there. The Freedom Academy 
is based on the philosophy that the country at large has to be trained, 
must understand this Communist threat as a nation, and our allies, 
together with us, have to understand it better. Well, let's take a 
specific case. I think that one of the primary type of students 
should be the congressional assistant. A lot of people who work 
here in Congress, who do a lot of your staff work, should go to 
a school teaching the facts of international life. 

Where could tliey go today ? There is no school for them. Can 
you send them over to the State Department? Of course, you can't. 
It wouldn't work. Furthermore, the facilities are much too small for 
that. You have quite a number of assistants in Congress today wlio 
would be qualified for, or should be given, this training, certainly 
several hundred people. Tlie State Department has barely enough 
slots for their own people. 

Now there are many additional types of prospective students. Pri- 
orities will have to be defined, but I would not exclude anyone from 
participation in the Freedom Academy. We are talking about a big 
institution. 

The Chairman. Well, just a couple of more questions, and I asked 
almost the same thing of Mr. Grant a while ago. You envisage 
quite a library that will put out a wealth of informed material. 
That material will be printed. It will be distributed. It must be, 
or it would be useless. 

Now, as a matter of international relations, if this Academy is 
set up, could our Government say to foreign countries, "Now look, 



1016 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

this material comes out of this Academy, but it must not be read as 
foreign policy material." How can that be done? And if it is for- 
eign policy material, why should we telegraph our punches in public 
documents ? 

Dr. PossoNY. There are three questions. One is you do not pub- 
lish foreign policy papers, unless they are released, like, let us say, 
George Kennan's piece in Foreign Affairs more than 15 years ago. 
Such release would be a deliberate decision by the State Department. 
Here is this piece written, it goes into Foreign Affairs for a par- 
ticular purpose in foreign policy. 

The second case would be a paper written by, let's say, a Foreign 
Service officer, a student of the Academy or by a military officer 
student, and this paper would be written for the internal uses of the 
Government. The paper is classified. The writer, whether a student 
or not, just uses the facilities of the Academy. The paper remains 
classified. The bill reads : 

Nothing in this Act shall authorize the disclosure of any information or 
linowledge in any case in which such disclosure (1) is prohibited by any other 
law of the United States, or (2) is inconsistent with the security of the United 
States. 

The third case is a scholarly piece written by a student or in- 
structor or which was prepared by the research staff. This would 
be a historical or background paper, not a classified operational plan, 
for example. It would be an academic piece, albeit of topical in- 
terest. If it is a good piece of work, it will be released, for exam- 
ple, as a textbook or a case study. The Academy might not bother 
with the whole subject, but the individual authors are their own mas- 
ters — provided no security is involved. 

Would other powers complain? If the academic information is 
accurate, well, if anyone complains about what he does not like — 
of course, they complain- — there's nothing you can do about this. 
If a quotation is alleged to be wrong, let us know, Mr. Communist, 
what the correct quotation is and please give us the original source. 
If the quotation is correct, why do you object to our side interpreting 
what you say? Show us where the interpretation is wrong. This 
sort of dialogue might be quite useful. 

The Chairman. Well, would it be true, also, as indicated by Mr. 
Grant, that these publications would be, to a large measure any- 
way, suggestions made to agencies for improvement of techniques and 
so on in a large measure, rather than position papers ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, there are two types of suggestions you can 
make. One is classified, and the other one is unclassified. When we 
discuss today the Freedom Academy, this is a suggestion made to the 
Government of the United States from the American people to im- 
prove our capabilities to fight the cold war. This is the sort of sug- 
gestion that would never be classified. There should be no obstacles 
to release, either. 

The Chairman. So it would be just in that sense. 

Dr. PossoNY. In that sense, only. Operational matters remain class- 
ified. 

The Chairman. You think the Commission, the work of the Com- 
mission could be sold as, oh, the Work of so many other commissions 
we create, appointed by the President. They make recommendations 



PROVIDING FOR CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1017 

and the world seems to understand that these commission reports are 
not acts of Congress, and are not binding. Do you think we could 
get by with that ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Even if they were binding, even if you follow through 
with the proposal here, the proposal to establish the Freedom Academy, 
thers is no particular reason to keep it classified. It would be entirely 
different if the Commission recommends a new method to apply in 
Vietnam tomorrow. That would be classified. 

The Chairman. You understand that the questions I am asking now 
are not a criticism of the bill, because I suspect that that is what the 
opposition witnesses will be telling us, that it won't work, for these rea- 
sons. I am trying to get the benefit of your views as to why it will. 

Dr. PossoNY. The code of classification is perfectly plain. Anyone 
who ever sat in the Government knows what classification you put on 
a paper. There is a clear-cut definition of what is confidential, secret, 
and so on. The paper has to be classified according to the rules. If it is 
an unclassified paper, it is unclassified. 

Now, there is another point. The Academy, as an academy, is not 
really in the publication business. It is Mr. Student X or Mr. Student 
Y or Professor X or Professor Y who is publishing something, and it is 
his personal work. It is his personal by-line which goes on the product. 

The Chairman". I thought, though, that a while ago you were stress- 
ing the fact — unless I missed your point — that in researching a prob- 
lem the great difficulty was that we had so many classified document-s. 
Now, nothing can be done about that ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Except if the information is subject to declassification, 
you use it as we do it in normal research practice. When you want to 
write a story, let us say, of events in 1938, then you go to the National 
Archives. You get permission to go through the file, you find classified 
documents, you go through a declassification procedure. If declassi- 
fication is accomplished, the scholar will footnote his piece by refer- 
ring, for example, to a communication from the Ambassador to Berlin 
to the State Department. Some papers that cannot be declassified, may 
be used as background information. There is a clear-cut routine in 
all this. It will not be necessary to depart from the established routine. 

The only difference, I hope, which would come out of it is that the 
declassification procedures would be speeded up and that much rele- 
vant material would become usable. 

The Chairman. Would it be a valid objection to this proposal to say 
that these studies could— studies of Communist policies, techniques, 
and aggression — be undertaken through universities and libraries, in- 
stead of this way? 

Dr. PossoNY. The answer to that one is, theoretically they could; 
but, as a matter of practicality, you do not have in any university 
the resources needed to undertake this precise sort of a study effec- 
tively and thoroughly. 

Furthermore, the average university does not have a staff that is ade- 
quate in terms of training, teaching, library management, and so on. 
Hence even a very good student would be unable to give the best ac- 
count of himself. Thirdly, you don't really have in the average uni- 
versity the sophistication and knowledge of the Communist threat that 
would be necessary to do this sort of study properly. The difference is 
one of quality, of better access to the information, and, I would say, of 
judgment. 



1018 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. Well, some of the product, studies, of this Academy, 
this establishment, if established, could be channeled through univer- 
sities. Would that improve the position of universities to go into 
teaching of communism ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, one of the points I made with respect to the 
libraries, for example, but the point is generally valid — is that the 
Academy should be a support agency for the academic community. 
This is particularly necessary in library and microfilm exchange and 
all that sort of thing, but certainly this is also true with respect to — 
well, I am being helped here with the language of the bill. This is in 
section 6, paragraph 3 : 

To provide leadership in encouraging and assisting universities and other 
institutions to increase and improve research, educational, and training pro- 
grams attuned to the global operational needs of the United States. 

So this point is quite well taken. However, there is an obverse to it. 

The Chairman. What is the reality of the apprehension that the 
Academy might fall into "wrong hands" ? 

Dr. PossoNY. May I just finish with the previous question? The 
obverse to this point is that the Freedom Academy should, must, and 
will rely on resources that the private universities make available. 
This system has been in force at the National War College and in the 
other War Colleges. You pull in suitable academic people to serve 
on what you call, loosely, the faculty, and as advisers on the academic 
advisory boards, and certainly as speakers. The AVar Colleges can't 
fill their quotas of speakers from the Washington area and the Govern- 
ment. They could, if they really tried to, but it is unnecessary and it 
is not desirable. It is necessary to bring in different viewpoints, and 
of course, many of these different viewpoints blossom forth in the 
universities, sometimes on the right side, sometimes on the left side. 
So the task is, above all, to improve the total academic potential of the 
United States in the area of communism, of political warfare, and 
of freedom strategy. 

Now with respect to the "false hands," I wrote a few lines and maybe 
I can read those. 

Some have feared that the Academy could fall into the wrong hands. 
The Presidency also could fall into the wrong liands and so could e^'ery 
Cabinet post and every elected and appointed position, but we do not 
abolish our public offices, not only because we need them but because 
also we are confident that we are able to handle and control the misuse 
and abuse of power. Certainly, we are not always successful, but we 
are successful most of the time. As the French say, "The better is the 
enemy of the good." The French poet, Alfred de Musset, was right 
when he said that the desire to possess perfection "is the most danger- 
ous kind of madness." 

Now, the Academy bill has many provisions to handle this particular 
problem. The subject should be considered at great length and with 
great care. It is not a matter, I would say, of security clearances, 
because the man can be the wrong choice despite the fact that he was 
given all the security clearances in the world and there is nothing 
whatever wrong with him. Yet he might be a very bad chancellor if 
he lacks motive, will power, realism, academic probity, administrative 
ability, and so on. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1019 

The bill calls for Senate confirmation. This certainly is a good 
provision. It is one element of control. 

I think we should make reasonably certain — I don't know that you 
put this into the bill, but you might be well advised to do so — that 
there sliould be bipartisan selection of the lecturers. I think you 
should liave provision so that the research staffs are rotated. 

The Chairman. Are what? 

Dr. PossoNY. Rotated. Bringing new people, very frequently. 

I think that the Advisory Committee, perhaps supervisory board 
would be a better term, should include people who are appointed, not 
just by the President, but perhaps also by the congressional majority 
and minority leaders. I don't know whether there is precedent for 
such a solution, but it certainly is not unfeasible. In any event, the 
appointees would have to be examined and interrogated by the Internal 
Security Subcommittee or some other committee. I think your com- 
mittee also should have a voice in this. 

It might be very useful to have a structure where visiting firemen 
are passing through quite frequently, to talk to people, including staff, 
instructors, and students, not just to receive the red carpet treatment. 
Also, a debriefing routine may be instituted, whereby the students or 
some of the professors can be regularly debriefed as to whether the 
school is moving in the right direction. 

Now, having said all this, and we could think of other elements, 
I will make another point : I think it is not conducive to good condi- 
tions in an academic institution when you have too many mutual 
supervisors. Academic institutions are known to be among the worst 
nests of intrigue, and I don't think you would help the situation with 
this type of an arrangement. SupeiTision is necessary to some extent, 
but the point I want to make is this : That the Freedom Academy, un- 
der our philosophy of Government, essentially ought to offer an oppor- 
tunity for self-study. It is the individual who goes there. This indi- 
vidual may be working for the Defense Department or for the State 
Department or for a university, but it is still he himself who goes there 
and who puts the documentation he obtains to his use. Similarly, a 
man can draw his own conclusions, but I don't think you want to in- 
terfere with his freedom to think for himself. The chance you take is 
that most people will learn something and will put it to good use. 

Now, the Freedom Academy is not, and should never be, an indoctri- 
nation outfit, I don't think it would work, I don't think indoctrination 
is a good academic procedure, and I don't thmk you g&t, really, the 
most mileage for your money from this approach. It is much tetter to 
consider the Freedom Academy as a supersophisticated, well-financed, 
well-organized facility for the individual to study in. 

The Chairman. Well, two questions in one. ^Vliom did you envis- 
age the student body to be, and the teachers to be ? 

Dr. PossoNY. The student bod;^ should consist of people in the Gov- 
ernment, who would be selected in approximately the same manner, 
with perhaps a little bit more voluntarism thrown in, as people are 
selected at present for the staff schools and for the War Colleges. 
There could be repeated attendance on the several levels of the Acad- 
emy, just like a regular officer attends the service academy, the Com- 
mand and Staff School, possibly several teclinical schools, and the War 
College. 



1020 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. You mentioned, perhaps, congressional help, too, as 
members of the student body ? 

Dr. PossoNY. Absolutely. 

The Chaikman. People in management, and in labor. 

Dr. PossoNY. That is outside the Government. As a matter of fact, 
the judiciary is a part of the Government, and perhaps some troubles 
we are having are caused by the fact that the judiciary is not too 
sharp with respect to the internal security threat. Attendance by 
jurists and legal assistants might help. I don't know how well this 
suggestion would sit. 

Tiie Chairman. I will go along with it. 

Dr. PossoNY. It is a hopeful possibility. 

Now, management and labor, certainly; newspapers certainly. In 
what way do you select these people I I do not really know, because 
I don't want to suggest that you go, let's say to the National Associa- 
tion of Manufacturers, and say, "All right, give me 10 students." I 
don't think this would work, but you keep slots open for voluntary 
enlistment, so to speak, and send out invitations. There are all kinds 
of postgraduate courses given to business leaders by the various busi- 
ness schools, so the same type of arrangement would be feasible. 

In Washington, I think it would be very important that a large 
portion of the instruction be given in evening classes. At the local 
universities, Georgetown, for example, the graduate school used to 
teach only, or predominantly, evening classes. Wlien I taught there, 
practically every student was a Government person. I always con- 
sidered this one of the greatest advantages of Washington, and one of 
the great strengths of the U.S. Government, that you had so many 
people voluntarily attend the university. 

Now, a lot of the instruction, however, suffers from the fact that you 
have a young instructor — let's say he instructs on India, and a student 
who sits in his class was the last naval attache or the air attache to 
India. The attache knows more than the professor about the subject. 
It happens all the time at Washington universities. If the instructor 
is a wise and reasonable person, this is a great advantage. I'd an- 
ticipate that students in the Academy occasionally will be very knowl- 
edgeable, but their knowledge will be partial. 

Another group of people who should attend our summer courses is 
the academic people. Professors need a great deal of instruction on 
these operational areas, because they are quite innocent about these 
subjects. 

With respect to foreign students, I will put it this way : evolutionary 
growth is probably preferable to a sudden blossoming forth with a 
very large administrative problem. You can't have at once thousands 
of foreigners coming in. I would set up priorities, and I would start 
out with NATO, plus one or the other major countries outside the 
NATO area, and then branch out from there. I would not restrict the 
foreign students to those appointed by their governments. Because 

The Chairman. Say that again. 

Dr. PossoNY. I would not restrict foreign attendance to students 
appointed by the foreign government. Let us say Mr. Nkrumah ap- 
points his boys, and perhaps we want precisely those boys he would 
not appoint. 

The Chairman. Well, there you go into some security check. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1021 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, with respect to security checks, I will say this : 
I would be extremely clear on the classified area: without security 
check, no access to sensitive materials. With respect to the unclassi- 
fied area, I would not be too particularly finicky, because 

The Chairjman. Well, they would find out about that part, anyway. 
I mean, those who would want the information as to the unclassified 
part, democracies such as ours being what they are, they would know 
all about it anyway ; wouldn't they ? 

Dr. PossoNT. The foreign students at our military and civilian 
schools don't gain access to the classified areas and materials. Sup- 
pose you have a Communist from, I don't know, from some unfriendly 
country. One of his reasons for attending the Freedom Academy 
might be to spy on it and find out what is going on. There is no doubt 
that this will happen. 

At the same time, this informer student may pick up something 
which he didn't know beforehand. I am not sure which opinions he 
will be carrying back. I would not be defeatist about this. If the 
man is at all endowed with intelligence, when he sits through these 
classes with open ears he may cease being a very good Communist. I 
don't think the Commmiists will particularly trust him — they can't 
be sure what happened to his convictions. In other words, we must 
see to it that security provisions will not be self-defeating. 

The Chairman. Well, I might have some disagreement with you on 
that score. 

Finally, who would the teachers be ? Lecturers ? 

Dr. PossoNT. I think they would fall into three broad catagories. 
One would be the Government and military person who has had expe- 
rience, who knows and who has been through some phases of this con- 
flict. Many of these people are academically qualified, so it is no 
problem finding good instructors in the foreign and military services. 

The second category would be the academic person with background 
and specialized knowledge. The third type would embrace opera- 
tional persons, let us say, the ex-Communist with operational experi- 
ence, but he doesn't necessarily have to be an ex-Communist, either; 
if you have a union man who fought the Communists in Africa or 
South America, he should be among the instructors. If you have a 
newspaperman who — or, well, a reporter who went through a harrow- 
ing experience like some of our newspapermen who didn't quite catch 
what was going on in Vietnam, and today they may know better. I 
would put these people on and let them tell their stories. Some might 
be a little bit embarrassed, but others will be big enough to report their 
experiences for the benefit of all. 

I would also put on the newspaperman who had a scoop. For ex- 
ample. Max Eastman, an American newspaperman and writer, was 
handed the secret testament of Lenin. That was almost 40 years ago. 
When he returned to this country, he published the secret testament of 
Lenin ; of course, it was immediately branded as a forgery. Naturally, 
it wasn't a forgery and now is printed in Lenin's Collected Worhs, and 
Khi-ushchev authenticated it. Max Eastman was honest and right, 
and the academic community — or that part of it which declared this 
testament a forgery — was wrong and had fallen for propaganda. 

Well, that is the type of experience I would make very sure to make 
available to the Academy. There are dozens of cases of this sort. 



1 022 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

These men should be brought in to cure the professors from the over- 
dose of abstract thinking which sometimes passes as academic ob- 
jectivity. 

Tlie Chairman. All right, my final question : Wliat do the partici- 
pants, the students, quote "students," do with the knowledge they gain ? 

Dr. PossoNY. This is the same question we always get. I am sure 
you gentlemen get it very frequently ; give a speech somewhere, and 
people come up and ask, "Wliat am I supposed to do to save the coun- 
try?" My pet answer to this one is, "Well, there are two parties in 
this country. I don't care which one, go in there and make sure that 
the facts of life are known to the local organization of your party and 
that, accordingly, policies are being decided upon." 

This usually floors them. They don't understand that we have a 
two-party system which is more than a vague abstraction, that one can 
work with it, and that the person interested in security and progress 
should work with it. 

In amplification of this, what the man does depends upon where 
he is and who he is. If you have a newspaperman, and he has been 
through the Academy, well, the next time he goes into the field, I am 
sure he is going to be considerably more attentive to some little tricks 
that the Communists are going to play on him. If you have a business- 
man, he will understand that perhaps the Soviet Union isn't going 
to offer him the great market he thinks is his for the asking. If he is 
a security official, he might be able to make a little bit less mechanical 
decisions as to who is or is not a security risk. Wlierever the man is, 
he will do a better job and he will strengthen our security. 

I think one of the most important changes would occur in the uni- 
versities. One of the greatest weaknesses we are suffering from today 
is that the academic youth which is being brought up is kept in com- 
plete ignorance about the foremost security problems besetting our 
country and the free world. 

Mr. AsHBROOK. I have a couple of questions. 

Two basic questions, one relating to policy and one relating to per- 
sonnel. I think it is going to be awful hard on a new Commission like 
this to avoid policies which the Government is obviously tiying to set 
out in the foreign policy field. Take this example. If we had a Free- 
dom Conunission or a Freedom Academy of this type 2 years ago, when 
the effort was being put forth by the State Department, the so-called 
muzzling the military, and the policies were handed down, and George 
Ball was telling the Freedom Academy in opposition to x4.rleigh Burke 
and the military that the use of the word "victory" denotes a militaris- 
tic range and has a sense of fatality which rules out all possibility of 
accommodation, and this is a very basic policy for a country to take, 
how are you possibly going to gear an overall effort like this into a 
Freedom Academy, which, if it is to operate freely, and we hope it 
will, would certainly have to go in direct contradiction to this type of 
policy ? Because if we have a Freedom Academy to tell people the 
dangers of world communism and how the forces of freedom are going 
to combat it, then it would seem to be impossible to have yourself tied, 
in effect, by a policy which would say, "Well, talking in terms of win- 
ning or victory is certainly bad." 

And this is just one area of policy that probably would come into 
conflict with this, and undoubtedly some of the reason for this opposi- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1023 

tion. How can an independent agency like this operate completely free 
of these overall policies and be meaningful and do its oAvn job? 

Dr. PossoxY. I think the ansver to that one is academic freedom. 
Let's assume you have this "'no wimiing" policy or "no victory" policy. 
In the lirst place, this would be a matter of reporting upon it in the 
courses and in tlie instruction materials, and so on, as an input into 
the documentation. It is a matter of reporting, of absorbing, and also 
of discussion. 

In the second place, insofar as the instruction, the seminars, and the 
study papers are concerned, there must be the Golden Rule that the 
various viewpoints will be presented objectively and fairly. No cen- 
sorship, not even censorship ""for lack of time or space." 

Mr. AsHEROOK. Equal time for appeasement, in other words. 

Dr. PossoNY. Not necessarily that. I would think that — if any 
person tries to argue at great length without showing real compre- 
hension of the problem, I don't think it would go over too well. 

He may have a good point at a given period. Let's not be too dog- 
matic about it. In other words, the idea of an accommodation at one 
point in the historical continuum may be exactly the type of policy 
you want, and this should be brought out. I wouldn't hesitate about 
that. The students should know the whole spectrum of possible poli- 
cies. But, on the other hand, if a man inins counter to a large body of 
evidence, and if the evidence just dosen't support his type of policy, 
I don't think it hurts when he makes his point. And it may help the 
speaker to learn about valid objections. 

I remember very vividly a scene in one of the Government's great 
institutions of learning. A member of the Cabinet made a little 
speech and got flustered by a question — which wasn't meant malici- 
ously — but he got trapped into a wrong answer. This was a perfectly 
lionpolitical question — it dealt with finance and private investment. 
Everyone in that room knew from personal experience that the Secre- 
tary was wrong, and assumed he wanted to be funny. They burst out 
laughing, and the Cabinet member got quite a little irritated, but in 
the end he saw the light. Sometimes these incidents serve a useful 
purpose. 

Mr. AsHBROOK. I think we all agi'ee that we should have all view- 
points presented, but the point I make, which I think you answered 
well by '"academic freedom," is that it is going to be very hard in many 
areas to present a point of view which may be in direct conflict with 
some of the overall policies of the comitry. 

Dr. PossoxY. That, Congressman, if I may say so, is of course one 
of the greatest troubles we liave in the academic community today, 
that we are operating under a phony academic freedom which is vio- 
lated every day, for example, through appointments. Likes appoint 
likes. In some schools and departments, everybody is representing 
the same line, and not always through the scientific method. That is 
the one real danger, more important, I think, than the danger of the 
chancellor of the Academy falling into the wrong hands. He is, after 
all, an administrator, and he will make wrong decisions and good de- 
cisions, but the diversity of the instruction materials, the free discus- 
sion, and the completeness of the libraries, those are key items. You 
find concealed censorship frequently in the university and public li- 
braries. "We don't order this sort of a book. No one reads it." 

30-471— 64— pt. 1 7 



1024 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Who determines who reads it? Or "It isn't important." Who 
says so ? 

The librarian tends to exclude materials he or she doesn't like. The 
budget always offers a good excuse. That is the danger we must avoid. 

Mr. AsHBROOK. I think that is a good answer to my first question. 
My last question, of course, I think you have probably already an- 
swered it in effect, in the fact that it really is impossible at any time, 
even though the concept is good, to make sure the right people will 
be on the faculty, and so forth. I can't help but think, for example, 
of a speech I heard by supposedly — at least he is said to be — the Rus- 
sian expert of the USIA, and in this speech, his direct statements — 
and I have the speech — were to the effect that, on the whole, Americans 
make the mistake of misunderstanding the Russians because many of 
their seemingly aggressive moves are really motivated by defensive 
fear of what we are going to do. And then at one other point 
he said that, on the whole, the United States is more democratic than 
the Soviet Union, and at the same time we are less imperialistic than 
they are, and I couldn't help but think, because I have always believed 
in this Freedom Academy concept and the inability of people through- 
out the country to go some place and learn about communism, if you 
were to take that approach, I wonder what kind of graduates you 
would have of your Freedom Academy? Wlio would go home and 
say, "Well, on the whole, we are more democratic than the Soviet 
Union, we are less imperialistic than they are. We must look more 
carefully at what they are doing, because a lot of times we have got 
to recognize that what seems aggressive is really motivated by the de- 
fensive fear of what we are going to do in being the aggressor.'" 

And I guess you have got no safeguard on that, but as one person 
who favors this bill, I am certainly thinking of this approach. 

Dr. PossoNY. Well, you have got a safeguard. Let me put it this 
way : This may have been a correct though probably incomplete state- 
ment. The average Russian citizen may very well be afraid, I don't 
know and I am unconvinced. But after all, he is a victim of propa- 
ganda, and these fears are being carefully instilled. If the speaker 
was talking about the Kremlin, this is something else. 

Mr. AsHBROOK. Or talking about the political leader. 

Dr. PossoNY. That is silly. But if you had ample documentation, 
you had a fair number of excellent and knoAvledgeable lecturers, and 
you had enough time to press the speaker on such a point, I think it 
would come out very clearly what is correct about it, and what is not 
correct about it. 

Let me point out one fact which perhaps has not been brought out, 
but I lived through it and I think it is important to stress it. 

By the time you attend a War College and sit daily tlirough the 
lectures and debates, every day, listening to lectures — and the War 
College is handling just one lecture — and then you have a discussion 
in the main room and then another discussion in the seminar room — 
by the fourth month you are becoming almost clair\'oyant. The non- 
sense that speakers dish out becomes easily noticeable. The windbag 
is recognized without trouble. In fact, after this period, even the 
most excellent speakers are confronted with a very tough assignment. 
The audience is too sophisticated. These are all men of maturity, 
they are colonels and captains, who have been around and who know 
that things aren't quite rosy and can't be solved by magic. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1025 

Twelve years ago, we had one high-ranking speaker from an im- 
portant agency telling us how the cold war could be won by socio- 
economic reform alone, but it soon became obvious he didn't know 
his own subject ; he confused Sweden with Switzerland — and it was 
painful. Kremlinologists often have a difficult time — even a reason- 
able systematic course is like a vaccination against intellectual small- 
pox. 

So the point is, if you have an institution like the Freedom Acad- 
emy, you can draw on the foremost experts in the country plus experts 
from NATO or India or any country, any discipline and all different 
viewpoints. You also could set up academic discussions. 

If, in addition, you back all this up with adequate research materials 
and active research, I wouldn't be worried. This country has the 
capability of establishing and running the Freedom Academy most 
effectively. We need the Academy for our intellectual rearmament. 

Mr. AsHBROOK. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much, sir. 

Anything else ? 

Dr. PossoxY. No, sir. Thank you very much for your attention. 

(Dr. Possony's prepared statement and letter to Chairman Willis 
dated March 2, 1964, follow:) 

STATEMENT OF STEFAN T. POSSONY 

The usual practice in election years is for the administration to claim that the 
United States is winning the cold war, that the Communist threat is receding, that 
soon defense expenditures can be allowed to level off, and that those who still 
are doubting that peace has descended on this dreary earth are negativist belly- 
achers that ignore the blessings of current leadership. One wonders why the 
triumphs of our cold war strategy remain hidden from tlie scrutiny of the world. 

The opposition takes the exactly opposite line and argues that the United 
States is just about to collapse, that we cannot possibly escape unscathed from 
the ordeal, and that if one looked carefully enough, one would realize that 
the administration is plotting to betray this country to the enemy. 

Following a change of administration, the party lines would be reversed, shortly 
after the elections. 

The United States is neither winniUfg the cold war, nor are the Soviets about to 
take over the United States. It does not speak highly of our political mores 
that national security challenges are being treated with less than the utmost 
objectivity. 

Both parties have been insincere in their attempts to master the Communist 
threat. Both parties have their own chorus of pollyannas and alarmists. 
Neither party has made a serious attempt, except by means of occasional oratory 
during an emergency, to inform the electorate on the nature and strength of the 
threat we are facing. In both parties — and also in the defense, intelligence, and 
research communities — the tendency has been to single out si)ecific aspects of 
the overall threat and to suggest isolated counteractions. There is scarcely any 
discussion about the whole spectrum of the threat, let alone a discussion about 
how this total threat could be met. I am convinced that both parties lack a 
genuine comprehension of the struggle the electorate desires the United States 
to win. 

The right and left extremists, about whom we hear so many complaints, are, 
for the most part, people who sense that something is basically wrong, who have 
never been given the benefit of a correct diagnosis, and who therefore volunteer 
with their own improvised therapies. The most unfortunate result of extremist 
thinking has been that the democratic debate has been diverted from the real 
issuGS 

It could be argued that this intellectual disarray is due to our laziness : it takes 
V7ork and diligence to learn about the basic facts of communism, and how many 
Americans really are making the effort? I believe that the reproach of mental 
laziness can indeed be substantiated, notably our national penchant for simplifi- 



1026 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

cations and oversimplifications. "Of making many boolvs tliere is no end; and 
much study is a weariness of the flesh." {Eccl. XII, 12) 

At the same time, it would be most unfair to let the matter rest with this 
identification of this one American failing. To study communism is a full-time 
job. We are dealing with close to 50 years of Soviet and world histoi-y, with 
more than 100 years of social history, and with 200 years of ideological history. 
■\Ve cannot wish that our citizens give up their normal activities to devote them- 
:selves to a life of study ; we would lose to communism immediately. 

Nor can part-time students be expected to master several languages, to obtain 
the required documentation from the five corners of the earth, and to develop 
sound judgments on a subject of encyclopedic scope with constantly changing 
specifics. 

The student, full- or part-time, is beset by special diflSculties : pertinent infor- 
mation is not being printed' — the publishers can't sell hard-to-read books ; other 
information is kept away from the broad public or is never written up in diges- 
tible form — -congressional hearings, which undoubtedly are among our best 
sources of information, are a good illustration ; every book the student reads, 
every evaluation, and every single fact are targets of propaganda, aspersion, 
discreditation, and disorientation. 

The Communist agencies specializing in misinformation are working overtime. 
The American voter and most American politicians and professors do not even 
know that there is a technique of misinformation and that it is being applied 
systematically by our enemies. 

We no longer must deal only with Communist strategy that is formulated in 
Moscow. The Commvmist world movement no longer is as monolithic as it used 
to be. It begins to split into a cautious "opportunistic" wing that is responding 
to the dangers of the nuclear age and an activist and "adventurist" wing which 
frequently relies on terror and audacity. Enormous changes are taking place 
in the Soviet Union, and it is becoming increasingly diflicult to distinguish 
between the recasting of Coumiunist orthodoxy ; retreat and a gradual liquida- 
tion of communism; deception and self -deception ; and preparations for future 
offensive experiments. 

Most Americans erroneously believe "peaceful coexistence" signifies that the 
Soviets have opted for peace in our time and for our type of peace. A minority 
detects in coexistence a strategy designed to entrap us and weaken us for the 
kill. Vei-y few even suspect that the reality could be far more complicated 
and that the so-called peaceful coexistence strategy, whatever the precise defini- 
tion of the current Kremlin strategists, may not merely be directed toward 
discovering the most convenient manner of burying us, but also may be a 
strategy directed against internal and bloc opponents of Khrushchev and his 
group, and may be connected with an ideological subversion within the Soviet 
Union. 

Suppose the Chinese are right and there were such "reformist" subversion : 
would we be really in a position to decide whether it suits our interests best if we 
entered into the coexistence scheme or if, for example, we adopted a strategy of 
relentless pressure? I doubt that many Americans even understand this sort of 
question, let alone are they able to give sophisticated consideration to additional 
alternatives. 

Add to the strictly Communist complex the facts and challenges of nuclear 
weapons and of the continuing technological revolution — modern-day Commu- 
nists know that the ultimate success of the world revolution depends on their 
nuclear victory. Add further the bewildering problems of disarmament and 
"arms control" — an area in which Washington and Moscow have been "cooperat- 
ing" for years to confuse manliind. Add the traiimatic fears that presently 
enslave the American public and preclude any effective strategy. Add all this, 
and it becomes clear that the enemy has won a decisive battle : he has succeeded 
in creating confusion, sowing mutual distrust, engendering anxiety, and para- 
lyzing will. But the enemy's most endurable single advantage lies in our intel- 
lectual inability to recognize the plight we are in. There is one line in the Bible 
which our Nation seems to accept with enthusiasm : "He that increaseth knowl- 
edge increaseth sorrow." (Eccl. 1, 18) 

If we were to organize our study of physics like we conducted the study of 
communism, we hardly would laave running water in our homes — we would still 
be in' the caves, hence, faucets would not be "cost-effective" — and we certainly 
would have no cars, no planes, and no spacecraft. If the study of medicine were 
organized like we have organized the study of the greatest threat this Nation and 
world freedom has ever been facing, the Black Death of the Middle Ages still 
would be with us and our life expectancy would be that of the troglodytes. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1027 

Let me now tiim to two specific aspects of the Freedom Academy. 

1. In my judgment, the Freedom Academy should in'clude a library which col- 
lects the materials that are indispensable to the study of the Communist threat. 
It will surprise many Americans to learn that a truly adequate repository of 
such documentation does not exist. 

By the end of World War I, Herbert Hoover, who later became President of 
the United States, was one of the few who correctly diaignosed the Communist 
danger. He foresaw the impact of communism on world peace. He also realized 
that university and public libraries do not have the materials needed for the 
study of revolutionary movements. Accordingly, he established what was later 
to become the Hoover Institution of War, Revolution, and Peace. The Hoover 
Institution possesses the country's foremost collection of the required documen- 
tation. We are very proud of our collections which are continuing to grow. 
We also are proud of the fact that we were the academic institute which pio- 
neered with the systematic study of communism. 

There are, of course, additional libraries, such as the Library of Congress and 
a few European libraries and archives which possess substantial holdings. But 
the total number of such libraries is small and access to archives leaves much to 
be desired. Documentation has many gaps, and valuable source materials are 
lost every day. 

Library capabilities have not been keeping pace with the growth of require- 
ments. Let me illustrate with one example. There is in this coimtry no com- 
plete set of Latin American newspapers and magazines. In fact, we do not have, 
in all American libraries put together, a complete run of Communist newspapers 
published in Latin America — a much smaller requirement. Only a few of the 
important South American newspapers are to be found iu U.S. libraries ; and in 
most instances, of those papers that are listed in the few libraries that buy 
South American materials, only a few random issues are available. 

My estimate would be that of the last 10 years, we obtained, nationwide, at 
best 10% of the newspapers published in Latin America. The Castro catastrophe 
must in part be ascribed to our dearth of documentation. 

With respect to African and Asian newspapers, brochures, and books the 
situation is even worse. 

It is quite clear why these gaps exist. The average library does not have the 
funds to buy large numbers of papers nor the incentive to do so, nor the funds to 
house or microfilm these bulky holdings. There is little interlibrary coordination 
in acquisition programs. There is no purchasing organization through which 
materials that are hard to acquire can be obtained. Finally, a worldwide news- 
paper acquisition program, even a more limited program for the acquisition of 
all Communist periodicals, is beyond the resources of private libraries. A 
special institution with ample finances is required. 

Given our present library resources, the study of world communism is not 
easy. Only last week two of my students had to change their topic. One was 
unable to find the docvunentation on the present disputes between a Soviet and a 
Chinese group in the Communist Party of India, the other student did not have 
enough data to determine the "line" of the French Communist Party vis-a-vis the 
Spanish Civil War. No doubt, several weeks of library research might have 
provided considerably more information. The point is that 2 weeks of biblio- 
graphic research in three major libraries, plus the Library of Congress catalogue 
and the Union Catalogue, did not yield a supply of primary source materials that 
would have been adequate for a good study. If documentation is to be of use in 
decision-making, it must permit fast research. Only an adequately supplied 
library facility permits both fast work and research in depth. 

Hence the Freedom Academy needs a library of a special type. The function 
of the library would not be to duplicate existing holdings, although, of course, it 
must acquire a substantial number of books. The primary function of this 
library, as I see it, should be (a) to establish a specialized U.S. and NATO-wide 
catalogue; (b) to supplement existing libraries with materials for the collection 
of which funds usually are lacking in universities, e.g. newspaper series, pamph- 
lets, and leaflets; (c) to enable persons who have had experience in operations, 
including refugees and former Communists, to write down their exi>eriences ; 
(d) to engage the services of a whole battery of translators so that foreign lan^ 
guage materials can be exploited effectively; and (e) to provide to cleared 
researchers ioth classified and unclassified documentation. 

This library should become a national research center where nongovernmental 
people can do research work. It should support other research organizations 
which presently are grappling with these problems. 



1028 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Library, perhaps in cooperation with the National Archives, could assume 
the fimction of organizing the gradual declassification of pertinent information 
held by the Government. 

A not inconsiderable fund is needed for the library to en'sure that adequate 
resources will be available as soon as the Academy starts functioning. 

Since the library ultimately will handle enormous masses of materials^ — classi- 
fied and unclassified, in many languages, pertaining to all countries, operational 
techniques, and ideologies — and will cooperate with a whole international net- 
work of libraries and since it would be a waste of time and money to have the 
students search endlessly for books and reports, I propose that the bill provide 
for an electronic data-handling system and for substantial reproduction 
facilities. 

In order to work up speedily the enormous historical and documentary backlog, 
provisions should be made for a research stafE which, initially and temporarily, 
must be fairly large in size. Research findings must be made promptly available 
to ensure the effective functioning of the Academy. 

2. I now want to discuss teaching and curriculum. I would like to suggest 
that the Academy pattern its instruction after the medical model: premedical 
education in basic sciences, specific medical education, practical training and 
internship, and, ultimately, specialist training. 

The preparatory education to be provided by the Freedom Academy should 
include such subjects as modem history, geography, physical and cultural 
anthropology, economics, government, sociology, political philosophy, political 
psychology, international law, elementary technology, etc. These subjects should 
be taught generally in the normal academic manner, except that all the sciences 
that relate to freedom and strategy would be taught according to an Integrated 
plan. Thus, the Freedom Academy's curriculum would list the totality of the 
politically relevant sciences, not just isolated portions of individual sciences. 

Wherever important, the different interpretations of the various political 
schools of thought should be brought out sharply, instead of being fuzzed over. 
Example : Economics should be studied with a clear realization that there are 
free enterprise, interventionist, and collectivist schools, with subgroups in each 
category. There should also be instruction in the rules of evidence, in political 
nomenclature and semantics, in the techniques of critical interpretation of 
political texts, and in scientific methodology. 

The main instruction courses should be devoted, inter alia, to the following 
topics : 

History : 

The Communist movement and related movements locally and worldwide 

The development of freedom systems 

The struggle between communism and the free world 

Related questions (e.g. neutralists) 
Ideology : 

The main Communist thinkers and their differences 

The party lines and resolutions 

The communication of the ideology 

Related ideologies 

Freedom ideologies 
Organization : 

The organization of Communist parties and subordinate groups 

The world movement 

Front organizations 

Communist-non-Communist coalitions 

Techniques of indirect control, penetration, and disorganization 

Organization of freedom groups 
States : 

The Soviet Union 

China 

The bloc 

The conflict machines of Communist states 

Strengths and weaknesses of Communist states 

The United States 

NATO states 

Other states 

Defense arrangements of democratic states 

Strengths and weaknesses of democratic states 

Decision-making 



Countermeasures 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1029 

Conflict Techniques : 

Intelligence 

Propaganda 

Diplomacy 

Political warfare 

Economic warfare 

Subversion 

Technology 

Terror 

GueiTilla 

Insurrection 

Disarmament 

Limited war 

Blackmail 

War 
Capabilities : 

Economic-technological 

Psychological-political-moral-ideological 

Subversive 

Military 

Soviet Union and United States compared 

Soviet bloc and NATO compared 
Strategy and Tactics : 

Doctrines 

Case studies 

Special techniques 

Integrated operations 
Counter-Strategies by Freedom Systems : 

Doctrines 

Case studies of successes and failures by freedom systems 
Special techniques 
Integrated operations 

Major differences between Communist and freedom operations 
Vulnerability Pattern's : 

Vulnerabilities of Communist states (e.g., ideology, economy, organization, 
political arrangements, etc.) 

Vulnerabilities of Communist parties 

Vulnerabilities of democratic states and parties 
Improvement of Freedom Strategy : 

Methods of analysis 

Usable techniques 

Purposes and goals 

National and international organizations 

Internal security 

Freedom strategy and war 

The challenge of war avoidance 

Superseding communism by peaceful means 

Building a free and prosperous world 
This curriculum looks very full, and it is. But actual instruction time can be 
cut down considerably through effective textbooks and a flow of case-study ma- 
terials. Furthermore, students that are accepted by the Freedom Academy could 
be selected on the basis of achievements in a previous correspondence course. 

Alter mastering the subject matter, the student could be assigned to the special 
study of problems that are of professional concern to him. For example, a news- 
paperman might analyze the contents of the paper with which he is connected 
and formulate an improvement plan. A businessman might analyze how his 
export trade is connected with the cold war, a priest might reread his sermons, 
and a Congressman might reevaluate his speeches and votes. All might want to 
contemplate how the flow of information through the country, the business 
world, the universities, the public opinion media, and the Government could be 
improved — we need a larger stream, and one that is less polluted. 

Graduate, postgraduate, and refresher study should be tailored to meet the 
specific requirements of the individual. But provisions should be made to develop 
specialists in all the major topical areas. 

Democracy, to paraphrase Walt Whitman, is not "only for elections, for 
politics, and for a party name." It is the system we are using to defend our- 



1030 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

selves and to enhance our liberties. It is the only system that is compatible with 
freedom. But democracy may fail in this country, as it has failed in other coun- 
tries. All democracies that failed to defend themselves effectively — at least all 
the failures I had the misfortune to observe — confirmed the younger Pliny's 
remark : "As in men's bodies, so in government, that disease is most serious which 
proceeds from the head." 

We cannot seriously assume that the institutions we possess to make freedom 
prevail over Communist dictatorship are perfect. If they were, how could 
freedom— since 1914, since 1939, since 1945, since 1959, since last month — have 
suffered so many setbacks ? But if these institutions and the men behind them 
are not perfect, what do we do to improve them? Is it enough to sit "like pa- 
tience on a monument, smiling at grief" ? ( Shakespeare) 

The critics of the Freedom Academy have found many faults with the proposal, 
but they have suggested few ameliorations and even fewer alternatives. They 
have singled out a few technical details, as though it really mattered how pre- 
cisely technicalities are handled. They have argued that we know enough about 
communism and its ways, but those who make this point, usually know very little 
about communism and its wiles. 

Some have feared that the Academy could fall into the wrong hands. The 
Presidency also could fall into wrong hands, and so could every Cabinet post 
and every elected and appointed position. But we do not abolish our public 
offices, not only because we need them, but also because we are confident that we 
are able to handle and control the misuse and abuse of power. Surely, we are 
not always successful, but we are successful most of the time. Le mieux est 
Vennenii dn Men. The French poet Alfred de Musset was right when he said 
that the desire to possess perfection "is the most dangerous kind of madness." 

The Freedom Academy is conceived as just one step toward the intellectual 
rearmament of our Republic, but it would be the first major step on a new road. 
'"Long is the way and hard, that out of hell leads up to light." (Milton, Paradise 
Lost, Book II, 1.432) 

The Hoo\^r iNSTiTtJTiON ON War, Revolution, and Peace, 

Stanford University, Stanford, Calif., March 2, 1964- 
The Hon. Edwin E. Willis, 

Chairman, Committee on Un-American Activities, 
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 

Dear Chairman Willis : During my testimony, I stated that I do not think 
security clearances would be necessary for foreign students attending the Free- 
dom Academy. You indicated disagreement with this point of view, but did not 
pursue the matter further. 

I would like to explain my viewpoint. In suggesting that foreign students do 
not need security clearances, I based myself on the assumption that the Freedom 
Academy would consist of several subsidiary schools. One of these schools 
would teach the basic information on the conflict between democracy and dicta- 
torship and offer courses which, though they would be streamlined and more 
complete and realistic than normal social science curricula in American col- 
leges, nevertheless would be entirely unclassified and strictly "academic" in 
orientation. In other words, these courses would impart relevant knowledge 
that is publically available, except that this knowledge would be "packaged" 
differently. 

It is my thought that these courses should be attended by a considerable 
number of foreigners, especially natives from countries where this sort of 
knowledge is not easily accessible and vrhere, therefore, most people remain hazy 
about the most elementary facts and the important stakes of the cold war. 

If we were to insist on security clearances for those people, we would have to 
spend considerable money on investigations and, in addition, be forced to establish 
an investigative corps of considerable size. I am doubtful that meaningful 
investigations can be conducted by Americans into the backgromid of people 
hailing from Africa, Asia, or even Latin America. On the contrary, I would 
presume that some routine investigative techniques could be easily turned 
against us. Thus, even if we conducted a security investigation on a prospective 
student, we could or should not have too high a confidence in our findings. 

Moreover, frequent investigations in foreign countries would lead to political 
trouble. Governments that do not like the Freedom Academy could easily dis- 
rupt the operation by refusing to allow the investigations. 



PROVIDrSTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1031 

I also would like to stress that a requirement for security investigations prior 
to the attendance of a nonoperational social science course might easily back- 
fire politically, whereas lack of such a requirement could be used by ourselves 
to political advantage. 

Furthermore, I am inclined to believe that political traditions in many coun- 
tries are so different from our own that many security categories do not really 
apply. More specifically — and this is based on my personal experience ovex"- 
seas — I would expect that many prospective students have a "socialist" orienta- 
tion. Quite a few of those people would not even know what "socialism" is, let 
alone "capitalism," but in a number of cases these vague predispositions facili- 
tate Communist recruiting. At the same time, it is precisely those individuals 
whom we should try to reorient. I for one would be quite willing to take the 
chance that a well-conceived teaching program would disabuse not only hazy 
self-styled "socialists," as you meet them all over Africa, but also convinced 
Communists. 

Naturally, the Academy's program cannot be successful in every single case, 
but we certainly should not deprive ourselves of the opportunity to convince a 
substantial number of foreigners who, prior to attending the Academy, may be 
inclined to embrace ideologies that are hostile to freedom. 

Under the circimistances, I think the money earmarked for investigations 
would be spent better by either increasing the number of students or improving 
the facilities of the Academy. 

Within this general philosophy, I would like to state the folloveing exceptions 
and specific points : 

1. I do not believe that we should concentrate on the socialist or semi- 
socialist groups. On the contrary, I believe that we should open the Acad- 
emy to students of all political orientations. But I do want to stress that 
we must not exclude prospective students from the left. 

2. Should a few hard-boiled Communists appear among the student group, 
and should they, in addition to making trouble, be uttei'ly resistant to 
absorbing new knowledge, the Academy in cooperation with our security 
agencies would be free to repatriate such disturbing individuals. 

3. No student who has not been cleared by security would attend courses 
dealing with operational matters. 

4. Attendance at the basic courses and class participation would provide 
information that could not be secured through investigation's in a foreign 
country. 

5. Only U.S. and select NATO students would be given access to classified 
information ; in conformity with existing regulations that control such access. 

In closing, I would like to suggest that consideration be given to the establish- 
ment, within the Freedom Academy, of a special course for Russian exiles and 
exiles from other Communist countries. 
Vei-y sincerely yours, 

(S) Stefan T. Possony. 
Stefan T. Possont. 

The Chairman. Mr. Clausen, our colleague from California, is here 
and I wonder if he would like to make a short statement or insert 
something in the record. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DON H. CLAUSEN, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM CALIFORNIA 

Mr. Clausex. i'es, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have been listening with great interest, of course, during this hear- 
ing, and actually I have spent a number of hours with Mr. Grant, I 
simply wanted to endorse very vigorously all of the comments that he 
has made. 

I would further like to have, possibly, another opportunity to come 
back and appear as a witness, and testify before the committee. 

At this particular time I would like to request permission to insert 
in the record some of my remarks that were made during the debate 



1032 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

on the Peace Corps, and I would like to have them inserted in the 
record at this particular time. 

The Chairman. That will be done. 

(Mr. Clausen's remarks follow:) 

[From the Congressional Record, Nov. 13, 1963] 

Mr. Don H. Clausen. Mr. Chainnan, the subject of the Peace Corps is receiv- 
ing much attention here today as it has since its inception. The primary reasons 
for its acceptance, in my opinion, are twofold. First, the American people have 
recognized the failure of other types of foreign aid programs which have created 
a damaging image of America and are looking for a program that will have a 
longer range, more productive effect. Second, our people are beginning to realize 
the urgency of establishing a program that will initiate an ideological offensive 
of our own — an offensive designed to set the stage for winning the cold war 
against the U.S.S.R. and other advocates of the Communist doctrine. 

There are, however, a few observations that I would like to make. Since 1955, 
I have participated in a program that provides various missionary services 
throughout the world — a program designed to promote self-sufficiency. This pro- 
gram is carried on with no tax support from the Federal Government. It has 
been our experience, throughout the years, once a mission station is established 
and the native staffing is completed — the service continues to expand but the 
financial requirements of the sponsoring organization tend to decrease. In 
effect, the mission programs carried on by many denominations can be appropri- 
ately identified as private peace corps. 

Where I strongly believe in the principle of the Peace Corps, I feel it is perti- 
nent to point out that the requests for additional funds here today suggest an 
increasing financial commitment to the sponsor — ^the U.S. Government — the 
American taxpayer. With this in mind, I believe we should give more incentive 
and recognition to the efforts of organizations willing to carry out and expand 
the private peace corps concept — it would appear to be more efficient and tmly 
provide the motivation for people best equipped to carry on the presentation of 
the American image. 

The great struggle between ideologies continues on and will be with us for 
years to come. The ideological offensive of the Soviet Union advocates a pro- 
gram where the public sector — I repeat, the public sector — provides all services 
to their population, directs their destinies, and controls their opportunities. The 
American' way of life is just the opposite — at least, it has been in the past — 
bringing this country to its present plateau, where we enjoy the highest standard 
of living. The American way of life advocates a minimal intervention in the 
life of the individual by Government. Our federal system of government was 
designed to provide the guidelines, under constitutional law and to create the 
environment for the private sector to advance and flourish, with a minimum of 
restrictions. 

Quite frankly, I do not believe the full potential of our Peace Corps effort will 
be realized until the Committee on Foreign Affairs reconsiders the underlying 
philosophy of the program. Our phiolsophy should be reflected in all of our for- 
eign aid programs — more emphasis in the private sector and less emphasis in the 
public sector. Let me make myself perfectly clear. I am for the Peace Corps con- 
cept — and will continue to support the cause. However, it will be my intent to do 
everything within my power to promote the philosophy that reflects the American 
system. In addition to current programs, I want to vigorously recommend that 
the leaders of our private enteri>rise system recognize a new responsibility of 
providing for our security. They must take the lead in projecting an ideo- 
logical offensive truly representative of our private enterprise system — it is they 
who are the most qualified to lead. The Congress might consider broadening tax 
incentives to expedite the formation of such a program. Further, the creation of 
a Freedom Academy, sponsored by our private sector, staffed by qualified gradu- 
ates of our private enterprise system is, in my judgmient, the tyi>e of program 
we should advocate as the answer to the Soviet ideological offensive. A defen- 
sive posture, by itself, is no lon'ger adequate to provide for our security in these 
rapidly changing times. The American people can be proud of their accomplish- 
ments thus far in history — let us show the developing nations throughout the 
world the American way — a program that positively reflects the American 
image — peace, security, and freedom with justice, under law. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1033 

Mr. Clausen. And in passing, Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to 
urge the committee to give very serious consideration to what is being 
presented to you, because I am personally of the conviction that we 
must come forth with something that relates to the Freedom Academy 
concept in order to combat the ideological offensive of the Soviet 
Union, and I am very pleased with the manner in which you are hear- 
ing these various witnesses, who I tliink are probably among the most 
sincere and most dedicated Americans that we have. I thank you for 
participating now, and I would like the opportunity of coming back 
and testifying later on, if I may. 

The Chairjman. We will be delighted. 

The committee will stand in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning. 

("Wliereupon, at 4:40 p.m., Tuesday, February 18, 1964, the commit- 
tee recessed, to reconvene at 9 :30 a.m., Wednesday, February 19, 1964.) 



HEARINGS RELATING TO H.R. 352, H.R. 1617, H.R. 
5368, H.R. 8320, H.R. 8757, H.R. 10036, H.R. 10037, H.R. 
10077, AND H.R. 11718, PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF 
A FREEDOM COMMISSION AND FREEDOM ACADEMY 

Part 1 



WEDNESDAY, FEBEUARY 19, 1964 
United States House of Representatives, 

COMMITPEE ON Un-AmERICAN ACTIVITIES, 

Washington^ D.C. 

PUBLIC HEARINGS 

The Coniinittee on Un-American Activities met, pursuant to recess, 
at 9:55 a.m. in Room 356, Cannon House Office Building, Wash- 
ington, D.C, Hon. Edwin E. "Willis (chairman) presiding. 

Committee members present: Edwin E. Willis, of Louisiana; Wil- 
liam M. Tuck, of Virginia; Joe R. Pool, of Texas; Richard Ichord, of 
Missouri; August E. Johansen, of Michigan; Henry C. Schadeberg, 
of Wisconsin ; and John M. Ashbrook, of Ohio. 

Staff members present: Francis J. ^IcNamara, director; Frank S. 
Tavenner, Jr., general counsel ; and Alfred M. Nittle, counsel. 

The Chairman. The committee will please come to order. 

We were scheduled to hear from an author of a Freedom Academy 
bill. Congressman Hale Boggs, but since he is not here yet, if agree- 
able, I will ask Mr. Mayers to take the stand, with the miderstanding, 
Mr. Mayers, that when Mr. Boggs comes he will take the stand. I 
understand it will not be long, after which you may resume; 

Mr. Maters. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. We are glad to have you, sir. Will you start out 
by giving a thumbnail sketch of your background for the record ? 

STATEMENT OF HENRY MAYERS 

Mr. Mayers. Yes. I have been engaged in the operation of an 
advertising agency, and have a number of other businesses in Los 
Angeles, since 1915. In the last several years I have been a member 
of the LT.S. Information Agency's Executive Reserve. 
(At this point Mr. Johansen entered the hearing room.) 
]\Ir. Mayers. This has given me a pretty good insight into what goes 
on in the field of information and propaganda. After writing on this 
subject for some advertising publications, I got enough response from 
the people in the fields of public relations and broadcasting and com- 
munications, generally, to feel that there was possibly a place for an 

1035 



1036 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

organization of people in those fields who are concerned, as I am, about 
the inadequacies of the "political communications" between the United 
States and the rest of the world. 

I might say that I have traveled on every continent and visited 
about 18 USIS posts and discussed with the very dedicated men in 
these posts the problems that they meet in getting over the American 
story. The Cold War Council w^as formed for the purpose of re- 
cruiting the support of other people in the communications profes- 
sions in bringing the propaganda problem to the attention of Govern- 
ment. We are not trying to tell the Government how to run the prop- 
aganda operation, but w^e w^ant to call attention to the inadequacies 
of present results and some of the reasons for it. That is the perti- 
nent aspect of my background. I have appeared before the Senate 
Foreign Relations Committee and another congressional committee 
in behalf of the Cold War Council. I am here today because the 
council is concerned with this U.S. neglect of propaganda and political 
warfare in the confrontation between free nations and global commu- 
nism. 

The Chairman. May I ask you this question ? I believe you men- 
tioned that you are a member of the U.S. Information Agency's Ex- 
ecutive Eeserve. 

Mr. Mayers. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What is that organization ? 

Mr. Mayers. A part of the civil defense setup w^iich was established 
several years ago. The USIA Executive Reserve consisted of about 
50 men around the country, many of them newspaper editors or heads 
of broadcasting companies. Some of them are in universities. Theo- 
retically they were supposed to be in a position to take over the execu- 
tive handling of the Information Agency should anything happen 
to it in Washington, D.C. 

We had a secret place to go to, as part of the civil defense plan. It 
never involved anything more than an occasional briefing. We would 
come to Washington and hear the problems of the Agency. We would 
get practically all the literature that xVgency produced, and it was a 
good source of information for me. I do not think we contributed very 
much, except an occasional letter of comment about what they were 
doing. 

In my case, it was mostly critical comment. 

The Chairman. Well, that did put you in a position of receiving 
reports from USIA about its general operations ? 

Mr. Mayers. Yes; I would get about three pieces of mail a week, 
anything from press releases to booklets, and so on, and I would write 
and get specific information that I wanted, very often. 

Now, we feel that U.S. neglect of political and propaganda warfare 
is directly related to today's problems in Cuba, in Panama, in 
Southeast Asia, Zanzibar, and Cyprus, in fact, wherever the United 
States is on the defensive with people of other nations. We believe 
that the Freedom Academy concept is at least a partial answer to 
such problems. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1037 
HOPEFUL SIGN 

The Cold War Council is in touch ^yith specialists in geopolitics, in 
propaganda, and other aspects of nonmilitary warfare, who are work- 
ing on strategic studies in this field in various parts of the United 
States and tliroughout the free world. All such authorities more or 
less agree that there is an urgent need for what might be called gi"eater 
professionalism in official U.S. efforts at political communication with 
the people in other parts of the world. 

These cold war specialists view the Freedom Commission or Free- 
dom Academy legislation before this committee as a step toward such 
greater professionalism. They consider a congressional hearing like 
this as a hopeful sign that the U.S. is at last awakening to the essen- 
tially political nature of the cold v/ar. 

An important and vital aspect of the Freedom Academy legisla- 
tion before this committee is the broad scope of persons who would 
receive cold war training. It is to be given not only to Foreign 
Service personnel of the United States Government and some private 
citizens, but also to Government personnel and citizens of other free 
world nations. The latter need better understanding of how to defend 
freedom from Communist subversion at least as urgently as Govern- 
ment employees and private citizens of the United States. 

The cold war is not merely a confrontation between the U.S. and 
the U.S.S.R. as the Soviet propagandists would like the world to 
believe. It is a war between communism and every nation outside 
the Red bloc. And it is a war that must be fought by citizens of 
all nations of the free world who want to stay free. 

POLITICAL WARFARE 

It is above all a political war. Although the battlefronts of the 
cold war include the arms race and the competition in space and in 
trade and in other areas, the political battlefronts are the most serious. 
They are the ones on which the Communists pin their greatest hopes 
of victory. They are the fronts on which they are the strongest and 
we are the weakest. 

The United States Government, in its efforts to stem the Communist 
tide, has poured out billions of dollars annually in military aid, in 
economic aid, and in technical aid to foreign nations. Yet what 
many of these nations need most of all is political aid — political aid 
of the kind that could be made available to the present and future 
leaders of those nations through a U.S. -sponsored Freedom Academy. 

A Freedom Academy could train such native leaders in techniques 
for counteracting the propaganda of the Communists in their midst. 
It could show them how to conduct positive propaganda in behalf of 
legitimate progressive government, freedom of thought, and other 
basics of the free society, as opposed to the totalitarian state. 

COSTA RICAN EXAMPLE 

The concept of a free world political academy has already been 
tested. In 1958 the former President of Costa Rica, Jose Figueres, 
established there an Institute of Political Education. It attracted 
students from all other Latin American nations and trained them, 



1038 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

according to its literature, "for political action through instruction 
in strategy and tactics to attain and maintain power for the purpose 
of defending and developing democracy." 

The Costa Rican undertaking has received praise and congratu- 
lations from many prominent U.S. officials. But it has received not 
one penny of support from the U.S. Government. After a few years 
of operation, it had to close its doors for lack of funds. The Costa 
Rican institute was never more than a successful test-tube demon- 
stration of what could and should be done on a significant scale by a 
U.S.-sponsored free world Freedom Academy. 

A GLOBAL APPROACH 

How would the Freedom Commission, established under the pro- 
posed legislation, go about developing the research program, the cur- 
riculum, and the faculty necessary for the operation of an effective 
Freedom Academy? One source of guidance would be found in the 
large number of American specialists in propaganda and political war- 
fare working today in leading educational institutions that maintain 
centers for strategic studies in nonmilitary warfare. These include 
universities such as Columbia, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, Pennsyl- 
vania, Notre Dame, Stanford, and U.S.C. 

In addition, a U.S.-sponsored free world Freedom Academy would 
attract the support and cooperation of outstanding anti-Communist 
political leaders in other nations. It would be hailed by men who have 
proved, in their own practical political experience, that they know how 
to meet and defeat Communist machinations in their own countries. 
Dr. Figueres of Costa Rica is but one of them. Romulo Betancourt of 
Venezuela is another Latin American exam.ple. In Asia there is the 
Singapore Prime JNIinister Lee Kuan YeAv who fought the Communists 
politically for 10 years and successfully prevented a takeover in Singa- 
pore and the Malaya peninsula. 

A great potential cooperator in a Freedom Academy would be 
George Papandreou, former Prime Minister of Greece. Through his 
sheer political skill, he saved his country from an attempted takeover 
by armed Greek Connnunist partisans after the Nazis fled. Willy 
Brandt of Berlin is another European figure who could contribute 
much to the Academy. 

In the Near East there is Charles Malik of Lebanon, one of the free 
world's most articulate and inspirational spokesmen in behalf of West- 
ern political ideals. Those ideals are also forcefully expounded by 
Spain's great political writer and former diplomat, Salvador de Ma- 
dariaga. He could have tremendous influence on Latin American po- 
litical trainees at a U.S.-sponsored Freedom Academy. 

The Chairman. In what way could the gentlemen you have re- 
ferred to make a contribution to the Academy ? 

Mr. Mayers. The first requirement of the Freedom Commission is 
that they engage in research as to how to build a curriculum, what 
they are to teach in the Academy ; and these men, I believe, would be, 
first of all, great consultants on that subject. They could help deter- 
mine what should be taught and how it should be taught. 

I believe, in addition, that they would be glad to come as visiting 
lecturers. Dr. Figueres has been in Cambridge, just up until recently, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1039 

at the School of Politics there. ]\Ir. Papandreoii of Greece, of course, 
could not come now, having just been elected Prime Minister again. 
^Vlien I met with him a couple of years ago, he told me that he would 
love to come to America. He was never paid any attention by our 
Government since he was no longer the Prime Minister, yet he told 
me he had received five invitations from Khrushchev to come to 
Moscow. Of course he was not interested. Even though he is the most 
hated man by the Communists because he prevented Greece from going 
behind the Iron Curtain, Khrushchev's invitation shows what political 
realists the Communists are, and how unrealistic we have been in 
Greece. 

The Chairman. You said a while ago that some prominent U.S. 
officials, as I recall, had praised the work of the Costa Rican Institute 
of Political Education. Who are some of those ? 

Mr. Mayers. I have a list. I have the literature of the institute 
here. 

The Chairman. Well, just name a few. 

Mr. Mayers. A most interesting aspect of the list was its bipartisan- 
ship. I remember John F. Kennedy, Nelson Rockefeller, Mr. Keating, 
Mr. Schlesinger, a remarkably bipartisan political list. They all sent 
telegrams to the Costa Rican school after it graduated its first class, 
telegrams of congratulations. 

The Chairman. How was the institute financed ? 

Mr. JMayers. It was financed largely by a labor group in the United 
States, which in turn, I believe, was financed by a foundation, but it 
was inadequately financed. 

They never graduated more than 50 students, as I recall, in one 
session. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Do you recall what the labor group was ? 

Mr. Mayers. I have a record of it. I can get it for the record. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Would you supply that? 

Mr. Mayers. Yes ; I can supply it for the record.^ 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Could you recall, or could you supply the name of 
the foundation? 

Mr. Mayers. I believe it was called the Kaplan Foundation. I 
think there was more than one foundation involved, but I, remember 
that name. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. May I, Mr. Chairman, just ask one or two questions 
at this juncture? 

Unfortunately, I was not able to be with you yesterday, and this 
point may already have been raised. Am I correct in the impression 
that establishment of this type of Freedom Academy or Commission 
presupposes the fact that communism is an internal threat within 
the United States as well as it is in other free countries? 

Mr. Mayers. The instruction that would be given under the law 
would certainly include very extensive opportunity for instruction to 
citizens of the United States which would be applicable to the internal 
threat. But, by and large, the Freedom Commission concept is to 
train our overseas personnel, plus people who might be operating in 
the private sector, and Government employees and private-sector 



1 Mr. Mayers subsequently informed the committee that the labor group in question was 
the Institute of International Labor Research, Inc. 

30-471— «4—pt. 1 8 



1040 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

people of other nations. This recognizes the global threat and is not 
limited to the domestic threat. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. But not excluding the domestic threat. 

Mr. Mayers. Oh, no, by no means. There is a provision in the 
bill for the publication of textbooks and preparation of motion pic- 
ture films and other educational material purely for use within the 
United States. There is a great dearth of responsible official informa- 
tion about the Communist menace, and this material would be a 
contributor toward that end. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Now, that leads me to the second question. Then 
I will not interrupt further at this juncture. The makeup of the Com- 
mission and the makeup of the faculty or personnel responsible for 
the execution of this program would pretty well determine the effec- 
tiveness and the success of this operation, would it not ? 

Mr. Mayers. Yes. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. And in some measure, at least, the makeup of this 
Commission and of the personnel would be governed by the premises 
of those making the appointments, both of the Commission itself and 
those appointments made by the Commission, so that the thing that 
happens — let me just lay it right out on the table — we hear a great 
deal of criticism of the State Department, for example, in certain 
areas, alleged softness in some of the middle echelons, softness apropos 
of Communists. What are the safeguards in the setup of this Com- 
mission and of the operating personnel against that type of weakness 
or fault? 

Mr. Mayers. I would say there are four distinct safeguards. The 
first, and most important one, is that all of these bills remove from 
the State Department the kind of jurisdiction that you are concerned 
with. The Freedom Commission would be a bipartisan, independently 
appointed agency. While it would cooperate with the State Depart- 
ment and the CIA and the Defense and other departments, it would 
not be under the domination of the State Department. 

Now, on the question of bipartisan appointments, as you know, the 
President makes the appointments and the Senate approves. 

I have had considerable contact with many of the 13 Senators who 
sponsor S. 414, which is the corresponding legislation. I have dis- 
cussed this with them and I believe it must be assumed that the Presi- 
dent would not make appointments which would, in a sense, antagonize 
those Senators by defeating the purposes for which they have worked 
so hard to get this bill passed. They would certainly have good rec- 
comendations for the appointments and they would definitely resist 
approval by the Senate of anybody who was questionable on the sub- 
ject that you suggested, of softness towards communism. Hardness 
towards communism is the number one essential. 

Mr. Johaxsen. The mention, and I do not want to single him out 
particularly, of Mr. Schlesinger caused me some concern because I am 
not sure just how soon he would think the Commission would start 
engaging in McCarthyism. 

Mr. Mayers. He probably just thought it was politic to add his 
name to a list of people who were congratulating the Costa Rica school. 
Maybe he did not know what it was. It so happened that I once had 
quite a discussion of the Freedom Academy idea with Mr. Schlesin- 
o;er. He does not seem to understand the bill. On the record of that 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1041 

conversation, which was reported in newspapers tliroughout the coun- 
try, Mr. Schlesinger clearly disqualified himself as a possible member 
of the proposed Freedom Commission. 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Boggs has arrived. 

Mr, Mayers. Shall I withdraw for the moment? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. [To Mr. Boggs.] We will be glad to 
hear you. We know you are not going to be long and it was the 
understanding when we put Mr, Mayers on the stand. 

STATEMENT OF HON. HALE BOGGS, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE EROM 

LOUISIANA 

Mr. Boggs. Mr. Chairman, I shall only take a minute. I appreciate 
the opportunity of appearing before your distinguished committee. I 
would have been here yesterday, but we are in the middle of the tax 
conference, as you know, 

Mr. Tuck. Mr, Chairman, I would like to say we are greatly honored 
to have such a distinguished gentleman from Louisiana and a leader 
of the House to appear before our committee. 

Mr. Boggs. Thank you very much. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to set the bipartisan tone here 
by saying that I associate myself with the Governor in those sentiments. 

Mr. Boggs. Thank you. 

The Chairman. You gentlemen have relieved me of the need of com- 
plimenting my good colleague from Louisiana. 

Mr. Boggs. I must say, thank all of you. 

I am very happy to appear in behalf of this legislation. As you 
gentlemen know, I am one of the cosponsors of the bill pending before 
you. My dear friend and colleague. Congressman Herlong, if I re- 
member correctly, was the first person to sponsor this idea. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I would just like to make a few observations on 
why I think this legislation would serve a most salutary purpose in the 
world as it now exists. 

I think that we have been very fortunate in arming our country to 
such a point that our offensive superiority over the Communist world 
is so great that it makes the prospect of nuclear war somewhat remote, 
at least at this time. 

And I think as long as we maintain that superiority — and it exists, 
if my information is correct, in almost every field: in the field of 
manned aircraft ; in the field of nuclear-powered, missile-equipped sub- 
marines ; in the field of missiles, both short range, intermediate range, 
and intercontinental range; in the field of economics and technology, 
particularly in the field of agricultural production, and so on. 

As a matter of fact, probably the greatest confrontation in history 
occurred a year or so ago over the missile installations in Cuba — so I 
think that as long as the American people are willing to continue to 
make the tremendous sacrifices required — we will be considering this 
week the authorization foi- the Armed Forces of the United States, 
where w^e will continue to spend $50 billion a year on armament alone. 
I think w^hat this points up in many ways is that the doctrinaires in the 
Kremlin, in Cuba, in China, and elsewhere are convinced that if they 
are to succeed, it is in the field of ideology. We have seen a great deal 
of this. I think there has been more of it than has come to the public 
attention, particularly in Latin America. 



1042 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The threat of Castro is a double threat, in that Cuba is today being 
used as a base for the training of Communists or subversives who 
infihrate the Latin American nations. We have seen a demonstration 
of that in recent weeks in Panama. Prior thereto, the situation in 
Venezuela was very acute, as you gentlemen know. 

There are other dangerous spots in Latin America, in countries as 
large as Brazil, for instance. In this, the biggest nation in this hemi- 
sphere, there has been an infiltration of Castro agents. 

( At this point Mr. Pool entered the hearing room. ) 

Mr. BoGGS. Now, it is incumbent upon us to counteract this type of 
thing. It is just as important that we do this as that we win the mili- 
tary battle, because we could win militarily and lose in other ways, as 
you gentlemen well know. 

I have always said that the greatest revolution in the history of man- 
kind was the American Revolution, because the American Revolution 
actually freed people. It made it possible for men and women to 
utilize their abilities in a free society. Until the American Revolution 
and the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, all of 
which followed therefrom, mankind had rea,lly never lived in that 
kind of free society. 

And this is still the most revolutionary society on the earth. It is 
fantastic to me that it is possible to export the autocratic, dictatorial, 
repressive society which is called communism as an appeal to idealism 
and not to be able to explain the American ideal and the tremendous 
impact of the American free system to the rest of mankind. 

Now, there is a great yearning on the part of people throughout the 
world to know something about what our system is all about. I think 
one of the reasons the Peace Corps has been such a remarkable suc- 
cess is because it has demonstrated the basic idealism of Americans. 
We have had these young people — and some of them have not been so 
young, I have had some middle-aged and even some old people come 
to me and interest themselves in that operation — but we have had those 
people dedicating themselves principally to what we call the genu- 
ine American ideal. 

So, Mr. Chairman, as I see it, what this legislation would — and as 
all of you know, it has strong bipartisan support in this body and in 
the other body as well— it would provide tlie opportunitv for us to 
channel these abilities that are innate in our society to fighting the 
greatest threat that mankind has ever faced. 

Now, in saying this, I do not want to derogate anyone. I think 
that the work done by our security agencies, the FBI particularly, 
on the domestic scene, the CIA elsewhere in the world, is by and large 
the highest type of activity on earth. But what is proposed here is 
something else. This is not intelligence work. It is not checking on 
subversives — all of which is vital and important to the security of 
this country and the security of free men everywhere. This is the use 
affirmatively of the great reservoir of talent that we have in the 
United States to show what the free system and what a free society 
can do. I have no preconceived notions of how this Academy should 
be set up, but I would expect it to bring to its cause the best educated, 
the most talented people in our country. 

The Chairman. I might mention that, yesterday, your friend and 
mine, Congressman Herlong of Florida, made a splendid presentation 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1043 

and said that perhaps it was a good thing we have not moved too 
fast in this area because your and Congressman Taft's bill are cur- 
rently, in his opinion, the two superior bills because they have been 
brought up to date on the basis of Senate hearings, and so on. 

Mr. BoGGS. Well, I appreciate Congressman Herlong's saying that, 
but I would certainly want to amend his statement by saying that, 
had it not been for his initial action in this field and his willingness 
to spend a great deal of time, maybe the effort would not have been 
possible at all. 

The Chairman. I know ; I know you feel that way. 

Number two, your development of the idea of our superiority in the 
military field, as compared to the ideological field, is a thought that 
permeated the record yesterday. 

Finally, you ref eiTed to the" Peace Corps. Some witness yesterday 
mentioned that one of the reasons — perhaps he said the major reason— 
for the success of the Peace Corps was the insistence that it would not 
be under the "complete domination" of the State Department. It was 
a new effort, a new approach, and for freedom of action, more freedom 
of action by that agency, independence was needed. That is an argu- 
ment for this Freedom Academy being an independent agency, though 
of course with the provisions in the bill, with full contemplation, that 
all agencies will have advisory capacities in the operation of this 
contemplated institution. 

We appreciate your appearing. 

Mr. Tuck. I have no questions. Thank you veiy much. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I want to also compliment the gentle- 
man and also tell you that I brought a bunch of your neighbors in here 
a while ago from east Texas, in Dallas. 

Mr. BoGGS. Well, good. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Boggs is the majority whip of the House and he 
joins us in Louisiana, so I am especially glad that they were here 
today to attend this session. 

Mr. BoGGS. Well, all I can say. Congressman, is that I hope that 
they appreciate you as much as I do, and that's a lot. 

Thank you, gentlemen, very much. Thank you. I would like to 
leave this statement for the record. 

The Chairman. It will be incorporated in the record at this point. 

(Congressman Boggs' prepared statement follows :) 

STATEMENT OF HON. HALE BOGGS, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

LOUISIANA 

It is indeed a pleasure for me to have the opportunity today to testify before 
this distinguished committee, whicli is so ably chaired by my good friend and 
colleague from Louisiana, Edwin Willis. 

Today I am happy to speak on behalf of my bill, H.R. 5368, and its companion 
measures sponsored by my colleagues in the House and the Senate, which call 
for the establishment of a Freedom Academy and a Freedom Commission, as a 
separate agency of our Government. 

However, before I begin my comments on this proposed legislation. I would 
like to pay tribute to my colleagues in the House, the Honorable A. Sydney Her- 
long, Jr., of Florida, and the Honorable Richard Schweiker, of Pennsylvania, for 
being the pioneer sponsors of this bill to establish a new arm for our Govern- 
ment's anti-Communist offensive — that is, a Freedom Academy to train Govern- 
ment personnel, American citizens from all segments of our society, and young, 
educated citizens from other nations throughout the free world. 

I am particularly gratified that Mr. Herlong told this committee yesterday 
that he is pleased with the newest version of this bill, as sponsored by a bipar- 



1044 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

tisan group of 13 Senators and by myself and Congressman Robert Taft, of 
Ohio. Because Congressman Herlong was a pioneer in sponsoring this proposed 
legislation, I am particularly flattered about his announcement that he will 
support my bill and those companion measures before the House and the Senate. 

My opening remarks would not be complete without my paying tribute to 
Mr. Alan G. Grant, Jr., of Orlando, Fla., for his tireless and diligent efforts for 
more tlian a decade to realize the establishment of a Freedom Academy as a 
separate agency of our Government. As you know, Mr. Grant was a charter 
member of the dedicated Orlando Committee for a Freedom Academy, and he 
and his coworkers are deserving of great praise for their work on behalf of our 
coimtry. 

I know that a great deal already has been said on the need for establishing 
a special training center or academy to counter Communist nonmilitary tactics 
around the world. Facts have been cited by Mr. Grant and other private citi- 
zen specialists on the thousands of Russians and citizens of other Communist 
countries who have been trained in all manner of nonmilitary conflict techniques 
in a host of Soviet schools, both military and nonmilitary. Mr. Grant and other 
specialists in this field — in testimony before the Senate Internal Security Sub- 
committee in 1959, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1963, and now this 
week before this committee of the House — have pointed out that the Soviet 
Union is operating an estimated 6,000 special schools to train Russian Commu- 
nist Party members and Communist agents from the bloc countries and other 
nations of the world in the tactics of agitation, iuflltration, propaganda, subver- 
sion, sabotage, and other nefarious techniques. It also has been estimated that 
the Soviet Government is spending something like $5 billion a year to provide 
this highly specialized training to their agents and to those of Communist nations 
around the world. These agents from other countries then return to all parts 
of the world and begin fomenting revolution, either in their own coimtries or in 
neighboring ones. Particularly are the uncommitted, emerging nations ripe for 
overthrow of their infant governments and Communist takeover. 

Mr. Grant, Congressman Hei'long. and others also have pointed up the United 
States apparent lack of any central training center or academy specifically 
designed for the purpose of conducting research and the training of our public 
and private citizens, as well as citizens of other countries of the fx'ee world, 
in all kinds of political, nonmilitary techniques which can be used to counter the 
Soviet and Red Chinese propaganda offensive. Not only do we not have an 
agency designed for this specific purpose, but also we do not have, in any of 
the existing departments or agencies of our Government, an extensive course in 
nonmilitary counteroffensive techniques for our Government personnel alone! 

Of primary concern to all Americans is the existence of a Communist-controlled 
country just 90 miles from the coast of Florida — Cuba. In testimony last year 
before the Inter- American Affairs Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs 
Committee, Mr. John McCone, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, noted 
that some 1,500 agents from other Latin American nations went to Cuba "to 
receive," as he put it, "ideological indoctrination or guerrilla warfare training, or 
both." Mr. McCone said that many more such agents probably would get into 
Cuba in 1963, despite the curtailed facilities for reaching Castro's island. 

In the years which have passed since the Korean war began, if we were never 
before concerned about the need for training our own people in the necessary 
political warfare tactics to counter the Communist offensive, we should well be 
concerned now ! At the edge of our shores is a Communist-held training base, 
now teaching agents from throughout Latin America how best to export violent 
or nonviolent revolutions into their own countries — some of which are ripe for 
Communist takeover. If we did not think previously that the establishment of 
a Freedom Academy was necessary, surely we should do so now. 

Mr. Chairman, in thinking on the need for this legislation, I was reminded of 
our late President's magnificent words in his historic inaugural address : "And 
so, my fellow Americans : Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what 
you can do for your country." 

These words came to mind because, to me, they emphasize the unique advan- 
tage that this proposed Freedom Academy would have over any existing govern- 
mental training schools. What I am saying is that this Academy would provide 
specialized training not only to our Government personnel, but also, more impor- 
tantly, to our private citizens from all segments of our society and to citizens 
from nations throughout the free world. Students at the Freedom Academy 
would be trained not only to defeat Communist offensives of all kinds, but also 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1045 

to replace their tactics with positive substitutes designetl to obtain our own 
political objectives and to establish free societies wherever possible. 

To my mind, the establishment of a Freedom Academy provides our people 
with an imaginative avenue in which to answer our late President's call tc 
service. One of President Kennedy's greatest contributions in his all-too-short 
term was his sincere effort to make the American people aware of the complexity 
of the many problems which, face our country, both at home and abroad, and 
to show us that the solutions to these problems are not to be found in simple, 
"pat" answers. In looking at this proposal to create a Freedom Academy, one 
of its most important assets is its recognition of the need to make the American 
people more aware of the dangers of communism — to give us a greater under- 
standing of the goals and the modus operandi of communism, so that we can be 
fully prepared to meet their challenge. Further, the Freedom Academy would 
utilize the much neglected private sector of our coimtry's extensive human 
resources. Like the $11.6 billion tax cut bill, which soon will become law, this 
bill provides a fine way to engage actively the private citizens of our country in 
direct participation against the worldwide Communist conspiracy. In the pri- 
vate segment of American society, there is a large reservoir of unused talent, 
ingenuity, and wisdom which can and should be harnessed for active service 
in the continuing cold wai". 

A prime example of making productive use of private citizens in the ideological 
and psychological struggle against communism is to be found in active operation 
today in my home city of New Orleans, La. I speak of the Information Council 
of the Americas, directed by Mr. Edward S. Butler III of New Orleans. Dr. 
Alton Ochsner, a world-famous surgeon from my home city, is doing a fine 
job as president of this information council. 

Under the leadership of Mr. Butler as executive director, INCA was estab- 
lished in New Orleans in early 1961, with the aid and support of some of the 
city's leading citizens, including Mayor Victor H. Schiro. Since then, INCA 
has waged an incessant campaign of anti-Communist and prodemocratic infor- 
mation to the peoples of Latin America through all types of communications 
media — radio, television, newspapers, magazines, speeches, leaflets, and so on. 

Particularly have INCA's "Truth Tapes" radio programs been effectively di- 
rected to the peoples of Latin America. Today members of INCA include busi- 
nessmen, professional men, educators, farm leaders, journalists, and others from 
17 different States in our country. These citizens have provided solid support 
for the "Truth Tapes" programs, which feature Cuban refugees who have escaped 
from the oppression of Castro's dictatorship. These Americans present in these 
broadcasts proof of the lies to be foimd in Communist propaganda and in 
Communist actions. 

After 3 years of intensive effort, INCA now sends regularly its "Truth Tapes" 
programs to 129 radio stations in 16 different Latin American coimtries. Mr. 
Butler has told me that a total of 17 stations in Venezuela used these "Truth 
Tapes" prior to the recent general election as a means to help counteract the 
agitation of Communist agents, who were trying to terrorize the people find keep 
them from the polls. These tapes were played over and over again, on and 
before election day, and the Venezuelan broadcasters told Mr. Butler that they 
were most effective in countering the terrorist tactics of the Communist agents. 
As you know, about 97 percent of the electorate voted in that election, despite the 
attempts to frighten them by Communist agents. 

In his work, Mr. Butler has utilized the services and talents of journalists, 
entertainers, engineers, technicians, and others in INCA's efforts against the 
spread of communism in Latin America. He has received cooperation and 
support from both the governmental and private sectors of our society, and he 
has proved the validity of using the energy and talents of private citizens of our 
country to combat communism. 

At this point, I would say that INCA and Mr. Edward Butler and his staff are 
doing a fine job — but the task in Latin America alone is herculean, and INCA 
and other similar such organizations cannot do it alone. They need the assist- 
ance and the direction for a broader, nationwide, anti-Communist training pro- 
gram to come from the National Government — to come from the Congress and 
the Executive, but, at the same time, to be established on the basis of utilizing 
to the fullest possible extent the wealth of human resources from all segments 
of American society. 

When I say such organizations as INCA cannot do this massive job alone, 
I have only to point out that today there are in Latin America an <?stimated 



1046 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

285,000 to 300,000 members of the Communist Party— most of them trained in 
all manner of nonmilitary and military conflict techniques, then sent back to 
their own countries to foment revolution. 

Against this formidable array, our own United States Information Agency 
has less than 1,000 officers and staffers in all of Latin America ! 

I would sum up by stating that the establishment of a Freedom Academy as 
proposed in my bill provides a splendid avenue for Americans from all walks 
of life to join directly in the cold war battle with vigor and imagination. It 
provides our countrymen with the direct opportunity to answer this call to 
service enunciated so well by President Kennedy. It will give them a con- 
structive and positive way to do — to act — in the service of our country and of 
free men everywhere. 

It is true that we have signed a nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union, 
but this treaty should not lull us into any false sense of security or into a 
sense of maintaining the "status quo." The leaders in the Kremlin know full 
well the devastating power of destruction locked in the nuclear weapons which 
we and they have for instantaneous use. But these men are still bent on world 
domination, and they can be expected to increase their political warfare around 
the world. The test ban treaty by no means will lessen the Communist offensive 
in the cold war. On the contrary, I believe their tactics of agitation, subver- 
sion, propaganda, espionage, and others will be stepped up. 

Thus, the United States should expect and prepare for an intensified drive of 
total political warfare by the Communist movement. What is needed in our 
country to counteract and drive back this Communist offensive, and also foster 
the establishment of democratic societies, is a totality of effort by our National 
Government, with the aid of private citizens, as well as Government personnel, 
from all segments of our society. The Freedom Academy will provide the best 
avenue, the best means, to engender this totality of effort against communism — 
a totality of effort by citizens from both the public and private sectors of 
American society. 

Thank you. 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. Mayers, will you resume the stand ? 
STATEMENT OF HENRY MAYERS— Resumed 

Mr. Mayers. During the rest I had, I found that information you 
requested concerning the Costa Rican school. It was underwritten by 
the American Institute for Free Labor Development. Some of the 
other people, or the many who congratulated are : Mr. J. W. Fulbright, 
JSIr. George Meany, J^Ir. C. D. Jackson of L?'fe and Time, Mr. Jacob 
Javits, Mr. Clifford P. Case, and Mr. Wayne Morse. 

Mr. Johansen, I said there were four safeguards of the kind which 
3'Ou have wisely inquired about. I mentioned, first, the fact that the 
Commission would not be under the State Department domination; 
second, the fact that the appointments have to be bipartisan and 
approved by the Senate; and, third, that the Senators who sponsor 
the bill- — and there are 13 of them — would vigorously resist any 
questionable appointment. 

A fourth point I would like to make is that since the Cold War 
Council has spent so much time on the Freedom Academy bill, some 
people ask us, "'What are you going to do when it's passed ?" We are 
going to be a citizens' organization that sees that the Commission 
carries out the real intent and purpose of the writers of the bill and 
that it is not subverted by weak appointments or weak administration, 
once the bill is on the books. 

The Chairimax. Then, too, you might add two more safeguards. 
One is that it will have to meet the Appropriations Committee every 
year. 

Mr. Maters. Yes, sir. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COIMMISSION 1047 

The Chairman. And, two, under the bill, annual reports will have 
to be made to the President and to the Congress. 

Mr. IVIayers. Thank you. 

Now, I mentioned possible foreign consultants to the Coniinission 
only to emphasize that this is a rcorld challenge. We are the pre- 
sumed leaders of the free world. These men could help shape the 
Freedom Academy to make it the nucleus of a free world "popular 
front" against the global Red peril. From personal and con^espond- 
ence contact with several of the world political figures that I have 
mentioned, I have learned that even men with strong differences on 
domestic issues will join hands in a united free world effort to defeat 
the common political enemy — communism. 

I mentioned Mr. Papandreou in Greece. I also met there Mr. Spyros 
Markezini, who is his diametric opposite, politically. Both men told 
me the same thing. When I told them about the bipartisan ideals of 
the Cold War Council they said, "That is the only answer : a united 
front. No matter what our domestic differences, we will unite against 
Communists." 

Such men are deeply concerned over global communism's capacity 
for nonmilitary warfare, a capacity that has spread Marxist control 
over almost a third of the earth's area. They find little comfort in 
the fact that some of the native Communist cadres seeking to expand 
that area are guided and financed by Moscow, while others get their 
instructions and inspiration from Peking. The split in the bloc does 
not reduce its overall political threat to every free nation. 

How does our Government face up to the awesome nonmilitary 
challenge of global communism? Our major nonmilitary opposition 
in the area of political and propaganda warfare is through the USIA, 
an agency whose strategy has not changed since it was established in 
1948 — hefore even China went Communist! 

The Chairman". How do you support that statement ? 

Mr. Mayers. Well, I have studied Public Law 402, which is the 
original law establishing the USIA. It was later amended to take it 
out of the State Department and make it an independent agency. I 
have checked all of the several subsequent Executive orders to the In- 
formation Agency. The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that the law instructs 
the Agency to promulgate United States foreign policy and the Amer- 
ican way of life to other countries. That is not political warfare, as 
I think I can develop later. 

There has been no change in that basic directive to the USIA. The 
Agency still operates under Public Law 402. 

THE MADE-IN-U.S. HANDICAP 

I have mentioned that I have visited LTSIS posts around the world 
and on these travels have tried to learn why our Information Agency's 
conscientious efforts to communicate our political iclealogy and to 
expose the deceptions and the fallacies of Marxist ideology have had 
so little political impact in the target countries. I discovered that 
our ideological propaganda is often misunderstood or distrusted 
merely because it is disseminated under a made-in-the-U.S.A. label. 

It is poor psychology to try to sell such ideas as democracy, free- 
dom of thought, the dignity of man, the necessity of a middle class, 



1048 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

etc., as though these were U.S. mventions or U.S. monopolies. It is 
even more unwise to attempt to expose Marxist fallacies and Com- 
munist crimes through American spokesmen, or even through natives 
who are employees of the U.S.A. 

(At this point Mr. Johansen left the hearing room.) 

Mr. Mayers. That is why it is important that truths about the 
dangers of communism be explained to the people of a developing 
country by their own fellow men — by native patriots whose only con- 
cern is the security and progress of their own nation and who are 
not involved in furthering the foreign policy of the United States — 
which may not always be a very wefcome policy, from another coun- 
try's point of view. 

But such native patriots are up against highly trained Communist 
cadres who are thorough professionals in political warfare. They 
cannot be expected to fight their Communist enemy effectively unless 
they are inspired and trained through "instruction in strategy and 
tactics to attain and maintain [political] power for the purpose of 
defending and developing democracy," is advocated in the Costa Rican 
school's literature. They would get such training at a U.S. Freedom 
Academy. 

Now, we might speculate on what miglit have been the history of 
the cold war if a U.S. -sponsored Freedom Academy had been in op- 
eration 10 or more years ago. 

The Chairman. Before you go on to that point, you imply, as I 
understand, that the USIS has not had much political impact. I 
understand that they do have libraries in various countries, and they 
are reportedly well patronized. Wliat is your information on that? 

Mr. Mayers. They are very well patronized; I have seen many of 
them. But the amount of folitical impact that any library has is very 
limited. The Soviets do not even bother to set up libraries in these 
countries. They achieve a tremendous political impact through trained 
propagandists w^ho influence the press, the radio, all mass communica- 
tions media. Also through the word of mouth. 

I might raise the question of how much "political impact" do Amer- 
ican libraries have ? Propaganda is a much more serious undertaking 
than merely the running of a library, although I do not belittle USIo 
libraries. 

WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN 

If we had had a Freedom Academy 10 or more years ago, there 
would have been not only an anti-Batista movement in Cuba before 
the revolution, but inside that movement there would have been an 
alert anti-Communist group. The Cuban Communist underground 
would have had less opportunity to infiltrate and steal the legitimate 
anti-Batista revolution from the Cuban patriots and from the middle 
class that innocently financed Castro. 

The Chairman. Well, do you think Batista would have permitted 
Cubans to attend the Academy ? 

Mr, Mayers. Well, wherever there is a totalitarian regime, there 
is an underground and the underground has ways of getting informa- 
tion, if it is available. There would have been other Latin American 
countries to whom these Cubans could go, and they would get their 
information that way. They would have seen publications by the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1049 

Latin American anti-Communists that would have been smuggled into 
Cuba. 

I do not think that Batista would have been enthusiastic about 
sending Cuban Government employees to the Freedom Academy, but 
the potential for getting the "'know-how'- to prevent Red inhltration 
of the July 26 revolution would have been there to prevent what hap- 
pened to the Castro forces. The anti-Communists in these forces 
would have been alerted. 

What about Panama? If there had been a Freedom Academy 10 
years ago, there might today be more moderation in the cam- 
paign for President down there, which appears to l)e notliing but a 
competition as to who can be the most anti-American candidate. And 
there probably would have been less serious rioting over the flag inci- 
dent, because the rioting was obviously Communist incited and there 
was no group alert enough to recognize it, or strong enough to warn 
the rioters how they were being manipulated. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman. I personally discussed this with a group 
of Methodists at breakfast this morning. They are here today and 
they are from Texas and they are constituents of mine. Do you have 
any suggestions as to how you would combat this nationalist propa- 
ganda in these countries? How would this Academy teach that? 

Mr. Maters. Well, there is nothing in the Academy instruction, as 
I see it, that would in any way contradict nationalism. It would only 
direct nationalism into liealthy, progressive government channels. 
The Communists have been able to steal the nationalist movements 
because there has been no anti-Communist leadership of the national- 
ist movements sufficientiy strong to frustrate Communist infiltration. 

Mr. Pool. The big problem there in these countries is that one 
politician will be anti-United States, and then he may get us to give a 
little bit, and then the next will ask for more, and it keeps on, just a 
vicious cycle there. 

Mr. Mayers. Knowing how to handle these politicians, how to 
divert their direction, or how to defeat them, if necessary, by having 
candidates who are more patriotic and less self-seeking — this is a part, 
I think, of what any Freedom Academy student would learn. What 
we are talking about teaching them, are the principles of sound, demo- 
cratic government. Not that ours is perfect, but we have the nearest 
thing to that on the face of the earth. Many Latin Americans are 
hungry for constructive information on self-government. It is sur- 
prising how little tliey understand about how to go about creating the 
kind of government they would like. Many of the things that we take 
for granted in our political activity, such as opinion research and 
simple statistics and finding out what the people really need, such 
things are hardly known to tomorrow's Latin American politicians. 

It would not be a swift process, but they would gradually learn 
what makes the American system tick and they would be fortified in 
their efforts to counteract the amoral politicians who lean toward the 
Communist cause or who think that their only chance of success lies 
on being anti-American campaigners. 

Mr. Pool. Of course, the Communists are going to push a "hate 
America" campaign to offset any good that these students who go back 
might try to do. 



1050 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Mr, Mayers. Well, they are pushing it to the full right now. What 
^ve are talking about is offsetting the Communists' hate campaign. 

Mr. Pool. It is going to take a lot of imagination and a real smart 
curriculum to offset that. 

Mr. Mayers. Mr. Pool, I am glad you used the word "imagination" 
because that is one of the biggest things lacking in our whole approach 
to this problem. 

The Chairman". Well, of course, the student body of this Academy, 
in addition to being made up of newspaper people, church people, labor 
people, management people. Government people — that is, people of our 
Government stationed abroad, as well as stationed here — would also 
include foreign students. 

Mr. Mayers. Yes, foreign citizens. 

The Chairman. "VlHiich, as you say, could have included Cubans un- 
der Batista and could now include Panamanians. 

Now, we covered that a little bit yesterday, but let me ask you this 
question : What are your ideas about their selection and security ? One 
man expressed a thought that we should not go for letting the govern- 
ment of a country sponsor, or be solely responsible for sponsoring, 
students from that country. 

Mr. Mayers. I quite agree. 

The Chairman. There would be pitfalls in that. Wliat are your 
ideas? You see, we are plowing a brand new road now, and I do not 
know where it is leading and we have to make a record that will answer 
as many questions as possible. 

Mr. ^Iayers. Well, there was considerable discussion yesterday 
about the security check, which we need not go into again. But as- 
suming that you have an adequate security check, there should be no 
limit to how many carefully selected foreign students might receive 
training within the financial limits of the appropriations for the 
Academy. Those admitted could include university students, labor 
leaders, journalists, and other professional men with strong desires to 
learn more about how to fight communism. We must not forget that 
for every Communist in any one of those countries there are 10 anti- 
Communists, maybe 100. But as long as they are not trained the 
Communists with very limited cadres can take over unions and or- 
ganizations and governments. 

The Chairman. I think you are right, that that is our problem as 
members of the Committee on Un-American Activities. 

Mr. Mayers. I am sure this committee knows that, yes. 

The Chairman. I was pleased to hear someone say yesterday. Gov- 
ernor, that the student body could well be composed of employees of 
Members of Congress, and someone even suggested that maybe we 
should draw some from the judiciary. 

Mr. Tuck. I think you are right. 

Mr. M,\YERS. Well, it seems to me that the security check and appro- 
priations should be the only actual controlling factors. 

The Chairman. Now of course, we will meet with stooges, we will 
meet with plants. There is no question about that. But as someone 
said, there is a counter to that. There will be some courses that will 
be limited and if the plants come to hear ideas, our own ideas, why 
then we are at least educating them on what we propose. In an open 



PROVIDING FOR CREATIOX OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1051 

society it is pretty hard to control those things absolutely, and I sup- 
pose we have to take those risks. 

Mr. Mayers. It is not beyond possibility that a Communist would 
come to subvert and stay to pray. 

The Chairman. They are everywhere else, so I guess they would be 
there, too, 

Mr. Mayers. I have been talking- about if there were a Freedom 
Academy 10 years ago. In places like Laos and Cambodia and Viet- 
nam there might be today more stable political elements there, and 
better leadership. Those govermnents might have been nudged more 
in the direction of a viable democracy if some of their leaders had been 
trained in the Freedom Academy. 

Our Government continues to be surprised by Communist political 
strategy in today's trouble areas. 

(At this point Mr. Schadeberg entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. MAYERS. The record of our neglect of political warfare is shame- 
ful. Yet we find strong opposition to the Freedom Academy comes 
from the one U.S. department most responsible for that shameful 
record. That is the Department of State. Mr. Chairman, I would 
like to refer here to something that was said yesterday, to the eifect 
that all of the departments, the CIA and the Defense Department and 
the rest, are all opposed to the Freedom Academy. I have watched 
very closely the attitudes of those departments. Wlien the State De- 
partment was first asked by Senator Fulbright in February of 1960 
to send him its opinion or its position on the Freedom Academy, he 
sent the same question to the Defense Department and to the other 
depart.ments. State did not answer for a long time — 15 months. Not 
one of the other departments answered, imtil the State Department 
answered. Very soon after the State Department answered, in came 
the answers from the others. The USIA reply repeated, almost word 
for word, whole paragraphs of the State Department letter. The 
Defense Department letter did not say that they were opposed to it. 
They merely said they felt it was out of their sphere and they had 
no objection to it. That was the record at that time, anyway. 

The CIA also said that they would defer to the State Department. 
The Attorney General's Office did not answer at that time. I called 
there and talked to one of JNIr. Kennedy's assistants. The Attorney 
General is emphatically on record in a book he has written about the 
need for the very thing that we are talking about — it was quoted in 
Mr. Alan Grant's testimony yesterday. Robert Kennedy went over 
to Southeast Asia and ran up against trained Japanese students and 
Indonesian students who would hardly let him talk. He saw the 
operation of those Communist cadres within the student body, and 
came home and wrote that we had better do something about it. That 
may be one reason why his Department did not follow the others in 
deferring to the State Department, out of coiu'tesy, because they 
were asked to do so, although not really opposed to a Freedom Acad- 
emy. There are any number of men in the armed services who are 
veiy strong for cold war training programs such as we are consid- 
ering here today. 

The Chairman. Well, the position of the State Department initially 
was one of opposition. In the most recent, a matter of months, I 



1052 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

guess — however, they are now proposing a separate academy. What 
is it, the National Academy ? 

Mr. Mayers. The National Academy of Foreign Affairs. 

The Chairman. The Academy of Foreign Affairs which would be 
mider the domination — and I imply no evil — of the State Depart- 
ment. And, of course, there is some feeling abroad that that is a 
subtle way of neutralizing the bill we are now considering. But 
in any event, this is an acknowledgement of deficiency, and no one can 
shake that away from our mind. 

(At this point Mr. Ichord entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. The fact that they are sponsoring a bill is an 
aclaiowledgment of a deficiency in the present system. I think that 
is important. 

Mr. Mayers. Yes, of course, Mr. Chairman, as Mr. Alan Grant in- 
dicated yesterday, they rather reluctantly wrote that bill under in- 
structions from President Kennedy. Two months before the Perkins 
report came out, higlily critical of what the State Department was 
doing in the area of training with the Foreign Service Institute, I 
had a meeting with Mr. Walt Rostow, in which he assured me there 
was absolutely no need for any academy. The Department wrote 
the NAFA bill only imder instructions from the President. 

The Chairman. That was after the President's commission made 
a report. 

Mr. Mayers. Yes, after the Perkins report said that there has to 
be something done and the President asked to have it done. 

The bill they wrote was what you would expect from a reluctant 
department that had been opposing the Freedom Academy idea for 
years. It is a weak bill that merely renames and expands the existing 
Foreign Servnce Institute. It does not increase its budget much, ex- 
cept tliat it asks for an $18 million building to house it. Without go- 
ing into too many details here, I assure this committee it is nothing but 
a straw man compared to the Freedom Academy bill. I might add 
tliat many State Department officials do not want that bill passed. 
Thev are just using it as a sort of roadblock to the Freedom Academy 
bill.'^ 

On January 21, a story appeared in the Neio York Times reporting 
on a letter from Dean Acheson, now an adviser to the State Depart- 
ment and to the President, denouncing the National Academy of 
Foreign Affairs bill in no uncertain terms. 

Senator Jackson's Committee on National Security has recently 
been interviewing many people in the diplomatic service. Every one 
of them is opposed to the NAFA bill. No State Department people 
are pressing for action on the NAFA bill. They refer to it in these 
hearings presumably to divert attention from the real issue we are 
discussing here today, which is the Freedom Commission concept. 

The Chairman. Well, proceed, because we have quite a list of wit- 
nesses today. 

Mr. Mayers. I would like to dwell just a little longer on a point 
that you, Mr. Chairman, raised yesterday — the question, "Why does 
the State Department oppose the Freedom Commission bill?" 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1053 
DIPLOMATS VERSUS POLITICAL WARRIORS 

We in the Cold War Council have given considerable thought to 
why this is so. Our conclusion is that our foreign policymakers are 
experienced in conventional diplomacy, in global conflicts, and in other 
aspects of the international relations picture, but they have little skill 
in the arts of communicating with the jiolitical leadership of other 
countries on the people-to-people level. They are not only inexperi- 
enced in propaganda and political warfare, they are hostile to it. They 
prefer to ignore the fact that the propaganda and political warfare 
has been largely responsible for the Communist expansion ever since 
the end of World War 11. C. D. Jackson of Ti7ne magazine says: 

One of the reasons why the Eastern European satellite countries have become 
the forgotten theater of the cold war is that the West's diplomats have won out 
over the psychological warriors. There is a great difference between political 
warfare and diplomacy. Although they both pursue the same ends, they are dif- 
ferent sides of the street. 

The resistant attitude of the diplomats toward political warfare 
somewhat parallels the attitudes of the generals and admirals of 
World War I who resisted the development of air warfare. The 
Army and Navy brass of that day had built their own careers on land 
and water strategy. They instinctively opposed Gen. Billy Mitchell 
because air power, a new concept of military operations, threatened the 
supremacy of the only type of warfare with which they were familiar. 

Political and propaganda warfare todaj^ represents a new power 
concept in international relations. It is not surprising that some 
State Department careerists instinctively oppose the idea that the 
U.S. should develop this new power in a field for which they are not 
equipped by either training or temperament. 

The authoi-s of Freedom Academy legislation recognize that politi- 
cal warfare guidance is not a logical field of activity for the U.S. diplo- 
matic corps. They wisely propose an independent Freedom Commis- 
sion which would cooperate with the State Department, but build a 
corps of experts in an area in which the diplomats have few qualifica- 
tions and many limitations. 

Mr. Chairman, I have several more pages, but I would just as soon 
insert them in the record in the interests of saving time. And thank 
you veiy much for this opportunity. 

(The balance of Mr. Mayers' statement follows:) 

HIGH LEVEL MISUNDERSTANDING 

Examples of such limitations are seen in the oflScial behavior of State De- 
partment spokesmen in their opposition to Freedom Academy legislation. In 
May 1962, Assistant Secretary of State Frederick Dutton replied to a letter 
from Senator J. William Fulbright requesting the Department's views on Free- 
dom Academy legislation. Mr. Dutton offered three pages of reasons why the 
Department opposes a Freedom Academy. Roscoe Drummond, an exceedingly 
responsible journalist, then wrote in one of his columns, "the Dutton letter is 
based on a misreading and a misunderstanding of the Freedom Academy Bill." 

The Drummond comment suggests the Dutton letter may have been hastily 
written. The fact is, however, that it took the Department of State 15 months 
to formulate an answer to Senator Fulbright's request. 

When the Cold War Council asked Mr. Dutton why he took so long, he ex- 
plained that considerable research and study had to go into the preparation of 
the State Department's position on Freedom Academy legislation. Several 
months later, I had occasion to discuss that position with Dr. Walt W. Rostow, 



1054 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

chairman of the State Department's Policy Planning Council. I was amazed 
to discover that Dr. Rostow, whose office is about a hundred yards down the hall 
from Mr. Button's, did not know about the letter the Department had taken 15 
months to prepare. 

STATE DEPARTMENT SEMANTICS 

In my discussion with Dr. Rostow, he failed to recognize the difference be- 
tween the political education to be provided by a Freedom Academy and the 
Pentagon's "counterinsurgency" military training programs. Assistant Secre- 
tary of State Roger Hillsman, the State Department's specialist on Southeastern 
Asia, engaged in similar semantic confusion last summer when he addressed a 
Cold War Education Conference in Tampa, Florida. He told an audience, "what 
is going on in Laos today is political warfare." His listeners laughed. They 
were well aware that where American soldiers are dying, as in Southeast Asia, 
the situation cannot be called "political warfare." Tens of thousands of Amer- 
ican troops are engaged there today because we are 10 years too late in South- 
east Asia for true political warfare. 

Last June, when I had an opportunity to discuss the Freedom Academy con- 
cept with Secretary of State Dean Rusk, I discovered still another facet of the 
Department's concept of the words "political warfare." Referring to the thou- 
sand or more cables received by the Department every day, Mr. Rusk told me 
"everything we are doing here is political warfare." I learned from that con- 
versation that the Secretary of State had practically no previous knowledge of 
the nature and purpose of the Freedom Academy legislation. 

NSC OBJECTrVES 

The administrative body that should be most directly concerned with the fate of 
Freedom Academy legislation is the National Security Council. There is a close 
relationship between the bills under consideration and NSC policy objectives. A 
recent NSC paper on objectives calls for "mounting a systematic effort for the 
timely identification of points of crisis and forehanded action to resolve them." 
The Freedom Academy legislation is based on recognition of the need for fore- 
handed U.S. action along political training lines. It provides such action long 
in advance of the kind of crisis situation to which the NSC paper refers. Train- 
ing leaders of the developing nations in political strategy and propaganda for 
democracy would certainly forestall the growth of Communist political power to 
a crisis point in those nations. 

We are, of course, much too late in Cuba, Panama, Sovitheast Asia, and other 
points of the globe. But we are not too late in many other areas. The American 
ideals of representative government are still widely admired in the developing 
countries, where many present and future political leaders appreciate our ideology 
and would like to move their people toward our political concepts. But their 
desires represent only a frozen asset of the free world unless they can acquire what 
the Costa Rican institute refers to as "instruction in strategy and tactics to attain 
and maintain power for the purpose of defending and developing democracy." 

NATIONWIDE EXPECTATIONS 

Political analysts throughout the free world wonder when the United States 
Government will wake up to its opportunities and its obligations as a global ideo- 
logical leader. The same question disturbs American voters, both Democrat and 
Republican. This committee is aware of the innumerable magazine articles and 
newspaper columns written in recent years favoring the Freedom Academy idea. 
Intense bipartisan public interest in the subject is also revealed in the current 
mail received by the Cold War Council. 

More than a year ago, a group of citizens in California launched a drive for 
signatures on a petition to the President and Congress, urging action on Freedom 
Academy legislation. Thousands of such petition signatures were turned over to 
the Cold War Covmcil. However, the council didn't encourage the continuance 
of the drive because at that time the Gallup Poll announced results of a nation- 
wide public opinion survey on the subject. The poll revealed that almost 9 out 
of 10 American citizens queried as to the desirability of a "cold war academy" 
had definite opinions on the subject and that 5 of every 6 of those citizens favored 
the idea of a Freedom Academy. 

Such public opinion wil presumably be reflected in the Congress when the 
House of Representatives and the Senate are given an opportunity to vote on 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1055 

Freedom Academy legislation. As this committee knows, that was the result 
when the issue came before the Senate of the 86th Congress, which overwhelmingly 
passed the Freedom Commission bill by a voice vote. 

The Cold War Council believes it is reflecting the wishes of most informed 
citizens, as well as of most U.S. cold war specialists outside of Government, 
when it urges this House committee to render a report on Freedom Academy legis- 
lation similar to the one made by the Internal Security Subcommittee of the 
Senate Judiciary Committee and approved by the whole committee, stating the 
committee "considers this [Freedom Commission] bill to be one of the most im- 
iwrtant ever introduced in the Congress." 

Mr. Pool. I do have one question, Mr. Chairman. It is a very 
short one. Do you have any comment to make about the John Birch 
Society's opposition to the bill ? 

Mr. Mayers. Well, it is very strange that they and the State 
Department should be in the same camp. 

Mr. Pool. That is what brought the question up. 

Mr. Maters. I believe that their opposition is based on unreason- 
able fears. It is a defeatist attitude toward the American system of 
government. We should not oppose a sound piece of legislation for 
fear it may be subverted by bad appointments or by mishandling. 
What would be our position today if we had taken that attitude 
toward the Atomic Energy bill? It might have been opposed by 
somebody who said, "The President might put somebody in charge 
who will be soft on communism," then we wouldn't have had the 
development of the H-bomb. To approach the Freedom Commission 
idea from that standpoint is a defeatist attitude. 

The Chairman. Well, I am glad to say that this legislation has 
bipartisan support and, fbr lack of better words, both conservative 
and liberal support in the Congress. Here are some of the Senators 
who sponsor the bill : Senator Mundt, Senator Douglas, Senator Case, 
Senator Dodd, Senator Smathers, Senator Goldwater, Senator Prox- 
mire. Senator Fong, Senator Hickenlooper, Senators Miller, Keating, 
Lausche, Scott. That covers a pretty large, composite segment of all 
of our political thinking, and I think that is a wholesome thing. 

Mr. Mayers. It is definitely bipartisan. The Cold War Council is 
bipartisan. We never get into partisan politics, and that is why we 
are behind this bill. 

The Chairman. Well, you know, we opened these hearings with a 
completely open mind, and I am going to try to have my mind remain 
in that condition until we hear everybody, but you are making a pretty 
strong case. 

Mr. Mayers. Thank you. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Our next scheduled witness is Mr. McDowell. Mr. McDowell is 
the director of the Department of Civic, Educational and Govern- 
mental Affairs, the Upholsterers' International Union of the AFL- 
CIO, and is also executive secretary of the Council Against Communist 
Aggression. 

You might expand on your background for the record here, Mr. 
McDowell. 

STATEMENT OF ARTHUR GLADSTONE McDOWELL 

Mr. McDowell. Mr. Chairman, I would, in the interest of expedit- 
ing the hearings, file my copy of my formal statement which is before 
the committee. 

30-471 O— .64— pt. 1 9 



1056 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman. It is more impressive to us, if you could do that, and 
speak from it. 

Mr. McDowell. And then make allusions to the essential points 
there. 

(Mr. McDowell's prepared statement follows :) 

STATEMENT OF ARTHUR G. McDOWELL 

My name is Arthur Gladstone McDowell. I reside at 574 West Clapier Street, 
Germantown, Philadelphia, Pa. I am employed as director of the Department 
of Civic, Educational, and Governmental Affairs of the Upholsterers' 
International Union of North America, vv^hich is affiliated veith the American 
Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. I also function, 
since 1948, as director of International Labor Relations for the purpose of 
handling all correspondence vpith the International Federation of Building and 
Woodworkers, with headquarters in Copenhagen, Denmark, with which our 
union is aflBliated, and with all other labor organizations and personnel abroad. 
Also, with the approval of the Upholsterers' International Union, my employer, 
with whom I have been identified for nearly 19 years, I serve, without salary, 
as executive secretary of the Council Against Communist Aggression, founded 
in Philadelphia in February 1951 and additionally titled since December 1961 as 
the "Alexis de Tocqueville Society." The principal oflSces and headquarters of 
both organizations are located at 1500 North Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 

I appear before your committee in urgent support of the Freedom Commission 
and Academy legislative proposal embodied in substantially similar bills, most 
recently introduced in the 88th Congress by Representative A. S. Herlong, Jr., of 
Florida ; Representative Richard S. Schweiker, of Pennsylvania : Representative 
Charles S. Gubser, of California ; Representative Hale Boggs, of Louisiana ; and 
Representative Robert Taft, Jr., of Ohio. The most up-to-date form of this 
legislation is that introduced by Representative Boggs and one or two others, 
corresponding in most respects to the similar bill, S. 414, on which public hear- 
ings were held by the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate on April 
29 and May 1 of 1963, last year. There is only slight variation between these 
various versions of the bill and that passed by the U.S. Senate, without opposi- 
tion, on August 30, 1960. 

The Council Against Communist Aggression has been in active support of the 
Freedom Academy proposal since its circulation as a proposal for a private 
training and research institution with governmental consent and approval 
through the executive department in 1955. The Upholsterers' International 
Union, by convention action at San Francisco in June 1959, endorsed the proposed 
bills to legislate the Freedom Commission and Academy as introduced in the 
86th Congress by Congressmen Sydney Herlong and Walter Judd in the Housa 
of Representatives, and Senators Douglas and Mundt in the Senate, and I ap- 
peared before the Internal Security Subcommittee of the U.S. Senate on June 18, 
1959, in official support of passage, following the filing of statement of similar 
support by Andrew J. Biemiller, director of the Legislative Department of the 
AFL-CIO, on their behalf on June 17, 1959. The bill, subsequently reported by a 
unanimous Senate Judiciary Committee and described by them as "one of the 
most important ever introduced in the Congress," and subsequently passed by 
the Senate, is substantially the same as subsequently reintroduced in both houses 
in 1961 and again in 1963 and now before your committee, and no reiteration of 
these formal labor endorsements was believed required in Senate hearings last 
year. 

I have, however, requested permission to appear and add fresh testimony 
before this committee, both because of the urgent necessity, nay, the indispensa- 
bility of this legislation for the hopes of freedom of ourselves and our children, 
borne in upon us by every new ill wind that brings bad news for freerlom's cau«e. 
from Cuba and Panama to Southeast Asia and Zanzibar, and because this com- 
mittee, by its long historic, but often misunderstood and unacknowledged, service 
to the vigilance of the American people, is especially well equipped to under- 
stand the need, the urgency, and the relevance of this legislation. 

To qualify the organizations for whom I speak in this field, may I note that 
the Upholsterers' International Union of North America, founded in Philadelphia 
in February 1882, is one of the oldest continuous national and international 
unions in America. Predating the AFL itself, it became affiliated with AFL 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1057 

only in 1900, after surviving unassisted the divisions growing out of the early 
Knights of Labor and the disruptions and attempts at domination by external 
political radicalism represented by Daniel de Leon and his Socialist-Labor Party, 
remarkable for their similarity and precise contemporary date with early 
experiences of Lenin, evil genius of modem communism and his later Bolshevik 
Party. It was not a mere historical curiosity that, when Lenin hurriedly assem- 
bled his originally ramshackle and improvised First Congress of the Communist 
International in Moscow in March 1919, it was a delegation from the minuscule 
Socialist-Labor Party who belatedly turned up to claim title as the true Amer- 
ican Bolsheviks. Samuel Gompers and his close associates sharpened their 
understanding of would-be elites who aspired to take over the trade union move- 
ment as a tool of their Marxist revolutionary fanaticism in their contest with 
de Leon's Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance in the 1890's, and were rehearsed 
and prepared well in advance when Lenin disdainfully announced his intent 
to take over the U.S. trade union movement of the AFL, whose principle of 
voluntarism, to him, was "a rope of sand" against the militarily disciplined 
and centrally directed Communist forces Lenin proposed to create and put to 
the task of boring from within established trade union ranks. Gomi)ers died 
in 1924, within the same year as Lenin, but there was no doubt of Gompers' 
victory in the contest, a victory which lasted unquestioned until a self-willed 
and politically ambitious labor leader, by the name of John Lewis, in 1935, for 
his own purposes, swung wide the doors Gompers had so successfully barred. 

After 40 years of continuous existence, the Upholsterers' International Union 
published its first monthly official Journal ^ in June of 1922. In the third issue, 
that of August, the Upholsterers' Journal editorially reviewed the history of 
radical minorities, who beginning with de Leon and coming down to the official 
Moscow created and dominated Communist Party, just then emerging from 
underground existence of years since 1919, imder the name of the Workers 
Party, had sought to take over the trade unions for their special devious pur- 
poses. The editor, under the title of "Our Nemesis," stated the issue simply as 
follows : "The question resolves itself into whether the American labor move- 
ment wiU permit these friends of the payroll of Soviet Russia to scuttle the 
ship, or whether it (we) will make them walk the plank." 

In all successive years, in our union we made the scuttlers crew "walk the 
plank," including the late 1930's when the powerful John L. Lewis, who never 
relaxed his own rules permitting him to expel the loneliest, most ineffective 
Communist rank-and-file member from membership, his job and the industry in 
his own United Mine Workers, nevertheless made his deal to turn over whole 
union formations, such as office workers, farm workers, furniture workers. 
Government employees, longshoremen to exactly this Communist pirate crew. 
It was the Upholsterers who first stood their ground and licked outright deals 
to deliver their organization and membership to the leftwing forces invited into 
the CIO organization. It was these forces which the CIO was ultimately driven 
to belatedly expel from its ranks 12 years later (along with their nearly million 
members, whose affairs a small entrenched Communist clique doininated and 
had used as a base to entwine a third of the American trade union movement, 
along with almost all the Social-Democratic-led unions of Western Europe, vdth 
the Moscow-dominated World Federation of Trade Unions. It was the timely 
affiliation and aid of the Upholsterers' International Union which in 1948 enabled 
the International Federation of Building and Woodworkers, including furniture 
workers of Western Euroi)e to join with other of the international trade secre- 
tariats in resisting final incorporation into the World Federation of Trade Unions' 
trap and started the counter trend which enabled the CIO and free trade unions 
of Western Europe to pull out of the embrace of the Communist WFTU 2 years 
later and join with AFL in forming the present International Confederation of 
Free Trade Unions. 

In 1950 when the Upholsterers' International Union and its president, who 
had, in 1947. joined the other AFL and liberal forces and later some sections of 
the CIO in founding the Americans for Democratic Action to demolish the 
attempt of the Communists to establish a mass political party in America under 
the misleading Progressive label and behind the face of the bemused former 
Vice President Henry Wallace, found our associates in ADA involved in the 
incredible confusion and appeasement of advocating the U.N. entry and diplo- 
matic recognition of Red China in the midst of the Sino-Soviet Communist 



1 UJ.U. Journal. 



1058 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

aggression in Korea, the Upholsterers' Union and its oflBeers withdrew from the 
ADA in defense of the strongly opposite policy of AFL, which we supported. 

In February 1951 the Upholsterers' Union appealed to a leading officer of one 
of its largest employers, Fred McKee of Pittsburgh (now deceased), who after 
lifelong service as treasurer of the old League of Nations Association and its 
successor, the Association for the United Nations, had just resigned from the 
latter organization on the same issue, to form a new center of anti-Communist, 
common-sense information and correspondence. Out of this labor and manage- 
ment initiative, a gathering held in Philadelphia on February 10, 1951, rallying 
behind the militant, antiappeasement speech in the U.S. Senate by Senator Paul 
Douglas of Illinois of that January, formed the Council Against Communist 
Aggression, for whom I also speak today, as its chief executive officer. All of 
our study documentation and correspondence of the intervening 13 years has 
crystallized since 1959 in our concurrence with the Senate Judiciary Committee's 
unanimous report of 1960 that the Freedom Commission and Academy is the 
most important piece of legislation to come before the Congress in our lifetime, 
and that it is a proper subject for legislation and not mere executive department 
or private initiative. 

Beginning in 1903, the evil, political genius, Nicolai Lenin, combined an em- 
bittered and hate-filled German exile's distillation of a theory of historical prog- 
ress by class war and dictatorship, drawn from two German philosophers, Hegel 
and the renegade theologian and materialist Feurbach, with his own experience 
and roots in the long night of Russian absolutism, and produced what we know 
today as Marxism-Leninism, which has already claimed as many victims as 
Hitler's equally evil and powerful racist theory. It is interesting to note that 
both Marx and his class-war theory of progress and the Frenchman Gobineau, 
who in his Essay on the Inequality of the Races laid basis for Hitler's theory 
of race as basis of progress, were contemporaries and both had as their youthful 
philosophical source the same two philosophers, the dialectician Hegel and the 
materialist Feurbach. Ironically, it was in Philadelphia that the only English 
edition of Gobineau's racist theory of history was published in 1859, and it was 
to Philadelphia that Marx in the 1870's sent his First International (Inter- 
national Workingmen's Association) to die rather than be captured by his 
enemy, the Russian terrorist Bakunin. It was scarcely mere coincidence that 
in 1913-14, when European civilization stood on brink of the abyss of world war 
for the first time in 99 years, the only two voices recorded as welcoming the 
prospect, and that for its inevitable furtherance of their political hopes and 
schemes, were respectively Nicolai Lenin and Adolph Schicklegruber (Hitler), 
both men to enter history under assumed names, under which they will ever be 
execrated by civilized man. 

As Americans should above all remember, since their Declaration of Inde- 
pendence and the idea of government by consent of the governed and all men are 
created equal and endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights to life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness has toppled vast empires once spanning the 
earth, ideas and not material things are the most powerful forces on earth. This 
goes for bad ideas like the class-hatred ideas of Marx-Lenin and the race hatred 
of Hitler, as well as for the best ideas. Actually today we seem to have in many 
cases adopted in action the materialism of Marx and are failing, with all our 
material success, while the enemy, using the power of an outworn and dis- 
credited by every event 19th-century idea, is succeeding in spite of all their 
daily material failures, which we do solicitously try to repair for them with 
food and credits, to the despair of the oppressed and imprisoned peasants, whose 
.sabotage weapon against their oppressors we strike from their hands. 

Lenin invented a genuinely new idea and instrument of tyranny. It was the 
idea of a professional revolutionary elite dedicating the whole of their lives, 
under a centralized, military-type discipline, to the acquiring and holding of 
power, total power for the recasting of the whole human race and its society, 
in the long run, not one whit less grisly and costly in blood practice than Hitler's. 
It is not the single.idea of conspiracy and secrecy, the unlimited use of violence 
as needed, the concept of a self-chosen elite, the ethic which uses assassination 
of character and deception as the first, and not the last resort, or anyone of 
these precepts alone, but their blending into a whole, which broiaght the Com- 
munists from a tiny group of backbiting exiles to rulership over a third of the 
world's peoples and territory in 61 years. The 75-mile gun with which Germany 
dismayed the French in World War I shelling was not a new gun. They simply 
took an old one and reduced the size of the barrel, leaving the powder chamber 
of larger bore. Lenin's genius did something of the same thing. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1059 

It is the combination of the appearance of civilian conduct of affairs, usiing such 
Western peaceful, democratic terms as the very word "party," with the actuality 
of the waging of a struggle for power at every level and in every and any social 
formation by the most rigorous of military methods and tactics. Lenin avidly 
studied the works of the German, thoroughgoing, military genius Von Clause- 
witz as much or more than he did Marx. High on his list of maxims, as on that 
of every follower of his, down through Khrushchev and Mao, is that which says : 

"The political aim determines the strategy, the tactics and the outcome of 
war," and that "war is the mere pursuit of diplomacy by other means." 

There is not a single Western, free world statesman — whether President, 
Premier, Secretary of State, Information OflScer — in this generation who now 
understands or ever grasped this principle of world Conuaunist procedure, save 
perhaps Churchill in his prime, and none who is prepared to act upon it in free 
world terms. Lenin went on to perfect, in control of his first state, Russia, a 
new and modern despotism in which there is the appearance of distinct institu- 
tions such as parliament, army, bureaucracy, judiciary, etc., but only one power 
reality, the newly invented Communist Party. He understood the newly decisive 
importance of money on the scale available to a national state, as compared 
with any private formation, because it was German General Staff funds that 
not only took Lenin across war lines into confused, Czarless, and suddenly 
theoretically democratic but totally inexperienced Russia, but we now know that 
it was German Government funds that in the summer of 1917 kept his party 
growing steadily over all others in organization and position in Petrograd and 
Moscow and enabled it by armed coup to seize power without the country even 
realizing it. 

The proposed Freedom Commission and Academy is the first proposal to 
actually establish equality between the free world, led of necessity by the United 
States, and the Communist slave world, still led by Soviet Russia, as Alex de 
Tocqueville, as true a prophet for democracy as Marx was a false one for his 
dictatorship, actually foresaw would inevitably be the case, 130 years ago. 
Failure to act on this measure and its concept means that we, with the best ideas 
and the most magnificent of resources, will see an enemy with some of the worst 
and most outworn and discredited ideas in history, and most blundered, stunted, 
and mismanaged economic organization and resources known to man go on to one 
political and diplomatic victory after another, in one spot after another, simply 
because they are in a political war with us and we are at political peace with 
them or, at best, are spasmodically trying to end the political war we call cold, 
and ease tensions, the decisive ones of which they will not relax one inch or one 
ounce, save to renew them in another quarter, where to relax tension is simply to 
let the other fellow pull you across the line into his arms, as we have already 
done in Laos and may yet be persuaded or blundered into doing in neighboring 
South Vietnam. 

The U.S. labor movement has grown tired of waiting over the 5 years which 
have elapsed since the basic idea of the Freedom Academy— to train our forces 
to win the political wars instead of losing by default, to meet an idea with a 
better idea, the only way any idea, however false or evil, has ever been 
defeated — first was introduced in the Congress and referred to the Senate Judi- 
ciary and to this committee in the House. In frank and effective collaboration 
witli American management interests, the American Institute for Free Labor 
Development was created 2 years ago by AFL-CIO to train their fellow trade 
unionists in Central and South America in the techniques of free trade union 
leadership and the destruction of totalitarian infiltration. True to its char- 
acter. Government bureaucracy has come in on the tail end of the procession 
and used what good efforts private forces in our society were putting forth as 
an excuse for not doing anything in the vast exposed student, university, and. 
above all, the agricultural area where 80% of the population in most 
exposed and politically weak and unstable nations live. Lenin, Stalin, and Mao 
have developed a sure-fire way of attaining power in predominantly peasant 
countries, starting with Russia and climaxing with China, and moving now on 
to Brazil, British Guiana, Vietnam, Indonesia, and you name it. Tune up the 
hatred of the landlord and the moneylender by the small peasant, set the land- 
less peasant and farm laborer, who can only be absorbed and made useful by 
growth of industry in the towns, against all of them, and^it is no trick to take 
over. They (the Communists) can't make it work, but "when the i>easant finds 
that out it is too late for any machinery for political change. If you have a 
modern country like Czechoslovakia or a relatively modern one, with a middle 
class, like Cuba, the quasi-legal coup, well learned from Hitler and his Nazis in 



1060 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Germany, will do, and Castro has brought new tricks of student terrorism to 
bear. 

If there is any university or Government agency currently preparing civilian 
tjainees on the strategy of the enemy and helping research and accumulate data 
on how freedom fighters can wage political warfare on even slightly even terms, 
I defy State or any executive department to name it or show a curriculum that 
would do anything to a hard-boiled Communist training school instructor, except 
reduce him to helplessness by laughter. The last time I looked, there was not 
a university or library in the United States which could produce a set of the 
collected works of our shrewdest enemy in history, Nicolai Lenin, in English. 
We are in no position to poke fun at Chamberlain and his umbrella for his 
refusal to read Mein Kanipf, or listen to those who had, until it was too late 
and England had declined to where it could not save or aid what weakened allies 
it had after appeasing away the others. 

There is another great jest which must make Khrushchev's evenings merry 
even in the midst of the 38th year of agricultural failure and stagnation. That 
is the distinction between the external Communist danger and the internal one 
solemnly discussed by what I^icnin called "the useful idiots" in non-Communist 
societies, which he planned to subvert. This distinction may be given momen- 
tary reality in a college classroom or in a very high and remote pulpit on a very 
calm and fine Sunday morning. To a practical trade union like ours, whose 
October 1942 Journal stumbled on the American trade union cover for Stalin's 
refusal to admit U.S. lend-lease to Russian people, the distinction is a fantasy. 
To the men in the Kremlin today or those in Peiping's palace tomorrow, there is 
no such distinction. 

The decision of the Communist closed societies in 1960, in congress assembled, 
to persuade the open societies of the West, and, above all, the United States, 
that the dead Hitler and Mussolini and their dispersed legions and their sur- 
viving adolescent and paranoid sympathizers in our time were more of a danger 
to our peace, democracy, and freedom than Khrushchev and Mao and all their 
divisions, armament, bombs, and worldwide apparatus, this fantastic idea was 
not sent out in Russia or by courier, but by 1962 a bishop in the pulpit of my 
church declared that fascism, and not communism, was the menace of today 
and misquoted Huey Long of 1934 as an authority. When I corrected his 
quotation and asked him if he could remember where he got it, he, being an 
honest man, said no he could not remember and promised to stop using it, 
but it had been spread across a continent before he reached Philadelphia. 

Thousands of U.S. clergymen publicly protested and last summer attested to 
the supposed fact that the head of a government allied with us against the Com- 
munist military and murder attack in Southern Asia, in which Khrushchev only 
yesterday says he is as enthusiastic as that so-and-so Mao, was persecuting the 
religion of a majority of his countrymen. The anti-Communist government 
invited the United Nations to send a commission to investigate. It has made 
its report, under date of December 7. It failed to find the religious perscution and 
talked freely to supposedly murdered monks, but none of the great daily news- 
papers, whose superficial and hasty reporters had reported the alleged religious 
persecution, destroyed pagodas, and supposedly siwnteneons suicides of protest, 
even mentioned the fact of the report until an indignant Costa Rican Ambas- 
sador member of the U.N. Commission spoke up, 20 days later, through a reli- 
gious press service. After all, alarmed by the agitation of American opinion 
over the nonexistent and obviously insane religious persecution of a majority 
of a country under military attack, our Under Secretary of State Harriman and 
Assistant Secretary of State Hilsman had called for overthrow of that gov- 
ernment ; and by the time the U.N. Commission reported the actual facts, the 
government had been overthrowm, the anti-Communist President assassinated, 
and the rejoicing street mobs permitted to selectively wreck not only all strongly 
anti-Communist newspapers, which may or may not have been connected with 
the overthrown anti-Communist government, but also the international head- 
quarters of the Asian People's Anti-Communist League, which was not connected 
with the overthrown government. 

Actually, the whole formula of faslsehood and exaggeration and demand for 
destruction of the then allied, anti -Communist government in South Vietnam was 
set forth in a paid ad in the New York Times of April 12, 1962, signed by a group 
of notorious Communist fellow travelers familiar to this committee and, of 
course, some innocents. I wrote one of the innocents, my old college professor 
in history, in protest and correction, ar.d his name and that of two of his col- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1061 

leagues at Yale disapi)eared from subsequently published copies of the ridiculous 
Communist-Party-line, lying ad on South Vietnam, which, in our country, with- 
out a political warfare trainee in clergy or State Department, became the utter 
truth for thousands of clergymen. An old and often-fooled friend of mine, who 
organized his campaign a year after the fellow travelers' ad appeared, was 
totally taken in himself by press reports. In a case in a Communist-ruled coun- 
try, where he knew firsthand of religious i>ersecution, he kept quiet for i)ersonal 
reasons and the difficulty of getting any attention from a press that believes 
that Conmiunist oppression is a case of "dog bites man" and is therefore no 
news, while oppression by an anti-Communist government is a case of "man bites 
dog"and is news, even if untrue. 

The newspapermen who misled the American people and all those clergymen 
were, of course, ignorant of the religious, cultural, political, and every other 
kind of history of the remote Asian country to which the newsmen were assigned, 
and from which the clergymen got their news, with assists from conveniently 
appearing Buddhist students and exiles here. Small surprise. Only a minority 
of American States require even the study of history of the United States. A 
bright young man can get a bachelor's degree from Princeton or Harvard, in 
turn, without ever having had an hour in American history, and become a Foreign 
Service officer or correspondent for a great U.S. daily newspaper or television 
chain. There is small chance of this supposedly educated man bothering about, 
or even being able to grasp, the history of the country to which he is assigned if 
he doesn't know the history of his own country. It is doubtful if any single 
newspaperman cabling the phony story of religious persecution in invaded and 
civil-war-torn South Vietnam had ever heard that Lincoln and Halleck had had 
to order General Grant to withdraw General Order No. 11 expelling all Jews 
from his Department of Tennessee, an action Grant stoutly insisted had no 
religious significance or that Stanton, with little interference from Lincoln, in 
the course of the war arrested and held 15,000 U.S. civilians without charges, 
bail, or habeas corpus. 

Our Communist enemy does not send out an Embassy porter without political 
training. Their thousands of political warfare trainees are recruited from every 
country of the earth, and have been for a generation and a half now, and are 
sent back drilled and prepared for action. Tliere are many backward and 
swampy areas of the earth ; but as science has now established, contrary to 
old wives' tales, it is not the swamps that breed and breathe out malaria, but 
that little parasite carried by the malarial mosquitoes, who do live happier in 
swamps, but can breed and bite from less favorable areas. 

In the last 35 years in these United States I have been either in uneasy, 
and always subject-to-cancellation-without-notice, "peaceful coexistence" with 
Communists or at open war with them as student, in union, in religious, press, 
welfare, community, minority and majority jvolitical party, civil liberties and 
sports organizations, in each and every year. 

There is no sjibstitute for concrete experience with the Communist operation, 
and its political aim of power is so uniform that any item of concrete experience 
with them has eventually some usefulness, but there must be a complete, sys- 
tematic training in the political inspiration and methodology of the foe. This 
is completely lacking from top bureaucrats in the State Department to politi- 
cally untrained businessmen and students going abroad. It is reflected in the 
I)resent coat of arms of our key Department of State, which should be two 
eyebrows raised in perpetual surprise. In 1959 the State Department's respected 
press officer was "surprised" that a Communist delegation had used the Inter- 
national Olympics Committee meeting in Chile for a political cold war maneuver, 
although to my personal knowledge the Communists in the United States, 
through an international agent in Chicago, were using the Olympics for political 
propaganda purposes as long ago as 1932 and the principal personal target then 
was the American businessman, then head of the American Olympics Committee, 
as he is now head of the International Olympics Committee, who has never 
studied communism and, therefore, never caught on, in 32 years. 

Cuba was a surprise, Panama and its students were a surprise, and Cuba's 
Castroites in far away African Zanzibar were a surprise. Eventually, the free 
world could die of surprises. 

It is time to stop the surprises. Once, in early days, they were inevitable. 
Thirty-five years ago, as the campus political radical at my university, I was 
asked to become the new head of the campus Liberal Club. Faculty advisers 
and incumbent officers cleared it, but a young professional Communist student, 



1062 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

whose father was a Soviet textile factory boss in Leningrad, was actually elected 
at a routine and poorly attended meeting. One of the faculty advisers was a 
party sympathizer and worked secretly with the Communist nucleus. Nineteen 
years later, I last heard of the professor in action. He was an economist and 
was leading a batch of American university students in Prague shortly after 
the 1948 coup and explaining that the new and growing shortage of food since 
Communist takeover was purely temporary and would soon be followed by 
Communist guaranteed plenty. 

That, my first experience, was in 1929; the Communist International was 
barely 10 years old. Student operations of Communists were underestimated 
and little understood, as against today when we know the second man in line 
in Communist China, the first man in North Vietnam, the top banana in British 
Guiana, in left-leaning Ghana, and a score of other places were recruited to 
Communist and revolutionary purpose as college students, as indeed was Lenin 
himself, and, in a sense, Marx and Engels. 

In 1929 it remained for me to get exi)elled from the university for Liberal 
Club activity on a club board on which I was minority and a professional Com- 
munist was chief with a majority. The chancellor of the university later told 
my older brother, who graduated the usual way, that the fight over our expul- 
sion, which went to court, cost the university a million dollars in cash contribu- 
tions and put his building program back 3 years. 

Three of us were thrown out, the Communist club president, now number 
three on the Attorney General's list of leading Communist oflicials in the U.S.A., 
your witness, and a young philosophy teaching graduate assistant, Frederick 
Woltman. I went out of the university to lend a hand the following week to a 
group of striking milk wagon drivers, and found my erstwhile Communist fellow 
student on the outskirts of my street meetings, distributing scurrilous leaflets 
attacking the union on strike and me and, in effect, urging the strikers, whose 
union I was trying to help, "to shoot their captain and bore from within." 

Exasperated and half amused, I set out to find what made this new kind of 
gink, the Communist, click. In 35 years of tense maneuver and occasional bitter, 
open conflict I never ceased to be exasperated, but I quickly ceased to be amused. 
Fred Woltman, the other expellee, won a job on the tfew York World Telegram 
and there won the Pulitzer Prize for his articles exposing the Communist at- 
tempts at takeover of unions. 

In a way, when I sum up my personal arguments for the Freedom Academy 
and Commission, I think of it in terms of the boyhood score as it stands today. 
The Communist trap broke its teeth on the two non-Communists in that student 
flap at the University of Pittsburgh, but the third operator is still a vigorous top 
professional in the Communist Party, U.S.A., a William Albertson. Fred Wolt- 
man, of Pulitzer fame, is out of the writing game forever with a multiple stroke 
and aphasia, and yours truly must do a part-time job in this main fight. We 
continue to rely on amateurs like myself in the decisive private sector. The 
enemy recruits systematically and sends against us trained professionals. In 
the long run, there is no question of which ball team will win most of the games. 
We either apply the good old American way of education of teachers and fighters 
and developing technical training to overcome, at home and abroad, nearly 40 
years' lead time that the Communists have on their side, or we default and at 
iate last send raw and inexperienced troops into this political war to "fall, one 
by one, in an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." 

I could give some, in fact an almost endless list of summary examples of the 
ease with which tiny groups of Communists of small capacity per individual, 
but with political training and military-type organization, took over originally 
even anti-Communist mass movements of unemployed, of church-sponsored orga- 
nizations ; held for 20 years the minority control of a key labor press association ; 
planned use of American unions to cover up their failure to acknowledge lend- 
lease in 1943 ; once gave instructions by Moscow cable on how to retain control 
of a Duluth, Minnesota, cooperative; etc.. etc. But also there are the many 
examples of small, determined, anti-Communist individuals and groups who, 
with experience, routed the Communist operation. There is no defeatism where 
there is training and preparation on the free world side. Until we found and 
place in operation a functioning Freedom Commission for research and accumula- 
tion of political warfare intelligence and an Academy for training our own and 
our allied sons and daughters, our side will still on balance put up only a 
"contemptible struggle." 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1063 

Mr. McDowell. I think it should be clear, sir, that I have no 
expertise from foreign travel, since my folks came here from Ireland 
and Scotland in the beginning of the 18th centuiy, and I dont' know 
of any members of the family tliat have traveled abroad except at 
the immediate invitation of Uncle Sam in certain emergencies. 
Therefore, I speak from the point of view and from the background 
of experience of a person who has dealt with the Communist opera- 
tions, toe to toe, over a period of the last 35 years, purely in its 
domestic manifestation. And yet, since 1934, I have had organiza- 
tional responsibilities in various organizations in the labor movement 
concerned entirely with international affairs. 

I have not found this a complete disability, because I have never 
found a single item of foreign news of the Communist operations in 
virtually any country which is not matched by an item of experience 
with the operations of this particular conspiracy in its domestic 
manifestations. Any attempt to draw a distinction is one that can 
only be dra^Ti in a classroom, and that only very briefly and in fugitive 
terms, because we are here dealing with a unity and a whole, not 
with some artificial distinctions within a conspiracy that operates 
from without and within all national borders. 

I might point out that in appearing before the committee in urgent 
support of the Freedom Academy bill, I speak for both the Uphol- 
sterers' International Union, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, and I 
appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the initial hear- 
ings on the first form of this measure in 1959, only following the 
filing of an official statement by the legislative representative of the 
AFI^CIO, indicating their support of this measure. This was filed 
by Mr. Andrew Biemiller, the 

The Chairman. I am sorry. Wliose support are you referring to ? 

Mr. McDowell. The Upholsterers' International Union. I first 
appeared for them before the Senate Judiciary Committee in support 
of this same measure. 

The Chairman. You are going beyond that, now ? 

Mr. McDo\VELL. Subsequent to the filing of the official statement 
by the AFIv-CIO, of which we are an affiliate, in support of the 
principles of this measure. And, therefore, I appear here more in 
the lines of a policy, which has been authenticated not only by action 
of my international union, in successive conventions, but by the 
AFL-CIO's legislative department as well. 

The Chairman. That is the whole AFL-CIO organization? 

Mr. McDowell. Tliat is right. 

I might call your attention to the fact that that statement is in 
the public hearings of the Senate indicating the AFI^CIO position. 

The Chairman. All right, proceed. 

Mr. McDowell. This bill, of course, at that time was submitted 
both to the educational departments and to the international affaire 
departments of the AFI./-CIO; and after their study, the authoriza- 
tion for approval by the AFI^CIO was then put in the record. 

The Chairman. What record ? 

Mr. McDowell. Into the record of the Senate Judiciary on the 
first hearings on this bill, held in 1959. 

The Chairman. Does counsel know whether we have that statement ? 



1064 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Mr. NiTTLE. Yes, sir, we do. 

Mr. McDowell. I think it might be relevant, with the committee's 
permission, to preface my formal remarks by the insertion of that 
statement, which is still the standing policy of the AFI^CIO. 

The Chairman. Yes, I wish it to be incorporated in your testimony. 
That statement of the AFLr-CIO will be incorporated at this point in 
the record. 

(Mr. Biemiller's statement follows:) 

Statement of Andrew J. Biemiller, Director, Legislative Department, 
\AFLt-CIO], ON S. 1689 

We have examined the purpose and contents of S. 1689, a bill to create a 
Freedom Commission and a Free World Academy. 

The AFL-CIO concurs in the general aims of this bill and urges its passage 
at the earliest possible moment. 

The AFL-CIO has been among the first that have consistently pointed to the 
threat posed to the free world by the attempt of world communism to conquer 
and dominate the world. The Communist conspiracy works on every level and 
works 24 hours a day. Its agents are hard-working fanatics who have been 
especially trained at their jobs of infiltration and subversion. The necessary 
effort of defense and counterattack on our part cannot be successfully achieved 
by hit and mis®, uncoordinated efforts. Our country needs a coordinated effort 
on all levels, using men well grounded in knowledge of all asjiects of Communist 
ideology and endeavor, and skilled in countering its agents all over the world in 
their moves on the economic, political, social, religious, moral, cultural fields. 

For these reasons we favor the passage of this bill whose aim is exactly to pro- 
vide the means whereby the training of this necessary personnel will be achieved. 

Mr. McDowell. In evidence of the interest and concern of our 
organization, I speak in this case of the Upholsterers' International 
Union. It is one of the oldest unions in the United States, founded 
in Philadelphia in 1882. It became affiliated with the AFL only in 
1900, having survived the storms of various types of radical attempts 
to dominate that organization and its purposes from without by an 
individual who in many respects — an American, by the way — who in 
many respects duplicated the same rather devilish concepts of ex- 
ternal political domination of a basic institution of American life 
subsequently represented by Lenin and his ilk. I speak of Daniel 
de Leon, the head of the Socialist Labor Party, who in the 1890's 
created the Socialist Trade and Labor Alliance, which was an orga- 
nization whose main purpose was to create a high command which 
would direct the trade union movement without, although still lack- 
ing the essential Communist elements of secrecy, deception, and mili- 
tant conspiracy. 

This was then challenged by Samuel Gompers, who had here a val- 
uable preliminary experience with elements of the philosophy 
represented by Lenin and his procedures on the American scene, as 
early as the 1890's. When, therefore, in 1919 Lenin created his Com- 
munist International and declared the AFL one of his major 
targets and his major enemy to be Samuel Gompers and the philos- 
ophy of the American trade union movement, they of the AFL were 
not unprepared for the issue, and I might say that one of the most 
neglected documents in American diplomatic history is the memo- 
randum filed by Samuel Gompers with President Wilson at the con- 
ference in Versailles, in which he pointed out that American postwar 
foreign policy in Europe was basing itself upon a foundation of sand, 
namely, the possibility in the existing situation in Europe of creat- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1065 

ing a democratic Germany, because, he pointed out, if we founded our 
policy on this assumption, as it was evident that we were going to do 
for the next decide, we would base it upon a rather fragile force in 
German society, which was unable to even maintain public order 
against the Communist attack, except by the invocation of the aid of 
the next most undemocratic force in German society, which was the 
German General Staff and its military force and tradition; and he 
pointed out that, beginning in 1917, there were elements in that Gen- 
eral Staff which had a weakness for playing ball with the Bolsheviks 
and that this would recur in subsequent periods, as of course it did. 

Now this warning was, I might say, completely disregarded, but 
Samuel Gompers was a person whose comprehension ran far beyond 
the problems merely of the trade union movement. He comprehended 
the problems of the free society and the nature of the challenge to it 
of the totalitarian conspiracy and procedure which Lenin had cre- 
ated. And it is, as I pointed'out in the statement, necessary for com- 
prehension of the purposes of such a bill as those before you to realize 
that in 1903 and thereafter, and based upon his thinking before that 
time, Lenin created something new in international operations and 
affairs, and that was the creation of a new type of organization known 
as a "party," a deceptive word to those who use the term in the West- 
ern sense, but a new type of organization which applies existing prin- 
ciples in a combination never before achieved. This is, to create an 
organization which ostensibly operates in the civilian area, among 
peaceful and more normally democratic groups in any society, but is 
itself actually military in its form, in its method of operations, and 
therefore is facing a group of people who are completely unprepared 
to carry on an equivalent operation. 

I point out that the equivalent of this was in the case of the develop- 
ment of artilleiy by the German Army in 1915 to 1918, in which they 
developed the long-range gun — the so-called 75-mile gun-— which was 
able to bombard Paris from the other side of the German lines. This 
was not done by creating a new piece of ordnance. They merely took 
a piece of ordnance that previously existed, reduced the size of the 
bore, left the powder capacity in its same proportion as it existed be- 
fore, and brought to bear a new and more effective weapon. 

This, essentially, is what Lenin created. 

The Chairman. That was the Big Bertha. 

Mr. McDowell. The Big Bertha. And I would offer it, I would 
offer the observation that, up to this present moment, we have not 
devised, or even set out to devise, an instrument to counter this new 
political invention, an evil invention, but nevertheless an effective in- 
vention, which Lenin created. 

The Chairman. Well, I touched on that idea yesterday, except, of 
course, I used a different comparison — that they created the Ministry 
of Propaganda. To us, that word is a dirty word, and therefore we 
shy away from it and we have never sought to be experts in that very 
field in which they use most potent "artillery" against us. 

Mr. McDowell. I might point out, sir, that there are two elements 
here. Propaganda was not initially a dirty word. 

The Chairman. It was not intended to be, philosophically. 

Mr. McDowell. Historically it comes from a church institution, the 
Institute for the Propagation of the Faith. 



1066 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The Chairman, Of course, the Propagation of the Faith. 

Mr. McDowell. But this word was given a very nasty connotation 
because of the obvious abuses that were used by various sides in the 
propaganda war which emerged in World War I, and since that time, 
I might say also that it is not merely in propaganda. It might be 
esteemed to be a fair statement that we do engage in propaganda in 
such an institution as that created in the Voice of America and the 
Information Agency. What we do not engage in, and a field where 
the Gomnumists are absolutely undisputed, is in the field of agitation, 
which is the taking of two or three ideas at the most, and the constant 
reiteration and organization around those ideas for their disruptive 
power and purpose. 

Now in this field, there is nothing that we are doing at the present. 
It is not a question of whether we do it better or worse than the 
enemy. It is a question of something that we do not do at all. 

We do constantly receive, for example, elements suitable for our 
counteruse in this contest. I have here, and I would like to leave 
with the chairman for incorporation in the record, an item coming out 
of an African paper published in Nairobi under date of February 9 
of this year. (See pp. 1079-1081.) 

(At this point Mr. Clausen entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. McDowell. This relates the terrifying experiences of an Afri- 
can student in Communist China, in which he comes back to give — as 
the newspaper headline puts it — "as Red China woos Africa, a timely 
warning by a young African who went to China and came away 
afraid . . . afraid for Africa." 

Now here is a complete item of the most valuable propaganda, and 
it happens to be also the truth. Yet I dare say that this, which comes 
to me from a young labor correspondent who is attempting to help 
unions in these new countries of Africa organize on a trade union 
basis, on the basis of the experience of the American trade union 
movement applied in their different circumstances, that this will not 
be picked up. It could be reiterated, it could be repeated over and 
over again. This is agitation, based upon a propaganda truth, but 
unless it is used and is used by the people who are most concerned, 
that is, not by Americans, but by those who are directly confronted 
with the type of experience that this young African had in Red 
China, it will of course be a one-shot item. It is reproduced, a few 
people read it, and then it is forgotten. 

Given this sort of a statement based on flimsiest of facts, the Com- 
munists would be using this statement for the next 10 years. It 
would reappear in every type of publication in every part of the world, 
as of course items relating to the difficulties in American life are 
made to do. 

I would also point out that we are not any longer in the field of 
theory, as far as the operation of a Freedom Academy is concerned. 

Tlie Chairman. Field of what? 

Mr. McDoweli.. We are not in the field purely of theory. There is 
pome practice now to go upon. The American labor movement gave 
its official support to the principle of the Freedom Academy in 1959 
but, not seeing any action, undertook to actually enter the field. It 
created, after consultation in a good, somid basic American tradition, 
consultation with American management and business interests that 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1067 

are concerned witli Latin America, the American Institute for Free 
Labor Development, and this institute, in less than 2 years' time, has 
proceeded to create training; a<2:encies for Latin American unionists in 
Washington and, what is more important, in a dozen countries of Latin 
America itself, where this trainnig is given to these people in the 
essential techniques of democratic procedure which enable them to 
carry on an effective organization for their ow^n purposes, which is at 
the same time a solid obstacle to Communist penetration and victory in 
those countries. Therefore, this program, I might say, was not sup- 
ported by any Government bureaucracy until it was in operation and 
showing its effectiveness under labor-management auspices. The bu- 
reaucracies then moved in to support it, but as is tragically true in so 
many instances, they then used the progress that was made in this 
private institution as an argument that nothing effective should be 
done in the even wider area involving the vast and ever-increasing 
student population in which I have been familiar with the Communist 
operations since 1929, the whole area of agricultural life, which is the 
framework of life of 80 percent of the population in most of the key 
countries in exposed positions, such as Brazil, Vietnam, and almost 
any area of any society and any conflict that you may mention. 

The Chairman, May I interrupt at this point? And I want to 
make out of you the DeviPs advocate that I made out of Dr. Possony 
yesterday, t assume that the representative of the State Department 
w^ill appear in opposition to this bill. He is scheduled to appear 
Thursday and he will argue, I guess, to the effect that the Propaganda 
Ministry of the Soviets is under the dominance of the government 
and, therefore, the two go hand in glove. 

Now, I want to ask you. How in a democracy can we separate the 
two? By that I mean, this bill proposes an independent agency, 
separated or divorced, loosely, from the foreign policy makers, and 
they will probably say that is difficult or impossible. They will prob- 
ably say that the material, reading material, pamphlets, study courses, 
will be interpreted abroad as being foreign policy and that great con- 
fusion will result. I imagine they will argue along those lines. What 
is your answer ? 

Mr. McDowell. The answer on that is that, of course, we are two 
completely different societies. The Communist state — and I might 
say to a lesser extent the Russian state which preceded it— proceeds 
on the concentration of all power and all functions in a single arm, 
which is the state. The contrary general usage of American society 
is the team operation between private citizens and their organizations, 
working witli their Government, but not as a completely dominated 
part of that Government, to carry out part of almost every purpose of 
which Government is capable, with the possible exception of military 
operations itself. 

Now therefore, the philosophy and thinking behind the Freedom 
Academy bill is that of an institution that is engaged, let us remember, 
in teaching and in research and in information accumulation and co- 
ordination, not in operations. This is a training institution, it is a 
research institution, it is an information center. 

(At this point Mr. Pool left the hearing room.) 

Mr. McDowTELL. And its influence w^ould, of course, be felt all along 
the line, because you would have, for the first time, specifically knowl- 



1068 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

edgeable people there at all levels, and there is no distinction today in 
our affairs between international affairs and national affairs when we 
come to this area. The line between Communist operations, nationally 
and internationally, is only, iis I say, an artificial one which can exist 
in a classroom for the purposes of discussion. It does not exist in 
action. 

The Chairman. Then, too, let me say this. I don't view this bill, 
and I hope nobody does, as a deliberate slap at the State Depart- 
ment or as an indication of wholesale mistrust, and I think that under 
the structure of the bill linkage with the Government is there. First, 
you have the Commission appointed by the President, by and with 
the advice and consent of the Senate, and it will run the institution. 
And, under the bill itself, there will also be an advisory group, drawn 
from all these agencies — Defense Department, the USIA, State De- 
partment, and all others — so that they would not be ignored at all, al- 
though the overriding character of the Academy would be that of an 
independent agency. So this is not a slap at State or other executive 
agencies. 

You don't view it that way, do you? 

Mr. McDowell. In no sense as a slap or reproach to any department 
of Government. The United States Department of State is charged 
with a multitude of functions, with a multitude of operations that 
almost defy the human mind's capacity for keeping track through 
one man, a Secretary of State, of what is going on, even in those 
things which are clearly his responsibility. 

The flexibility in these Freedom Academy bills comes from the 
yoking of the private resources of society, which is possible through 
simply the furnishing of an educational and research institution. It 
is a combination of these factors, and the peculiar genius of the 
American life that you can involve the citizens' private organiza- 
tions in the carrying out of functions in this area which vitally 
aid, without being directed specifically hj, the department of Gov- 
ernment that is charged with official functions and a series of relation- 
ships which would prevent them effectively from using such an insti- 
tution for policymaking purposes that are lodged elsewhere in official 
Government hands. 

(At this point Mr. Pool reentered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Now, do you regard the training of personnel in 
the private sector, such as people in the business world and the labor 
field or students, and so on, here and abroad, as equal in importance 
with that of training professional representatives of Government 
in this field of anti- Communist political warfare? 

Mr. McDowell. Yes; I believe that actually, that if you were to 
make an analysis of our relationships with other nations and other 
peoples, you would find that the majority of those relationships and 
connections are in the private sector, and not through the official 
i-epresentatives of Government. 

For instance, in the area of propaganda, we realize that material, 
however valid, however beautifully prepared, which has the stamp 
of official diplomatic agencies of a government lands in the "round 
file" of almost any editor in almost any place on the face of the earth. 
That is where the most beautiful official material is consigned. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1069 

But if this material comes from a private source — let me give you, 
sir, an example of an incident where private citizens could deal with 
matters that your State Department could not enter upon. 

At the time of the report of the U.N. Special Commission for inves- 
tigation of the Hungarian events, this report had been completed and 
was prepared for submission, but an immense amount of Soviet pres- 
sure was then assembled on the various governments and their rep- 
resentatives who were on the Commission, and there was an agonizing 
delay. The Commission's report seemed to be in danger of being sup- 
pressed for lack of sufficient signatures. Now, at this critical moment, 
the key person in the Commission was a person wdio was not under 
such pressure but faltered for other reasons; he came from a free 
nation, from Australia. Faced with this difficulty, a member of our 
organization who had a friend in the Australian labor movement 
asked him what could be done. He, the Australian labor leader, sim- 
ply called up his senator, who then rose on the floor of the Parliament 
at Canberra the next day and called attention to this situation. The 
government was then in a position, which it would not have been other- 
wise, to reiterate its strong position in favor of the submission of 
that report. 

This was read, not in an official cable, but was read in the newspapers 
by the weak person at the United Nations, and in a matter of 48 hours, 
the Commission's report was signed by a majority of the Commission 
and the report was in. 

Yet, I do not believe that our official diplomatic agencies could have 
done this sort of a thing. It would have been improper for them to 
do and it was only possible because there was a trained person who 
understood this, who had a friend in the Australian labor movement 
who was also trained from long and bitter experience in battling the 
Communists on the waterfront in Australia, who had gone to the 
same school, and who was, therefore, able to get the picture imme- 
diately and take action. 

The Chairihan. Well, I have two more questions, and then I want 
to yield to thd members. 

What, do you think, is the central weakness in the past and cur- 
rent conduct of the defense of the free world and the defeat of com- 
munism which you believe will be repaired by the proposed legisla- 
tion ? Wliat is the central weakness that this would repair? 

Mr. McDowell. The central weakness is that we have not, as yet, 
an understanding of the concept of political warfare as it has been 
waged since Lenin secured control of a national economy and the re- 
sources of a great imperial state; and, however, ramshackle that econ- 
omy may be, the resources of a government are simply of no comparison 
with those that any private political organization can assemble, and 
he put this to work on a vast, worldwide program of political warfare 
directed against every free country. 

Now^, this concept of political warfare has as yet no opposing con- 
cept in the American structure, private or public, that is responsible 
for defending the interests of the United States and of the free world. 

What is done in this bill is a declaration of policy that explicitly 
sets, for the first time in a public declaration of policy, a concept of 
effective research and training of relevant means of opposition to the 



1070 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

political warfare operation which has been waged against us, with 
no comparable operations in return, all of these years. 

Now, this actually, in the legislation, is the most effective thing, 
and I might cite the evidence of recognition of it on the part of all 
those concerned. This bill was almost ready at the Senate Judiciary 
end for a report in August of 1959, but when the invitation and all 
of the futile attendant attempts at arrangement of a standstill agree- 
ment with the Soviet Government came into existence with the Khru- 
shchev visit, it was officially and unofficially requested that this bill 
not be reported at that time, because it set forth a concept which 
Khrushchev would recognize as a declaration of equivalent prepara- 
tion to wage war in the political field, in the nonmilitary field, where 
he at that moment was undisputed. Tlie bill was, therefore, held up 
by diplomatic representations to shelter from reality a hope that 
could and was always found to fail, because this declaration is so ex- 
plicit and so clear in recognizing the situation and providing, for the 
first time in the history of this 47-year-old struggle, for an equivalent 
response on the part of the leader of the free world, which of neces- 
sity is the United States. 

The Chairman. Now, let me ask you a final two-pronged question. 
First, do you believe that more and better private mstitutions — uni- 
versities — engaged in this anti-Communist operational research and 
training can meet the need and, second, would enactment of the 
Freedom Academy undercut or discourage such efforts ? 

Mr. McDowell. I do not believe that this would, in any case, be 
the result. The various institutions which are set up are in their na- 
ture academic. They can't put forth working instruction as to how 
this political warfare battle is to be carried on. Furthermore, they 
are like the blind man and the elephant. Each one tends to grasp 
hold of a different part, and academic pride being what it is, the 
tendency is to say that this is the whole elephant. 

What is required here is a coordination, which I do not believe is 
now possible at this late hour, except through legislative initiative. 
This whole proposal, as worked out with such painful detail by the 
Orlando group over a period of years, was originally conceived of 
more than 10 years ago as something that could be done as a private 
operation with the gracious assent and approval of the executive de- 
partment of Government, supplemented by some such governmental 
assistance as is now given to the proven Ainerican Institute for Free 
Labor Development. 

In 1959, after a period of a better part of a decade, the conclusion 
was reached — and I believe it is a sound conclusion — that unless there 
is legislative initiative, and the involvement of decision on the basic 
policy of creating equivalents to the enemy in this political warfare 
operation, we can't meet the situation in time; there will not be the 
centralized center of information every one of these institutions could 
draw upon and would benefit by, and, in turn, the personnel that they 
both would be developing would be available for an increasing mu- 
tual support.. 

I might just make one reference, because I understand that, at a 
later date, there will be a witness discussing the matter of education 
in a secondary level of our public school system, something that we 
have been interested in through our Council Against Communist 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1071 

Aggression since 1956, and I live in the State of Pennsylvania, sir, 
whose State Department of Public Instruction has adopted this as 
a policy. Superintendent of Public Instruction Boehm is a personal 
friend of mine. I see him about once a year and have since 1956, and 
each year I say to him, "What progress have you made?" And he 
says, "We haven't made any progress, because we haven't trained 
any teachers in this subject who can and will teach it," and this essen- 
tially is true at the present time, in spite of the fact that there are now 
25 institutions of higher learning involved in one phase or another of 
this subject, a very recent and sharp increase mostly since 1959, and 
partly as a result of stimulation from Freedom Academy discussion 
and Senate passage, Gallup Poll results, etc. 

There is, as yet, no place where teachers in this subject are being 
prepared systematically, given access to the data; and until there is 
this centralization and the declaration of legislative intent and pur- 
pose, which is the essential part of this measure, before it goes to 
implementing it in terms of institutional arrangement, until that is 
done, I do not think that the problem of Superintendent Boehm and 
other people in the departments of public instruction in the States, in 
the basic instructing for survival of our population in what they are 
dealing with, at the secondary school level, this will not be met, because 
you will just have the same thing, public statements of policy like that 
of Pennsylvania in 1956, but no teachers, no teaching, no trained 
pupils. 

The Chaikman. Well, I had a similar experience, and I will relate 
it off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. McDowell. May I summarize, possibly, another point, and 
that is to say that in these general declarations of policy in this legisla- 
tion as introduced, particularly as up to date with bills of Mr. Boggs 
and Mr. Taft, there is the statement of something that Americans are 
constantly forgetting, because the simplicity of its truth permits it 
to slip through their minds, namely, that the most powerful thing 
on the face of the earth in human affairs is ideas. These ideas need 
not be good ideas, sound ideas, or historically based. Neither Hitler 
nor Marx, who have remarkable affinities, by the way, in their ori- 
gins — the philosophers of these two movements were contemporaries ; 
they drew their philosophic inspiration from the same sources, but 
we do not know this or accept such facts as important. We, who put 
forth the Declaration of Independence, the most disturbing set of 
ideas that has ever been let loose on the face of the earth, which has 
caused more political changes and is causing more political changes 
today than anything that has ever been set going by the reactionary 
type of philosophy and of the hate organization for its promotion 
which is represented by Marxism-Leninism, we have forgotten this. 

We are constantly forgetting it. If you call people's attention to 
it, they will admit for the moment that it is right, and then forget 
the next moment. 

My friend, Rebecca West, the English novelist, when visiting my 
home a number of years ago, said to me in this respect, because she 
had done some reporting in depth on the trial of traitors in England 
in her book on The Meaning Of Treason^ and she said, "We are not 
losing progress for mankind because truths of the fundamental sort 

30-471 O— 64— pt. 1 10 



1072 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

are too difficult for common minds, but because the important truths 
are so simple that we are constantly forgetting them." And today 
we have forgotten, and in our appropriations for all the vast panoply 
of foreign aid and even of military appropriations, we have forgot- 
ten that these are never effective, only except as they have an idea 
which they carry on. 

On the other hand, the other side, which asserts in its theory that 
only material considerations are important, act upon the premise, 
which is a sound one, that ideas are the things that sway human minds 
and human events. 

The Chairman. Governor Tuck ? 

Mr. Tuck. Mr. Chairman, I have no questions, but I would like to 
take this opportunity of commending Mr. McDowell on his very 
excellent and, I must say, interesting and informative and, indeed, 
convincing statement. 

The Chairman. Mr. Pool ? 

Mr. Pool. I want to add to that and would also point out that 
I congratulate the labor movement, in general, for their patriotism. 
They have stayed with democratic principles through all the years. 
You have had some real heroes in the labor movement and, although 
they have been in a vulnerable spot, they have done a remarkable job. 
I want to make that comment. 

The Chairman. Mr. Ichord? 

Mr. Ichord. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to com- 
mend Mr. McDowell for the part of his statement that I have heard. 
I am sorry I was called out and was not able to hear the entire state- 
ment. 

I would like for you to comment on a criticism of this bill by the 
Department of State, and I read from State's report on the bill : 

Another proposed purpose of the Academy is to train operational cadres in 
countering Soviet Communist techniques and methods for use abroad. This is 
not something that can properly be done by Americans alone, and its very nature 
should not be a publicized oi>eration. Publicity of the type suggested in the 
Academy Bill, in our view, would defeat this purpose of the program before it 
had begun. Soviet training of foreign communists in the techniques of orga- 
nization, subversion, etc., is conducted, for example, in the highest secrecy. 

This, of course, will be an overt institution. Would you comment 
on that, Mr. McDowell ? 

Mr. McDowell. My first comment would be that it seems to be an 
indication of a situation which we lament, namely, that most of these 
statements coming from the State Department are by people who 
have not read the bill, and this imposes an initial difficulty on them 
in making these statements. 

This, in the nature of things, is not intended to be an operational 
procedure with all the considerations of high security and secrecy. 

My own observation is that the most effective things that have been 
done in this field of political warfare have been done in many cases 
by private citizens and organizations, and there has been no secrecy 
about it. The last thing we wanted was secrecy. They wanted the 
world to know what the facts were and who stood on what side of 
those facts. Therefore, this, as I say, is a criticism based upon either 
a misreading or a reading into the bill of something not there. 

Mr. Ichord. Now, another objection was on the ground that the 
institution would be overburdened with duties; that it would not 
only have the duty of training and performing research but also in- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1073 

volving the activity of operating the information centers. Would 
you comment on that ? 

( At this point Mr. Tuck left the hearing room. ) 

Mr. McI)o'\\t:ll, These functions are complementary in the sense 
that one serves the other. The accumulation of a centralized informa- 
tion center. I point out, for example, that not a single institution in 
the United States can refer a student to the collected works of Lenin 
in English. It is not available. 

Now, here is a man who — whatever we may estimate his evil in- 
fluence on the history of the world and its affairs — was a political 
genius. Let nobody deny that to a man whose method of procedure, 
whose devices, have enabled a group of penniless and rather con- 
temptible-appearing exiles to build their power to the place that, in 
61 years from the formal enunciation of it by Lenin at a gathering 
of less than 60 people in Brussels and London in 1903, has proceeded 
to dominate a third of the world's population and its area. This man 
was a genius, and yet if you are to refer a student today, you will not 
find, unless he reads Russian, you will not find available to him the 
source material on the presiding genius of the enemy — the thing which 
makes understandable the conduct of a Khrushchev. It is not pos- 
sible, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, a very eminent bishop now told me a number of 
years ago that the greatest weakness of American and Western society 
is the decline of our respect for the importance of belief as influencing 
action. This was most tragically shown in the case of England con- 
fronting the totalitarian menace of Hitler in the years 1931 to 1939. 

(At this point Mr. Johansen entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. McDowell. In this time, the leaders of English thought, Mr. 
Dawson, the decisive editor of the Times of London, and Mr. Cham- 
berlain not only had not read Mein Kam,pf^ but they refused to listen 
to the scholars who had read it. This was literally true, and on the 
date that war was declared, it was also literally true that key people 
in the Foreign Office raced down to the library to open Mein Kampf 
for the first time in their careers, and I do not make any question 
that there are key people in our diplomatic operations who today, 
in case of contingency, would have to crack their first book on this 
subject, and yet the vast literature that exists is here. 

Might I just simply cite one example, which was timely at the time 
that I appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee? That morn- 
ing, the State Department's press officer, a very competent and hi^h- 
grade officer, was reporting in answer to queries what was our position 
on a question that had been raised before the International Olympics 
Committee. And his comment was the most devastating of all. He 
said, "We are surprised." I might say that our diplomacy's coat of 
arms should be two perpetually raised eyebrows in surprise. 

Now, we can die of surprises. The British society almost died of 
surprises in 1939 when they found out what Hitler proposed, and 
yet which he had written out plainly all along the line. 

I, therefore, pointed out that to my own personal knowledge, as 
early as 1932, an agency, an international Communist agency, was in 
Chicago, engaged in organizing propaganda around a counter- 
Olympics, because the Soviet at that time did not compete and, there- 
fore, organized a propaganda operation dealing with the Olympics. 
Its main target was a man by the name of Avery Brundage, at that 



1074 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

time chairman, a biisinesman — a very competent, successful business- 
man — chairman of the American Olympics Conunittee. This propa- 
ganda operation against the "capitalist" Olympics was carried out 
in Chicago in 1932. I got involved before I knew it, and we even 
had a respected figure like Carl Sandburg, who was sucked in as a 
sponsor, and so on; but Avery Brundage is now the international 
chairman of the Olympics and 27 years later, neither the State Depart- 
ment nor Avery Brundage, who was the target of this Communist 
operation in 1932, knew that Communists would use an International 
Olympics Committee for a political maneuver. 

Now, it seems overdue to give some instruction in this operation 
to influential businessmen who operate in private organizations as 
well as press officers of the State Department, who are competent in 
their field, but have complete lack of knowledge or interest in ac- 
quainting themselves with this background, which is the only thing 
which enables them to know what their chief enemy is now engaged in 
doing and to make sense and not perpetual surprise out of each 
morning's news. 

Mr. IcHORD. Mr. Chairman, when will we hear the State Depart- 
ment? 

The Chairman. Tomorrow. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Mr. Chairman. I am sorrier than I can tell to be 
late, but I want to say two things to you, sir. One is in the nature of 
an apology, and the other is to say something I wanted to say a long 
time. I apologize to you because I haven't availed myself of the 
privilege of getting to know you earlier. I have been an avid reader 
of your bulletin for a long time, and the other thing I want to say to 
you is that I have an immense admiration for you and the job you have 
been doing, and I welcome this opportmiity to say so to you and to say 
it on the record. But I recall the fact, if memory serves me right, that 
the first authentic, thorough docmnentation of the Communist threat 
in this country presented to our Government was done under the aegis 
of Mr. William Green, president of the AFL, back about 1933. 

Mr. McDowell. 1933. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. And I want to acknowledge and pay tribute to that 
fact. 

Mr. McDowell. Thank you. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Mr. McDowell, I do not know exactly how to 
proceed, because I know you probably don't want to make a judgment 
on the matter, but I think that what is at the base of all this is a basic 
difference in philosophy. Would you suggest that those who would 
propose the Freedom Academy had a philosophy that stated that you 
can't do business with Communists, or that you can't coexist peacefully 
with them? 

Mr. McDowell. Well, I might say, as I indicated in my statement, 
that I have 35 years in which I have watched evei-y type of well-inten- 
tioned citizen, some of the best educated, some of the most finely 
endowed that I would ever meet, trying on various occasions, in var- 
ious forms of organization or various purposes to coexist with the 
Communist operations, and I have seen universal disaster overtake 
those people individually, intellectually, and every other way. There- 
fore, from the basis of domestic experience, and as I warned the cliair- 
man, I am not going to compete with the experts of the State Depart- 
ment on firsthand Imowledge of the details of the society in Zanzibar, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1075 

but I do know what the Communist operation amounts to, and there 
is no possibility of peaceful coexistence with them in the sense that we 
use it. 

We must remember that this is a phrase which the Communists 
designed,-and they give their content to it, and peaceful coexistence is 
now clearly defined by the most authoritative persons, namely, Mr. 
Khrushchev and his associates, as the most unrelenting political, eco- 
nomic, propaganda, and eveiy other kind of warfare, including brush- 
fire ware wherever they can bring to bear military force, the exception 
to this relentless, constant warfare being a resort to atomic warfare. 

Tliere has been no single subtraction — except possibly since the 
confrontation in Cuba — there has been no subtraction from the un- 
relenting 100 percent warfare purpose behind every phrase and every 
move that the Communist international operation carries out. We 
are not the people who are first in formulating the ideas around 
this Academy, and I must point out that we came to its support when 
it had been almost completely developed by the painful thoughts and 
research and consideration of a group of patriotic young Americans 
who just wanted to know, initially, one thing — that group in Orlando, 
Florida — why 5 years after a world war, which was supposed to have 
destroyed totalitarianism as a force on the face of the earth, they and 
their comrades were being called back into service, and in some cases, 
in many cases, to give their lives in a new war against totalitarian 
aggression. 

And they set out to find out. They did, and their research was so 
effective that their contribution drew the support, wherever, Mr. 
Cliairman, this measure was submitted, as you will see in the sponsor- 
ship, now possible mider the Senate Rules, where the same names can, 
of course, appear on the same bill, you will see here an amazing range 
of acceptance of this basic fact, based on experience. The experience 
is conclusive that there is no possibility of doing any business with 
a totalitarian regime in which, by its nature, the very existence of any 
free society of the most completely recumbent character in inter- 
national affairs cannot be tolerated, because its very existence is a 
threat at any moment to their continued total rule over their own 
people. 

It is not because they are more vicious than anyone else, but because 
their philosophy, their guiding and controlling belief, is such that they 
can't relax that desire to conquer because they would fall off their 
bicycle. Their total power can't be maintained unless they maintain 
sufficient forward movement of their totalitarian extension of power, 
so that they can stay on their bi^cle of political power. 

Once they are stopped, as Hitler could have been stopped in the 
spring of 1938 by the refusal of further concession of any kind and 
backing-up by effective British military power and the building of 
the Royal Air Force. We now know that a group of people who 
subsequently lost their heads under the most terrifying of circum- 
stances of execution in 1944, in an attempt to assassinate and clear 
Hitler out of the picture, in 1938, ostensibly making a survey of 
British public opinion for Hitler, came to Britain and passed to the 
key people in government at the same time this message, "Stand fast. 
Give this dictator no single more concession, and announce at the 
same time that the Royal Air Force will be built as rapidly and as 
effectively as possible, and we will pledge our lives and our fate on an 
attempt to overthrow this demon." Chamberlain sent back word that 



1076 PliOVlDIl^G FOB CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

he wanted to deal with the "real Germans," not with such elements 
as this. So he dealt with them at Munich in the fall, in September 
of 1938, and we know the results : World War II. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. And this is the next question which I was going 
to ask, but you may not want to answer it, and you don't have to, if 
you don't wish. I am ^oing to ask it when the State Department is 
here. What do you thnik our policy has been toward communism? 
Has it been one of accommodation, or not necessarily of embracing it 
but one of feeling that we can coexist ? 

Mr. McDowell. I think that from the beginning of the Kennan 
memorandum, the most advanced position that our diplomacy has 
ever attained was the concept of containment. That is, the contain- 
ment within the existing lines to which it had attained by the over- 
throw beyond the level of its actual military control of the Czecho- 
slavakian Republic in 1948. This policy actually, for a period, was 
fairly successful, although it had to be carried out in the case of Korea 
by meeting military aggression as military alone can be met, by effec- 
tive, overwhelming force. 

But specifically, that policy collapsed, I would say, since the capture 
of Cuba by the Communist force, by new devices, because they are 
constantly working out new devices. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that 
I asked the representative of the AFL-CIO in Latin American affairs 
in August of 1959, while the New York Times was still carrying reas- 
surance that Castro was no Communist and no Communist was in any 
influential position in the Castro government, I asked Mr. Serafino 
Romualdi to describe to me what was happening in Cuba. Mr. 
Romualdi, because of his knowledge and background, was singled out 
by the Castro government in its first months by a special order Feb- 
ruary 7, 1959, which forbade him to enter Cuba. Unfortunately he 
previously suffered a heart attack, and the significance of his barring 
w^as never developed in terms of the public press, nor was there any- 
one in the regional desk of the State Department who could under- 
stand or care about the meaning of this exclusion order. 

Anyhow, the public press isn't interested. The press has a concept 
of news based on the old concept of "man bites dog." Now, when 
Communists oppress and attack, this is not news, this is their charac- 
ter, because this is a case of dog biting man. Therefore, by definition, 
it is not news. Only that is news which appears to be news in the other 
direction. Therefore, there was no press attention to this, and they 
didn't have a correspondent in a carload who would have understood 
its significance in any case. 

Mr. Romualdi said to me very quickly, "What we have in Cuba is 
black communism." I said, "What do you mean by 'black commu- 
nism?'" He said, "It is a Communist operation which does not 
initially openly attack the church, for example. It awaits its time; 
it prepares to destroy the middle class, which is the sole major source 
of possible future opposition activity to challenge it and overthrow 
it when its real nature becomes obvious, and it quickly paralyzes or 
seizes the labor movement. When it has destroyed in Cuban society, 
all of the elements, either by execution or by exile, those elements 
who by their nature and training and equipment are in a position to 
be the source of opposition, it will then declare itself in its full 
panoply of color, but it now is what we call 'black communism,' com- 
munism which conceals its purpose, evades the conflict, for instance. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1077 

with the main religious institutions, but the character of it is, of 
course, the same color all along," 

Now, this analysis was given to me up at Unity House, Pa., during 
the coui"se of an executive council meeting of the AFL-CIO, by Mr. 
Romualdi, in August 1959 before the labor movement of Cuba was 
seized. Therefore, we know that the people who understand and 
have the relevant experience across the yeai^ are relatively few, of 
which of coui-se there is a high proportion of {people in the trade union 
movement, because we were the first major target. From the begin- 
ning, Lenm, as early as 1895, from his observation of even the frag- 
mentary unions that had taken form and had led a very precarious, 
semilegal life in Czarist society, declared in his private writings, of 
which there is no English translation, that the trade union movement, 
if left to itself, would concern itself with the improvement of its 
members' conditions and would become an obstacle to his revolutionary 
purpose, and, therefore, the trade union movement in any society in 
which his militarily disciplined Communists moved in must be sub- 
verted and taken over and completely dictated to and controlled by 
his political clique, the Communist Party. Otherwise, the trade union 
movement, if it is left just to follow its own devices, would, of course, 
refute both Marx and Lenin and become the major obstacles to revolu- 
tionary enterprise. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. I just close, Mr. Chairman, by saying that while 
I certainly would see no reason for not having the Academy because 
of this, there still would be a basic need for an adjustment between 
two very separate points of view, one teaching the facts about commu- 
nism, the other that would be the official policy of the Government, 
which would state that we can do business with them. 

Mr. McDowell. I might say in further comment, sir, that I can't 
mention his name, because it would be a breach of confidence, but the 
Ambassador from a very important allied country, which has the 
largest Communist Party in Europe, after 5 years in Washington, 
met the president of my union and myself just as he was about to leave 
the U.S. 

He had been his country's envoy, the first envoy to Soviet Russia 
after the war. He had had firsthand observation and experience and, 
as he shook hands with us in farewell on that day in Philadelphia, he 
said : "We can only survive, not with the creation of some vast, secret, 
or impressive apparatus to match the Communists, but only insofar as 
we create and teach more people like ourselves, tough-minded and 
informed, who know each other, who realize that our understanding 
of the foe is fmidamental, and who can therefore communicate as 
free men do in free societies and take those simple actions which frus- 
trate the puq3ose of this totalitarian foe, who is not 10 feet tall, but 
whose method of procedure gives us no chance at the old-fashioned 
diplomatic level, because he has devised a method of military-type 
operation against which we are essentially in civilian formations. 
And until we repair that by training pei*sonnel, not only here — and it 
must start here — but wherever free men reside and desire to struggle 
for their freedom, until that time comes, we will continue to lose un- 
worthily, because we are fighting a bad idea, a discredited idea, we 
are fighting an economic order that is a ramshackle one that is con- 
stantly having to be propped up by our resources at critical points, 
but we are losing because outside of your new chief of protocol I meet 



1078 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

no one who really has studied and comprehends the special and pecul- 
iar nature of the Communist foe. 

"And it is not always bad to lose. Defeat is possible in the best of 
causes. But to lose when the resources on your side are in every 
sense of ideas and of economic organization, to lose there, that indeed 
is shameful and frustrating, and that's what we are doing at the present 
time." 

Mr. JoHANSEN. Will the gentleman yield ? 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Yes, I will yield. 

Mr. JoHANSEN. The greatest area of my concern, and I welcome 
your comment on it — and my colleague has, I think, come very close 
to it — is it your judgment that it is possible, and how is it possible, to 
set this up as an independent agency, doing the very necessar}^ job, 
and yet keep it free of control by official foreign policy considerations ? 
In other words, can this agency be set up in a fashion that it will be 
doing a job perhaps opposite to the stated policy of the United States 
Government, if that policy is one of peaceful coexistence or of reliev- 
ing or avoiding tensions ? 

Mr. McDowell. Well, let me say in the first place, to come back to 
the point that this is not an operational agency. It is to provide per- 
sonnel with the information and the understanding that enables them 
in their individual capacities to do work without being coached, 
directed, or dominated. Now, this can only be done — and we have a 
tradition, sir, of a certain amount of respect for the integrity of educa- 
tional institutions created for this purpose. The Congress even 
created an institution such as Howard University, early in its history, 
and this university serves a purpose which public policy agreed to, 
but it is not run by the Government in that sense. Tlierefore, I think 
that it is possible. We have sought the analogies wherever we could 
find them in such things as the Atomic Energy Commission, and I 
might point out that in that Commission there was a time when the 
most vital questions of policy, which certainly involved the State 
Department, had to be fought out between points of view, and fortu- 
nately the realistic policy triumphed, and I remember the expression 
of an individual who has strayed down some strange paths in his 
individual political operations since, but I remember Harold Urey got 
up and told a group of very astonished liberal people in January 1950 
that he had been for the development of the H-bomb, and he said, "If 
you ask me why I was for it, I will give you the simple answer : That 
knowing what would be the consequences if we did not develop it, and 
the totalitarian power did, we know the consequences," and he said, 
"I happen to be a simple, corny believer in Patrick Henry's formula 
which says, 'Give me liberty or give me death.' " 
( At this point Mr. Pool left the hearing room. ) 

Mr. McDowell. And that is an answer on this. 

The Chairman. It is now a couple of minutes to 12. I know the re- 
porter's fingers must be twitchy. And so we will stand in recess until 
quarter to 2. 

Thank you very much, you have been very impressive, indeed. 

Mr. McDowell. Thank you. 

(Whereupon, at 12 m. Wednesday, February 19, 1964, the committee 
recessed, to reconvene at 1 :45 p.m. the same day.) 
(The article submitted by Mr. McDowell follows:) 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1079 



[Time 01^', Nairobi, Kenya, Feb. 9, 1964] 

IMPERIALISTS 

COME IN 
ALL COLOURS 



EMMANUEL John 
Hevi is a 31-year- 
old African who went 
to China in search of 
all the answers. 

He foiind none. But he 
found the cruellest racial 
discrimination. 

He found awesome waste, 
inefficiency and a relentless 
exploitation of the people b> 
the State machine. So, with 118 
other African students who 
spent 18 months in Peking, he 
packed and left. 

Now his book. An African 
Student in China (Pall Mall 
Press), is a warning to 
all Airicans — a timely one 
wl>en President Nkrumah is 
Staging a referendum to secure 

S one-party State, and Presi- 
ent Nyerere appoints a com- 
mission to study the same 
panacea. 

Hevi and his friends found 
China's racialism worse than 
ai^ in the West because it was 
NOT spontaneous, but Imposed 
by the party. 



Tried 



" *yp**wri I W W. I l l • "- ->■ 

■"y^itst.hm& anly to dance with 
H'€8SBmm girl to ensure she 
Wig|M be "packed off to prison 
or Commune farms for hard 
labour." They tried to meet in 
pttics — but how do you dis- 
guise • black skin among the 
7«Uow? 

Hevi publishes a declaration 
by ZkiQZibar students: "We are 



l|Ot aOowed to make friends of 
bolh aexes here in Pelung. The 
<'^ tTi^g<> authorities' excuse has 
been that they do not allow 
j^MpUiutioQ.** 

r'Vittiey added: "We are looked 
i i mu upcm; we are reigarded 
Idkin ae animals than as 
MMUtt beings. It is a crime for 
Africans to enter some hotels 
aM thopa here in Peking." 

The diowdown came in 
March 1962. A Zanzibari 
studtnt was reused service in 
the I'vace Hotel. He argued. 
Bvrtm* began beating him. 
TVronather Zanzibaris, a man 
and wile working ttr Radio 
^ItiQg, heard his screama. and 
lmmMl0Ud. They. too. were 



Hevi holds no brieX for 
Wealwn cmviiM.am^^ pf 
Contuteunitm. Wb tUuiB solely 
"esi Uie teoovictlfan that the 
mdivi&al ia pupremt. . ^ . The 
kfnd €i ayaterol «|w practiaed 
tik CltinB la an insult at cmce 
to tl» body and mlod of a 
peopl* auMDOaed to be free and 
fanNViiCliu 

Tlia African tludents found 
^M nifiinan peMde reduced to 
tiM status elf ''weak animals 
brutally tamed by boss 
animals." They were appalled 
at the sight of everyone in blue 
cotton — a device, they con- 
cluded, to eliminate individua- 
lism. 

And they discovered that 
China is no classless society, 
but one divided, into: 

FIRST, the Boss Class, Gov- 
ernment leaders who could get 
anything they desired which 
was obtainable in the country; 



1080 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



SECONDLY, the Gentry, 
mostly party members running 
universities or factories, with 
cars, allowances, better^ food, 
the right to special shops; 

THIRDLY, the new Middle 
Class, rank-and-file party rhem- 
bers (16 million); 

Finally, the Masses, every- 
one not in the party — "under- 
fed, ill-clothed, it is for them 
that the most back-breakins 
tasks are reserved in the name 
of that Communist system 
which is supposed to have been 
adopted for their special 
benefit." 

Constantly exhorted to col- 
lective action and thought, the 
Africans never felt they be- 
longed to a corpurate lite. No 
debating clubs — only the 
Communist Youth League. And 
Hfg*tn9 so bad m»»t^ot tfi^m 
tniMietf milet to eaifge a bath 
from therr respecti've 
CmlHissies. 

Miserable ' 

The miserable Chinese 
students lived eight to a room, 
shared one bath-house betweeii 



5,000, were always hungry. The 
cloth ration -^ a mere two feet 
a year — was wholly inade- 
quate against Peking's winter. 

The Africans found the 
people's communes a flop, the 
most prized possession a foreign 
import. They left feeling it was 
"we Africans whb must civilise 
the Chinese, not vice versa." 

And the only memory they 
frx>k with them — after going 
on hunger strike to get out — 
was the enduring image of the 
State's exploitation of the 
individual. 

Hevi aiHl hie friends may 
not have fo«uul all the amwMrt 
btit th«y M laara what they 
do not want for Afrioa. 

"God forbid that the people 
of any part of Africa should 
ever have to suffer the abject 
humiliation which is now the 
lot of the masses in China," he 
warns. 

"We must defend our con- 
tinent against imperialist^. But 
we need to bring our definition 
of 'imperialism' up to date. We 
have to realiaa tbAt imperialists 
come in - all colourit white, 
ycUow and Ijiawl; jraa* cv«n 
b)a«kl" 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1081 




1082 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

AFTERNOON SESSION— WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1964 

(The committee reconvened at 2:30 p.m., Hon. Edwin E. Willis, 
chairman, presiding. ) 

(Committee members present : Representatives Willis and Pool.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

I think it has been understood among the witnesses that we might 
call Dr. Atkinson at this time. 

Doctor, I wish you would give some background information about 
yourself and the capacity in which you appear.' 

STATEMENT OE JAMES D. ATKINSON 

Dr. Atkinson. Mr. Chairman, I am associate professor of govern- 
ment at Georgetown University and I have been a member of its fac- 
ulty since 1946. I am also a research associate in the Georgetown 
Center for Strategic Studies, which is headed by Admiral Arleigh 
Burke. 

From 1950 to 1954, I served as director of the psychological war- 
fare course, a special course conducted, under contract with the De- 
partment of Defense, for the Armed Forces by the Georgetown Grad- 
uate School. 

In the past, I have served, for example, during the latter part of the 
Truman administratioon, as a consultant to the Psychological Strategy 
Board and, at various times, to the Research Analysis Corporation, 
formerly Operations Research Office, the Department of the Army, 
the Department of the Navy, and to other Government agencies. 

Durmg the summers of 1959 to 1960, 1 was a member of the faculty 
of the National War College for the Defense Strategy Seminars, 

I have also lectured at various times at the Industrial College of 
the Armed Forces, the Army War College, the Air War College, the 
Strategic Intelligence School, the Special Warfare Center at Fort 
Bragg, and also at the National Defense College of Canada, for 2 
different years. 

I have had a large number of articles published in professional and 
service journals, and I have contributed to the following books: 
Soviet Total War, which was a publication of the House Committee 
on Un-American Activities and to which a large number of scholars 
throughout the United States contributed; Seemacht Heute, which 
was published in Germany a few years ago; American Strategy for 
the Nuclear Age; National Security: Political, Military, and Eco- 
nomic Strategies in the Decade Ahead; and other books. 

My own book, The Edge of War, has recently been translated and 
published in Germany under the title Bis Zum Flanvmenrand des 
Krieges. 

I am currently president of the American Military Institute, a 
member of the board of visitors of the Freedoms Foundation at Valley 
Forge, of the editorial board of World Affairs, and a fellow in the 
Company of Military Collectors and Historians. 

From 1955 to 1960, I served as a member of the advisory board of 
directors of the Association of the United States Army. 

I am also a member of the American Political Science Association 
and other scholarly organizations. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1083 

My military service is as follows : I was commissioned in the Infan- 
try in 1940, following which I served in the Military Intelligence 
Division of the Army, in the European theater, through World War 
II, and I am currently a colonel in the Intelligence Reserve and have 
commanded a Strategic Intelligence unit since 1947 to the present 
time. 

The Chairman. Will you proceed with your statement? 

Dr. Atkinson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Chairman, I have no formal statement to read, as such, but 
I do have a few points which may be of interest to you, and I would 
like to begin by reading for the record some quotations from the Soviet 
press and from the official Soviet news agency Tass to illustrate the 
point that not only in the past, but very currently, the Soviet Union 
and other Communist states with which it is associated, such as Castro's 
Cuba, view the situation that we are in now as a state of neither overt 
war nor yet of actual peace. 

Rather, they look at it as a kind of ill-defined gray area, in which 
there is a constant conflict in the political sphere, in the psychological 
sphere, in the economic sphere, in the diplomatic sphere. 

In other words, they look at this as an unceasing form of struggle 
with all the non-Communist states in the world, especially the leader 
of those states, the United States. 

I think this is very germane to your committee, sir, because it seems 
to me that the proposal for the Freedom Academy is aimed at meet- 
ing — certainly not meeting alone, of course, but aimed at meeting 
in an important way — one of the things which has been raised by this 
new kind of struggle, which is neither war nor peace, but a mixture 
of the two. 

And it seems to me that in the past, perhaps — I may be quite wrong — 
the United States has tended to suffer from the fact that we have ap- 
proached this kind of psychopolitical struggle, which is going on in 
the form, let's say, of economic struggle in various parts of the world, 
of penetration and subversion, as the recent takeover in Zanzibar, as 
riots and demonstrations, as we saw the hand of the Commmiists in 
the Panama incident, as guerrilla warfare in Vietnam, et cetera — that 
this entire spectrum of neither war nor peace, this new kind of 
struggle, has tended at times to take Americans at a disadvantage be- 
cause we have not really any organized body to develop the kind of 
professional competence to which the Communists, whatever their 
faults may be — and I certainly view them as large — but whatever 
their faults may be, I think if we are wise, we can also learn from them. 
They have approached this struggle from the standpoint of de- 
veloping cadres who are professionally competent to carry out all these 
multiform activities of neither war nor peace. 

And this, it seems to me, is why it is garmane to make a few of these 
remarks with respect to the Soviet and general Communist approach 
to this kind of struggle and to relate it to the bill which is before your 
committee to establish some kind of professional organization for 
training that would attempt to develop American assets to counter 
this. 

Let me begin by reading a quotation from Suslov. Mr. Suslov is a 
member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the 
Soviet Union. And some writers in this country give him credit for 



1084 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

masterminding the Zanzibar coup. Certainly, he has a long record of 
professional competence in the field. 

Speaking in Moscow, February 5, 1962, Mr. Suslov, who is the chief 
theoretician for Premier KhrushcheA^ and for the Commvinist Party of 
the Soviet Union, said, and I quote : 

Any reconciliation or compromise, even temi)oraxily, with bourgeois ideology, 
either in internal or external spheres, is impossible. 

Now, the translation of that from the jargon of communism is that 
the Communists intend to carry on an unceasing struggle with the non- 
Communist comitries, and of course principally with the one they 
have denominated the No. 1 target, the United States, in all forms 
of political, economic, psychological, social, et cetera, struggle, every- 
thing short of overt nuclear war, which of course they want to avoid, 
because they realize quite well that our American society is structured 
in such a way that we usually face up to an overt situation of war, an 
open, declared kind of situation. 

Our society, our whole democratic processes are structured so that 
we can meet that pretty well, as our enemies in the past have testified. 
Our society, however, is less well structured — and here I think, again, 
one may say it is germane to indicate that the bill before your com- 
mittee for the creation of this kind of training organization, Freedom 
Academy, would help — it would not be a panacea, but it would help — 
better to structure our society to meet this kind of less-than-overt 
war challenge. 

Let me quote secondly, if I may, from a recent statement of Anastas 
Mikoyan, the Soviet leg-man, as you know, of Mr. Khrushchev, who 
came to Cuba during the missile crisis, et cetera. On January the 
2d, 1964, at a reception in the Cuban Embassy in Moscow, Mr. Mikoyan 
said: 

The Cuban revolution is important for all countries of Latin America. It 
testiflas to the great force of the ideas of Marx, Engels, Jjenin. 

Here, again, he is giving you, I believe quite clearly, the pattern 
of unconventional warfare, that is, of subversion, of intelligence op- 
erations, of sabotage, of propaganda, of stirring up social unrest, 
rioting, and so on, of which we have already seen an indication in 
Panama, and unfortunately I fear that we are to see many other 
indications before we are much older. 

Finally, let me quote from Premier Khrushchev himself. Speak- 
ing in January in an important address, which was published in 
Pravda^ the newspaper, the official paper, indeed, of the Communist 
Party of the Soviet Union, published as an editorial in Pravda^ Janu- 
ary 24, 1964 — Khrushchev said, and I quote : 

Although Cuba and the Soviet Union are in different hemispheres and the 
distance between them is measured by thousands of kilometers, our people 
march along the same Leninist road in the common ranks of the socialist 
states. We all have common aims and common interests, which unite and 
bring together the people of socialist countries. 

Again, to translate from the jargon of communism, what he is 
saying, of course, quite clearly, is that the Soviet bloc, in cooperation 
with Castro and in cooperation with Communists throughout the 
world, will use every device they can, front organizations such as the 
World Federation of Trade Unions, front organizations such as the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1085 

World Federation of Teachei*s Unions, which, incidentally, is cur- 
rently very active in Latin America, attempting to discredit the 
United States in every way. These organizations, saboteurs, espio- 
nage operations, both overt and covert propaganda, psychological op- 
erations, all of these things, of course, in a grand design gradually to 
whittle away at the power of the country that is most capable of 
resisting them, that is, the Soviet Union using this approach toward the 
United States in an attempt gradually to isolate, to whittle away, to 
reduce its power, and perhaps most of all to reduce its will; in other 
words, its guts, its determination, to carry on this struggle. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the privilege of being 
able to give these few remarks. 

(At this point Mr. Schadeberg entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. And you view the Academy proposed by this bill 
as an answer to this gap in our policy in this cold war period, or this 
period between cold and hot war? You believe the Academy would 
be a step in the right direction ? 

Dr. Atkinson. Yes, sir; I think that is well put, what you have 
said, that it would be a step. In fact, I think one might almost say 
that it would be a decisive step in the right direction, to organize and 
train the kind of professional expertise that I think we badly need to 
give a focus for this. 

It seems to me this would be one of the principal contributions 
which the Freedom Academy would make, that you would have there 
people who could give the proper focus, the right kind of training, 
above all, the understanding, of how to meet what is essentially a 
new kind of warfare. 

So often in the past, w^e Americans — ^perhaj)s it is one of the defects 
of our qualities — have associated warfare wnth overt fighting, with 
an overt declaration of war. And I think many of us have taken a 
long time to come to understand that what the Communists are carry- 
ing on now is a rather new kind of warfare, but that it is just as real, 
just as deadly. 

If you organize a mob, let's say, to tear down the American flag in 
Panama, to burn the automobiles of American citizens, to stone Amer- 
icans, to discredit Americans, really you are carrying on acts of war- 
fare which, if you can keep the momentum going successfully around 
the world, will just as surely bring down your adversary as though 
you dropped nuclear weapons on him. 

The Chairman. The point is that you think that the bill before 
us is a vehicle upon which we can ride the crest of this trouble, that 
the present U.S. mechanism for conducting this period of cold war is 
defective, and that the Academy would be a better approach ? 

Dr. Atkinson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. We can all agree on what you and I have been 
saying, but now we propose to build a bridge, to build a structure, 
to devise a procedure, to create an instrument, to do the job. And you 
think the bill would do it ? 

Dr. Atkinson. Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier, I certainly do not 
view the bill as a panacea, as an honest opinion, but I do believe tliat 
it would be a very distinct contribution to building this bridge. 

May I take a little of your time to point out to you something that 
I thinik is relevant ? 



1086 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

On page 7 of the bill, you have : 

The private sector must understand how it can participate in the global 
struggle in a sustained and systematic manner. 

That is, how to bring the private sector, which is always important 
in America, into the struggle which we have not chosen, but which 
the Soviets have chosen, to conduct and which we must, of course, meet 
and win. 

Now, if I may use a little illustration of how valuable something 
like the Freedom Academy could be : Here is a coloring book. It is 
called the Sing Along With Khrushchev coloring book. And you may 
like to take a look at it. 

This little book was put out on a shoestring by a few Hungarian 
emigres, people who had to flee their own country at the time of the 
Soviet crushnig of the Hungarian people's uprising in 1956. It was 
put out on a shoestring with their own money, illustrated by a Hun- 
garian emigre artist, the text written by Dr. Fabian. 

This is one of the things. It is a very tiny thing, although it 
makes you very proud, I think, to be an American, to realize that 
people are sufficiently devoted to their comitry that they will take 
their own resources and just a little bit of effort on their own, a mere 
shoestring, to try to do something to make the country realize what 
kind of warfare, what kind of situation, we face. 

Now, if this represents a tiny effort, and of course it does, a very 
minuscule one, it seems to me that it is very relevant to indicate the 
point made on page 7 of the bill, about the importance of the private 
sector and how it can be brought into the struggle, to illustrate how, 
if you had an organization such as the Freedom Academy and the 
Freedom Commission to coordinate research, it would assist various 
parts of the private sector that are doing things of this kind. 

And I cite this, as I say, deliberately, as a very tiny example. It 
seems to me that here alone, if you did nothing else, you would be 
creating a service. 

I think that you would be doing much more than this, certainly. 
In, for example, the teaching profession, I can see that the Freedom 
Academy and Freedom Commission could do a very important work 
in helping to combat such organizations as the World Federation of 
Teachers Unions, which is a Communist- front organization operating 
out of headquarters in Prague, Czechoslovakia, and could aid the 
private sector, teachers in this country and elsewhere, in combating 
organizations of this kind. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. We appreciate your ap- 
pearance. 

Dr. Atkinson. Thank you, sir. 

The Chairman. Is Mr. Cunningham with us? 

I understand Mr. Cunningham is a high school teacher from Naples, 
Florida, who has been engaged for several years in teaching about 
communism. That is the kind of a witness I think we need for the 
record at this time. 

Glad to have you, Mr. Cunningham. We want to hear from you. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1087 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. CUNNINGHAM 

Mr. Cunningham. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee: I consider it an 
honor and a privilege to appear here today in order to testify on be- 
half of the Freedom Academy bill. 

My name is William J. Cunningham, and I am a high school teacher 
from Naples, Florida. 

I am here, not as an expert on any of the numerous facets of the 
cold war, but as a private American citizen who is vitally concerned 
about the future of his country. 

Although I have studied the contents and background of the major 
Academy bills and although I am fully aware of the variety of 
opinions concerning the specific characteristics of each bill, I shall 
confine my presentation to the support of that provision in the Free- 
dom Academy proposal with which I am most directly concerned: 
namely, section 2, article (a), paragraph (7), subsections IV and V, 
which relate to the participation of the private sector in the Freedom 
Academy proposal. 

As I studied the statements of those who testified last spring before 
the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, I became very much con- 
cerned over' the doubts expressed by several witnesses concerning the 
wisdom of including the private sector in the Freedom Academy's 
proposal. 

I am firmly convinced that the potential contributions of this ele- 
ment to the comprehensive effectiveness of our Nation's efforts to 
reverse the tides of the cold war should not, 7nust not, be ignored. 

Much of the preceding testimony has dealt with the pros and cons of 
the various aspects of the Freedom Academy on general terms. I 
would like to discuss the merits of private-sector participation from 
a somewiiat different perspective, that of a participating individual. 

With your permission, I would like to submit a statement based 
upon my own experiences and observations of the past 2 years as a 
teacher and as an American citizen. I hope that the ensuing remarks 
will, in some way, substantiate the convictions held by those who main- 
tain that we can no longer ignore the capacity of the private sector 
to contribute to our total cold w^ar effort. 

In September of 1962 I accepted a teaching position in Immokalee 
High School in Collier County, Florida. As a history teacher, I was 
asked to participate in an instructional program authorized by the 
Florida Legislature in the fall of 1962. 

This program requires that every graduate of a public high school 
in Florida receive a minimum of 30 hours of instruction in a course 
entitled "Americanism versus Communism." The key objectives of 
this course are: to recreate an awareness and respect for American 
history, patriotism, and tradition ; to develop an understanding of the 
true nature of communism ; and to encourage the development of an in- 
tellectual renaissance related to the unique characteristics of both 
Americanism and communism. 

(At this point Mr. Ashbrook entered the hearing room.) 

When I accepted this teaching assignment, I knew that before I 
could feel competent as an instructor, I would have to do a consider- 
able amount of research and study in order to expand my previously 
acquired knowledge about this topic. 
30-471 a— 64— pt. 1 11 



1088 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

I soon found myself immersed in a research project which consumed 
an average of 3 to 4 hours daily. As is frequently the case in such 
situations, the more I learned, the more I realized how much I did not 
know. 

I became increasingly interested in the subject matter, and also in 
the philosophy and reasoning behind the enactment of this law by the 
State legislature. In New Jersey, where I had taught for 5 years, 
many schools, fearing public censure or misunderetanding, con- 
scientiously avoided the subject entirely. I discovered that Florida 
was actively participating in a rapidly expanding program designed 
to eliminate the stigma attached to instructional, informative educa- 
tion about communism. 

Furthermore, emphasis was to be placed upon the numerous rights, 
privileges, and traditions of our people, the same rights, privileges, 
and traditions that are frequently taken for granted — or worse, 
ignored. 

The persistent and insidious challenge of communism, particularly 
toward the young, makes it both imperative and mandatory that we, as 
a nat'on dedicated to democratic concepts and the inherent rights of 
the individual, invoke measures capable of dispelling the apathy which 
permeates our society. 

A year ago I agreed with these ideas in principle, but I could not be 
totally convinced of their validity without exposing them to the 
realities of the classroom. Today, after a variety of related experi- 
ences, skepticism has vanished. 

I introduced the subject in my American and world history classes 
by commenting upon various international situations that were ap- 
pearing daily in newspapers and in other news media. The students 
complained that newspapers were scarce in their relatively isolated 
community. To insure the availability of a daily news source, thej' 
wrote to the Miami Herald^ 120 miles distant, and explained their 
problem. The following Monday, and on every school day thereafter, 
57 copies of the Herald were delivered to the high school for my his- 
tory students. 

They began to study the newspapers, to listen to expressed opinions 
on radio and television, and to seek additional viewpoints from a 
variety of responsible sources. Gradually, individual opinions 
emerged as they critically accepted or rejected statements expressed 
in the news media. They were beginning to fulfill the responsibilities 
incumbent upon citizens of a free democracy. 

The most impressive example of this newly acquired interest in inter- 
national affairs was their reaction to the highly controversial Cuban 
issue of the fall of 1962. Before President Kennedy's nationwide ad- 
dress, the two history classes had become deeply interested in the prob- 
lem and the variety of proposed solutions. Many had begun to formu- 
late their own opinions, others had espoused one or another of the pub- 
licized viewpoints, most were able to justify their positions intelli- 
gently. 

The morning after the President's address, I was greeted by a group 
of students bursting with opinions and questions. They were proud 
of the fact that they knew and understood the developments which led 
to this crisis. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1089 

As I listened to their comments, their questions, their differences of 
opinions, and their individual reactions, 1 experienced a glow of satis- 
faction that perhaps only other teachers could fully understand. This 
is the kind of intellectual and enthusiastic response that lent strong 
impetus to my own desire for further knowledge and comprehension 
of these problems. 

As the year progressed, study intensified, and these youngsters 
eagerly responded to the challenge. They struggled to understand 
strategy and tactics foreign to their natures, and the traditional con- 
cepts of American democracy gained new and increased significance 
as they probed and questioned and sought answers to the world prob- 
lems facing our Government and our people. It was working and 
learning with these youngsters that led me to consider graduate work in 
this field. 

Teaching Americanism versus Communism in Immokalee High 
School initially aroused and strengthened my interest in this area of 
cold war education, but there have been two subsequent events which 
have served to sustain and further my efforts. 

In June of last year, the Naples Civic Association asked me to attend 
Governor Bryant's Conference on Cold War Education as an educator 
representing Collier County. This conference held in Tampa, 
Florida, June 12, 13, 14, and 15, 1963, was sponsored by the Florida 
Center for Cold War Education and, acting as secretariat, the Insti- 
tute of American Strategy. 

Brought together for participation in this conference were key lead- 
ers from colleges, universities, secondaiy schools. State boards of edu- 
cation, labor organizations, businesses, and private, civic, and religious 
groups from all sections of the country. 

As I listened to each of the 68 speakers contribute to the central 
theme of the conference, I was impressed by the degree of representa- 
tion attained during the 4-day conference and by the extent to which 
this concept had been endorsed by leaders in so many diversified areas. 
Intelluctual growth and the renewed enthusiasm engendered by this 
experience provided the impetus for the third contributing factor in 
my own progress. 

After listening to several approaches to the problem of educating 
adults in this field, I suggested to Lewis Predmore, the director of 
adult education in Collier County, that I would like to organize and 
conduct an adult class in Naples. 

As a result of his cooperation and encouragement and the support 
of several civic leaders, this idea has become a reality. I feel that 
the interest and concern expressed by those adults who attend this 
class are indicative of the gradually increasing public interest in 
foreign affairs and other related problems. 

The participation of these people in this pilot program has pro- 
vided me with an additional incentive to increase my qualifications 
as an instructor. 

A further opportunity to contribute to the concept of cold war 
education resulted from the establishment of this class. The manager 
of our local radio station asked me to appear as a guest on his program 
in order to discuss the details and objectives of the course and to 
comment on its content. 



1090 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

At the conclusion of this program, he offered to allocate a weekly 
half hour of his programming time if I would present the various 
aspects of cold war education to his listeners as a public service. I 
consider his recognition of the importance of this topic to be indica- 
tive of the increased concern of many leading citizens over the absence 
of public reaction to these provocative issues. I have willingly ac- 
cepted the responsibilities incumbent upon the presentation of such 
a program because of my desire to contribute to the dissemination 
of knowledge vital to the purposeful existence of our society. 

I might add that partially as a result of these efforts, several 
leading citizens in Naples, upon hearing of my proposed trip to 
Washington to appear at these hearings, were interested enough to 
contribute to a fund established by one or two individuals in order 
to defray the expenses which this trip incurred. 

In spite of this encouraging response from some of our local citi- 
zens, I believe that our community is just beginning to gain momentum 
in its increased awareness of the significance of these cold war issues 
and, although circumstances and my own interest have led to my 
present involvement with these problems, I am acutely aware of my 
shortcomings. 

My knowledge has been painfully gleaned from a combination of 
self-study, observation, analysis, and experience. In an attempt to 
fill the gap resulting from a lack of formal training, I have applied 
for a fellowship which would permit me to expand my limited training 
in this field. The list of selected fellows will be released some time 
this month. May I say that, as a representative of the private sector, 
I would certainly welcome an opportunity to attend ithe Freedom 
Academy. 

As a result of my experiences and contacts with young people and 
adults, I have drawn a number of conclusions which I would like to 
submit for your consideration. 

In working with high school students in this area of Americanism 
versus Communism, two facts became obvious. First, the students 
displayed an immediate and sincere interest in learning about com- 
munism. Motivation was no problem, because they wanted to know. 

Second, as they learned the realities of communism, they began to 
see their own way of life in a brand-new perspective. They became 
vitally concerned over the ignorance and apathy of many adults. 
They became indignant at reports of limited voter participation in 
any kind of an election. 

In short, they recognized the value and importance of a free and 
democratic government, but more important, they realized that main- 
taining it is the full-time responsibility of each individual citizen. 

Isn't this the kind of attitude that must be developed among our 
youthful citizens? I believe that an intelligently administered pro- 
gram of education about communism is an excellent means of blunt- 
ing the sharply honed instrument of Communist propaganda as well 
as strengthening the internal structures of our own democratic way 
of life. 

I believe, further, that if we, as a nation, make a concerted effort 
to disseminate accurate and vital information concerning the true 
nature of the threat posed by Communist ideology, that we will not 
only strengthen our cold war capabilities, but we shall also disperse 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1091 

much of the public apathy which seemingly permeates our society. 

Previously, others have spoken about the importance of educating 
Government employees in this area of political warfare. They have 
discussed the value of educating foreign nationals. I believe that 
both of these programs are important. But how can our Nation af- 
ford to bypass or ignore the very source of its strength and endurance ? 

The United States Avas founded by citizens from the private sector. 
Its entire history of progress and accomplishment is proudly based 
upon the worth of the individual. In World War II the Govern- 
ment immediately began to mobilize the resources of the private 
sector, because it was obvious that the total resources of our Nation 
would be needed for victory. 

Men, women, and children responded, and the tremendous impact 
created by this unity of purpose astounded the world. Americans 
have always been willing to come to the aid of their country, but they 
must know that their aid is needed and they must know more about 
what they can do. 

There has been considerable criticism directed at our society because 
of its apparent apathy and preoccupation with individual problems. 
It seems to me that the quickest way to unify our Nation and strength- 
en its democracy is to stop lulling people into a false sense of security 
by assuring them that things are really well under control. 

Our Nation must develop a sense of national urgency and must con- 
vey this attitude to its people. If we are going to compensate for 19 
years of blissful inactivity and unawareness, then we need the aid and 
cooperation of all Americans. Our Government must show that it 
has not lost confidence in our people and their wisdom, their strength, 
their resourcefulness. 

If the people were anxious and willing to accept Government coor- 
dination and assistance to preserve their freedom in World War II, 
isn't it logical to assume that the same source of strength and enthusi- 
asm can be tapped again ? 

Private citizens such as myself are fighting an uphill battle. We 
must constaiitly overcome the lack of concern fostered by platitudes, 
assurances, and inaction. It is difficult to generate enthusiasm when 
the great majority of Americans do not even understand communism, 
let alone its potential danger. 

If, through the Freedom Academy, enough interested Americans 
can learn how to impress their fellow citizens with the magnitude 
and significance of the cold war struggle, and if they can leam how 
to assist the numerous elements of the private sector in constructively 
utilizing their vast jx>tential, then our Nation will be efficiently and 
effectively operating in its best democratic traditions. 

Many Americans want to know what they can do to help. Many 
others, like myself, are helping as much as possible in isolated areas, 
in projects large or small. But combating such a complex concept 
as communism is not something that can be done on a spur-of-the- 
moment, part-time basis. 

When to this already herculean task you must add the problems 
of widespread ignorance and misunderstanding and the ensuing in- 
difference which follows, the task appears overwhelmingly difficult. 
Without the national endorsement and encouragement of our Federal 
GoveiTunent, those who speak up become mere voices in the wilderness. 



1092 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The dominant reason for this lack of concern steins largely from the 
fact that people feel if Congress, the State Department, and other 
Federal branches and agencies are not concerned enough to do some- 
thing, why should they have to worry about it ? It becomes extremely 
difficult to refute this kind of logic. 

I mentioned earlier that many individuals and organizations are 
trying to help. Even many State governments are encouraging and 
supporting cold war education projects. But consider the scatter-gun 
effectiveness of such an approach, and temper the evaluation with the 
knowledge that these projects are suffering from one or all of the 
following deficiencies : lack of financial support, a lack of competent 
personnel, a lack of material and informational resources, and an 
audience which is frequently apathetic, occasionally antagonistic. 

Under these circumstnces, the total effectiveness of such efforts 
cannot be commensurate with their potential. 

I believe that the very existence of the Freedom Academy will 
generate a realistic and determined reaction on the part of the private 
sector, simply because it will be impressive evidence of our Govern- 
ment's recognition of the dangers of political warfare, as well as 
tangible proof of a dedicated and sincere effort to do some thing about 
it. 

I believe it will encourage existing programs to increase their efforts 
and, even more important, I believe it will help not just our people, 
but people everywhere to realize that our Nation understands, finally, 
that all is not well with the world and that we intend to do something 
about it. 

If, on the other hand, such an academy ignores the private sector 
and fails to provide for such students in its program, I believe that it 
will not only fail to capitalize on a significant source of talent and 
stren^h, but it will be indirectly undermining its whole program. 

Is it reasonable to assume that we can successfully cope with cold 
war issues abroad if the very heart of our Nation remains uninformed, 
confused, misled, or generally indifferent ? Isn't it axiomatic that the 
true strength of our Nation has always been derived from its people? 

Certainly conditions in the world today would seem to demand that 
now, more than ever, our Nation should let the world know that our 
form of government still relies on the wisdom and participation of 
its basic component — the average American citizen. 

Time and again in our sometimes turbulent history, this Nation has 
successfully answered the most awesome of challenges. Time and 
again its victories have resulted from the invaluable cooperation of its 
private citizens. 

The challenge which faces our Government today is perhaps greater 
than any of the others, but let us not forget that in a nation whose 
Government has never been divorced from the people, they must face 
the challenge together. This unique combination has never lost a con- 
test, and as long as each element respects the ability and wisdom of the 
other, our Nation cannot fail. 

Therefore, I believe it is incumbent upon the one to display its con- 
fidence in the other. I sincerely hope that any academy proposal will 
reaffirm our Government's faith in our people by providing adequately 
for the participation and cooperation of the private sector. 

Thank you, gentlemen, for your kind attention. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1093 

This concludes my prepared statement. 

The Chairman. Well, sir, you have provided one of the most in- 
spiring statements that has come before us thus far. 

Mr. Cunningham. Thank you, sir. 

The Chairman. I am aware of the work of you people in Florida. 
In fact, I attended the Cold War Conference that you spoke about. 

Mr. Cunningham. I realize that you did, sir. 

The Chairman. You have confidence in our ability to do something 
in this area, and yet your words indicate a certain sense of frustration, 
that I myself share, frankly. 

We live in an age of shortcut, rigid expressions. Our minds are half 
made up before we hear the evidence. Sometimes we do not care about 
what the evidence is going to be. We have a feeling about what should 
be done and we pay little attention to the record. I do not propose to 
act that way. 

I have heard statements that the State Department is honeycombed 
with Communists. "Investigate that source." That is one way to 
look at it. Then, from the State Department's point of view, emanate 
such expressions as: "Well, the State Department is the only instru- 
mentality of Government that knows anything about this thing, and 
everyone who wants to get into it is after publicity headlines and 
wants to reincarnate McCarthyism." 

Then you have some who say : "Well, the only way to do it is to fight 
it out, just the way w^e have conducted our wars in the past. There- 
fore let's get it over with." 

Almost every approach that I have run across contains this idea: 
Our minds are made up. We know better. So why listen to the 
evidence ? 

I was glad to hear you talk about confidence and faith and the 
partnership with the private sector. Let's try to cope with it. 

Those are not questions, but now I want to ask you a few questions. 

I want to reiterate that I share your miexpressed sense of frustra- 
tion, because you are trying to cope with this thing and meet it without 
preconceived notions. Obviously, you have gone out of your way to 
study tliis problem. 

I said this morning, off the record, and I am going to repeat it now, 
that in Louisiana we have a statute requiring a course of study entitled 
"Democracy versus Communism" which is essentially the same as the^ 
course you have m Florida, "Americanism versus Communism." 

Let me ask you this : What problems have you run into in prepar- 
ing yourself to teach Communist ideology, strategy, tactics ? 

Mr. Cunningham. First of all, let me preface my answer by saymg 
that I believe these problems which I face could be most adequately 
and efficiently handled by the Freedom Academy proposal which is 
before your committee at this time. 

Let me follow along with that by saying this : The primary prob- 
lems which I encountered were : 

No. 1, even though a relatively recent graduate of a State university, 
there was nothing in my curriculum, although I was a social studies 
major as well as an English major, which would even remotely relate 
to this problematical area. Therefore, upon being asked to teach in 
this field, I was left with a tremendous blank, a tremendous gap, in 
my own educational background. 



1094 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

In seeking some kind of assistance or some kind of source of infor- 
mation, there was relatively little available, gentlemen. And as a 
teacher, as a family man, I could not afford to take time off to study 
in any great depth, even if an opportunity presented itself. 

But the nucleus of the whole problem is simply that I had to train 
myself in this field. I had to obtain the literature, the books, the in- 
formation, and not only obtain it, but teach myself to discriminate and 
discern so that I would know the good from the bad. 

The Chairman. And then did you not feel like I do, and probably 
still feel, that you still do not know the kind of books that would give 
you the background to teach ? 

Mr. Cunningham. That is true, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that not disappointing? Is that not frus- 
trating ? 

Mr. Cunningham. Very much so. 

The Chairman. Obviously, you have excelled in this. You have 
pioneered in this new concept or approach to the cold war. 

What about the normal teacher in Florida, or, I could say, in Lou- 
isiana, who, by act of the legislature, is ordered to t-each a course on 
Americanism versus Communism or Democracy versus Communism ? 
If you are a pioneer, how do you evaluate the qualifications of the 
others to go into this area ? 

Mr. Cunningham. In defense of Florida's approach to this prob- 
lem — and I feel that basically they did a pretty good job — they only 
failed to provide one very important thing, and that was for the 
mandatory in^ruction of these teachers before they sent these teachers 
into the classroom. 

But they did try to help the situation, because I heard in September 
of the year that I began teaching that some counties, some areas, had 
had some sort of workshop for the teachers who knew they were going 
to be in this field. I do not know exactly how adequate they were, 
or how efficient their program was, but they did make something of an 
honest attempt. 

Along with this, if I may, I would like to quote from the results 
of a survey taken by the Florida State Department of Education. At 
the close of the last school year, which was the first year this course 
was in operation, they sent out a 39-question questionnaire to each 
teacher in this field and asked them to complete it. 

I have before me a synopsis and a summary of the reactions of the 
teachers to this questionnaire and I would like to, if I may, read a 
couple of these items off, to give you an idea of how this program went 
in its first year. 

Approximately three out of four teachers reported that they needed 
further preparation prior to teaching the unit. 

Approximately seven out of ten teachers enrolled in a formal 
course at a college, a university, or a junior college for a county work- 
shop, but in spite of that, three out of four still said that they needed 
further preparation. 

Nine out of ten indicated that they would like to have further 
preparation. 

Nine out of ten reported that they would like to continue teaching 
the unit. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1095 

Seven out of ten teachers taught the unit for a 6 weeks' period, but 
only five out of ten reported that they planned to spend only 6 weeks 
on the unit during the ensuing school term. 

In other words, this indicates they did not feel that they had 
enough time and thej^ would like to devote more than just the mini- 
mum 6 weeks to this instructional unit. 

These are just some of the reactions of the 464 teachers of this course 
who replied to this Florida State Department of Education question- 
naire. I was one of those teachers. 

The Chairman. Well, aside from your own research, helter-skelter 
as it might be, were you given a set of instructions or an institution 
where you could go to get the answers to these things right away? 
Is there such a thing in America ? 

Mr. Cunningham. There is no such thin^ in America today. 

I have investigated the possibility of doing graduate work in this 
field, as I mentioned in my testimony. I have applied for a fellowship. 
But in seeking the answers to these types of questions among the 
people who know more about it than I, I have been convinced that 
the opportunity to gain the type of knowledge and the kind of in- 
struction that I am seeking is a relatively difficult thing to do today, 
and the proposal which again is before this committee provides the 
only comprehensive answer to this kind of a problem that I have yet 
encountered. 

And I would like to reemphasize that onoe more for your considera- 
tion, gentlemen. 

Mr. Chairman. Well, now, let me ask you this question : What is 
your appraisal of the reaction of the students to this course? Their 
interest? Are they hungry for it? Are they interested? Or are 
they lost ? Would they like to know ? Or are their minds made up ? 
Are they willing to listen ? And so on. What is the student reaction ? 

Mr. Cunningham. To answer that question, sir, if I may, I would 
like to take it in two parts. 

One, to lend validity to my own appraisal, I would like to refer to 
this survey that was taken at the end of the year. 

The Chairman. I think that survey is absolutely informative, as far 
as I am concerned. 

Mr. Cunningham. One of the questions was based on student re- 
action, ,and the summary of the survey states that 9 out of 10 teachers 
reported that in their opinion this unit was effective in developing in 
their students a greater appreciation of the American way of life, and, 
two, that the major criticism of the instructional program by the 
teachers, as determined by their observation of the students, was the 
lack of time to devote study to this unit. 

The survey indicates that student reaction was most positive, most 
interested, and certainly my own personal experiences would back this 
up. I had students who had never been exposed to this kind of an 
instructional program before. They were blank slates as far as infor- 
mation about communism is concerned. 

But it was only a matter of a mere introduction to the study of this 
unit before they became absolutely enthusiastic in their thirst for fur- 
ther knowledge. Their questions at first perhaps were not too per- 
ceptive, but at least plentiful. As they gained in their own knowledge, 
their questions, of course, became more perceptive and more pointed. 



1096 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The end result of their enthusiasm and their interest, I believe, was 
almost as frustrating as my own, because as the course approached its 
end, almost every day one or more of them would say, "Well, Mr. 
Cunningham, if all of this is factual and all of these things have hap- 
pened, why don't we do something about it ?" 

Now, here we have stimulated a group of high school seniors to 
learn and acknowledge the problems in this field of cold war education. 
They have a very fundamental background in this area. They recog- 
nize the significance of the issues and the problems. And they are 
primed, as only young people can be, to go forth and do something in 
this area. 

And what can they do? They go to one of our university centers, 
which in many cases do not supply even superficial information on this 
topic. They have no recognition from the Federal Government that 
this problem is as imperative or as major as they say it is now, or as 
they have come to believe it is. 

And then we put the damper on this kind of youthful enthusiasm, 
which, I might add, the Communists are only too quick to exploit and 
capitalize upon whenever they have the opportunity. 

If there were a Freedom Academy for these youngsters, if they had 
the idea that this thing would be possible for them, I think the Free- 
dom Academy in 10 years would be swamped with applications. 

The Chairman. Well, thank you very much, sir. It has been very 
enlightening testimony, and I am glad to have someone who has gone 
through this experience and ordeal of trying to enlighten the youth 
of America in this very disturbing area. WTiat to do is hard to say. 

Anyway, you think the Freedom Academy approach is something 
that should be at the very least seriously explored and considered ? 

Mr. Cunningham. At the very least, yes, sir. 

Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, along the same lines that you were dis- 
cussing: The students would be interested in going to this Freedom 
Academy. I have heard some people express this interest to me since 
these hearings started, and before they started. Of course, I realize 
that all of this testimony has proven the need for this institution in 
training our own and foreign students and others. 

But they think of this as being an academy similar to a military 
academy. West Point or Annapolis, with a 4-year curriculum and a 
commission on graduation. That is some people's concept of the thing. 
What about that phase of it ? 

Mr. Cunningham. Well, sir, in studying the Freedom Academy, 
I am aware of the fact that this proposal does not provide for any 
kind of a degree-granting university. And I perhaps am not quali- 
fied to expound upon this particular answer to your question, but I 
would say this : I do not believe, personally, from my experiences with 
these students, that an undergraduate school would be the answer to 
this problem. It would be too specific and geared only to one phase 
of a multifaceted problem. 

I believe that these youngesters who would be encouraged to attend 
this school would understand that and would realize that the back- 
ground of the initial parts, at least, of a college education would be in- 
strumental in their being able to continue along this specific line of 
educational development later on. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1097 

Mr. Pool. One other question, and it is strictly information for me. 
I am not being argmnentative at all. 

You have studied the Communist system of training their pro- 
paganda experts? 

Mr. Cunningham. Yes, I have. 

Mr. Pool. Along the line of this Academy, what do they have 
similar to that? What would be similar to that? Would there be 
anything close to it? 

Mr. Cunningham. You mean the Communist situation comparable 
to what we are talking about here ? 

Mr. Pool. Yes. 

Mr. Cunningham. I believe that would be most completely an- 
swered in the first parts of tlie "Green Book," which was prepared 
by the Orlando Committee, as they intensively studied the Soviet 
political research and training program. 

Perhaps not to try and dodge your question, sir, but to answer it 
very quickly, it is stated there that there are many political warfare 
trainmg centers throughout the Communist-bloc world. And cer- 
tainly that would be in line, perhaps, to some extent, with your ques- 
tion, the fact that they are well ahead of us in this area. 

Mr. Pool. What I am thinking of : When we start drafting legisla- 
tion, I want to see what we need to do. The testimony so far has 
been very favorable as far as I am concerned. I have not heard the 
other side. Like the chairman, I want to hear from both sides. 

But now I am looking ahead, trying to figure out what we are gomg 
to do when we decide to do something. That is why I ask the ques- 
tion. I am going to talk to Mr. Grant further about this. 

Mr. Cunningham. I am sure he would be eminently better quali- 
fied than I to discuss this with you, sir. 

Mr. Schadeberg. Would your concept of the Academy, then, be 
that it would be more informative and patriotically inspirational for 
our people who are interested, not just for teachers but for the average 
citizen ? 

Mr. Cunningham. I believe you are referring to part of my state- 
ment in which I made this remark. If I may enlarge on that just a 
little bit. The meaning there was simply that the very existence of this 
Freedom Academy, endorsed and recognized by our Federal Govern- 
ment, would be an incentive to the private American citizen to become 
better informed and help him realize the importance and significance 
of these issues. Just the existence of it would do this much, which 
I think would be of tremendous benefit to the entire country. 

Mr. Schadeberg. Let me ask a question which may seem a kind of 
queer question to ask : Suppose they are aware of it. What good will 
it do? Where will they carry it from there? 

Mr. Cunningham. Well, let's assume, since we have gone this far, 
that the Freedom Academy is a reality, that they are motivated in 
chis fashion. If I may go back to my own experiences, as a partial 
answer to your question : I would not have to contend with the almost 
dominant apathy among the private citizens, who do not believe that 
this problem is so significant that they should have to worry about it, 
simply because they feel that since the Government has not indicated 
any specific concern over the problem, then it is certainly not in the 
realm of their responsibility to get upset about it. 



1098 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMltllSSION 

So, initially, it would tend to wake people up to the significance of 
these cold war factors and make them realize that they cannot afford 
to ignore these problems any longer. 

This in itself would give tremendous aid to any private endeavor, 
whether it is my little operation down there in Naples or anything else. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Would you not consider this an effort on behalf 
of the average citizen, for instance, who was going into the Army or 
the Navy or whatever it was, into the service, to make him better 
qualified, to better understand his job ? 

I do not mean insofar as the military man is concerned, but I mean 
the purpose for which he is serving this country. 

Mr. Cunningham. This is a specific question, but if you will per- 
mit, I would like to try and answer it in general terms. 

I believe that this kind of cognizance of these problems and their 
crucial importance would be of tremendous help in helping almost any 
American in any capacity to do a job which would, on a long-range 
basis, ultimately benefit the entire free world, and our Nation in par- 
ticular, whether it was the armed services or business or education or 
whatever it might be. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. They would be more capable if they were able to 
recognize any possibilities of infiltration in a church or a labor orga- 
nization or busmess community or club ? 

Mr. Cunningham. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you, sir, very much. 

Is Mr. Kintner with us ? 

Mr. Grant. I do not know just where he is, Mr. Chairman. He 
apparently has been slowed up by that snowstorm up there. 

The Chairman. Well, is he coming? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir, he is supposed to be here, and he was to be 
here by 3 :15. 

Mr. Mayers. Mr. Chairman, since I didn't quite complete my state- 
ment, could I make a couple ot additional points ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Mayers. In connection with the discussion that was just held 
on education, I would like to call your attention to how Mr. Walt 
Rostow, at the Senate hearings, described what this legislation is at- 
tempting to do to help American educators by publishing textbooks 
and other educational material. He referred to that as "Federal 
control of education." This, of course, is an alarmist phrase which 
is pretty much of a red flag. 

Every agency, including the State Department, publishes educa- 
tional literature. When the Department of Agriculture provides 
farmers with information that they would like to liave, it is not "con- 
trolling" the farming of this country or controlling the education of 
farmers. When the Department of Commerce issues material for 
businessmen, it is not "controlling" them. 

The Chairman. Or when the Federal Reserve Bank puts out state- 
ments, they are not controlling banking, either. 

Mr. Mayers. Yes. The effort that Mr. Rostow made to somehow 
associate this legislation with ^''Federal control of education^'' was 
based wholly on a misrepresentation of the legislation. 

Another unfair use of words in Mr. Rostow's testimony has recurred 
often when State Department spokesmen discuss Freedom Commis- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A 'FREEDOM COMMISSION 1099 

sion legislation. We have the phrase in the bill, "research and 
training." 

The same phrase appears in the State Department's NAFA bill. 

The Chairman. What bill was that ? 

Mr. Mayers. The National Academy of Foreign Affairs bill, the 
one the State Department sponsored. 

But when they refer to exactly the same phrase in the Freedom 
Academy bill, they used the word "indoctrination." 

There is no difference between the phraseology in the bills. This 
is an effort to read into the Freedom Commission legislation a con- 
cept that does not belong there. 

The Chairman. In other words, as I understand you, in the bill to 
establish the State Department's National Academy of Foreign Af- 
fairs, the same words are used in describing the course of study ? 

Mr. Mayers. In describing the object of the bill. 

The two objects of the bill are research and training. First, re- 
search to determine mhat to teach, and then the teaching. There is no 
difference in the language in this respect. 

But they inject the word "indoctrination" only in their description 
of the Freedom Commission bill. "Indoctrination" is no more a part 
of the Freedom Commission bill than it is a part of the National 
Academy of Foreign Affairs bill. 

The Chairman. I see. 

My colleague, here, Mr. Pool, raised a question, if I can rephrase 
it, while you are on the stand : He said that there could be an under- 
standing on the part of the American people that we are setting up 
just another academy, such as West Point, the Naval Academy, or Air 
Force Academy, leading to a degree, a set course of study, with 
specialized graduate work, and so on, and wonders whether or not this 
should be of the same type, and if not, why. 

Was that about what you had in mind ? 

Mr. Pool. That is about it — as to whether or not we should special- 
ize and go on and get specialists as a result of it, and not a hodgepodge 
where one fellow has 2 months, another fellow has 6 months, and an- 
other person 2 years. 

What should be our purpose ? 

Mr. Mayers. Our purpose should be to have as many courses as fit 
the needs of the various types of students. Some of them might be 
short courses. Some of them would be longer. 

I believe that the most important aspect of the legislation is the 
fact that it provides for research to determine what to teach. It would 
be a little presumptuous for the writers of the bill at this point to be 
very specific about the length of the course, the nature of the curricu- 
lum, or anything which could be criticized as a detailed program, when 
all they are fighting for is the principle that "cold war training" is 
essential, 

Mr. Pool, At a later date, after the Commission sets up a division 
of research, you might have an academy where they did give a degree ? 

Mr. Mayers, That I think would be up to the Commission, But 
research comes first, 

Mr, Pool, I mean that could be developed later on ? 

Mr, Mayers, Yes, The Commission would have the authority to 
develop the courses, and perhaps there might be degrees on some of 
them. 



1100 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

But it is not comparable to West Point. That is a 4-year coui-se to 
train a man to become a professional military man and coniprehen- 
sively educated. That is not what the Freedom Academy would be 
aiming to do. 

Mr. Pool. Well, let me ask you this question, then: Do we need 
professional soldiers of propaganda? Do we need professionals to 
go out into the world and sell these ideas and to direct the propaganda 
effort of this country ? 

Mr. Mayers. I would like to answer it in this way. There is urgent 
need of professionals to fight Communist professionals in the field of 
propaganda and political warfare. Now, whether these professionals 
all need be Americans, or whether many of them should be native 
political figures who would learn how to counteract Communist prop- 
aganda with their own 

Mr. Pool. Professional anti-Communists. Let's put it that way. 

Mr. Mayers. It is a way to put it; yes. But we certainly need pro- 
fessional skill in meeting this tlireat. 

Now, the question was asked of me after my recent testimony as to 
what I meant by saying that we needed greater professionalism in 
our political communications with the other countries. I was asked, 
"Do we not have professional journalists and broadcasters ;ind moving 
picture men and others right in the USIA today?" The answer is 
yes, but they are not professional 'political warriors. They ai'e pro- 
fessionals in a very limited sense. 

Mr. Pool. Do we need people like that representing the United 
States and representing the other free countries? 

Mr. Mayers. Absolutely. You raised the question, Mr. Pool, be- 
fore, about what the Russians have. They have all kinds of schools, 
from mere propaganda to organizing riots to devices for assassina- 
tion. 

A Freedom Academy need not ever get beyond anything which is 
overt. There is nothmg about the Freedom Academy instruction 
which would have to be concealed or hidden. 

Concerning the proposed training, there has been criticism by the 
State Department that political warfare training must be done in 
secrecy — there need be no secrecy about selling concepts of progres- 
sive government and the ideology of a free people in an open society. 
There is nothing secret about that. 

Mr. Pool. Well, let's lay our cards on the table. If we are going 
to get serious about really doing a job, in my opinion we are going 
to have to fight fire with fire and we are going to have to get just as 
professional as they are, or more so. 

Mr. Schadeberg, Will the gentleman yield ? 

I think that this analogy would be possible : that there are two kinds 
of wars, your hot war and this cold war. And you have a set of arma- 
ments that you fight one with, and your academies, West Point and so 
on, teach our men how to use these weapons. 

Could not this Academy be one in which we give them the tools of 
the cold war, and how to use them ? 

Mr. Mayers. Absolutely. Nonmilitary warfare of all kinds. 

But a Freedom Academy can only develop the tools, not use them. 
I do not think we should be confused to the point where somebody 
could say, "Well, the CIA is doing that, and you are overlapping." 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1101 

The proposed training does not overlap that given today by any de- 
partment of Government. 

The big danger, here, is that we can be brushed off as charging that 
we are overlapping existing governmental activities. But we are not. 

Mr. Pool. Well, of course, I am just a Congressman and I can say 
what I want to, and I realize that when you pass a bill sometimes 
everything is not laid out. But I am looking away into the fu- 
ture. I would like to see us doing what is really practical and pro- 
ductive, and I think eventually we are going to have to do something 
like that if we are going to be successful in fighting what I think 
is not a cold war but a hot war. 

I think we are right in the middle of it, as if we had declared war. 

Mr. Mayers. When you talk nonmilitary warfare in Soviet terms, 
it means everything short of shooting and even includes brushfire wars. 
Free world citizens should be equipped completely to respond on 
every level. 

We do respond to brushfire wars with our guerrilla training. Mr. 
Rostow, with whom I had a talk about this, has the notion that be- 
cause there are counterinsurgency programs by the Pentagon, that is 
all that is needed. 

He will not recognize that political warfare, which is mostly non- 
military, nonviolent, is the thing that we are also in need of. 

Mr. Pool. We do not have anything along that line at the present 
time? 

Mr. Mayers. Political warfare, as distinguished from both diplo- 
macy and guerrilla warfare, is nobody's business in the American Gov- 
ernment today. It is not the Department of State's, not the Penta- 
gon's, not the CIA's. It has gone by default, and that is the reason 
for the Freedom Commission bill. 

Mr. Clausen. Mr. Chairman, I realize that I am not a member of 
the committee, and you were very kind to let me listen in, but there is 
a point I would like to make here in response to Mr. Pool's point of 
view. 

The real key here is to recognize the tremendous flexibility in the 
private sector that the public sector, under no circumstances, will ever 
have available to them. 

In other words, if someone is going to be working in some of these 
countries, they must have the flexibility that is only available to the 
private sector, because if the public sector is going to be doing this, 
then they run the risk of being labeled as an intervenor or an ag- 
gressor. And I think this is the basis of our objective. 

Mr. Mayers. There is certainly a big, wide area which a Freedom 
Commission would have to investigate to finally determine what pri- 
orities to give what kind of activity. We are about 45 years late in 
recognizing the very thing which the Communists have used to make 
the tremendous progress that they have made. It has been largely 
through political warfare. 

Mr. Po!)L. I visualize that in some countries we could actually use 
professionals and go in there and do the job. In other countries we 
could not ; it would not be allowed. That is a problem, too; is it not? 

Mr. Mayers. The Freedom Commission i)lan is to give the training 
to the natives of the countries to do the job themselves, wherever jws- 
sible. We cannot, as the United States, do the whole political job. 
We can only be giving aid. 



1102 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Our whole concept in the Freedom Academy is to give political aid, 
in addition to the financial and military and technical aid which we 
give these countries. Today we give them no political aid. The 
Freedom Commission concept is a way to start giving them political 
aid. 

The Chairman. I think what the gentleman from California was 
suggesting was that if this proposal were enacted into law, there would 
be danger that participants, graduates, of this Academy w^ould be 
charged with being "agents" of the Government, whereas, if this were 
done on a privately financed plan, we would not have that danger. I 
am not sure that you agree with that. 

Mr. Mayers. Mr. Chairman, that danger exists even without a 
Freedom Academy. Any student who studies in this country the 
Communists may label "a tool of the imperialists." The trouble is 
that he does not know how to answer the charge. He is not able 
politically to stand up to those charges and explain the difference 
between the kind of country in which his accusers were trained and 
the kind of country he received his training in. 

The Chairman. Mr. McDowell, would you address yourself to the 
question I asked ? 

Mr. McDowell. Mr. Chairman, this point has been specifically 
raised. We have within the institutions of higher learning in excess 
of 50,000 foreign students per year. For instance, there is Cheddi 
Jagan, the Communist who got his training and indoctrination, and 
his marriage, which cinched the thing, for his Commmiist operation in 
British Guiana, at the University of Chicago, on American soil. He 
went back, a prepared and hardened Communist operator, a very 
clever one, with a wife along to see that he was kept in line. 

Now, this is what occurs in the positive sense. Every student who 
goes back who is not politically committed to the Communists finds 
himself faced in that country, where there is an active Communist 
group, with the charge in just the crudest form : "He is a CIA agent." 
Any person who is not pro-Communist has a wall of suspicion built 
around him by the Communist operation in the country to which he 
returns. 

The Chairman. I do not want to make an odious comparison, but I 
notice that Oswald's mother is trying to portray her son as a CIA 
agent. 

Mr. McDowell. And this, of course, is a straight formula off the 
Moscow radio. Tlie general development of this philosophy began 
within a matter of hours after the assassination. 

The Chairman. All right. Pardon me. I did not really want to go 
into that area. 

But as I understand from you and from Mr. Grant and maybe some- 
body else, at first, the originators of the Freedom Academy idea, those 
who gave birth to it, toyed, played, conceived the idea of this Academy 
being run as a private institution, and then discarded it. 

Is that right ? And if so, why ? 

Mr. McDowell. The original concept psychologically I think was 
under the title, "The Lincoln University." It was a calculated phras- 
ing in terms of the fact that in terms of personalities — and I do not 
want to take in the issue of 1860, although I am perpetual secretary 
to the Lincoln Civil War Society in Philadelphia — the Lincoln person- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1103 

ality happens to be identified on the basis of opinion t^sts as the per- 
sonality most appealing in terms of sentiment abroad. And this was 
the term, therefore, that was originally used. 

It was to be privately managed, but it would, of course, involve exec- 
utive department consent, approval, and clearance, because there were 
certain areas hi dealing with foreign students. 

For instance, we cannot bring foreign students here on the scale 
that we do for our private universities, except with the cooperation of 
Government agencies, the State Department, the Immigration Divi- 
sion of the Department of Justice. 

There is no such thing as the absence of that, of governmental agen- 
cies, in the movement of these students back and forth and the ar- 
rangement for their education. We, for instance, in our union are 
subsidizing a student from Kenya, Africa, in a private university in 
America, simply because we were concerned so that we had some con- 
tacts and we made this exertion on our private part. There is noth- 
ing political in this. There is on connection with our union activity 
at all. But, of course, we had to work through agencies, including 
agencies of the Government, in so doing. 

But the major point which has to be made — and this will be raised 
by critics of this — is that any foreign student trained here will be 
termed an agent of the imperialist interests of this Government, of 
the United States. 

And the overwhelming answer, again, is that this is exactly what 
occurs to any student who returns to a country where there is an ac- 
tive Communist operation, if he is not already in the classification 
of a Cheddi Jagan, who is on the other side. 

And the only difference is : He is not prepared. There is no pro- 
vision. These students go back and in many cases become higlily 
defensive. It has got to the place effectively that the head of the 
African State of Guinea, conferring with one of the individuals who 
has been associated with him, associated with the International Con- 
federation of Free Trade Unions, said, "Our students whom we send to 
the West come back either defensive or pro-Communist, and the 
only students that become anti-Communist are the students we send 
into the Communist countries. They get a bad dose and come back, 
and these are the anti -Communist students we get.'" 

The Chairman. The point is, as I understand, that you thought 
about this idea, or this creation or establishment, of a privately 
financed university and discarded that idea in favor of the approach 
contemplated by this bill. 

Mr. McDowell. We came to the conclusion, may I say rather sor- 
rowfully, that the concept of victory in the political warfare struggle 
was so completely absent at the cooperating executive department of 
Government that it could not be communicated to the private citizens 
and to the private agencies which were capable of raising the funds 
that were necessary to put a significant operation into effect. 

In other words, we found ourselves bound by th^ ill compulsion of 
the fact that the absence of governmental recognition of legislative 
intent to provide such a purpose meant that it was not accepted as 
an American purpose, and therefore it could not communicate itself. 

The foundations, for example, veered away from any such idea. 
The sources of finance just were not available. And therefore we 

30-471 O— 64— pt. 1 12 



1104 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

finally realized, as the young teacher said this afternoon, the attitude 
of the people is that if there is no declaration of this as a strategic 
and important matter on the part of that agency which by their votes 
they have charged with the responsibility of the promotion of our 
interests abroad — ^then obviously private citizens need not exert them- 
selves in that respect. 

And we just came full stop before that obstacle. 

Mr. ScHADEBERG. Mr. Chairman? 

Would there be any reason, any objection, for people who believe 
in freedom to admit that they were agents, speaking for the free 
world ? We ought not to be ashamed of that. In cases where we send 
a student out, and they say, "You are an agent of the CIA," we should 
not back away from it. I think we ought to be proud of it. 

Mr. McDowell. This is the answer of the Commmiist student, 
because there is not a single one of these countries that are most 
exposed and vulneraT3le where there are not scores of students being 
recruited for Iron Curtain universities and training schools. 

They go and they return, and their answer, when they are queried — 
they are drilled and prepared before they go back to give the answer, 
and the answer is, "This is a lot of malarkey, this idea that I am an 
agent of Moscow. Look, judge me by the things I advocate. These 
are the things in your interest and in the interest of the common 
welfare." 

And this has been completely effective. But the only difference is 
that the foreign student here, the uncommitted student returning, 
has no opportunity of access to any training resource which would 
prepare him with a reasonable and proper answer such as you give. 

Mr. Schadeberg. I would hope, just getting off that subject a little 
bit, that in some way, if and when the bill comes up and we are dis- 
cussing it, there will be the opportunity for the private sector to co- 
operate financially as well as otherwise, so that we do not have this 
entirely Government. 

Mr. Mayers. It is not precluded by the bill. On the contrary, the 
bill gives every encouragement to the private sector. 

Mr. McDowell. May I give a specific instance ? 

I have been in touch with a group known as "Fight Communism" 
in Western Europe. There is an attempt to carry on an institute 
annually which draws students from Western Europe for the purpose 
of giving them at least a week's institute training, with the presence 
of qualified speakers. 

This institute failed last year for the lack, I found out at a later 
date, of a sum which amounted to $250, because students here do not 
have pocket money such as American students have. 

The whole thing fell flat. 

Now, the institute is again preparing for this year. There was one 
large deficiency on their program, and that was information to these 
students in Western Europe who were coming to this institute on the 
question of Cuba, because there is no question on which we are as 
uniformly misrepresented, not in the Communist countries, but in the 
free countries of Western Europe, led off by Britain, for example. 

Now, this difficulty required that they drop that part from their 
program, because they could not find a person with the resources 
that could be made available to them at that time. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 105 

So this May they will have their institute, but with this gap in the 
program. And yet it is the most strategic gap, because even the 
conservative press of Europe takes a position in relation to our prob- 
lem of Castro's communism in Cuba which is absolutely incredible in 
terms of its distortion, misrepresentation, and the portraying of the 
entire public opinion of America and its Government as a bunch of 
"nervous Nellies," exaggerating something that has no real danger, 
because it is so remote. 

Now, this is an example of where you have voluntary action on the 
part of a group of students, but they cannot get the resources. 

You could not get, under the present setup — you could not get an 
American information officer made available to this student group for 
this purpose, under this title, because you run again into this lack of 
declared policy. 

I should imagine just what would be the reaction if any of these 
agencies were asked to supply a speaker for a group entitled "Fight 
Communism." 

Now, this is a group of students voluntarily putting money out of 
their own pockets, which are very poorly supplied. There is a gap. 
■- Now, this occurs in more countries than one. 

The Chairman. Let's get down to my question. Do I understand, 
then, that you did consider that approach and you dropped it ? 

Mr. McDowell. We did, because we found in practical experience 
that without the declaration of interest on the part of the public 
agency, the agency of Government that is charged with this respon- 
sibility by the American people, there was not sufficient rallying 
ground to get the resources which would be necessary to make this a 
significant operation. 

It would be again a shoestring operation, like these inadequately sup- 
plied students at the University of London. They have done excel- 
lent work, but 

The Chairman. As I understand it, if there is validity — and I am 
not discarding it — to the argument that there should not be an injec- 
tion of the Government into this Academy and that it should be done 
through some private plan of financing, then we should not pass a bill, 
because if we financed the private institution, the Governnient would 
still be in it. So that would be the end of these hearings, if we go 
that route. 

Is that not right? 

Mr. McDowell. That is correct. 

Mr. Mayers. Mr. Chairman, may I comment on this reference to 
the fact that this is a private institution, or a separate institution 
from Government ? 

It is not separate from Government. It is only separate from the 
State Department. The State Department attempts to convey the 
impression that anything that has to do with foreign affairs that is 
not under its control is automatically "out of Government." 

The Chairman. Well, I come back to what I have said a number 
of times. As I understand the striicture of this bill, you would have 
the Commission as an .independent agency separated from the State 
Department or the Government, but, at the same time, you would have 
a link with the Government in the sense that all these agencies would 



1106 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

have an advisory group consulting, although not overriding and 
running the Commission. 

(At this point Mr. Ashbrook left the hearing room. ) 

Mr. Mayers. Mr. Chairman, over and above the Advisory Com- 
mission. 

The Chairman. But is that right? 

Mr. Maters. Yes ; but it is not right to the extent you say it is the 
only link with Government. 

When you have commissioners appointed by the President and 
approved by the Senate, and their salaries and staff salaries are paid by 
the Government, why should anybody say that it is "outside of Govern- 
ment," any more than the Atomic Energy Commission is outside of 
Government ? 

It is not outside of Government. The impression that it is outside 
of Government has been created by the State Department in line with 
its erroneous assumption that anything that has to do with foreign 
affairs that they do not handle is outside of Government. 

The Chairman. While waiting for Mr. Kintner — and if he does not 
come, we will have to adjourn — I wonder if Mr. Grant would have 
some observations, without repeating the question — short observa- 
tions on the issue we have now been discussing. 

Mr. Grant. I will have certain observations, Mr. Chairman. I 
wonder if we could turn to one particular aspect of this that I did 
not get to in my previous testimony. As you recall, we had to cut it 
off so that Dr. Possony could make his presentation. 

I want to have a chance to be more specific in terms of what the pri- 
vate sector can contribute. 

The Chairman. No. No. I know they will contribute. I know 
this will aid them in contributing. We are not talking about making 
a choice. 

Shall we have this Academy as a privately financed institution by 
a foundation or philanthropic contributions, or must we have a Gov- 
ernment supported Freedom Academy? These are the choices. 

I know it will spill over and aid private institutions and private 
efforts and private sectors. Let's face the choice. 

And I understand you have made that choice. If you did, why? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir, we did ; and let me explain exactly why. 

I testified earlier we are going to need a budget of $35 million per 
year, an operational budget, not endowment, but an operational 
budget, to conduct this thing upon the scale on which it is going to 
have to be conducted if we really are serious about closing the biggest 
gap in all of our defenses against the Soviet drive for world 
domination. 

Few universities in this country have $35-million-per-year opera- 
tional budget. Maybe the American Red Cross can raise that kind 
of money annually, but I seriously doubt that it would be possible and 
1 believe it would be impossible, under present circumstances and con- 
ditions, to raise $35 million per year to operate this thing on that 
scale in the private sector. 

This is so serious, it is so late in the game, that only the Federal 
Government itself, at this late date, has the resources and prestige to 
operate the Freedom Academy on the scale it is going to have to be 
operated, if all aspects of this research and training problem are go- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 107 

ing to be covered as I indicated they should be in my previous testi- 
mony. 

The Chairman. I know my friend from California is deeply in- 
terested in the privat-e approach, so I would gladly yield to him for 
questions on this point. 

Mr. Clausen. Getting down to the nub of the question, if it was 
possible to raise the money in the private sector, this is the sort of ap- 
proach you would like to have, so as to retain the flexibility, but you 
have concluded that, with the late date that we have here today, you 
have to come through the Government in order to raise the funds? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, but money is only part of the problem. The 
second is a q^uestion of prestige, Mr. Chairman. 

I^et. me give you an example. Every year, the Naval War College 
at Newport, Rhode Island, at the end of their 10 months' training 
program has a global strategy conference in which they bring in 
about 100 VIP's from around the country. These are top-drawer 
executives. They have to give up a week of their time to come up 
there at their own expense, and so forth. But they get about 95 per- 
cent of those who are invited to attend that come. 

If Harvard University, for example, was running a foreign affairs 
seminar or something and they asked the same group of executives to 
come up, they would be lucky to get 10 percent. 

It is a p^restige factor. 

If this is going to be a major national effort, and is 'so shown to be, 
we are going to develop this prestige, and it will be a great prestige 
factor to be invited to the Academy. But I wonder if we can ever 
develop that type of prestige around a private institution. 

Mr. Clausen. If I may ask this : What about the possibilities that 
might be available if we could establish the Freedom Academy con- 
cept, a very solid concept, by an endorsement from this committee, 
by an endorsement from the Congress ? 

Tlie Chairman. By an Act of Congress ? 

Mr. Clausen. By an Act of Congress. 

The Chairman. Well, then the Government is in it. 

Mr. Clausen. I think here may be a significant point. I think the 
gentleman earlier — the gentleman from the union organization — made 
the strong point that what was needed here was legislative initiative 
to recognize that a problem exists. 

I believe this was your point. And it is simply now a question of 
how it is going to be financed. And I think that there is a possibility, 
for instance, of initiating legislation in the tax field, for tax incen- 
tives for some of these people to be motivated to participate. 

This is just one of the possibilities. But I think the real key, here, 
is that we consider a very strong endorsement of this Freedom 
Academy concept, and then work it out from there. 

Now, these are points that I think are very pertinent. 

But I think there is flexibility here, sir, that can be incorporated 
into legislation. 

Mr. Grant. May I further add, though, Mr. Chairman, that this is 
a critical area of national defense, and tlie most basic purpose of all 
Government is defense. Can we afford to take an area of defense 
which can be just as crucial as military defense, beoaujsie this is a 
struggle in which we can freeze as well as bum 



1108 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

Mr. Pool. Right along at that point, I voted for $50 billion, I 
believe, for national defense, and I did not even look back. I have 
got a pretty conservative voting record in this Congress. And as far 
as this idea is concerned, if we can work out the idea — and I have not 
said we can, but if we can — I do not thmk you will get to first base on 
$35 million. 

I would be in favor of doing a really good, practical job and appro- 
priating tlie money that is necessary to do it right. 

Mr. Grant. I hope I made it clear in my earlier testimony that $35 
million was minimal. 

Mr. Pool. I understand ; yes. 

Mr. Grant. But, Mr. Chairman, I ask you this 

The Chairman. Do not ask. Tell us. 

Mr. Grant. Certainly we would not turn over our entire defense 
establishment, and preparation for it, to the private sector. But I 
think that this is such a critical area of national defense, which is the 
No. 1 responsibility of the United States Government — that this is 
something we caimot shuck oil and tell the private sector to play this 
major role of research and training, because this has to be major 
training for Government foreign affairs personnel, as well as private 
citizens and foreign nationals. 

Mr. Clausen. Will you yield, sir ? 

The point that you are making is that the stimulation to the private 
sector must come from the Congress of the United States, to motivate 
these people to come into this field. 

Mr. Grant. Let me make this point, Mr. Chairman. Once the 
Freedom Academy is in operation, it will be a major stimulant to 
our private universities to begin offering graduate training, seminars, 
as well as undergraduate instruction, in the type of subject matter 
which the Freedom Academy will cover. 

The Chairman. That will spill over into the private sector? 

Mr. Grant. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. But you do not think you can start it that way — 
through a private academy — you have to have this central agency 
called the Freedom Academy ? Is that your opinion ? 

I am developing the record. I am asking for your opinion. 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And your Orlando Committee, the initiator of 
this idea, thought about it and discarded the private-sector plan of 
an institutional setup. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Grant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Chairman, I feel sure that in the present day and age we might 
be able to go out and raise a $5, $10, or $15 million endowment, and 
set up some kind of a private training institution in the Academy, but 
this would be small potatoes in terms of what we need. And it could 
not begin to carry on the extensive research or training program which 
we would have to have. 

Mr. McDowell. Might I inject one matter of import? 

I referred this morning to the American Institute for Free Labor 
Development. This program had scarcely begun, under private aus- 
pices, which included substantial business support as well as sub- 
stantial support from union treasuries, which had been expending a 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1109 

great portion of the income of the AFL-CIO that now goes exclusively 
to foreign affairs activities. 

When they ran against the matter of cost, for example, when you 
draw students, workingmen, from countries as poor as the Latin 
American countries are, you cannot ask them to take an unpaid vaca- 
tion. They have no funds. Therefore, immediately there came the 
fact that you have to have the stipend to support the student over 
this period of 90 days to 6 months in which this training takes place. 

It was at this time — it is not a matter of too much advertising, it is 
true — that it became essential that governmental funds were required 
on the scale necessary, and it was at this point that the AID was tapped, 
because they had a program going. 

It was welcomed by the governments, for example, that these people 
were returning to. The strongest kind of endorsements came in the 
case of a country such as Honduras, who said that 3 months after the 
return of one of the graduates the almost complete dominance of one 
section of Honduras by the Communists was broken, simply because 
they had two knowledgeable people conducting the fight there and 
knowing what the issues were and knowing how to do the very me- 
chanical things. 

Now, they therefore came up against the fact that in this area, a 
vital area of national defense, there is no such thing as private financ- 
ing. When it comes to the scale even of the American Institute for Free 
Labor Development, it started on labor-management initiative, a part- 
nership, with real resources of the major labor organization and of 
groups represented by the type of Mr. Grace of the Grace Lines. 

They nevertheless came along to providing actual students, and 
this was beyond the capability of private financing, and even though 
this agency is operating as predominantly a private agency, it would 
have been stopped in midcareer if it had put itself within the limita- 
tions of its original private financing. 

May I add this : that in terms of the ideal, it is probably described, 
in a free enterprise society, by a friend of mine, who at the end of 
World War I found himself, without any preparation in Government 
or military affairs, the Governor of Transylvania in Hungary. He 
had on his hands 21,000 cavalry horses. The tonnage of fodder re- 
quired for the support of those horses was fantastic, calibrated over 
a week's time. There were no railroads. There were no good roads. 
There was no communication. But at that time he made known 
that a vital thing such as horses was freely available to farmers 
who needed horses. 

He had no telegraph. He had no radio. But by the ordinary 
process of the peasant's telegraph, within 10 days he had no horses, 
no logistics problem, no forage problem, or anything of the sort. 

Now, this is ideal in the sense of a description, of making available 
the things that are to be had, in this case, the most precious thing, 
making available knowledge, data, and information. And when this 
is made available on the scale, there will be people who will come. 

But, of course, it cannot be on the short scale, when you are bringing 
people all the way from Asia and from Africa and Latin America. 
They cannot travel these days on foot. It requires finance. And this 
is the plain and simple fact of what you are up against. 



1110 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

This is a fundamental struggle of the forces, led by the United 
States; and if the U.S. Government is not going to make avail- 
able those resources, it will be a pitiful struggle, backed by bril- 
liant successes, here, there, and the other place, but not sustained by 
the even and guaranteed support that comes following a legislative 
declaration of intent and support. 

The Chairman. Now, has Mr. Kintner come yet ? 

Any more questions ? 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. We will stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow 
morning. 

(Whereupon, at 4 :15 p.m., Wednesday, February 19, 1964, the com- 
mittee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Thursday, February 20, 1964.) 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION HH 



APPENDIX A 

Proposed Bills for Creation of a Freedom Commission and Freedom Acad- 
emy AND Letters From Certain Executive Agencies Concerning Same 



88th congress 
1st Session 



H. R. 5368 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

April 2, 1963 

Mr. BoGos introduced tlie following bill; which was referred to the Com- 
mittee on Un-American Activities 



[HJt. 8320, introduced by Mr. Taft on August 30, 1963, and H.R. 10037, intro- 
duced by Mr. Clausen on February 20, 1964, are identical to H.R. 5368, with the 
exception that they omit paragraph (1) of sec. ll.(a) of H.R. 5368. 

[H.R. 11718, introduced by Mr. Talcott on June 24, 1964, is also identical to 
H.R. 5368, with the following exceptions : (1) H.R. 11718 omits sec. 8 of H.R. 5368, 
which provides for the establishment of an "information center," and (2) as in 
the case of H.R. 8320 and H.R. 10037, omits paragraph (1) of sec. ll.(a) of 
H.R. 5368.] 



A BILL 

To create the Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy, 
to conduct research to develop an integrated body of opera- 
tional knowledge in the political, psychological, economic, 
technological, and organizational areas to increase the non- 
military capabilities of the United States in the global 
struggle between freedom and communism, to educate and 
train Government personnel and private citizens to under- 
stand and implement this body of knowledge, and also to 
provide education and training for foreign students in these 
areas of knowledge under appropriate conditions. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 

2 fives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

I— O 



1112 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

2 

1 SHORT TITLE 

2 Section 1. This Act may be cited as the "Freedom 

3 Commission Act". 

4 CONGRESSIONAr. FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF POILCY 

5 Sec. 2. (a) The Congress of the United States makes 
^ tlio following findings and statement of policy: 

"^ ( 1 ) The United States in preparing to defend its 

^ national interests in coming years faces grave and complex 

^ problems in the nonmilitary as well as military areas. 
^^ (2) First and foremost are the problems raised by the 

^^ unremitting drives by the Soviet Union and Communist 

^^ China seeking world domination and the destruction of all 

•^^ non-Communist societies. The Communist bloc and the 

-'^^ various Communist parties have systematically prepared 

^^ tliemsclves to wage a thousand-pronged aggression in the 

^^ nonmilitary area. Drawing on their elaborate studies and 

^^ extensive pragmatic tests, Communist leaders have developed 

^^ their conspiratorial version of nonmilitary conflict into an 

^^ advanced, operational art in which they employ and orches- 

^^ trate an extraordinary variety of conflict instruments in the 

^^ political, psychological, ideological, economic, technological, 

^^ organizational and paramilit<ary areas enabling them to ap- 

^^ proach their immediate and long-range objectives along 

^■^ many paths. This creates unique and unprecedented prob- 

^^ lems for the United States in a conflict that is being waged 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 113 

3 

1 in student organizations, peasant villages, labor unions, mass 

2 communication systems, in city and jungle, and institutions 

3 and organizations of every description, as well as in the 

4 world's chancelleries. Recognizing that nonmihtary conflict 

5 makes extraordinary demands upon its practitioners, the 

6 Communists, for several decades, have intensively trained 

7 their leadership groups and cadres in an extensive network of 

8 basic, intermediate, and advanced schools. The Sino-Soviet 

9 conflict capacity has been immeasurably increased by the 

10 mobilization of reseai^ch, science, industry, technology, and 

11 education to serve the power-seeking ambitions of Com- 

12 munist leaders rather than the needs of their people. 

13 (3) Second, the problems of the United States are 

14 complicated by the emergence of many new nations, the 

15 unstable or deteriorating pohtical, social and economic con- 

16 ditions in many parts of the world, the revolutionary forces 

17 released by the rising expectations of the world's people, 

18 and other factors, all of which increase the difficulties of 

19 achieving our national objectives of preventing Communist 

20 penetration while seeking to build viable, free, and inde- 

21 pendent nations. 

22 (4) The nature of the Sino-Soviet power drive, the 

23 revolutionary and fluid world situation, the emergence of 

24 the United States as the major leader of the free world and 

25 the need to deal with the people of nations as well as govern- 



1114 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

4 

1 ments, lias compelled the United States to employ many new 

2 instraments under the headings of traditional diplomacy, 

3 intelligence, technical assistance, aid programs, trade devel- 

4 opment, educational exchange, cultural exchange, and 

5 counterinsurgenc}^ (as well as in the area of related military 

6 programs) . To interrelate and program these present in- 

7 struments over long periods already requires a high degree 

8 of professional competence in many specialties, as well as 

9 great managerial skill. 

10 (5) However, the United States has fallen short in 

11 developing and utilizing its full capacity to achieve its objec- 

12 tives in the world stmggle. Not only do we need to improve 

13 the existing instruments, but a wide range of additional 

14 methods and means in both the Government and private 

15 sectors must be worked out and integrated with the existing 

16 instruments of our policy. Othenvise, the United States will 

17 lack the means to defeat many fonns of Communist aggi'es- 

18 sion and to extend the area of freedom, national independ- 

19 ence, and self-government, as well as to attain other national 

20 objectives. However, this will require an intensive and 

21 comprehensive research and training effort first to think 

22 through these additional methods and means, and, second, to 

23 edncate and train not only specialists, but also leaders at 

24 several levels who can visualize and organize these many 

25 instruments in an integrated strategy, enabling the United 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1115 

5 

1 States to approach its national objectives along every path 

2 in accord with our ethic. 

3 (6) There has been a tendency t<t look upon strategy as 

4 a series of discrete problems with planning often restricted 

5 by jurisdictional walls and parochial attitudes and too much 

6 piecemeal planning to handle emergencies at the expense 

7 of systematic, long-range development and programing 

8 of the many instruments potentially avaihable to us. While 

9 there has been marked improvement in such things as 

10 language training at agency schools, and while university 

11 centers have made significant i)rogress in area studies, 

12 nowhere has the United States established a training pro- 

13 gram to develop rounded strategists in the nonmilitary area 

14 or even certain vital categories of professional specialists, 

15 particularly in the area of political, ideological, psycholog- 

16 ical, and organizational operations and in certain areas of 

17 development work. Nor has the United States organized 

18 a research program which can be expected to think through 

19 the important additional range of methods and means that 

20 could be available to us in the Government and private 

21 sectors. 

22 (7) In implementing this legislation the following re- 

23 quirements for developing our national capacity for global 

24 operations in the nonmilitary area should receive special 

25 attention : 



1116 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

6 

1 I. At the upper levels of Government, the United States 

2 nnist have rounded strategists with intensive interdepart- 

3 mental training and experience who understand the range of 

4 instruments potentially available to us and who can or- 

5 ganize and program these instnunents over long periods in 

6 an integrated, forward strategy that systematically develops 

7 and utilizes our full national capacity for the global stniggle. 

8 II. Below them, Government personnel must be trained 

9 to understand and implement this integrated strategy in all 

10 of its dimensions. Through intensive training, as well as 

11 experience, we must seek the highest professional compe- 

12 tence in those areas of specialized knowledge required by 

13 our global operations. Government personnel should have 

14 an imderlying level of imderstanding as to the nature of the 

15 global conflict, the goals of the United States, and the vari- 

16 ous possible instruments in achieving these goals to facilitate 

17 team operations. We should seek to instill a high degree 

18 of elan and dedication. 

19 III. Foreign affairs personnel at all levels must under- 

20 stand communism with special emphasis on Connnunist non- 
21 military conflict technique. It is not enough to have experts 

22 available for consultation. This is basic knowledge which 

23 must be widely disseminated, if planning and implementa- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1117 

7 

1 tiun are to be geared to the conflict we are in. (The present 

2 two weeks seminar offered at the Foreign Service Institute 

3 is entirely too brief for even lower ranking personnel.) 

4 IV. The private sector must understand how it can par- 

5 ticipate in the global struggle in a sustained and systematic 

6 manner. There exists in the private sector a huge reservoir 
'^ of talent, ingenuity, and strength which can be developed 
8 and brought to bear in helping to solve many of our global 
^ problems. We have hardly begun to explore the range of 

1^ possibilities. 

1^ V. The public must have a deeper understanding of 

^^ comnumism, especially Communist nonmilitary conflict tech- 
^'^ nicjue, and the nature of the global struggle, including the 
goals of the United States. 

(8) The hereinafter created Freedom Academy must be 
a prestige institution and every effort should be made to 
demonstrate this is a major effort by the United States in a 

-I Q 

vital area. 
^^ (b) It is the intent and purpose of the Congress that 

the authority and powers granted in this Act be fully utilized 
by the Commission established by section 4 of this Act to 
achieve the objectives set forth in subsection (a) (7) of this 
section. It is the further intent and purpose of the Congress 



1118 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

8 

1 that the authority, powers, and functions of the Commission 

2 and the Academy as set forth in this Act are to be broadly 

3 construed. 

4 DEFINITIONS 

5 Sec. 3. As used in this Act — 

6 (1) The term "Commission" means the Freedom Com- 

7 mission established by section 4 of this Act; and 

8 (2) The term "Academy" means the Freedom Acad- 

9 emy established by section 6 of this Act. 

10 ESTABLISHMENT OF TUB FREEDOM COMMISSION 

11 Sec. 4. There is established in the executive branch of 

12 the Government an independent agency to be known as the 

13 Freedom Commission which shall be composed of six mem- 

14 hers and a chairman, each of whom shall be a citizen of the 

15 United States. The Chairman may from time to time desig- 

16 nate any other member of the Commission as Acting Chair- 

17 man to act in the place and stead of the Chairman during 

18 his absence. The Chairman (or the Acting Chairman in 

19 the absence of the Chairaian) shall preside at all meetings of 

20 the Commission, and a quorum for the transaction of business 

21 shall consist of at least four members present. Each member 

22 of the Commission, including the Chairman, shall have equal 

23 responsibility and authority in all decisions and actions of the 

24 Commission, shall have full access to all infonnation relating 

25 to the performance of his duties or responsibilities, and shall 



PROVIDENG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1119 

9 

1 have one vote. Action of the Commission shall be deter- 

2 mined by a majority vote of the members present. The 

3 Chairman (or Acting Chairman in the absence of the Chair- 

4 man) shall be the official spokesman of the Comniission in 

5 its relations with the Congress, Government agencies, per- 

6 sons, or the public, and, on behalf of the Commission, shall 

7 see to the faithful execution of the policies and decisions of 

8 the Commission, and shall report thereon to the Commission 

9 from time to time or as the Commission may direct. The 

10 Commission shall have an official seal which shall be 

11 judicially noticed. 

12 MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION 

13 Sec. 5. (a) Members ol the Commission and the 

14 Chairman shall be appointed by the President, by and with 

15 the advice and consent of the Senate. Not more than four 

16 members, including the Chairman, may be members of any 

17 one political party. In submitting any nomination to the 

18 Senate, the President shall set forth the experience and 

19 (|ualifications of the» nominee. The term of each member 

20 of the Commission, other than the Chairman; shall be six 

21 years, except that (1) the terms of office of the members 

22 first taking office shall expire as designated by the Presi- 

23 (lent at the time of the appointment, two at the end of two 

24 years, two at the end of four years, and two at the end of 



30-471 O— 64^pt. 1 .13 



1120 



PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



10 

1 six years; and (2) any member appointed to fill a vacancy 

2 occurring prior to the expiration of the term for which his 

3 predecessor was appointed shall be appointed for the re- 

4 mainder of such term. The Chairman shall serve as such 

5 during the pleasure of the President, and shall receive com- 

6 pensation at the rate of $20,500 per annum. Each other 

7 member of the Commission shall receive compensation at the 

8 rate of $20,000 per annum. Any member of the Commis- 

9 sion may be removed by the President for inefficiency, 

10 neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office. 

11 (b) No member of the Commission shall engage in 

12 any business, vocation, or employment other than that of 

13 serving as a member of the Commission. 

14 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FREEDOM ACADEMY; PRINCIPAL 

15 FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION AND ACADEMY 

16 Sec. 6. The Commission shall establish under its super- 

17 vision and control an advanced research, development, and 

18 training center to be known as the Freedom Academy. The 

19 Academy shall be located at such place or places within the 

20 United States as the Commission shall determine. The prin- 

21 cipal functions of the Commission and Academy shall be : 

22 (1) To conduct research designed to improve the 

23 methods and means by which the United States seeks its 

24 national objectives in the nonmilitary part of the global 

25 struggle. This should include improvement of the present 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1121 

11 

1 methods and means and exploration of the full range of ad- 

2 ditional methods and means that may be available to us in 

3 both the Government and private sectors. Special attention 

4 shall be given to problems of an interdepartmental nature 

5 and to problems mvolved in organizing and programing the 

6 full spectrum of methods and means potentially available m 
'^ the Government and private sectors in an integrated, forward 

8 strategy that will systematically develop and utilize the 

9 full capacity of the United States to seek its national objec- 
1^ tives in the global struggle, including the defeat of all forms 

11 of Communist aggression and the building of free, inde- 

12 pendent, and viable nations. 

13 (2) To educate and train Government personnel and 
1^ private citizens so as to meet the requirements set forth in 
1^ section 2(a) (7) of this Act. The Academy shall be the 
-'^ principal Government interdepartmental, educational, and 
1^ training center in the nonmilitary area of the United States 
1^ global operations. Authority is also granted to educate and 
1^ train foreign students, when this is in the national interest 
^^ and is approved by the Secretary of State. 

21 . (3) To provide leadership in encouraging and assisting 

'^^ universities and other institutions to increase and* improve 

"^^ research, educational, and training programs attuned to the 

^* global operational needs of the United States. 

^^ (4) To provide leadership, guidance, and assistance to 



1122 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

12 

1 the training staffs of Government agencies handling United 

2 States global operations, including training programs con- 

3 ducted at oversea posts. 

* (5) To provide a center where officers and employees 

5 of Government agencies, as well as private citizens, can meet 

6 to discuss and explore common and special elements of their 
"^ problems in improving United States capabilities in the global 
8 struggle. 

^ STUDENT SELECTION; GRANTS; ADMISSION OF FOREIGN 
10 STUDENTS 

^^ Sec. 7. (a) Academy students, other than Government 
12 personnel, shall be selected, insofar as is practicable and in 
1^ the pubUc interest, from those areas, organizations, and insti- 
ll tutions where trained leadership and infonned public opinion 
1^ are most needed to achieve the objectives set forth in section 
1^ 2 (a) (7) IV and V. Persons in Government service com- 
^'^ ing within the provisions of the Goveniment Employees 
1^ Training Act may be trained at tlie Academy pursuant to 
1^ the provisions of said Act. All agencies and departments 

20 of Government are authorized to assign officers and em- 

21 ployees to the Academy for designated training. 

22 (b) The Commission is authorized to make grants to 

23 students and to pay expenses incident to training and study 
2* under this Act. This authorization shall include authority 
25 to pay actual and necessary travel expenses to and from the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1123 

18 

1 Academy or other authorized place of trainhig under this 

2 Act. The Commission is autliorized to grant financial as- 

3 sistance to the dependents of students who hold no office or 

4 employment under the Federal Government during the time 

5 they are undergoing training authorized under this Act. 

6 Grants and other financial assistance under this Act shall be 

7 in such amounts and subject to such regulations as the Com- 

8 mission may deem appropriate to carry out the provisions 

9 of this Act. 

10 (c) Foreign students selected for training under this 

11 Act shall be admitted as nonimmigrants under section 101 

12 (a) (15) (F) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 

13 U.S.C. 1101(a) (15) (F) ) for such time and under such 
1"^ conditions as may be prescribed by regulations promulgated 
1^ by the Commission, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney 
16 General. A person admitted under this section who fails 
l'^ to maintain the status under which he was admitted, or who 
1^ fails to depart from the United States at the expiration 
19 of the time for which he was admitted, or who engages in 
^^ activities of a political nature detrimental to the interest 
^1 of the United States, or in activities in conflict with the 
^^ security of the United States, shall, upon the warrant of the 
^3 Attorney General, be taken into custody and promptly 
^^ deported pm'suant to sections 241, 242, and 243 of the 
25 Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1251, 1252, 



1124 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



14 

1 and 1253). Deportation proceedings under this section 

2 shall be summaiy and findings of the Attorney General as to 

3 matters of fact shall be conclusive. Such persons shall not 

4 be eligible for suspension of deportation under section 244 

5 of such Act (8U.S.C. 1254). 

6 INFORMATION CENTER 

7 Sec. 8. The Commission is authorized to establish an 

8 information center at such place or places within the United 

9 States as the Conmaission may detennine. The principal 

10 function of the information center shall be to disseminate, 

11 with or without charge, information and materials which will 

12 assist people and organizations to increase their understand- 

13 ing of the tme nature of the international Communist con- 

14 spiracy and of the dimensions and nature of the global 

15 struggle between freedom and connnunism, and of ways they 

16 can participate effectively toward winning that struggle and 

17 building free, independent, and viahle nations. In caiTying 

18 out this function, the Conmiission is authorized to prepare, 

19 make, and publish textbooks and other materials, including 

20 training films, suitable for high school, college, and com- 

21 munity level instruction, and also to publish such research 

22 materials as may be in the public interest. The Commission 

23 is authorized to disseminate such infonnation and materials 

24 to such persons and organizations as may be in the public 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1125 

15 

1 interest on such tenns and conditions as tlie Commission 

2 shall determine. 

3 DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION 

4 Sec. 9. Nothing in this Act shall authorize the dis- 

5 closure of any information or knowledge in any case in which 

6 such disclosure (1) is prohibited by any other law of the 

7 United States, or ( 2 ) is inconsistent with the ■ security of 

8 the United States. 

9 SECURITY CHECK OF PERSONNEL 

10 Sec. 10. (a) Except as authorized by the Commission 

11 upon a determination by the Commission that such action is 

12 clearly consistent with the national interest, no individual 

13 shall be employed by the Commission, nor shall the Com- 

14 mission permit any individual to have access to information 

15 which is, for reasons of national security, specifically desig- 

16 nated by a United States Government agency for limited or 

17 restricted dissemination or distribution until the Civil Serv- 

18 ice Commission shall have made an investigation and report 

19 to the Commission on the character, associations, and loyalty 

20 of such individual, and the Commission shall have determined 

21 that employing such individual or pemnitting him to have 

22 access to such information will not endanger the common 

23 defense and security. 

24 (b) In the event an investigation made pursuant to 



1126 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

16 

1 subsection (a) of this section develops any data reflecting 

2 that the individual who is the subject of the investigation is 

3 of questionable loyalty or is a questionable security risk, the 

4 Civil Service Commission shall refer the matter to the Fed- 

5 eral Bureau of Investigation for the conduct of a full field 

6 investigation, the results of which shall be furnished to the 
'J Civil Service Commission for its information and appropriate 

8 action. 

9 (c) If the Commission deems it to be in the national 

10 interest, the Coitnmission may request the Civil Service Com- 

11 mission to make an investigation and report to the Commis- 

12 sion on the character, associations, and loyalty of any indi- 

13 vidual under consideration for training at the Academy, and 

14 if the Commission shall then determine that the training of 

15 such individual will not be in the best interest of the United 

16 States, he shall receive no training under this Act. 

17 (d) In the event an investigation made pursuant to 

18 subsection (c) of this section develops any data reflecting 

19 that the individual who is the subject of the investigation is 

20 of questionable loyalty or is a questionable security risk, 

21 the Civil Service Commission shall refer the matter to the 

22 Federal Bureau of Investigation for the conduct of a full 

23 field investigation, the results of which shall be furnished to 

24 the Civil Sei*vice Commission for its information and appro- 

25 priate action. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1127 

17 

1 (e) If the President or the Commission shall deem it to 

2 be in the national interest, he or the Conmiission may from 

3 time to time cause investigation of any individual which is 

4 required or authorized by subsections (a) and (c) of this 

5 section to be made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation 

6 instead of by the Civil Service Corlmiission. 

^ GENERAL AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSION 

8 Sec. 11. (a) In addition to the authority already 

^ granted, the Commission is authorized and empowered — 

10 ( 1 ) to establish such temporary or permanent 

11 boards and committees as the Commission may from 

12 time to time deem necessary for the pm'poses of this 

13 Act; 

1^ (2) subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of 

^ this section, to appoint and fix the compensation of such 

■'•" personnel as may be necessary to carry out the functions 

1' of the Commission; 

1° (3) to conduct such research, studies, and surveys 

1^ as the Commission may deem necessary to carry out the 

^" purposes of this Act; 

^1 (4) to make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend 

^^ such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry 

^ out the purposes of this Act; 

** (5) to make such expenditures as may be necessary 



1128 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

18 

1 for adiiiinistering and carrying out the provisions of 

2 this Act; 

3 (6) to utilize, with the approval of the President, 

4 the services, facilities, and personnel of other Govern- 

5 ment agencies and pay for such services, facilities, and 

6 i)ersoimel out of funds available to the Commission under 

7 this Act, either in advance, by reimbursement, or by 

8 direct transfer; 

9 (7) to utihze or employ on a full-time or part-time 

10 basis, with the consent of the organization or govern- 

11 mental body concerned, the services of personnel of any 

12 State or local government or private organization to 

13 perform such functions on its behalf as may appear 

14 desirable to carry out the pui-poses of this Act, without 
li> rc(piiring such personnel to sever their connection with 

16 the furnishing organization or governmental body; and 

17 to udlize porsomiel of a foreign government in the same 

18 manner and under the same circumstances witli the 

19 approval of the Secretary of State; 

20 (8) to acquire by purchase, lease, loan, or gift, and 

21 to hold and dispose of by sale, lease, or loan, real and 

22 personal property of all kinds necessary for, or resulting 

23 from, the exercise of authority granted by this Act; 

24 (9) to receive and use funds donated by others, if 

25 such funds are donated without restrictions other than 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1129 

19 

1 that they be used in furtherance of one or more of the 

2 purposes of this Act; 

3 (10) to accept and utihze the sei-vices of voluntary 

4 and uncompensated personnel and to provide transporta- 

5 tion and subsistence as authorized by section 5 of tlip 

6 Administrative Expenses Act of 1946 (5 IJ.S.C. 73b- 

7 2) for persons serving without compensation; 

8 (11) to utihze the services of persons on a tcm- 

9 porary basis and to pay their actual and necessary 
1^ travel expenses and subsistence and, in addition, com- 

11 pensation at a rate not to exceed $50 per day for each 

12 day spent in the work of the Commission. 

13 (b) The personnel referred to in subsection (a) (2) 

14 of this section shall be appointed in accordance with the 
1^ civil service laws and their compensation fixed in aecord- 
1^ ance with the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, ex- 
1'^ cept that, to the extent the Commission deems such action 
1^ necessary to the discharge of its responsil)ilities, personnel 
1^ may be employed and their compensation fixed without re- 

20 gard to such laws. No such personnel (except such per- 

21 sonnel whose compensation is fixed by law, and specially 

22 qualified professional personnel up to a limit of $19,000) 

23 whose position would be subject to the Classification Act 

24 of 1949, as amended, if Such Act were applicable to such 
2^ position, shall be paid a salary at a rate in excess of the rate 



1130 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



20 

1 payable under such Act for positions of equivalent diflBculty 

2 or responsibility. The Commission shall make adequate 

3 provision for administrative review of any determination 

4 to dismiss any employee. 

5 GENERAL MANAGER OF THE COMMISSION 

6 Sec. 12. The Commission is authorized to estabhsh 

7 within the Commission a general manager, who shall dis- 

8 charge such of the administrative and executive functions 

9 of the Commission as the Commission may direct. The 

10 general manager shall be appointed by the Commission, 

11 shall serve at the pleasure of the Commission, shall be re- 

12 movable by the Commission, and shall receive compensation 

13 at a rate determined by the Commission, but not in excess 

14 of $18,000 per annum. 

15 ADVISORY COMMITTEE 

16 SiEC. 13. (a) To assure effective cooperation between 

17 the Freedom Academy and various Government agencies 

18 concerned with its objectives, there is established an advisory 

19 committee to the Freedom Academy (referred to hereinafter 

20 as the "Committee") . The Committee shall be composed of 

21 one representative of each of the following agencies desig- 

22 nated by the head of each such agency from officers and em- 

23 ployees thereof: The Department of State; the Department 

24 of Defense; the Department of Health, Education, and Wei- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1131 

21 

1 fare; the Central Intelligence Agency; the Federal Bureau 

^ of Investigation; the Agency for International Development: 

^ nnd the United States Information Agency. 

4 (b) Members of the Committee shall elect a member 

5 to ser\^e as Chairman of the. Committee. The Chairman shall 
G seiTe for such a term of one year. The chairmanship shall 
'^ rotate among the representatives of the agencies who com- 
8 prise the membership of the Committee. 

^ (c) No member of the Committee shall receive compen- 

1^ sation for his services as such other than that received by him 

11 as an officer or employee of the agency represented by him. 

12 Each member of the Committee shall be reimbursed for ex- 

13 penses actually and necessarily incurred by him in the per- 

14 formance of duties of the Committee. Such reimbursements 

15 shall be made from funds appropriated to the Freedom Com- 

16 mission upon vouchers approved by the Chairman of the 

17 Committee. 

18 (d) The Committee shall— 

19 (1) sei've as a medium for liaison between the 

20 Freedom Commission and the Government agencies 

21 represented in the Conunittee; 

22 (2) review from time to time the plans, programs, 

23 and activities of the Freedom Commission and the Free- 

24 dom Academy, and transmit to the Commission such 



1132 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

22 

1 recommendations as it may detcniiinc to be necessary or 

2 desirable for tbe improvement of tliose plans, programs, 

3 and activities; 

4 (3) meet with the Freedom Commission periodi- 

5 cally, but not less often than semiannually, to consult 

6 with it with repird to tlie plans, programs, and activities 

7 of the Freedoni Connnission and tlie Federal Academy; 

8 and 

9 (4) transmit to the President and to the Congress 

10 in January of each year a report containing (A) a com- 

11 prehensive description of the plans, programs, and activi- 

12 ties of the Commission and the Academy during tbe 

13 preceding calendar year, and (B) its recommendations 

14 for the improvement of those plans, programs, and 

15 activities. 

16 (e) The Committee shall promulgate such rules and 

17 regulations as it shall determine to be necessary for the 

18 ])erformance of its duties. 

19 (f) The Commission shall furnish to the Committee 

20 without reimbursement such office space, personal services, 

21 supplies and equipment, infonnation, and facilities as the 

22 Committee may require for the performance of its functions. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1133 

23 

1 APPROPRIATIONS 

2 Sec. 14. There is authorized to be appropriated, out of 

3 any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such 

4 sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 

5 Act. 



1134 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



88th congress vv n O ^ O 



m THE HOUSE or REPRESENTATIVES 

January 9, 1963 

Mr. Herlono introduced the following bill ; which was referred to the Com- 
mittee on Un-Ajnericiin Activities 



A BILL 

To create the Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy; 
to research and develop an integrated, operational science 
to win the nonmilitary part of the global struggle between 
freedom and communism; and to train Government per- 
sonnel, private citizens, and foreign students in this science. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SHORT TITLE 

4 Section 1. This Act may be cited as the ''Freedom 

5 Conmaission Act". 

6 CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF POLICY 

7 Sec. 2. (a) The Congress of the United States makes 

8 the following findings: 

I— O 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1135 

2 

1 (1) The interaational Communist conspiracy is waging 

2 a total political war against the United States and against 
^ the peoples and governments of all other nations of the free 
^ world. 

^ (2) Unlike the free world, the Communist bloc has 

systematically prepared for this total political war over sev- 
eral decades. Drawing on the experience of previous oon- 
querors and upon their own elaborate studies and extensive 
. pragmatic tests, Communist leaders have developed their 
conspiratorial version of political warfare into an opei-ational 

science in which all ihethods and all means in the political, 

12 

ideological, psychological, economic, paramilitary, and or- 

13 . . 

ganizational spheres have been integrated and are used 

14 . . . . 

against us in a carefully patterned, many directional strategy. 

15 

Recognizing that political warfare is a difficult art or science 

ifi 

making unusual demands on its practitioners, the Commu- 

17 . 

nists have estabUshed an extensive network of training 

18 

schools, within and without the free world, in which have 

19 . 

been trained large numbers of skilled cold war professionals 

20 

who have mastered all forms of conflict in the nonmiUtary, 

21 

as well as military areas. These professionals continue to 

22 

receive intensive training throughout their party careers. 

23 . . . 
(3) In this total political war the Communists permit 

24 \ . . 

no neutrals. Every citizen, every economic, cultural, re- 

25 

ligious, or ethnic group is a target and is under some form 



30-471 O— «4— pt. 1 14 



1136 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



3 

.1 of direct or Indirect Communist attack. The battleground 

2 is everywhere, and every citizen, knowingly or unknow- 

'2 ingly through action or inaction, is involved in this con- 

4 tinuous struggle. 

5 (4) Since the end of World War II, the Commimists, 
^ taking full advantage of their better preparation and often 
'^ superior organizational and operational know-how, have 
8 inflicted a series of political warfare defeats on the free 
^ world. The total simi of these defeats is nothing less than 

10 a disaster for the United States and the free world and 

11 the continuation of this total political warfare by the Com- 

12 munists confronts the United States with a grave, present, 

13 and continuing danger to its national security. 

14 (5) The United States can and must develop the 

15 methods and means to win the nonmilitary part of the global 
1^ struggle between freedom and commimism. A vast array 
I'i^ of methods and means are potentially available to us, not 

18 only in the public sector, but also in the private sector. 

19 However, it will require an intensive concentrated research, 

20 development, and training program, first to think through 

21 these methods and means and to intermesh and integrate 

22 them into an operational science especially designed to meet 

23 the needs and requirements of the United States and the 

24 free world, and second, to educate and train leaders at all 

25 levels who can understand the full range and depth of the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 137 

4 

1 Communist attack and can visualize and organize the vast 

2 array of inten'elaied methods and means needed to meet and 

3 defeat this attack and to work systematically for the preser- 

4 vation and extenj.ion of freedom, national independence, and 

5 self-government. 

6 (o) It is fitting and proper that the United States, 

7 which won its independence in the first great antioolonial 

8 struggle, should take the lead in developing the ways and 

9 means of defeating the ruthless new Communist imperialism 

10 and J. extending the .irea of freedom and justice, so that 

11 all nfiiinns can preserve or attain governments which are 

12 obsci lit of the individual rights of their people and re- 

13 sponsive to their will. The United States can provide the 

14 ideals and knowledge which can assist the liberty-seeking 

15 forces at work in much of the world in attaining freedom 

16 and an open society and rejecting the organized tyranny 

17 and closed society of the Communist bloc. 

18 (7) In order to meet and defeat the Communist politi- 

19 cal warfare offensive (including the full range of methods 

20 and means being used against us in the nonmilitary area) , 

21 to manifest and reemphasize to the peoples now made cap- 

22 tive by the imperialistic and aggressive policies of communism 

23 the support of the free world nations for their just aspirations 

24 for individual freedom and national independence, and to 

25 preserve the integrity and independence of the nations of the 



1138 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



5 

1 free world, as well as to work systematically for the preserva- 

2 tion and extension of freedom, national independence, and 

3 self-government, it is imperative— 

4 (A) that the knowledge and understanding of all 

5 the peoples of the free world concerning the true nature 

6 of the international Communist conspiracy and of the 

7 dimensions and nature of the global struggle between 

8 freedom and comnuinisrn l)e increased as rapidly as is 

9 practicable ; 

10 (B) that we develop with all practical speed an 

11 advanced, integrated, and operational science and strat- 

12 egy for the nonmilitary area of the global conflict that 

13 will mobilize and utilize our full strength in the public 
1^ and private sectors to win the worldwide struggle be- 
1^ tween freedom and communism; 

^^ (C) that Federal Government personnel engaged 

^'^ in this worldwide conflict increase their knowledge -of 

1^ the international Communist conspiracy and of the di- 

1^ mensions and nature of the global struggle between free- 

20 dom and communism, develop a high esprit de corps and 

21 sense of mis.sion and a high degree of operational know- 

22 how in counii^ing the international Communist conspir- 

23 acy and working for the preservation and extension of 

24 freedom, national independence, and self-government; 

25 and 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1139 

6 

1 (D) that private citizens not only understand the 

2 dimensions and nature of the threat, but that they also . 

3 know how they can participate, and do participate, in 

4 this continuous struggle in an effective, sustained, and 

5 systematic manner so that the full weight of the private 

6 sector can be brought to bear; 

^ (8) It is vital to the security of the free world that the 

8 objectives stated in paragraph (7) be accomplished on a 

9 crash basis. 

10 (b) It is the intent and purpose of the Congress that 

11 the authority and powers granted in this Act be fully utilized 

12 by the Commission established by section 4 of this Act to 
1"^ achieve the objectives set forth in subsection (a) (7) of 

14 this section. It is the further intent and purpose of the 

15 Congress that the authority, powers, and functions of the 

16 Commission and the Academy as set forth in this Act are 

17 to be broadly construed. 

18 DEFINITIONS 

19 Sec. 3. As used in this Act — 

20 ( 1 ) The term "Commission" means the Freedom Cora- 

21 mission established by section 4 of this Act; and 

22 (2) The term "Academy" means the Freedom Academy 

23 established by section 6 of this Act, 



1140 PROVIDLNTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

7 

1 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FREEDOM COMMISSION 

2 Sec. 4. There is established in the executive branch of 

3 the Government an independent agency to be knovt'n as the 

4 "Ereedom Commission" which shall be composed of six mem- 

5 hers and a Chairman, each of whom shall be a citizen of the 

6 United States. The Chairman may from time to time desig- 

7 nate any other member of the Commission as Acting Ohair- 

8 man to act in the place and stead of the Chairman during his 

9 absence. The Chairman (or the Actmg Chairman in the 

10 absence of the Chairman) shall preside at all meetings of the 

11 Commission, and a quorum for the transaction of business 

12 shall consist of at least four members present. Each member 

13 of the Commission, including the Chairman, shall have equal 

14 responsibility and authority in all decisions and actions of the 
1^ Commission, shall have full access to all information relating 
1^ to the performance of his duties or responsibilities, and shall 
1'^ have one vote. Action of the Commission shall be deter- 
1^ mined by a majority vote of the members present. The 
1^ Chairman (or Acting Chairman in the absence of the Chair- 

20 man) shall be the official spokesman of the Commission in 

21 its relations with the Congress, Government agencies, per- 

22 sons, or the public, and, on behalf of the Commission, shall 

23 see to the faithful execution of the poHcies and decisions of 



PROVIDENG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1141 

8 

1 the Commission, and shall report thereon to the Commission 

2 from time to time or as the Commission may direct. The 

3 Commission shall have an official seal which shall be judi- 
^ cially noticed. . 

^ MEMBERSHIP OF THE COMMISSION 

" Sec 5. (a) Members of the Commission and the Chair- 

" man shall be api)()inted by the President, by and with the ad- 

^ vice and consent of the Senate. Not more than four mem- 

^ hers, including the Chairman, may be members of any one 

^^ pohtical party. In submitting any nomination to the Senate, 

■'■■'■ the President shall set forth the experience and quaUfications 

^ of the nominee. The term of each member of the Commis- 

^ sion, other than the Chairman, shall be six years, except that 

■^"* ( 1 ) the temis of office of the members first taking office shall 

^^ expire as designated by the President at the time of the 

^^ appttintment, two at the end of two years, two at the end of 

^' four years, and two at the end of six years; and (2) any 

^° member appointed to fill a vacancy occumng prior to the 

^^ expiration of the term for which his predecessor was ap- 

^^ pointed shall be appointed for the remainder of such term. 

^^ The Chairman shall serve as such during the pleasure of the 

22 President, and shall receive compensation at the rate of 

2^ $20,500 per annimi. Each other member of the Commis- 

2^ sion shall receive compensation at the rate of $20,000 per 

^ annum. Any member of the Conomission may be removed 



1142 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

9 

1 by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or mal- 

2 feasance in office. 

3 (b) No member of the Commission shall engage in any 

4 business, vocation, or employment other than that of serving 

5 as a member of the Commission. 

6 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FREEDOM ACADEMY 

7 Sec. 6. The Commission shall establish under its su- 

8 pervision and control an advanced research, development, 

9 and training center to be known as the "Freedom Acad- 

10 emy". The Academy shall be located at such place or places 

11 within the United States as the Commission shall determine. 

12 The principal functions of the Commission and Academy 

13 shall be — 

14 (1) to carry on a research program designed to 

15 develop an integrated, operational science that benefits 

16 and bespeaks the methods and values of freemen and 

17 through which the free world will be able to meet and 

18 defeat the carefully patterned total aggression (political, 

19 ideological, psychological, economic, paramilitary, and 

20 , .organizational) of the Communist bloc, and through 

21 which we, as a nation, may work in a systematic man- 

22 ner for the preservation and extension of freedom, na- 

23 tional independence, and self-government. To achieve 

24 this purpose the full range of methods and means is to 



PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1143 

10 

1 be thoroughly explored and studied including the meth- 

2 ods and means that may best be employed by private 

3 citizens and nongovernmental organizations and the 

4 methods and means available to the Government other 

5 than the methods and means already being used. This 

6 research program shall include fHeastudy of our national 
'^ objectives and the development of proposals for inter- 
8 meshing and integrating the full spectrum of methods 
^ and means into a coordinated short- and long-range 

1^ strategy for victory, seeking the utilization of our full 

11 potential in the public and private sectors; and 

12 (2). to educate and train Government personnel, 

13 private citizens, and foreign students concerning all 
1^ aspects of the international Communist conspiracy, the 
1^ nature and dimensions of the global struggle between 
1" freedom and communism and the full range of methods 
1"^ and means that freemen should employ to meet and 
1^ defeat the entire Communist attack in the nonmilitary 
^^ areas and to work systematically for the preservation 

20 and extension of freedom, national independence, and 

21 self-government. 

22 TRAINING PROGRAM 

23 SiBC. 7. (a) Academy students, other than Government 

24 personnel, shall be selected, insofar as is practicable and in 

25 the pubUe interest, from the diverse groups within and 



1144 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

11 

1 without the United States where trained leadership and 

2 informed public opinion are most needed. Persons in Gov- 

3 emment service coming within the provisions of the Govem- 

4 ment Employees Training Act may be trained at the Acad- 

5 emy pursuant to the provisions of said Act. All agendes 

6 and departments of Government are authorized to assign 
'^ officers and employees to the Academy for designated 

8 training. 

9 (b) The Commission is authorized to make grants to 

10 students and to pay expenses incident to training and study 

11 under this Act. This authorization shall include authority 

12 to pay actual and necessary travel expenses to and from ^he 

13 Academy or other authorized place of training under this 
1^ Act. The Commission is authorized to grant financial as- 

15 sistance to the dependents of students who are nationals of 

16 the United States and who hold no office or emplojmtient 

17 under the Federal Government during the time they att^ 

18 undergoing training authorized under this Act. Grants and 

19 other financial assistance under this Act shall be in sitek 

20 amounts and subject to such regulations as the Conunisskxft 

21 may deem appropriate to carry out the provisions of this 

22 Act. 

23 (c) Foreign students selected for training under this 

24 Act shall be admitted as nonimmigrants under section 101 

25 (a) (15) (F) of the Immigratioii and Nationality Act {% 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1145 

12 

1 U.S.C. 1101 (a) (15) (F) ) for such time and under such 

2 conditions as may be prescribed by regulations promulgated 

3 by the Commission, the Secretary of State, and the Attonrey 

4 General. A person admitted under this section who fails to 

5 maintain the status under which he was admitted, or who 

6 fails to depart from the United States at the expiration of 

7 the time for which he was admitted, or who engages in 

8 activities of a political nature detrimental to the interest of 

9 the United States, or in activities in conflict with the security 

10 of the United States, shall, upon the warrant of the Attorney 

11 General, be taken into custody and promptly deported pur- 

12 suant to sections 241, 242, and 243 of the Immigration and 

13 Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1251, 1252, and 1253). De- 

14 portation proceedings under this section shall be summary 

15 and findings of the Attorney General as to matters of fact 

16 shall be conclusive. Such persons shall not be eligible for 

17 suspension of deportation under section 244 of such Act (8 

18 U.S.C. 1254). 

19 INPOBMATION CBNTEB 

20 Sec. 8. The Conmiission is authorized to establish an 

21 information center at such place or places within the United 

22 States as the Conunission may determine. The principal 

23 function of the information center shall be to disseminate, 

24 with or without charge, information and materials which will 

25 assist people and organizations to increase their understand- 



1146 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

13 

1 ing of the true nature of the international Communist con- 

■ 2 spiracy and of the dimensions and nature of the global strag- 

3 gle between freedom and communism, and of ways they can 

4 participate effectively toward winning that struggle. In 

5 carrying out this function, the Conmiission is authorized to 

6 prepare, make, and publish textbooks and other materials, 

7 including training fihns, suitable for high school, college, and 

8 community level instruction, and also to publish such re- 

9 search materials as may be in the pubUc interest. The Com- 

10 mission is authorized to disseminate such information and 

11 materials to such persons and organizations as may be in the 

12 pubHc interest on such terms and conditions as the Com- 

13 mission shall determine. 

14 DISCLOSURE OF INFOBMATION 

15 Sec. 9. Nothing in this Act shall authorize the disclosure 

16 of any information or knowledge in any case in which such 

17 disclosure ( 1 ) is prohibited by any other law of the United 

18 States, or (2) is inconsistent with the security of the United 

19 States. 

20 SECURITY CHECK OF PERSONNEL 

21 Sec. 10. (a) Except as authorized by the Commission 

22 upon a determination by the Commission that such axjtion 

23 is clearly consistent with the national interest, no individual 

24 shall be employed by the Commission, nor shall the Com- 

25 mission permit any individual to have access to information 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1147 

14 

1 which is, for reasons of national security, specifically desig- 

2 nated by a United States Government agency for limited or 

3 restricted dissemination or distribution until the Civil Service 

4 ConMnission shall have made an investigation and report to 

5 the Commission on the character, associations, and loyalty of 

6 such individual, and the Commission shall have determined 

7 that employing such individual or permitting him to have 

8 access to such information will not endanger the common de- 

9 fense and security. 

10 (b) In the event an investigation made pursuant to sub- 

11 section (a) of this section develops any data reflecting that 

12 the individual who is the subject of the investigation is of 

13 questionable loyalty or is a questionable security risk, the 

14 Civil Service Commission shall refer the matter to the Fed- 

15 eral Bureau of Investigation for the conduct of a full field 

16 investigation, the results of which shall be furnished to the 

17 Civil Service Commission for its information and appropriate 

18 action. 

19 (c) If the Conninission deems it to be in the national 

20 interest, the Commission may request the Civil Service Com- 

21 mission to make an investigation and report to the Commis- 

22 sion on the character, associations, and loyalty of any indi- 

23 vidua! under consideration for training at the Academy, and 

24 if the Coinmission shall then determine that the training of 



1148 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

15 

1 such individual will not be in the best interest of the United , 

2 States, he shall receive no training under this Act. 

3 (d) In the event an investigation made pursuant to 

4 subsection (c) of this section develops any data reflecting 

5 . that the individual who is the subject of the investigation 

6 is of questionable lo}alty or is a questionable security risk, 

7 the Civil Service Coirunission shall refer the matter to the 

8 Federal Bureau of Investigation for the conduct of a full 

9 field investigation, the results of which shall be furnished to 

10 the Civil Service Commission for its information and ap- 

11 propriate action. 

12 (c) If the President or the Commission shall deem it to 

13 be in the national interest, he or the Commission may from 

14 time to time cause investigation of any individual which is 

15 required or authorized by subsections (a) and (c) of this 

16 section to be made by the Federal Bureau of Investigation 

17 instead of by the Civil Service Conmiission. 

18 CJENERAL AUTJIOKITY OF THE COMMISSION 

19 Sec. 11. (a) In addition to the authoiity already 

20 granted, the Commission is authorized and emjjowered — 

21 ( 1 ) to establish such temporary or permanent 

22 boards and committees as the Commission may from 

23 time to time deem necessary for the purposes of this 

24 Act; 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1149 

16 

1 (2) subject to the provisions of subsection' (b) of 

2 this section, to appoint and fix the compensation of such 

3 personnel as may be necessary to carry out the functions 

4 of the Commission ; 

5 (3) to conduct such research, studies, and surveys 

6 as the Commission may deem necessary to carry out 
^ the purposes of this Act; 

8 (4) to make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and 

9 amend such rules and regulations as may be necessary 

10 to carry out the purposes of this Act; 

11 (5) to make such expenditures as may be necessary 

12 for administering and carrying out the provisions of this 

13 Act; 

14 (6) to utilize, with the approval of the President, 

15 the services, facihties, and personnel of other Govem- 
1^ ment agencies and pay for such services, facilities, and 
1'^ personnel out of funds available to the Commission under 
1^ this Act, either in advance, by reimbursement, or by 

19 direct transfer; 

20 C^) to utilize or employ on a full-time or part-time 

21 basis, with the consent of the organization or govem- 

22 mental body concerned, the services of personnel of any 

23 State or local government or private organization to 

24 perform such functions on its behalf as may appear 

25 desirable to carry out the purposes of this Act, without 



1150 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

17 

1 requiring such personnel to sever their connection with 

2 the furnishing organization or governmental body; and 

3 ^ to utihze personnel of a foreign government in the same 

4 manner and under the same circumstances with the 

5 approval of the Secretary of State; 

^ (8) to acquire by purchase, lease, loan, or gift, and 

'^ to hold and dispose of by sale, lease, or loan, real apd 

8 personal property of all kinds necessary for, or resulting 

^ from, the exercise of authority granted by this Act; 

1^ (9) to receive and use funds donated by others, if 

1^ such funds are donated without restrictions other than 

•^2 that they be used in furtherance of one or more of the 

1^ purposes of this Act; 

1* (10) to accept and utiHze the services of voluntary 

^^ and uncompensated personnel and to prqvide transpor- 

1^ tation and subsistence as authorized by section 5 of the 

17 Administrative Expenses Act of 1946 (5 U.S.C. 73b- 

■^8 2) for persons serving without compensation; 

^" ( 11 ) to utilize the services of persons on a tempo- 

20 rary basis and to pay their actual and necessary travel 

21 expenses and subsistence and, in addition, compensation 

22 at a rate not to exceed $50 per day for each day spent 

23 in the work of the Commission. 

24 (b) The personnel referred to in subsection (a) (2) of 

25 this section shall be appointed in accordance with the civil 



PROVIDLNG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1151 

18 

1 service laws and their compensation fixed in accordance with 

2 the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, except that, to 

3 the extent the Commission deems such action necessary to 

4 the discharge of its responsibilities, personnel may be em- 

5 ployed and their compensation fixed without regard to such 

6 laws. No such personnel (except such personnel whose 

7 compensation is fixed by law, and specially qualified profes- 

8 sional personnel up to a limit of $19,000) whose position 

9 would be subject to the Classification Act of 1949, as , 

10 amended, if such Act were applicable to such position, shall 

11 be paid a salary at a rate in excess of the rate payable under 

12 such Act for positions of equivalent difficulty or responsi- 

13 bifity. The Commission shall make adequate provision for 

14 administrative review of any determination to dismiss any 

15 employee. 

16 GENERAL MANAGER OF THE COMMISSION 

17 Sec. 12. The Commission is authorized to establish 

18 within the Commission a Geneml Manager, who shall dis- 

19 charge such of the administrative and executive functions of 

20 the Conmiission as the Conunission may direct. The Gen- 

21 eral Manager shall be appointed by the Commission, shall 

22 serve at the pleasure of the Conunis^on, shall be removable 

23 by the Commission, and shall receive compensation at a rate 

24 determined by the Conunission, but not in excess of $18,000 

25 per annum. 

30-471 O— i64--pt. 1 15 



1152 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



19 

1 ADVISORY COMMJTTBE 

2 Sec. 13. (a) To assure effective cooperation between the 

3 Freedom Academy and various Govenmient agencies con- 

4 cemed with its objectives, there is estabHshed an Advisory 

5 Committee to the Freedom Academy (referred to herein- 

6 after sis the "Committee") . The Committee shall be com- 

7 posed of one representative of each of the following agencies 

8 designated by the head of each such agency from officers 

9 and employees thereof: The Department of State; the De- 

10 partment of Defense ; the Department of Health, Education, 

11 and Welfare; the Central Intelligence Agency; the Federal 

12 Bureau of Investigation; the International Cooperation Ad- 

13 ministration; and the United States Information Agency. 

■^ (b) Members of the Committee shall elect a member 

to serve as Chairman of the Committee. The Chairman shall 
serve as such for a tenn of one year. The chairmanship 
shall rotate among the representatives of the agencies who 
comprise the membership of the Committee. 

(c) No member of the Conmiittee shall receive com- 
pensation for his services as such other than that received 
by him as an officer or employee of the agency represented 
by him. Each member of the Committee shall be reimbursed 

no 

for expenses actually and necessarily incurred by him in the 
** performance of duties of the Committee. Such reimburse- 
ments shall be made from funds appropriated to the Free- 



15 
16 
17 
18 



25 



PROVIDmO FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1153 

50 

1 dom Commission upon vouchers approved by the Chairman 

2 of the Committee. 

3 (d) The Committee shall— 

1 (1) serve as a medium for liaison between the 

5 Freedom Commission and the Government agencies rep- 

6 resented in the Committee ; 

7 (2) review from time to time the plans, programs, 

8 and activities of the Freedom Commission and the Free- 

9 dom Academy, and transmit to the Conmiission such 

10 reconmiendations as it may determine to be necessary 

11 or desirable for the improvement of those plans, pro- 

12 grams, and activities; 

13 (3) meet with the Freedom Commission periodi- 

14 cally, but not less often than semiannually, to consult 

15 with it with regard to the plans, programs, and activities 

16 of the Freedom Commission and the Federal Academy ; 
1'^ and 

18 (4) transmit to the President and to the Congress 

19 in January of each year a report containing (A) a 

20 comprehensive description of the plans, programs, and 

21 activities of the Conmfiission and the Academy during 

22 the preceding calendar year, and (B) its rccommenda- 

23 tions for the improvement of those plans, programs, 

24 and activities. 

25 (e) The Conmiittee shall promulgate such rules and 



1154 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

21 

1 regulations as it shall determine to be necessary for the per- 

2 formance of its duties. 

3 (f) The Commission shall furnish to the Conraiittee with 

4 out reimbursement such office space, personal services, sup- 

5 plies and equipment, information, and facilities as the Com- 

6 mittee may require for the performance of its functions. 

7 APPROPRIATIONS 

8 Sko. 14. There is authorized to be appropriated, out of 

9 any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such 

10 sums as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this 

11 Act. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1155 



88th congress 
1st Session 



H.R. 1617 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

January 10, 1963 

Mr. GuBSER introduced the following bill ; which was referred to tlie Com- 
mittee on Un-Ajnerican Activities 



[H,R. 10036, introduced by Mr. Ashbrook on February 20, 1964, and H.R. 10077, 
introduced by Mr. Schadeberg on February 24, 1964, are identical to H.R. 1617. 

[H.R. 8757, introduced by Mr. Schweiker on October 8, 1963, is substantially the 
same as H.R. 1617, with the exceptions that it omits the provisions which would 
establish a Joint Congressional Freedom Committee and would place a repre- 
sentative of the State Department on the Freedom Commission.] 



A BILL 

To create the Freedom Commission for the development of the 
science of counteraction to the world Communist conspiracy 
and for the training and development of leaders in a total 
political war. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa- 

2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SHORT TITLE 

4 Section 1. This Act may be cited as the "Freedom 

5 Commission Act". 

6 CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF POLICY 

7 Sec. 2. (a) The Congress of the United States makes 

8 the following findings: 

9 ( 1 ) The Soviet Union and Communist China are wag- 
I— O 



1156 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



2 

1 ing a total political war against the United States and 

2 against the peoples and governments of all other nations of 

3 the free world. 

4 (2) Unlike the free world, the Soviet Union has sys- 

5 tematically prepared for this total political war over several 

6 decades. Drawing on the experience of previous conquerors 
^ and upon their own elaborate studies and extensive pragmatic 

8 tests, the Soviet leaders have developed their conspiratorial 

9 version of political warfare into a highly eflfective operational 

10 science. Recognizing that political warfare is a difficult 

11 science making unusual demands on its practitioners, the 

12 Soviet Union and Communist China have established an 

13 elaborate network of training schools, within and without the 

14 free world, in which have been trained large numbers of 

15 highly skilled activists. These activists continue to receive 

16 intensive continuous training throughout their party careers. 

17 (3) In this total political war the Soviets permit no 

18 neutrals. Every citizen, every economic, cultural, religious, 

19 or ethnic group is a target and is under some form of direct 

20 or indirect Communist attack. The battleground is every- 

21 where, and every citizen, knowingly or unknowingly, 

22 through action or inaction, is involved in this continuous 

23 struggle. 

24 (4) Since the end of World War II, the Soviets, tak- 

25 ing full advantage of their better preparation and often supe- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1157 

3 

1 rior organizational and operational know-how, have inflicted 

2 a series of political warfare defeats on the free world. The 

3 total sum of these defeats is nothing less than a disaster 

4 for the United States and the free world and the continua- 

5 tion of this political war by the Soviets confronts the United 

6 States with a grave, present, and continuing danger to its 

7 national survival. 

8 (5) In order to defeat the Soviet political warfare 

9 offensive and to preserve the integrity and independence of 

10 the nations of the free world, it is imperative — 

11 (A) that the knowledge and understanding of all 

12 the peoples of the free world concerning the true nature 

13 of the international Communist conspiracy be increased 

14 as rapidly as is practicable; 

15 (B) that private citizens not only understand the 

16 true nature of the iijtemational Communist conspiracy, 

17 but that they also know how they can participate, and 

18 do participate, in this continuous struggle in an effective, 

19 sustained, and systematic manner; 

20 (C) that Government personnel engaged in the cold 

21 war increase their knowledge of the international Com- 

22 munist conspiracy, develop a high espirit de corps and 

23 sense of mission and a high degree of operational know- 

24 how in counteracting the international Communist 

25 conspiracy. 



1158 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

4 

1 (b) It is the intent and purpose of the Congress that 

2 the authority and powers granted in this Act be fully utilized 

3 by the hereinafter created Commission to achieve the objeo- 

4 tives set forth in the preceding subsection (a)(5) of this 

5 section. It is the further intent and purpose of the Congress 

6 that the authority, powers, and functions of the Commission 

7 and the Academy as hereinafter set forth are to be broadly 

8 construed. 

9 DEFINITIONS 

^® Sec. 3. When used in this chapter— 

^1 ( 1 ) The term "Commission" means the Freedom Com- 

^^ nussion ; 

^3 (2) The term "Academy" means the Freedom Acad- 

14 emy; and 

15 (3) The term "joint committee" means the Joint Con- 

16 gressional Freedom Conmiittee. 

17 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FREEDOM COMMISSION ; C0MP08I- 

18 TION ; CHAIRMAN AND ACTING CHAIRMAN ; QUORUM ; 

19 OFFICIAL spokesman; seal 

20 Sec. 4. There is established in the executive branch 

21 of the Government an independent agency to be known as 

22 the Freedom Commission which shall be composed of six 

23 members and a Chairman, each of whom shall be a dtizen 

24 of the United States. The Chairman may from time to 

25 time designate any other member of the Commission as 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1159 

5 

1 Acting Chainnan to act in the place and stead of the Chair- 

2 man during- his absence. The Chairman (or the Acting 

3 Chairman in the absence of the Chairman) shall preside at 

4 all meetings of the Commission and a quorum for the trans- 

5 action of business shall consist of at least four members 

6 present. Each member of the Commission, including the 
^ Chairman, shall have equal responsibility and authority in 

8 all decisions and actions of the Commission, shall have full 

9 access to all information relating to the performance of his 

10 duties or responsibilities, and shall have one vote. Action 

11 of the Commission shall be determined by a majority vote 

12 of the members present. The Chairman (or Acting Chair- 

13 man in the absence of the Chairman) shall be the official 

14 spokesman of the Commission in its relations with the Con- 

15 gress, Government agencies, persons, or the public, and, 

16 on behalf of the Commission, shall see to the faithful execu- 

17 tion of the policies and decisions of the Commission, and 

18 shall report thereon to the Commission from time to time 

19 or as the Conmndssion may direct. The Commission shall 

20 have an official seal which shall be judicially noticed. 

21 members; APPOINTMENTS; TERMS; COMPENSATION; 

22 EXTRANEOUS BUSINESS 

23 Sec. 5. (a) Members of the Commission and the Chair- 

24 man shall be appointed by the President, by and with the 

25 advice and consent of the Senate. Not more than four 



1160 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



6 

1 members, including the Chairman, ma}' be members of any 

2 one political party. In submitting any nomination to the 

3 Senate, the President shall set forth the experience and quali- 

4 fications of the nominee. The term of each member of the 

5 Commission, other than the Chairman, shall be six years, 

6 except that { 1 ) the terms of office of the members first tak- 

7 ing office shall expire as designated by the President at the 

8 time of the appointment, two at the end of two years, two at 

9 the end of four years, and two at the end of six years; and 

10 ( 2 ) any member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring prior 

11 to the expiration of the term for which his predecessor was 

12 appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of such 

13 term. The Chairman shall serve during the pleasure of the 

14 President. Any member of the Conunission may be removed 

15 by the President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or mal- 

16 feasance in office. Each member, except the Chairman, 

17 shall receive compensation at the rate of $20,000 per annum ; 

18 and the Chairman shall receive compensation at the rate of 

19 $20,500 per annum. 

20 (b) No member of the Commission shall engage in any 

21 business, vocation, or employment other than that of serving 

22 as a member of the Commission. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1161 

7 

1 AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH THE FREEDOM ACADEMY; 

2 FUNCTIONS 

3 Sec. 6. The Commission is authorized and empowered 

4 to establish under its supervision and control an advanced 

5 training and development center to be known as the Freedom 

6 Academy. The Academy shall be located at such place or 

7 places within the United States as the Commission shall 

8 determine. The principal functions of the Academy shall 

9 be— 

10 (1) the development of systematic knowledge 

11 about the international Communist conspiracy; 

12 (2) the development of counteraction to the inter- 

13 national Communist conspiracy into an operational 

14 science that befits and bespeaks the methods and values 

15 of freemen, and to achieve this purpose the entire area 

16 of counteraction is to be thoroughly explored and studied 

17 with emphasis on the methods and means that may best 

18 be employed by private citizens and nongovernmental 

19 organizations and the methods and means available to 

20 Government agencies other than the methods and means 

21 already being used; 

22 (3) the education and training of private citizens 



1162 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

8 

1 concerning all aspects of the international Communist 

2 conspiracy and in the science of counteraction to that 

3 conspiracy ; 

4 (4) the education and training of persons in Gov- 

5 emment service concerning all aspects of the intema- 

6 tional Communist conspiracy and in the science of 

7 counteraction to that conspiracy to the end that they can 

8 be more useful to their Government in defeating the 

9 international Communist conspiracy. 

10 ACADEMY STUDENTS ; SELECTION ; GRANTS AND EXPENSES ; 

11 ADMISSION AS NONIMMIGRANT VISITORS; DEPORTA- 

12 TION 

13 Sec. 7. (a) Academy students shall be selected, insofar 

14 as is practicable and in the public interest, from a cross 

15 section of the diverse groups, within and without the United 

16 States, in which the total political war is being fought. 

17 Before accepting any student for training wh« is an officer 

18 or employee of a Government agency, the Commission shall 

19 first obtain the concurrence of that agency. Persons in 

20 Government service coming within the provisions of the 

21 Government Employees Training Act may be trained at the 

22 Academy pursuant to the provisions of said Act. All other 

23 agencies and departments of Government are authorized to 

24 aid and assist the Conunission in the selection of students. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 163 

9 

1 (b) The Commission is authorized to make grants to 

2 students and to pay expenses incident to training and study 

3 under this chapter. This authorization shall include au- 

4 thority to pay travel expenses to and from the Academy 

5 or other authorized place of training under this chapter, and 

6 authority to give financial assistance to the dependents of 

7 students during the time they are undergomg training au- 

8 thorized under this Act. Foreign students selected for train- 

9 ing under this Act shall be admitted as noninmiigrants under 

10 section 1101(a) (15) of title 8, United States Code, for 

11 such time and under such conditions as may be prescribed 

12 by regulations promulgated by the Commission, the Sec- 

13 retary of State, and the Attorney General. A person ad- 

14 mitted under this section who fails to maintain the status 

15 under which he was admitted, or who fails to depart from 

16 the United States at the expiration of the time for which 

17 he was admitted, or who engages in activities of a poUtical 

18 nature detrimental to the interest of the United States, or 

19 in activities in conflict with the security of the United States, 

20 shall, upon the warrant of the Attorney General, be taken 

21 into custody and promptly deported pursuant to sections 

22 1251-1253 of title 8, United States Code. Deportation 

23 proceedings under this section shall be summary and findings 



1164 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

10 

1 of the Attorney General as to matters of fact shall be coo- 

2 elusive. Such persons shall not be eligible for suspension of 

3 deportation under section 1254 of such title 8. 

4 NON-ACADEMY TRAINING OF ACADEMY STUDENTS 

5 Sec. 8. The Commission is authorized to provide stu- 

6 dents selected for training at the Academy {either before, 

7 after, or during Academy training) with such additional edu- 

8 cation and training at colleges, universities, or technical 

9 schools other than the Academy, or with such on-the-job 

10 training in industry and business as the Conunission shall 

11 determine to be in the public interest. 

12 AUTHORIZATION TO ESTABLISH AN INFORMATION CBNTBB 

13 Sec. 9. The Oonmiission is authorized to establish an 

14 information center at such place or places within the United 

15 States as the Oonmiission may determine. The principal 

16 function of the information center shall be to disseminate 

17 with or without charge information and materials which will 

18 assist persons and organizations to increase th-air under- 

19 standing of the true nature of the international Conununist 

20 conspiracy and the ways and means of defeating that con- 

21 spiracy. In carrying out this function, the Commission is 

22 authorized to prepare, make, and publish textbooks and other 

23 materials, including training films, suitable for high school, 

24 college, and conmiunity level instruction. The Conmiission 

25 is authorized to disseminate such information and materials 



PBOVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1165 

11 

1 to such persons and organizations as may be in the public 

2 interest on such terms and conditions as the Commission 

3 shall determine. 

4 RESTRICTIONS ON DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION 

5 Sec. 10. Nothing in this chapter shall authorize the dis- 

6 closure of any information or knowledge in any case in which 

7 such disclosure (1) is prohibited by any other law of the 

8 United States, or (2) is inconsistent with the security of the 

9 United States. 

10 SECURITY CHECK OF PERSONNEL 

11 Sec. 11. (a) Except as authorized by the Commission 

12 upon a determination by the Commission that such action is 

13 clearly consistent with the national interest, no individual 

14 shall be employed by the Conunission until such individual 

15 has been investigated by the Civil Service Conmiission to 

16 determine whether the said individual is a good security risk 

17 and a report thereof has been made to the Freedom 

18 Conmiission. 

19 (b) In addition to the foregoing provisions, the Com- 

20 mission may request that any individual employed by the 

21 Conunission, or under consideration for emplo3anent by the 

22 Commission, be investigated by the Federal Bureau of In- 

23 vestigation to determine whether the said individual is a good 

24 security risk. 



1166 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

12 

1 QENEBAL AUTHOEITT OF THE COMMISSION 

2 Sec. 12. In addition to the authority already granted, 

3 the Commission is authorized and empowered — 

4 (1) to establish such temporary or permanent 

5 boards and conmiittees as the Commission may from 

6 time to time deem necessary for the purposes of this 

7 Act; 

8 (2) to iEippoint and fix the compensation of such 

9 personnel as may be necessary to carry out the functions 

10 of the Conmussion. Such personnel shall be appointed 

11 in accordance with the civil service laws and their com- 

12 pensation fixed in accordance with the Classification 

13 Act of 1949, as amended, except that, to the extent the 

14 Commission deems such action necessary to the dis- 

15 charge of its responsibilities, personnel may be employed 

16 and their compensation fixed without regard to such 

17 laws: Provided, however. That no personnel (except 

18 such personnel whose compensation is fixed by law, and 

19 specially qualified professional personnel up to a limit 
20. of $19,000) whose position would be subject to the 

21 Classification Act of 1949, as amended, if such Act were 

22 applicable to such position, shall be paid a salary at a 

23 rate in excess of the rate payable under such Act for 

24 ' positions of equivalent difficulty or responsibiUty. The 

25 Commission shall make adequate provision for admin- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 167 

1 istrative review of any determination to dismiss any 

2 employee ; 

3 (3) to conduct such research, studies and surveys as 

4 necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act ; 

5 (4) to make, promulgate, issue, rescind, and amend 

6 such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry 

7 out the purposes of this Act; 

8 (5) to make such expenditures as may be necessary 

9 for administering and carrying out the provisions of this 

10 Act; 

11 (6) to utilize, with the approval of the President, 

12 the services, facilities, and personnel of other Govem- 

13 ment agencies. Whenever the Commission shall use the 

14 services, facilities, or personnel of any Government 

15 agency for activities under the authority of this Act, the 

16 Commission shall pay for such performance out of funds 

17 available to the Commission under this Act, either in 

18 advance, by reimbursement, or by direct transfer ; 

19 ( 7 ) to utilize or employ on a full- or part-time basis, 

20 with the consent of the organization or governmental 

21 body concerned, the services of personnel of any State 

22 or local government or private organization to perform 

23 such functions on its behalf as may appear desirable to 

24 carry out the purposes of this Act, without said person- 

25 nel severing their connection with the furnishing organ- 

30-471 O— 64— pt. 1 .16 



1168 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

14 

1 ization or governmental body ; and further to utilize per- 

2 sonnel of a foreign government in the same manner and 

3 under the same circumstances with the approval of the 

4 Secretary of State; 

5 (8) to acquire by purchase, lease, loan, or gift, and 

6 to hold and dispose of by sale, lease, or loan, real and 

7 personal property of all kinds necessary for, or resulting 

8 from, the exercise of authority granted by this Act; 

9 (9) to receive and use funds donated by others, if 

10 such funds are donated without restrictions other than 

11 that they be used in furtherance of one or more of the 

12 purposes of this Act; 

13 (10) to accept and utilize the services of vol- 

14 untaiy and uncompensated personnel and to provide 

15 transportation and subsistence as authorized by section 

16 73b-2 of title 5, United States Code, for persons serving 

17 without compensation ; 

18 (11) to utilize the services of persons on a tempo- 

19 rary basis and to pay their actual and necessary travel 

20 expenses and subsistence and in addition compensation 

21 at a rate not to exceed $50 per day for each day spent 

22 in the work of the Commission. 

23 GENERAL MANAGER; API^OINTMENT ; COMPENSATION 

24 Sec. 13. The Commission is authorized to establish 

25 within the Commission a General Manager, who shall dis- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1169 

15 

1 charge such of the administrative and executive functions of 

2 the Commission as the Commission may direct. The Gen- 

3 eral Manap:er shall be appointed by the Commission, shall 

4 serve at the pleasure of the Commission, shall be removable 

5 by the Commission, and shall receive compensation at a rate 

6 determined by the Commission, but not in excess of $18,000 

7 per annum. 

8 ESTABLISHMENT OF JOINT CONGRESSIONAL FREEDOM 

9 COMMITTEE; MEMBERSHIP 

10 Sec. 14. There is established the Joint Congressional 

11 Freedom Committee hereinafter referred to as the "joint com- 

12 mittee" to be composed of seven Members of the Senate to 

13 be appointed by the President of the Senate, and seven Mem- 

14 bers of the House of Representatives to be appointed by the 

15 Speaker of the House of Representatives. In each instance 

16 not more than fojir Members shall be the members of the 

17 same political party. 

18 AUTHORITY AND DUTY OF JOINT COMMITTEE 

19 Sec 15. The joint committee shall make continued 

20 studies of the activities of the Commission and of problems 

21 relating to the development of counteraction to the inter- 

22 national Communist conspiracy. During the first sixty days 

23 of each session of the Congress the joint committee shall 

24 conduct hearings in either open or executive session for the 

25 purposes of receiving information concerning the develop- 



1170 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

16 

1 ment and state of counteraction. The Commission shall keep 

2 the joint committee fully and currently informed with re- 

3 spect to all of the Commission's activities. All bills, reso- 

4 lutions, and other matters in the Senate or House of 

5 Representatives relating primarily to the Commission shall 

6 be referred to the joint committee. The members of the 

7 joint conunittee who are Members of the Senate shall from 

8 time to time report to the Senate and the members of the 

9 joint committee who are Members of the House of Repre- 

10 sentative«5 shall from time to time report to the House, by 

11 bill or otherwise, their recommendations with respect to mat- 

12 ters within the jurisdiction of their respective Houses which 

13 are referred to the joint committee, or otherwise within the 

14 jurisdiction of the joint committee. 

15 CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN OF JOINT COMMITTEE; 

16 VACANCIES IN MEMBERSHIP 

17 Sec. 16. Vacancies in the membership of the joint com- 

18 mittee shall not affect the power of the remaining members 

19 to execute the functions of the joint conmiittee, and shall be 

20 filled in the same manner as in the case of the original se- 

21 lection. The joint committee shall select a chairman and a 

22 vice chairman from among its members at the beginning of 

23 each Congress. The vice chairman shall act in the place 

24 and stead of the chairman in the absence of the chairman. 

25 The chairmanship shall alternate between the Senate and the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 171 

17 

1 House of Representatives with each Congress, and the chair- 

2 man shall be selected by the members from that House 

3 entitled to the chairmanship. The vice chairman shall be 

4 chosen from the House other than that of the chairman by 

5 the members from that House. 

6 POWERS OF JOINT COMMITTEE 

7 Sec. 17. In carrying out its duties under this chapter, 

8 the joint committee, or any duly authorized subcommittee 

9 thereof, is authorized to hold such hearings or investigations, 

10 to sit and act at such places and times, to require by sub- 

11 pena or otherwise, the attendance of such witnesses and the 

12 production of such books, papers, and documents, to admin- 

13 ister such oaths, to take such testimony, to procure such 

14 printing and binding, and to make such expenditures as it 

15 deems advisable. The joint committee may make such rules 

16 respecting its organization and procedures as it deems neces- 

17 sary: Provided, however, That no measure or recommenda- 

18 tion shall be reported from the joint committee or by any 

19 member designated by him or by the joint committee, and 

20 may be served by such person or persons as may be desig- 

21 nated by such chairman or member. The chairman of the 

22 joint committee or any mepiber thereof may administer oaths 

23 to witnesses. The joint committee may use a committee 

24 seal. The provisions of sections 192-194 of title 2, United 

25 States Code, shall apply in case of any failure of any wit- 



1172 PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

18 

1 ness 1« comply with a subpena or to testify when summoned 

2 under authority of this section. The expenses of the joint 

3 committee shall be paid from tlie contingent fund of the 

4 Senate from funds appropriated for the joint committee upon 

5 vouchers approved by the chairman. The cost of steno- 

6 graphic services to lepoit public hearings shall not be in 

7 excess of the amounts prescribed by law for reporting the 

8 hearings of standing committees of the Senate. The cost of 

9 stenographic services to report executive hearings shall be 

10 fixed at an equitable rate by the joint committee. Mem- 

11 bers of the joint commitee, and its employees and consult- 

12 ants, while traveling on official business for the joint com- 

13 mittee, may receive either the per diem allowance authorized 

14 to be paid to Members of Congress or its employees, or their 

15 actual and necessary expenses provided an itemized state- 

16 ment of such expenses is attached to the voucher. 

17 STAFF AND ASSISTANCE; UTILIZATION OF FEDERAL 

18 DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES; ARMED PROTECTION 

19 Sec. 18. The joint committee is empowered to appoint 

20 and fix the compensation of such experts, consultants, and 

21 staff employees as it deems necessary and advisable. The 

22 joint committee is authorized to utilize the services, informa- 

23 tion, facilities, and personnel of the departments and 

24 establishments of the Government. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMRHSSION 1 1 73 

19 

1 CLASSIFICATION OF INFORMATION BY JOINT COMMITTEE 

2 Sec. 19. The joint committee may classify information 

3 originating within the committee in accordance with stand- 

4 ards used generally by the executive branch for classifying 

5 restricted data or defense information. 

6 RECORDS OF JOINT COMMITTEE 

7 Sec. 20. The joint committee shall keep a complete 

8 record of all committee actions, including a record of the 

9 votes on any (juestion on which a record vote is demanded. 

10 All conmiittee records, data, charts, and files shall be the 

11 property of the joint committee and shall lie kept in the 

12 offices of the joint committee or other places as the joint 

13 committee may direct under such security safeguards as the 
^ joint committee shall determine in the interest of the com- 

mon defense and security. 
^^ APPROPRIATIONS 

^' Sec. 21. There is authorized to be appropriated, out of 

any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, so 
much as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of 

^ this Act. 



1174 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



By way of general summary, all of the bills have in substance the 
same purposes and objectives, but differ on the following major points : 



Information 
Center 

H.R. 352 (Herlong) Yes 

H.R. 1617 (Gubser) Yes 

H.R. 5368 (Boggs) Yes 

H.R. 8320 (Taft) Yes 

H.R. 8757 (Schweiker) Yes 

H.R. 10036 (Ashbrook) Yes 

H.R. 10037 (Clausen) Yes 

H.R. 10077 (Schadeberg) Yes 

H.R. 11718 (Talcott) No 



Advisory 
Committee 


Joint 

Congressional 

Freedom 

Committee 


Yes 


No 


No 


Yes 


Yes 


No 


Yes 


No 


No 


No 


No 


Yes 


Yes 


No 


No 


Yes 


Yes 


No 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 1 75 



UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORI^TEY GENERAL 
VJasbington, D. C. 

May 18, 1959 

Honorable Francis E. ^'alter 
Chairman, Committee on Un-American 

Activities 
House of Representatives 
Washington, D. C. 

Dear Mr. Chairman; 

This is in response to your request for the views of the Department 
of Justice concerning the bill (H.R. 3880) "To create the Freedom Com- 
mission for the development of the science of counteraction to the world 
Communist conspiracy and for the training and development of leaders in 
a total political war." 

The bill would create a Freedom Commission with responsibility 
for training Americans and selected foreign students to better under- 
stand the nature of the international Communist conspiracy and for 
developing effective methods for combating it. The Commission would 
function, to a large extent, through a Freedom Academy and Information 
centers which it is authorized to establish. A Joint Congressional Free- 
dom Committee would also be established, to make continued studies of the 
activities of the Fieedom Commission and of prdblems relating to the 
development of counteraction to the International Communist conspiracy. 

The Department of Justice is wholly in accord with the view that a 
greater awareness throughout the free world of the extent and operations 
of Communism and methods of combating it is most desirable. However, 
there would seem to be no need to create a new agency in order to ac- 
complish this objective. Rather, existing agencies, for example, the 
United States Information Agency, and others in the security field, could 
be utilized with less risk of confusion, overlapping of responsibilities, 
and duplication of effort. 

Accordingly, the Department of Justice is unable to recommend enact- 
ment of this bill. 

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to 
the submission of this report. 

Sincerely yours, 

SIGHTED 

Lawrence E. Walsh 
Deputy Attorney General 



1176 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE 
Washington 
* 

July 23, 1959 



Dear Mr. Walter: 

Your letter of February 12, 1959, requested comments of the 
Department of State on H. R. 3880 which would establish a Freedom 
Academy whose principal functions would be the development of 
systematic knowledge about the international Communist conspiracy, 
the development of counter-action to the conspiracy into an opera- 
tional science, and the education and training of private citizens 
and Government employees of the United States and other countries 
in these matters. 

As you may know, the Department sought in its appropriations 
request for Fiscal Year 1960 funds for additional personnel to 
strengthen the Department's ability to cope with world Communist 
political and economic activities. The challenge of international 
communism requires that we discern and fully understand the various 
facets of the Communist menace and correctly evaluate its every move 
and thrust. For this purpose, it is the Department's belief that it 
must increase the number of its personnel who are experts in this 
field and whose full time can be devoted to observing the maneuvers 
of international Communism on a global scale and in formulating 
policies, devices and tactics to meet these maneuvers. In this 
connection, the Department of State is currently considering ways 
and means by which the training of Foreign Service officers on this 
subject can be improved. 

Accordingly, the Department is in agreement with the basic 
objective of H. R. 3880 to increase knowledge and understanding 
of the international Communist menace. However, there would seem 
to be no need to create a new agency in order to accomplish this 
objective. Rather, existing agencies could be used with less risk 
of confusion, overlapping of responsibilities, and duplication 
of effort. 

We have been informed by the Bureau of the Budget that there 
is no objection to the submission of this report. 

Sincerely yours. 

For the Acting Secretary of State: 

SIGNED 

William B. Macomber, Jr. 
Assistant Secretary 

The Honorable 

Francis E. Walter, Chairman 

Committee on Un-American Activities 
House of Representatives 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 1 77 



GEWERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Washington 25, D. C. 



23 May 1952 



Dear Mr. Chairman: 

This is in reply to your request for the views of the Department 
of Defense on H.R. 18A5, H.R. 2708, and H.R. 5207, 87th Congress, a 
proposed "Freedom Commission Act." 

The bills would establish a Freedom Commission and a Freedom 
Academy to counteract the international Communist conspiracy. 

The broad objectives of the bills are entirely praiseworthy and un- 
exceptionable. However, the need for the creation of new agencies for 
their accomplishment is questionable. In most of their functions, the 
proposed agencies would duplicate the work of existing Federal agencies 
and private organizations concerned with policy formulation, research, 
education, indoctrination and information programs. 

VJhether there is need for the establishment of a Freedom Commission 
and Academy to accomplish the objectives of H.R. 18^:5, H.R. 2708 and 
H.R. 6207 is a matter outside the purview of the Department of Defense 
and with respect to which we defer to the State Department and other 
interested agencies more directly concerned. 

The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the 
Administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of 
this report for the consideration of the Committee. 

Sincerely, 

SIGNED 

C^rus R. Vance 



Honorable Francis E. Halter 
Chairman, Committee on Un-American 

Activities 
House of Representatives 



1178 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



DEPARTMEOT OF STATE 
Washington 



June 7, 1962 



Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The Secretary has asked that I reply to your letter of September 13, 
1961 in which you asked for the Department's view on Bill H.R. 8936 
proposing "To create the Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy." 

As you are aware, the proposals contained in this bill involve almost 
every major area of the Department and those of several other agencies. 
1 sincerely regret that the necessary lengthy discussions and studies 
long delayed a reply to your letter. After careful study of the various 
thoughtful proposals in H.R. 8936 and a comprehensive review of the 
Department's and other agencies' programs for research, training and 
information programs on communism, there are summarized below, in some 
detail, our views on the proposed legislation. In general, I would say 
that, while the Department fully appreciates the deep concern for the 
security of the United States which motivates the sponsors of the proposed 
legislation, and recognizes that certain aspects of it have considerable 
merit, on balance we believe that it would not serve as a useful instrument 
of national policy. 

The sponsors of H.R. 8936 and the various other Freedom Academy Bills 
urge, correctly, in the Department's view, that in our struggle with the 
forces of tyranny - and communism in particular - we must employ not only 
military strength but also all of the political, psychological, economic 
and other non-military means at our disposal. The President has given to 
the Department of State a primary role in marshalling all of our resources 
in these fields which cut across many broad areas of government responsibility. 
The integrated efforts of the foreign affairs and security agencies are as 
vital in developing the overall strategy and tactics of the "cold war" as 
in carrying them out. Expertise and operational experience are as important 
in the formulation of policy as they are in its execution. For this reason, 

the Department 

The Honorable 

Francis E. Walter, Chairman 

Committee on Un-American Activities 
House of Representatives 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 1 79 



the Department seriously questions whether comprehensive and realistic 
plans for dealing with the infinitely complex problems of U.S. Foreign 
Affairs can be developed by a new, separate government agency, especially 
one without operational responsibilities, as contemplated by S. 822. 
Furthermore, we would be seriously deluding ourselves if we believed, as 
S. 822 suggests, that the strategy for waging our struggle against 
communism could be formulated into an "operational science." 

The Department agrees that intensive research into the nature and 
techniques of the communist movement is necessary to our cause. As you 
are aware, our intelligence community has built up a large reservoir of 
talent and material in this general area and their efforts are complemented 
by the large volume of excellent studies being conducted by private 
individuals, foundations and institutions. As the Bill correctly points 
out, however, more work is needed in research on the appeals, techniques 
and organizations of World Communism. We have submitted requests to 
Congress in the Department's budget for increased research in this area. 

Another purpose of the bill is to instruct public officials and 
private citizens in the techniques and methods of communist infiltration 
and organization. Instruction in this area is provided government officials 
through the National and Service War Colleges, the Foreign Service Institute 
and training assignments at private institutions. For example, the Foreign 
Service Institute emphasizes communist methods and organization in all its 
substantive courses and conducts twelve special two weeks' seminars each 
year on communist strategy. During the last five years, 2,750 students 
from many departments and agencies of the Government attended these seminars. 
Plans are currently underway to expand significantly the Foreign Service 
Institute and broaden its training responsibilities to meet the needs of 
the changing times. For example, a special course is soon to be added to 
the Foreign Service Institute curriculum designed specifically for senior 
officers of the Department and other government agencies assigned to newly 
developing countries. The course at its inception will concentrate on 
problems peculiar to Southeast Asia and Latin America where Communist 
efforts at subversion and other activities have a potentially disruptive 
influence. Additional ways of improving the Institute, particularly with 
respect to the Communist threat, are under active consideration. 

In addition, educational opportunities are available at any one of 
the excellent Russian research or international studies centers throughout 
the country. The number of university programs and courses on Soviet 
studies on "Communism" has increased greatly in the last few years. Only 
a few years ago Soviet and Chinese Communist specialization was available 

at only 



1180 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



3 - 



at only three or four universities, now such specialization is offered by 
over 25 American universities and colleges. 

Another proposed purpose of the Academy is to train operational cadres 
in countering Soviet Communist techniques and methods for use abroad. This 
is not something that can properly be done by Americans alone, and by its 
very nature should not be a publicized operation. Publicity of the type 
suggested in the Academy Bill, in our view, would defeat this purpose of 
the program before it had begun. Soviet training of foreign communists in 
the techniques of organization, subversion, etc., is conducted, for example, 
in the highest secrecy. 

With reference to the idea of enrolling foreigners in this Academy for 
training as operational cadres, it is extremely doubtful if the governments 
of many countries or public opinion abroad would support a United States 
program of this nature and the reaction in these countries to a highly 
publicized institution of this kind would bring almost certainly a negative 
response. The Freedom Academy would be regarded abroad, and immediately 
characterized by Soviet propaganda, as a "Cold War Institute," which would 
be regarded as a training course for espionage and would give a completely 
incorrect connotation to the world of the U.S. concept of "freedom." 

While existing programs and facilities for other types of training 
and research are impressive and are continually expanding, the Department 
believes that more rapid expansion and improvement bf them is essential. 
Various steps in this direction are under consideration. One is proposed 
in the foreign aid legislation, which calls for a new authorization to 
finance an intensive program of research in the problems of economic and 
social development in less developed countries. Another is the previously 
mentioned program to expand the Foreign Service Institute. 

In the Department's view, however, the best research and training for 
meeting our international responsibilities will not come from the estab- 
lishment of a single, government institution like the proposed Freedom 
Academy. As with our society as a whole, the genius of American research 
and education lies in its pluralism, and to depart from this tested approach 
at a time when we face the most difficult international problems in our 
history would, in the Department's view, be most unwise. 

Finally, we believe that positive programs aimed at furthering the 
cause of freedom represent the best means of fighting communism. Abroad, 
in a world in flux, the peoples of the less -developed areas yearn for 
national and individual dignity, for a better life for themselves and 

their 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION Ugl 



4 - 



their children. To align ourselves with these aspirations, the 
Administration initiated such new programs as the Peace Corps, the 
Alliance for Progress and a reoriented and reinvigorated program of 
foreign aid that V7ill provide economic and social development where it 
is most needed and will do the most good. At home, we can all join 
together in building a stronger United States not only by conducting 
ourselves at all times as responsible citizens but also by working for 
improvements such as a stronger economy and a modernized and reinvigorated 
educational system. 

The Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that from 
the standpoint of the Administration's program there is no objection to 
the submission of this report. 

Sincerely yours, 

SIGNED 

Frederick G. Dutton 
Assistant Secretary 



1182 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE DEPARTMEOT OF DEFENSE 
Washington 25, D. C. 



29 March 1963 



Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Reference is made to your request for the views of the Department 
of Defense with respect to H. R. 352, 88th Congress, a bill "To create 
the Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy; to research and develop 
an integrated, operational science to win the nonmilitary part of the 
global struggle between freedom and communism; and to train Government 
personnel, private citizens, and foreign students in this science," 

The purposes of the bill are as stated in the title. 

The broad objectives of the bill are entirely praiseworthy and un- 
exceptionable. However, as you are avjare, the President, on February 
II, 1963, transmitted to the Congress a legislative proposal to provide 
for the establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs designed 
to provide a center for Government -wide training and research in inter- 
national matters. The proposal has been introduced in the House as 
H. R. 3668. 

The President's proposal Was based primarily on the recommendations 
of the Perkins Panel and was coordinated, in draft form, with the De- 
partment of Defense. 

Establishment of a National Academy, as the President indicated in 
his message of February 11, 1963, is not intended to affect the interde- 
partmental support for and participation in the joint professional 
schools of the Department of Defense or in the War Colleges of the mili- 
tary departments. It is expected that other departments and agencies 
will continue to support and participate in these schools just as the 
Department of Defense will support and participate in the National 
Academy. 

For the foregoing reasons, it is the belief of the Secretary of 
Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff that the proposed National Academy 
of Foreign Affairs will provide a valuable complement to the existing 
military schools and is better suited to that purpose than the Freedom 
Academy proposed in H. R. 352. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1183 



Accordingly, the Department of Defense strongly recommends the es- 
tablishment of the National Academy of Foreign Affairs as proposed in 
H. R. 3568 in lieu of the proposal included in K. R. 352. With respect 
to the other provisions of the bill, the Department of Defense defers to 
the Department of State. 

The Bureau of the Budget advises that, from the standpoint of the 
Administration's program, there is no objection to the presentation of 
this report for the consideration of the Committee. 

oincerely, 

SIGNED 

John T. McWaughton 



Honorable Francis E. Halter 
Chairman, Committee on 

Un-American Activities 
House of Representatives 



30-471 O— 64— pt. 1 17 



1184 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE 
Washington 



April 8, 1963 



Dear Mr. Chairman: 

The Departinent appreciates the opportunity to comment on 
H. R. 352, a bill "To Create the Freedom Commission and the Freedom 
Academy," which you forwarded to us with your letter of 
January 31, 1963. 

H.R. 352 is similar to a bill on which the Department commented 
to you in a letter dated June 7, 1962. We expressed appreciation of 
the purposes of the sponsors and recognized the merits of certain 
aspects of the proposal, but e::pressed the conviction that the bill 
as a whole would not serve as a useful instrument of national 
policy. 

While the Department continues to have serious objections to 
the machinery proposed by H.R. 352, it is deeply aware of the acute 
need for more adequate training and research in the vast and complex 
field of foreign affairs. As you know, the President recently pro- 
posed the creation of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs, to 
provide advanced training and research for the benefit of more than 
a score of different Federal departments and agencies now actively 
engaged in various foreign operations. The President's proposal was 
the outgrowth of an intensive reexamination of current requirements 
and facilities for training and research, conducted by the Department 
of State in cooperation with other agencies; and supplemented by the 
Report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel, chaired by 
Former Secretary of State Herter, as well as the Report of a special 
Presidential Advisory Committee, chaired by Dr. James A. Perkins of 
the Carnegie Corporation. 

While the President's plan for a National Academy of Foreign 
Affairs is based prinarily upon the findings of the Committee headed 
by Dr. Perkins, it includes ideas from other sources. Special 
attention, of course, has been given to past and current proposals 
for a "Freedom Conii:.issicn and Freedom Academy," including H.R. 352. 



The President's 



The Honorable 

Francis E. VJaiter, Chairman, 

Commi'ctea on Un-American Activities, 
Kouse of Representatives. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1185 



The President's plan incorporates some of the most constructive 
features of this bill. Thus it appears that the most useful way 
to explain the Department's views on H.R. 352 is to compare it 
with the legislation recently proposed by the President: 

1. The Department shares most of the basic objectives expressed 
in H.R. 352. We agree fully as to the magnitude of the communist 
threat and the diverse forms it has taken, and agree that the pro- 
tection of our national security and the extension of human freedom 
demands a titanic and protracted effort by the United States--that 
our nation must, to use the words of President Kennedy, "intensify 
our efforts for a struggle in many ways more difficult than war." 
The Department agrees that a "wide range of additional methods and 
means... must be worked out and integrated with existing instruments 
of policy" and that American officers involved in foreign affairs 
must attain the "highest professional competence in those areas of 
specialized knowledge required by our global operations." Finally, 
we agree that a new institution for advanced research and training 

is needed. The proposed National Academy for Foreign Affairs is 
designed to gather and combine the best available talent, knowledge, 
experience and other facilities from public and private sources alike, 
and to use these capabilities for the more effective prosecution of 
the cold war and for the pursuit of the entire range of America's 
international interests, 

2. By its very nature, the struggle against communism permeates 
all aspects of American foreign affairs, and is inseparable from 
other international activities. Our Government cannot fight communism 
in a vacuum. It must be opposed at specific times and places by 
specific means, including a wide variety of resources and techniques. 

Because of the very diversity of the communist threat, many 
varieties of knowledge and skill are essential. The struggle requires 
expertise in diplomacy, intelligence, political analysis and action, 
negotiation, cultural affairs, economic development, international 
trade, social reform, technical assistance, informational techniques, 
Pj /chological warfare, investment opportunities, liaison with special 
segments of foreign populations, general and localized military 
operations, the functioning of international organizations and many 
similar fields. It requires specialized knowledge of the language, 
history, culturCj economics, politics, resources and attitudes of 
all countries and rcsious of the world. It requires knowledge of 
the specific nature of the communist threat in each locality, the 
apparatus employed, its nasquerades, its relations with other groups, 
its immediate and Icrg-tarm aims, its shifting tactics, its sources of 
strength, its vuln?.-..abillties, et cetera. 

Thus, 



1186 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Thus, it is impossible to develop and sustain an effective 
strategy for opposing communism and promoting freedom unless this 
strategy embraces the whole spectrum of foreign affairs. This is 
the concept underlying the President's plan for a National Academy. 

3. The research and training conducted by the proposed National 
Academy, of course, would not be limited exclusively to "cold war" 
problems. While it is true as Secretary Rusk has said, that "global 
struggle for freedom and against communist imperialism is our main 
business at the State Department," it is also true that the American 
people have other important interests in the international sphere. 

We would have an enormous stake in world affairs even if communism 
had never existed. It is essential that the foreign affairs personnel 
of our Government be aware of the totality of America's international 
interests and be equipped to protect and promote ^11 these interests. 

4. While the National Academy of Foreign Affairs, like the 
institution envisaged by H-R. 352, would have essential autonomy in 
structure, administration and operations, the National Academy would 
be designed to assist personnel of all the departments and agencies 

of the Federal Government in the practical problems of foreign affairs 
and thus would be linked to the substantive operations of these 
agencies. Comprehensive training, research and planning in the field 
of foreign affairs cannot be wholly divorced from operational respon- 
sibilities. The National Academy would be subject to direction by 
the President and to policy guidance by a Board of Regents, in order 
to make sure that the Academy's programs are realistically geared to 
the actual problems, needs and policies of our Government. 

5. Unlike the institution proposed by H.R. 352, the National 
Academy of Foreign Affairs would not be given major responsibilities 
for channeling information to the general public. While it is highly 
desirable that the whole American people gain a better understanding 
of the global communist menace, the Department doubts the value of 
any effort to centralize and standardize the dissemination of infor- 
mation on this subject, which is now being provided by various Federal 
departments, by members of the Congress and other political leaders, 
by numerous publications, by private organizations, by private aca- 
demic institutions, et cetera. While the research programs of the 
Academy will produce new material for discemination through these 
diverse sources, the Department sees little value and considerable 
risk in burdening the Academy with a massive public information 
function, thus dissipating the energies and complicating the functions 
of conducting intensive, modern training and research programs for 
professional personnel under carefully designed security safeguards. 

In view 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1187 



In view of the foregoing considerations, the Department is 
convinced that the President's proposal for a National Academy of 
Foreign Affairs is the most practical and realistic approach to the 
basic purposes of H.R. 352, along with other important foreign 
policy objectives. Therefore, we hope that the sponsors of H.R. 352, 
who have demonstrated their keen awareness of the need for advanced 
training and research and who deserve commendation for the valuable 
work they have done, will give active support to the President's 
proposal. 

The Bureau of the Budget advises that from the standpoint of 
the Administration's program there is no objection to the submission 
of this report. 

Sincerely yours. 

For the Secretary of State: 



Frederick G. Dutton 
Assistant Secretary 



1188 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Ul'lITED STATES lUFORMATIOM AGENCY 
Office of Washington 

The Director 

April 19, 1963 



Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Reference is made to your request for the views of the U, S. 
Information Agency with respect to H.R. 352, 88th Congress, a bill 
"To create the Freedom Commission and the Freedom Academy, to con- 
duct research to develop an integrated body of operational knowledge 
in the political, psychological, economic, technological, and organiza- 
tional areas to increase the nonmilitary capabilities of the United 
States in the global struggle between freedom and communism, to 
educate and train Government personnel and private citizens to under- 
stand and implement this body of knowledge, and also to provide 
education and training for foreign students in these areas of know- 
ledge under appropriate conditions." 

The Agency is in general accord with the objectives of the bill. 
However, as you are aware, the President transmitted to the Congress 
a proposal for the establishment of a National Academy of Foreign 
Affairs for training personnel of foreign affairs agencies (H.R. 3668). 
The President's proposal was based primarily on the recommendations 
of the President's Advisory Panel headed by Mr. Perkins, and the 
Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel headed by the Honorable 
Christian A. Herter. 

In our judgment the President's {Proposal for a National Academy 
of Foreign Affairs presents the most practical and realistic basis 
for training and research programs for foreign affairs personnel. 
Accordingly, the Agency recommends the establishment of the National 
Academy of Foreign Affairs as proposed in S. 865 in lieu of the 
Freedom Commission and Academy proposed in H. R. 352. 

The Bureau of the Budget advises that it has no objection to the 
submission of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's 
program. 

Sincerely, 

SIGNED 

Edward R. Murrow 
s Director 

The Honorable 

Francis E. Ualter 

Chairman 

Committee on Un-American 

Activities 
House of Representatives 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1189 




OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20301 



February 12, 1964 



Honorable Edwin E. Willis 

Chairman, Committee on Un-American 

Activities 
House of Representatives 
Washington, D. C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Chairman: 

Thank you for your letter of February 5, 1964, advising 
of your intention to hold public hearings on February 18-20 
on bills to create a Freedom Commission and Freedom 
Academy. 

Although your offer to receive testimony of Department of 
Defense witnesses is appreciated, it is believed that this 
Department has nothing to add to the views expressed in 
Mr. McNaughton's letter of March 29, 1963. Except for 
the general comments included ih that letter, the Depart- 
ment of Defense defers to the Department of State as to 
the detailed provisions of the bills in question. 

Sincerely, 



^^U <^''*^'%z^^ 




David E. McGiffert 
Assistant to the Secretary 
(Legislative Affairs) 



1190 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 




UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON 



February 17, 1964 



Dear Mr. Willis: 



Your letter of February 5, 1964 to Carl Rowan, Director 
Designate of the U. S. Information Agency, has been referred to 
me for reply. We appreciate your thoughtf\ilness in inviting the 
Agency to testify at your Committee Hearings on the Freedom 
Commission and Academy Bills. 

As you are aware, the Executive Branch has proposed the 
establishment of a National Academy of Foreign Affairs, based 
primarily on the recommendations of the President's Advisory 
Panel, headed by Mr. Perkins, and the Committee on Foreign 
Affairs Personnel, headed by the Honorable Christian A. Herter. 
We support that proposal as set forth in H. R. 3668. 

As you know, our views on this matter have previously 
been conveyed to the Committee, in a letter fronn Mr. Murrow 
dated April 19, 1963. For that reason we hope you will permit us 
to decline your kind invitation to testify at this time. 

We have conveyed the substance of this letter to Mr. 
McNamara, Director of the Committee, so as not to delay plans 
for your hearings. 




Donald M. Wilson 
Acting Director 



The Honorable 
Edwin E. Willis 
Chairnnan, Committee on 
Un-American Activities 
House of Representatives 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION HQl 



APPENDIX B 

Excerpts From the "Green Book" Referred to in Testimony of 
Alan G. Grant, Jr. 

PART I 

THE SOVIET RESEARCH AND TRAINING 
PROGRAM IN POLITICAL WARFARE 

Despite the great outflow of books on the Soviet Bloc 
and Comnriunism, insufficient attention has been given to 
the long range research and training program which under- 
lies Communist capabilities in political warfare. This pro- 
gram is not the only reason for their very great capabilities 
in non-military conflict, but it is an important one and must 
be understood, at least in outline, before we can fully under- 
stand our own deficiencies. It involves thousands of training 
schools, large and small, on both sides of the Iron and Bam- 
boo Curtains and a very large, conflict oriented research 
establishment. Nothing quite like this has existed before, 
and it can be the key to eventual Soviet victory. It is well 
worth reviewing. 

Lenin and his successors are above all specialists in 
power. They have studied and mastered the many methods 
and means by which a small elite can acquire and maintain 
power in all its forms. From the beginning Lenin recognized 
that many avenues lead to revolution and that revolution is a 
complex and serious business requiring the services of highly 
trained professionals. 

In his first important book. What Is to Be Done ? (1902), 
Lenin accused his fellow Social Democrats of being amateurs 
using primitive methods of political conflict. If the revolu- 
tion was to succeed, Lenin argued, it must be lead by t rained 
professional revolutionists who alone would be capable of 
"maintaining the energy, the stability and continuity of the 
political struggle," who alone would be capable of traveling 
all roads that lead to revolution and "guiding the whole pro- 
letarian struggle." (Emphasis Lenin's). 

The most imperative task was to train professional 
revolutionists. And in case anyone might conclude this was 
a quick or easy task Lenin warned, "professional revolu- 
tionists must be trained for years." And he added, "we are 
training ourselves, will train ourselves and we will be 
trained!" ^ 

1. Lenin. What Is to Be Done, Selected Works, Vol. 2, 
especially pp. 115-168. 



1192 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Lenin was tactically and strategically uninhibited. 
Much of his writing consists of critiques on the acquisition 
of power in which he excoriates his associates for their 
sometimes narrow approach to political struggle. He urged 
the mastering of all forms of struggle and complete tactical 
flexibility: 

"The revolutionary class must be able to master 
all forms or sides of social activity without ex- 
ception . . . (and) must be able to pass from one 
form to another in the quickest and most un- 
expected manner. 

"Everyone will agree that an army which does not 
train itself to wield all arms, all means and meth- 
ods of warfare that the enemy possesses or may 
possess is behaving in an unwise or even in a 
criminal manner. This applies to politics to a 
greater degree than it does to war. In politics it 
is harder to forecast what methods of warfare 
will be applied and be useful for us under certain 
future conditions. Unless we are able to master 
all means of warfare, we stand the risk of suffer- 
ing great and sometimes decisive defeat if the 
changes in the position of the other classes, which 
we cannot determine, will bring to the front forms 
of activity in which we are particularly weak. If, 
however, we are able to master all means of war- 
fare, we shall certainly be victorious, . . . But 
revolutionaries who are unable to combine illegal 
forms of struggle with every form of legal struggle 
are very poor revolutionaries . . . Only one thing 
is lacking to enable us to march forward more 
surely and more firmly to victory, namely, the full 
and completely thought out appreciation by all Com- 
munists in all countries of the necessity of display- 
ing the utmost flexibility in their tactics."^ (Em- 
phasis Lenin's). 

Where there were strong trade unions, as in Great 
Britain, Lenin sneered at sectarian comrades who employed 
the sterile and self defeating strategy of organizing narrow 
Communists unions rather than penetrating and manipula- 
ting the existing labor organizations. Where parliamentary 

2. Lenin, Left Wing Communism, An Infantile Disorder , Selected Works, 
Vol. 10, pp. 139, 140, 145. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1193 



forms of government were well established, he blasted 
comrades who boycotted the parliaments as hopelessly 
tainted bourgeois institutions and instructed them to form 
a combat party within the parliaments and exploit the ex- 
isting contraditions. He emphasized that Communists 
must be able to master the widest "revolutionary exper- 
ience ... a variety and rapidity of shifting forms in the 
movement -- legal and illegal, peaceful and stormy, open 
and underground, embracing small circles and large 
masses, parliamentary and terrorist ... a multiplicity ot 
forms, shades and methods of struggle, embracing all 
classes of modern society. "^ 

". . . it is our duty to carry on our preparatory 
work in such a manner as to be 'well shod on all 
four feet,' . . . We do not know and we cannot 
know which spark -- out of the innumerable sparks 
that are flying around in all countries as a result 
of the economic and political world crisis -- will 
kindle the conflagration, in the sense of specially 
rousing the masses, and we must, therefore, with 
the aid of our new. Communist principles, set to 
work and 'stir up' all, even the oldest, mustiest 
and seemingly hopeless spheres, for otherwise we 
shall not be able to cope with our tasks, we shall 
not be all- sided, we shall not be able to master all 
arms and we shall not be prepared for victory 
over the bourgeoisis. . . . "^ 

TRAINING 

Lenin meant what he said about training. Prior to 
1917 he established three political warfare training centers 
in Western Europe -- one on the Isle of Capri outside 
Naples, one at Bolognia, and one in a Parisian suburb.^ The 
graduates of these schools played an important role in un- 
dermining and weakening the Kerensky government. One 
cannot help being impressed by the ruthless yet sophisticated 
and professional way in which Lenin and his small but well 
trained group of Bolsheviks laid the ground work and created 
the organizational forms and the propaganda climate for the 
November seizure of power. Their skillful selection of 
slogans, the penetration and capture of key institutions, the 

3. Quoted by Frank S. Meyer in The Moulding of Communists, (1961), 
page 22. 

4. Left Wing Comnrmnism , Ibid., pp. 140-143. 

5. 1959 Senate hearings on the Freedom Academy Bill, page 81. . 



1194 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



manipulation of opponents from positions of power, the 
coordination of all methods, the expert timing, the flexi- 
bility in tactical approach. This was not the work of 
amateurs. It could only have been carried out by exper- 
ienced, well trained professional revolutionaries. 

Lenin and his successors looked upon world revolution 
as first of all a research, development and training problem. 
The strategy and tactics which had worked so well in Russia 
would have to be sophisticated and specialized for the quite 
different conditions in other countries ranging from back- 
ward, colonial societies to advanced industrialized nations. 
They would need indigenous cadres in all countries capable 
of carrying out a complex strategy, flexibility, yet with 
clearly understood direction and purpose. They would need 
to know all about the cultures, the areas of tension and con- 
flict, the decision making machinery and the points at which 
it could be influenced in each target nation. At the top they 
would need conflict managers capable of orchestrating the 
revolution at every level in every dimension. 

To train the leadership groups for worldwide revolu- 
tion, the Communists established several top level training 
centers at Moscow. The best known of these was the 
famous Lenin School (Lenin Institute of Political Warfare) 
which opened its doors in 1925, graduating its first class 
in 1928. The four thousand students came from many 
countries and were given an unusually intensive three year 
course designed to train them in all of the arts of a total 
power struggle. Guerrilla warfare, armed uprising, agita- 
tion and propaganda, legal and illegal methods, as well as 
advanced indoctrination in Marxism- Leninism, were all in 
the curriculum. 6 The importance attached to these schools 
can be seen in the list of lecturers which was a who's who 
of world Communism beginning with Stalin and including such 
leading party figures as Manuelsky, Bukarin, Molotov, 
Kuusinen, and even Trotsky before he was forced to flee. 

Another important school was the Sun-Yat Sen 



6. For a description of the training program at the Lenin School during 
this period, see Gitlow, The Whole of Their Lives , (1948), chapter 10, 
Schools for Revolution; statement of Joseph Z. Kornfeder, a graduate of 
the Lenin School, 1959 Senate hearings on the Freedom Academy Bill, pp. 
115-118; testimony of William Odell Nowell, another Lenin School graduate, 
before UnAmerican Activities Committee, Nov. 30, 1939, Vol. 2 of Com- 
mittee's hearings on HR 282, pp. 7020-7022. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1195 



University, sometimes called the Far Eastern University, 
which trained Communists from Asia including many of the 
present top leaders of the Chinese Communist Party. A 
third school, the Academy of Red Professors, which is now 
disbanded, had the special function of teaching the teachers 
and top theoreticians. 

Today the higher party school in Moscow conducts a 
three year training program for an estimated 1500 students, 
of whom about 900 are from outside the Soviet Bloc. This 
is only one of a number of upper level schools in the Soviet 
Union giving intensive training in political warfare. '^' 

Even during the darkest days of World War II, the 
Kremlin continued the large scale training of foreign Com- 
munists. A former member of the German CP, Wolfgang 
Leonhard, who was taken to Russia in 1935 by his Cona- 
munist parents, has given us a detailed and fascinating des- 
cription of a Comintern school operated at Ufa during 1942 
and 1943 for training young foreign Communists (mainly in 
the 18-25 age group though many older, more experienced 
Communists were included). The students came from 
France, Spain, Italy, Korea, and the various Balkan and 
Central European countries. This was originally a two 
year course. 

Below the top schools are a whole complex of inter- 
mediate and lower level schools. Prague has become a prin- 
cipal center for training Communists from Latin America 
and Africa. Daniel James, a leading authority on Com- 
niunism in Latin America, describes one of these Prague 
schools as follows: 

"The institute has an enrollment of 7 50 students 
* * * The great majority of them are Latin Ameri- 
cans, the rest Europeans. The purpose in having 
Communists from Latin America and Europe study 
together is to train them as teams. Upon gradu- 
ation, the Latin Americans return to their native 
countrie s and are later joined by European 

6(a). 1959 Senate hearings. Ibid., pp. 80-88. This testimony by Dr. 
Stefan Possony, given without notes, is perhaps the most complete listing of 
Soviet political warfare research and training centers available outside 
classified government files. 

7. Leonhard, Child of the Revolution , (1958), pp. 195-296. Also see pages 
462-471 for a description of the Karl Marx Academy in East Germany. 



1196 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



graduates, who may be former classmates. The 
latter are usually assigned to Iron Curtain diplo- 
matic or trade missions in Latin America -- 
hence the stress being laid by Communists every- 
where in Latin America upon establishing diplo- 
matic and trade relations with the Soviet sphere. 
(It is quite possible that the Iron Curtain envoys 
in Mexico who visited Guatemala were trained at 
Prague. ) 

"Subjects taught at the Institute for the Study of 
Latin American Relations include the history, 
culture, politics, law, and languages of the Latin 
American countries, all rendered from a Marxist 
viewpoint. Special attention is devoted to the 
theory and tactics of revolution, espionage, and 
sabotage. 

"The institute's primary aim, however, is not to 
turn out spies and saboteurs but experts at infiltrat- 
ing non- Communist organizations and institutions 
and at leading or influencing mass movements, in 
accordance with the general strategy of exploiting 
and channelizing the dominant trend in Latin Ameri- 
ca: Nationalism. The trainees are handpicked from 
Latin America's Communist Parties and their labor, 
intellectual, peace, and youth fronts. These facts 
underscore the significance of the increasing flow 
of Latin Americans to Communist centers in 
Europe; there is scarcely any doubt that a great 
many of themi find their way to Prague, 

There are reports of a school at Tashkent, Russia, train- 
ing Communists from the Islamic areas. 

Father de Jaegher, a Belgian missionary, who spent 
many years in or near Communist controlled areas of China 
prior to 1948, has given us a description of the s even levels 
of training schools from village to Moscow, in which the 
upper cadres of the Chinese CP were trained before they con- 
quered China. He describes the end distillate, the Moscow 
trained man: 

"These Chinese returned to China apparently un- 
changed outwardly, in so far as their physical 
appearance was concerned, except for their eyes. 



8. James, Red Design for the Americas. (1954), page 202. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1197 



whose expression reflected the transformation of 
the inner nrian. ... So complete was their alter- 
ation of self that they burned themselves out fast. 
Communists I knew admitted there were many 
deaths and losses among these men from tubercu- 
losis and heart disease, even though they ate well 
and lived on a higher, better scale than they would 
have as less privileged, non- Communist Chinese."^ 

Each Communist Party runs its own system of training 
schools. J. Edgar Hoover has given us this description of 
party schools in the U. S.: 

"Most people don't think of the Communist Party 
as an educational institution. Yet year after 
year the Party operates a school system of vast 
proportions: theory schools; orientation schools; 
specialized schools in current events, history, 
economics, social problems; schools in Party 
techniques: how to collect dues, recruit new mem- 
bers, serve as a club chairman, be a better pub- 
lic speaker; and, of course, schools on revolu- 
tionary tactics and procedure." 

In addition to the centers within the Soviet Bloc and 
within each party, there are important regional centers 
(usually secret) where cadres from several countries re- 
ceive months of schooling. One such center was accidently 
uncovered by the Argentine police on September 25, 1958. 

This particular school was located in a villa in a wood- 
ed rural area in the Province of Buenos Aires. The course 
was six months (divided into a two and four months course) 
and the 25 students, averaging about 30 years old, boarded 
at the school. In addition to Argentina there were students 
from Colombia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador. The 
teachers were leading figures in the Argentine CP and cer- 
tain mysterio us individuals known only by their party names. 

9. de Jaegher & Kuhn, The Enemy Within, (1952), pp. 165-169. 

10. For mention of the hundreds of schools run by the French CP, see 
Einaudi, Domenach and Garosci, Communism in Western Europe , pp. 94-95. 
For a helpful summary of Communist training schools, see The Moulding 

of Communists, Ibid. , chapter 9 and the footnotes. 

11. Hoover, Masters of Deceit . (1958), chapter 12. This is one quote 
from a more detailed description. 

12. Big Red School House. Time, October 13, 1958. 



1198 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



The students from outside Argentina included two 
lawyers, a university professor, a school teacher, an em- 
ployee of a farmer's association, a dressmaker, a tailor, 
two white collar workers, a chauffeur and a worker. 
Argentine students included two labor leaders, a fourth 
year law student, a journalist, an electrician, and three 
metal workers. This was obviously an important cadre 
school, since some of the students already held responsible 
party positions and the arrest records of others for Com- 
munist activities went back some years. 

The school was operated under conditions of extreme 
secrecy. Windows in the principal classroom were covered 
to prevent direct observation and the students were under 
strict security discipline. Of course, there was no mention 
of the school in the party press. The curriculum included 
the usual combination of theoretical indoctrination and 
practical organizational work, and was so intensive the stu- 
dents showed signs of fatigue. There was a substantial 
library ranging from the writings of Marx, Lenin and Stalin 
to pamphlets and books written by leading Latin American 
Communists dealing with practical political- organizational 
problems. 

Reports filtering out of Cuba indicate various types of 
political warfare schools have been established there and it 
is in the nature of things that Cuba will become (and probably 
already is) a major base for training cadres for all of Latin 
America. 

In addition to schools giving general training in Marx- 
ism-Leninism and revolutionary strategy and tactics, there 
are numerous specialist schools for training, among others, 
of organizers, agitation and propaganda experts, specialists 
in military questions and penetration of military forces, 
specialists in labor unions, race specialists and guerrilla- 
political specialists. ^^ There are also specialists schools 
for specific regional groups. For example, there is (or 
was) a school for African labor leaders at Warsaw; while 
from 19 53 to 1955 another school for Latin American labor 
leaders was operated at Budapest. ^^ 

As to length of training, in general district (roughly 

13. 1959 Senate Hearings, Ibid., page 81. 

14. Testimony C. P. Cabell to Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, 
November 5, 1959. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1199 



State) level schools run one to three months; national level 
schools six months to a year; international courses two to 
three years. Thus, upper level cadre have often received 
four or more years of actual schooling in addition to the 
continuing training which is part of every party unit. 

In preparation for the intensified drive into Latin Amer- 
ica and Africa the training of cadres from these areas was 
significantly increased in 1956 and in tliat year Red China be- 
gan operating its own training system for Latin Americans. 
On November 5, 1959, General Cabell, deputy director of 
CIA, gave this important testimony before the Senate Inter- 
nal Security Subcommittee: 

"The training of Latin American Communist 
Party leaders at the higher party school of the 
Communist Party of the Soviet Union has been 
going on continuously since 1953, with an in- 
crease noted since 1956. 

"The usual curriculum is based on a 2- or 3-year 
course of training, and the students are active 
party leaders and functionaries who have been 
selected by their parties and approved by the Com- 
munist Party of the Soviet Union, 
"it is probable that most of the Latin American 
Communist Parties now have a number of leaders 
who have received this special training. Beginning 
in 1956, the Communist Party of China also under- 
took to give training to Latin American Communist 
Party leaders. 

"They emphasize, among other subjects, the 
special contributions of the Chinese party in the 
field of clandestine work, agrarian reform and 
peasant affairs, guerrilla warfare, and the manip- 
ulation of the bourgeoisie and other elements in the 
'anti- imperialist struggle.' 

"Since 1956, there is evidence that the organization 
of such training has been improved, and that the 
Chinese Communist Party is now giving regular 
courses specifically for Latin American Communist 
students, thereby paralleling the Soviet effort. 

ijli illi :tf * * 

"Chinese Communist revolutionary instruction is 
well received by Latin American Communist students 
who find it practical and well suited to the conditions 



30-4711 O— 64— pt. 1— d8 



1200 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



in which they operate in Latin America. They 
especially appreciate the fact that the Chinese 
Communists pay even their travel expenses. 
"In February and March of 1959, Latin American 
Communist representatives received specific ad- 
vice and guidance from Mao Tze-tung and other 
leading Chinese Communists concerning inter- 
national Connmunist policy and effective methods 
of carrying on clandestine activities. " 

Since all party schools are modeled after the higher 
schools in Russia, the training materials and methods used 
in Prague, Buenos Aires, New York, or New Delhi, depend- 
ing on the level of instruction, are almost interchangeable, 
with the result the cadre, wherever they are, have a common 
understanding of theoretical and operational problems and a 
common methodology and can move in unison in carrying out 
generalized instructions in detail. This is of tremendous 
importance in global operations. 

Of course, schools are only one part of the process by 
which the cadre is moulded. Life in the party is a continuing 
and most intensive and practical education in political war- 
fare. Each party unit is itself a form of training school, with 
each member loaded with homework and engaged in a never 
ending stream of revolutionary action ranging from the organ- 
ization of street mobs to the most subtle forms of subversion. 

Indoctrination in Marxism- Leninism never ceases, but 
becomes more intensive as the party member rises in the 
cadre. Indoctrination serves the double purpose of insulating 
the party member from non-party influence and ridding him 
of any trace of bourgeois mentality in conflict with the 
world- view of Marxism- Leninism, while providing a con- 
stant guideline to political action. The Communist, at the 
cadre level, is always oriented. 

Marxism- Leninism may be a straight jacket for a 
Soviet artist or writer, but it encourages initiative and im- 
agination at the tactical level of political warfare. The Com- 
munist must submit to an iron discipline, but he must also 
display imagination, initiative and flexibility in implement- 
ing the party line, 

Reading the biographies of former Communists, one 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1201 

is struck by the variety of party work entrusted to them. 
It is plain the party makes a serious effort to expose its 
developing cadre to the widest range of revolutionary action 
so they can master all arms. In the Soviet Union it is com- 
mon in recent years to assign future conflict managers to 
serve successively in the KGB, the Army, the AGITPROP 
and the foreign service. Within these organizations he 
obtains a broad and rich experience in political warfare in- 
volving operational methods and organizational forms which, 
taken together, exploit every type of conflict situation at 
every level. 

The nature of party training causes the party member 
to politicalize everything. To him a non-political event is 
unheard of. Everything that happens has relevance in terms 
of the global struggle. This constant seeking out of the 
political significance in events makes the Communist aware 
of political meaning and suggests lines of revolutionary 
action which would escape the uninitiated. To the Communist 
"all social or human activity is understandable and from the 
Marxist- Leninist viewpoint manipuable. " 

Frank S. Meyer describes this remarkable concentra- 
tion on control thus: 

". . , meaning and reality are drained out of all 
aspects of life not concerned with control. En- 
joyment, the satisfaction of curiosity, meditation, 
intellectual achievement, art, and certainly all 
spiritual awareness are empty except insofar as 
they derive a secondary meaning, positive or 
negative, from the essential reality of human ex- 
istence regarded as control of the universe. 
"This subsuming of all the complexities of life 
under the single rubric of action directed towards 
control is so complete that it becomes in time an 
invisible and unrecognized condition of existence. 
... If something happens in China or in Bulgaria, 
in England or in Venezuela, in New York or 
Chicago, in his own section of the city or another 
section, he must immediately have an attitude to- 
wards it, and not merely an informed attitude or 
one of judgment. Like a fireman sleeping next to 
an alarm bell, all his faculties must be stimulated 
into action. What should be done? Is there anything 



1202 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

in this situation which, in his organization, his 
trade union, his neighborhood, he can do? This 
is the way a Communist must learn to react at 
all times."^^ 

'This passion to politicalize everything and to turn all 
human activity to the party's advantage has led to the work- 
ing out of the many organizational possibilities inherent in 
a global power struggle so that every increment of power 
can be squeezed out of every developing situation. One of 
the best books on Communist strategy and tactics is called, 
" The Organizational Weapon ." ^° The developed cadre Com- 
munist is above all else an organizer in the fullest sense of 
the word, keenly aware of all the organizational forms and 
devices by which he can openly or secretly control and ma- 
nipulate his fellowmen. Dual power tactics, the united front 
from above or below, the power caucus, the front organiza- 
tion itself are some more common reminders of the advanced 
state of the party's organizational- operational art. Today 
the party and the Soviet underground are skillfully deployed 
throughout the fabric of each nation to make the best use of 
the organizational weapon in agitation and propaganda, sub- 
version, policy misdirection, disintegration and demorali- 
zation tactics and para-military methods, all carefully 
coordinated with Soviet global strategy. To a remarkable 
degree student organizations, labor unions, peasant leagues, 
intellectual elites, newspapers, and institutions and organi- 
zations of every description in Latin America, Asia and 
elsewhere have been penetrated and manipulated. 

The matured member of the cadre is a completely 
committed individual immersed in the intricacies of the 
struggle for power. He is dedicated to an extent which is 
difficult for the non-member to comprehend. While the rank 
and file in uncounted thousands have been in and out of the 
party, only a handful of the matured cadre have defected. 
Frank S. Meyer states: 

"in the American Party I do not know of a score 
of cadre Communists who have broken within the 
last twenty years and this despite the serious crises 
which b eset it in 1945 and 1956. It seems to require 

15. The Moulding of Communists . Ibid., pp. 38, 39. 

16. Philip Selznick. The Organizational Weapon , a RAND study (19 52). 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1203 

a most unusual set of circumstances to penetrate 
the powerful defenses of the Communist person- 
ality at this level of development,"^^ 

There may be many time servers within party ranks 
in the Soviet Union, Poland and Hungary, where many have 
joined the party for opportunist reasons, or have become 
disillusioned by over exposure to Utopia, but within the 
Free World, the party by and large, has been able to sus- 
tain the driving force and elan of its cadre. 

Schools must be seen in relation to the whole process 
bj^ which the cadre is developed. They are, as Meyer points 
out, forcing beds where under conditions of great pressure 
students are raised to higher levels of sophistication and 
Communist consciousness in prejjaration for more important 
positions. As such they are essential to the full development 
of the cadre. 

R ESEARCH 

Soviet research relevant to political warfare can be 
roughly divided into two parts. The first deals with know- 
ledge that has direct application to the organizational- opera- 
tional techniques of non-military conflict. The second con- 
sists of more general research aimed at interpreting all 
knowledge from a Marxist- Leninist viewpoint. Both are im- 
portant to political warfare. 

Published information about the Soviet research effort, 
especially the first part, like the reports on their training 
establishment, is scattered and inadequate. However, what 
there is strongly indicates the Soviets have engaged in the 
greatest concentrated research program with a predeter- 
mined objective in all history. That objective is to discover, 
develop and systematize all knowledge obtainable from his- 
tory, the sciences and social sciences and from the operation- 
al experience of the party, which may be useful in expanding 
the spheres of Communist influence and control. 

This unprecedented research effort apparently got 
underway on a large scale in the early twenties. Joseph Z. 
Kornfeder, who attended the Lenin School from 1928 to 1931, 
states by that time there was already a central library in 

17. The Moulding of Communists, Ibid., page 156. 



1204 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Moscow serving the various training and research centers 
comparable in size to our Congressional Library, but un- 
like the Congressional Library, stressing materials use- 
ful for political warfare purposes, ^^ Even assuming 
Kornfeder's comparison was overdrawn, it still shows a 
remarkable effort by the Soviet government during a 
period of extreme dislocation and hardship. 

As part of their program an exhaustive analysis has 
been made of various revolutionary movements and conflict 
situations, past and present, to determine their dynamics, 
the correct and incorrect use of various tactics under vary- 
ing conditions, and so forth. This has undoubtedly produced 
a wealth of operator usable knowledge enabling the Soviets 
to respond quickly and consistently to a variety of chsuiging 
conflict situations. 

Certain of the sciences which the West seldom con- 
siders from the viewpoint of political warfare have been sys- 
tematicEilly explored. 

Cases in point are physiology and psychology. At the 
time of the November counterrevolution, Ivan Pavlov, the 
great Russian physiologist, was 68 years old. For many 
years he had been engaged in basic research on the conditioned 
reflex in animials. Communist leaders, Lenin in particular, 
saw possibilities. If the repetitious use of scientifically con- 
tolled external stimuli could so condition the brain and nerv- 
ous system as to produce a predetermined reaction, this 
might open unlimited horizons to Soviet propaganda -- both 
for external conflict and internal control of the Russian 
people, including shaping of the "New Soviet Man." 

Pavlov was not a Communist, and prior to the Revolu- 
tion there is no indication he anticipated his findings would 
be turned against the human mind. Soviet leaders did not 
permit Pavlov's known reservations about Communism to 
stand in their way. They built extensive laboratories and the 
equivalent of a college town in Pavlov's home village of 
Koltusky twenty miles from Leningrad, and Pavlov was in- 
stalled in a villa. His experiments received extraordinary 
support. The extent to which these politico-medical labora- 
tories have assisted Soviet conflict managers in working out 
the techniques of creating neu^^oses and special behavior in 

18. 1959 Senate hearings. Ibid., page 114. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1205 



target individuals, elites, or entire nations may be the sub- 
ject of differences among experts. The point to note is not 
the success or failure of this particular research effort. 
Rather, it is the consuming interest of the Soviet government 
in any area of the sciences or social sciences which shows 
pronnise of contributing to their revolutionary expertise and 
the all out effort to master this knowledge. The continuing 
popularity of Pavlov in Russia and China, and an objective 
study of the available evidence, indicates the conditioned re- 
flex, as well as a whole array of theories and techniques 
from physiology and psychology, have become important tools 
in Communist external political warfare and internal manipu- 
lation and control of the Russian people. 

These many tools, as well as special techniques from 
other areas of the behavioral sciences, together with the cu- 
mulative experience of the Party, have been used to work out 
a total form of psychological warfare which is so far beyond 
what has been attempted by our side that the very term has 
quite a different meaning to Soviet leaders and our people. 
While American efforts are limited and affect only a small 
segment of the human psyche, the Soviets attempt a total psy- 
chological impact and their objectives for external conflict 
include: 

". . . the creation in the ruling, upper and in- 
tellectual classes of non- Communist societies 
of frustration, confusion, pessimism, guilt, fear, 
defeatism, hopelessness, and neurosis (in short 
the psychological destruction of ant i- Communist 
leadership); the splitting of non- Communist soci- 
eties into many competing and mutually hostile 
groups and the sapping of the spirit of loyalty, com- 
munity, mutual helpfulness, positive expectation, 
and willingness to take risks and to act; the creation 
and stimulation of an all prevading sense of fear and 
anxiety whether it be fastened onto the dangers of 
nuclear war, or physical terror, or professional, 
social and human ruin; the semantic domination 
of intellectual, emotional and socio-political life, 
as well as the semantic control of all political argu- 
ments; the capture of the time dimension in th§ 
sense that an expectation of cataclysm and no- 
progress under 'capitalism' is established and 
paried with the affirmed expectation that the future 



1206 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



belongs to Communism; the promise of relief 
from all troubles by means of an infallible, as 
well as inevitable solution; the weakening and 
destruction of national consciences in the Free 
World and the inculcation of bad conscience about 
firm opposition to Communism and the ideals 
usurped and distorted by it." 19 

There are a number of institutions in the Soviet Union 
with names that give them a surface similarity to like 
named institutions in this country. However, the raison 
d'etre for the Soviet institutions is the exploration of areas 
for knowledge that have significance in terms of revolu- 
tionary action. Thus, their Institute of World Economics 
had the function of analyzing economic situations in other 
countries to determine how economic difficulties might be 
exploited for the benefit of the Communist movement. The 
newly formed (1956) Academy of Social Sciences has im- 
pressed the social sciences, especially the behavioral 
sciences, into the service of political warfare. The import- 
ant Academy of Sciences which operates directly under the 
Council of Ministers is devoting a significant part of its 
efforts to political warfare. ^ 

Beginning in 1956 the Soviets made new efforts to co- 
ordinate and intensify their research attuned to the needs of 
political warfare. A case in point is Africa. Dr. William 
R. Kintner of the Foreign Policy Research Institute of the 
University of Pennsylvania, in a forthcoming book calls our 
attention to the New Council for Coordination of Scientific 
Work on Africa: 

"The new and more sophisticated efforts being 
made in the direction of improving Soviet plans 
and programis for influencing and penetrating 
foreign areas is the creation of the 'New Council 
for Coordination of Scientific Work on Africa. ' 
This relatively innocuous sounding title cannot 
hide its true purpose, for the first priority given 
members of this Council is to conduct 'profound 
and comprehensive study of the modern political 
and economic problems of the African continent.' 

19. Communist Psychological Warfare , Orbis, Vol. I. Reprinted as an 
appendix to Protracted Conflict, Strausz-Hupe, et al, (1959). This i§ an 
excellent description of Soviet uses of psychology in their political warfare. 

20. 1959 Senate hearings. Ibid., pp. 85, 86. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1207 

This is further specified as the study of 'socio- 
economic processes in the emergency of new 
social forces opposing colonialism in Africa, dis- 
integration of the colonial system of imperialism, 
the national liberation struggle of enslaved peoples, 
the workers and peasants movement in African 
countries, (and) contradictions between imperial 
powers.' Nothing could, of course, be more 
explicit in restating the familiar and precise 
Communist objectives in Africa. 
"It may be conjectured that the Council on Africa 
will be followed by similar new coordinating 
organizations to assist Soviet policymakers and 
plEuiners in programming Soviet propaganda and 
infiltration of other areas, such as Latin America, 
the Middle East and the Far East." ^1 

Two years ago General C. P. Cabell in a little noticed 
speech gave some of the details about Soviet research and 
training programs preparing the way for penetration of 
Africa: 

"The Soviet Union is clearly preparing for action 
in Africa. Since 1950, considerable study and re- 
search has been underway in various academies 
and institutes of the Soviet Union and bloc countries. 
An increasing number of publicized studies on Africa, 
some of real scientific value, have been forthcoming 
from Soviet Government study programs. Intro- 
duction of a wide range of university courses and the 
stepped- up preparation of instructors in African 
subjects have been underway at Moscow, Leningrad, 
and Prague universities. Language training in such 
languages as Youraba, Congo, and Luba, has be- 
come a fixed part of the curriculum. The aim is 
clearly to create a nucleus of Soviet experts on 
Africa and to equip Communist engineers and 
scientists with the necessary knowledge for work 
in Africa. Standard among such training is in- 
cluded the techniaues and methods of propaganda 
and sub version." ^^ 

21. William R. Kintner with Joseph Kornfeder, The New Frontier of War, 
(1962), chapter X. Tentatively scheduled for publication in June, this book 
contains probably the best description of Soviet political warfare to date. 

It also breaks new ground in terms of countermeasures. 

22. Speech of C. P. Cabell to the National Guard Association, November 

8, 1959. 



1208 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Communists being Communists, the central purpose 
of all area studies is, of course, political. Area know- 
ledge -- economic, historical, social is important to the 
extent it can be attuned to the needs of the Communists all 
encompassing concept of political warfare. We can be sure 
that Soviet study of African tribal lore is for the purpose of 
adjusting their agitation and propaganda to the local psycho- 
social terrain. Further, the Soviets seek to dominate many 
of the sciences and social sciences, and interpret them 
from a Marxist- Leninist viewpoint to impress Afro- Asian 
elites and so create a favorable propaganda climate. The 
factor to remember is that Communist scientists and 
academicians are sensitive to the needs of political warfare, 
are frequently reminded of the ultimate political purpose of 
their work, and the areas of concentration are the ones 
most likely to yield relevant results. 

Alvin Z. Rubinstein has given us an appraisal of the 
Soviet effort in Asian studies and their essential political 
purpose in his article on the Twenty-fifth International Con- 
gress of Orientalists held at Moscow in I960: 

"Behind this comprehensive program of scholar- 
ship lies an ambitious political objective: the 
interpretation and dissemination of all knowledge 
-- whether in the natural sciences, the arts, or 
the social sciences -- from a Marxist- Leninist 
perspective, with the aim of gaining acceptance 
for these views among non- Western nationalist 
elites. No subject is regarded by Moscow as too 
obscure or as too peripheral for cultivation and 
research as it strives to become the recognized 
cultural-ideological mentor of the underdeveloped 
countries. Moscow has undertaken, in addition to 
the traditional instruments of diplomacy and the 
manipulation of compliant international communist 
movements, a vast, well-financed and multi- 
faceted program designed to project a favorable 
image of the Soviet Union and its achievements, 
and to gain the ideological allegiance of the 
educated elites of Afro- Asia. Its commitment to 
these ends is total." ^^ 

1956 also marked the year when Soviet scientists and 



23. ScholarshiD & Cold War in Moscow. Orbis, Vol. IV, Winter 1961, 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1209 



academicians were given a relative new freedom and in 
which Soviet mathematicians, physiologists, psychologists, 
economists and engineers officially and ardently embraced 
the new science of cybernetics (the science of control in 
nnan, machine and society) which had previously been 
denounced as a capitalist device. Cybernetics has now 
been declared in harmony with dialectical materialism and 
it appears the Soviets believe they have found a new scien- 
tific rational for the moss-covered old dogmas. 

This interest in cybernetics also evidences the strong 
trend to Leninist flexibility in strategy and tactics and in- 
dicates Khrushchev will use the nmost advanced methods his 
scientists and social scientists can devise in programming 
his infiltration of the Free World. 25 xhis is further under- 
lined by the New Draft Program of the Communist Party, 
"submitted" to the 22nd Party Congress, which refers to 
the Social Sciences by name and emphasizes, in only 
slightly veiled language, their political warfare goal: 

"There must be intensive development of re- 
search work in the Social Sciences which con- 
stitute the scientific basis for the guidance of 
the developnnent of society . . . The investiga- 
tion of the problems of world history and con- 
temporary world development must disclose 
the law-governed process of mankind's advance 
toward Communism, the change in the balance 
of forces in favor of Socialism, the aggravation 
of the general crisis of capitalism, the break- 
up of the colonial system of imperialism and its 
consequences, and the upsurge of the national- 
liberation movement of the peoples. , . . The 
social sciences must continue to struggle with 
determination against bourgeois ideology. 



24. The New Frontier of War , Ibid. , chapter X. Cybernetics is mentioned 
by name in the New Draft Program, though only in relation to automation. 

25. Cybernetics, the so-called crossroads of the sciences, is so new and 
some of its theories so tentative and speculative that its applicability to 
political warfare is still unknown. The illustration is used solely to dem- 
onstrate the new freedom and felxibility in Soviet research --a flexibility 
and imagination which we can assume will be increasingly applied to their 
political warfare. For an example of Soviet interest in this new field, see 
The Human Element in Automation Systems , Oshanin & Panov, Soviet 
Survey, December, 1961. 



1210 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

against right Socialist theory and practice and 
against revisionism and dogmatism. They must 
uphold the purity of the principles of Marxism- 
Leninism." 26 

The alarming development for the future is Khrush- 
chev's obvious determination to make a massive, coordi- 
nated assault on those areas of the sciences and social 
sciences which can be of the greatest assistance to Soviet 
leaders in achieving world control. There is evidence of 
excellent long range planning. It is most significant that 
all of this is being directed at the highest levels by exper- 
ienced conflict managers who understand power in all of its 
dimensions and know the types of knowledge and trained per- 
sonnel they will need at each stage of their massive penetra- 
tion and manipulation of the non-Conamunist world. 

Further, Soviet research is no longer crippled by the 
narrow and extreme dogmatism of the latter Stalin years. 
The already mentioned areas of physiology and psychology 
are illustrative. From 1950 to 1953 Stalin dictated an ex- 
treme neo- Pavlovian party line for Soviet psychology in 
which man was viewed as a hollow shell without spontaneity 
or inner sources of activity, whose character and conduct 
are determined solely by the reflex mechanism which the 
state could completely control through indoctrination and pro- 
paganda. Under Khrushchev this extreme position has been 
revised. Soviet psychologists now admit the existence of a 
subjective psyche and there is increasing recognition that 
propaganda can't do everything. ' Pavlov and the conditioned 
reflex continue to hold a place of honor, but psychologists 
are now showing deep interest in the new and sophisticated 
theories of cybernetics (which seem to tie in nicely with some 
of Pavlov's findings). 

It IS sometimes asserted that philosophy, psychology, 
the social sciences, history, etc. in the Soviet Union have 
made few important discoveries because of limitations on 
freedom of inquiry and freedom of thought, or that there is 
no such thing as sociology, social psychology, philosophy, 
political science as we understand these disciplines in the 

26. Reprinted under title, Khrushchev's Mein Kampf , Belmont Books, 
page 164. 

27. Robert C. Tucker, Stalin and the Uses of Psychology, World Politics, 
Vol. vm. No. 4, (July, 1956). 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1 2 1 1 



West. From the viewpoint of Western academicians, 
there is considerable truth in these assertions. The point, 
however, is that Communists being primarily concerned 
with power and control and already possessing the dialectic, 
have a different criteria for their research. Research, as 
Cantril points out, is given practical tasks that can assist 
the leadership in achieving predetermined Communist ob- 
jectives and all research is judged in the final analysis 
according to its contribution toward achieving the final goals 
of Marxism- Leninisnn. The absence of important new con' 
tributions (in Western eyes) to the social sciences in 
published reports does not mean their social scientists have 
not made significant progress on the practical, politically 
oriented tasks assigned by the leadership. 

Further, the difficulties being encountered in develop- 
ing the New Soviet Man and in obtaining not merely passive 
acceptance of ideology but enthusiasm among the masses and 
the questions thereby raised as to the ability of the Soviets 
to achieve their internal indoctrination goals, does not mean 
their organizational- operational theories and methods for 
external conflict are incorrect or faltering (i.e. young Soviet 
social scientists may be chafing under the restraints of dia- 
lectical materialism, but Communist guerrillas in Viet Nam 
are displaying a fanatical devotion to duty). 

The elimination of the last "vestiges of capitalism" 
from the attitudes of Soviet citizehs by methods which pre- 
sume that all human behavior is determined by controllable 
social- economic factors calls for one system of techniques 
which may prove grossly inadequate. The splintering and 
manipulation of Afro-Asian and Western societies by Marxist- 
Leninist methods calls for a different system of techniques 
which are proving quite adequate. 

The validity of Marxism- Leninism in terms of the con- 
struction of a Communist society is one thing. The correct- 
ness of Marxism- Leninism as a conflict theory for the 
destruction of non- Communist power is quite another. The 
Soviet Union's heralded transition from Socialism to Com- 
munism may prove the flop of the century. In the meantime, 
Krushchev or his successors may complete the isolation of 
the United States and a few of its allies. 

28. Hadley Cantril. Soviet Leaders & Mastery Over Man .(1960), pp. 61, 102. 



1212 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

The systematic, cold blooded use of the sciences and 
social sciences for the purpose of world conquest is so for- 
eign to the traditions of American academic thought, we 
have been slow to grasp the nature of the Soviet research 
effort. There has been too much emphasis on why the 
Soviet system is failing or succeeding internally and en- 
tirely too little emphasis on their development of the 
methods and means of total political war. 

CONCLUSIO N 

The long range Soviet research, development and 
training program beginning with Lenin's three small schools, 
together with many decades of revolutionary experience, has 
given the Communists three advantages which they believe 
are decisive: 

First, at the top are a group of superbly prepared con- 
flict managers with years of intense schooling and operator 
experience in every phase of power acquisition. They are 
conductors who understand all instruments and can orches- 
trate the cold war in all of its dimensions. Subversion, 
propaganda, blacknnail, guerrilla warfare, culture, trade 
and diplomacy, as well as hot war, are tools to be integrated 
in carefully calibrated aggression. Their first hand operator 
experience, extending over decades, ranges from the tech- 
niques of penetrating and capturing a labor union, or turning 
a student riot into a march on the nearest USIA library, to 
the sophisticated techniques of programming the multitude of 
devices which can shape and manipulate the revolutionary 
forces at work on an entire continent. True professionals, 
they can respond quickly and consistently to the unanticipated 
in a fluid world conflict where a variety of revolutionary 
forces are at work. They have a developed conceptional 
framework for political warfare and the long view of strategy 
which enables them to program research over decades and 
then to utilize quickly the output of this conflict oriented 
effort. They know that many roads lead to revolution and 
they can dominate developing situations by flexible tactics 
and inflexible purpose. Most important they have fixed ob- 
jectives, ultimate and intermediate, which are clearly under- 
stood. They are the end product of Lenin' s command that the 
cadre master all arms, be all- sided. 

Second, Soviet conflict managers can implement a 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1213 



a thousand pronged aggression, because below them are the 
trained, professional cadres of the party deployed in each 
target area. The cadre, wherever it is, shares a common 
theoretical background and a common fund of operational 
knowledge enabling it to respond in unison to general in- 
structions from above. Experienced in all forms of politi- 
cal warfare, they are showing exceptional initiative, im- 
agination and finesse in implementing their instructions 
and are combining and coordinating a variety of organiza- 
tional devices and operational techniques which exploit the 
full range of possibilities at each level. Sharpened and dis- 
ciplined by years of struggle and intense schooling, they 
are the ideal instrument to implement Soviet indirect ag- 
gression. 

Third , because Soviet research has had a clearly un- 
derstood political goal and has been systematically organized 
to attain this goal, the Soviets have accumulated a huge fund 
of knowledge attuned to the special needs of their global 
operations. The better coordinated and more intensive pro- 
gram beginning in 1956 promises even greater dividends. 

The Soviets are winning the cold war precisely be- 
cause Lenin understood sixty years ago that political warfare 
is an incredibly complex and difficult art and science and as 
such should be conducted by highly trained professionals -- 
and then acted on this belief by inaugurating a comprehensive 
training and research program which systematically created 
capacity for total political war. 

The large scale training of foreign cadres, which be- 
gan forty years ago and has been accelerating ever since, 
has created a global cadre sufficient in number and know- 
how to carry out any combination of strategy and tactics the 
Kremlin may dictate. This makes possible an orchestration 
in which a guerrilla- political struggle in Indo- China is sup- 
ported by systematic sabotage of war material shipped from 
France, defeatism systematically spread in French news- 
papers, TV, radio and within the parliament, and even the 
cruel undermining of fighting morale by the stoning of hospital 
trains returning French wounded to their home towns. ^^ In 
Latin America it makes possible the simultaneous organizing 
of guerrilla warfare in the Andes, the take over of student 
o rganizations in almost every university, the large scale 

29. Bernard F. Fall, Street Without Joy , (1961), page 237. 



1214 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



organizing of peasant leagues in the northeastern provinces 
of Brazil, the deep penetration of the state government of 
Rio Grande do Sul, the infiltration of arnny units in Peru, 
the preparation and systematic distribution of hundreds of 
party line newspapers and periodicals, the winning of a 
free election in British Guiana, the winning with the 
Peronistas of an election in Argentina, the manipulation of 
a sizable segment of intellectuals, the systematic intimida- 
tion and isolation of anti- Communists, the capture of major 
segments of organized labor, the near frustration of parlia- 
mentary government in country after country, and finally the 
partial neutralization of tjie OAS itself by the combined 
effect of all these methods and means. 

This flexibility of the global cadre, this highly developed 
capacity to use all arms like the trained professionals they 
are, gives the Soviets an incalculable advantage. It enables 
Soviet leaders to approach their strategic objectives, not 
down a few well worn avenues, but from every point of the 
compass using a whole network of crisscrossing superhigh- 
ways, roads, trails and footpaths, all leading directly or cir- 
cuitously to the final objective. With stunning rapidity they 
can shift from one form of attack to another. 

Without the global cadre, the range of methods and 
means available to Soviet leadership for indirect aggression 
would be comparatively narrow, and conversely, if Soviet /let 
leaders were not developed conflict managers,, they could not 
fully utilize and orchestrate the wide range of non-military 
weapons and weapons systems which the experience and train- 
ing of the global cadre makes possible. 

The New Draft Program is above all an arrogantly 
confident statement of Khrushchev's belief that the Commu- 
nists can complete the isolation of the U. S. without big hot 
war. In assessing Khrushchev's chances, we must keep in 
mind the Communists have captured nearly a billion people 
during a period when their sphere was markedly inferior in 
industry, technology, science and overall military capa- 
bilities --in fact, inferior in almost everything except power 
seeking know-how. 

The great push forward seeking domination of the 
-naturall sciences, the burgeoning of Soviet technology and 
industry, the training of engineers and technicians in 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1215 



numbers far beyond internal needs, the great increase in 
language training, the rising standard of living -- all of this 
also has a tremendous impact on political warfare capabilities. 

It is no longer a case of the cadre aggravating the 
crisis of capitalism almost exclusively through superior agi- 
tation, propaganda, subversion, guerrilla warfare and organ- 
izational technique. The existing methods may now be 
heavily reinforced by large scale economic warfare and ex- 
port of Soviet science and technology, by the Soviet Union 
becoming a Mecca for Afro- Asian and Latin American 
students and scientists, by greatly expanded aid and cultural 
programs -- all carefully calibrated with the existing methods 
and all further reinforced by the impression that Communism 
is succeeding in the Soviet Union and that Marxism- Leninism 
can do the same for other underdeveloped nations. 

At the same time the Communists are demonstrating 
an increasing sophistication and flexibility in the use of the 
older methods. 

The most disturbing aspect of the New Draft Program 
is the decision of Khrushchev to out Lenin Lenin in the flexi- 
bility and range of methods and means he will use against us. 
This is especially evident in Part 1, chapter 5, The Inter- 
national Revolutionary Movement of the Working Class.^^ 
Confident we will not risk a major military reposte, he is 
pulling out all of the stops on the Communist organizational 
weapon. The Party Program brags, "The great objectives 
of the working class can be realized without world war. To- 
day the conditions for this are more favorable than ever." 

And in a paraphrase of Lenin's, " Left-wing Communism " 
it instructs the cadre: 

"The success of the struggle which the working 
class wages for the victory of the revolution will 
depend on how well the working class and its 
party master the use of all forms of struggle -- 
peaceful and non- peaceful, parliamentary and 
extra -parliamentary -- and how well they are 



30. The New Frontier of War , Ibid., chapter 10. 

31. Khrushchev's Mein Kampf, Ibid., pp. 63-73. 



30-471 o— 64^pt. 1 ao 



1216 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



prepared to replace one form of struggle by 
another as quickly and unexpectedly as possible." ^^ 

The clearest statement of the Soviet blueprint for 
world domination is contained in Khrushchev's speech of 
January 6, 1961, to a combined meeting of the Higher Party 
School, the Academy of Social Sciences and the Institute of 
Marxism- L&ninism. This is an affirmation of Khrushchev's 
belief that the Communist Bloc's superiority in political war- 
fare, combined with their rapid scientific, technological, 
industrial expansion, assures Communist victory. This 
speech is so frank, for example in its cynical definition of 
peaceful coexistence, its release was an expression of Com- 
munist contempt for our countercapabilities in non- military 
conflict. To add insult, English translations were delivered 
to the press in Moscow on January 17, 1961. In effect 
Khrushchev was saying -- look you decadent bourgeoisie, this 
is what we are going to do to you and you are incapable of 
developing a successful defense or offense. Our continuing 
neglect of non-military conflict, as will be developed in 
Part II, makes Khrushchev's contemptuous estimate seem, 
dangerously cJose to reality. 

A third of the world is being systematically organized 
for conquest of the remainder. It seems clear, in the words 
of the Senate Committee report, that "the traditional methods 
of the past which could only partially contain a weak Soviet 
will have to be revised," 

32. Khrushchev's Mein Kampf, Ibid., page 69. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1217 



PART n 

THE LIMITED NATURE OF THE U. S. RESEARCH 
AND TRAINING PROGRAM IN NON- MILITARY CON- 
FLICT -- THE FIVE REQUIREMENTS AND OUR 
FAILURE TO MEET THEM. 

The very great capabilities of the Communist enter- 
prise in political warfare makes our problems of defense 
and offense extremely difficult. The more or less conven- 
tional methods of diplontiacy, economic and military aid, 
student and cultural exchange, the limited informational 
activities of USIA, together with certain covert intelligence 
operations and limited efforts by private organizations, are 
proving inadequate, as presently formulated and implemented, 
to contain, much less defeat, Soviet indirect aggression. Un- 
doubtedly some of the things we are doing are causing the 
Soviets more difficulty than is generally realized, but over- 
all the existing methods and means, as they have been em- 
ployed since the end of World War h;, have only succeeded in 
slowing the Soviet push. 

Again and again our methods have proven inadequate, 
because the enemy has mastered all arms and is employing 
an extraordinary variety of conflict instruments which en- 
ables him to outflank, envelop or smother the more limited 
and hesitatingly applied instruments of our policy. Thus 
an aid program, even when well conceived, may achieve 
nothing toward improving the economic or political conditions 
in the recipient nation, if it is more than offset by Com- 
munist economic sabotage and superior agitation and propa- 
ganda capabilities, A USIA library in India is simply over- 
whelmed by a Soviet translation and publication effort which 
distributes millions of books and periodicals each year in 
many tongues and dialects, the large scale buying up of pub- 
lishing houses and intimidation of book stores, the massive 
penetration and manipulation of the mass communications 
system -- and it hardly 'competes at all with trained Com- 
munist organizers operating in universities, unions, peasant 
villages, classrooms and various fronts. 

The rapidly expanding Soviet capacity in non- military 
conflict and the dangerous developments beginning in 1956, 
now confirmed by the New Draft Program, make it impera- 
tive for the U. S. and its allies to develop, and rapidly, a 



1218 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



far greater capacity in the area of non-military conflict. 

The question is -- what are the conditions, •'•the require- 
ments, which must be met before this nation can realize'its 
full capacity to engage in the type of global struggle which 
has been forced upon us? It is rather remarkable that with 
all that has been written and said about the. cold war, so little 
thought has been devoted to thinking through these require- 
ments and how best we can meet them. 

Only by understanding these requirements and the wide 
margin by which we have failed to realize them, can the 
present legislation be understood. Most of our failures to 
date can be traced to our central failure to take the necessary 
organizational measures to meet these needs systematically. 

It is submitted the principal requirements are as follows: 

REQUIREMENT NO. 1 : At the upper levels of govern- 
ment we must have conflict managers on our side who under- 
stand the full range of methods and means by which this 
nation and its allies can meet the entire Communist attack 
and work toward our global objectives systematically. This 
means they will have to master a broad range of non^military 
measures which have yet to be thought through and system - 
atized. It means they must be able to organize and orches- 
trate these measures in an integrated strategy in which our 
national objectives are approached from many directions, 
using every promising nneans in accord with our ethic. 

REQUIREMENT No. 2 : Below these conflict managers, 
agency personnel must be trained to understand and imple- 
ment this integrated strategy in all of its dimensions. Un- 
less these people share a substantial common fund of know- 
ledge about the nature of the enemy, the global conflict, and 
the vast array of positive and negative measures potentially 
available to us, there cannot be the close team play necessary 
to carry out a complex strategy with vigor and elan against a 
skilled and dedicated enemy. 

REQUIREMENT No. 3 : (Implicit in above, but listed 
separately to facilitate subsequent analysis.) Policy makers 
and cold war personnel at many levels must understand Com- 
munism, with special emphasis uu Communist conflict tech- 
nique. It is not enough to have experts available for 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1219 



consultation. This is basic "battle knowledge" which must 
be widely disseminated in the agencies, if planning and im- 
plementation are to be geared to the conflict we are in. 

REQUIREMENT No. 4 : The public must have greater 
understanding of Communism, especially Communist con- 
flict technique, and the nature of the global struggle. This 
is necessary to maintain the will to victory and to overcome 
apathy in a long and tedious struggle. It is necessary if the 
public is to support wholeheartedly the difficult and often 
distasteful things we must do in the coming years. In a free 
society, policy, to be effective, must have support. A widen- 
ing fissure between public knowledge and policy can spell dis- 
aster. For defensive purposes alone this knowledge is essen- 
tial, if public opinion is not to be confused and manipulated by 
the deceptions and blandishments of skilled propagandists who 
understand us and our desire to be left alone too well. 

REQUIREMENT No. 5 : The private sector must know 
how it can participate in the global struggle in a sustained 
and systematic manner. There exists in the private sector 
a huge reservoir of talent, ingenuity and strength which can 
be developed and brought to bear in helping solve our cold 
war problems. A wide range of interrelated programs can 
be implemented, if certain preconditions are met. Whether 
these things are done or not done can be the difference be- 
tween victory and defeat in a close contest in which the enemy 
has mobilized his entire society to win the cold war, as well 
as to prepare for hot war. ^ 

It is submitted these requirements cannot be met with- 
out a large scale research and training program directed by 
exceptional men who have a clear understanding of these needs. 

Unfortunately, it is still being argued that existing 
research and training is adequate for our cold war needs, or 
can be made adequate with a little beefing-up. It is true that 
many things are being worked on wi.thin the government that 
the general public is not aware of, and that institutions like 
the War Colleges and the Foreign Service Institute have ad- 
justed their curriculums to some degree to meet new 
situations created by the Communist enterprise and the 
revolutionary forces at work in Afro- Asia and Latin America. 

1. There are other requirements, but the above are basic in fixing goals for 
our research and training program. Of course, we want our friends and 
allies to develop a similar capacity. 



1220 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



It is also true. that various Russian research centers and 
centers for international and area studies have been estab- 
lished at a number of universities since the end of World 
War II, and that the government has available to it certain 
research organizations like RAND. 

Yet, it is equally true that the existing programs 
have failed to achieve to a substantial degree any one of the 
above requirements. Further, I can find no evidence that 
anyone in govermnent has thought out the overall research 
and training prograir which would be necessary to fill sys- 
tematically and adequately these five fundamental require- 
ments, or if anyone has done so, that he was able to make 
any impression on his superiors. Rather, the research and 
training problem has been considered in bits and pieces and 
the programs instituted met bits and pieces of the problem. 
This should be self-evident, but there is a built-in ability 
within the agencies to resist these facts and the conclusions 
to be drawn. 

It seems it will be necessary to summarize the exist- 
ing programs in relation to these requirements before pro- 
ceeding to an examination of the Freedom Academy Bill. 
This will help define the nature of the gaps to be filled. 

For a starting point, take Requirement No. 3, the need 
for wide understanding of Communism and especially Com- 
munist conflict techiiique in the agencies. This is the most 
obvious and fundamental requirement and should have been 
recognized and systematically approached at least fifteen 
years ago. Yet, even today there is little evidence of a com- 
prehensive, organized effort to fill this need. 

Before reviewing the present programs in relation to 
this requirement, two points should be emphasized. First, 
Communism, especially Communist conflict technique, is not 
a quick and easy subject to learn. ^ It requires a considerable 

2. A minimum curriculum would have to include the historical development 
of Communism; the principal theoretical works of Marxism- Leninism, includ- 
ing Mao; the Communist Bloc from 1917 to the present. This would be back- 
ground. The most important part of the curriculum would be a study of Sdviet 
external political warfare which is an encyclopedic subject requiring the read- 
ing of many books, the study of numerous operational case histories, and 'a. 
well organized course of study, I am appalled that some still seem to believe 
this is an easy subject to grasp or can be covered in a few days or weeks pf 
training. They are displaying gross ignorance of the subject matter. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1221 

amount of systematized study. Training courses .lasting a 
few days or weeks simply cannot give the student more 
than a superficial introduction, regardless of how well they 
are run. 

Secondly, there is the distinction between area studies 
of the Communist Bloc dealing with such things as agricul- 
ture, the transportation system, the new managerial class, 
internal indoctrination, the arts and sciences and Kremli- 
nology, on the one hand, and studying Communist strategy 
and tactics for external political warfare. To a remarkable 
degree our university centers have concentrated on the 
former and ignored the latter. ^ Both subjects are important, 
but our cold war strategists and operational personnel will 
need months of intensive schooling, in addition to a range of 
operator experience, before they can begin to master Soviet 
political warfare. 

With this in mind the inadequacy of the present pro- 
grams becomes apparent. 

The War Colleges^ may devote two weeks to a month 
to coverage of the Soviet Bloc. Within that period the speci- 
fic treatinent of Communism and Communist conflict tech- 
niques rarely exceeds two or three days. It is true, of 
course, that the rest of the instruction is related to the Com- 
munist threat. But this is an indirect tie which in many cases 
presupposes a more complete understanding of Communist 
operations than the student actually possesses. 

The Foreign Service Institute^ has a two-week seminar 
on Communism and the Soviet Union. This is a broad sur- 
vey course which can give only light treatment to Communism 
and Communist conflict techniques. By trying to cover 
everything in ten days of actual training, the course is nec- 
essarily superficial. For example, it provides 1 1/2 hours 
of lecture-discussions each on Communism in the Far East, 
South Asia, Africa, Southeast Asia, Western Europe, 
Eastern Europe, Latin America, and the United States. There 
is one lecture-discussion on such involved, encyclopedic sub- 
jects as subversion and "coordination of forces to stop the 
Communist advance." Considering the very few points even 

3. This can be seen by glancing through their journals. 

4. Army War College, Naval War College, Air University, National War 
College, and The Industrial College of the Armed Forces. 

5. Established in 1947 under the State Department to provide in service 
training to the Foreign Service and other agency personnel. 



1222 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

a first-class teacher can get across in one hour, the super- 
ficiality of the course is self-evident. This is no criticism 
of the teachers -- they just don't have enough time. 

The Basic Foreign Service Officer's Course (9 weeks) 
required of all junior officers on appointment and the Mid- 
Career Course in Foreign Affairs (13 weeks), which are 
the mainstay of FSI training (outside language training), offer 
almost nothing. The Basic Course has six hours of lectures 
by CIA experts "covering" the Soviet Union, the international 
Communist movement, the organization and strategy of Com- 
munism, Soviet global propaganda, and how to answer criti- 
cisms abroad originating from Communists. (In Orlando we 
considered seventeen hours on the same subjects too skirnpy 
for high school seniors. ) The Mid-Career Course includes 
only a two-hour lecture on Communist doctrine and practice, 
two hours on the role of behavioral sciences in Soviet strat- 
egy, and two hours on Soviet political organizations. There 
is time, however, for five hours on "Philosophy of Adminis- 
tration" and four hours on "Origin and Diffusion of Myths 
and Rites. "6 

In 1958 FSI inaugurated the Senior Seminar in Foreign 
Policy, a nine months course, for about twenty senior 
officers at a time which appears to be the FSI counterpart 
to the Wa.r Colleges. This devotes five days to "Communist 
Strategy," and a good part of this time is spent in discussion 
groups or attending optional films. Actually there are just 
five lectures by four guest lecturers, who are, however, 
top men, and several short training films. Thirty- one books 
are recommended to the students, together with certain 
classified material, but this lengthy list must have been 
drawn up with tongue in cheek for a five-day course. Again, 
much of the remainder of the course relates to the Communist 
threat, but as in the case of the War Colleges, this is an in- 
direct tie which presupposes more knowledge about Commu- 
nism than the student usually possesses. 

The USIA training program has no course on Commu- 
nism, but makes use of the two week FSI Seminar. The FBI, 
I am told, has a one-week course for its internal security 
people. 

In summary, I do not kno.v of a single government 



6. Figures are based on the 1960-61 academic year. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1223 

operated school which gives coverage in any real depth to 
Communism and Communist conflict technique."^ Without 
detracting from the general value of the War Colleges and 
agency trade schools, it cannot be seriously argued these 
schools provide an adequate coverage. There is indeed a 
coverage in broad outline, but no intensive study in depth. 
It can hardly be otherwise under present conditions, since 
there are no textbooks covering the necessary range of 
material between covers, and the student who wants to be 
knowledgeable about Communist political warfare must read 
dozens of books and such an undertaking is simply not in the 
cards within a ten months course (length of war college 
courses), most of which deals with other subjects, let alone 
courses lasting only a few weeks. Further, literature deal- 
ing with Communism shows large gaps. 

The answer sometimes given by government spokes- 
men is that government operated schools were not intended 
to provide this coverage. Instead, agency personnel are 
sent to leading universities for graduate work. However, an 
examination of these graduate studies, insofar as they are 
concerned with Communism, reveals that practically all of 
them are of the area study type devoted to the internal study 
of Soviet Russia or China rather than study of Communist 
external political warfare.^ 

Further, the various Russian research centers are not 
suitable for instruction, but are devoted to research, and 
again this is overly academic and mostly of the area study 
type. Research on specific operational problems is rarely 
done. This should be obvious from the literary output of 
these institutions. 

Last fall Columbia University announced it was estab- 
lishing a Research Institute on Communist Affairs. The 
most interesting part of this announcement was Columbia's 
opinion this was believed to be the first institute in any 
American university devoted to intensive study of relations 
and comparisons of Communist states and movements 

7. A partial exception may be a CIA school about which I have little informa- 
tion. 

8, Diligent inquiry may uncover a rare seminar giving more coverage to 
non-military conflict problems. I understand such seminars have been held 
by Kissenger at Harvard and Possony at Georgetown. This does not change 
the general picture. 



1224 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

throughout the world. ^^^^ In other words, for the first 
time an American university was departing from internal 
area studies to take a serious, scholarly look at Commu- 
nism outside the Sino- Soviet Bloc and relations between 
members of the Bloc. Coming in the sixteenth year of the 
cold war, that is an appalling admission of the lack of in- 
terest in the academic community in some of the most 
fascinating and involved problems ever to face mankind and 
on the solution of which this nation's security depends. 

The Orlando Committee congratulates Columbia, but . 
we hope policy planners in Washington will not be mislead. 
This is a research center, not a training center. And it is 
concentrating on Communism, not developing our methods 
and means of non- military conflict. To the extent it may 
deal with counter measures, this will apparently be almost 
entirely at the diplomatic level (i. e. what diplomacy can do 
to increase the rift between the Soviet Union and Communist 
China). If this institute runs true to form, we can expect 
its output to be overly academic. 

How many more years will slip by before an American 
university will announce it is establishing an institute that 
will take a serious interest in researching non-military con- 
flict for our side; and how many years after that will an 
American university announce it is offering training in this 
area? 

REQUIREMENTS 1 and 2 : Speaking generally there is 
no existing training program or combination of programs 
which can produce conflict managers for our side. Even if 
Requirement No. 3 is fully met, we will still be a long way 
from realizing Requirements 1 and 2. Studying Communist 
political warfare is a necessary prerequisite to becoming an 
expert in non- military conflict for our side, but expert know - 
ledge about Communism does not make an expert in our 
methods. ^ We can learn a great deal from the Soviets, but 
we must develop our own art and science of non-military con- 
flict that meets our special needs and is in accord with our 
ethic. 

Our training programs are a reflection of our whole 
limited approach to the cold war. Sixteen years ago, when 

8(a). The Christian Science Monitor, Nov. 3, 1961, page 14. 

9. It is remarkable how many people assume that an expert on Communism 
is also an expert on non-military conflict for our side. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1225 

the agencies realized we were entering a protracted cold 
war, our policy planners formulated some rather minimal 
ideas and programs for meeting the non- military part of 
the challenge. As the crisis deepened and the massive 
nature of the Soviet assault on our civilization became evi- 
dent, various research projects were instituted at our 
universities and within the agencies; there was an increase 
in language training at the Foreign Service Institute and 
greater emphasis was placed on the non-military area at the 
War Colleges. But our policy planners did not seem to com- 
prehend the new areas of knowledge, especially operation- 
ally attuned knowledge, we would have to explore and the 
range of subjects our policy level people and operators 
would have to master before they would be able to compete 
globally with the superbly prepared conflict managers and 
cadres directing and implementing the Soviet effort. 

The result has been a grossly inadequate approach to 
the research and training problems posed by the Soviet poli- 
tical warfare challenge. While the Communists recognized 
that political warfare is at least as difficult as any of the 
arts and sciences and that those who lead it must be inten- 
sively and specially trained professionals, the way we pre- 
pared our people seemed to reflect a belief that a liberal 
education gave our policy makers and operators most of the 
actual schooling they needed, other than on the job experience. 

This attitude is seen most clearly at the Foreign 
Science Institute where newly appointed Foreign Service 
officers, fresh from the campus, are given only nine weeks 
of general orientation training before being committed to the 
global conflict of systems. ^^ Only as they are entering ntiid- 
career do they qualify for thirteen more weeks at the 
Institute, and this training is not only inadequate as regards 
Communism, it fails to give the student even a superficial 
survey of the range of measures potentially available to us. 
Only when he becomes a senior officer is he qualified for a 
nine months course, and here the training.in non-military 
conflict, as will be developed later, is still most inadequate. 

This would seem to reflect an attitude that non-military 
conflict is really not so complex and that one can pick up the 
essentials on the job. Or it can reflect a general resistence 
to going beyond the traditional instruments of foreign policy 

10. This is not an argument for an undergraduate foreign service academy. 
We agree this might take students out of the main stream of American life at 
too early a stage in their development. 



1226 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



conventionally applied, which leaves the Communists 
unopposed on much of the political- ideological terrain. 

Lacking an adequate training program, our cold war 
strategists and operators have had to learn on the job, with 
tragic consequences. Furthermore, and this is an important 
point, the conceptual thinking and experience of careerists 
is often limited to one agency. While they may serve on . 
various inter-agency boards and even attend one of the other 
agency schools, they are short on operator experience out- 
side their agency. There are exceptions -- non-careerists, 
like Robert Lovett and Gordon Gray come to mind, who 
have moved around quite a bit. 

As previously noted, this stands in marked contrast 
to the preparation of Soviet conflict managers who have often 
rotated through the KGB, Army, AFITPROP and Foreign 
Service. 

Henry Kissinger, in his useful study. Nuclear 
Weapons and Foreign Policy , commented on this (page 434): 

"Whatever the qualities of Soviet leadership, its 
training is eminently political and conceptual. 
Reading Lenin or Mao or Stalin, one is struck by 
the emphasis on the relationship between politi- 
cal, military, psychological and economic factors, 
the insistence on finding a conceptual basis for 
political action and on the need for dominating a 
situation by flexible tactics and inflexible purpose. 
And the internal struggles in the Kremlin ensure 
that only the most iron-nerved reach the top. 
Against the Politburo, trained to think in general 
terms and freed of problems of day-to-day admin- 
istration, we have pitted leaders overwhelmed 
with departmental duties and trained to think that 
the cardinal sin is to transgress on another's 
field of specialization. To our leaders, policy is 
as a series of discreet problems; to the Soviet 
leaders it is an aspect of a continuing political 
process. As a result, the contest between us and 
the Soviet system has had many of the attributes 
of any contest between a professional and an ama- 
teur. Even a naediocre professional will usually 
defeat an excellent amateur, not because the 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1227 

amateur does not know what to do, but because 
he cannot react with sufficient speed and con- 
sistency. Our leaders have not lacked ability, 
but they have had to learn while doing, and this 
has imposed too great a handicap." 

C. D. Jackson, who has been closely associated with 
our political warfare efforts, such as they are, for two dec- 
ades as Deputy Chief of Psychological Warfare at SHAEF, 
later president of the Free Europe Committee, and finally 
President Eisenhower's special assistant on cold war plan- 
ning, made these pertinent observations at the 19 59 Senate 
hearings on the Freedom Academy Bill (pp. 60, 61): 

"If there is a single common denominator 
running through these different experiences 
-- military, civilian, governmental, and 
private -- it is the difficulty of finding Amer- 
icans who have not only an instinct or a flair 
for political warfare, but also the elementary 
knowledge and training on the nature of the 
conflict and how to go about our end of the con- 
duct of this very real and continuing warfare. 
"To be a Communist is to make political war- 
fare a full-time job and a life commitment. 
For Americans it is at best a part-time aspect 
of some other job, conducted intermittently 
and with grossly inadequate training. There are 
far too few Americans who are both dedicated 
enough and knowledgeable enough to combat com- 
munism effectively on a full-time basis. If the 
Communists are scoring steady political gains 
-- and we know they are, in all corners of the 
world --it is because they take their political 
warfare seriously and we do not. Our greatest 
danger, it seems to me, is that we may let the 
victory go by default, simply because too few of 
us realize the nature and understand the weapons 
of the struggle. 

"Now, Mr. Chairman, if I may repeat and para- 
phrase, I ana sure that there is a general im- 
pression that adequate instruction places exist 
where this art or this profession can be studied. 
Actually, sir, there is no existing place where the 
whole problem is pulled together and taught in con- 



1228 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



centrated form and not in bits and pieces. That 
is why I think this is a good idea." 

During the past decade, the nearest thing we have had 
to a training program taking note of the new forms of struggle 
has been at the War Colleges. Originally designed to em- 
phasize military subjects, the Colleges have reoriented their 
courses to give to national and international affairs some- 
thing approaching a co-equal role. Their primary purpose 
is to give the officer, often insulated from non-military 
matters prior to World War II, a grasp of the broader as- 
pects of national strategy. Tiny quotas are also assigned 
from State, USIA, CIA, ICA, Treasury and Commerce. 

Many factors which go into formulating national policy 
are considered. In terms of providing a broad survey of 
our cold and hot war machinery, an understanding of the in- 
terplay between existing programs, and a survey of current 
political, economic, military matters around the world, the 
War Colleges do a reasonably good job and they enjoy con- 
siderable prestige. 

However, the War Colleges, despite their excellence, 
fall far, far short of training rounded conflict managers. 
Their purpose is more modest. They were designed as 
finishing schools for military officers -- not as training cen- 
ters for conflict managers in the new forms of struggle. 
Such central subjects as Communist conflict doctrine are, 
as noted, given only the lightest coverage. The all im- 
portant subject of psycho- political wa^-fare is mentioned, 
but not studied in depth, and so forth. The same is true at 
the Senior Officer's Seminar at FSL They hardly begin to 
open the students' eyes to the whole new range of operation al 
method s and organizational forms which we must develop 
and master, if we are to successfully resist Communist pro- 
tracted conflict from the student organizations of Latin 
America to the jungle villages of Viet Nam. 

In the spring of 1961, the writer asked Dr. Stefan 
Possony^^ to list some of the important subjects not being 

11. Dr. Possony, author of the pioneering book, A Century of Conflict ,(1953), 
and co-author of A Forward Strategy for America , (1960), has devoted much 
of his adult life to a study of Soviet conflict methods. He is a professor at 
Georgetown, past faculty member at the National War College, occasional 
lecturer at FSI and adviser to the Defense Department on Soviet Affairs. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1229 

covered in government cold war training programs. Here 
is part of his reply: 

"If we look at specific gaps, we find that there 
is nowhere any instruction on political warfare. 
Some times the word is used, but the speaker 
usually has no solid background of information 
nor is documentation handy. Nowhere, to my 
knowlege, is the subject treated comprehensively, 
and even if one agency does devote some attention 
to this, I doubt that there is enough competence 
throughout the government. Hence not only our 
own operators, but also those large segments of 
the U. S. Government who are the very target of 
political warfare, are left in ignorance about the 
matter. 

"Similarly, there is no place where ideology is 
being studied. Ideologies are studied in univer- 
sities, of course, but only in terms of Hegel, 
Marx, etc. In a deeper operational sense, notably 
in view of offensive or defensive manipulation, 
ideology is not on the instructional map. I would 
go so far as to say that there is no instruction 
throughout the government designed to protect us 
against hostile propaganda. It is naively taken 
for granted that our people understand propaganda 
techniques and have no trouble distinguishing pro- 
paganda from genuine communications. 
"Going beyond propaganda, I am unaware of any 
government effort dealing with psychological war- 
fare including such important features as motiva- 
tion, will, perseverance, conversion, anxiety 
neuroses, and other factors from the area of psy- 
chology and personality. 

"There is unquestionably some pragmatic exper- 
ience in economic warfare, but there is no agency 
where this problem is studied comprehensively. 
"With respect to technological warfare, the 
Industrial College of the Armed Forces has been 
making some progress, but, essentially, this 
school continues to deal with economics in the 
traditional sense. 

"The inter-relationships between psychological 
and technological warfare such as they manifest 
themselves in the test-ban agitation are studied 



1230 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



nowhere. The many scientists who are called 
upon to advise the U. S. Government on tech- 
nological matters are kept in blissful ignorance 
about the most essential points on which their 
advice has a bearing. 

"Academic instruction is one thing and opera- 
tional training another. The operational training 
the U. S. Government has been providing, even 
in its trade schools, is quite inadequate, partly 
because operational records are kept highly 
classified and are withheld from instruction. 
Once a particular operation is terminated, the 
data and the lessons learned could be incorporated 
into the instructional materials, but this is not 
done, possibly with the occasional exception of one 
trade school. 

"There are several efforts to acquaint reserve . 
officers and civilian leadership groups with com- 
munism and other strategic problems (Strategy 
Seminars). But these programs are intermittent, 
improvised, and have too broad or narrow an 
audience base. No effort is really made to give 
the facts to such key segments of the American 
people as the communications industry. Nor is a 
real effort made to acquaint public opinion with 
the facts of life. Add to this the unfulfilled or 
largely unfulfilled need to increase the knowledge 
on communism in allied countries, and to give a 
proper instruction to exchange people and foreign 
students, and you have good list of the many things 
we are not doing." 

These gaps in political warfare and its substrategies 
of economic, psychological, technological warfare and pro- 
paganda, as well as operational Communism, could hardly 
be more critical, for they are in the very subjects which 
are essential to an understanding of the conflict we are in. 

Without intensive, systematic study of these subjects, 
how can a cold war strategist possibly hope to develop strat- 
egy attuned to the world conflict? To say that specialists 
are available to advise him on these matters is like saying 
experts on strategy and tactics are available to a field com- 
mander who has never gotten ai ound to studying these things 
himself. Washington advised Braddock about those uncon- 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1231 



ventional Indians and well before the ambush. Unless the 
policy maker has himself mastered these central subjects 
and can think conceptually about the non-military conflict, 
the availability of specialists will not make a strategist 
out of him. 

When these grave deficiencies are pointed out, the 
stock answer is, we know government training programs 
are inadequate, but this is supplemented by sending regular 
quotas to the better schools of international studies at our 
universities. As one State Department official put it to me, 
"We like our people to get the Harvard viewpoint, the John 
Hopkins viewpoint, the MIT viewpoint." 

The point is that our universities are concentrating 
on language and area studies and not on developing or teach - 
ing non- military conflict . Whoever heard of a course in 
political warfare? Yet it is total political war in which we 
are engaged. 

I do not argue against the desirability of exposing 
agency personnel to many viewpoints. I do say that when 
these training programs, in sum, skim over or bypass sub- 
jects essential to an understanding of the war we are in, they 
are in no sense a substitute for the Freedom Academy. Lan- 
guage studies and area studies are essential. But until the 
strategist has also studied in depth Communist conflict doc- 
trine and political, ideological, psychological, organiza- 
tional, econonaic conflict from our viewpoint , as well as the 
Soviets, he cannot relate the other knowledge to the world 
struggle --he cannot "reorient our forces of all kinds" in 
the new forms of struggle. 

The urgent need is for rounded cold war strategists. . 
Our universities are attuned to developing scholars. and 
specialists. The urgent need is for operational- organiza- 
tional know-how in the new dimensions of struggle. Our 
universities are attuned to language and area studies, or to 
international law and diplomacy in a more conventional con- 
text. 

There is another most important reason why our un- 
iversities fall short. This has to do with motivation and the 
will to victory. Motivation is the most essential element 
we must instill in our people at ail levels. We are 



30-471 O— 64— pt. 1 20 



1232 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



constantly told that the Communists work harder with 
more dedication than their opponents. This is true be- 
cause the Communist training program, the whole process 
by which they mould their cadre, concentrates on achieving 
a complete personal commitment. We naively assume moti- 
vation. Our armed forces understand its importance. Para- 
troop, Marine Corps, and Special Forces cadres have it, 
and it has been carefully coltivated in training, because 
their tough combat missions require it. Yet non- military 
conflict tests the human will in more subtle and deadly ways 
than military combat, and the will to win is crucial. The 
university atmosphere is simply not conducive to developing 
a complete personal commitment. Sometimes it will, but 
this is by accident rather than by design. 

Many of the programs which are potentially available 
to us are conditioned on highly motivated as well as tirained 
personnel to implement them. Men and women ready to 
accept any financial sacrifice or physical rigor, if it contri- 
butes to victory; who will not permit themselves to be 
affected by the apathy of their associates or the psycholo- 
gical pressures of the enemy. 

Our training program is, of course, severely handi- 
capped by the grossly inadequate research and development 
program in non- military conflict. This has kept us from un- 
derstanding our potential capacity and instituting a training 
program oriented to this capacity. It has kept our training 
programs confined to the comparatively narrow scope of 
our present knowledge. 

Much work has been done at our universities on area 
research, especially on the Soviet Union. The Russian Re- 
search Center at Harvard and the Russian Institute at 
Columbia have produced a number of books going into many 
facets of the Soviet state. There is an increasing awareness 
of the need for African, Latin American and Eastern studies, 
and many area studies ai^e underway at our universities. 
Language training is being stepped up. Hundreds of books 
have been pub lished on Communism.-^ '^ 

12. In many of these books, the author in the closing chapter feels the need 
to suggest countermeasures. Usually they have little to offer. This is most 
revealing as to our low" level of knowledge in the area of non- military conflict. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1233 



Yet, we must keep constantly before us the distinction 
between studying Communism and the languages, institutions, 
economies and histories of foreign countries on the one hand 
and researching and developing the operational- organiza- 
tional know-how and the conceptual framework for non- 
military conflict. Only the latter makes it possible to under- 
stand the conflict we are in in all its dimensions and to apply 
the full range of methods and means potentially available in 
an integrated, sustained and consistent fashion. 

It is this operational- organizational knowledge and a 
realistic conceptual framework for a global struggle be- 
tween Freedom and Communism which is neglected at our 
universities. I do not mean that nothing is being done about 
these things at our universities. Here and there an individual 
professor or small group is doing useful work. This does 
not change the general picture. There seems to be a feeling 
that the operational problems of non- military conflict are 
not a suitable subject for the campus. 

The Soviets also engage in extensive area and lan- 
guage studies, and in African studies they are probably 
ahead of us. But it is not this which gives them their great 
advantage. Rather, it is the systematic way in which they 
have thought out and mastered all the organizational forms 
and operational techniques which are possible in a total power 
struggle and the way in which they apply these flexibly yet 
systematically and consistently with clearly understood pur- 
pose within an all encompassing conceptual framework. This 
gives them the capability of using the production of their 
area studies to best advantage. 

The government research effort in non-military con- 
flict has been a bits and pieces affair. There has been con- 
siderable ad hoc inquiry into specific, limited operational 
problems as they arise. There has not been an organized, 
comprehensive effort to think through the full range of 
methods and means potentially available to us. The em- 
phasis has been on meeting the day to day problems, rather 
than a long range research and development effort to sys- 
tematically develop our national capacity to engage in the 
new dimensions of struggle. Furthermore, the existing 
operational knowledge and research has not been assembled 
at one place so that we can determine what has already been 
done, define the gaps to be filled, and then set about in an 



1234 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



organized way to fill these gaps. 

The result of this research and training failure is 
that our policy makers simply do not know what our national 
potential is in the global struggle. A whole range of means 
which could be available to us do not enter into our planning, 
because our policy makers have not been prepared to under- 
stand these things, our operators have not been trained to 
implement them, and our research has not been attuned to 
finding out what they are. 

Therefore, in seeking our national objectives we em- 
ploy only a fraction of the methods and means potentially 
available. Again and again an objective is approached 
along a few well worn avenues when a whole complex of 
access roads lead directly or indirectly to the same objective. 
Ours has been a limited approach to strategy, while the Com- 
munists employ all arms. 

Our greatest weakness is that we continue to plan too 
much in terms of present capacity rather than in terms of 
systematically developing capacity in the new dimensions of 
conflict by instituting a research and training program organ- 
ized to fill the five requirements I have listed. 

Consider Requirement No. 4 -- adequate public know- 
ledge about Communism and the global struggle. Again 
there is no evidence of an organized effort which can hope 
to fill the gap. 

It should be emphasized once again that adequate gen- 
eralized knowledge about Communism and Communist con- 
flict technique can only be obtained through a systematic 
training program or a heavy amount of organized reading. 
It is no answer to say that our news media give excellent 
coverage of world events. They present a hodgepodge of 
uncorrelated facts which leave the untrained individual with 
a blurred image of Communism. Nor is it any answer to 
say there are many good books about Communism in our 
libraries, when no significant number of people are reading 
these books, or reading them in sufficient quantity. 

It should be kept in mind there is little in the exper- 
ience of our people to prepare them to understand the present 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1235 



Struggle. The type of enemy we face, the confusing array 
of methods and means used against us, the skillful deception, 
the ambiguous nature of enemy moves, the misleading vocab- 
ulary, the slow and often concealed erosion of our position, 
the seemingly disconnected events in all parts of the globe, 
subversion raised to the level of a science, the staggering 
long range implications of the Soviet industrial, technolo- 
gical, scientific effort, are all foreign to our experience. 

Our secondary schools and universities are an ob- 
vious place to make a beginning. Yet by and large they offer 
almost nothing. Allen Dulles, in his August 1960 speech to 
the VFW commented: 

"In our schools and colleges we can find many 
courses in ancient history, in philosophy, courses 
on the great movements of the past, the conquests 
of ancient times from Alexander the Great to 
Napoleon. Courses on Communist theory and 
practices are few and far between. 
"By and large, however, in our educational in- 
stitutions, except in the graduate field or in 
specialized schools and seminars, these subjects 
are not generally taught. 

"There is a real urgency to build up our knowledge 
on the entire background of the Communist thrust 
against our civilization. 

"The people of this country are and will continue 
to be basically opposed to Communism in general. 
This opposition is based more on instincts than on 
knowledge. This is not enou^. Our people 
should be sufficiently educated in all of the rami- 
fications of communistic intrigues and its his- 
torical background, its purposes and programs 
adequately to contribute toward an effective 
answer. 

"The initiative for new knowledge comes more 
often from those of us who want to learn than from 
those who teach. But let us also call on our 
educators, and on those in authority who have in- 
fluence over the development of our educational 
system to begin to expand the realistic teaching 
of the history and policies of Communism." 

Mr. Dulles was overly generous in his reference to 



1236 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



the graduate field. One expert recently advised me, "I do 
not think there are more than half a dozen courses in the 
entire country that cover Communism as such and, if so, 
discuss operational technique rather than political philos- 
ophy and history. If there are more such courses they 
would be outside regular degree curricula." A course 
covering political philosophy in the 19th and 20th centuries 
in which the student reads the Communist Manifesto and 
State and Revolution , does practically nothing to prepare 
him to understand the conflict we are in. Nor do a few 
chapters on Russia since 1917 in a Modern European History 
course. Yet this is about all that many colleges offer. 

As Dulles emphasized, this instruction should begin 
in our secondary schools. Here the gap is almost complete. 
Actually some public pressure is developing to institute 
courses on "Communism versus Democracy" in our high 
schools. However, even if our schools wanted to do this, 
and some now do, they are stymied be cause no teachers 
have been trained to give such courses, or to include the 
the subject in adequate form in social science and history 
courses. 

Nothing demonstrates our research and training failure 
better than this failure to teach the teachers. Again and 
again civic organizations, the American Bar Association for 
example, have urged such instruction. And each time they 
run up against the same roadblock. There is little evidence 
our teachers' colleges and state universities are doing any- 
thing to remedy the situation or that they have instructors 
themselves, in many instances, who are prepared to teach 
these things. It is unrealistic to expect our busy teachers 
to educate themselves in this difficult subject. Under mount- 
ing pressure, courses will begin to appear in our high schools, 
but their quality, in the absence of systematically trained 
teachers, will leave much to be desired. 

There are a few bits and pieces, small scale attempts 
to overcome public ignorance. The War Colleges bring in 
a few private citizens, mostly reserve officers, for one or 
two week Strategy Seminars. These range over such a wide 
area they can provide only the skimpiest coverage of Com- 
munism. Some private groups have initiated schools on 
Communism, usually of one to five day duration. Sometimes 
these have been well run. Sometimes they have been 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1237 



unnecessarily partisan. There is seldom any follow up. 
Last fall the University of Southern California received a 
$3 50, 000 gift to establish a school on Communist strategy 
and tactics. Presently it is offering six weeks of night 
classes. This event was so unique in the academic world, 
it received wide press coverage. It is a small, but 
hopeful beginning. 

It is when we come to Requirement No. 5, however, 
-- not merely understanding Communism and the nature of 
the global struggle between systems, but knowing how the 
private sector can contribute to winning this struggle, that 
the extent of the research and training gap really becomes 
apparent. 

The very idea of the private sector playing a large 
role in the cold war may seem novel. The Orlando Com- 
mittee, after years of considering the problem, is convinced 
that many of our most difficult cold war problems are sus- 
ceptible of partial solution, at least, through a wide range 
of naethod and means which can be implemented by the pri- 
vate sector -- provided our private institutions ^nd civic 
organizations have among their members some who have 
received at least a little systematic training about Commu- 
nism, the global conflict, and what the private sector can 
contribute. Without such trained and motivated people, what 
the private sector can do is limited. With them, even in 
comparatively small numbers, the range of activities, as 
will be developed in Part IV, is almost unlimited. Yet, as 
in the case of school teachers, we haye neglected to provide 
anywhere a training program which would enable any sig- 
nificant number of private citizens to learn about these 
things. 

Today the private sector wants to participate. From 
personal experience, and this has been confirmed by others 
I have talked with, I can testify a marked change has 
occurred in the public's attitude toward the cold war. Res- 
ponsible citizens who showed little concern even a year or 
two ago, are now crowding forward to ask "what can we do?" 
They are worried. They sense that the business as usual 
civic projects now engaging their time, are a little remote 
in terms of the present world situation. Many display eager- 
ness to involve themselves and their organizations in worth- 
while projects that have some real bearing on winning the 



1238 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



cold war. These are responsible civic leaders, who un- 
derstand the battle must be won in Latin America and Africa 
as well as Hoboken, and by a combination of positive as well 
as negative programs. 

By and large, however, this increasing desire to 
participate has been frustrated by lack of trained leadership 
at the community, state and national levels and advanced 
knowledge on what the private sector can do. 

This is disturbing, because every day important oppor- 
tunities are slipping by, some never to reappear. But our 
civic leaders lack the training to enable them to visualize 
these opportunities or the methods and means their organi- 
zations could employ to take advantage of them. 

The little training that is available, like the Strategy 
Seminars, has one common failing. It gets the student all 
stirred up and then suggests little or nothing he can do. 
There is a good reason why. In this tough and complex 
struggle the things the private sector can do are not as ob- 
vious as some imagine. Knowing something about the enemy 
is not sufficient preparation for making an effective contri- 
bution. It will require a concentrated, systematic research 
program involving a broad cross- section of experts with a 
maximum cross fertilization of ideas and experiences to 
think through the many methods and means the private sector 
can employ -- if the private sector is to participate on a sus- 
tained and systematic basis. 

A number of private organizations are making some 
contribution here and overseas. Certain foundations are 
spending substantial sums overseas on a range of projects 
that sometimes have at least an indirect bearing. The 
AFL-CIOhas done considerable work in Latin America, 
Africa, Europe and Asia attempting to build up free labor 
against the Communist onslaught. If you go through the 
whole list of private participation, at first glance it appears 
impressive. 

In fact, it is not. Only a tiny fraction of the ingenuity, 
talent and strength that could be brought to bear here and 
overseas is being utilized. The great majority of our civic 
organizations are uninvolved. Much of what is being done 
is mediocre in terms of what it could be, if we had trained. 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1239 



motivated people to carry out these programs. 

To my knowledge, there is no comprehensive, organ- 
ized effort going on anywhere to research and think through 
the full range of methods and means the private sector can 
properly employ. Nor does any existing center have the 
staff, funds or directive to undertake this enormous and 
challenging job. Yet, until the problem is considered whole, 
until a wide range of expert knowledge is focused on the pro- 
blem, we can never know what the true capacity of the pri- 
vate sector is. 

In planning our strategy in the non-military area, we 
tend to down grade the role of the private sector and this is 
realistic, considering its present limited capacity. The 
point is that we can very likely develop a very large capacity 
to participate with the type of research and training program 
envisioned for the Freedom Academy. Instead of bemoaning 
the lethargy, indifference and seeming incapacity of the pri- 
vate sector, we should recognize these are the natural and 
expected results of our neglect to institute an adequate re- 
search and training program. 

The President's speech of April 20, 1961, to the Amer- 
ican Society of Newspaper Editors indicates the Administra- 
tion may have turned a corner in its comprehension of the 
inadequacy of our strategy and the means of implementation 
in non-military conflict. I was particularly struck by these 
words: 

". . . it is clear that the forces of communism are 
not to be underestimated in Cuba or anywhere else 
in the world. The advantages of a police state, its 
use of mass terror and arrest to prevent the spread 
of free dissent, cannot be overlooked by those who 
expect the fall of every fanatic tyrant, 
"if the self-discipline of the free cannot match the 
iron discipline of the mailed fist in economic, poli- 
tical, scientific, and all the other kinds of struggle 
as well as the military, then the peril to freedom 
will continue to rise. 

". . . it is clearer than ever that we face a relentless 
struggle in every corner of the globe that goes far 
beyond the clash of armies or even nuclear armannents. 
". . . We dare not fail to see the insidious nature of 



1240 PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 

this new and deeper struggle. We dare not fail 
to grasp the new concept, the new tools, the new 
sense of urgency we will need to combat it . . . 
And we dare not fail to realize that this struggle 
is taking place every day without fanfare in 
thousands of villages and markets day and night 
and in classrooms all over the globe. 
". . . Too long we have fixed our eyes on tradi- 
tional military needs; on armies prepared to cross 
borders; on missiles poised for flight. Now it 
should be clear that this is no longer enough; that 
our security may be lost piece by piece, country 
by country, without the firing of a single missile 
or the crossing of a single border. 
"We intend to profit from this lesson. We intend 
to re-examine and reorient our forces of all kinds; 
our tactics and our institutions here in this com- 
munity. We intend to intensify our efforts for a 
struggle in many ways more difficult than war ..." 

These are hopeful words. Whether the corner has been 
turned will depend in good measure on the training and re- 
search effort we now inaugurate to prepare us to understand 
and master "the new concepts, the new tools" which will en- 
able us to "re-examine and reorient our forces of all kinds, 
our tactics and our institutions.'" 

For many years I have felt that one of the best indicators 
of future Soviet intentions is their immediate research and 
training effort. No one who noted the stepped up training of 
Latin Americans at Prague beginning in 1954 would have been 
mislead by Khrushchev's protestations of peaceful co- exist- 
ence. 

By the same token I will remain unimpressed by talk 
about new methods and means until an adequate research and 
training program is inaugurated to provide them. 

The question is this. Will the Administration take the 
position that the existing research and training program is 
adequate, or can be made adequate with a little more em- 
phasis on non-military conflict? Or will the Administration 
admit that we have not even come close to an adequate re- 
search and training effort in the new dimensions of conflict 
-- and then set about systematically creating national 



PROVIDING FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 1241 



capacity for the long haul in the new forms of struggle? 

The President is on record that we can lose every- 
thing if we fail to master the new forms of struggle. As of 
today there is not a single center in or out of government 
where this vast subject is pulled together and taught in con- 
centrated form. ^■^ Yet, only when it is considered whole 
can we understand the nature of the challenge and generate 
an adequate response. 

13. The Senate Judiciary Committee in its June 1960 report on the Freedom 

Academy Bill made this finding: 

"1. No concentrated, systematic effort is being made to develop 
an integrated operational science for our side which will meet 
the entire Soviet attack and work toward our long-range national 
objectives in a coordinated nnanner, utilizing every area of poten- 
tial strength in the public and private sectors. We have not thought 
through all of the short- and long-range methods and means which 
free men can properly use when faced with a Soviet-type challenge, 
and we have not integrated these methods into a broad strategic 
plan. This is especially true in the field of political and economic 
warfare. Bits and pieces of the problem are being worked on with- 
in the Government and at some universities, and part of this develop- 
ment work is of a high order, but the total effort falls far short of 
seeking an integrated, operational science and does not begin to 
develop our true potential. 

"2. Nowhere today can Government personnel or private citizens 
receive broad spectrum training in cold war, especially in the 
large and highly complex field of political and economic war. Not 
only do we lack top level schools, we do not even have intermediate 
or lower level schools. There is no place where the bits and pieces 
are pulled together and taught in concentrated form." 



1242 



PROVIDESTG FOR CREATION OF A FREEDOM COMMISSION 



Gallup Poll on Freedom Academy Bill 



Friday, May 4, 1962 



©riattlifl Sritlittrl 



General News 



7 Of 10 Favor Strategy School 

New Appeal Building 
For Freedom Academy 

By GEORGE GALLUP ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ -^^^ 

°Xe?ic<i,"A'ffi'i^s°' Of the proposed Freedom 
PRINCETON, N. J. — The Academy, Gallup Poll report- 
establishment of a "Free- e" asked a cross-section of 
dom Academy" to train Govt adults this question: 
personnel and private citi- "A proposal now before 
Zens in cold war strategy Congress would establish a 
would have great appeal to special academy to train 
the American people. men in cold war strategy 
Such an academy — which and to give them a better 
would be the U. S. counter- understanding of communist 
part of Russian political propaganda and political 
warfare schools already in warfare methods. Would you 
existence — is seen by favor or oppose establishing 
Americans as answering a such an academy?" 
definite need in the pres- The results from inter- 
ently ideological struggle be- views with citizens in big 
tween communism and de- cities, towns, villages and 
mocracy. rural areas in all major re- 
Plans for the Freedom gions of the nation: 

Academy are called for in Favor 69 Pet. 

a bill, under the leadership Onnose 14 

of Sen. Karl Mundt of South ^, . , _ 

Dakota, now being con- ^o opmton 17 

sidered by committees of The proposed cold war 

both the Senate and the training school — which is 

House. sponsored by 12 Senators 

Emphasizing what he felt ^^^i both political parties- 

to be the need for the Acad- ^^^° ™f ^ w'th bipartisan 

emy in a recent speech at approval at the grass roots 

a Princeton University level. 

Conference on InternaUonal '^.°"?hly the jame size 

Communication, Senator rnajont.es of Republicans 

Mundt said- ^^^ P^"" '=^"^)' Democrats 

Mundt saia. _ ^ ,^ (70 per cent), and Independ- 

"In the theater of the Cold g^ts (71 per cent) favor es- 

War, we still operate with tablishing an academy to 

far too many amateurs who j^ain people in propaganda 

have the desire to win but warfare, 
who completely lack the 

, . , . . J V „i. Linked to the majority 

needed training and back- recognition that 

ground with which to sue- ^j^f^ 3 ,^ ^^J^^^^, ,a,k. 

*^^^°" ing in what Mundt has 

Mundt said that while we (,a„gj ..^oid war know-how" 

are training military people ;„ fighting a shrewd adver- 

are the "hot war" that we g^ry who has made such 

are not fighting, we are fail- political warfare a special- 

ing to train people to oper- jy 

ate in the cold war conflict . .j.^^ minority who oppose 
in which we are presently ^^^^ Freedom Academy pro- 
engaged, posal, however, do so chiefly 




because they feel our pres- 
ent training facilities are 
adequate. 

The present findings are 
but further evidence of a 
public desire to "do more" 
in a struggle which many 
citizens admit we are cur- 
rently losing. 

Since World War II, the 
public has favored various 
measures designed to sell 
the U. S. point of view to 
the world. A teacher-ex- 
change program, U. S.-spon- 
sored universities in Africa 
and Asia, the Peace Corps 
— to cite but a few ex- 
amples — have all had the 
backing of public opinion in 
Gallup Poll surveys. 

The public, moreover, has 
been willing to spend the 
money needed to get such 
projects underway. A little 
over a year ago, for ex- 
ample, two out of three per- 
sons favored the U. S. spend- 
ing as much money for 
propaganda purposes as the 
Russians do — or an esti- 
mated twenty times as much 
as we do now on our U. S. 
Information Agency. 

In back of this willingness 
is the concession — re- 
corded earlier this year — 
that Russia is now ahead 
of us in the "propaganda 
war" — that is, doing the 
better job of winning people 
around the world to its point 
of view. 



o